TexasCHLforum.com

GC §411.207. AUTHORITY OF PEACE OFFICER TO DISARM.
(a) A peace officer who is acting in the lawful discharge of the officer's official duties may disarm a license holder at any time the officer reasonably believes it is necessary for the protection of the license holder, officer, or another individual. The peace officer shall return the handgun to the license holder before discharging the license holder from the scene if the officer determines that the license holder is not a threat to the officer, license holder, or another individual and if the license holder has not violated any provision of this subchapter or committed any other violation that results in the arrest of the license holder.

I have a newbie question about the above statute. I understand the LEO has the right to disarm a chl holder if he feels threatened. My question is, if for instance in a traffic stop, I give the LEO my chl, and he asks if I'm armed. I reply yes, he asks where my gun is. I tell him it is in a covered (concealed) holster beside my seat. What happens next? If hypothetically, for some reason they feel threatened and want to disarm me, does the LEO have the right to pull me out of the vehicle and retrieve the gun himself? Does he have to ask my permission to enter my vehicle to retrieve it? What I'm asking is do I have to give consent to search for him to take it out of my vehicle? What if I said no?

I know this is more than one question, but being a new chl applicant I want to be sure on the proper procedure.

Thanks.

I would say if you stepped out of the vehicle (I would close the door in the process) then you are no longer armed. Being no longer armed and considering that you have not given consent, he would need probable cause or a warrant to conduct a search.
IANAL and am probably completely wrong.

Watchful wrote:

GC §411.207. AUTHORITY OF PEACE OFFICER TO DISARM.
(a) A peace officer who is acting in the lawful discharge of the officer's official duties may disarm a license holder at any time the officer reasonably believes it is necessary for the protection of the license holder, officer, or another individual. The peace officer shall return the handgun to the license holder before discharging the license holder from the scene if the officer determines that the license holder is not a threat to the officer, license holder, or another individual and if the license holder has not violated any provision of this subchapter or committed any other violation that results in the arrest of the license holder.

I have a newbie question about the above statute. I understand the LEO has the right to disarm a chl holder if he feels threatened. My question is, if for instance in a traffic stop, I give the LEO my chl, and he asks if I'm armed. I reply yes, he asks where my gun is. I tell him it is in a covered (concealed) holster beside my seat. What happens next? If hypothetically, for some reason they feel threatened and want to disarm me, does the LEO have the right to pull me out of the vehicle and retrieve the gun himself? Does he have to ask my permission to enter my vehicle to retrieve it? What I'm asking is do I have to give consent to search for him to take it out of my vehicle? What if I said no?

I know this is more than one question, but being a new chl applicant I want to be sure on the proper procedure.

Thanks.

It's not so much that he or she has the right to do that as it is that he or she has the authority to do it. The odds are that you won't be disarmed. It seems to be fairly common that the officer won't even ask where the gun is. Actually being disarmed doesn't happen most of the time. As far as the procedure, just do whatever the cop tells you to do, and do it calmly without "attitude." But the longer CHL is a fact of life in this state, the more it seems that cops are getting comfortable with it. Consider this, if you are comfortable with it, the officer will likely be comfortable with it too. If you're acting all hinky, like you're afraid you're about to get caught doing something wrong, the officer may act accordingly.

I've had to show my ID to a cop 5 times since I first got my CHL. In one instance, the officer asked me if I was armed at the time, and where it was, and then simply requested that I keep my hands off of it during the stop. The other 4 times they didn't even ask if I was armed. The last time, the cop glanced at my CHL and said, "oh I don't need this," and handed it right back to me while he took my TDL back to his car (burned out breaklight bulb).

The Annoyed Man wrote:
It's not so much that he or she has the right to do that as it is that he or she has the authority to do it.

That's a good point. LEO's are government officials, given certain authorities and powers when acting under the law so that they can perform a very difficult job. They are not, or should not be, a special class of citizen with rights superior to others.

The same should go for elected officials and other government employees.

I was pulled over for speeding (going down hill at 39mph in a 30 zone). I sat with my hands in plain sight, and notified him that I had a CHL and that I was armed. I told him I have a Glock at 330 IWB. He asked my politely to step out of the car and he disarmed me in a respectful manner. He made my Glock safe, gave me a warning and then gave me my Glock back and sent me on my way. I believe that my respect of his safety, my safety and the law is what helped me get a warning that day.

Matt78665 wrote:I was pulled over for speeding (going down hill at 39mph in a 30 zone). I sat with my hands in plain sight, and notified him that I had a CHL and that I was armed. I told him I have a Glock at 330 IWB. He asked my politely to step out of the car and he disarmed me in a respectful manner. He made my Glock safe, gave me a warning and then gave me my Glock back and sent me on my way. I believe that my respect of his safety, my safety and the law is what helped me get a warning that day.

Do you mean that he unholstered your gun or that you unholstered it and gave it to him?

Matt78665 wrote:I was pulled over for speeding (going down hill at 39mph in a 30 zone). I sat with my hands in plain sight, and notified him that I had a CHL and that I was armed. I told him I have a Glock at 330 IWB. He asked my politely to step out of the car and he disarmed me in a respectful manner. He made my Glock safe, gave me a warning and then gave me my Glock back and sent me on my way. I believe that my respect of his safety, my safety and the law is what helped me get a warning that day.

Was this in round rock, by a wilco deputy? I bet I was stopped by the same guy. Same thing happened.

v-rog wrote:

Matt78665 wrote:I was pulled over for speeding (going down hill at 39mph in a 30 zone). I sat with my hands in plain sight, and notified him that I had a CHL and that I was armed. I told him I have a Glock at 330 IWB. He asked my politely to step out of the car and he disarmed me in a respectful manner. He made my Glock safe, gave me a warning and then gave me my Glock back and sent me on my way. I believe that my respect of his safety, my safety and the law is what helped me get a warning that day.

Do you mean that he unholstered your gun or that you unholstered it and gave it to him?

I doubt seriously an officer would allow you to unholster. If he's concerned enough to want to disarm you, he's not going to allow you to touch your weapon. I sure wouldn't. If you were wearing the holster, I'd ask you to place your hands on the hood or roof and then I'd disarm you. If the weapon was in the car, as the OP described, I'd ask you to step out of the car, without the weapon, then I would retrieve it myself. (No, I'm not a cop, but I think about safe procedure all the time.)

baldeagle wrote:

v-rog wrote:

Matt78665 wrote:I was pulled over for speeding (going down hill at 39mph in a 30 zone). I sat with my hands in plain sight, and notified him that I had a CHL and that I was armed. I told him I have a Glock at 330 IWB. He asked my politely to step out of the car and he disarmed me in a respectful manner. He made my Glock safe, gave me a warning and then gave me my Glock back and sent me on my way. I believe that my respect of his safety, my safety and the law is what helped me get a warning that day.

Do you mean that he unholstered your gun or that you unholstered it and gave it to him?

I doubt seriously an officer would allow you to unholster. If he's concerned enough to want to disarm you, he's not going to allow you to touch your weapon. I sure wouldn't. If you were wearing the holster, I'd ask you to place your hands on the hood or roof and then I'd disarm you. If the weapon was in the car, as the OP described, I'd ask you to step out of the car, without the weapon, then I would retrieve it myself. (No, I'm not a cop, but I think about safe procedure all the time.)

Which brings us full circle back to my original question. Does the LEO need your permission to enter your car to retreive the gun? I know this is a purely hypothetical situation and a huge percentage of LEO are going to have no issue with a chl holder, I just wanted everyone's thoughts on wheather he needed permission to enter my vehicle, or is this an illegal search.

Watchful wrote:

baldeagle wrote:

v-rog wrote:

Matt78665 wrote:I was pulled over for speeding (going down hill at 39mph in a 30 zone). I sat with my hands in plain sight, and notified him that I had a CHL and that I was armed. I told him I have a Glock at 330 IWB. He asked my politely to step out of the car and he disarmed me in a respectful manner. He made my Glock safe, gave me a warning and then gave me my Glock back and sent me on my way. I believe that my respect of his safety, my safety and the law is what helped me get a warning that day.

Do you mean that he unholstered your gun or that you unholstered it and gave it to him?

I doubt seriously an officer would allow you to unholster. If he's concerned enough to want to disarm you, he's not going to allow you to touch your weapon. I sure wouldn't. If you were wearing the holster, I'd ask you to place your hands on the hood or roof and then I'd disarm you. If the weapon was in the car, as the OP described, I'd ask you to step out of the car, without the weapon, then I would retrieve it myself. (No, I'm not a cop, but I think about safe procedure all the time.)

Which brings us full circle back to my original question. Does the LEO need your permission to enter your car to retreive the gun? I know this is a purely hypothetical situation and a huge percentage of LEO are going to have no issue with a chl holder, I just wanted everyone's thoughts on wheather he needed permission to enter my vehicle, or is this an illegal search.

At this point (I'm out of the car and the gun is in the car), I let the officer know that I do not consent to any search or seizure of property.

Watchful wrote:Which brings us full circle back to my original question. Does the LEO need your permission to enter your car to retreive the gun? I know this is a purely hypothetical situation and a huge percentage of LEO are going to have no issue with a chl holder, I just wanted everyone's thoughts on wheather he needed permission to enter my vehicle, or is this an illegal search.

IANAL, but I don't think it would be illegal to retrieve the gun - and ONLY the gun - because you've already admitted to possession and told the officer its location. And I think that if, while retrieving the gun, something else caught his eye, pursuing that would be fruit of the poisonous tree.

baldeagle wrote:

Watchful wrote:Which brings us full circle back to my original question. Does the LEO need your permission to enter your car to retreive the gun? I know this is a purely hypothetical situation and a huge percentage of LEO are going to have no issue with a chl holder, I just wanted everyone's thoughts on wheather he needed permission to enter my vehicle, or is this an illegal search.

IANAL, but I don't think it would be illegal to retrieve the gun - and ONLY the gun - because you've already admitted to possession and told the officer its location. And I think that if, while retrieving the gun, something else caught his eye, pursuing that would be fruit of the poisonous tree.

Legal possession of a firearm is not probable cause. Once I am no longer in the car I am no longer armed and have no obligation to consent to a search of my car. Unless the officer has probable cause I would say that he is on very thin ice.

Once the officer claims he thinks he smells pot, he has gained the right to search the car and temporally seize the weapon so that he can run the numbers. .

Liberty wrote:Once the officer claims he thinks he smells pot, he has gained the right to search the car and temporally seize the weapon so that he can run the numbers. .

So you are suggesting that an officer would lie to gain access to a car? Because I don't remember anyone mentioning pot in this conversation. If any LEO says he smells pot in my car he is a liar and I would pursue every legal avenue to ensure that he was never given the opportunity to commit the same crime against another.
This is a fraud a cop does not want to pull on me.
I would demand that before he touched my car his supervisor be dispatched to our location. I would then get the officer on record as saying he smelled pot. I doubt very seriously that he would do so. But if he did, I would then have the supervisor (recorded on dash cam) state wether or not he smelled pot. If he agreed, the only way they are finding anything is if they plant it.
If they did that, well...vengeance is mine says The Lord.

Even the two DPS officers who violated the women on the side of the road didn't plant drugs.

jmra wrote:

Liberty wrote:Once the officer claims he thinks he smells pot, he has gained the right to search the car and temporally seize the weapon so that he can run the numbers. .

So you are suggesting that an officer would lie to gain access to a car? Because I don't remember anyone mentioning pot in this conversation. .

Happens all the time all over the country. I'm not saying all cops do it or that most do it, but it happens.