Duty to inform

[General Geoff]

I know there is no duty to inform in Pennsylvania. This question pertains to all states that do.

I was thinking about this, and came to the realization that a duty to inform law is likely unenforceable in a court of law against those carrying illegally, because if a person is carrying illegally, he would be incriminating himself by informing the officer. Thus, the law violates his fifth amendment right against self incrimination; similar to Haynes v. United States (which held that a felon need not register NFA firearms since it would be self incrimination).

GunLawyer (or any other legal types), what is your opinion on this theory?

[JayBell]

well, i think yer lumping one legal requirement in with something completely different.

For example...NC has a "duty to inform" statute as part of the agreement for receiving a LTCF/Permit (I'll say both terms since I dotn know what THEY call it). IF you get stopped by a LEO in NC, AND you are carrying a firearm, THEN you must inform the LEO that you have a LTCF/Permit and are carrying a firearm.

Thus, the duty to inform only comes into play if you have a valid LTCF/Permit in NC, and are carrying a firearm under that LTCF/Permit.

since carrying WITH a LTCF/permit in North Carolina is not a crime, then the 5th Amendment does not come into play at all... its not self incrimination, its a condition of possessing a LTCF/Permit.

criminals illegally carrying a firearm of course are not required to inform, as that would be self incrimination.

I'm no lawyer, but thats how it is, near as i can tell.

[General Geoff]

well, i think yer lumping one legal requirement in with something completely different.

Not at all; the theory applies only to those violating the law, not those who are carrying legally.

In other words, the only folks required to inform officers that they are armed, are the ones who pose no threat to an officer. In other words, the law is completely pointless.

[mrjam2jab]

Not at all; the theory applies only to those violating the law, not those who are carrying legally.

In other words, the only folks required to inform officers that they are armed, are the ones who pose no threat to an officer. In other words, the law is completely pointless.

That's why only 10 states have it...

[tes151]

Sounds the same as the federal law that says if I ( a CDL holder ) get a ticket outside of my home state, I have a duty to notify Pennsylvania of the citation so they can assess points. I currently don't know anyone dumb enough to comply with that crap, but it is a law. Makes as much sense as the duty to inform when carrying.

[HbgHKFan]

Up until recently, I've been on the fence about duty to inform. But now I'm sure that I will always inform an LEO that I am conceal carrying during a traffic stop. Why? Because it's in my best safety, that's why. If you fail to inform, and at anytime during that traffic stop the LEO finds out, you're in even deeper shit! You know you'll see a gun pointed at your head and you'll be pulled out of the car and all sorts of hell.

[jshwak]

Up until recently, I've been on the fence about duty to inform. But now I'm sure that I will always inform an LEO that I am conceal carrying during a traffic stop. Why? Because it's in my best safety, that's why. If you fail to inform, and at anytime during that traffic stop the LEO finds out, you're in even deeper shit! You know you'll see a gun pointed at your head and you'll be pulled out of the car and all sorts of hell.

And then you'll have a perfectly viable reason to take the matter to court.

[BimmerJon]

Up until recently, I've been on the fence about duty to inform. But now I'm sure that I will always inform an LEO that I am conceal carrying during a traffic stop. Why? Because it's in my best safety, that's why. If you fail to inform, and at anytime during that traffic stop the LEO finds out, you're in even deeper shit! You know you'll see a gun pointed at your head and you'll be pulled out of the car and all sorts of hell.

lol. Many will argue that it's in your best safety to NOT inform. What makes you think you WON'T have several guns pointed at your head, get ripped from your car, have your firearm taken and searched if you DO inform?

LOL @ "in my best safety"

[tommy610]

Not at all; the theory applies only to those violating the law, not those who are carrying legally.

In other words, the only folks required to inform officers that they are armed, are the ones who pose no threat to an officer. In other words, the law is completely pointless.

And, the only people who would even THINK of informing are those who pose no threat. Once again, a gun law that adds no value, and takes away value from the law-abiding.

[MicroMonkey]

I have also wondered about this very issue. I very rarely carry, only because I dont have a gun that I can carry other than my wifes .380. But I have had conversations with a few state police officers, and they said they are well aware that alot of people carry, and when asked about informing, he said its not needed. If you were to lean over to get your papers from the glove box and they see it, they may say something like "I see you are carrying", and thats about it, they go about the business at hand. The attitude I got from them was that they basically dont care. They only care when you become a threat.