announcing carry to ununiformed police officer

[Randall]

Today I had an ununiformed officer stop by my office for a price quote. I didnt notice the badge and gun on their hip for a few minutes because we were looking at a set of plans and they were on my right side to where I couldnt see. After the officer turned to face me I saw their badge and gun. Should I have announced then that I was carrying concealed? I never did thru the entire visit because I figured it was too late to. Any thoughts on this situation?
Randall

[Michael Brown]

Were you at your privately-owned place of business or an agent thereof?

If so, you are not under any obligation to do so, particularly if it was a non-LE context.

I've had bar-owners tell me when I come in that they are carrying, but I'm pretty sure they're not required to since they're in a business that either they own or employs them.

You don't need a CCW to carry there so I doubt anyone could make a case for it being a requirement unless you are being arrested.

I wouldn't worry about it. It can't hurt if you choose to, but I wouldn't. I only do so if I am contacted in an LE-context.

Michael Brown

[Randall]

Thank you,
Randall

[dogbear]

I had wondered about that myself.From what I read in the SDA book if you are being detained or in a traffic stop you are suppose to tell the LEO you are carrying.I had wondered if when I am walking by a LEO in passing,at my apartment or on the street just saying hi if I would need to let them know.I would think if you are being detained they would tell you.

[BCurry1]

I am under the impression that you have no duty to inform simply because you run into a LEO, I believe that your duty to inform happens when you are pulled over, or stopped for questioning.

Do we have any attorneys on this site?

[mons meg]

From OSCN:

It shall be unlawful for any person to fail or refuse to identify the fact that the person is in actual possession of a concealed handgun pursuant to the authority of the Oklahoma Self-Defense Act when the person first comes into contact with any law enforcement officer of this state or its political subdivisions or a federal law enforcement officer during the course of any arrest, detainment, or routine traffic stop. No person shall be required to identify himself or herself as a concealed handgun licensee when no handgun is in the person’s possession or in any vehicle in which the person is driving or is a passenger. Any violation of the provisions of this subsection shall, upon conviction, be a misdemeanor punishable by a fine not exceeding Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00), by imprisonment in the county jail for a period not to exceed ninety (90) days, or by both such fine and imprisonment. In addition to any criminal prosecution for a violation of the provisions of this subsection, the licensee shall be subject to a six-month suspension of the license and an administrative fine of Fifty Dollars ($50.00), upon a hearing and determination by the Bureau that the person is in violation of the provisions of this subsection.

[skyydiver]

What OSCN said. Doesn't matter where you are, if he's not "questioning" you or some other matter of police business, you ain't gotta announce yourself and scare everybody. That could get tense across a crowded restaraunt when 2 cops walk in for lunch.

[Soulman]

"Excuse me! Excuse me! I have a gun!"

Yup, probably not a good idea to announce across a crowded restaraunt.

[Jon3830]

you do not have to tell a officer that you are carring if it is not pertaining to his job if you are just shooting the breeze with the officer its none of their concern. just like if you do announce to the officer that you are packing and he asks to see where your gun is you dont have to let him know but i suggest if you do that make sure you have the sda booklet handy or that will make for along night and alot of phone calls. but even if you are a bar owner or whatever and the officer is there to do their job you better let them know about it.

[Michael Brown]

you do not have to tell a officer that you are carring if it is not pertaining to his job if you are just shooting the breeze with the officer its none of their concern. just like if you do announce to the officer that you are packing and he asks to see where your gun is you dont have to let him know but i suggest if you do that make sure you have the sda booklet handy or that will make for along night and alot of phone calls. but even if you are a bar owner or whatever and the officer is there to do their job you better let them know about it.

This is NOT correct.

SDA grants the officer no specific authority to inspect your weapon but SDA DOES NOT override the U.S. Supreme Court which does grant the officer very wide latitude toward his/her safety when performing his/her duties as it relates to armed individuals.

Recently the son of a friend of mine took a CCW class in Sapulpa where the instructor propagated this myth that you can deny the officer control of your firearm during a traffic stop. Such is the problem with having unqualified people teaching CCW classes.

FWIW, check Attorney General Drew Edmondson's opinion of the issue. I got it at a legal update at work but I believe it was posted on the A.G. website. He stated that such teaching is completely incorrect.

Michael Brown

[SMS]

Isn't it called a "Terry Stop"?

The SDA is written to make sure officers aren't "inspecting" weapons just for the hell of it, but they stil maintain their prerogative under Supreme Court precedence to conduct a limited search for weapons for the "safety of the officer".

[Michael Brown]

Terry stops typically refer to criminal activity and covers a lot of ground other than pat-downs, such as the requirement for detention being reasonable suspicion not probable cause as there would be in a traffic violation, but the principle is largely the same.

A police officer in the lawful course of their duty can control a person's access to weapons.

This applies in a person's home or in public.

For example, if a police officer is called to a person's home reference an alarm or domestic or any other activity to which they are called, and they encounter the armed homeowner, they may disarm him/her for the duration of the contact as they see fit.

It doesn't matter that the person is in lawful possession of a firearm. The court recognizes that the duties of a police officer are dangerous and they allow great latitude in controlling the weapons accessible to people they encounter in the course of a contact.

The principle is the same in terms of the SDA. If a police officer detains you for something as simple as speeding or as dramatic as armed robbery, they have the legal right to control the weapons accesible to the detained person(s) for the duration of the contact, despite the fact that you are in lawful possession of the weapon.

The notification section of SDA does not grant ADDITIONAL authority to inspect a weapon but it does NOT override the Supreme Court.

Michael Brown

[Buzzdraw]

OK Statutes, 21-1290.8 E. reads "Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize a law enforcement officer to inspect any weapon properly concealed without probable cause that a crime has been committed." Still, I do not advise you to tell LE that "no, the law says you can't make me."

The point is the LE MAY have a reason to see your concealed gun, beyond your awareness and SDA rules. I strong suggest that arguing with the officer will probably get you on the LE's unhappy side. Obviously I do NOT advocate "informing" the LE of the law. It is a no-win situation for SDA carriers.

The SDA class curriculum does not include a discussion of this specific topic, possibly for this reason.

If you think the LE has overstepped his bounds, deal with it later, at a different time and place, possibly with the LE's administrative hierarchy.

[Michael Brown]

OK Statutes, 21-1290.8 E. reads "Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize a law enforcement officer to inspect any weapon properly concealed without probable cause that a crime has been committed." Still, I do not advise you to tell LE that "no, the law says you can't make me."

The point is the LE MAY have a reason to see your concealed gun, beyond your awareness and SDA rules. I strong suggest that arguing with the officer will probably get you on the LE's unhappy side. Obviously I do NOT advocate "informing" the LE of the law. It is a no-win situation for SDA carriers.

The SDA class curriculum does not include a discussion of this specific topic, possibly for this reason.

If you think the LE has overstepped his bounds, deal with it later, at a different time and place, possibly with the LE's administrative hierarchy.

The problem with the interpretation that has been given up til this point is that the standard listed above is "probable cause".

The standard an officer needs is actually much less than that and is defined as "reasonable suspicion" in Terry vs. Ohio.

Thus the probable cause statement in 21-1290.8 E is largely irrelevent since state statutes cannot override the Supreme Court's decisions no matter how much we would like it to be so.

An authority no less than the Oklahoma Attorney General has stated so.

I would suggest in any dealings with law enforcement you regard this as the soundest advice, not your SDA instructor's or your personal interpretation of the SDA.

You wouldn't want to find out you were wrong in order to prove a point.

Michael Brown

[J.P.]

FWIW,since the *** "Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize a law enforcement officer to inspect any weapon properly concealed without probable cause that a crime has been committed." *** clause was written in the SDA,I have not been disarmed during a stop.
Beforehand,the LEO would disarm me for the duration.