Out of state traffic stop

[Mark 1911]

Federal law allows us to carry in any state, but still must abide by local laws about magazine capacity, ammo restrictions, off limits businesses, etc. LEOSA.

Nice perk. Very nice.

 

[ilikeguns]

Some of you guys have been stopped 5 mph over? Geez. That's not worth the effort.

I got stopped on my way home from work just last week for going 6mph over. Guy was ahead of me even, jumped over into the turn lane and hit his brakes to get behind me. First thing he said when he walked up was "Don't worry, I'm not gonna write you up." I was thinking if he knew that before he even talked to me why pull me over in the first place? He was a super nice guy though and even complimented my truck before he left lol. Ran my license/registration and that was it.

 

[bwframe]

Handing the officer my pink card along with my driver's licence has netted me warnings, written and verbal, since I started doing it years ago.



Sorry Kirk.
I'm a driver, not a follower. Hands on the wheel, eyes on the road...
It's often safer to break the speed limit to put the fidiots behind you. Just as j706 has suggested.

 

[RobbyMaQ]

Oh man, sorry but I would have liked to have been a fly on the wall for that one!

So... did your being LEO come up at all? Was that influential?

BTW, congrats! What he's neglected to tell everyone here, is that he was going down there to see one of his children graduate basic training!
Sorry to let the cat out of the bag JV!

 

[mrortega]

Yes and that sure helped without a doubt. But not getting wrote is about 80% the attitude you have i think.

It always helps to have that little FOP star stuck on your rear plate, doesn't it?

 

[mrortega]

You got lucky. He could have invited you onto a back road to hear some banjo music.

 

[Lex Concord]

You got lucky. He could have invited you onto a back road to hear some banjo music.

I was going to suggest that might have been a good excuse for the original infraction. "Sorry, Trooper. I heard banjo music."

 

[Fargo]

Federal law allows us to carry in any state, but still must abide by local laws about magazine capacity, ammo restrictions, off limits businesses, etc. LEOSA.

Where are you finding the part about mag caps and ammo types? I don't recall leosa excepting anything except gov't property, federal property, and limitations on private property. I thought LEOSA covered everything concealed except NFA weapons.

 

[BigMoose]

I have never gotten a written warning, all of mine have been verbal.

They sometimes do the written warning so they can show they are doing something, but with less overall paperwork.

I don't know if it's me, but it's getting increasingly stressful to drive on four lane busy (non interstate) highways anymore.
Really gets stressful when there is so much traffic that the cars are in both lanes, but it's not packed enough to be crawling bumper to bumper. You get the folks mixed in running normally with the folks that still think they should be running 15 to 20mph over the limit. They run up on your bumper, think that they can slice in and around traffic. Mix this in with a few semis, stop lights on the at grade roads. 37 Between Indy and B-town is getting bad.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Where are you finding the part about mag caps and ammo types? I don't recall leosa excepting anything except gov't property, federal property, and limitations on private property. I thought LEOSA covered everything concealed except NFA weapons.

LEOSA does not exempt individuals carrying under the privilege it affords from laws prohibiting the possession of firearms on private property, Federal buildings (or parts thereof), installations and parklands, Gun Free School Zones and any State or local government property installation, building, base or park. The law also does not supersede state or local laws regulating magazine capacities

-http://le.nra.org/leosa/leosa-welcomes-the-military.aspx

Am I also exempt from State laws prohibiting the possession or use of “highcapacity” magazines?No. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has ruled that State andlocal laws and regulations applying to magazines do apply and the exemption provided by LEOSAapplies only to firearms and ammunition

- https://www.fop.net/legislative/issues/hr218/hr218faq.pdf

Can I carry any type of firearm or ammunition under this law?No. The exemption provided under this Federal law applies to the carriage of concealed firearmsonly. The definition of “firearm” in this statute specifically excludes machine guns, silencers,explosives or other destructive devices as these terms are defined in Federal law.However, the Federal law does extend the exemption to allow the carriage of ammunition “notexpressly prohibited by Federal law or subject to the provisions of the National Firearms Act.”This means that qualified active and retired law enforcement officers may carry ammunition inStates which may have prohibited the possession of certain ammunition by persons not activelyserving in law enforcement within that State.

- https://www.fop.net/legislative/issues/hr218/hr218faq.pdf

Looks like the 2010 amendment changed the ammo restrictions, so I was outdated on that one. At least per the NRA and FOP, magazine restrictions still stand.

 

[Fargo]

-http://le.nra.org/leosa/leosa-welcomes-the-military.aspx

- https://www.fop.net/legislative/issues/hr218/hr218faq.pdf



- https://www.fop.net/legislative/issues/hr218/hr218faq.pdf

Looks like the 2010 amendment changed the ammo restrictions, so I was outdated on that one. At least per the NRA and FOP, magazine restrictions still stand.

Very interesting. While it doesn't carry force of law, I'm curious about the BATFE's position on magazine capacity. Seems counter-intuitive to the very premise of the law itself. Learn something every day!

I'll be curious whether an actual judge follows the BATFE's position or not as I don't see the BATFE's position as being at all consistent with the actual text of the statute.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Very interesting. While it doesn't carry force of law, I'm curious about the BATFE's position on magazine capacity. Seems counter-intuitive to the very premise of the law itself. Learn something every day!

I'll be curious whether an actual judge follows the BATFE's position or not as I don't see the BATFE's position as being at all consistent with the actual text of the statute.

No idea, but I'm not going to be the test case.

 

[IndyDave1776]

No idea, but I'm not going to be the test case.

Indeed so.

Doesn't it make the heart long for the days when you actually had to make a deliberate effort to get crosswise of the law?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Indeed so.

Doesn't it make the heart long for the days when you actually had to make a deliberate effort to get crosswise of the law?

Such as when?

 

[IndyDave1776]

Such as when?

I can't pull up historic versions of the IC or USC, but that said I am well aware that so recently as the time in which my grandparents grew up, if you followed the Ten Commandments, particularly the last 7 dealing with interaction with others, and paid your taxes, you would never have legal problems. Accidentally violating the law wasn't in the cards. Unfortunately, the laws have become far more arbitrary and have multiplied exponentially in number. Can you honestly look someone in the face and tell him that ignorance of the law is no excuse when there is no single professional lawyer whose services you can enlist to deal with the entire body of law?

 

[BehindBlueI's]

I can't pull up historic versions of the IC or USC, but that said I am well aware that so recently as the time in which my grandparents grew up, if you followed the Ten Commandments, particularly the last 7 dealing with interaction with others, and paid your taxes, you would never have legal problems. Accidentally violating the law wasn't in the cards. Unfortunately, the laws have become far more arbitrary and have multiplied exponentially in number. Can you honestly look someone in the face and tell him that ignorance of the law is no excuse when there is no single professional lawyer whose services you can enlist to deal with the entire body of law?

Would you consider having to know segregation laws to travel with your IU basketball team as being under the 10 Commandments or under paying taxes? My friend who played with them in the 50's tells stories of some issues that occurred as a result of having a black teammate while traveling.

Did your grandparents have to register their handguns with the sheriff? Mine did.

Of course there is a larger body of law today. We live in a more complicated society. How many laws did the invention of the automobile create? Yes, no one knows all the law. I don't know anything about copyright law, what the legal requirements to run a smelter are, etc. etc. That doesn't mean those laws are bad or unnecessary. It means if I choose to enter into that realm, I need to educate myself.

Nostalgia is a powerful thing, but seldom a productive one outside of entertainment and art. Personally, I figure it's less of a hassle to look and see if a state has a magazine limit then having to look if I can get a hotel room if traveling with a black companion, I remember when I couldn't carry a handgun at all under any circumstances because the state I lived in didn't have a permit, etc. Idealizing the past isn't an issue I have.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Would you consider having to know segregation laws to travel with your IU basketball team as being under the 10 Commandments or under paying taxes? My friend who played with them in the 50's tells stories of some issues that occurred as a result of having a black teammate while traveling.

Did your grandparents have to register their handguns with the sheriff? Mine did.

Of course there is a larger body of law today. We live in a more complicated society. How many laws did the invention of the automobile create? Yes, no one knows all the law. I don't know anything about copyright law, what the legal requirements to run a smelter are, etc. etc. That doesn't mean those laws are bad or unnecessary. It means if I choose to enter into that realm, I need to educate myself.

Nostalgia is a powerful thing, but seldom a productive one outside of entertainment and art. Personally, I figure it's less of a hassle to look and see if a state has a magazine limit then having to look if I can get a hotel room if traveling with a black companion, I remember when I couldn't carry a handgun at all under any circumstances because the state I lived in didn't have a permit, etc. Idealizing the past isn't an issue I have.

My grandpa could remember that driving was in his youth considered no different from walking or riding a horse and did not hear the word 'privilege' used in conjunction with it until into the 1950s. In the preceding half-century, the sky didn't fall on account of under-regulation.

You have a point regarding segregation, but I see that as an exception and not the rule. Never heard anything about handguns one way or other and the time has passed in which I was able to ask questions. We still haven't really addressed the 'ignorance of the law' argument. It is easy to simply assign responsibility, but very difficult to do so with a shred of intellectual honesty. Government officials are much like terrorists in that they only have to get lucky once where the rest of us have to be right every time and do not get the luxury of being able to specialize in only one small area. For example, I could have a great deal of difficulty in a direct collision with a government employee who may not know how to wipe his own ass but knows in encyclopedic detail which puddles on the farm qualify as 'wetlands'. Wash, rinse, and repeat for any number of equally specific and obscure issues. At the end of the day, if you can't send one cop to enforce the law, you cannot reasonably expect one citizen to be able to follow the law.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

My grandpa could remember that driving was in his youth considered no different from walking or riding a horse and did not hear the word 'privilege' used in conjunction with it until into the 1950s. In the preceding half-century, the sky didn't fall on account of under-regulation.

You have a point regarding segregation, but I see that as an exception and not the rule. Never heard anything about handguns one way or other and the time has passed in which I was able to ask questions. We still haven't really addressed the 'ignorance of the law' argument. It is easy to simply assign responsibility, but very difficult to do so with a shred of intellectual honesty. Government officials are much like terrorists in that they only have to get lucky once where the rest of us have to be right every time and do not get the luxury of being able to specialize in only one small area. For example, I could have a great deal of difficulty in a direct collision with a government employee who may not know how to wipe his own ass but knows in encyclopedic detail which puddles on the farm qualify as 'wetlands'. Wash, rinse, and repeat for any number of equally specific and obscure issues. At the end of the day, if you can't send one cop to enforce the law, you cannot reasonably expect one citizen to be able to follow the law.

When there are 5 cars in the county, rules can be more lax then when there are 50,000. When the Wright brothers flew, there wasn't much in the way of laws concerning airplanes, either, but I'm pretty sure you can foresee the issues if we went back to that. That sort of goes to your one person knowing all the law. I don't have to know the laws about airplanes and their uses, because I'm not a pilot. The fact I don't know those laws doesn't mean they aren't reasonable laws, now does it? I don't know much about adoption laws, either. Let's throw those out. Patent law? Nope. Banking, investing, and trade laws that protect from fraud and abuse? Nope. And there is zero way that I, or anyone, could learn all of it. However if you're going to engage in those things, then you should take the time to learn, correct?

I get your frustrated with your wetlands issue, but you know as well as I do that such an oversimplification is not workable in the real world, nor desirable.

 

[IndyDave1776]

When there are 5 cars in the county, rules can be more lax then when there are 50,000. When the Wright brothers flew, there wasn't much in the way of laws concerning airplanes, either, but I'm pretty sure you can foresee the issues if we went back to that. That sort of goes to your one person knowing all the law. I don't have to know the laws about airplanes and their uses, because I'm not a pilot. The fact I don't know those laws doesn't mean they aren't reasonable laws, now does it? I don't know much about adoption laws, either. Let's throw those out. Patent law? Nope. Banking, investing, and trade laws that protect from fraud and abuse? Nope. And there is zero way that I, or anyone, could learn all of it. However if you're going to engage in those things, then you should take the time to learn, correct?

I get your frustrated with your wetlands issue, but you know as well as I do that such an oversimplification is not workable in the real world, nor desirable.

Since we are addressing a few different issues at once, I will start with the fact that many of the laws we deal with are backed up with a complete absence of constitutional authority, either at the federal level or state laws which the states were extorted into passing by the federal government. The correct response here is c:\unconstitutional law\del *.* .

I have not really addressed an even bigger problem which leaves me more jaded than most others. I frequently have to deal with new federal regulations--de facto laws written by bureaucrats under the umbrella of a law which gives them a blank check to exercise the power of congress--which typically are introduced 'with the approval of industry' translated the handful of largest corporations in the business who realize that many of their smaller competitors can't afford an in-house compliance department. I am not talking about anything necessary or beneficial, but rather highly arbitrary and sometimes seesawing back and forth between the same thing being alternately accepted if you choose to do it, prohibited, or required. We don't have laws that prohibit murder today, make it acceptable tomorrow, illegal on Monday, and mandatory on tuesday, so why should any other area of law behave this way and why should I have what amounts to a full time job of simply knowing what the law is this week? For the purpose of full disclosure, my timeframe is generally but not always an exaggeration. I have seen a time when I observed the same trucks retrofitted with different load securement equipment, each time to the satisfaction of the powers that be, three times in a two-week period! This of course takes me back to the point where the [STRIKE]terrorist[/STRIKE] government employee only has to be right about one obscure detail once while I have to be right every time.

This last example also gets into the complexity issue. Why should I have an entire subdivision of the federal government inventing stupid rules which change with the wind in the first place? I know, public safety. How about employing responsibility for one's own actions rather than micromanaging? That could be applied to any number of things.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

t's often safer to break the speed limit to put the fidiots behind you. Just as j706 has suggested.

No it isn't. That's just rationalizing unsafe behavior, which I see all the time (well, I usually see it with the tilted head and both index fingers going up and down).

If you want to "get away", just take your foot off the gas and let the "fidiots" get away from you.

I'm all for rationalizing bad behavior, but it is just silly not to tell the truth and tell people to stop playing Tony Stewart. Your grand jury won't let you "get away".