Watching Cops Last Night

[Bruce]

Originally Posted by bigbear

I guess the point that I'm trying to make here, albeit not as clearly as I'd like to, is, there is nothing wrong with telling a police officer that you are legally carrying a firearm on your person or in your car, and telling him may prevent a tragedy that could easily be prevented. Isn't that a good thing?

Not nearly that clear - until this paragraph.

Before this paragraph you went from: "If I see a glint of metal" to "He'll have a gun in his ear." This paragraph (above), however, was reasonable and thoughtful. Certainly now people will understand the message you were trying to get across.

I hate to seem argumentative here, but... Do you pull over every single person you see driving a vehicle to check if they are licensed to drive?

If your logic holds that an officer has reasonable articulable suspicion that a person may be committing a crime simply for carrying a firearm in a vehicle, then - any responsible officer should investigate every single driver that they see on the street - all of them. As I understand it, driving on public roads without a drivers license is a pretty serious offense.

Silliness aside and back to the law...

I am not a lawyer, but I do know that Pennsylvania Supreme Court cases (was it Ortiz or Hawkins - or both?) have settled that carrying a concealed firearm *is not* suspicious - therefore there can be no RAS *just* because of the presence of a firearm.

As I said, I don't want to argue the point. And I would never suggest that street patrol isn't extremely dangerous. I don't want the job - I am glad that there are people who do!

Still, those cops who do the job choose to on their own. No one is forcing them to be cops. I get that you put a high value on your own safety. I put a high value on mine too.

Of course I want every officer to be safe. Of course I want every cop to come home in one piece at the end of their shift. But not at the expense of my rights or my freedoms or my safety - or any other law-abiding citizens rights, freedoms and safety.

Would it hurt you to read Ortiz and Hawkins? Maybe even tell some brother and sister officers about these cases?

You won't have to admit that you read the cases to anyone here.
.

[bigbear]

Originally Posted by JCWohlschlag

If you can, please supply the RAS definitions that you refer to. I would like to know where the line is drawn, exactly. It has already been discussed that it is improper for a law enforcement officer to stop someone to check their license to carry a firearm simply because they were openly carrying on foot in Philadelphia, just like it is improper to stop someone to check their driver’s license just because they are driving. If you have reasonable, articulable suspicion of carrying a firearm without a license just because you see a firearm in a vehicle when you pull someone over for committing another crime, I would like to see some sort of reference.

I am not agreeing with your position, nor am I disagreeing. I am simply asking if you could provide the definition you referred to or any other citation.

Sure. Keep in mind that RAS does not equal Probable Cause. Reasonable, Articulable Suspicion is defined as "more then a mere hunch," (some court ruling, I don't know which one.

So, taking the totality of circumstances: First, I have to be lawfully where I am, in other words, did I make a traffic stop because of RAS of a motor vehicle code violation? If so, and for the sake of this argument, let's say I did, then we move on to step two.

I am lawfully engaged in the conduct that I am doing. I am speaking with the driver of a lawfully stopped motor vehicle and requesting documents that the driver is required to produce. Now, at this time, I spot a handgun in the car. It really doesn't matter if it's in the glove box, center console, back seat, or where. A weapon being transported in a vehicle is a concealed weapon, and a LTCF is required.

At this point, since I have not been told by the driver of the vehicle that there is a weapon in the car, nor have I been provided with a LTCF, I can articulate that, based upon the information that I have availble to me AT THIS MOMENT, I may have a violation of the UFA. RSA, not PC.

20/20 hindsight may show something different, but I can only use what I know as of this moment to guide my actions.


I hope this helps.

[bigbear]

Originally Posted by Bruce

Would it hurt you to read Ortiz and Hawkins? Maybe even tell some brother and sister officers about these cases?

You won't have to admit that you read the cases to anyone here.
.

I'll read anything put in front of me. I love learning new things. And I'll admit that I don't know everything on the planet. Freely. Now, does anyone have a link to them?

[JCWohlschlag]

Originally Posted by bigbear

I'll read anything put in front of me. I love learning new things. And I'll admit that I don't know everything on the planet. Freely. Now, does anyone have a link to them?

http://www.paopencarry.org/info.html#caselaw

[JCWohlschlag]

Originally Posted by bigbear

Sure. Keep in mind that RAS does not equal Probable Cause. Reasonable, Articulable Suspicion is defined as "more then a mere hunch," (some court ruling, I don't know which one.

So, taking the totality of circumstances: First, I have to be lawfully where I am, in other words, did I make a traffic stop because of RAS of a motor vehicle code violation? If so, and for the sake of this argument, let's say I did, then we move on to step two.

I am lawfully engaged in the conduct that I am doing. I am speaking with the driver of a lawfully stopped motor vehicle and requesting documents that the driver is required to produce. Now, at this time, I spot a handgun in the car. It really doesn't matter if it's in the glove box, center console, back seat, or where. A weapon being transported in a vehicle is a concealed weapon, and a LTCF is required.

At this point, since I have not been told by the driver of the vehicle that there is a weapon in the car, nor have I been provided with a LTCF, I can articulate that, based upon the information that I have availble to me AT THIS MOMENT, I may have a violation of the UFA. RSA, not PC.

20/20 hindsight may show something different, but I can only use what I know as of this moment to guide my actions.


I hope this helps.

Actually, it does help. Thank you for your explanation. It makes sense, as the idea of the totality of circumstances of lawfully stopping a motorist for violating a vehicle code may give you reasonable suspicion to investigate other crimes which come into plain sight. LittleRedToyota posted a similar situation of totality of circumstances here: http://www.pafoa.org/forum/concealed...tml#post350182.

Issues like these are debated on the forum quite a bit, as evidenced by the following threads:

• http://www.pafoa.org/forum/concealed...inson-twp.html
• http://www.pafoa.org/forum/hunting-2...e-my-ltcf.html
• http://www.pafoa.org/forum/concealed...my-rights.html
• http://www.pafoa.org/forum/concealed...assed-psp.html
• http://www.pafoa.org/forum/concealed...ittsburgh.html

The situation being debated here — being required to show your license to carry a firearm when a law enforcement officer lawfully pulls you over and spots your firearm in plain sight — seems to definitely be a borderline situation that could go either way.

Thank you for providing your input.

[Damage control]

bigbear,

You pull someone over for speeding, you approach the car you see a gun tucked in between the drivers seat and center console and the drivers hands are on the steering wheel. How do you proceed? Keep in mind you and the driver have not spoken yet.



Say the driver states he has his LTCF but it is in his wallet keeping the above information in mind, How do you proceed?



One more. Say you ask the driver to hand over his gun for officer safety and he A) declines B) submits. What would you do in these situations? Please give separate examples for A and B.


DC

[DaveM55]

Here's some more cases to read regarding the 4th amendment. There are hundreds if not thousands of cases arguing the 4th amendment. Just pasting the 4th in a forum thread is not an understanding of it.

Lawyers and judges argue it constantly to have a better understanding of it. Unfortunately the law is not black and white. It takes a lot of work and years of study to understand it.

I have several books that discuss the 4th and these books have references with hundreds of cases. I am a student.

Have I read all these cases below, yes and more. Do I fully understand every law, not even close. And here's a shocker, neither does any lawyer or judge. But I understand and work within my limitations. Wish I had the time and money to go to law school.

There are very few law experts on this forum, I admit I am not one of them.

FLORIDA v. J.L. 529 U.S. 266
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/htm...9_0266_ZS.html

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DENNIS DAYTON HOLT,
Defendant-Appellee.
http://ca10.washburnlaw.edu/cases/2001/09/99-7150.htm

BECK v. OHIO 379 U.S. 89 (1964)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/script...ol=379&page=89

ALABAMA v. WHITE, 496 U.S. 325 (1990)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/script...=496&invol=325

OHIO v. ROBINETTE, ___ U.S. ___ (1996)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/script...us/519/33.html

MARYLAND v. WILSON
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bi...408&pageno=415

PENNSYLVANIA v. MIMMS, 434 U.S. 106 (1977)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/script...=434&invol=106

[headcase]

Originally Posted by bigbear

Thanks, appreciate it. Your opinion of me means SOOOO much. You don't know me, or what kind of cop I am. I never said "If I even saw a HINT of a gun, I'd shove my gun in their ear."

I have pulled people over that have had legally owned and carried guns on them or in the vehicle. At no time did I shove my gun in their ear. But they told me about the guns, I didn't get surprised by them. I've also pulled over cars with illegal guns on the passengers or in the cars, and in one case, did stick my gun in the suspect's face, because he made a stupid move towards his waist. (Where we later found the stolen, loaded .380 pistol with no serial number.) Later, while we were interviewing the suspect, he admitted that he was going to shoot the officer talking to him, (Not me) and didn't even know I was there until I caught his attention. And, I pulled over a car with legal guns in the glove box, and the driver was so drunk, that he reached into the glove box for his paperwork. What, sir, do YOU say my reaction should have been? "Wow, those are some nice looking guns you got there, what kind are they?" Or, "Don't move!!!" with my gun out and pointed. As the one on the sharp end, I made my decision.

Now, as far as the other part of your post, "Your having no knowledge of a LTCF and seeing a gun on a person, which is the original situation you decided deserved a loaded gun pressed against an ear, is in no way, shape, or form, a reason to assume them guilty of a damn thing, by itself." RAS, as the members here love to call it, has been defined over and over again. Are you saying that if I see a gun in a car, without any knowledge of a LTCF, I don't have RAS to believe that the subject is in violation of Title 18 Section 6106? If that's what you are saying, then you are wrong, plain and simple.

This can be solved, easily. If you are pulled over, and you are carrying a firearm on your person, (Which, BTW, I think that those that are legally allowed to do so should do as often as possible), then tell the officer. I know that there's no state law that says that you have to. There's no state law that says that I have to tell you immediately why I stopped you.

Again, let's picture this:

"Sir, I'd like to see your driver's license, registration and insurance card." It's properly produced. "Okay, I'll be with you shortly."

"Um, officer, why did you stop me?"

"Sir, all of that information will be on your charging document."

I come back up to the car.

"Sir, you're being charged with violating section 4703 a of the PA Vehicle Code. Sign line 46 showing that you've received this citation. Here's your copy. Pull out safely and you're free to go."

Have I complied with state law? Yeah, I have. I've provided you with the charging document, which spells out your violation, date, time, who the charging officer is, etc. On the back are rights and obligations, and instructions and a mail in form. Do I have to explain that to you? No!!! I don't even have to point that out to you. But do I? Yeah. Why? Because it helps the person that I stopped understand what they have to do from there. I understand that getting pulled over doesn't happen to every person, every day. So I try to prevent confusion for the driver.

I guess the point that I'm trying to make here, albeit not as clearly as I'd like to, is, there is nothing wrong with telling a police officer that you are legally carrying a firearm on your person or in your car, and telling him may prevent a tragedy that could easily be prevented. Isn't that a good thing?

Ok, let's try this again...

You said:

As far as the rest of the post, if someone has a gun in the car, and fails to mention it, and I see it, they can expect to find the five inch barrel of my Kimber growing out of their ear. Don't like it? Tough crap.

Whether you agree, or not, it has been established that the presence of a firearm, by itself, is not RAS of anything, at all. If you see a firearm, in a vehicle, during a traffic stop, the correct course of action is to inquire about whether or not a license to carry is held. If you see it while it is being held, or swung toward you, or while someone is reaching for it, do you have a reason to fear for your life? Yes. But if it is sitting on someone's hip, or in a console, or in a holster, or just sticking out from under the seat, unless there is other signs of illegal activity accompanying the sight, no, you have no justifiable reason to assume lack of licensure. If you truly feel your life is in danger, then by all means defend yourself. But if just seeing a firearm, in a state where a great deal of the population legally carries one, is a threat to you, something is wrong.

Your post was full of "you're damn right I'll do what I have to, too bad if you don't like it" attitude. I made an observation, prefaced by a request that you read it as it was intended, and you replied with more piss and vinegar bravado.

Maybe we got off on the wrong foot. My point was that if you see a firearm, and the person has not declared that he possesses one, as long as it is just there, not being reached for, or an eminent threat, you should probably just ask if the person has a LTCF, before whipping out the Kimber, and sticking it in his ear. My reasoning is that the potential for getting harrassed by informing a LEO is greater than the chance of him ever seeing it, and then getting harrassed because you didn't announce it.

The argument that even though we have no duty to announce our possession, we should because officers don't like surprises, is self serving. I don't say this to be combative. Law enforcement is a position of public trust. The citizens you encounter are due respect and assumption of innocence, unless you observe them actually doing something illegal. Them not telling you they have a firearm as soon as you have contact, while it may invoke feelings of disrespect in you, does not qualify as an illegal or threatening act.

[4XLT]

Originally Posted by headcase

Ok, let's try this again...

You said:

Whether you agree, or not, it has been established that the presence of a firearm, by itself, is not RAS of anything, at all. If you see a firearm, in a vehicle, during a traffic stop, the correct course of action is to inquire about whether or not a license to carry is held. If you see it while it is being held, or swung toward you, or while someone is reaching for it, do you have a reason to fear for your life? Yes. But if it is sitting on someone's hip, or in a console, or in a holster, or just sticking out from under the seat, unless there is other signs of illegal activity accompanying the sight, no, you have no justifiable reason to assume lack of licensure. If you truly feel your life is in danger, then by all means defend yourself. But if just seeing a firearm, in a state where a great deal of the population legally carries one, is a threat to you, something is wrong.

Your post was full of "you're damn right I'll do what I have to, too bad if you don't like it" attitude. I made an observation, prefaced by a request that you read it as it was intended, and you replied with more piss and vinegar bravado.

Maybe we got off on the wrong foot. My point was that if you see a firearm, and the person has not declared that he possesses one, as long as it is just there, not being reached for, or an eminent threat, you should probably just ask if the person has a LTCF, before whipping out the Kimber, and sticking it in his ear. My reasoning is that the potential for getting harrassed by informing a LEO is greater than the chance of him ever seeing it, and then getting harrassed because you didn't announce it.

The argument that even though we have no duty to announce our possession, we should because officers don't like surprises, is self serving. I don't say this to be combative. Law enforcement is a position of public trust. The citizens you encounter are due respect and assumption of innocence, unless you observe them actually doing something illegal. Them not telling you they have a firearm as soon as you have contact, while it may invoke feelings of disrespect in you, does not qualify as an illegal or threatening act.

someone give this man some rep for me. im all out !!!

[bigbear]

Originally Posted by Damage control

bigbear,

You pull someone over for speeding, you approach the car you see a gun tucked in between the drivers seat and center console and the drivers hands are on the steering wheel. How do you proceed? Keep in mind you and the driver have not spoken yet. At this point, I would definately have my hand on my weapon, maybe have it out and hidden behind my leg. I would ask for his DL, Registration, Insurance, and his LTCF.



Say the driver states he has his LTCF but it is in his wallet keeping the above information in mind, How do you proceed? I'd have him step out of the vehicle, keeping his hands where I can see them, and walk to the rear of the vehicle, then have him produce the documents that I asked for. I'd keep him out of the car while I prepare the citation/warning/whatever, give it back to him, and release him from there.



One more. Say you ask the driver to hand over his gun for officer safety and he A) declines B) submits. What would you do in these situations? Please give separate examples for A and B. I don't ask anyone to handle a weapon while I'm dealing with them. If I really feel that I need to have possession of the weapon, I'd ask them if I could retrieve it, not for them to hand it to me.


DC

The text in blue are my responses.