I was disarmed by a police officer

[mrwildroot]

Originally Posted by MarcS

Then you can't very well avoid it, can you?

Not really, and with all the homeland security upgrades to the states' computer systems, many jurisdictions have access to others' files....
As one sheepdog to another, it could put all involved on a better footing...Assuming that the LEO is a sheepdog too.
Of course, YMMV. ;-)
MW

[mrwildroot]

Originally Posted by NineseveN

Around the year 1700, the slang verb, cop entered English usage, meaning "to get ahold of, catch, capture." By 1844, cop showed up in print, and soon thereafter the -er suffix was added, and a policeman became a copper, one who cops or catches and arrests criminals. Copper first appeared in print in 1846, the use of cop as a short form copper occured in 1859. :: Merriam-Webster New Book of Word Histories

See also:
http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-cop2.htm


Back to the subject at hand...

Thanks for the info!
28 years living in NYC can cloud ones memory....
<bg>
MW

[Farbmeister]

Why would anyone want LEO.. most OF WHOM CANNOT PROPERLY HANDLE THEIR OWN FIREARM to take my personal firearm, fitted to my own idiosyncrasies (trigger pull, safety position and function (lefty)) and start trying to handle it?

OK, LEO gets to 'officially' fire like 60 rounds a year to qualify.. at a range, in controlled situations with a firearm they handle daily. That qualifies them as an expert in firearms safety?

I remember an episode of the farce show DALLAS SWAT where the 'gun experts' misnamed EVERY gun seized in a search. Other than saying its a pistol or rifle/revolver they got every one wrong. Watching them try to clear each weapon was funny... they handed the off to each other so they could take a guess and how to clear it. Yeah.. experts

PUH-LEASE.

If the officer is 'concerned for their safety' then they should call for backup or do a felony stop with backup. Asking me to give them my firearm for *their* safety is nothing more than LEO control freaks.

[MarcS]

Originally Posted by mrwildroot

Not really, and with all the homeland security upgrades to the states' computer systems, many jurisdictions have access to others' files....
As one sheepdog to another, it could put all involved on a better footing...Assuming that the LEO is a sheepdog too.
Of course, YMMV. ;-)
MW

I wouldn't go so far as to make that assumption.

[mrwildroot]

Originally Posted by MarcS

I wouldn't go so far as to make that assumption.

Based on what I have been reading, I am rethinking that position...

MW

[Steve in PA]

Originally Posted by Farbmeister

Why would anyone want LEO.. most OF WHOM CANNOT PROPERLY HANDLE THEIR OWN FIREARM to take my personal firearm, fitted to my own idiosyncrasies (trigger pull, safety position and function (lefty)) and start trying to handle it?

OK, LEO gets to 'officially' fire like 60 rounds a year to qualify.. at a range, in controlled situations with a firearm they handle daily. That qualifies them as an expert in firearms safety?

I remember an episode of the farce show DALLAS SWAT where the 'gun experts' misnamed EVERY gun seized in a search. Other than saying its a pistol or rifle/revolver they got every one wrong. Watching them try to clear each weapon was funny... they handed the off to each other so they could take a guess and how to clear it. Yeah.. experts

PUH-LEASE.

If the officer is 'concerned for their safety' then they should call for backup or do a felony stop with backup. Asking me to give them my firearm for *their* safety is nothing more than LEO control freaks.

And what do you think is going to happen during a felony stop???

[farmplinker]

Originally Posted by Zach

There is a recurring theme on the gun boards, of most people claiming they will inform a cop if they are carrying, even if not required by law. They say they do it out of "courtacy" or "respect" for the officer. Those threads always leave me scratching my head. The question of informing a LEO of your CCW comes up at least onces a month between Glocktalk, AR15, and the other forums. More than 75% of the people responding say they will inform a cop right off the bat.

No good can come of this! The one situation in which informing a cop can save you trouble-he orders you out of the car and pats you down - is just about as rare as it gets. On the other hand, being ordered out of the car and disarmed after informing a LEO of your CCW is not rare at all. A very large percentage of cops admit they will disarm anyone with a gun during a traffic stop- and these are just the cops who post on the gun forums, gun-friendly cops!

The prospect of some young cop, a couple years out of the academy who probably did not grow up around firearms and maybe trains with them once a month...the prospect of that guy taking a loaded gun off my hip or ankle does not thrill me at all.

You had to get out of your car, bend over, and submit to being man-handled like a common criminal. You should not feel good about that. That's some Eastern European type nonsense...

I have to agree with this post. The last thing I want is to hand over a loaded gun to someone who may not be familiar with it, who then for some notion decides to unload it. You have a nervous motorist handling the gun, and then a nervous cop (presumably he's nervous if he feels the need to disarm the motorist) handling it. Even worse is the idea of unloading it, while keeping one eye on traffic, one eye on the motorist he's pulled over and one eye on the gun he's unloading. That's at least one eye too many. Leave the dang gun in it's holster or glove box or under the seat, where it isn't going to hurt anyone.

[brewguy]

Unless I am asked I don't know if I would volunteer the info. I don't really see how it can make the situation less tense. If my gun is concealed they won't even know I have it.

maybe at each stop we should all be forced to get out of the car, at gun point, and lay on the ground. Then they can pepper spray us and handcuff so they know we can't do anything to them.

If traffic stops are so dangerous then perhaps we need to rethink why we do them. Going 5mph over the limit is not endangering anyone except the cop who makes the stop. I mean traffic here not the driver.

I know for a fact that when I had tint on my car it was safer, everyday I have severe glare now which makes it very hard to see. Sure cops can see I'm not pointing a gun at them now..

[Archiver]

I'd definitily find it insulting to be disarmed as it would make me feel like a criminal and anyone viewing the incident might assume as much...a defamation to my character for sure!

Of course the reality is that cops get to do whatever they want with very little recourse either in complaints to their departments or to the AG when THEY break Laws. Why? we let them.

End Result...we are forced to comply as "sheeple" or risk the added in- convenience or harrassment.


The reality also as many have mentioned is the unfamilirity of an officer with your particular weapon and the inherent dangers. Recently, while at the Police station they asked my wife if she had any weapons. She told them she was carrying and they insisted on possession of the weapon (this in itself was a debatable since the magistrates office although in the same building is on a different floor. There are also NO metal detectors like a real court facility).

After removing the gun from its perfectly safe pocket holster the incompetent cop at first couldnt eject the mag and then couldnt even rack the slide all the while pointing it in an unsafe direction! After trying 3 times he still couldnt do it but wouldnt let her. After he finally ejected the round in the chamber he kept trying to get the slide to lock back...it doesnt as its a DAO keltec. He was so dumb she had to explain it to him! Sad and SCARY!

[MarcS]

Originally Posted by Archiver

The reality also as many have mentioned is the unfamilirity of an officer with your particular weapon and the inherent dangers. Recently, while at the Police station they asked my wife if she had any weapons. She told them she was carrying and they insisted on possession of the weapon (this in itself was a debatable since the magistrates office although in the same building is on a different floor. There are also NO metal detectors like a real court facility).

If there's no place to check your weapon, they're not in compliace with the law. That's not debatable.