What are the ramifications of lying to a LEO about your weapon during a traffic stop?

[pennsy]

If you are pulled over for a traffic violation and when the LEO asks if you have a weapon; and you say no; even though you do have a weapon; what are the ramifications of lying to the LEO? Personally, I'm not in favor of volunteerly informing a LEO I have a weapon. I just want to know what happens if you tell a LEO you don't have a weapon but one thing leads to another to the point where the LEO discovers that you indeed have a weapon, what could likely happen other than pissing off the LEO? And this is for someone that has a LTCF; legally in possesion of a firearm; no warrants for their arrest; and no criminal record? Just merely lied to the LEO about having a weapon because that person doesn't feel like being treated like a criminal by having to step out of the vehicle; disarmed; kissing the ashpalt; frisked; and finally being tossed in the back of their cruiser (possibly in cuffs); while the LEO ejects the ammo out of you handgun along side of the road because he feels threatened by an armed law abiding citizen who has a LTCF. Can it get any worst than this by lying to the LEO about not having a weapon?!?

[ddefazio]

If you are pulled over for a traffic violation and when the LEO asks if you have a weapon; and you say no; even though you do have a weapon; what are the ramifications of lying to the LEO? Personally, I'm not in favor of volunteerly informing a LEO I have a weapon. I just want to know what happens if you tell a LEO you don't have a weapon but one thing leads to another to the point where the LEO discovers that you indeed have a weapon, what could likely happen other than pissing off the LEO? And this is for someone that has a LTCF; legally in possesion of a firearm; no warrants for their arrest; and no criminal record? Just merely lied to the LEO about having a weapon because that person doesn't feel like being treated as a criminal by having to step out of the vehicle; disarmed; frisked; then kissing the ashpalt; finally being tossed in the back of their cruiser; while the LEO ejects the ammo out of you handgun along side of the road because he feels threatened by a law abiding citizen with a LTCF.

If you respond to the question that you have nothing illegal in the car then you are not lying...

[zackattack784]

If you are pulled over for a traffic violation and when the LEO asks if you have a weapon; and you say no; even though you do have a weapon; what are the ramifications of lying to the LEO? Personally, I'm not in favor of volunteerly informing a LEO I have a weapon. I just want to know what happens if you tell a LEO you don't have a weapon but one thing leads to another to the point where the LEO discovers that you indeed have a weapon, what could likely happen other than pissing off the LEO? And this is for someone that has a LTCF; legally in possesion of a firearm; no warrants for their arrest; and no criminal record? Just merely lied to the LEO about having a weapon because that person doesn't feel like being treated like a criminal by having to step out of the vehicle; disarmed; kissing the ashpalt; frisked; and finally being tossed in the back of their cruiser (possibly in cuffs); while the LEO ejects the ammo out of you handgun along side of the road because he feels threatened by an armed law abiding citizen who has a LTCF. Can it get any worst than this by lying to the LEO about not having a weapon?!?

While I don't recommend it, I don't believe there are any laws prohibiting lying to a LEO. Once you're under oath that's a different story, but I can't come up with any statute at the moment that would criminalize lying during a traffic stop.

[IronSight]

Well, there are the legal realities of the limits a police officer has during a traffic stop.

And then there are the real-world possibilities that could lead you to filing a civil-rights lawsuit.

If the cop stays within limits: If you are "found out" for having lied, the police could terry-search the passenger compartment of your car, and you would likely be asked some unfriendly questions, but eventually you would have to be let go, your property returned, and you could go on your way. As far as I know (not legal advice, not a lawyer, not read in law, just done plenty of my own personal research on case-law).

If the cop doesn't stay within limits: well then all bets are off, and I'm sure there are a couple old horror-stories detailed in past threads on this board as this is a topic that gets beat to death just about every week.

Regardless, PA is not a duty-to-inform state, and how you respond to the question of whether or not you have weapons in your vehicle is up to you. You don't even have to respond, but each and every officer will react to the situation in a different way, and some may overstep their authority depending on the events that occur.

[Steve_NEPhila]

Why even consider lying when you have the right to say nothing? Your questions attempts to make this matter more complicated then it is. You are never under any requirement to talk to the police, answer questions from the police or to tell them anything. If you say nothing you will never have to worry about any situation that may arise from lying.

Watch the video.

[Camasco]

You cannot lie to the police. You will go to jail and be charged with obstructing a peace officer, and it will cost you thousands of dollars in attorney fees to get the stupid thing dismissed, or if youy are found guilty, you will go to jail for a max of 6 months and pay a max fine of $5,000.00 and be required to complete 200 hours of community service.

You CAN refuse to say anything, though, and that is your right that the Miranda Warning reminds you of, excersice it!

~ Folks, lets not pull "Law" out of our butts... you can be infracted and banned for armchair lawyering!

[Steve_NEPhila]

You cannot lie to the police. You will go to jail and be charged with obstructing a peace officer, and it will cost you thousands of dollars in attorney fees to get the stupid thing dismissed, or if youy are found guilty, you will go to jail for a max of 6 months and pay a max fine of $5,000.00 and be required to complete 200 hours of community service.

You CAN refuse to say anything, though, and that is your Miranda right, excersice it!

I need to address the above. The right to not be compelled to be a witness against yourself (remain silent if you choose) is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, 5th Amendment. Miranda was just a guy who took a case to the Supreme Court of the US claiming he was not informed of those rights.

[Camasco]

I need to address the above. The right to not be compelled to be a witness against yourself (remain silent if you choose) is guaranteed in the Bill of Rights, 5th Amendment. Miranda was just a guy who took a case to the Supreme Court of the US claiming he was not informed of those rights.

That is correct, I thought it would be more cumbersome to say that. I should have said something about Miranda Warning, which reminds you of the 5th amendment right, rather than Midranda Right. I will fix it up.

[IronSight]

You cannot lie to the police. You will go to jail and be charged with obstructing a peace officer, and it will cost you thousands of dollars in attorney fees to get the stupid thing dismissed, or if youy are found guilty, you will go to jail for a max of 6 months and pay a max fine of $5,000.00 and be required to complete 200 hours of community service.

That's simply flat out false. There are certain times when lying to police/authority is illegal, and then there are PLENTY of times when it's not. If you want to quote law, then quote it, link to it, and back up your assertions otherwise all you are doing is providing bad legal information.

Edit to add:

Let's look at the actual law.

Here's 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 4914

§ 4914. False identification to law enforcement authorities

(a) Offense defined.--A person commits an offense if he furnishes law enforcement authorities with false information about his identity after being informed by a law enforcement officer who is in uniform or who has identified himself as a law enforcement officer that the person is the subject of an official investigation of a violation of law.


(b) Grading.--An offense under this section is a misdemeanor of the third degree.

Note that the above is ONLY an offense for lying about identity while the subject of an official investigation.

Here's 18 Pa.C.S.A. § 5101

§ 5101. Obstructing administration of law or other governmental function

A person commits a misdemeanor of the second degree if he intentionally obstructs, impairs or perverts the administration of law or other governmental function by force, violence, physical interference or obstacle, breach of official duty, or any other unlawful act, except that this section does not apply to flight by a person charged with crime, refusal to submit to arrest, failure to perform a legal duty other than an official duty, or any other means of avoiding compliance with law without affirmative interference with governmental functions.

Note that in the above, simply lying to a police officer does not apply unless you are doing so unlawfully, which as I've already pointed out nowhere does it state that "lying to a police officer" is a crime under any and all circumstances, and there isn't a statute I've seen anywhere that covers what the OP is pointing out. Lying to a police officer does not, by default, equal obstruction; it can, but only under specific circumstances.

2nd Edit: I knew your post sounded familiar, this is the second time I've had to correct you recently after you've stated incorrect things about the law as absolute fact. For those interested, here's the first time you did this: http://forum.pafoa.org/open-carry-14...ml#post1352100 (post #402 in the thread in case the link fails).

3rd Edit: You're not even correct about the law in Montana, (since you have that listed as your location I decided to look it up):

http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/mca/45/7/45-7-302.htm

45-7-302. Obstructing peace officer or other public servant.

(1) A person commits the offense of obstructing a peace officer or public servant if the person knowingly obstructs, impairs, or hinders the enforcement of the criminal law, the preservation of the peace, or the performance of a governmental function, including service of process.
(2) It is no defense to a prosecution under this section that the peace officer was acting in an illegal manner, provided that the peace officer was acting under the peace officer's official authority.
(3) A person convicted of the offense of obstructing a peace officer or other public servant, including a person serving process, shall be fined not to exceed $500 or be imprisoned in the county jail for a term not to exceed 6 months, or both.

That's all I could find, perhaps there's an applicable statute that covers what you were saying that I don't know of? If so, please provide it.

[Big Kahuna 19547]

Although your scenario is a traffic stop and a local or state police officer and Ironsight accurately provides the Pennsylvania laws which show no crime was committed. Remember to be careful, a blanket no violation is not true... Who stops you can mean a world of difference. Remember that federal officers and agents sometimes do traffic stops (ie.. US Park Police near DC cover all those fancy federal parkways or US Park Rangers at Gettysburg or Valley Forge..) If they ask if you have a weapon, you might want to tell the truth. It is a crime to lie to a federal officer or agent.

Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001 makes it a crime to: 1) knowingly and willfully; 2) make any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or representation; 3) in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative or judicial branch of the United States. Your lie does not even have to be made directly to an employee of the national government as long as it is "within the jurisdiction" of the ever expanding federal bureaucracy. Though the falsehood must be "material" this requirement is met if the statement has the "natural tendency to influence or [is] capable of influencing, the decision of the decisionmaking body to which it is addressed." United States v. Gaudin , 515 U.S. 506, 510 (1995). (In other words, it is not necessary to show that your particular lie ever really influenced anyone.) Although you must know that your statement is false at the time you make it in order to be guilty of this crime, you do not have to know that lying to the government is a crime or even that the matter you are lying about is "within the jurisdiction" of a government agency. United States v. Yermian , 468 U.S. 63, 69 (1984).

Now .. whether or not the US Attorney would prosecute the issue is a whole different matter. Then again do you trust Eric Holder and his posse?