|
|
|
|
|
||
| Moderated by: jpierce | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
mdguy90 Regular Member 
|
Today as I was a passenger with my dad driving in the car, when we got pulled over for a traffic violation (not slowing down on 2 lane road while emergency vehicle is parked) and got a warning. Do I need to tell an officer if I'm carrying, or only when he asks? I didn't tell him as it had nothing to do with it and he didn't ask. |
|||||||||
|
Equinox Regular Member
|
Unless required by law, I don't recommend revealing that kind information voluntarily unless asked or unless you need to make a movement toward a part of your car that has a weapon, like your glove box. Volunteering information is only inviting trouble. There's no need to play "gotcha games" with LEO. Besides you have 5th amendment rights. Just my 2 cents. |
|||||||||
|
vonu Regular Member
|
How would one know if it's required by law? Much of what we do that "is required by law" is required by a law that the claimer can't cite, like the apocryphal section in title 26 that requires most of us to pay income tax. IMHO, 2A trumps 5A. |
|||||||||
|
Citizen Founder's Club Member
|
vonu wrote: SNIP IMHO, 2A trumps 5A.  Depends on which way the muzzle is pointing. (Sorry. I couldn't resist.) |
|||||||||
|
opusd2 Regular Member
|
When I took my basic course a few years back in order to get my CC permit, I believe I learned that you do need to inform the officer of such when you are carrying. But I will need to look over my materials before I swear to that fact. It's been a while. |
|||||||||
|
JoeSparky Centurion Member 
|
opusd2 wrote: When I took my basic course a few years back in order to get my CC permit, I believe I learned that you do need to inform the officer of such when you are carrying. But I will need to look over my materials before I swear to that fact. It's been a while. But, his question was basically... as a passenger in a vehicle stopped by LEO do I have to volunteer that I am armed with a concealed weapon. And since he was not the driver the answer would be "NO"! JoeSparky |
|||||||||
|
vonu Regular Member
|
JoeSparky wrote:opusd2 wrote:When I took my basic course a few years back in order to get my CC permit, I believe I learned that you do need to inform the officer of such when you are carrying. But I will need to look over my materials before I swear to that fact. It's been a while. Can you cite any legal authority that a driver waives his/her rights by being a driver? This is just another reason to eschew the unconstitutional CC permit and exercise your right to remain silent. If the CC law requires the surrender of Constitutional rights, it's a violation of title 42 statutes. Last edited on Fri Dec 5th, 2008 12:11 pm by vonu |
|||||||||
|
JoeSparky Centurion Member
|
vonu wrote: JoeSparky wrote: The Driver does NOT give up any rights by being a driver, but if the vehicle the driver is operating is stoped by LEO it is the OPERATOR of the vehicle who is experiencing the special attention of the LEO NOT the passengers in the car. If the state that you are carrying in with your CCP requires you to notify the LEO during that states "Terry Stop" variation then to comply with the law you must notify. For example--- let us assume you ran a red light and were subsequently stopped by a LEO for this infraction. You are in a state that REQUIRES by statute that you notify an officer that you are a permit holder and are carrying a concealed weapon. Then YOU must according to that law notify the officer. YOUR PASSENGERS ARE UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO NOTIFY. This has nothing to do with your Federal "Peaceable Transport" laws allowing you to legally transport an unloaded firearm in a locked container when travelling between 2 points in which you can legally possess a firearm! |
|||||||||
|
mrbiggles Banned
|
most traffic violations are unconstitutional. even running red lights |
|||||||||
|
vonu Regular Member
|
mrbiggles wrote:most traffic violations are unconstitutional. even running red lights That is true only if you have not surrendered your right to travel in exchange for a privilege to drive. |
|||||||||
|
vonu Regular Member
|
JoeSparky wrote:vonu wrote:JoeSparky wrote: When a vehicle is stopped, all of the occupants are under arrest, and subject to that condition. I have found that the best way to startle a LEO is to ask if you are "free to go" in your first utterance. Most people don't understand what constitutes arrest. If they don't have probable cause to make the arrest, they don't have standing to do anything else. If you are under arrest, you have the right to remain silent, which, being constitutional, takes priority over any duty to inform that you committed to when you surrendered your right to keep and bear for a privilege to carry concealed. Last edited on Sat Dec 6th, 2008 01:55 am by vonu |
|||||||||
|
Citizen Founder's Club Member
|
vonu wrote: SNIP If you are under arrest, you have the right to remain silent, which, being constitutional, takes priority over any duty to inform that you committed to when you surrendered your right to keep and bear for a privilege to carry concealed. Hmmmm. That is an interesting theory. I believe there are Supreme Court cases where, in dicta, the court has said a person does not have to answer questions. "The officer can ask, but the person is not required to answer...." That sort of thing. |
|||||||||
|
mrbiggles Banned
|
vonu wrote: mrbiggles wrote: maybe, but i was going at it in a different route. mostly standing and subject matter jurisdiction most states have "traffic court" in civil court. w/o standing there is no jurisdiction. standing requires an injury |
|||||||||
|
opusd2 Regular Member
|
vonu wrote: mrbiggles wrote: This is truly interesting, that you even mentioned the fact that it is considered a "privilege" to drive and not a right, which is exactly the truth. Sometimes it is the smallest item stated which makes the biggest difference. So all things considered, remaining quiet is probably the best possible action other than compliance for keeping the officer a little less excited. |
|||||||||
|
vonu Regular Member
|
opusd2 wrote:vonu wrote:mrbiggles wrote: If you want to avoid giving the officer probable cause for further investigation and to avoid getting him excited, silent compliance is best. If he demands verbal testimony, invoke your right to remain silent. |
|||||||||
|
vonu Regular Member
|
Citizen wrote:vonu wrote:SNIP If you are under arrest, you have the right to remain silent, which, being constitutional, takes priority over any duty to inform that you committed to when you surrendered your right to keep and bear for a privilege to carry concealed. There have been cases where anything said after the invocation of the right to remain silent have been found to be coerced and inadmissible. |
|||||||||
|
vonu Regular Member
|
Since I respect the desires of the forum to remain on topic, I'd like to invite anyone who wants to continue a conversation about rights and law to do so on the group I started on Yahoo! called VONULIFE. Plus, it's been ignored since I started it on Thanksgiving, and VONULIFE is all about exercising the right to be left alone. |
|||||||||
|
jbowers24 Regular Member
|
I've never read of any requirement to inform in WY. |
|||||||||
|
vonu Regular Member
|
jbowers24 wrote:I've never read of any requirement to inform in WY. It would seem to be counterproductive to make cc well known to bad apples that might use it to make points for themselves. 2A, after all, was so we could protect ourselves from corrupt government. Now, we apply to corrupt governments to get permission to exercise our rights. |
|||||||||
|
opusd2 Regular Member
|
Again, I will check with my literature that I got in class. It will be a while tho. But it is a moot point right now since not only does it seem like a bad idea to advertise while carrying, as well as the point that I now am in WI where CC is just not permitted. |
|||||||||
|
M1Gunr Regular Member 
|
The way I see this is at the time of the stop the driver was the main point of interest. Should at some point should the LEO want the passenger to step out of the vehicle or information from the passenger, then and only IF you are either required to by state law or feel the need to inform the LEO should you alert the LEO that you "Are Legally Armed." Phrase it like so, Officer I am legally carrying a weapon. |
|||||||||
|
Hickwithstick Regular Member
|
Hello, I just got home from my CCW class here in wyoming, the instructor told us we had to inform any LEO's about our permits as well as weather we had a weapon on us or not. his words were "I wouldn't be such a nice guy as I might have been after I may have turned my back on a weapon I didn't know I was there" He also said not telling an oficer was reason enough to have your permit revoked for life. Personally I feel that telling an officer I have a valid CCW permit would settle alot of the tensions the officer might have about my self and the kind of person I am. possibly it might even speed things along since he would know by my having a permit that I was not a felon, and that I have no record. Hopefully this would end in a have a nice evening sir and a quick release rather than half an hour sitting in the car while he checks me out with his dispatcher |
|||||||||
|
vonu Regular Member
|
If LEOs presume that everyone is a felon until known otherwise, what happened to their support of a constitution that provides for a presumption of ignorance? |
|||||||||
|
Hickwithstick Regular Member
|
Fact is most cops are just doing a job we are paying them for, true some let the power go to their heads and well ..... If I was a LEO I would want to go home safely to my family at night the same way I went to work that morning, no diffrent than the cleck at the corner convenience store standing behind the bullet proof glass, LEO's are dealing with someone that has already broken a law, hence the contact to start with, How would they know if its a BG that just Raped a woman and killed her family. or a working man that is thinking "What was it the wife wanted from the store?' That caused them both to not see the stop sign they just ran. With the way violence and drugs have deteriated our society if I were a LEO I would think everyone was mass murderer untill proven diffrently and I don't expet them to act any diffrently than I would |
|||||||||
|
stuckinchico Regular Member 
|
WOOOO now driving is a privilage not a right constitution doesnot apply except for searching and stopping |
|||||||||
|
onlymeself Regular Member
|
As far as I understand it driving is a priviledge, not a right. If someone you are riding with gets pulled over, they normally will ask you for ID as well. At that time if you have a permit to carry you must declare that you have or don't have your weapon on you. (in wyoming anyway, when the run your license it will show) If it were me and I wasn't asked for ID I would tell them that I was a permit holder and had my weapon. Why, because I don't want him to see the outline of it when I move, and get freaky on me. Besides a little respect can go a long way. LEO are just doing a job. Do some get over zealous? Sure, but there are those types of people in every career. I personally know a lot of the sheriff's deputies around here. They are a pretty good bunch of people. I'm sure some will say I'm wrong, but I would tell the officer if I was in the passenger seat, whether I was OC or carry concealed with a permit. Cuz I don't want to have a gun pointed at me, I don't want to end up eating pavement, and I, too, want to go home with the same number of holes as I left with. |
|||||||||
|
Bill in VA Regular Member 
|
vonu wrote: How would one know if it's required by law? Much of what we do that "is required by law" is required by a law that the claimer can't cite, like the apocryphal section in title 26 that requires most of us to pay income tax. ... Do you mean 26USC CH1 Subchapter A, Part I, §1, where it says things like, "There is hereby imposed on the taxable income of every individual ..."? |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member 
|
stuckinchico wrote: ...driving is a privilege not a right constitution does not apply except for searching and stopping... Only because, "we the people" let them impose it on us, do you think the "wagon trains west" got licenses to travel? or do you think the founders wanted so many licenses and rights to be forfeited? If you would have told one of the founders they needed a license to travel and with this license you would have to give up some of your rights, I don't think it would have went over well. "Sorry Mr. Washington you will have to register your carriage and you need a license to drive it, and one last thing you need to have a permit to carry your firearms as well." or "Sorry Mr. Jefferson you have to become a resident of this state to purchase a hand-gun and you must get a drivers license, you must live here for six months before we consider you a resident" I think there would have been "bloodshed". "The constitution by itself is like, writing in the sand, unless you defend it, day and night, the wind, the rain and men will trample it till you can no longer recognize what it says." - AB Last edited on Wed Jul 1st, 2009 07:20 am by AB |
|||||||||
|
AB Regular Member
|
To clear up the first question, there is no statutory requirement in Wyoming, to tell an officer you have a concealed weapon and permit, period. Also there is nothing in state statutes that says you cannot have a firearm in the glovebox without a CCW permit. It is primarily a LEO that might not be "clear on the law", so it is best to keep your mouth shut, and in doing that, you are not breaking any laws. |
|||||||||