Pulled over while carrying...

[GodFearinGunTotin]

No, it's not.

If you're actually a LEO, you really should read State v. Washington and distribute the opinion around your department. You'll see how your department "SOP" actually violates the 4th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution.

For your convenience: http://www.ai.org/judiciary/opinions/pdf/03041001jsk.pdf

Guy

Thanks Guy. I really appreciate the information you provide here.

 

[MagicKev]

Nobody said anything about violating anyones rights. Its called department SOP's. No matter what kind of firearm it is, we have to run the serial #'s. Its just to cover you and our a****. We are not trying to take your rights from you guys or disarm you. We have rules that we have to follow and that just so happens to be one of them. You are not in the wrong for carrying. We just check to make sure the weapon doesnt come back stolen or anything. And make sure it is registered to you. Thats it! So I dont understand what all the fuss is about? Its a easy and painless process.

Well Morgan County Sheriff Deputy Josh Sparrow, perhaps we should ask Captain Scott Hamilton, you know your Training Coordinator & "ILETB" Senior Instructor (Indiana Law Enforcement Training Board Instructor) & your "STOPS" Instructor (Strategies and Tactics Of Patrol Stops) if that is indeed how you have been trained and if indeed that is what Morgan County Sheriff Department's SOP's actually are.

Or perhaps you could go ask yourself and tell us what he says. We look forward to your answer.

 

[Roadie]

This ^^ is how I thought it was.
But now learning that some officers (but I dont think very many) may "ask" me to take my glock (with one in the chamber, ready to fire with a pull of the triger) out of the safety of the holster. Then, pass it to someone whom I am not sure of thier level of familiarity with my particular gun for a "routine" numbers check? This gives me pause.

I know very well how to handle my firearm and a big part of that is not playing with it with my wife and kids in the car and bystanders all around. THAT would seem to be "asking for trouble" and makes it more dangerous for everyone within a couple hundred yards, including the officer.

I would have told you to make you "feel" safer, but not at the risk of not BEING safer. Not with the knowlege that I could hear.. "sir could you remove you handgun and pass it to me" because I would probably refuse unless ordered to and would cite the reasons stated above.

You guys have a dangerous job and I give you my upmost respect. But it seems your job would be even more dangerous asking strangers to hand you thier loaded gun. I wouldnt want to be on the recieving end of an ND

^^THIS^^

Also, they are giving a citizen permission to pull their gun. How much easier does that make it if the person DID have bad intentions, to shoot the Officer? Leaving it in the holster is safer for everyone involved, period.

 

[euby]

Everybody needs to remember these laws are for Indiana ......some states do have inform laws. Been a hot politcal topic in Ohio for a while. Carry on.

 

[tgmorris99]

In a Civilian Firearms Training class I took in Georgia (no need to inform) the Sheriff department staff expressly said that if they don't during a stop ask that you shouldn't tell. The rational was that if they know you are carrying, legal or otherwise, then they have to go into a different scenario than "just a traffic stop."

 

[Dirtebiker]

Sometimes sarcasm is my only friend...

When my purple is done recharging, I will go back and edit my post.

Good, you had me worried!

 

[DaddyFixSemi]

Everybody needs to remember these laws are for Indiana ......some states do have inform laws. Been a hot politcal topic in Ohio for a while. Carry on.

It's not about, "have to inform or choice of informing" with what joshua_xdm is talking about. It's the fact that he is saying that it's department SOP to disarm and then "run the numbers" on the handgun. It's the fact that he and his department is ignoring the law on this matter just to "feel" safer. Regardless of the fact as Roadie and other's on here have said before it is safer to leave the handgun where it is. you gotta remember that the more times you mess or "play" with something the higher the probability that something will go wrong.

 

[euby]

It's not about, "have to inform or choice of informing" with what joshua_xdm is talking about. It's the fact that he is saying that it's department SOP to disarm and then "run the numbers" on the handgun. It's the fact that he and his department is ignoring the law on this matter just to "feel" safer. Regardless of the fact as Roadie and other's on here have said before it is safer to leave the handgun where it is. you gotta remember that the more times you mess or "play" with something the higher the probability that something will go wrong.

I understand what Joshua was saying....you don't honestly believe he was/is a LEO do you? I don't. I am trying to stick with OP.

 

[griffin]

Everybody needs to remember these laws are for Indiana ......some states do have inform laws.

Being neighbors, some of you may travel to Michigan on occasion. MI currently is a MUST INFORM state. However, before we had our SHALL ISSUE law, we were not a must inform state. Back then is when I began carrying. I took my first handgun safety course from two NRA certified Michigan policemen. They told us way back then to NOT inform the cop who pulled us over for a traffic infraction we were carrying. They said, "If you're an honest, law-abiding citizen I don't need to know you are carrying. If you are a dirt-bag, you aren't going to tell me, anyway. There is no advantage to you, or us, to inform the police. All it can do is potentially cause problems for you with certain LEOs."

 

[IndyGunSafety]

After returning from his car, he informed me that honesty goes a long way with him and he would not be writing me a ticket.

What does honesty have to do with it? Is he implying you are dishonest if you don't inform? Sounds like it to me, and that's a load of BS.

 

[IndyGunSafety]

So lets say you get a weapon stolen from you. You report it to the police. You give them a description, make, model and serial #'s. It goes in the system. So lets just say i just so happen to pull someone over and i find a gun in the car. We run the information and something comes up that it has been reported stolen. Same decription and everything. Would you be happy that it was found? We do it for a reason. Not to hurt your feelings or anything.

Or this: Again gun is stolen from you. You dont report it and some guy robs a store and the gun is dropped accidently. The police run the numbers and it comes up registered to you. That would suck!

You finding a gun in the car through PC or consensual search or laying on the street after a crime is much different that you taking my private property from me without PC or reasonable suspicion that a crime is afoot, and conducting an unlawful search by running the serial number. You also needlessly delay me further. You have no authority to do so. Do it to me and I'm gonna sick Kirk or Guy on you... or BOTH! Besides, Joshua XDM would be a silly name for the new boat your department would buy me. But by God I'd name it after you!

 

[DaddyFixSemi]

I understand what Joshua was saying....you don't honestly believe he was/is a LEO do you? I don't. I am trying to stick with OP.

Honestly no I don't believe he is a cop at all, How ever that doesn't change the issue with police departments operating under that type of SOP. They are breaking the laws as they are written when they do have such procedures and enforce them at will.

Now don't get me wrong I know from experience how officers feel about certain things concerning safety, that can and sometimes do impact the way they conduct even the simplest of traffic stops. I was a military police officer for 5 years. So officer safety is always a major factor for the cops. How ever since my time as a Leo. My view of civilian cops has become tainted because a lot of officer's today fall to use common sense. However none of that means squat if the officer fails to ad-hear to a higher standard of the laws that he/she enforces.

Like i said before you can't be a police officer of any type or agency and pick and choose which laws you wish to enforce. their job is to enforce the laws as the are currently written, if they wish to enforce certian laws one way and other's another then that person should have become a judge. so that they could interpret the laws or become a congressman to write and draft news laws.

 

[griffin]

Also, as long as the "is this pistol stolen" crap keeps coming up, if you legally purchase a pistol that later turns out to be stolen, it is still yours and police cannot legally confiscate it without a court order. And even then you'll likely get it back. So this entire "stolen pistol" crap is just that.

 

[DragonGunner]

Honestly no I don't believe he is a cop at all, How ever that doesn't change the issue with police departments operating under that type of SOP. They are breaking the laws as they are written when they do have such procedures and enforce them at will.

Now don't get me wrong I know from experience how officers feel about certain things concerning safety, that can and sometimes do impact the way they conduct even the simplest of traffic stops. I was a military police officer for 5 years. So officer safety is always a major factor for the cops. How ever since my time as a Leo. My view of civilian cops has become tainted because a lot of officer's today fall to use common sense. However none of that means squat if the officer fails to ad-hear to a higher standard of the laws that he/she enforces.

Like i said before you can't be a police officer of any type or agency and pick and choose which laws you wish to enforce. their job is to enforce the laws as the are currently written, if they wish to enforce certian laws one way and other's another then that person should have become a judge. so that they could interpret the laws or become a congressman to write and draft news laws.

Not a Cop....?....after post 123 by MagicKev I kinda beleive he really is......

...Well Morgan County Sheriff Deputy Josh Sparrow, perhaps we should ask Captain Scott Hamilton, you know your Training Coordinator & "ILETB" Senior Instructor (Indiana Law Enforcement Training Board Instructor) & your "STOPS" Instructor (Strategies and Tactics Of Patrol Stops) if that is indeed how you have been trained and if indeed that is what Morgan County Sheriff Department's SOP's actually are.

Or perhaps you could go ask yourself and tell us what he says. We look forward to your answer.

 

[james.bryant88]

Thats great to hear, I would have done the same thing, you hear horror stories about cops freaking out sometimes.

 

[archy]

No, it's not.

If you're actually a LEO, you really should read State v. Washington and distribute the opinion around your department. You'll see how your department "SOP" actually violates the 4th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 11 of the Indiana Constitution.

For your convenience: http://www.ai.org/judiciary/opinions/pdf/03041001jsk.pdf

Guy

Might also want to read the decision in Plummer v. The State, 135 Ind. 308, 313, 334 N.E. 968 (1893)