thoughts on being disarmed

[G.A. Heath]

G. A. Heath's shortened quote: Unfortunately he went and purchased ammo and didn't realize that handguns used specific cartridges.

Are you telling us that a newly minted officer, who will be carrying a pistol every day for his job, didn't realize
that he had to buy the specific caliber for his gun? Really?

Whoa! If he doesn't know about his own gun, he would not be smart about handling other people's guns.

SIA

I could also tell you the story about a rookie officer who got bit by a dog because they couldn't remember to work the safety on a 1911 that they did qualify with. You would be amazed at the stories I could tell you from all the people in Law Enforcement that I know. I know one officer who, if he could convince his superior, would carry nothing but an old three screw Blackhawk (Single action revolver) because he doesn't trust anything else to work.

[Ameer]

What would/could cause the disarmament in the first place?

Obeying the rules and displaying your CHL.

[Seburiel]

would carry nothing but an old three screw Blackhawk (Single action revolver)

LOL Awesome!
Not smart, mind you, not in the typical modern mindset, but awesome none-the-less.

[TexasGal]

I understand the nervousness of the police at anyone that is armed. I don't hold it against them. He/she works in a job where they are lied to daily by people. It can sure cause some trust issues. I do hope the person disarming me is thinking clearly about how to handle the loaded firearm(s) so the less I act like I am going to be a problem, the more attention he/she has to handle the gun(s). I remember reading a post once where the officer was unfamiliar with the 1911 he was trying to unload. The owner was sweating watching him fumbling with it wondering just what the outcome would be if the officer shot himself with it.

[flechero]

I agree that the officer (and chl) deserve to go home safely... but I don't think this is really about safety most of the time.

If the chl or anyone had intentions of hurting the officer, it would most likely happen at initial stop before allowing the gun to be removed... so by nature of the fact that we offer up the plastic and have our (empty) hands in plain sight should promote trust.

It seems like many LEO's who disarm, do so for no legitimate reason and the rest seem not to have an issue with trusting chl's.

[flechero]

Another side of this I just thought of...

No one I know has been asked if he/she was carrying (under MPA) when they didn't display a chl... but in most of the cases, there is still a legal firearm in the vehicle. Is the "oversight" as simple as our reminding them with the plastic that we have a weapon? It certainly suggests that disarming chl's has nothing to do with safety. If the officer is concerned for his safety, wouldn't it seem reasonable that they ask everyone they pull over if they have a weapon?

[recaffeination]

That only affects the honest people and the supremo court says felons are allowed to lie and say they don't have a gun. Self incrimination.

Disarming a CHL has as much to do with safety as TSA searching a 5 year old girl's underwear for explosives.

[Oldgringo]

What would/could cause the disarmament in the first place?

Obeying the rules and displaying your CHL.

That in itself shouldn't qualify one for a disarming by a LEO. There must be something else that would trigger the stop/questioning? Help us understand what attracted the LEO to the subject.

[flechero]

Oldgringo,

for the sake of this thread, I just assumed a plain jane traffic stop- something like 7mph over, speeding, on the highway. (which was my last stop).

[Hoosier Daddy]

But if someone doesn't have a CHL and is carrying under MPA and desn't volunteer answers to questions the LEO doesn't ask, the risk of being disarmed is much, much lower. Therefore, what really caused the disarming is probably showing the CHL.

[03Lightningrocks]

Try as I might, I Haven't been able to get a cop to pull me over in almost three years.,,, maybe four. I speed, run red lights... Throw beer cans out the window... Nothing works! I have been busting at the seams to whip out my CHL to a cop... NOTHING.... NADA ...ZIP! I feel cheated!

But if I did and a cop wanted to disarm me, I don't feel I would give him any crud about it. I have yet to hear any stories of a driver winning an argument with a police officer when pulled over. The one time I got mouthy, I managed to get an extra ticket for an offense he was going to let me get away with before I popped off. Just so everyone knows... Never tell a cop the only reason he pulled you over is because he got mad you beat him off the light. It was an under cover car and I thought he wanted to race. I had no idea it was a cop until he pulled behind me and hit the lights.

[gigag04]

I treat being informed of a gun in a vehicle, and observing an undisclosed gun in a vehicle very differently. One involves me making a funny comment, and the other drawing my weapon and starting to issue commands.

[The Annoyed Man]

Another side of this I just thought of...

No one I know has been asked if he/she was carrying (under MPA) when they didn't display a chl... but in most of the cases, there is still a legal firearm in the vehicle. Is the "oversight" as simple as our reminding them with the plastic that we have a weapon? It certainly suggests that disarming chl's has nothing to do with safety. If the officer is concerned for his safety, wouldn't it seem reasonable that they ask everyone they pull over if they have a weapon?

Just as an observation, I would offer the following responses:

1. Don't confuse "failure to present CHL" with "failure to inform officer of gun in car." Presenting the CHL is a requirement under the law if you are armed at the time, even if the law no longer has a penalty appended for failure to present. Informing the officer that you're armed is not a requirement under the law. If the officer wants to know once he/she has seen your CHL, then the officer will ask you (if they care) if you are armed and if so, where the gun is, etc., etc. In this case, if you fail to present your CHL, you're "playing the fool" because the officer is going to find out your CHL status anyway, and he/she may change their opinion of you since failure to present your CHL may be reasonably interpreted as a deliberate attempt to conceal the information, and that could make their spidey sense tingle.

2. MPA doesn't require you to inform the officer of a weapon in the car unless asked. Thus, whatever follows by way of officer response is not a legal risk to you, so long as you don't play the fool. In this case, "playing the fool" would constitute not being truthful when asked on the one hand, and screaming "I HAVE A GUN!!!!" on the other hand. Being pleasant, calm, and rational, and truthfully answering the question if the officer asks if there are any firearms in the car is the path that is going to keep you out of handcuffs and free to go when the "interview" is over.

2. Whatever the various constitutional opinions are, the prevailing legal opinions are that when you have a CHL and a gun in your car, your CHL "preempts" MPA, and you are subject to the laws of CHL, not MPA. In this case, "playing the fool" would constitute failure to present the CHL to the officer, and failure to truthfully answer the question of whether your are armed or not if asked.

Therefore, if your friend(s) A) had a CHL, B) were in possession of a firearm in the vehicle, C) were stopped by an LEO, and D) did NOT present their CHL when asked for ID, they were in violation of the law. The fact that there is no longer a penalty for failure to present the CHL has not removed the requirement to inform from the statutes. One of the things that having a CHL does—in theory—is inform the officer that you are one of the good guys. I've only ever had 3 occasions to show my CHL (only one was a traffic stop), two of the officers (Grapevine PD) didn't even ask if I was armed, and the third one (Southlake PD) asked if I was armed, where it was, and just asked me to keep my hands away from that area.....but he didn't ask to disarm me. The problem is that failure to present the CHL, which will be discovered anyway, may very well destroy whatever good will having one in the first place had created.....setting up the type of situation which will take the contact into the area of confrontation rather than cooperation.

The trouble is, some people are their own worst enemies, and because pride goeth before the fall, they remain willfully blind to the relationship between their choices, and the consequences that develop from those choices. Those are the times that deserve one of these:

YMMV.

[jmra]

I don't think I would like being disarmed. How would I tie my shoes?

[The Annoyed Man]

I don't think I would like being disarmed. How would I tie my shoes?

That's what flip-flops are for, silly.