For Those Who Don't Disarm For LEO's

[SWATDUDE]

Except that you are dead wrong on several counts.

For one, an officer cannot make a custodial arrest for an infraction and nor can he take you to the lock up to make sure you see the judge.

For two, if you actually think all traffic violations are "dangerous behavior", you are either naive or dense. "Failure to sign your registration" is obviously incredibly dangerous behavior right along with "license plate light not working" or "license plate swinging".

For three, I don't know of ANY department which considers a traffic stop to be an "arrest" for statistical purposes and I am privy to quite a few. In Indiana, civil infractions are by definition not arrestable offenses. That is why they are civil, not criminal.

If you really want to get all "non-ambiguous" here, a traffic stop for a civil infraction is a Terry-stop limited detention, requiring reasonable suspicion, which by law cannot continue beyond the scope of citing the infraction.

Joe

Amen brother!

 

[ThrottleJockey]

I actually had a state trooper in MS at a weigh station see my pistol on the jump seat of my KW...I asked him if he would like me to secure it and he told me to just leave mine where it was and he'd leave his where it was.

 

[Booya]

First and foremost, good story and thanks for sharing.

BUT, there is a huge difference between declining to hand over your firearm and not allowing an officer to disarm you. You met an officer that had some sense about him, but if he wanted to disarm you it would be in your best interest to oblige...I sure as hell wouldn't resist.

Correct, had he really pushed the issue and got all belligerent about it, I would have let him get in and get it. I'm certainly not going to have a shouting match with an LEO on the side of the road. Then again, if it really started to get nutty, I would have started recording and asking him a lot of questions. I did get a good officer that day (pretty much always do), but if they are being rude and unprofessional, they can probably expect the same attitude right back from me.

 

[sloughfoot]

Whenever you have been stopped by an Officer of the law and are not free to travel as you were prior to the stop, you have been arrested in order to stop that behavior.

You are correct, technically you have been detained, but the purpose of the detainment is to stop the dangerous, ilegal behavior. Whether it is a traffic infraction or misdemeanor, you have been stopped from continuing the actions which triggered the official response fro the Officer.

Where I went wrong in my previous post was to not clarify at what point you were detained and where that devolved into a legal arrest that is recognized by the court.

For the purposes of the OP's post, if you refuse to comply with the investigating Officer's requests to disarm, you might regret it.

 

[mrortega]

I agree with the wise chinese man, once more!
I wont disarm but I wont resist if the LEO wants to take my gun away from me.
If he shoots himself in the foot by accident, while taking it out of the holster, he will have to deal with it.If he shoots me, he will have more things to deal with.
But in both cases it wont be my fault.
Im not touching a loaded gun (even a non loaded gun) when a LEO is around.

Excellent point. I'd hope most LEOs would be familiar enough with my retention holster to get it out without a ND into his goodies (or mine.)

 

[Gunner52]

I agree with the wise chinese man, once more!
I wont disarm but I wont resist if the LEO wants to take my gun away from me.
If he shoots himself in the foot by accident, while taking it out of the holster, he will have to deal with it.If he shoots me, he will have more things to deal with.
But in both cases it wont be my fault.
Im not touching a loaded gun (even a non loaded gun) when a LEO is around.

Si senior, I defiantly agree. It would be a bad idea to draw your weapon, I would very politely request I be allowed to turn my back to him and spread em so he could take it.

 

[Mackey]

I had one stop when I was disarmed. I thought my SP101 looked very nifty tucked into the waist band of the motorcycle cop. I thought about telling him that and winking at him when he returned to my car with my ticket (btw: get pulled over by ISP motorcycle cop = getting a ticket), but I resisted. Firstly because I'm not a funny boy, and secondly because I just made that up. (but only the winking part ... I did get stopped and disarmed and a ticket, in that order).
Sorry for rambling on ...

 

[Zoub]

I was stopped by a motorcycle cop on 465 E heading N.

He then asked if I had any weapons in the vehicle, I said yes.

He then asked that I hand over the weapon to which I then replied "I really would rather not."

He just looked at me and said "ok, makes sense.".

We then had a chat about being in the Marines.

Now that is a short story

I have never had a cop ask me to disarm. Perhaps it is due to my reputation? Technically I refused to disarm since I did not volunteer to do so.

 

[concrete dog]

My story is this: It happened at the scene of an accident that I was 30% at fault. It was about an hour into the situation when the female officer asked if that was a knife under my shirt? To which I replied no! She then drew her sidearm and put it to her side while TAKING my sidearm out of the holster. She was really ticked when she was informed it was legal and she had to give it back. I was never asked to disarm.

 

[Booya]

Now that is a short story

I have never had a cop ask me to disarm. Perhaps it is due to my reputation? Technically I refused to disarm since I did not volunteer to do so.

I can tell a story my friend! trust me That was short compared to how long I could have made it!

I try not to ramble, but sometimes I just can't help it. I just want to be sure that I really make my point and it's hard sometimes.....wait a sec...Nevermind I'm rambling...

 

[sloughfoot]

Also, just to clarify, if you have been arrested for an infraction and you are from out of state and refuse to sign the citation, you can be placed in jail to see the Judge the next morning.

If you give reasonable cause to make the Officer believe that you might not respond to the infraction citation, you can be retained in jail to speak with the Judge in the morning.

I don't know if this is state law or local rule, but I know that Judges Gull, Surbeck, and Sheibenburger have all ordered this in Allen County. And I follow all judges orders.

 

[Fargo]

If you say so......

The traffic statutes are all in the Criminal section, not the civil section.

Really? The Traffic code is title 9, the Criminal code is Title 35. This has been so for only about 30 years. Ya know, back when they made all those traffic offenses civil and gave them their own section.

Don't believe me?

Indiana Constitution

Click and see what the titles are.

Yes, the original stop may have been for an infraction, but the investigation may have became something else. If it needs to become a custodial arrest, that is exactly what happens.

No, if an officer has PC to believe a felony or certain select misdemeanors have been committed or if a misdemeanor has been committed in his presence, then he can arrest. Otherwise, no dice. See IC 35-33-1.

When a citation is written, it then becomes an arrest. Sorry if I was not clear on that in my other post.

No it doesn't and it hasn't for 30 years. See IC 35-33-1 for when you can arrest. It is only an arrest for certain constitutional purposes as regards unlawful seizures and the suppression of evidence. It is not an arrest per the Indiana code.

At least my traffic stopping days are over, so you don't have to worry about me anymore. I have trained a lot of guys and gals though..

While I am relieved that I don't have to worry about your complete disregard for the law, the fact that you apparently were an FTO isn't exactly reassuring.

Also, just to clarify, if you have been arrested for an infraction and you are from out of state and refuse to sign the citation, you can be placed in jail to see the Judge the next morning.

If you give reasonable cause to make the Officer believe that you might not respond to the infraction citation, you can be retained in jail to speak with the Judge in the morning.

I don't know if this is state law or local rule, but I know that Judges Gull, Surbeck, and Sheibenburger have all ordered this in Allen County. And I follow all judges orders.

You are referring to certain parts of the traffic code as regards refusal of service and Failure To Appear. Infractions are still not arrestable offenses.


Joe

Joe

 

[Fargo]

dupe

 

[maxmayhem]

I am not looking for trouble
I am not going to divulge that I have a firearm as I have no obligation to do so in Indiana
I am not going to lie about a firearm
I will conceal carry and tell the truth if I am asked if I have a firearm
I am not carrying drugs or other contraband so no worries here
I probably am not going to answer many questions at all from the police


This being said--When i was 21 (16+ years ago) ...i was stopped in a little town called Rockford, Ohio between fort wayne and dayton...they set up speed traps and would nail you for driving 9 mph over the speed limit...with all the wisdom of a 21 year old I was driving with a suspended license (for an unpaid speeding ticket in TN) with a 22 smith and wesson pistol in the backpack in the bed of my pickup truck...the city police officer pulled me over for speeding and ran my license...he came back up and told me to get out of the truck....i got out and my 2 labrador retrievers who were wired up from a long trip from virginia followed me out and took off...he got a kind of annoyed/exasperated look on his face when the two giant dogs bolted out of the truck into a field...i yelled at them and they both came back. They probably came back to meet him and I collared both of them. I put them back in the truck cab....after this he handcuffed me and searched me for weapons and whatever....he then asked me if I had any weapons in the vehicle...i reluctantly but without hesitation said "yes , in the backpack. I inherited it and i am bringing it home from virginia" ...I had a loaded 22 pistol in the back of my truck with no permit. He took it out and called in the serial number with no issues of course. He then put me in the back of his cruiser....I sat back there handcuffed for a while...Another cop came up who was apparently his supervisor. They talked for about 10 minutes. At one point, the law enforcement officer opened the door as if to show his boss how young and naive I looked. The supervisor eyeballed me while the other officer just looked at him. They shut the door without saying a word. After about a minute, they took me out of the vehicle and uncuffed me. The supervisor left. The other officer told me that I had to pay the ticket before I could leave. I went to the atm back in town riding in the front of his cruiser and complied. I gave him the cash which was nearly every cent I had and he recorded the transaction on a tape recorder. He gave me my smith and wesson revolver back and started to hand me the ammo. To this point I was more worried about driving while suspended. He told me, "It was a good thing that you told me about the firearm in the back because if you had lied and I would have found a loaded gun in your car then you would be going to Cleveland." I didnt ask what going to Cleveland meant but assumed it would have been something serious. I was kind of concerned at this moment. He handed me the gun and started to hand me the ammo. I think he told me not to load it but I dont remember. I told him to keep the ammo and he did. What I later realized is that he was probably making the case to his supervisor (before he opened the door) not to charge me with a weapons charge of some kind because i was a honest "kid". I think the fact that I was honest kept me from getting some kind of felony charge. For this I am grateful because those felonies are hard to explain at job interviews and when you are buying a firearm. The point is, you should always be honest when dealing with law enforcement in my experience as this will make things go best for you.

 

[thebishopp]

Nothing non-ambiguious here. If an Officer stopped you while driving your vehicle, you have been arrested. It may or not turn into a custodial arrest, but, it is an arrest nonetheless. The Officer has stopped you from continuing an illegal, dangerous behavior.

You have been arrested.

You might be released with a citation to later explain your behavior to a Judge, you might be locked up to ensure that conversation the next morning.

But it is an arrest and the Officer will take credit for that arrest on his/her daily sheet.

Wow, I must of missed this during the legal course at the police academy. This is so totally off base it's almost laughable.

 

[thebishopp]

If you say so......

The traffic statutes are all in the Criminal section, not the civil section.

Yes, the original stop may have been for an infraction, but the investigation may have became something else. If it needs to become a custodial arrest, that is exactly what happens.

And just to clairify, I have NEVER stopped anyone for failure to sign the registration. I have stopped people for license plate light and license plate swinging. Sometimes we had a polite conversation and sometimes it went much further.

When a citation is written, it then becomes an arrest. Sorry if I was not clear on that in my other post.

At least my traffic stopping days are over, so you don't have to worry about me anymore. I have trained a lot of guys and gals though..

regards

A traffic stop is NOT an arrest at least not by any legal definition of the word. If you are applying your own definition then I guess you could call it that but man...

While a stop for a routine traffic infraction can RESULT in an arrest, they are not considered "arrests" in an of themselves. Which is also a reason why you are only allowed to "detain" someone on a traffic stop for a "reasonable" amount of time.

You can not UNARREST someone. Once you arrest them that's it. By your definition you are "unarresting" people once you let them go on a traffic stop. You can't "arrest" someone and then "let them off with a warning".

Surely you can't be serious and your postings in this thread must be an attempt to "bait" some of the INGO members here... but if they are not, it is a prime example of the lack of training some departments have.

Now granted my police academy training was in Kentucky so maybe some Indiana LEOs would like to take this opportunity to correct one of their own... at least I hope they aren't training you guys here in Indiana that traffic stops are arrests.

 

[maxmayhem]

Most/some people do not understand the difference between being detained and arrested or the difference between a civil and a criminal issues

 

[thebishopp]

Whenever you have been stopped by an Officer of the law and are not free to travel as you were prior to the stop, you have been arrested in order to stop that behavior.

You are correct, technically you have been detained, but the purpose of the detainment is to stop the dangerous, ilegal behavior. Whether it is a traffic infraction or misdemeanor, you have been stopped from continuing the actions which triggered the official response fro the Officer.

Where I went wrong in my previous post was to not clarify at what point you were detained and where that devolved into a legal arrest that is recognized by the court.

For the purposes of the OP's post, if you refuse to comply with the investigating Officer's requests to disarm, you might regret it.

Ah, ok. While I am glad you clarified that I am still somewhat concerned.

The problem I can see arising though is if the people you are training do not understand that you are attributing your own meaning to the term "arrest" versus what the court's view as an "arrest". Again I certainly hope you are not serious about what you have posted here and hopefully you are not training anymore impressionable young officers in this way.

Yes your movements have been "arrested", as in stopped, for the traffic infraction but you have not been "arrested" as defined by the legal definition of the act.

The fact is that an officer has more authority when making/during an "arrest" then during a "detainment".

Popping the word "Dangerous" in front of "illegal behavior" when referencing ALL traffic stops/infractions does not grant any more authority to you during your "detainment" of an individual.

As for following ALL Judges orders... well folks, I think what we have here is a prime example of why if laws (more of then anyway) are passed that further hinder, or in the most extreme cases totally strip away constitutional rights, you will not have any shortage of people willing to carry out those orders.

 

[thebishopp]

Most/some people do not understand the difference between being detained and arrested or the difference between a civil and a criminal issues

True, and normally not an issue... but when that person has been granted the powers by the governing body to irreversibly change and sometimes destroy peoples' lives, I must say it causes me more than just a little concern.

While I do not believe that LEOs have to know EVERY law. They MUST know the laws that they are ENFORCING. If not then they shouldn't be enforcing them.

 

[mtgasten]

I'll give the officer my DL if I was driving that's it. If they want anything else they will have to obtain it w/o my consent and will be facing whatever consequences come from that. If they want to search anything, too bad. If they want to know I have a firearm on my person, too bad. We have 4th and 5th Amendment rights for a reason.
That being said...the few times I've been pulled over the conversation didn't go past, "License and registration please sir...Here is your license back, please slow down."
Ive only come across a disrespectful LEO once, and I was disrespectful right back. I was breaking no law so I was able to leave w/o incident, we were both breaking each others' balls for awhile though. So I don't anticipate ever having to pull the 4th/5th/14th Amendment cards on an LEO but I most certainly will if the situation presents itself.