Buster Beaver Cerakote
DSG Arms
Advertise on Northwest Firearms
Gun Deals
HighLine Firearms
Oregon Rifleworks
Low Price Guns
Sporting Systems
Simply Triggers
Southwest Firearms
Defensive Arts
J&B Firearm Sales
Oregon Arms & Ammunition
Messages
1,726
Reactions
2,834
I believe the officer failed to notice the paper tags until they were pointed out. Failure to notice seems unlikely to stand up in court but we will see.


First words out of the officer's mouth should be "the reason I pulled you over is ...."

If that doesn't happen, I have a right to ask.
Well you answered my first question. It wouldn’t go to court if the officers simply saw the tags, apologize, describe their mistake and drive away. You have the right to ask. The cop doesn’t have to tell you $hit right away. You’re not entitled to anything except Miranda rights if you are being arrested. Lol.
 
Messages
289
Reactions
430
Thought provoking question.

If some here believe it is ok for police to use firearms without the presence of a threat of life threatening act, how is that different from red flag laws that remove a gun from someone when no threat or life threatening act has yet been established?
Not sure anyone's arguing that, however. Police officer or private citizen still needs to articulate imminent threat of great bodily harm, sexual assault, or death in most states to avoid legal jeopardy. Only difference for the cops is qualified immunity. Note, a weapon need not be present on the part of the assailant to meet that standard.
 

Dinglenutz

Messages
1,839
Reactions
3,346
You didn’t answer the question.

If pulled over, and then expired tags are found, is the stop lawful?
If he was pulled over for some other legal reason, such as speeding or running a stop sign then sure, of course. Some reason has to exist to initiate the stop is my understanding. Also, it's been quite a while since I had a traffic violation but last time, the officer knew quite a lot about the owner of the car (me) by the time he walked up to the car.

He was not, to my knowledge, clairvoyant, and so didn't know if the person on the registration was driving until he got my ID in hand.
 
Messages
289
Reactions
430
Following LE commands is likely to be "common knowledge" for many of us, but the fact that they carry "guns and stuff" shouldn't be the prevailing motivation. Meaning I don't think LE should be "feared" or looked at as "do what I say or die" type of thing. They work for US, not the other way around.
Agreed, however both the social contract and the law require compliance with lawful orders and authorize cops to deploy force to gain compliance. Specifically wrt operating a motor vehicle, equipment violations or expired registration are prima facie probable cause for a lawful stop and that driver license comes with implied consent.
 
Messages
12,133
Reactions
26,736
If he was pulled over for some other legal reason, such as speeding or running a stop sign then sure, of course. Some reason has to exist to initiate the stop is my understanding. Also, it's been quite a while since I had a traffic violation but last time, the officer knew quite a lot about the owner of the car (me) by the time he walked up to the car.

He was not, to my knowledge, clairvoyant, and so didn't know if the person on the registration was driving until he got my ID in hand.
Pulling plates is done usually before you come to a stop. That can and can not be helpful as cars can be driven by someone other than it is registered to.

I keep up bringing up fishing. I’ve briefly brought up profiling.

It is my opinion that this was likely an unlawful stop, either by means of fishing or profiling (black kid driving nice car). Until I am proven this is false, I’m going with it. It’s definitely an opinion, I hope folks read that and understand I’m not trying to state that as fact.

I am highly against this practice, and having a LEO member (possibly LEO he didn’t state he was but it read as if he was) here call it “good policing“ kind of shocked me. I’ve also learned it is extremely common and part of some departments training. This is, in my opinion tyrannical, and as bad as red flag laws.

We will likely never know what the actual reason was to pull him over. The department is sticking with tags, which is good on their part as they better have something to tell the public. Only the police had video recordings, so there isn’t any other footage to go off of. We all know that law enforcement likes to be very particular about what footage they share with the public in regards to their footage. I’m not one that goes along with being told to believe the official narrative.

Obviously we can’t get the kids perspective...
 

Dinglenutz

Messages
1,839
Reactions
3,346
Pulling plates is done usually before you come to a stop.
Exactly, and the tags are not hard to identify when looking at the plates. I wouldn't be shocked if the process isn't somewhat automated by this year; I can take a picture of a bag of chips and the cell phone will give me nutrition info, surely scanning a plate and pulling info shouldn't be a tough thing to do in an instant.

I strongly suspect the expired tags started the whole ball rolling. The fact they were expired doesn't seem to be in question, so ... why would they risk an illegal stop where there are plenty of other people to pull over? Occam's shaving implement strongly suggests it is just what it seems to be.

Protip to aspiring felons: Obey the trivial laws. The little stuff can trip you up.
 
Messages
1,726
Reactions
2,834
Pulling plates is done usually before you come to a stop. That can and can not be helpful as cars can be driven by someone other than it is registered to.

I keep up bringing up fishing. I’ve briefly brought up profiling.

It is my opinion that this was likely an unlawful stop, either by means of fishing or profiling (black kid driving nice car). Until I am proven this is false, I’m going with it. It’s definitely an opinion, I hope folks read that and understand I’m not trying to state that as fact.

I am highly against this practice, and having a LEO member (possibly LEO he didn’t state he was but it read as if he was) here call it “good policing“ kind of shocked me. I’ve also learned it is extremely common and part of some departments training. This is, in my opinion tyrannical, and as bad as red flag laws.

We will likely never know what the actual reason was to pull him over. The department is sticking with tags, which is good on their part as they better have something to tell the public. Only the police had video recordings, so there isn’t any other footage to go off of. We all know that law enforcement likes to be very particular about what footage they share with the public in regards to their footage. I’m not one that goes along with being told to believe the official narrative.

Obviously we can’t get the kids perspective...
Fishing is a good practice if done correctly. Fishing allows you to dig for something more substantial. For example you witness something that you believe to be a drug deal. You have reasonable suspicion that is what you saw but no PC to initiate a stop. The individual gets in a car that has a tail light out. Now you have PC. You pull the vehicle over and identify the driver. The driver is a felon out on parole. You get permission from the parole officer to search the vehicle. Upon your search you find a stolen handgun, narcotics and a woman tied up in the trunk (drastic yes but I am simply laying out a situation). Because of that tail light you got a felon, gun and drugs off the street and saved a girl from human trafficking. Seems like a win to me. And on the flip side if the cop finds nothing it is up to his own discretion to either cite him for the tail light or allow him to go with a warning.
 
Last Edited:
Messages
12,133
Reactions
26,736
Fishing is a good practice if done correctly. Fishing allows you to dig for something more substantial. For example you witness something that you believe to be a drug deal. You have reasonable suspicion that is what you saw but no PC to initiate a stop. The individual gets in a car that has a tail light out. Now you have PC. You pull the vehicle over and identify the driver. The driver is a felon out on parole. You get permission from the parole officer to search the vehicle. Upon your search you find a stolen handgun, narcotics and a woman tied up in the trunk (drastic yes but I am simply laying out a situation). Because of that tail light you got a felon, gun and drugs off the street and saved a girl from human trafficking. Seems like a win to me. And on the flip side if the cop finds nothing it is up to his own discretion to either cite him for the tail light or allow him to go with a warning.
Replace fishing with red flag law, differences?
 
Exactly, and the tags are not hard to identify when looking at the plates. I wouldn't be shocked if the process isn't somewhat automated by this year; I can take a picture of a bag of chips and the cell phone will give me nutrition info, surely scanning a plate and pulling info shouldn't be a tough thing to do in an instant.

I strongly suspect the expired tags started the whole ball rolling. The fact they were expired doesn't seem to be in question, so ... why would they risk an illegal stop where there are plenty of other people to pull over? Occam's shaving implement strongly suggests it is just what it seems to be.

Protip to aspiring felons: Obey the trivial laws. The little stuff can trip you up.
Exactly correct, the little things are what typically get the ball rolling. I was an avid watcher of Live PD, many significant stops were initiated due to equipment issues (light out, not working, Expired tags, not signaling, cracked windshield, ....)

If your going to be doing illegal activities, make sure your vehicle is up to snuff...
 
Messages
12,133
Reactions
26,736
One has due process, one does not.
Got me there.

Fishing is questionable and I’ve seen it abused. In some cases fishing, as a possible LEO member here stated, “skinheads driving at night in a neighborhood that is primarily Hispanic” is grounds for a stop?

If that is trained or common practice, neither have due process.
 
Messages
1,726
Reactions
2,834
Got me there.

Fishing is questionable and I’ve seen it abused. In some cases fishing, as a possible LEO member here stated, “skinheads driving at night in a neighborhood that is primarily Hispanic” is grounds for a stop?

If that is trained or common practice, neither have due process.
Just looking like a skin head is not a reason for a stop. But if you are in a Hispanic community and as a cop you see a truck with white guys, shaved heads, and swastika tattoos you should automatically have reasonable suspicion something is gunna pop off. That’s not a reason to initiate a stop. But I can guarantee you that cop is going to find something illegal on the vehicle to initiate a stop. Lights, exhaust, tags, fender flares, mud flaps, whatever. We would be the first to blame that same cop if he saw them, did nothing, and they went and shot up a kids birthday party.
 
Messages
12,133
Reactions
26,736
Just looking like a skin head is not a reason for a stop. But if you are in a Hispanic community and as a cop you see a truck with white guys, shaved heads, and swastika tattoos you should automatically have reasonable suspicion something is gunna pop off. That’s not a reason to initiate a stop. But I can guarantee you that cop is going to find something illegal on the vehicle to initiate a stop. Lights, exhaust, tags, fender flares, mud flaps, whatever. We would be the first to blame that same cop if he saw them, did nothing, and they went and shot up a kids birthday party.
You see where I’m going with this though?

We allow this? Where will it stop?

Allowing cops to profile the skinheads, opens the doors to profile anyone for anything. The exact stuff that likely opened the door for red flag laws.

4473 11 f/h/i are checked by anyone buying a gun.

Could easily be argued that by soomewhay violating any of these things in life would allow law enforcement to profile you and come remove your firearms.

We should go back to, officer sees a crime, officer acts accordingly.

More we allow for minority report, the more it becomes minority report.
 
Messages
1,726
Reactions
2,834
You see where I’m going with this though?

We allow this? Where will it stop?

Allowing cops to profile the skinheads, opens the doors to profile anyone for anything. The exact stuff that likely opened the door for red flag laws.

4473 11 f/h/i are checked by anyone buying a gun.

Could easily be argued that by soomewhay violating any of these things in life would allow law enforcement to profile you and come remove your firearms.

We should go back to, officer sees a crime, officer acts accordingly.

More we allow for minority report, the more it becomes minority report.
So what is the purpose of police? Are they simply a reactionary force after a crime has been committed? I’d rather them be able to investigate events or issues LEGALLY and hopefully stop the crime before it happens. Just cause you get stopped or talked to doesn’t mean you’re going to jail. And it’s less about profiling and more about noticing something that doesn’t belong in the base line.
 

Dinglenutz

Messages
1,839
Reactions
3,346
Allowing cops to profile the skinheads, opens the doors to profile anyone for anything.
Watching people that look suspicious just sounds like good police work to me. I don't see how we can assert that people out in public have any right not to be watched.
 
NW Custom Firearms
Oregon Arms & Ammunition
Project Appleseed
Copeland Custom Gunworks
Southwest Firearms Forum
Advertise on Northwest Firearms
DSG Arms
Sporting Systems
Cerberus Training Group

Upcoming Events

22 Rimfire Challenge
Redmond, OR
Rimfire Challenge July 31st @ DRRC
Eagle Creek, OR

Latest Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Top