LTCH and serial number question

[Sylvain]

Here is the situation:
You are stoped by the police when carrying your firearm (OC or CC) and they ask for your LTCH.
Can they take the gun away from you?
Can they run the serial number to see if it was stolen or just right it down?

What if I hide the serial number with some tape and do not give them consent for any search?
Would they need a search warrant to remove that tape and get to that information?

I know in Indiana the guns are not registered so the serial number wouldnt give much information but im asking to know if that would be legal to hide.

 

[JoshuaW]

They wouldnt need a warrant to remove the tape.

You dont have to offer up your gun. Some officers arent going to take that as easy as others, and you may get forced to anyways in the name of "officer safety".

I have no problems with exercising rights, but you also have to be prepared to be hassled. If you are okay with that, more power to you. If you are going to whine about it later, why bother? If your gun isnt stolen, let them run the numbers. No big deal.

Oh, and they will almost definitely unload it for you. Completely. If they know how to break it down, it may be handed back to you in pieces, especially if they felt you were a PITA.

 

[LPMan59]

don't volunteer anything. but don't lie either.

 

[Sylvain]

I was just curious about that because after I saw a video about OC in California.
(Im glad the gun laws in Indiana are not ****ed up like that btw)
There I believe the guns are registered and you can OC without any kind of ID on you, also if you hide your serial number they cant look at it without a search warrant.
Now here in Indiana if you are already showing your LTCH to the police they already have all your information and my gun not being stolen I would have no problem having them run the serial number.
I was just wondering if they can legaly do it but more important if they do it often when they find someone with a legal gun.

 

[Bondhead88]

I was just curious about that because after I saw a video about OC in California.
(Im glad the gun laws in Indiana are not ****ed up like that btw)
There I believe the guns are registered and you can OC without any kind of ID on you, also if you hide your serial number they cant look at it without a search warrant.
Now here in Indiana if you are already showing your LTCH to the police they already have all your information and my gun not being stolen I would have no problem having them run the serial number.
I was just wondering if they can legaly do it but more important if they do it often when they find someone with a legal gun.

But it had to be unloaded so a lot of good OCing would do you

 

[esrice]

Indiana law does not require you to voluntarily inform the officer that you are carrying a firearm. That does not mean, however, that you should lie if asked.

Some people choose to inform the officer immediately during a traffic stop. Others choose to only inform if they were to be asked to get out of the car, where its accidental discovery could be an issue. Others will not inform under any circumstances.

In any case, if the officer does have knowledge of your firearm, he may run the serial number to check if its stolen. He may not.

 

[JoshuaW]

I was just curious about that because after I saw a video about OC in California.
(Im glad the gun laws in Indiana are not ****ed up like that btw)
There I believe the guns are registered and you can OC without any kind of ID on you, also if you hide your serial number they cant look at it without a search warrant.
Now here in Indiana if you are already showing your LTCH to the police they already have all your information and my gun not being stolen I would have no problem having them run the serial number.
I was just wondering if they can legaly do it but more important if they do it often when they find someone with a legal gun.

Many times officers will do so if they are able to get their hands on the gun (it is volunteered, they request it). They will normally run the numbers, then unload it and return it to you. For the sake of "officer safety". I personally dont have a problem with them running numbers, since my guns are legal. If I do have a stolen gun, I bought it stolen, and I would feel horrible and would want the original owner to have their gun returned to them. That is just me.

I do hate that they will typically unload EVERYTHING. I dont want to spend five minutes loading 37 rounds. God forbid the officer drops a round (high quality HPs are like $.25/round at least!).

I have yet to be stopped, but this is my plan: Inform the officer/Show LTCH. If he asks for the gun, give it to him. If he asks about extra mags, give them to him if they are on my immediate visible person (I usually carry my mags IWB, so likely no). After the gun is returned unloaded, I will just get out a loaded mag from my glove box, or off my person and reload. I will take all the ammo he hands me and put them in the ammo box in my glove box. If he provides me with a little baggy, I will just leave them in there. When I am where I am going or have a moment, then I will reload everything.

 

[Bondhead88]

What's that old saying.

You can have my gun when my manicure is done...oops that's not it!

 

[Compatriot G]

I have never understood the justification behind running the serial number on a firearm to see if it is stolen. What reasonable suspicion does a police officer have that just because I possess a firearm, it might be stolen? Why is my firearm treated differently than my watch, cell phone or any other article in my vehicle?

 

[Bondhead88]

I have never understood the justification behind running the serial number on a firearm to see if it is stolen. What reasonable suspicion does a police officer have that just because I possess a firearm, it might be stolen? Why is my firearm treated differently than my watch, cell phone or any other article in my vehicle?

because they say so, nananananana

 

[Yamaha]

agreed.....I have only been asked to do that twice, and both times were awhile ago, by the local town department. I never let them unload it themselves(I view it as a liability on myself) and since I've learned more, the next time I will prolly ask on what grounds they wish to run it

 

[Timjoebillybob]

They wouldnt need a warrant to remove the tape.

Maybe, maybe not. Would they need a warrant to remove it? Nope they can do that without one. But would they be legally allowed to do so? Now that is a different question.

Without the tape the serial number would be in "plain view" and they can run it all they want. With the tape it would be concealed and they may need a warrant to run it unless they have probable cause to believe it is stolen. See Arizona v Hicks where it was found that just moving a piece of stereo equipment to get the serial number was an unConstitutional search because while the officer may have had reasonable suspicious he did not have probable cause and that also it was not inline with the legal reason for entering the apartment. In my opinion removing a piece of tape would be the same. Because it is not in plain view and also if the officer seizes the weapon for "officer safety" removing the tape to view the serial number would not be related to the reason for the seizure.

IANAL but IMHO removing the tape would be very good grounds for a civil lawsuit for violating 4th amendment rights.

 

[singlestacksig]

would tape count as altering or obscuring the number?

 

[Sylvain]

would tape count as altering or obscuring the number?

No as it can be removed.If they have a warrant to search your number they can still do so.
For me its just like having a hogue grip on your gun who would hide the number.
You also dont have to tell the police why your serial number is taped.

 

[Sylvain]

Maybe, maybe not. Would they need a warrant to remove it? Nope they can do that without one. But would they be legally allowed to do so? Now that is a different question.

Without the tape the serial number would be in "plain view" and they can run it all they want. With the tape it would be concealed and they may need a warrant to run it unless they have probable cause to believe it is stolen. See Arizona v Hicks where it was found that just moving a piece of stereo equipment to get the serial number was an unConstitutional search because while the officer may have had reasonable suspicious he did not have probable cause and that also it was not inline with the legal reason for entering the apartment. In my opinion removing a piece of tape would be the same. Because it is not in plain view and also if the officer seizes the weapon for "officer safety" removing the tape to view the serial number would not be related to the reason for the seizure.

IANAL but IMHO removing the tape would be very good grounds for a civil lawsuit for violating 4th amendment rights.

That's how I understand it and you explained it better than I could.

 

[OWGEM]

Other than trying to entrap a LEO in a legal technicality, why would one put tape over their firearms serial number?

 

[Bondhead88]

Other than trying to entrap a LEO in a legal technicality, why would one put tape over their firearms serial number?

How is that entrapment?

ENTRAPMENT

A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case.
However, there is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and the Government agents merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime. For example, it is not entrapment for a Government agent to pretend to be someone else and to offer, either directly or through an informer or other decoy, to engage in an unlawful transaction with the person. So, a person would not be a victim of entrapment if the person was ready, willing and able to commit the crime charged in the indictment whenever opportunity was afforded, and that Government officers or their agents did no more than offer an opportunity.
On the other hand, if the evidence leaves a reasonable doubt whether the person had any intent to commit the crime except for inducement or persuasion on the part of some Government officer or agent, then the person is not guilty.
In slightly different words: Even though someone may have [sold drugs], as charged by the government, if it was the result of entrapment then he is not guilty. Government agents entrapped him if three things occurred:
- First, the idea for committing the crime came from the government agents and not from the person accused of the crime.
- Second, the government agents then persuaded or talked the person into committing the crime. Simply giving him the opportunity to commit the crime is not the same as persuading him to commit the crime.
- And third, the person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before the government agents spoke with him.
On the issue of entrapment the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entrapped by government agents.

 

[OWGEM]

How is that entrapment?

ENTRAPMENT

A person is 'entrapped' when he is induced or persuaded by law enforcement officers or their agents to commit a crime that he had no previous intent to commit; and the law as a matter of policy forbids conviction in such a case.
However, there is no entrapment where a person is ready and willing to break the law and the Government agents merely provide what appears to be a favorable opportunity for the person to commit the crime. For example, it is not entrapment for a Government agent to pretend to be someone else and to offer, either directly or through an informer or other decoy, to engage in an unlawful transaction with the person. So, a person would not be a victim of entrapment if the person was ready, willing and able to commit the crime charged in the indictment whenever opportunity was afforded, and that Government officers or their agents did no more than offer an opportunity.
On the other hand, if the evidence leaves a reasonable doubt whether the person had any intent to commit the crime except for inducement or persuasion on the part of some Government officer or agent, then the person is not guilty.
In slightly different words: Even though someone may have [sold drugs], as charged by the government, if it was the result of entrapment then he is not guilty. Government agents entrapped him if three things occurred:
- First, the idea for committing the crime came from the government agents and not from the person accused of the crime.
- Second, the government agents then persuaded or talked the person into committing the crime. Simply giving him the opportunity to commit the crime is not the same as persuading him to commit the crime.
- And third, the person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before the government agents spoke with him.
On the issue of entrapment the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entrapped by government agents.

OK, I will rephrase the question. Other than trying to trick a LEO into a legal technicality, why would one put tape over their firearms serial number?

 

[Sylvain]

OK, I will rephrase the question. Other than trying to trick a LEO into a legal technicality, why would one put tape over their firearms serial number?

Maybe you dont want to waste any more time during that "weapon check" by having them run the serial number when there is no reason for them to do.They dont check the serial number of your cell phone or any other item you have on you that may have a serial number to see if it was stolen so why would they do that to your gun.
You just keep your personnal informations to yourself by not letting them check the serial number.
It's like if they want to check your social security number or something else that you have inside your wallet.
They can can see your LTCH and ask for your drivers licence if you were driving but they cannot ask for more personnal stuff.
And if you said that you dont consent any search they cant legally just reach into your pocket, take your wallet and look at your social security number or other informations.
With the serial number its the same thing, if they cant see it they cant search it without your prior approval or a search warrant.
The more things you keep private the better you are IMO.

 

[OWGEM]

Maybe you dont want to waste any more time during that "weapon check" by having them run the serial number when there is no reason for them to do.They dont check the serial number of your cell phone or any other item you have on you that may have a serial number to see if it was stolen so why would they do that to your gun.
You just keep your personnal informations to yourself by not letting them check the serial number.
It's like if they want to check your social security number or something else that you have inside your wallet.
They can can see your LTCH and ask for your drivers licence if you were driving but they cannot ask for more personnal stuff.
And if you said that you dont consent any search they cant legally just reach into your pocket, take your wallet and look at your social security number or other informations.
With the serial number its the same thing, if they cant see it they cant search it without your prior approval or a search warrant.
The more things you keep private the better you are IMO.

Oh, you are not trying to trick the LEO into a legal technicality, you are trying to save time during a weapons check. Got Ya.