Traffic stop, gun taken.

[philagothon]

You are right in theory.
BUT if I had taken a constitutionally confrontational stance in my SPECIFIC case, by the time things were sorted out and was shown in court to be "right", I would've lsot THOUSANDS of dollars.
I'm not about to have thousands of dollars in weapons confiscated, and either never get them back, or get them back damaged.
I chose to "fight" another day.

But if you'd like to have your car full of thousands of dollars in weapons, get stopped for going 90+ MPH, be confrontational and RISK having them ILLEGALLY siezed, then have to fight to get them back, HAVE AT IT... :-)
Let us know how it turns out... LOL

"Discretion IS sometimes the better part of valor"

LOL, there is another option. It's called not speeding to the point that you are likely to be suspected of another crime. Personally, I think the officer did a disservice to the rest of the drivers on the road by not impounding your car and slapping you with the biggest penalty he could conjure up.

FWIW, it seems like most sheriffs/deputies are typically of a better disposition and more likely to let someone off as long as they are not driving a mobile meth lab.

ETA: I am generally in the camp of "Don't ask, don't tell." But I get pulled over so rarely that it is virtually a non-issue.

 

[chocktaw2]

Don't get it!!

If she wasn't speeding, would she have been stopped? I read so many times on this forum how people have issues with LEO after they get pulled over for violating laws. Stay under the radar. folks. Times are tough, and the LEO'S are the coffer'$$$$. I try to fly low, giving no reason to be pulled over. what so ever. The fact that I'm carrying makes me more cautious.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

LOL, there is another option. It's called not speeding to the point that you are likely to be suspected of another crime.

One does not have to break the law to be stopped by the police.

If she wasn't speeding, would she have been stopped?

Yes, you can be stopped by the police for obeying the law.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

Many believe that "it can't happen here, or at least to me because I am of a certain race, socio-economic status, or everyone here knows me, etc."

Denial may be a comfortable defense mechanism but it does no help in preparing for the eventual encounter with the police.

 

[philagothon]

One does not have to break the law to be stopped by the police.



Yes, you can be stopped by the police for obeying the law.

I was once pulled over because the officer wanted to "Make sure I was where I was supposed to be." That's what I get for taking off before my windshield had totally defogged and driving slowly because of it. I was going about 15 on a 35mph county road. I played along and was sent on my way as soon as he saw that my eyes were not glassy and bloodshot. I have little doubt that it would have been a much longer stop if my skin were darker or my appearance rougher. Btw, I did not carry at that point in my life so that was a non-issue, but I also don't remember him asking.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

I was once pulled over for obeying the law. When the officer approached my car and saw that I was very white, I got a fraudulent ticket.

I was once stopped from walking back to my SUV for carrying coffee, wearing a University of Texas t-shirt, and being awesome in public.

It's all well and good to say "just don't break the law". However, the truth is that one does not need to break the law to encounter the police.

 

[philagothon]

There are varying degrees of law breaking and they often result in varied interactions with the police. The point in my first post is that limiting one's level of lawlessness, will typically lower the level of interaction with the police. There will always be those cowardly bullies that hide behind a badge, and I agree that we should be prepared to respond to them accordingly, but they are the exception rather than the rule. Most encounters can be avoided in the first place by not breaking the laws to the extent that an officer feels the need to discuss it with you.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

One can have zero degree of law breaking, such as my examples (stopped on suspicion of being non-white and suspicion of coffee), and still be stopped.

I'm all for obeying the traffic code, especially the stop sign on my corner. However, we need to acknowledge that just because we obey the law does not mean we will not interact with the police.

 

[ryknoll3]

One can have zero degree of law breaking, such as my examples (stopped on suspicion of being non-white and suspicion of coffee), and still be stopped.

I'm all for obeying the traffic code, especially the stop sign on my corner. However, we need to acknowledge that just because we obey the law does not mean we will not interact with the police.

... and then you confirmed their suspicions with your "contempt of cop". They obviously knew a thug when they saw one.

 

[88E30M50]

The reason some officers take the gun and some don't is because some officers derive their authority from their gun and others from their badge. The officer that thinks a gun gives him/her their authority will see a civilian carrying as a threat to that authority and will make sure they put that civilian in their place. An officer that derives their authority from their badge will have no issue with a civilian lawfully carrying a weapon and will generally respect that person a bit more for taking responsibility for their own safety.

That's my opinion on the issue.

 

[edporch]

LOL, there is another option. It's called not speeding to the point that you are likely to be suspected of another crime. Personally, I think the officer did a disservice to the rest of the drivers on the road by not impounding your car and slapping you with the biggest penalty he could conjure up.

FWIW, it seems like most sheriffs/deputies are typically of a better disposition and more likely to let someone off as long as they are not driving a mobile meth lab.

ETA: I am generally in the camp of "Don't ask, don't tell." But I get pulled over so rarely that it is virtually a non-issue.

My point.
I WAS guilty, and felt that discretion was the better form of valor in that situation.

What I didn't say was my REASON for driving 90+mph.

I was coming back home from up North and trying to make it to my girlfriend's house QUICKLY.
She has a teenaged son who in those days PHYSICALLY and VERBALLY abusive. (took after his deceased father who was a wife beater)

I KNOW, there are those who would say she should call the police.
But this boy knew how to play the SYSTEM enough where he'd not do anything to rise to the level of anything the police could do anything about.
AND the police would begin to get a little annoyed when being called to the house and he actually hadn't "done" anything...

HE also knew that because his mother is a widow, when she did put him in the "system" in the past, the money she had to spend on the courts, etc. took money from the family that they didn't have.

He'd just sadistically intimidate her (and his two sisters too) until he felt like smacking her around a little.

He was beginning to go on the rampage and I was trying to get back.

FUNNY THING, when I'm there his urge to BEAT his mother seems to leave him, and suddenly he isn't the little junior wife beater punk anymore...

The boy has since improved to where he doesn't beat his mother anymore, and his verbal abuse has improved significantly.

Hopefully due SOME to his seeing me NEVER abusing his mother, and realizing a man isn't some punk who slaps women around.

So yes, I was guilty of going 90+mph on an open stretch of road.
But I'd bet there's a lot of men here who would've done the same thing under the same circumstances.

 

[IndyGunner]

So when they give you your gun back, can you rack one in the chamber and load up the magazine before driving off? I dont understand how they can disarm you, let alone prevent you from re-preparing yourself when they take off to their next doughnut shop or speed trap.

 

[Dave00c5]

was it takin' a dump?


i got pulled over by sbpd a couple weeks ago. he asked if i had a gun, and i told him. he asked where it was, and i told him. he asked me to keep my hands on the steering wheel while he ran my stuff. worked well for both of us.

long story short, south bend>warsaw.

My sons best friend is a Elkhart County officer and he says to inform the cop and keep your hands on top of the steering wheel and usually all goes well.

 

[DragonGunner]

My sons best friend is a Elkhart County officer and he says to inform the cop and keep your hands on top of the steering wheel and usually all goes well.

"usually" just isn't cutting it anymore for alot of us here...at least for me.

My son filed a complaint but said they weren't going to push it....the officer he talked to in Warsaw said he would talk to the officer an contact him today....guess what...never got a call, big surprize. Then they told him if he pursued it, then they would pursue charges against his wife for illegally carrying a handgun....you see, they were married last summer....she mailed a letter to the State Police telling her name had been changed, requesting an expecting a new license.....so far nothing has happened...I have heard this has happened to others....anyway, the Warsaw LEO told my son they let it go but she can't carry until thats takin care of....I think thats a bunch of crap. So they Faxed info to the State Police again....I should of called the State Police today to find out why it was taking so long, an if the Warsaw police was just blowing smoke....

 

[9mmfan]

I once was pulled over for an expired tag (1 day). The female south bend cop about had a cow I was carrying a knife with a pocket clip. I would have hated to see her reaction if I would have been carrying.

 

[Rookie]

I also think their info is wrong. Quick answer would be to call state police Monday and find out. I think they are bluffing to get it to go away.

 

[Hammerhead]

(i) If a person who holds a valid license to carry a handgun issued under this chapter:
(1) changes the person's name;
(2) changes the person's address; or
(3) experiences a change, including an arrest or a conviction, that may affect the person's status as a proper person (as defined in IC 35-47-1-7) or otherwise disqualify the person from holding a license;
the person shall, not later than thirty (30) days after the date of a change described under subdivision (3), and not later than sixty (60) days after the date of the change described under subdivision (1) or (2), notify the superintendent, in writing, of the event described under subdivision (3) or, in the case of a change under subdivision (1) or (2), the person's new name or new address.

They're blowing smoke. Push the issue. The license doesn't have to be current, the ISP just has to be notified. They won't send out a new one unless you pay the $20 fee.

Don't roll over due to their bullying. That LEO is full of fecal matter.

 

[Rookie]

There you go. They're trying to feed a line of bull **** in the hopes that you tuck your tail and run. After all, why would anyone question them?

Don't let them scare you off.

 

[DragonGunner]

Thats what I told my son, they are bluffing hoping its dropped so they can continue on their bully assualt on the people who pay their wages.....seems they forgot that part too.....I'll let my son know today....but he may not pursue it...?....If I can I would because this happened to my daughter in law, she' a great gal an was upset an doesn't know if she will carry for awhile because of this an may just want it to go away....I'm thinking of writing to the Warasaw times an telling them all this...but who knows if the paper will print such a bad image of their beloved city police....?....They asked who the leo was, couldn't read his name on the ticket an they wouldn't tell him but his badge number is 125....I would like to keep the heat on this myself, otherwise nothing will change an I HATE bad LEO's, an LEO's that that stick up for an cover those LEO's....they SUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Hooker]

There might be a very good reason why he writes his name illegibly.