Recent encounter with LEO

Gun, shooting and equipment discussions unrelated to CHL issues

Moderator: carlson1

User avatar

Topic author
OnceFired
Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 149
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 3:33 pm
Location: Texas
Contact:

Re: Recent encounter with LEO

#16

Post by OnceFired »

Yes, I knew it was a fishing expedition.

I couldn't even SEE the so-called burnt out light, and I hadn't checked the tail lights in a long time. I'm not going to have a dispute with the officer on the spot.

Frankly, since I was armed, my dad has his carry permit from NV and we had other guns in sight although they were beyond properly stored, I like to make things as easy as possible for the officer.

I'm just happy he didn't find something else I was unaware of. Like a dragging muffler, or something equally bad for the car. That poor van is not in great shape.
Video games are an escape from reality. Gun ownership is for when you can't.
CHL - 07/03/12 submitted, 09/07/12 received
Texas Security Guard Jobs
User avatar

Charlies.Contingency
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 808
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2014 4:58 pm
Location: South Central Texas

Re: Recent encounter with LEO

#17

Post by Charlies.Contingency »

FastCarry wrote:
Charlies.Contingency wrote:If they're not wanted, and the car isn't stolen, let em' know a light isn't working, and let em' go.
That would be a definition of a fishing stop, and unlawful. You can't be pulled over randomly or without having committed an offense.

If a 3rd light out is probable cause, I screwed. Mine is out on a bmw and I not among the type who can pay for a visit to a German garage.

And correct, it is not an item of inspection.
Most would consider fishing, pulling somebody over, and trying to find an offense. If the vehicle is stolen, or the person is wanted, then how is that fishing? I wouldn't even have to pull you over to figure out if the vehicle is stolen, and who the RO is. Anybody here ever heard of a rolling 28? Run the plates, get the registration info, check the owner for warrants... If I don't need to pull you over to get that information, would it be wrong of me to pull you over, and notify you of your defective lighting equipment? Most people appreciate it, as they do not check their lighting before hitting the road. You can have your opinion, but I think that I am pretty fair. Pulling somebody over to try to search their car, come up with an offense, and harass them is wrong IMO.
Sent from Iphone: Please IGNORE any grammatical or spelling errors.
ALL of my statements are to be considered opinionated and not factual.

WTR
Banned
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 1931
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 10:41 pm

Re: Recent encounter with LEO

#18

Post by WTR »

I consider fishing when I am pulled over for 82 in a 80 zone.......they were fishing for drugs as they brought in a dog. Also a deputy pulled me over for not having my signal on long enough before I pulled back into the right lane after I had passed the deputy.........bored I guess.
User avatar

bortaz
Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:42 pm
Location: Edinburg (RGV)

Re: Recent encounter with LEO

#19

Post by bortaz »

WTR wrote:
TexasJohnBoy wrote:Thanks for publishing a good encounter with LEO. These days all we hear about are bad encounters and we all know that is not all that happens. I'd say you handled it well.
I grew up with LEOs and the judicial system......mostly good......some the underside of the belly. I do have respect for them. Unfortunately, a few of my my last encounters (traffic) the LEO has been arrogant, dismissive and confrontation. However, when I have called the Law out on two occasions, they have been as polite as they could possible be.
Why is it that you have such a disproportionately high incidence of encounters with law enforcement?
User avatar

ScottDLS
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 5080
Joined: Sun Jun 26, 2005 1:04 am
Location: DFW Area, TX

Re: Recent encounter with LEO

#20

Post by ScottDLS »

bortaz wrote:
WTR wrote:
TexasJohnBoy wrote:Thanks for publishing a good encounter with LEO. These days all we hear about are bad encounters and we all know that is not all that happens. I'd say you handled it well.
I grew up with LEOs and the judicial system......mostly good......some the underside of the belly. I do have respect for them. Unfortunately, a few of my my last encounters (traffic) the LEO has been arrogant, dismissive and confrontation. However, when I have called the Law out on two occasions, they have been as polite as they could possible be.
Why is it that you have such a disproportionately high incidence of encounters with law enforcement?
Because they're fishing....duh... :biggrinjester:

I've gotten pulled over in NJ for DWT (driving while Texan).... :shock:
4/13/1996 Completed CHL Class, 4/16/1996 Fingerprints, Affidavits, and Application Mailed, 10/4/1996 Received CHL, renewed 1998, 2002, 2006, 2011, 2016...). "ATF... Uhhh...heh...heh....Alcohol, tobacco, and GUNS!! Cool!!!!"
User avatar

bortaz
Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 78
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2015 12:42 pm
Location: Edinburg (RGV)

Re: Recent encounter with LEO

#21

Post by bortaz »

ScottDLS wrote:
I've gotten pulled over in NJ for DWT (driving while Texan).... :shock:
That's what you get for going to a 3rd world state.

WTR
Banned
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 1931
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2015 10:41 pm

Re: Recent encounter with LEO

#22

Post by WTR »

bortaz wrote:
WTR wrote:
TexasJohnBoy wrote:Thanks for publishing a good encounter with LEO. These days all we hear about are bad encounters and we all know that is not all that happens. I'd say you handled it well.
I grew up with LEOs and the judicial system......mostly good......some the underside of the belly. I do have respect for them. Unfortunately, a few of my my last encounters (traffic) the LEO has been arrogant, dismissive and confrontation. However, when I have called the Law out on two occasions, they have been as polite as they could possible be.
Why is it that you have such a disproportionately high incidence of encounters with law enforcement?
Well, I use to put about 200,000 miles per year on my pickup truck and I tended to speed. Two calls to my home in 25 years excessive? One young lady banging on my door a 3 in the morning because someone had taken her out in the country and tried to rape her......I called the State Police. One drunk who wreaked through my fence.......I called the Sheriff.

EEllis
Banned
Posts in topic: 4
Posts: 1888
Joined: Mon Mar 11, 2013 4:54 pm

Re: Recent encounter with LEO

#23

Post by EEllis »

EEllis wrote:
dlh wrote:
EEllis wrote:Montes v.State, No. 08-13-00060-CR (Tex.App.-El Paso 2015)

The issue was whether the Statute that speaks to working tail lights was satisfied if the mandatory two were working or if it covered the additional lights that were present in this case. The Defendant’s vehicle had four tail lights, two more than are required, and one of them was out. Court held that the transportation code section applies to “all” light on vehicle and therefore the single light not working did constitute a traffic violation.


and more specificly

Starrin v. State, 2005 WL 3343875 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 2005, no pet.).

Stop was based on observation that one of the three brake lights on the defendant's vehicle was out. Defendant argued on appeal that Texas law requires only two functioning brake lights. The Court finds that federal standard requires three brake lights for cars of a certain width and takes judicial notice of the fact that the car in question fits those dimensions and holds the stop was lawful.
The two cases you cite are unpublished opinions and have no precedential value. See T.R.A.P. 47.7

dlh
So the fact that someone has been found guilty of exactly what's be stated as not an offense has no value? It may not be controlling precedence but certainly means it's a valid stop.
And just to throw a little more on

TX Transportation code: Sec. 547.101. RULES AND STANDARDS IN GENERAL. (a) The department may adopt rules necessary to administer this chapter.

(b) The department may adopt standards for vehicle equipment to:

(1) protect the public from unreasonable risk of death or injury; and

(2) enforce safety standards of the United States as permitted under the federal motor vehicle act.


Code of Federal Regulations:
Additional Lamp(s) Required on All Passenger Cars, and on Multipurpose Passenger Vehicles (MPV), Trucks, and Buses, Less Than 2032 MM in Overall Width and With a GVWR of 10,000 Lbs or Less

High mounted stop lamp 1 Red, or 2 red where exceptions apply. See Section 6.1.1.2 On the rear including glazing, with the lamp center on the vertical centerline as viewed from the rear Not less than 34 inches except for passenger cars. See Section 6.1.4.1 Steady burning.
Must only be activated upon application of the service brakes or may be activated by a device designed to retard the motion of the vehicle.
User avatar

karder
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1380
Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 12:14 pm
Location: El Paso

Re: Recent encounter with LEO

#24

Post by karder »

About 3 weeks ago I got pulled over by Border Patrol coming back from a long day hike in the New Mexico bootheel. It was about 8pm and had gotten dark. I was heading north up a dirt road in an old lifted ford bronco. As I passed a fork in the road two BP trucks rolled up behind me and lite me up. A pair of extremely cautious agents with hands on their pistols approached and asked if I was alone. I told them it was just me and my dogs. After about :30 of conversation both guys relaxed and were very friendly. They said that some sensors had gone off and they saw my truck and thought I might have picked someone up. I talked with them about 5 minutes and I gave them the location about a mile up the trail I had been on, where I had seen some backpacks that had been dropped, probably by illegals. We had a very friendly chat and everyone went their own way.

I have a lot of respect for those guys and did not mind being stopped at all. When they hit their lights I figured that they were just looking for information and I am happy to provide it. When I saw how cautious they were approaching, it hit home just how dangerous a job they have and I did my best to put them at ease. They never asked for Id (although I gave them my first name and shook their hands as we began talking). I was open carrying to boot and they didn't pay it a bit of attention nor did they mention it.
“While the people are virtuous they cannot be subdued; but when once they lose their virtue then will be ready to surrender their liberties to the first external or internal invader.” ― Samuel Adams
Post Reply

Return to “General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion”