Pulled Over

[Mark 1911]

Well first of all he shouldn't have made himself at home and opened the glove box, I'm assuming he was also taking a little peek to see what was in the glove box possibly looking for something illegal Illegal search and seizure warrentless search). He could have just as well given you the mags and ammo ( all seperated). Secondly he probably ran the serial number to see if the gun was stolen.
You might want to call Internal (without initially giving his name ) to see if everything he did was standard procedure. If they determine that it isn't they would as you his name and badge nuumber ( usually on the citation ). Then let them deal with it.
Sounds like he was looking for something illegal to get an arrest, but for the most part you did the correct things.

It could be that he was fishing for something, but The feeling I got from watching him was that he was unsure of what he was supposed to do and just made some honest, albeit serious, errors. The Hammond PD website doesn't give any options outside of filing a complaint. I plan to file the complaint but it will be against the procedure and policy as opposed to against the officer. It's my judgement that he was following instructions. Yes he should know better but I don't want to get him in hot water, I just want the practice corrected, hopefully through some training.

 

[medic6882]

I was a paramedic for 23 years and I actually transported multiple people over my career who were carrying. In each case I would request an LEO to secure the weapon as to protect myself from a person I had no idea what they could be capable of. AND on multiple occasions I had transported LEO's and guess what ? They got the same treatment. You may think that is wrong or illegal but when I'm locked in the back of a 12 x 7 box I want to know if we are going to fight it's going to be a fair fight.

 

[Bunnykid68]

I was a paramedic for 23 years and I actually transported multiple people over my career who were carrying. In each case I would request an LEO to secure the weapon as to protect myself from a person I had no idea what they could be capable of. AND on multiple occasions I had transported LEO's and guess what ? They got the same treatment. You may think that is wrong or illegal but when I'm locked in the back of a 12 x 7 box I want to know if we are going to fight it's going to be a fair fight.

That is completely different than a traffic stop. It's like comparing apples and cinder blocks

 

[actaeon277]

I'm not sure why they take your gun, and assume that's the only one.

This point makes me chuckle. Because I usually have two with me.

I was pulled over right near the entrance to the Willow Slough range.
Being a couple decades younger, and not knowing about all the trouble people have had, I answered the officer.
One on my right hip, and a few more various places in the car.
He asked how many I had.
I thought for a second, and said, somewhere around 12 (I can't remember exact number, maybe it was 15?).
Oh to have had a camera to record the look on his face.
When he got his voice back, he asked why I had so many.
I just pointed to the sign at the entrance to Willow Slough, and told him I'm not going to drive an hour to shoot one gun.
He let the firearms stay in the car, and the one stay on my hip.

The whole point of the issue at hand and the point I was trying to make earlier in the thread is how far are you willing to go or how much are you willing to give up to "go along and get along" so that maybe you might just get a break for the infraction you've been pulled over for? Are you willing to submit to a search of the vehicle? or perhaps a search of your person?

Some of us in this thread find not only that objectionable but also an officer taking possession of our legally possessed personal property without RAS to be objectionable as well and wish to set the record straight by filing an objection with the PD in question.

Others in this thread seem to berate those that look to correct a situation they have every right to object to as frivolous.

Yes it is that important.

Well, traveling to Iowa, I was stopped in Illinois, outskirts of Chi-town.
Pulling out of a gas station, going to a restaurant, I weaved a little, because the black road didn't have lines painted, and the dirt was black. I was finding the road.
After determining that I was not drunk (and I give him credit for quickly determining that), the officer wanted to search the car for weapons.
(He first asked if I had any, I informed him I was on the way to Iowa which didn't at the time, recognize my license).
I do not consent to a search.
Over
and
Over
He said he could get a warrant.
I looked at my watch, told him I was on vacation for 7 days, I had time. Go get the warrant.
He mentioned the search would not be pretty.
Ok, I'll still wait.
He took 15 seconds to determine I wasn't drunk.
He took 10 minutes or so trying to get me to ok a search of the car.
He gave up. Let me go.

When the ISP Trooper grabbed mine, I still had my BUG small of back, a range bag with another five or six handguns, AND a rifle right between the seats! (I assume he felt safer once he had the ONE he knew about!?)

Yup. That's why I think its funny that an officer would assume you have only one. What, then relax.
What if you said no. Then relax.
I'm not an officer, but I would think they would watch everyone, and not trust them to tell the truth.

Well first of all he shouldn't have made himself at home and opened the glove box, I'm assuming he was also taking a little peek to see what was in the glove box possibly looking for something illegal Illegal search and seizure warrentless search). He could have just as well given you the mags and ammo ( all seperated). Secondly he probably ran the serial number to see if the gun was stolen.
You might want to call Internal (without initially giving his name ) to see if everything he did was standard procedure. If they determine that it isn't they would as you his name and badge nuumber ( usually on the citation ). Then let them deal with it.
Sounds like he was looking for something illegal to get an arrest, but for the most part you did the correct things.
He apparently does these types of things on a regualr basis and just hasn't had his hand slapped for it yet!

I'm pretty sure, in the OP, it was stated the gun was in the door panel. Behind the officer. The door had to be opened because the window didn't roll down.
But I could be wrong.

I was a paramedic for 23 years and I actually transported multiple people over my career who were carrying. In each case I would request an LEO to secure the weapon as to protect myself from a person I had no idea what they could be capable of. AND on multiple occasions I had transported LEO's and guess what ? They got the same treatment. You may think that is wrong or illegal but when I'm locked in the back of a 12 x 7 box I want to know if we are going to fight it's going to be a fair fight.

That is completely different than a traffic stop. It's like comparing apples and cinder blocks

I agree. Not the same.

 

[MisterChester]

OP, just do what feels best for you. If I were you, I would contact the chief. Be polite and respectful and let them know the officer did things you think were questionable (like the glovebox opening). If he didn't seem to know what to do then say that, and that you hope he gets properly trained on how to handle a situation like that.

 

[BE Mike]

OP, If I were you, I'd just start obeying the traffic laws.

 

[Mark 1911]

OP, If I were you, I'd just start obeying the traffic laws.

Yes, I totally agree. I think all of us should all obey the law, even those of us who wear badges for a living. I don't mind answering for my traffic violation. Similarly, the police should have accountability as well.

Here's a thought for you. You are not impacted by my traffic ticket. But there is a good chance that you will someday have some interaction with an LEO over carrying a handgun. If I am content as you say with "just obeying the traffic laws", what positive impact does that have on the exercise of your right to bear arms? I may not be perfect, but a traffic ticket does not forfeit my right or my responsibility to be involved.

 

[Hookeye]

My favorite stop was one where indeed I was speeding, trying to beat a coworker to another coworker's farm just outside of town.
After work, we had planned on blasting some chucks.
So yeah, I wanted to get there first (couple of big ones)...........had rifles for the back bean fields.
But for the barn, I had my 629-1 6", laying on the seat of the car.

Cop pops me.

I inform up front, and he says cool, windows down, he can lift it off the passenger seat and lay it on the hood and we can discuss the speeding.

He takes it..................and then asks how to open it. That was kinda odd.

After we get all the stuff sorted out (gun permit OK and warning for speeding) he says to load it when he was gone.............and then offered a little extra bit of help.
Something to the effect that "it's dangerous to have that loaded on the seat- if you came to a sudden stop it could fall and go off".

I smiled and said, thanks but it wouldn't. He got a little snarky and asked how I would know.
So I explained the mechanism, and he fired back "who do you think you are, some kind of mechanical engineer?"

I started laughing and replied "well according to a piece of paper I have from Purdue..............yeah".

 

[BE Mike]

Yes, I totally agree. I think all of us should all obey the law, even those of us who wear badges for a living. I don't mind answering for my traffic violation. Similarly, the police should have accountability as well.

Here's a thought for you. You are not impacted by my traffic ticket. But there is a good chance that you will someday have some interaction with an LEO over carrying a handgun. If I am content as you say with "just obeying the traffic laws", what positive impact does that have on the exercise of your right to bear arms? I may not be perfect, but a traffic ticket does not forfeit my right or my responsibility to be involved.

I have had interactions with officers while having guns in my vehicle. On one occassion, when asked for my registration, I voluntarily told the officer that my registration was in my glove compartment, but so was a handgun. Of course, I'm one of those people who believe that in general, the police are there to serve me and are on my side. My point regarding obeying the traffic laws is, you will lessen your interactions with police officers and you will benefit. If I had a significant complaint about an officer's actions, I'd take the appropriate steps and not air it on a public forum. If I had an issue with being ticketed or arrested, I'd fight it in court. Regarding my right to keep and bear arms, well, like it or not, no rights are absolute.

 

[Mark 1911]

I have had interactions with officers while having guns in my vehicle. On one occassion, when asked for my registration, I voluntarily told the officer that my registration was in my glove compartment, but so was a handgun. Of course, I'm one of those people who believe that in general, the police are there to serve me and are on my side. My point regarding obeying the traffic laws is, you will lessen your interactions with police officers and you will benefit. If I had a significant complaint about an officer's actions, I'd take the appropriate steps and not air it on a public forum. If I had an issue with being ticketed or arrested, I'd fight it in court. Regarding my right to keep and bear arms, well, like it or not, no rights are absolute.

Mike,

I've admitted several times on this thread that I should not have been speeding. I didn't realize I was going as fast as I was, and have kept a clean driving record for years. You're right, don't give the cops a reason to stop you and most likely you will not be stopped. That's like saying the sky is blue, but saying the sky is blue does nothing to stop air pollution, the two are not directly related.

In my case, what started as a stop for speeding turned into something much different. The errors that were made should be addressed. In no way is it a statement that the officer is incompetent, I have even complemented his general handling of the situation. At the same time, this may be an area that he is not used to. A lot of cops know what to do with bad guys with guns, but maybe are less sure about how to handle good guys with guns.

As far as airing publicly, I haven't given the officer's name or mine for that matter, only that it involved the Hammond PD. The purpose of this discussion is to help me weigh the situation and take the most appropriate steps as you say. Maybe you would not need any help from your peers in order to do that, but I do, and if I can't ask the opinions of folks on this website, then tell me why not and if not, then who should I ask? Granted this is a public forum, and one of the purposes of this forum is to help folks understand their right to bear arms better. I respect the collective experience of my peers on this website, and don't mind tapping into their knowledge and experience to help myself and others understand better what to do. Are we as a collective community not concerned with advancing the right to bear arms, and not just being satisfied with things as they are? Some things are worth getting involved to improve.

 

[inccwchris]

You forgot to add "without probable cause, warrant, or reasonable and articulable concern for safety"

I believe that the for any reason part of my statement was in error. However show me in Indiana code where it says I have to forfeit my property to you just because you are concerned for your safety. With all due respect, the Indiana Supreme Court says that as soon as an LTCH is produced any and all questioning about firearms is to stop, including the seizure of it to run a serial number. Again with all due respect, removing and unloading a firearm from a person who has shown no signs of resistance is not something you are allowed to do legally and is not only illegal but it is against IMPD and ISP general orders. Matter of fact there was an officer on south east district who was suspended for that recently. So if you really wanna try me on the road side thats fine, I won't physically resist you. I will say I consent to no searches, and I will report the misconduct to IAB then let the chips fall where they may.

 

[actaeon277]

I believe that the for any reason part of my statement was in error. However show me in Indiana code where it says I have to forfeit my property to you just because you are concerned for your safety. With all due respect, the Indiana Supreme Court says that as soon as an LTCH is produced any and all questioning about firearms is to stop, including the seizure of it to run a serial number. Again with all due respect, removing and unloading a firearm from a person who has shown no signs of resistance is not something you are allowed to do legally and is not only illegal but it is against IMPD and ISP general orders. Matter of fact there was an officer on south east district who was suspended for that recently. So if you really wanna try me on the road side thats fine, I won't physically resist you. I will say I consent to no searches, and I will report the misconduct to IAB then let the chips fall where they may.

I could be wrong, but I think RAS was brought up by the court, not by the IC.

 

[Bunnykid68]

I believe that the for any reason part of my statement was in error. However show me in Indiana code where it says I have to forfeit my property to you just because you are concerned for your safety. With all due respect, the Indiana Supreme Court says that as soon as an LTCH is produced any and all questioning about firearms is to stop, including the seizure of it to run a serial number. Again with all due respect, removing and unloading a firearm from a person who has shown no signs of resistance is not something you are allowed to do legally and is not only illegal but it is against IMPD and ISP general orders. Matter of fact there was an officer on south east district who was suspended for that recently. So if you really wanna try me on the road side thats fine, I won't physically resist you. I will say I consent to no searches, and I will report the misconduct to IAB then let the chips fall where they may.

And if you had read his other post he said he would not disarm anyone without RAS or warrant because it is violates the 4th Amendment

 

[inccwchris]

He also stated he would do it for his safety. Reread his post.

 

[BE Mike]

Mike,

I've admitted several times on this thread that I should not have been speeding. I didn't realize I was going as fast as I was, and have kept a clean driving record for years. You're right, don't give the cops a reason to stop you and most likely you will not be stopped. That's like saying the sky is blue, but saying the sky is blue does nothing to stop air pollution, the two are not directly related.

In my case, what started as a stop for speeding turned into something much different. The errors that were made should be addressed. In no way is it a statement that the officer is incompetent, I have even complemented his general handling of the situation. At the same time, this may be an area that he is not used to. A lot of cops know what to do with bad guys with guns, but maybe are less sure about how to handle good guys with guns.

As far as airing publicly, I haven't given the officer's name or mine for that matter, only that it involved the Hammond PD. The purpose of this discussion is to help me weigh the situation and take the most appropriate steps as you say. Maybe you would not need any help from your peers in order to do that, but I do, and if I can't ask the opinions of folks on this website, then tell me why not and if not, then who should I ask? Granted this is a public forum, and one of the purposes of this forum is to help folks understand their right to bear arms better. I respect the collective experience of my peers on this website, and don't mind tapping into their knowledge and experience to help myself and others understand better what to do. Are we as a collective community not concerned with advancing the right to bear arms, and not just being satisfied with things as they are? Some things are worth getting involved to improve.

You are right, I would make up my mind about this after serious self-reflection. I would also weigh whether or not it was a battle worth fighting. I just don't know how much opinions on a website such as this are worth, especially considering the posters only have one side of the story. No offense, but there are always at least two sides to a story. As to your judgement of how the situation was handled, well, everyone has an opinion. My opinion is that a cop, especially one working in a high crime area, won't last long by trusting people he doesn't know. He may even get into trouble by trusting some that he knows well. It's pretty hard to tell the good guys from the bad guys, except in old western movies.

 

[2A_Tom]

I just don't know how much opinions on a website such as this are worth. Quote: BE Mike.

If that was my opinion I would Not waste my time here.

When I first came to INGO I had many misconceptions about Indiana Law. When i stated some of my opinions I was dumped on unmercifully. I was one of the last, if not last member to be negative repped into oblivion. I appealed to the Mods and they did have mercy on my ignorant soul.

One of the things I did was use my two eyes more than my ten fingers. Check out my join date and posts.
I learned that not everything that the eminent Mr. Ayoob said was true in Indiana.
I learned where to find Indiana Code and did.
I learned about legal precedents that pertain to gun ownership IN Indiana.

INGO is a place to learn. There are many very savy posters here. you can learn a lot if you are willing.

As for any thread that deals with our civil rights being violated, you will find many of us who will stand our ground. Think about it, if you don't think it is worth the trouble to stand up now you will probably meet the armed JBT's that come to your door to confiscate your arms in the same way.

 

[Bunnykid68]

He also stated he would do it for his safety. Reread his post.

I did. He said "reasonable and articulable concern for safety" , which means if he cannot articulate to a judge a damn good reason he is in trouble and every other post he has ever made was he does not care if you are armed or not, he is not going to make an issue out of it if you dont.

 

[BE Mike]

I just don't know how much opinions on a website such as this are worth. Quote: BE Mike.

If that was my opinion I would Not waste my time here.

When I first came to INGO I had many misconceptions about Indiana Law. When i stated some of my opinions I was dumped on unmercifully. I was one of the last, if not last member to be negative repped into oblivion. I appealed to the Mods and they did have mercy on my ignorant soul.

One of the things I did was use my two eyes more than my ten fingers. Check out my join date and posts.
I learned that not everything that the eminent Mr. Ayoob said was true in Indiana.
I learned where to find Indiana Code and did.
I learned about legal precedents that pertain to gun ownership IN Indiana.

INGO is a place to learn. There are many very savy posters here. you can learn a lot if you are willing.

As for any thread that deals with our civil rights being violated, you will find many of us who will stand our ground. Think about it, if you don't think it is worth the trouble to stand up now you will probably meet the armed JBT's that come to your door to confiscate your arms in the same way.

Interesting that you edited my quote to suit your side of an argument. Do you work for MSNBC?

 

[2A_Tom]

Originally Posted by blue falcon View Post
I just don't know how much opinions on a website such as this are worth. Quote: BE Mike.

My opinion is that a cop, especially one working in a high crime area, won't last long by trusting people he doesn't know. He may even get into trouble by trusting some that he knows well. It's pretty hard to tell the good guys from the bad guys, except in old western movies. Quote: BE Mike

FACT: I have a LTCH, AKA a good guy card, issued by the Indiana State Police who did a Federal background check after my local Police found no reason to deny my request. The State of Indiana considers me a proper person.

LAW: So unless an Officer has a Reasonable Articulable Suspicion or Reasonable Cause he breaks the law when he takes my weapon.

Sir please get your supervisor and although it is not required by IC I am informing you that my recorder has been on since before you came to the window.

BE Mike it seems you think you are right.

You seem to think that is okay For the police to break the law if they think it is necessary.

 

[VUPDblue]

I believe that the for any reason part of my statement was in error. However show me in Indiana code where it says I have to forfeit my property to you just because you are concerned for your safety. With all due respect, the Indiana Supreme Court says that as soon as an LTCH is produced any and all questioning about firearms is to stop, including the seizure of it to run a serial number. Again with all due respect, removing and unloading a firearm from a person who has shown no signs of resistance is not something you are allowed to do legally and is not only illegal but it is against IMPD and ISP general orders. Matter of fact there was an officer on south east district who was suspended for that recently. So if you really wanna try me on the road side thats fine, I won't physically resist you. I will say I consent to no searches, and I will report the misconduct to IAB then let the chips fall where they may.

Our General Orders don't cover this extremely specific topic. Don't know where you got that info from.

He also stated he would do it for his safety. Reread his post.

No I didn't. NO. I. DIDN'T.

...and please let me know what officer on MSE was suspended for taking someone's property during a traffic stop. I want to try and substantiate that claim. Thanks.