Arizona tells armed drivers how to avoid deadly police stops

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • bwframe

    Loneranger
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    93   0   0
    Feb 11, 2008
    38,170
    113
    Btown Rural
    Arizona tells armed drivers how to avoid deadly police stops - NBC-2.com WBBH News for Fort Myers, Cape Coral & Naples, Florida

    Posted: Jul 22, 2017 2:10 PM EDT
    Updated: Jul 22, 2017 2:12 PM EDT

    ...PHOENIX (AP) - Gun-friendly Arizona is trying to avoid deadly encounters between police and people behind the wheel by teaching armed drivers how they should handle themselves when they are pulled over.

    Arizona, which allows residents to carry weapons without permits, recently changed its rule book for the road in a bid to avoid confrontations such as the one that killed Philando Castile. The Minnesota man, who had a gun permit, was fatally shot during a 2016 traffic stop after telling an officer he was armed...



    ..."The goal was to create a set of standards," Bolding said.

    The new edition of the driver's manual, published about a month ago, advises drivers with guns to keep their hands on the steering wheel during traffic stops and tell officers right away that there's a firearm in the car.

    It also tells drivers not to reach for anything inside the vehicle without getting permission first. And officers can take possession of guns, for safety reasons, until the stop is completed. The firearms would be returned if no crime has been committed....
     

    jamil

    code ho
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 17, 2011
    60,142
    113
    Gtown-ish
    Arizona tells armed drivers how to avoid deadly police stops - NBC-2.com WBBH News for Fort Myers, Cape Coral & Naples, Florida

    Posted: Jul 22, 2017 2:10 PM EDT
    Updated: Jul 22, 2017 2:12 PM EDT

    ...PHOENIX (AP) - Gun-friendly Arizona is trying to avoid deadly encounters between police and people behind the wheel by teaching armed drivers how they should handle themselves when they are pulled over.

    Arizona, which allows residents to carry weapons without permits, recently changed its rule book for the road in a bid to avoid confrontations such as the one that killed Philando Castile. The Minnesota man, who had a gun permit, was fatally shot during a 2016 traffic stop after telling an officer he was armed...



    ..."The goal was to create a set of standards," Bolding said.

    The new edition of the driver's manual, published about a month ago, advises drivers with guns to keep their hands on the steering wheel during traffic stops and tell officers right away that there's a firearm in the car.

    It also tells drivers not to reach for anything inside the vehicle without getting permission first. And officers can take possession of guns, for safety reasons, until the stop is completed. The firearms would be returned if no crime has been committed....

    Wondering what the ultra libertarians think about that.
     

    Double T

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   1
    Aug 5, 2011
    5,955
    84
    Huntington
    I'm ok with it, except for where they can disarm a person without a reason to. Illegal seizure for "officer safety" doesn't make it any less illegal.
     

    bwframe

    Loneranger
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    93   0   0
    Feb 11, 2008
    38,170
    113
    Btown Rural
    Wondering what the ultra libertarians think about that.

    That is WAY different from Indiana law.

    The news article lays it out in the fashion that it's completely the armed driver's responsibility to not get shot by the officer vs the officer's responsibility to be aware/trained that any driver might be armed.

    It adds some reason for scepticism that the Democrat (party of gun control) state representative got this wording into the driver's manual.

    ...Democratic state Rep. Reginald Bolding said Castile's death inspired him to seek changes to the state's driver's manual. He said the revisions were necessary because Arizona does not require gun permits and some owners have not been trained to handle firearms...


     

    eldirector

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Apr 29, 2009
    14,677
    113
    Brownsburg, IN
    "Only shoot folks that need shot" goes both ways. Really shouldn't need a driver's manual or a department policy.

    Otherwise legal carriers are less dangerous to a cop than him/her standing on the side of the road during the stop.
     

    ATM

    will argue for sammiches.
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    30   0   0
    Jul 29, 2008
    21,019
    83
    Crawfordsville
    Wondering what the ultra libertarians think about that.

    I would not ask permission, but would state my intentions, narrating my slow and deliberate movements, if I suspected my captor to be a threat to me.

    I wouldn't do just anything I was told, either. Some rather common commands would be calmly refused.
     

    Trigger Time

    Air guitar master
    Rating - 98.6%
    204   3   0
    Aug 26, 2011
    40,112
    113
    SOUTH of Zombie city
    Still though there needs to be a look at what's acceptable force for not complying with an order but no threat of violence. Too many people getting the crap beat out of them or even shot by the police simply because they have outstanding parking tickets or broke a ordinance. If I can't shoot someone for stealing my **** then neither should the cops be able too unless they are threatened with violence
     

    Trigger Time

    Air guitar master
    Rating - 98.6%
    204   3   0
    Aug 26, 2011
    40,112
    113
    SOUTH of Zombie city
    Still though there needs to be a look at what's acceptable force for not complying with an order but no threat of violence. Too many people getting the crap beat out of them or even shot by the police simply because they have outstanding parking tickets or broke a ordinance. If I can't shoot someone for stealing my **** then neither should the cops be able too unless they are threatened with violence. People resisting arrest don't deserve to die unless they try to shoot a cop
     

    Hornett

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    15   0   0
    Sep 7, 2009
    2,579
    84
    Bedford, Indiana
    I still have problems with the general advice that you should inform the officer that there is a weapon in the car.
    Why?
    Telling them that only makes the traffic stop longer and more complicated.
    It has nothing to do with your speeding or running a light on red, or your tail light being out.
    It's like throwing a whole, unneccessary level of complexity into the interaction.
    Now we have to deal with the firearms issue instead of the law that you apparently broke.

    For example, when I buy something at my local convience store, I do not feel any need to inform them that I am carrying a gun. I just buy my polar pop and I am on my way.
    But when police are involved, it becomes everybodies business.
    A lot of people carry handguns, it has nothing to do with the police, it's a personal choice.
    Get over it.
    I think a case can easily be made that it is LESS safe for a driver to inform an officer that there is a weapon in the car.

    If there are any police here that can help me to understand, please jump in.
    I love you guys, I really do.
    It just seems a little hopolophobic to expect people with guns to announce it.
     

    IndyDave1776

    Grandmaster
    Emeritus
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    27,286
    113
    That is WAY different from Indiana law.

    The news article lays it out in the fashion that it's completely the armed driver's responsibility to not get shot by the officer vs the officer's responsibility to be aware/trained that any driver might be armed.

    It adds some reason for scepticism that the Democrat (party of gun control) state representative got this wording into the driver's manual.

    ...Democratic state Rep. Reginald Bolding said Castile's death inspired him to seek changes to the state's driver's manual. He said the revisions were necessary because Arizona does not require gun permits and some owners have not been trained to handle firearms...



    Exactly. I don't advocate escalating the situation under most likely circumstances, but I tend to thoroughly reject the 'don't spook the jumpy pit bull' argument. If an officer is that damned edgy that you have to work at not getting shot, he has no business in law enforcement.
     

    MinuteManMike

    Expert
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    5   0   0
    Oct 28, 2008
    1,062
    83
    Lawrence, IN
    Which is absurd. Cops can violate the law all day long and it SHOULD be their job to know it. And the local DA will never press charges when the local PD violates the rights of "normal folks".

    But let a "civilian" violate the law... oh wait, NOW it's different...

    Lawyers, politicians and police all lie. All the time. They know they lie and they know they can do it with impunity as long as they don't rock the boat for the establishment.
     

    Twangbanger

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    21   0   0
    Oct 9, 2010
    7,062
    113
    ...If an officer is that damned edgy that you have to work at not getting shot, he has no business in law enforcement.

    Yeah, but, tell that to Philando Castile. (Speak loudly).


    I still have problems with the general advice that you should inform the officer that there is a weapon in the car.
    Why?
    Telling them that only makes the traffic stop longer and more complicated.
    It has nothing to do with your speeding or running a light on red, or your tail light being out.
    It's like throwing a whole, unneccessary level of complexity into the interaction.
    Now we have to deal with the firearms issue instead of the law that you apparently broke.

    For example, when I buy something at my local convience store, I do not feel any need to inform them that I am carrying a gun. I just buy my polar pop and I am on my way.
    But when police are involved, it becomes everybodies business.
    A lot of people carry handguns, it has nothing to do with the police, it's a personal choice.
    Get over it.
    I think a case can easily be made that it is LESS safe for a driver to inform an officer that there is a weapon in the car.

    If there are any police here that can help me to understand, please jump in.
    I love you guys, I really do.
    It just seems a little hopolophobic to expect people with guns to announce it.

    I totally agree. They added a requirement that did not need to be there. They are just accommodating legislators who have a "regulatory" personality and feel the need for police to be in control of all information about a situation, whether it helps or not. Philando Castile informed, and not only did it not suffice to keep him alive, the case could very well be made that it substantially contributed to his death.

    All this does, is introduce additional irrelevant excuses for shooting a person, when Officer Sponge-Bob-crap-my-pants is on the scene.

    If you're justified shooting the person, that fact stands on its own whether the person informed or not. And, if you're _not_ justified...ditto.

    I think a really solid psychological test needs to be developed for determining whether someone is a control freak, and if you score above a 5, you shouldn't be allowed to hold public office. (And yes, ATM, I do understand that it will be like a church bus on Rapture Day...all legislatures would be emptied by it in an instant).
     

    foszoe

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Jun 2, 2011
    16,052
    113
    I put my hands on the wheel out of respect for the job, whether carrying or not. I don't inform.
     

    foszoe

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    24   0   0
    Jun 2, 2011
    16,052
    113
    Yeah, but, tell that to Philando Castile. (Speak loudly).




    I totally agree. They added a requirement that did not need to be there. They are just accommodating legislators who have a "regulatory" personality and feel the need for police to be in control of all information about a situation, whether it helps or not. Philando Castile informed, and not only did it not suffice to keep him alive, the case could very well be made that it substantially contributed to his death.

    All this does, is introduce additional irrelevant excuses for shooting a person, when Officer Sponge-Bob-crap-my-pants is on the scene.

    If you're justified shooting the person, that fact stands on its own whether the person informed or not. And, if you're _not_ justified...ditto.

    I think a really solid psychological test needs to be developed for determining whether someone is a control freak, and if you score above a 5, you shouldn't be allowed to hold public office. (And yes, ATM, I do understand that it will be like a church bus on Rapture Day...all legislatures would be emptied by it in an instant).

    No such thing as rapture day
     
    Top Bottom