Law Student Backs Down Cop After Being Unlawfully Stopped For Carrying A Gun

[Crydaddy]

Can't the officer say that the man is suspected to be carrying illegally and need proof he is not doing so? Lol

 

[elwoodward]

Can't the officer say that the man is suspected to be carrying illegally and need proof he is not doing so? Lol

if he is in a constitutional carry/OC state there is no need for a stop.
ianal thats just my

 

[IndyDave1776]

Can't the officer say that the man is suspected to be carrying illegally and need proof he is not doing so? Lol

Isn't that like stopping any of us while driving on the grounds that the car could be stolen or we may not have a valid driver's license, or we may be velociraptors dressed as humans?

 

[donballz]

I find it interesting that everyone is saying it would be different in Indiana. The cases the student was citing in the vid were US Supreme Court decisions. Example Brown vs Texas. Any Indiana law which contradicted those decisions would therefore be Unconstitutional.

I am not saying you should literally make a federal case out of being stopped. I would have saved myself the 3 minutes if I was in this kid's shoes and just produced my permit.

But assuming his legal take is correct, its correct nationwide.

 

[Clay]

am I the only one who 'puckered up' when I saw the glove being put on

 

[PeaShooter]

Also during a routine traffic stop where the officer runs your driver's license your LTCH will appear on your record.

This is not standard in Indiana. There are only a few localities that have any sort of cross referencing on permits they in particular "issued" and drivers licenses. Most of the state has no such cross reference.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

This is not standard in Indiana. There are only a few localities that have any sort of cross referencing on permits they in particular "issued" and drivers licenses. Most of the state has no such cross reference.

That used to be the case. As of a year or year and a half (iirc) that changed. Now your drivers lic is linked with your LTCH through the BMV. I've heard (but can't confirm) that it was done because some people through a hissy fit when must inform was shot down in the legislature a couple of years back. IIRC it never even made it out of committee.

 

[brew45]

love this. the kid may have been a smart ass, but he did know what he was talking about. either way, great assertion of rights. makes me want to buy another gun.

 

[ryknoll3]

I find it interesting that everyone is saying it would be different in Indiana. The cases the student was citing in the vid were US Supreme Court decisions. Example Brown vs Texas. Any Indiana law which contradicted those decisions would therefore be Unconstitutional.

I am not saying you should literally make a federal case out of being stopped. I would have saved myself the 3 minutes if I was in this kid's shoes and just produced my permit.

But assuming his legal take is correct, its correct nationwide.

Difference in Indiana, it IS illegal to carry without a license, and it IS part of the law that the burden is on the person/suspect to prove that they are exempt from the illegality (by having a license). So, if a IN LEO stops you for carrying a handgun, he DOES have reasonable suspicion of a specific crime (unlike Brown v Texas, where no specific crime was suspected) and can ask for proof that you are legally able to carry.

We need to pass constitutional carry here in Indiana, and remove this ability for LEO to hassle.

 

[marcweid]

While I feel the guy was totally in the right. I think that most of the time this would have turned out different. I see it ending up something like, armed man shot by police after suspect waves gun in the streets. It only has to possible for the media to make it look true. They said people had already called it in. And I am sure his cell phone camera would have come up missing.

A fews years back I stood my ground on a different topic and ended up in jail for several days. After thousands in legal fees I was fully cleared and all charges were dropped and I was even given a written formal apology. However I was then pulled over multiple times in the same small town over the next year for rolling stop, unsafe start, failure to use turn signal, etc. all of which I had no way to fight my word against his. Lesson to me was you may be right but it may not be worth the it. Save your fight for when it really matters.

 

[No Lot Lizards]

Difference in Indiana, it IS illegal to carry without a license, and it IS part of the law that the burden is on the person/suspect to prove that they are exempt from the illegality (by havimng a license). So, if a IN LEO stops you for carrying a handgun, he DOES have reasonable suspicion of a specific crime (unlike Brown v Texas, where no specific crime was suspected) and can ask for proof that you are legally able to carry.

We need to pass constitutional carry here in Indiana, and remove this ability for LEO to hassle.

Its also illegal to drive without a license, so anybody driving can reasonably suspected of committing a crime and a cop has the right to pull anybody over to prove they are exempt from the illegality of driving without a license?

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Its also illegal to drive without a license, so anybody driving can reasonably suspected of committing a crime and a cop has the right to pull anybody over to prove they are exempt from the illegality of driving without a license?

They used to be able to and did, until the USSC declared it unconstitutional.

 

[MikeDVB]

While I feel the guy was totally in the right. I think that most of the time this would have turned out different. I see it ending up something like, armed man shot by police after suspect waves gun in the streets. It only has to possible for the media to make it look true. They said people had already called it in. And I am sure his cell phone camera would have come up missing.

A fews years back I stood my ground on a different topic and ended up in jail for several days. After thousands in legal fees I was fully cleared and all charges were dropped and I was even given a written formal apology. However I was then pulled over multiple times in the same small town over the next year for rolling stop, unsafe start, failure to use turn signal, etc. all of which I had no way to fight my word against his. Lesson to me was you may be right but it may not be worth the it. Save your fight for when it really matters.

Vimeo FTW, take my phone - the video is already on the internet .

 

[offroadking208]

So slightly off topic, but if you do show your LTCH and the officer asks to take your firearm to "run the serial numbers and check if it's stolen." Do you have a legal obligation to let them do so, or can you say no and that be the end of it? Example being, a friend of mine got pulled over for speeding a few weeks ago, and was sat out on the curb behind his vehicle after the officer took his firearm, unloaded it, and had it in his vehicle to check the serial numbers to make sure it isn't stolen. Did he have to comply, or no? He got off with a verbal warning btw, but said he did feel like a criminal sitting out on the curb in front of two police cars.

 

[Hookeye]

I think the cop got exactly what he wanted.

Stopped a person, got info that said they were not of a felon type.

 

[Dybber]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=meiq2tVUkGM&feature=related


full vid

That is one of the greatest things I have seen! I need to brush up a little!

 

[repair]

I support our Police officers....when they are in the right but when they aren't they need to be educated.....this kid did a great job!

 

[ryknoll3]

They used to be able to and did, until the USSC declared it unconstitutional.

The carrying of a gun, particularly in states that don't require a permit for carry, or your method of carry should be equally protected, since 2A is a constitutional right, and not the "privilege" that we're always told that driving is.

That said, I don't ever envision SCOTUS ruling this way, bowing to the pressure of the "officer safety" bunch.

 

[MikeDVB]

So slightly off topic, but if you do show your LTCH and the officer asks to take your firearm to "run the serial numbers and check if it's stolen." Do you have a legal obligation to let them do so, or can you say no and that be the end of it? Example being, a friend of mine got pulled over for speeding a few weeks ago, and was sat out on the curb behind his vehicle after the officer took his firearm, unloaded it, and had it in his vehicle to check the serial numbers to make sure it isn't stolen. Did he have to comply, or no? He got off with a verbal warning btw, but said he did feel like a criminal sitting out on the curb in front of two police cars.

Honestly, I'm not sure. They could likely take the weapon for "officer safety" and after that, there wouldn't be a lot you could do other than taking them to court and making them prove that they felt you were dangerous (i.e. needed to be disarmed).

Speculating here, so don't take it as legal advice.

 

[handgun]

In indiana you do not have to give identification to the police officer for an an unlawful stop. Unless he believes you are commiting a crime about to comit a crime or have committed a crime. I would safely assume the same with a ltch. Due to the ltch does give you that right to carry in our state. However, there is no fines if such wasnt shown or on your person such as in KY and i think its only a 25.00 fine there.

I would show them the ltch and ask to leave.