Joined
·
283 Posts
Lately, I've been discovering that a person in a state like Oklahoma and Texas might get into trouble for not declaring possession of any gun or weapon to a policeman on a routine traffic stop. In some states as Nevada or Idaho I have been asked by officers about weapons in the car and I've always been honest with my answers. I know you have to declare firearms when traveling commercial air at the check-in counter. There are even signs there to remind people.
Is it true that in OK or TX the officer doesn't even have to ask you about any guns, you must take it upon yourself to tell him anyway?
What if you were to have an empty gun stowed in your trunk and you simply have forgotten about it during the traffic stop?
Let's say I have no CCW but I'm transporting an empty long gun in my vehicle or even an empty handgun in let's say the back of the truck or the trunk of a car.
So, an Oklahoma officer stops my pickup truck, for lets' say a broken taillight, and I am returning form a hunting trip with a cased empty shotgun under the camper shell of my truck, had I better still spit it out to the policeman about the gun on first contact before he even asks me about any guns? How aware are many people about officer-firearms-notification laws in some states? Are these laws heavily enforced? Most people probably assume that if the gun is unloaded and put in the trunk empty or under the camper shell empties separate from ammo, they are good on all state laws.
Should I just say, "Officer, there is an unloaded shotgun in the back of my truck"?
If I had my way, the laws in any state should be the officer must first ask you about any guns before you are obligated to disclose this information to them. This way if the officer asks you if you have a gun, you can simply say YES or NO. People might get into trouble by saying "I've got a gun."
Extra: some legal experts believe "duty to inform" under penalty violates the 4th A and undermines Miranda protections: I think federal courts and perhaps SCOTUS should visit the "duty to inform" laws of those few states.
https://ccwsafe.com/blog/interacting-with-law-enforcement--a-legal-analysis
Let’s have a very blunt conversation about interacting with law enforcement while in possession of a firearm. This article is not meant to focus on when a police officer has a legal right to stop you, but instead is meant to cover the less analyzed issue of what are the legal implications of informing an officer that you are carrying a firearm? I am going to offer this article from a purely legal standpoint, the same way I would advise a client. There are obviously differing opinions on how you should handle a police stop. It is not my intent to address how you should, but instead to analyze what the legal implications are of certain conduct during a stop.
Let’s start at the beginning. Relating to police stops of concealed permit holders there are three categories of states, namely:
IMPLICATION NUMBER 1: WAIVING YOUR FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS
A potential outcome of informing an officer that you have a firearm is that the officer might then have the ability to perform what is called a Terry Stop or a Terry Frisk. The Terry Doctrine stems from a 1968 Supreme Court case, Terry v. Ohio. In Terry, the United States Supreme Court held that an officer may perform a protective frisk and search pursuant to a lawful stop when the officer reasonably believes a person is “armed and presently dangerous to the officer or others.” (see: 392 U.S. 1, 24, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968)). This also gives the officer authority to temporarily disarm the permit holder “in the interest of officer safety.” The Court did caution that a search “is a serious intrusion upon the sanctity of the person” and should not be taken lightly. Still, the basis for the search itself is largely left up to the officer’s discretion once he is made aware of the presence of a weapon.
The sole purpose for allowing the frisk/search is to protect the officer and other prospective victims by neutralizing potential weapons. (see: Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032, 1049 n. 14, 103 S.Ct. 3469). As an example, a Terry Stop allows a police officer to remove you from your vehicle, pat down all occupants of the vehicle (using the sense of touch to determine if they are armed), as well as search the entire passenger compartment of the vehicle including any locked containers that might reasonably house a weapon. In other words, telling a police officer you have a firearm on you or in your vehicle can serve as a waiver of your Fourth Amendment rights and allow the officer to conduct a warrantless search.
This issue was recently highlighted in a recent 4th Circuit Court of Appeals case United States v. Robinson. In Robinson, the court extended the Terry Doctrine further than it previously had. In its ruling, the court stated that because firearms are “categorically dangerous
The waiver of your Fourth Amendment rights is why states with “duty to inform” laws create such a constitutional dilemma. If, as a condition to carrying a firearm, I am required by law to inform an officer that I have a firearm in my vehicle, then I am simultaneously required to waive my Fourth Amendment privacy rights. That is a violation of the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine and is long overdue for a legal challenge.
Is it true that in OK or TX the officer doesn't even have to ask you about any guns, you must take it upon yourself to tell him anyway?
What if you were to have an empty gun stowed in your trunk and you simply have forgotten about it during the traffic stop?
Let's say I have no CCW but I'm transporting an empty long gun in my vehicle or even an empty handgun in let's say the back of the truck or the trunk of a car.
So, an Oklahoma officer stops my pickup truck, for lets' say a broken taillight, and I am returning form a hunting trip with a cased empty shotgun under the camper shell of my truck, had I better still spit it out to the policeman about the gun on first contact before he even asks me about any guns? How aware are many people about officer-firearms-notification laws in some states? Are these laws heavily enforced? Most people probably assume that if the gun is unloaded and put in the trunk empty or under the camper shell empties separate from ammo, they are good on all state laws.
Should I just say, "Officer, there is an unloaded shotgun in the back of my truck"?
If I had my way, the laws in any state should be the officer must first ask you about any guns before you are obligated to disclose this information to them. This way if the officer asks you if you have a gun, you can simply say YES or NO. People might get into trouble by saying "I've got a gun."
Extra: some legal experts believe "duty to inform" under penalty violates the 4th A and undermines Miranda protections: I think federal courts and perhaps SCOTUS should visit the "duty to inform" laws of those few states.
https://ccwsafe.com/blog/interacting-with-law-enforcement--a-legal-analysis
Let’s have a very blunt conversation about interacting with law enforcement while in possession of a firearm. This article is not meant to focus on when a police officer has a legal right to stop you, but instead is meant to cover the less analyzed issue of what are the legal implications of informing an officer that you are carrying a firearm? I am going to offer this article from a purely legal standpoint, the same way I would advise a client. There are obviously differing opinions on how you should handle a police stop. It is not my intent to address how you should, but instead to analyze what the legal implications are of certain conduct during a stop.
Let’s start at the beginning. Relating to police stops of concealed permit holders there are three categories of states, namely:
- Duty to Inform States: States where you are required by law to affirmatively disclose the presence of your firearm (e.g. Ohio, Michigan, etc.).
- Quasi Duty to Inform States: In these states you do not have to affirmatively inform the officer of the presence of your firearm, but state law requires you to still do something, such as respond if you are asked if you have a weapon, or provide your permit if it is requested of you. The range of requirements for these states varies significantly (e.g. Iowa, Texas, etc).
- No Duty to Inform States: In these states you have no legal obligation to inform the officer if you are carrying and you generally have no legal obligation to respond if you are asked (e.g. Utah, Georgia, etc.).
IMPLICATION NUMBER 1: WAIVING YOUR FOURTH AMENDMENT RIGHTS
A potential outcome of informing an officer that you have a firearm is that the officer might then have the ability to perform what is called a Terry Stop or a Terry Frisk. The Terry Doctrine stems from a 1968 Supreme Court case, Terry v. Ohio. In Terry, the United States Supreme Court held that an officer may perform a protective frisk and search pursuant to a lawful stop when the officer reasonably believes a person is “armed and presently dangerous to the officer or others.” (see: 392 U.S. 1, 24, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d 889 (1968)). This also gives the officer authority to temporarily disarm the permit holder “in the interest of officer safety.” The Court did caution that a search “is a serious intrusion upon the sanctity of the person” and should not be taken lightly. Still, the basis for the search itself is largely left up to the officer’s discretion once he is made aware of the presence of a weapon.
The sole purpose for allowing the frisk/search is to protect the officer and other prospective victims by neutralizing potential weapons. (see: Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032, 1049 n. 14, 103 S.Ct. 3469). As an example, a Terry Stop allows a police officer to remove you from your vehicle, pat down all occupants of the vehicle (using the sense of touch to determine if they are armed), as well as search the entire passenger compartment of the vehicle including any locked containers that might reasonably house a weapon. In other words, telling a police officer you have a firearm on you or in your vehicle can serve as a waiver of your Fourth Amendment rights and allow the officer to conduct a warrantless search.
This issue was recently highlighted in a recent 4th Circuit Court of Appeals case United States v. Robinson. In Robinson, the court extended the Terry Doctrine further than it previously had. In its ruling, the court stated that because firearms are “categorically dangerous
an officer who makes a lawful traffic stop and who has a reasonable suspicion that one of the automobile’s occupants is armed may frisk that individual for the officer’s protection and the safety of everyone on the scene.” (source)
Or as Judge Wynn ominously wrote in his concurring opinion, “those who chose to carry firearms sacrifice certain constitutional protections afforded to individuals who elect not to carry firearms.”
The waiver of your Fourth Amendment rights is why states with “duty to inform” laws create such a constitutional dilemma. If, as a condition to carrying a firearm, I am required by law to inform an officer that I have a firearm in my vehicle, then I am simultaneously required to waive my Fourth Amendment privacy rights. That is a violation of the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine and is long overdue for a legal challenge.
