1. Sign up now and join over 35,000 northwest gun owners. It's quick, easy, and 100% free!
  2. We're giving away over $1,000 in prizes this month in the Northwest Firearms Winter Giveaway!
    Dismiss Notice

CHL/CPL guys/gals can a LEO disarm you for no reason?

Discussion in 'General Firearm Discussion' started by NK777, Jan 21, 2010.

  1. NK777

    NK777 West of Portland Member

    Likes Received:
    So this has been discussed a little bit in the "pulled over" thread but not properly answered. I've never had a police officer ask me for my carry before. I honestly don't like the idea. Disarming me at a traffic stop does not make the situation safer for anyone in my opinion.

    So if a LEO asks for my weapon do I have to let him disarm me? I certainly hope not because that just doesn't seem right to me. Please site the law in regards to this one. I'd personally like to refuse to submit to being disarmed for no reason as long as I am with in my rights to do so.
  2. Teufel_Hunden

    Teufel_Hunden Albany, Oregon Active Member

    Likes Received:
    I bet your best answer would come from Oregon Firearms Federation, specifically Kevin Starrett. I think I'd e-mail him and see what he says. I'd be very interested as to his answer.


  3. ORBrit

    ORBrit Eugene Member

    Likes Received:
    Good luck if you think you'd get away with not surrendering your weapon to a LEO.

    that would be such a huge red flag to them you'd suddenly find that they would have a very big reason to disarm you.
  4. NK777

    NK777 West of Portland Member

    Likes Received:


    I am a licensed CHL holder. I have not comunicated a threat to him or anybody else. He has zero cause to disarm me. He has zero cause to search me. He has zero cause to feel threatened by me. He knows damn well I'm not a felon being a card carrying CHL holder.
  5. NK777

    NK777 West of Portland Member

    Likes Received:

    Thanks I'll send him an email. :thumbup:
  6. matt_w

    matt_w Hillsboro, OR Active Member

    Likes Received:
    The guy who gave me CHL class said the officer has the legal right to disarm you during a traffic stop. I've seen this mentioned other places, although I can't seem to locate them now. I was pretty sure I saw this somewhere on the OFF website.

    edit: It was written on the letter that came with my CHL (Washington County). I looked it up and it's also written on the Multnomah county letter. I've never actually seen the text in the Oregon law (assuming it exists)
  7. mpmax

    mpmax Woodburn Active Member

    Likes Received:
    Your threat level(to the officer) is up to the officer.
  8. NK777

    NK777 West of Portland Member

    Likes Received:

    I see, so if I refuse to submit and am forcefully disarmed my only recourse is to sue the department?
  9. BlvdKing

    BlvdKing Almost Boring Member

    Likes Received:
    I believe its another discretionary law that isn't completely defined.
  10. ZachS

    ZachS Eugene/PDX Active Member

    Likes Received:
    Yes, but your lawsuit will have to wait until you're acquitted of "Interfering with a Police Officer" or some other such nonsense.

    And I recently learned the hard way that it takes a lot less than refusing to surrender a weapon to get charged with that.
  11. wolfwistle

    wolfwistle lebanon Member

    Likes Received:
    I carry concealed to protect myself,and my family And WE as a group of tax payers pay for police protection . These two facts complement each other.If it takes me giving up my handgun for a few minutes so the officer in question can feel safe enough to do watever he is going to do.I'm going to do just that. After it s all said and done ,And you feel like you have been wronged in some way then take leagal action . You don't have to agree with me,But please be safe out there.
  12. NK777

    NK777 West of Portland Member

    Likes Received:
    I submit to you that this is not the case. I have not interfered with the LEO however he is attempting to infringe on my civil rights without cause or justification.

    Again as a CHL holder I have never been asked by a LEO to surender my weapon. All experiences I have had with the police before and after recieving my CHL have always been pleasent. I merely want to kow the specific law that states they can disarm a law abiding individual with a CHL with out cause or justification because apparently from other members comments here it has happened to them and I do not believe the LEO is justified in doing so.
  13. fred c. dobbs

    fred c. dobbs salem Active Member

    Likes Received:
    What you believe is "Irrelavent" , you , We, Have No Rights, we have privledges that can be rescended anytime they like, Free Speech, Right to Carry, drivers lic. property rights, You have none, and only a fool believes otherwise, Go ahead continue to pretend to be free, if you ever have an opportunity to talk with someone from Louisiana who went through Katrina, you will be educated as to how it really is. The naysayers will ridicule me, Say what you like, Try to put a room addition on your house without a permit, Try to cut down Timber without a cutting permit, Find a spotted owl on your property forget it, You loose. Find any endangered animal, they come and take your property. They can take your money ( by the way our money is not money, it's "FIAT" currency, Money is Gold and Silver, everything else is credit ), They can take your property, They can take your Guns, They can take your life. Americans Pretending to be FREE!!!
  14. vern357

    vern357 Near Olympia Member

    Likes Received:
    Legally no, but practically, YES!

    No policy ever gets changed because of a roadside encounter. If you have a beef take it up the CoC or Sue, but do not be a jackass. Our cops up here are on defecon 4 with all the shootings.
  15. NK777

    NK777 West of Portland Member

    Likes Received:

    Why do you assume I will be a JackAss?

    This is a legal question I pose here and not a question as to whether or not you or I are Jackasses. Your hostility is complete unwarrented. Please take a couple of seconds to take a few deep breaths... Thank you. :thumbup:
  16. ORBrit

    ORBrit Eugene Member

    Likes Received:
    If you felt like the officer had no legal justification for pulling you over, because you're a law abiding legal drivers license holder, does that mean you don't have to stop?

    Think about your actions for a second. If an officer chooses to ask for your weapon, it is because of their own safety and comfort level.
    Refusing to hand it over only escalates that threat level to the police officer.

    Anyways, here is a document from OFF. Looks like Linn Co.
    http://oregonfirearms.org/chlcentral/LinnCO%20CHL rules.pdf

    Note the parts about surrendering your weapon on page 3.
    "If a police officer stops you while you are driving and armed, follow
    some common sense rules (1) keep your hands visible, preferably on the
    steering wheel; (2) if your gun is accessible in the car or if the
    officer asks whether you have a gun, inform the officer that you are
    armed, that you have a CHL, and the location of your gun; (3) follow the
    officer's instructions (depending on the circumstances, you may or may
    not be asked to surrender your gun during the traffic stop); (4) if you
    are asked to surrender your gun, be certain that you communicate with
    the officer clearly regarding how you are to present the gun and always
    remember to follow gun safety rules."

    Even if there is a law prohibiting them from confiscating your weapon, you won't get to take advantage of that until you're in front of a judge and jury, following an arrest (for resisting arrest/threatening a police officer or some other charges) and a quick trip to county, money out of your pocket and major inconvenience.

    As most of us know, police officers aren't always clued up on the law - especially when it comes to legality of certain types of weapons. That doesn't stop them from acting on what they interpret to be the law.

    Another document for Multnomah county
  17. stitchclimber

    stitchclimber St. Louis Active Member

    Likes Received:
    I've been disarmed of my carry piece on multiple occasions, though never on a traffic stop.
  18. ORBrit

    ORBrit Eugene Member

    Likes Received:
    So the question isn't about the law. It is about what warrants justification, which as I've already said, is pretty much whatever the officer wants to do to ensure his or her own safety.
  19. Wenis

    Wenis Tri-Cities, WA Member

    Likes Received:
    Try asking a police officer to surrender their weapon to you for your personal safety during a traffic stop. Logically, it makes just as much sense as them asking you to do it. It's one thing to be disarmed, but surrendering your weapon sounds like an option to me (in Washington).
  20. ORBrit

    ORBrit Eugene Member

    Likes Received:
    OK I think I've found the legal answer here.


    71st OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2001 Regular Session

    NOTE: Matter within { + braces and plus signs + } in an
    amended section is new. Matter within { - braces and minus
    signs - } is existing law to be omitted. New sections are within
    { + braces and plus signs + } .

    LC 1593

    Senate Bill 142

    Printed pursuant to Senate Interim Rule 213.28 by order of the
    President of the Senate in conformance with presession filing
    rules, indicating neither advocacy nor opposition on the part
    of the President (at the request of Joint Interim Judiciary
    Committee for Oregon Criminal Defense Lawyers Association)


    The following summary is not prepared by the sponsors of the
    measure and is not a part of the body thereof subject to
    consideration by the Legislative Assembly. It is an editor's
    brief statement of the essential features of the measure as

    Requires peace officer, before seeking consent to search motor
    vehicle, to inform motorist stopped for traffic violation that
    legal detention has ended and motorist is free to leave.

    Relating to traffic violation stops; amending ORS 810.410.
    Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:
    SECTION 1. ORS 810.410 is amended to read:
    810.410. (1) A police officer may arrest or issue a citation to
    a person for a traffic crime at any place within or outside the
    jurisdictional authority of the governmental unit by which the
    police officer is authorized to act as provided by ORS 133.235
    and 133.310.
    (2) A police officer may issue a citation to a person for a
    traffic violation at any place within or outside the
    jurisdictional authority of the governmental unit by which the
    police officer is authorized to act:
    (a) When the traffic violation is committed in the police
    officer's presence; or
    (b) When the police officer has probable cause to believe an
    offense has occurred based on a description of the vehicle or
    other information received from a police officer who observed the
    traffic violation.
    (3) A police officer:
    (a) Shall not arrest a person for a traffic violation.
    (b) May stop and detain a person for a traffic violation for
    the purposes of investigation reasonably related to the traffic
    violation, identification and issuance of citation.
    (c) May make an inquiry into circumstances arising during the
    course of a detention and investigation under paragraph (b) of
    this subsection that give rise to a reasonable suspicion of
    criminal activity.
    (d) May make an inquiry to ensure the safety of the officer,
    the person stopped or other persons present, including an inquiry
    regarding the presence of weapons.
    (e) { + After informing the person stopped that detention has
    ended and that the person is free to leave, + } may request
    consent to search in relation to the circumstances referred to in
    paragraph (c) of this subsection or to search for items of
    evidence otherwise subject to search or seizure under ORS
    (f) May use the degree of force reasonably necessary to make
    the stop and ensure the safety of the peace officer, the person
    stopped or other persons present.

    (g) May make an arrest of a person as authorized by ORS 133.310
    (2) if the person is stopped and detained pursuant to the
    authority of this section.
    (4) When a police officer at the scene of a traffic accident
    has reasonable grounds, based upon the police officer's personal
    investigation, to believe that a person involved in the accident
    has committed a traffic offense in connection with the accident,
    the police officer may issue to the person a citation for that
    offense. The authority under this subsection is in addition to
    any other authority to issue a citation for a traffic offense.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.