CCW & Surrendering your weapon.?

[tRidiot]

Nobody knows it off the top of their head because the SDA verbiage conflicts with standing precedence (Terry etc...) that upholds an officer's discretion to disarm for officer safety during a detention. Which makes it a gray area free from absolutes.

It probably happens so infrequently that it's never bubbled to the surface.

As for WNM being jacked up with hands on the hood? Smart call there...he's a shady sumbitch. I'da had him at gunpoint.

You're talking being detained... is a simple traffic stop considered the same thing as being officially detained??? Just curious, really. I've never been "disarmed" but I've had the officers ask me to come back and sit in their car, which is fine by me. I don't usually carry on my person in the truck, it's in the door pocket or console, in the car it's under the seat. If I told them I was carrying on my body, maybe they'd handle it differently, I don't know. I don't get pulled over too much anymore, though... maybe 3-4 times a year.

 

[jhat]

WTF??? Oh man... what was THAT all about?



Ok, I seriously need to take some time to do the research on this one. I might have time tomorrow or Sat to look it up. 'Cause that one right there would really stick in my craw, and if it were for nothing more than being a permit-holder, we'd have a problem. I say this because there have been a few people on this board who have brought up a traffic stop where the officer they dealt with was a real... well, let's just say wasn't real nice when they found out they had a permit. I can't fathom that, personally. I mean, you see someone has a permit, you automatically KNOW they're not a convicted felon, right? Right??? But people have said the officer took their gun for the duration of the traffic stop, etc. 99% of the officers I've ever dealt with were cool about it... but we happen to have one State Representative I know of who is an ex-OHP officer who fought very hard against open carry and joined in the whole "blood in the streets" rhetoric. Absolutely shameful, I thought he was a good guy, but he turned out to be just another paul-union-sam-sam-young who thinks we sheeple shouldn't be as "special" as our hired law enforcement officers.

Anyways, I digress. I would have thought someone here knew this off the top of their head.

If it is only a traffic violation and you advise the officer you are armed and provide proper credentials, the officer cannot frisk you or seize/inspect your weapon. An officer can only perform a Terry frisk if they can articulate a reasonable belief that you are armed and dangerous. The bulls+++ you see on cops is, more often than not, illegal. I have had several cases tossed when the officer stated that the only reason for the pat down was for officer safety with nothing more. This assumes, of course, that you are not committing other crimes such as DUI, no insurance, etc.

 

[gerhard1]

As my SDA instructor told me, the officer has to have either PC that you have committed a crime, or an articulable reason for him/her to fear for their safety. They cannot disarm you just because they don't like CC, or departmental policy.

This I believe, is what an Enid PD officer was conveying here as well. I have been lead-footed a few times and was caught fair and square, and at no time since I got my SDA license, have I been disarmed. The one time I was cited (and by Enid PD no less) for not wearing my seat belt, I showed him both the SDA license and my DL; he looked at it and thanked me for showing it and that was it. Another time, I was speeding (74 in a 65) and an OHP trooper pulled me over. I showed him both my licenses, and he handed the SDA license back but took my DL back to his vehicle. He gave me a written warning.

I have to say that the Oklahoma cops I have encountered have always been good folks.

 

[SMS]

You're talking being detained... is a simple traffic stop considered the same thing as being officially detained??? Just curious, really. I've never been "disarmed" but I've had the officers ask me to come back and sit in their car, which is fine by me. I don't usually carry on my person in the truck, it's in the door pocket or console, in the car it's under the seat. If I told them I was carrying on my body, maybe they'd handle it differently, I don't know. I don't get pulled over too much anymore, though... maybe 3-4 times a year.

Yes. IIRC, a traffic stop has been upheld as a lawful detainment.

 

[Jack T.]

This is a problem for me. . .and I'm cynical.

I don't think that any of us will disagree that if the LEO wants to disarm you, you will be disarmed. If you don't surrender the firearm peacefully, you'll be in more hot water.

If you press the issue via an attorney, it becomes expensive. Is the average judge in Oklahoma gonna accept the "officer safety" argument?

So. . .here are the options:

1) you peacefully surrender the firearm, even though *legally* the LEO may not have authority to take it
2) you don't peacefully surrender the firearm, and it gets worse/more expensive from there
3) you peacefully surrender the firearm, take it to court, and lose
4) you peacefully surrender the firearm, take it to court, and win.

In all of those scenarios you surrender your firearm. In three of the four, you surrender your firearm and spend a bunch of money, too.

The reason this is so much of a problem for me is because of the "what value do I place on my civil rights" question. My answer is "they are priceless". . .so as soon as I surrender the firearm, there is no course of action that can reverse that to the way it was before. I forever will have been forced (possibility illegally) to surrender my firearm to the State.

So I hope the legal beagles here can continue to gnaw over the problem and come to an agreement.

Or maybe I should start putting pressure on my rep/senator and on OK2A to add a bit into the SDA clarifying this question.

 

[SMS]

Doesn't matter if we come to agreement here. In the courts, there is little black and white...and in this murky subject there is plenty of precedence supporting "officer safety". Enough precedence that I'm comfortable handing over my firearm especially since I'm the one who put myself in the situation in the first place (I've never been pulled over without earning it LOL). If you choose to go another direction, you'll roll the dice with a subjective chain of humans from the LEO, to the D.A., to the judge(s), and/or jury.

 

[bigfug]

Yeah, I'm not comfortable handing my weapon to an Officer. I work with them, and not all are qualified to handle a firearm. I think the more the firearm is handled (especially if the officer is not versed in the manual of arms for that particular weapon), the more opportunity to have an ND, or misunderstanding. I know several who have had ND's, or don't know how to clear a 1911. Wording has changed a bit, but I believe the previous SDA book stated verbatim that the firearm was not to be confiscated unless a crime other than the traffic stop (detainment) was committed. If officer safety is a concern, it's best to keep it put away, lest something like this happen.

 

[Catt57]

Rule #1 treat every firearm as if it is loaded.

That being said, why the Hell was it in a display case and loaded?!?!?!?!

 

[tRidiot]

Rule #1 treat every firearm as if it is loaded.

That being said, why the Hell was it in a display case and loaded?!?!?!?!

That was exactly my question.

 

[O4L]

How difficult is it for a LEO to come up with a "probable cause " excuse if they really want to.