What to do during a traffic stop?

[Dirtebiker]

My New Rules for Both Parties in a Traffic Stop:

For the Driver:

0. Avoid this situation by not violating traffic regulations.

1. Don't be a douche.
2. Don't offer unnecessary information that does not pertain to the traffic stop.
3. Don't lie, but don't offer information that does not pertain to the traffic stop.
4. Do what you're told.
5. The cop's safety is just as important to him as yours is to you.
6. Accept the ticket and fight it in court if you're not guilty.

For the Cop:

1. Don't be a douche.
2. Don't ask questions that aren't pertinent to the traffic stop like whether or not someone is legally armed when you have no suspicions that a crime has been committed.
3. The driver's safety is just as important as yours.
4. KNOW THE LAWS you are enforcing.
5. Handling a previously holstered weapon solely for the sake of "officer safety" is foolish and greatly increases the risk of a negligent discharge. If it's in a holster or otherwise stowed and the driver's hands are in plain sight, just leave it there unless you have a legitimate reason to do otherwise. Disarming someone just because you can is a douche move (see #1).

Agreed 100%!

 

[Dirtebiker]

What would y'all do if the officer asked you to hand over your gun so he could run it to see if it were stolen?

Exactly what I did in Plainfield. Tell him I don't want him to touch my pistol, and that it's safer left in the holster.
I repeated the same to his supervisor who eventually agreed and let me go with a warning.

 

[Dirtebiker]

We've had Members discuss just that situation. One was handcuffed, they took his OC handgun never knowing he had a BUG in his back pocket, right by his handcuffed hands.

The Trooper who threw my pistol on top of my van had no idea I had a back up at the small of back, and several other handguns and a couple rifles right next to me.
I guess he "felt" safer!?

 

[Expatriated]

Exactly what I did in Plainfield. Tell him I don't want him to touch my pistol, and that it's safer left in the holster.
I repeated the same to his supervisor who eventually agreed and let me go with a warning.

When I lived in NC in the 90's, this was common practice. Cops would run your gun's serial number, give it back to you empty and ask you to load it up down the road. Not sure if they still do that. I never knew anyone to be upset by it or refuse to do it. Don't know what would've happened if you refused. I'm sure someone has, but I never heard of anyone doing it so I don't know how it worked out.

You had a right to inform there as well, at least back then.

 

[actaeon277]

When I lived in NC in the 90's, this was common practice. Cops would run your gun's serial number, give it back to you empty and ask you to load it up down the road. Not sure if they still do that. I never knew anyone to be upset by it or refuse to do it. Don't know what would've happened if you refused. I'm sure someone has, but I never heard of anyone doing it so I don't know how it worked out.

You had a right to inform there as well, at least back then.

Do they also run the serial numbers of cell phones, or other stuff in the car.
There is supposed to be something called "presumption of innocence".

 

[Roadie]

Do they also run the serial numbers of cell phones, or other stuff in the car.
There is supposed to be something called "presumption of innocence".

 

[Expatriated]

Do they also run the serial numbers of cell phones, or other stuff in the car.
There is supposed to be something called "presumption of innocence".

Yes, I realize there is SUPPOSED to be

They did not run other stuff. At least not that I ever heard of, unless they found a guy who was driving a car with a broken steering column and a trunk full of stereos. I'm sure they'd run the stereos.

They did run the tag, of course on just about every vehicle they got behind, which I'll admit is not the same thing--there's no seizure or whatever there.

I always thought it was unwise from an officer's perspective. If I'm a cop and I stop you and I see you have a gun, why would I ask you to hand it to me? I don't know you. Maybe you just killed the last cop that stopped you 100 miles up the road with that same gun and here I am giving you the opportunity to grab it and point it at me.

Maybe they cut that procedure out by now.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Do they also run the serial numbers of cell phones, or other stuff in the car.
There is supposed to be something called "presumption of innocence".

There is also the SCOTUS opinion in AZ v Hicks. Which should generally preclude seizing a firearm just for the purposes of running the serial number. And also sorta makes me want to put a piece of tape over the SN on my normal carry pistol, in case they seize it for "officer safety".
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/480/321/case.html

I've been pulled over a few times since I started carrying, only been asked twice. Once by a local the other by an IL state trooper.
The local asked me at the end of the stop. He told me he figured I had one because I kept my hands on the wheel, I answered and seeing that I had a LTCH when you ran my license probably didn't hurt. He then told me I'm supposed to tell them when stopped, I told him that IN does not have a duty to inform. He then changed it to "should" tell them. I asked why? He just looked at me, gave me my warning and told me have a good night and I could be on my way.

IL was a bit different...

 

[2A_Tom]

Question: Is there a law against obscuring a firearm serial number, and could simply placing tape over it be construed as obscuring.

Illinois is a must inform state , but I'm sure most know that.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Question: Is there a law against obscuring a firearm serial number, and could simply placing tape over it be construed as obscuring.

Illinois is a must inform state , but I'm sure most know that.

No law that I know of, if there was quite a few would be breaking the law by simply holstering the gun or putting slip on grips. Let alone putting one in a case. There are laws on defacing/removing serial numbers though. And I wouldn't be "obscuring", I would be "protecting" it from damage...

And yes IL is now a must inform. When I was pulled over, it wasn't. They didn't have carry yet, I was transporting legally though.

ETA And for IL, you do not have to volunteer that you are carrying, but if stopped for an investigatory stop (including traffic stops) and are asked, you must answer honestly.

 

[Concerned Citizen]

I answered that question truthfully to an IPD officer "Do you have any weapons in the truck?", and it went badly for me. I will NEVER OFFER THE INFO, and I will NEVER ANSWER THAT QUESTION AGAIN. After listening to "The Gun Guy" on WIBC, Guy stated that after the case "Washington Vs State of indiana" (I think this was it, but I'm not sure which Washington it was), the state supreme court ruled that you do not have to answer that question. So, forevermore my response will be "Sorry officer, but I am choosing not to answer that question, as is allowed me by the Supreme Court of Indiana". Additionally, unless that officer can prove a Reasonable Articulable Suspicion (RAS) that I have committed a crime or are a danger to that officer, then he has no right to search my vehicle or detain me or any of my property.

If he orders me out of the vehicle, I will ask him/her if they have a Reasonable Articulable Suspicion that I have committed a crime. If they say no, I will remind them that they cannot search my vehicle or detain any of my property. If they still order me out of the truck, I will comply and at that point, I will tell them I am carrying on my belt, before I step out.

I will be polite and professional, but I will not let my rights be stomped on because a LEO is not familiar with them.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

I answered that question truthfully to an IPD officer "Do you have any weapons in the truck?", and it went badly for me. I will NEVER OFFER THE INFO, and I will NEVER ANSWER THAT QUESTION AGAIN. After listening to "The Gun Guy" on WIBC, Guy stated that after the case "Washington Vs State of indiana" (I think this was it, but I'm not sure which Washington it was), the state supreme court ruled that you do not have to answer that question. So, forevermore my response will be "Sorry officer, but I am choosing not to answer that question, as is allowed me by the Supreme Court of Indiana". Additionally, unless that officer can prove a Reasonable Articulable Suspicion (RAS) that I have committed a crime or are a danger to that officer, then he has no right to search my vehicle or detain me or any of my property.

If he orders me out of the vehicle, I will ask him/her if they have a Reasonable Articulable Suspicion that I have committed a crime. If they say no, I will remind them that they cannot search my vehicle or detain any of my property. If they still order me out of the truck, I will comply and at that point, I will tell them I am carrying on my belt, before I step out.

I will be polite and professional, but I will not let my rights be stomped on because a LEO is not familiar with them.

I believe the case he was most likely referring to would be Melvin Washington v State of Indiana which is an court of appeals not supreme court opinion. And does not address if you are required to answer if asked. It addressed a search of a vehicle for a firearm, without a reasonable articulable basis for officer safety.

Also while IN does not have a statutory requirement to inform, some states do. Most that do, require you to inform immediately, IL requires you to inform if asked.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I answered that question truthfully to an IPD officer "Do you have any weapons in the truck?", and it went badly for me. I will NEVER OFFER THE INFO, and I will NEVER ANSWER THAT QUESTION AGAIN. After listening to "The Gun Guy" on WIBC, Guy stated that after the case "Washington Vs State of indiana" (I think this was it, but I'm not sure which Washington it was), the state supreme court ruled that you do not have to answer that question. So, forevermore my response will be "Sorry officer, but I am choosing not to answer that question, as is allowed me by the Supreme Court of Indiana". Additionally, unless that officer can prove a Reasonable Articulable Suspicion (RAS) that I have committed a crime or are a danger to that officer, then he has no right to search my vehicle or detain me or any of my property.

If he orders me out of the vehicle, I will ask him/her if they have a Reasonable Articulable Suspicion that I have committed a crime. If they say no, I will remind them that they cannot search my vehicle or detain any of my property. If they still order me out of the truck, I will comply and at that point, I will tell them I am carrying on my belt, before I step out.

I will be polite and professional, but I will not let my rights be stomped on because a LEO is not familiar with them.

Unfortunately, you are going to run into officers that get all "deer in headlights" when they find out someone is carrying a firearm. Truth be told, I was the same way, when first starting out. It actually took a citizen who challenged me on it, politely, that got me thinking about it, and it eventually changed my opinion.

 

[Concerned Citizen]

I believe the case he was most likely referring to would be Melvin Washington v State of Indiana which is an court of appeals not supreme court opinion. And does not address if you are required to answer if asked. It addressed a search of a vehicle for a firearm, without a reasonable articulable basis for officer safety.

Hmmm... I stand corrected. However, Guy specifically stated on his show that we can legally choose not to answer the question. I may not be stating the right case for that, but he was very clear on the issue.

 

[Concerned Citizen]

Unfortunately, you are going to run into officers that get all "deer in headlights" when they find out someone is carrying a firearm. Truth be told, I was the same way, when first starting out. It actually took a citizen who challenged me on it, politely, that got me thinking about it, and it eventually changed my opinion.

YUP. That's what happened to me. She called for backup, got me all "hands on the head, feet spread doing the perp walk" in the middle of 38th St. Keep in mind, this was 11:00 AM, with me dressed in Khaki slacks & polo shirt, in full wrapped company truck. Not the appearance of the typical BG you would expect is a danger to society. And of course, as I always am with LEO's, I was completely polite and respectful.

 

[Kutnupe14]

YUP. That's what happened to me. She called for backup, got me all "hands on the head, feet spread doing the perp walk" in the middle of 38th St. Keep in mind, this was 11:00 AM, with me dressed in Khaki slacks & polo shirt, in full wrapped company truck. Not the appearance of the typical BG you would expect is a danger to society. And of course, as I always am with LEO's, I was completely polite and respectful.

Well, I never went THAT far overboard

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Hmmm... I stand corrected. However, Guy specifically stated on his show that we can legally choose not to answer the question. I may not be stating the right case for that, but he was very clear on the issue.

Yes you can legally not answer that question, along with virtually all other questions they may ask. The only info you are required to provide is ID (can be done verbally if not operating a motor vehicle) if you are suspected of committing an infraction or ordinance violation and during a traffic stop present drivers license and registration.

Starr v State covers when you are required to ID.
http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/06221001lmb.pdf

 

[Tooms]

YUP. That's what happened to me. She called for backup, got me all "hands on the head, feet spread doing the perp walk" in the middle of 38th St. Keep in mind, this was 11:00 AM, with me dressed in Khaki slacks & polo shirt, in full wrapped company truck. Not the appearance of the typical BG you would expect is a danger to society. And of course, as I always am with LEO's, I was completely polite and respectful.

Did she even ask to look at your permit before putting you through this?

 

[Concerned Citizen]

Did she even ask to look at your permit before putting you through this?

Not only did she not ask to see my permit, she refused to let me show her my permit until 2 additional patrol cars showed up to disarm me. She ordered me to put both hands on the wheel and not move until all her backup arrived. Then it just weirder from there. One ridiculous fail after another.

 

[looney2ns]

Not only did she not ask to see my permit, she refused to let me show her my permit until 2 additional patrol cars showed up to disarm me. She ordered me to put both hands on the wheel and not move until all her backup arrived. Then it just weirder from there. One ridiculous fail after another.

Did you file a complaint, and if so anything come of it?