I was disarmed by a police officer

[TonyF]

Originally Posted by TheHighChild

How can everyone be so complacent about being disarmed on their own property?

I get that the cop was nice, professional, etc but how is it any different than if a cop comes to your door because your grass is too high, asks you if you have any weapons in your home and then asks you to hand over your weapons until he concludes his visit?

Don't get me wrong, I am very glad that this wasn't an aggressive encounter but how can everyone tolerate being disarmed without arrest? I'm shocked.

Traffic stops are the single most dangerous activity an LEO performs. He has no idea with whom he is dealing. Officer safety is not an insignificant issue in these kinds of stops.

If the occupant would happen to be a wanted felon, probability is high they would shoot the LEO at first chance. That's why I don't believe being disarmed during a traffic stop is over the top.

[crazyyankee]

From the original post I think the Officer acted properly. On the few occassions that I've been pulled over I've only been disarmed once.
That one time I was disarmed a stupid clerk at a Rutters store said I left without paying for gas..
As it turned out I was at the kero pump and the officer checked my gas tank which was only 1/4 full, and I was driving a 1977 Dodge Monaco. I of course was innocent of any and all charges. He returned my weapon once the stop was completed and thanked me for my cooperation...
I have no problem with the actions of the LEO in the original post.

[KeithPA]

Originally Posted by TonyF

Traffic stops are the single most dangerous activity an LEO performs. He has no idea with whom he is dealing. Officer safety is not an insignificant issue in these kinds of stops.

If the occupant would happen to be a wanted felon, probability is high they would shoot the LEO at first chance. That's why I don't believe being disarmed during a traffic stop is over the top.

Felon gets pulled over, officer approaches car and felon pulls out gun and fires as officer approaches.
or
Officer asks felon to exit the vehicle. While felon and officer are talking, felon pulls gun and starts shooting.

I don't understand the point. You can watch "worlds wildest police videos" or any of those shows, and in about 5 minutes you see a felon attacking a cop. It almost always happens outside of the vehicle. There is no longer a distance between the two or an object like a door. Most cops aren't chuck norris and can stop someone lunging at them.
Personally I would want the person in the car. They may be reaching for something, but at least you have a line of retreat and/or cover.

[D-FENS]

I'm not saying what the cop did was illegal or anything, I just don't understand how they can seize your property. I wouldn't be so surprised if they asked you to place your firearm where he can see it or even to unload the firearm and place it where it can be seen but to actually remove the firearm from you, and take possession of it.

I'm certainly not trying to tell people to not do it or to deny the cop, I'm just saying that it surprises me that no one sees any possible rights violations in this process. I'm sure I am just being naive about it. I've never even been pulled over but I sure as hell wouldn't expect to be disarmed in the process.

[craigc]

Thanks alot Rule I always wondered myself and even learned something today

[XD45]

The officer seemed to have only been protecting himself, maybe he makes it a habit of always asking if they have weapons.. IMO its more dangereous for them to be messing with guns they arent familiar with, than having someone who is legal, and tells you. But my guess would be he doesnt want to go back to his car, run you and see you have a warrant then have to deal with it... atleast you didnt get a gun in the face thats what would get me, I would be on the phone with a lawyer the second i got the chance if that ever happens to me, that is beyond ridiculous, unsafe, and plain scary i dont care if the person has a badge I wouldnt trust a loaded gun i'm holding pointed towards me..

Originally Posted by TonyF

Traffic stops are the single most dangerous activity an LEO performs.

I believe that domestics are the most dangerous call police go on, statistically speaking anyway... thinking about it maybe traffic stops are the highest for confrontations, and domestics are highest chance of getting shot? either way if I was an officer when I first go up to a car i'd be on high alert, but theres certain things some do that are absurd

[Rule10b5]

Originally Posted by TheHighChild

I'm not saying what the cop did was illegal or anything, I just don't understand how they can seize your property. I wouldn't be so surprised if they asked you to place your firearm where he can see it or even to unload the firearm and place it where it can be seen but to actually remove the firearm from you, and take possession of it.

I'm certainly not trying to tell people to not do it or to deny the cop, I'm just saying that it surprises me that no one sees any possible rights violations in this process. I'm sure I am just being naive about it. I've never even been pulled over but I sure as hell wouldn't expect to be disarmed in the process.

The word "seizure" in this context is a term of art -- it means very specific things.

When you're stopped by a police officer, your person, your car, and all the property in it is "seized" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment because you are not free to leave immediately. Sure, it's a temporary seizure, but it's a seizure nonetheless. There isn't much difference between your firearm being in your personal possession, or in the cops car, unloaded, once you're pulled over. You, your car, and the firearm are already pretty much in the cop's possession at that point.

There are always possible rights violations arising out of an officer's conduct during an otherwise valid stop, but as far as the primary seizure claim goes, once you're pulled over, you and your property are seized, and if it's a good stop (tag, speeding, weaving, whatever) you're stuck.

[djturnz]

Wow, 3 pages of comments in a short time, I don't think any post I ever made anywhere went this far. There are several questions and assumptions made, I'll try to answer them.

Originally Posted by dmg1969

Will we be seeing you on an episode of Speeders on CourtTV?

It's possible, he did tell me that we were being recorded by his dash cam and microphone. I drive a green dodge Ram and am a very large guy.

Originally Posted by Montell C. Williams

I don't think you have a real gripe, by your description of the car stop it sounds reasonable to me.I don't know the purpose of askng if you had a gun, a bad guy wouldn't say yes, I was on my was to a stick up.

I am not griping, I tried to state the facts as unbias as I could. I am not unhappy about this at all, except the $157.

Originally Posted by DeltaII5

You said "clocked" I assume this was the PSP that pulled you over?

Redding Township (East Berlin). He was using the glorified stopwatch known as VASCAR.

Originally Posted by tourrider

Where did he find the knife?

It's one thing to secure the weapons, but sounds like you got patted down. That was not right. Legal carry of a weapon is not cause for search. What if he had found that nickel bag of pot. (Not saying you would be carrying any such stuff)...but what if? It's now a completely different story.

I was not patted down. When Ilifted my shirt, he saw it clipped to my pocket next to my gun.

Originally Posted by Cole

So, I enjoyed seeing a post where someone was very responsible with carrying . . . but demonstrated the same sort of automotive irresponsibility that I sometimes do.

Yeah I feel like a hypocrit sometimes. My aunt asked me why I feel the need to carry everywhere. She asked if I think people are out to get me and if I think I'll have to shoot someone. I asked her do you where your seat belt? Why? Are you planning to get into an accident? Then I of course don't wear my seat belt.

Originally Posted by bloomautomatic

If you quoted him accurately, he asked you to step out of the car and be disarmed. You agreed, so I don't see any problem there. If he had ordered you to do that, it would be a different story.
Vince

Yes he asked and I agreed. I don't remember if he actually put it in the form of a question, but he requested it and I complied. I think he started to ask it,and I interuprted with "you want to disarm me?" He was sort of beating around the bush and I knew what he wanted.

Originally Posted by rand

When the police pull you over, do they usually ask about weapons in the vehicle?

rand

No. I used to work 2nd shift and get off at 1am. They used to ask me if I had been drinking. I sort of think that he always asks. The only stickers I have on my truck are a "in memory of" sticker for my friend that was murdered and one showing that I donated to the PSP widow fund (shameless I know).

Originally Posted by TonyF

Traffic stops are the single most dangerous activity an LEO performs. He has no idea with whom he is dealing. Officer safety is not an insignificant issue in these kinds of stops.

If the occupant would happen to be a wanted felon, probability is high they would shoot the LEO at first chance. That's why I don't believe being disarmed during a traffic stop is over the top.

I agree completely. One of my best friends is a cop and I have gone on "ride alongs" with him. It can be very dangerous. At least with a 911 call, they sort of know what's going on before they get there and can have gun in hand. Traffic stops are totally different.


I did have a gun drawn on me at a traffic stop once, actually two, but that's a story for another day.

[wewo]

Originally Posted by TonyF

Traffic stops are the single most dangerous activity an LEO performs. He has no idea with whom he is dealing. Officer safety is not an insignificant issue in these kinds of stops.

If the occupant would happen to be a wanted felon, probability is high they would shoot the LEO at first chance. That's why I don't believe being disarmed during a traffic stop is over the top.

So it is kinda silly to ask about a weapon, a felon will either shoot first or lie, whereas a law abiding citizen (excluding traffic violations) will answer honestly and therefore should not need to be disarmed because law abiding citizens do not shoot other than in self-defense. Certainly a felon will not have a valid LTCF. Just pointing out the apparent flawed logic, I do not necessarily disagree with disarming in that situation, I'm still on the fence. The disarming was for a very short duration and perhaps reasonable so I am not too concerned about search and seizure violations.

[djturnz]

The only problem i see with your logic is that cops don't always ask questions to get the correct answer, they want to see your manerisms (sp?) when you answer.

Just like a field sobriety test. Most people can't say the alphabet backwards, or walk that line. But they want to see you do it. Anybody can act like they aren't drunk if they stand still and keep quiet. They want to get you moving and talking, so they can see how drunk you are.