Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So in summary.
If a LEO asks for your gun, co-operate. The law permits them to do whatever is reasonable to protect themselves.
Why would you be talking to the police if you were not breaking a law? You don't get a cop's attention for doing nothing.
I mean, really, why would an officer disarm you just for the heck of it?
Not so! I've been pulled over at least 3 times in my life for doing absolutely nothing wrong. Unlawful stops do happen. Profiling is practiced.
I don't know but apparently that happens as well. My guess would be that they have an irrational fear of law abiding CHL holders.
"I was driving along one day not breaking any laws and I get pulled over by Johnny Law. He approaches my door and says he's randomly profiling people and if you have any guns, I'm going to have you surrender those as well."
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.
The reasonableness standard, as applied in this set of case law, is not about what you consider reasonable. The standard applies to what an average police officer would find objectively reasonable. Note that this is not the same as saying that it is what the average police officer would do, just that they would think another officer was acting reasonably if they saw them do it. Your opinion of reasonableness, just like your opinion that the light wasn't really red, does not matter at the roadside. This standard and the ability for law enforcement to disarm you during a lawful encounter have been held up in court literally thousands of times.I've read that but I still argue that it is "unreasonable" to disarm a CHL holder that is not comunicating any threat. See my point here. The clause of the law is "reasonable" force. I argue that it is irrational to use any force what so ever just because the person in the vehicle is legally concealed carrying. You are not automaticly a threat because your carrying a gun. It is irrational to believe other wise.
Why would you be talking to the police if you were not breaking a law? I mean, really, why would an officer disarm you just for the heck of it? You don't get a cop's attention for doing nothing.
That isn't true at all. What I want is proof in the form of a formal law that states a LEO can disarm me anytime he feels like it. So far I have not seen hard evidence to support your opinion that the police officer can do what he feels like in this regards.Since you seem to be unwilling to accept an opposing viewpoint, I would suggest that if this situation presents itself that you refuse to submit your weapon and then let us all know how it went for you.
Okay, prove it then.Like it or not, the LEO has the right to do what he/she feels is necessary to keep himself and others safe. This would include removing access to a firearm during contact.
Agreed but again these situations you present is not the situation I am talking about. I'm talking about getting pulled over say for a tail light out which happened to me recently BTW. You present your ODL, CHL, Insurance, and Registration. You are cooperating, being respectful, and polite. You have not comunicated a threat in anyway to the LEO. Does he have reason to feel threatened? Nope and thats probably why no officer has ever disarmed me but apparently others have been disarmed in the same kind of situation, so this makes one curious as to whether or not there is a law that allows him to disarm a law abiding citizen for no reason at all. So far no one has presented a law that says he has any right to do so and thats why I'm still discussing this issue.A ccw permit is issued on past behavior and while it is generally a good indicator, it is not absolute. I would not expect anyone (leo or otherwise) to base a decision on a permit if the current circumstances would give any indication that an individual might present a threat.
I can think of lots of circumstances where it would be appropriate to separate a person from their weapon while the LEO determined what had happened. A traffic stop on a car that is similar to the description of one involved in a crime, contact with a permit holder who is with a group of intoxicated or unruly people, a car stop where the LEO can smell alcohol, even if is later determined that there was no violation.
These things happen every day. An officers arrival at a reported crime scene can be extremely chaotic and things are rarely what they are initially portrayed to be.
Is that the reality? Again I say prove it! You glibly sugest that I act a fool to prove my point when I merely wish you or somebody would site a law stating the LEO can in fact disarm me for no reason. The information provided thus far only shows that it is exceptable on a case by case basis which obviously means that they can not disarm somebody for no reason.Anyway, the reality is that they can do this. If you think this is wrong and feel like it should be challenged if you are in this situation then go ahead and challenge it. I don't think that you'll enjoy the experience.