• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Question: Traffic stops and running the numbers

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
If the officer receives information that your CHP is valid from the state, I disagree that they have the authority to invoke Terry and seek to disarm the subject. From the Terry ruling:

https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/392/1/case.html
We merely hold today that, where a police officer observes unusual conduct which leads him reasonably to conclude in light of his experience that criminal activity may be afoot and that the persons with whom he is dealing may be armed and presently dangerous, where, in the course of investigating this behavior, he identifies himself as a policeman and makes reasonable inquiries, and where nothing in the initial stages of the encounter serves to dispel his reasonable fear for his own or others' safety, he is entitled for the protection of himself and others in the area to conduct a carefully limited search of the outer clothing of such persons in an attempt to discover weapons which might be used to assault him.

What is the entire purpose for the state requiring a person to obtain a CHP to carry a concealed handgun according to legislative intent? It would seem to me that the officer knowing the subject has a valid CHP would be cause to dispel a reasonable fear and thus remove the officer's authority to conduct any non-consensual search and seizure of the firearm.

Thank you for bringing up "legislative intent" - which BTW does not exist in Virginia except as the plain reading of the law indicates. In other words, if the law says "A, B, D, C" then unless a plain reading of the law shows otherwise, it was the legislative intent to say "A, B, D, C".

Carrying concealed in Virginia is a crime. A person who carries concealed is thus a criminal. A CHP does not remove the crimiality of the act. It merely provides an affirmative defense against conviction for having committing the crime.

§ 18.2-308. Carrying concealed weapons; exceptions; penalty.

A. If any person carries about his person, hidden from common observation, (i) any pistol, revolver, or other weapon designed or intended to propel a missile of any kind by action of an explosion of any combustible material; (ii) any dirk, bowie knife, switchblade knife, ballistic knife, machete, razor, slingshot, spring stick, metal knucks, or blackjack; (iii) any flailing instrument consisting of two or more rigid parts connected in such a manner as to allow them to swing freely, which may be known as a nun chahka, nun chuck, nunchaku, shuriken, or fighting chain; (iv) any disc, of whatever configuration, having at least two points or pointed blades which is designed to be thrown or propelled and which may be known as a throwing star or oriental dart; or (v) any weapon of like kind as those enumerated in this subsection, he is guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. A second violation of this section or a conviction under this section subsequent to any conviction under any substantially similar ordinance of any county, city, or town shall be punishable as a Class 6 felony, and a third or subsequent such violation shall be punishable as a Class 5 felony. For the purpose of this section, a weapon shall be deemed to be hidden from common observation when it is observable but is of such deceptive appearance as to disguise the weapon's true nature. It shall be an affirmative defense to a violation of clause (i) regarding a handgun, that a person had been issued, at the time of the offense, a valid concealed handgun permit.
(emphasis added)

The knowledge that you have a valid CHP is RAS/PC that you may be committing the crime of
carrying about [your] person, hidden from common observation, (i) any pistol, revolver, or other weapon designed or intended to propel a missile of any kind by action of an explosion of any combustible material" in violation of 18.2-308. At trial you get to say that you had an affirmative defense. You, me, most cops, and most judges know that hauling you in for a violation of 18.2-308 when you are going to claim an affirmative defense is just wasting time and money. Unless, of course, it becomes necessary to teach you the necessity of respecting the "a-thor-i-tay" of the cop.

stay safe.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
So then nobody in Virginia could be compelled to answer when an officer asks if there are weapons when carrying concealed with a permit due to 5th Amendment protection.

Correctamundo.

Just be prepared to deal with a cop who does not understand that and pops you for obstruction after he yanks you out, prones and stuffs you, and the Commonwealth Attorney/judge that tell you that the finer points of the law can be brough up in the Court of Appeals or VSC.

Not sayting it will happen, but it may.

Be informed. Be aware. Be prepared to follow your string out to the bitter end, realizing that once you start it is difficult to stop. Or don't go there in the first place. (Although some posters who decide not to go there will automatically be awarded the coveted keyboardcommandopatch_zps24784a32.jpg).

stay safe.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
We had a member that refused to answer. He was detained for hours. One cop even told him he didn't have the right to remain silent unless he had committed a crime and wanted to know what the crime was.

He filed suit in federal court and the judge admitted his rights had been violated but decided the cops meant well....and dismissed the case . Welcome to reality.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
We had a member that refused to answer. He was detained for hours. One cop even told him he didn't have the right to remain silent unless he had committed a crime and wanted to know what the crime was.

He filed suit in federal court and the judge admitted his rights had been violated but decided the cops meant well....and dismissed the case . Welcome to reality.
Is there case law to support dismissing a case due to good intentions? ;)
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
HEIEN v. NORTH CAROLINA

Umm - I don't think that's what the question was looking for. http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/13-604_ec8f.pdf (Claim of 4th Anmendment rights violation against cop even though the legal pretext he used for the initial stop was not in fact the actual law but "a reasonable factual mistake".)

And it applies to one of The Only Ones - supposedly they are in fact held to a much lower standard that us Law Abiding Citizens.

stay safe.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Umm - I don't think that's what the question was looking for. http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/13-604_ec8f.pdf (Claim of 4th Anmendment rights violation against cop even though the legal pretext he used for the initial stop was not in fact the actual law but "a reasonable factual mistake".)

And it applies to one of The Only Ones - supposedly they are in fact held to a much lower standard that us Law Abiding Citizens.

stay safe.
That and the doctrine of I'm the judge, appeal it if you don't like it. That's the very fabric of our legal system.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
And if it is something average and ordinary daily type stuff, the fee to file the appeal is usually more than the fine.


Exactly...I'm glad we analyze the laws here and try to know more than the establishment, but get annoyed when someone startsthe...they can't do that. ..routine. User is always careful to give two answers. The law and the real world.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
And if it is something average and ordinary daily type stuff, the fee to file the appeal is usually more than the fine.

Yet we've got two (2) cases in court right now (one a formal appeal and the other one heading for trial) and a few in resolution/resolved where it would have been both cheaper and less expensive to just pony up the fine.

Wonder why in the world those folks went to the personal, emotional, and financial expense?

stay safe.
 

conhntr

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2010
Messages
184
Location
, ,
We had a member that refused to answer. He was detained for hours. One cop even told him he didn't have the right to remain silent unless he had committed a crime and wanted to know what the crime was.

He filed suit in federal court and the judge admitted his rights had been violated but decided the cops meant well....and dismissed the case . Welcome to reality.



Is there case law to support dismissing a case due to good intentions? ;)


HEIEN v. NORTH CAROLINA



Umm - I don't think that's what the question was looking for. http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/14pdf/13-604_ec8f.pdf (Claim of 4th Anmendment rights violation against cop even though the legal pretext he used for the initial stop was not in fact the actual law but "a reasonable factual mistake".)

And it applies to one of The Only Ones - supposedly they are in fact held to a much lower standard that us Law Abiding Citizens.

stay safe.

Skid i thought we where talking about one of "the only ones" when oc for me asked for a cite for dismissal due to "good intentions of leo. I.e even if you are right about not disclosing carrying the judge will just say the cop ment well/legitimate misunderstanding of law like heien
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Im sure people where saying the same thing about just paying the tax on that tea to the british.

Of course there are other cases that are finished...why do they do it, why does one man help an elderly person carry heavy bags while others look the other way.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Skid i thought we where talking about one of "the only ones" when oc for me asked for a cite for dismissal due to "good intentions of leo. I.e even if you are right about not disclosing carrying the judge will just say the cop ment well/legitimate misunderstanding of law like heien
I was referring to the below, posted by Mr. Nap.
He filed suit in federal court and the judge admitted his rights had been violated but decided the cops meant well....and dismissed the case . Welcome to reality.
The (a?) judge admits that the cop broke the law, yet dismisses the case anyway...cuz the cop meant well???:banghead:

Far worse than a cop "misunderstanding" the law.
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
I take the position that, unless the cop has a reasonable basis for belief, based on "the totality of the circumstances", that you represent some kind of threat, he may not seize the gun, and that doing so is both robbery and grand larceny. That being said, most courts will look at you like you've got two heads if you challenge the concept of "officer safety". I use that logic mainly on cross-examination to show that evidence ought to be rejected or that the cop was on a fishing expedition and had no probable cause for an arrest.

Unless and until a cop actually makes a demand, it's a bad idea to talk about the CHP at all, and even then, all you have to do is produce it (along with the picture id if he doesn't already have your license - I carry a U.S. passport for that purpose). When asked about the firearm, since I do have a CHP and they know it, I always say, "I prefer not to discuss that subject." Never had a problem with that.

But keep in mind my cardinal rule: if you do not have a present necessity to kill someone, leave the gun alone; don't touch it, don't talk about it, don't gesture towards it, and don't think about it. If a cop wants to take your gun for "officer safety", you can tell him you object to his doing so but will not resist; neither will you help. DON'T EVER TOUCH A FIREARM IN THE PRESENCE OF A COP unless you're actually engaged in self-defense or protecting your home and family from a home-invasion by people wearing black burglar suits (assuming you have no knowledge that they're cops). If necessary, get out of the car (telling the cop that it's necessary that you do so in order to give him access to the gun), and allow the cop to remove the gun from your holster. Give warnings like, "Be careful, it's loaded.", especially if he does something stupid like stick his finger inside the trigger-guard. Don't hesitate to tell him what he's doing wrong - cops are not particularly well-trained on the use of firearms and may not be familiar with your gun - especially if you've got a voice-recorder running. If things get to that point, you may want to hand him a copy of my "letter to law enforcement" available on my website.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
On certain guns the owner can block the serial number with an accessory. That will not work on a Glock though because they put the number on the slide also. Probably the best option would be a pilots holster, lock the holster/gun and the officer needs a search warrant to remove it/or an arrest. Be warned any movement after your vehicle is stopped may get you shot. Best do it before pulling over, and then placing hands firmly on the steering wheel.

And never obey a order to remove your gun, like USER stated, let the officer remove it. Place hands on head or in the air, and respond that you will not touch the gun but will not stop the officer from taking it. And pray that someone has a video camera recording your stop.

ETA if you hear screams of stop resisting, drop the gun, don't touch my gun~~~start praying he/she is a bad shot. If you walk with a cane don't use it, better to fall on your a$$ then get shot. Don't reach back in your vehicle for anything either, even if they tell you to. Remember hands up means don't shoot...:uhoh:
 
Last edited:

MSG Laigaie

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
3,239
Location
Philipsburg, Montana
Electrical tape works to prevent a serial number from being in common view.

If you don't want a gun's numbers to be run, don't give police a clear opportunity to run the numbers.

I am carrying a Ruger P85 right now. I tried electrical tape, but the summers are warm here and the glue melts. I now use Gorilla tape. Never comes off by itself and no melting glue. A small strip over the numbers and a pic of it on my phone.
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Come on! [*pouts*]

It would be more fun to discuss a case where charges against some LAC were dismissed because the LAC was acting with good intentions.

It would also be a great opportunity to take pictures of flying pigs while eating ice cream made from the ice of Hell freezing over.

stay safe.
 

Maverick9

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
1,404
Location
Mid-atlantic
On certain guns the owner can block the serial number with an accessory. That will not work on a Glock though because they put the number on the slide also. Probably the best option would be a pilots holster, lock the holster/gun and the officer needs a search warrant to remove it/or an arrest. Be warned any movement after your vehicle is stopped may get you shot. Best do it before pulling over, and then placing hands firmly on the steering wheel.

And never obey a order to remove your gun, like USER stated, let the officer remove it. Place hands on head or in the air, and respond that you will not touch the gun but will not stop the officer from taking it. And pray that someone has a video camera recording your stop.

ETA if you hear screams of stop resisting, drop the gun, don't touch my gun~~~start praying he/she is a bad shot. If you walk with a cane don't use it, better to fall on your a$$ then get shot. Don't reach back in your vehicle for anything either, even if they tell you to. Remember hands up means don't shoot...:uhoh:

I googled and did not find a source for a lockable pilot's holster. I did find warnings that locking with a padlock could inadvertently depress the trigger inside the holster.

Got a source for purchase? I'm now thinking it might be a good idea to put a cabled, number dialed handgun safe between the car seats and leave your firearm in it while driving. If stopped, shut it. This prevents or discourages an officer from trying to play with your handgun.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
I googled and did not find a source for a lockable pilot's holster. I did find warnings that locking with a padlock could inadvertently depress the trigger inside the holster.

Got a source for purchase? I'm now thinking it might be a good idea to put a cabled, number dialed handgun safe between the car seats and leave your firearm in it while driving. If stopped, shut it. This prevents or discourages an officer from trying to play with your handgun.

A ten dollar gun show one size fits all holster with a hole melted through the holster where the trigger guard is. Any kind of light duty cable lock.
 
Top