thoughts on being disarmed

[flechero]

TAM,

My MPA question stems from friends that don't have a CHL. (not someone failing to produce chl upon contact.)

gigag04,

I assume since you hang out here, you aren't one to disarm everyone just for the sake of doing it. But for the guys you might work with who do disarm as SOP, do they ask every stop if they have weapons and search/clear vehicles, also as SOP?




Again, I haven't ever been disarmed, these questions stemmed from reading other's accounts of being disarmed. I would never resist or object to it, on the spot, but if it was unnecessary I would contact a supervisor the next day and report the facts. The time to fight for your rights, is rarely the same time time you lose them.

[The Annoyed Man]

TAM,

My MPA question stems from friends that don't have a CHL. (not someone failing to produce chl upon contact.)

Thanks for the clarification. You may ignore my previous comments.

[KC5AV]

TAM,

My MPA question stems from friends that don't have a CHL. (not someone failing to produce chl upon contact.)

Thanks for the clarification. You may ignore my previous comments.

And the fact that your list had number 2 twice.

[speedsix]

...you just wait...you'll get to the point where you repeat yourself again some more, too...

[KC5AV]

I already do.

[4t5]

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.

The only requirement is for a a CHL holder to present his license if armed. There is no requirement to inform if armed under either MPA or CHL. You cannot be forced to answer any questions AT ALL, if you choose not to. My attorney told me long ago no to get into conversations with officers on the side of the road, as no good can come of it. I intend to follow his advice. Sadly, the days of having a chat with Officer Friendly are long gone. Every day, we are becoming more US vs THEM, and not by the choice of US. If an officer wants to search me and my car, and check my S/N, he's going to have to do it the long way. I'm clean, my gun is clean, and my car is clean, and I will not have my rights trampled upon. Freedom can be uncomfortable and difficult at times, but rights need to be exercised in order to keep them strong.

[recaffeination]

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.

Some of us are able to be polite to the officer even if we think he's something that can't be discussed in polite company for disarming a CHL when he wouldn't even know about the gun if the same person was MPA carry because they didn't have a CHL.

Your mileage may vary.

[TexasGal]

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.

Perfect Explanation, Annoyed One
Common sense + knowledge = wisdom

[The Annoyed Man]

TAM,

My MPA question stems from friends that don't have a CHL. (not someone failing to produce chl upon contact.)

Thanks for the clarification. You may ignore my previous comments.

And the fact that your list had number 2 twice.

Some day your brain will be old and moldy too, my friend. I edited and re-edited that list so many times I guess I forgot to update the numbering sequence.

[gigag04]

gigag04,

I assume since you hang out here, you aren't one to disarm everyone just for the sake of doing it. But for the guys you might work with who do disarm as SOP, do they ask every stop if they have weapons and search/clear vehicles, also as SOP?

I ask almost every stop about weapons. I also ask about cocaine, crack, methamphetamine, marijuana, unprescribed controlled drugs, large sums of money, contraband, circus clowns, and rebellious nuns. I work the hood so nearly every stop is not just a "stop." It's interdiction of dope and drunks. I've never disarmed a CHL holder during a routine traffic stop, and I don't know anyone in my dept that does as SOP. I have disarmed a CHL holder during my contact who was the suspect of a theft and was ultimately arrested, tried, and convicted for theft. I understand that the majority of the people on this board are "one of the good guys" but in the moment how do we know? You can see the arrest stats for CHL holders...they are very small, but still present. I enjoy getting to chat with CHL holders and generally don't cite them, but I never let my guard down.

[speedsix]

"...but I never let my guard down."

...that's it...'specially in the times we live...ANYONE can snap...anytime, anywhere...

[rm9792]

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.

That was me and I did report the officer to his supervisor for disarming me. They are not allowed to disarm willy nilly (they need a reasonable cause and he had none) and I did everything you can possibly do to make him feel safe. The driver side officer knew I was armed and didnt care, the passenger was the jumpy one. Also, he did not return it inthe condition it was taken. He unloaded the mag and put everything banging around in a baggie. Can I put your $1200 1911 in a baggie with loose 45acp rounds and a mag scratching all over it?

[rm9792]

?

The law allows the LEO to disarm a CHL, so that isn't anything you can do about it. .

No, it doesnt allow at will. They need to feel an unsafe condition exists.

[flechero]

gigag04,

I assume since you hang out here, you aren't one to disarm everyone just for the sake of doing it. But for the guys you might work with who do disarm as SOP, do they ask every stop if they have weapons and search/clear vehicles, also as SOP?

I ask almost every stop about weapons. I also ask about cocaine, crack, methamphetamine, marijuana, unprescribed controlled drugs, large sums of money, contraband, circus clowns, and rebellious nuns. I work the hood so nearly every stop is not just a "stop." It's interdiction of dope and drunks. I've never disarmed a CHL holder during a routine traffic stop, and I don't know anyone in my dept that does as SOP. I have disarmed a CHL holder during my contact who was the suspect of a theft and was ultimately arrested, tried, and convicted for theft. I understand that the majority of the people on this board are "one of the good guys" but in the moment how do we know? You can see the arrest stats for CHL holders...they are very small, but still present. I enjoy getting to chat with CHL holders and generally don't cite them, but I never let my guard down.

Thanks for the response, gigag04... you work the "hood" and would probably have a better reason to disarm all stops than most, and don't. That was pretty much my question / point. Sounds like you are the model for what this discussion calls fair and right. Thanks for your service!

[jdkinman]

As for running the serial number. I hope people are not carrying guns around they don't know for a fact are clean. That is sort of a no-brainer. Maybe cousin Vinny isn't the right guy to get your EDC from

I hope you don't have anything in your house that's illegal. Does that mean the police should be allowed to search your house without a warrant at any time?

Apple to ONIONS comparison. . .

A traffic stop (usually) means you were seen doing something outside of the law and thus, the officer/deputy/trooper/agent has probable cause to stop and detain you. While you are being LEGALLY detained, the officer has specific abilities, covered in law, to ask you for certain things. In the case of CHL, he/she has the lawful ability to ask you to temporarily forfeit your weapon.

Cops do not randomly pick houses to suddenly pull into the driveway, dismount from their car, ring the doorbell and then ask to come in and search your house.

I've been stopped on three occasions since receiving my CHL--headlight out (which had just happened courtesy of a rock-hauler , expired inspection sticker (eleven days out on a car I drive once every few months), and mistaking a green "turn arrow" for the regular green light at 1:00 a.m. after a LONG, LONG day.

All three occasions, I had my CHL out and handed it to the officer along with my DL. On all three occasions, the officer/s asked where my firearm was. On two occasions, I told them in a holster attached to the bottom of my seat (my pickup) and in the sports-car, behind the passenger seat.

I was polite, "yes sir/no sir," had zero attitude (why should I have had attitude? I was wrong on all three counts). IF the officers had asked me to step out so that they could retrieve my weapon, I would've complied with zero problems--two of the stops were late at night.

I only received a ticket for the expired inspection sticker (I was in Coppell where you get fined for breathing without a permit). All officers were polite, professional and a credit to their profession.

Attitudes work both ways, and I for one refuse to act with police in a manner that will create or further any real or perceived divide between law-abiding gun-owners and CHL holders and law enforcement.

NOBODY wins when we do that.