Calguns.net  

Home My iTrader Join the NRA Donate to CGSSA Sponsors CGN Google Search
CA Semiauto Ban(AW)ID Flowchart CA Handgun Ban ID Flowchart CA Shotgun Ban ID Flowchart
Go Back   Calguns.net > POLITICS, LITIGATION AND ACTIVISM > How CA Laws Apply to/Affect Me
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-01-2013, 7:20 PM
Diablito Diablito is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 49
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default If pulled over with guns in car.....

If i get pulled over while transporting my firearms and the police ask if there are any weapons and I say yes, do i have to show them my guns and prove that they are legal and properly stowed? Do my 4th amendment rights apply?I choose to maintain as much privacy as the constitution grants me at all times. Thanks
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-01-2013, 7:22 PM
RudyCakes's Avatar
RudyCakes RudyCakes is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Ventura, CA
Posts: 526
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Never talk to them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-01-2013, 7:28 PM
ke6guj's Avatar
ke6guj ke6guj is offline
Moderator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: 909
Posts: 23,761
iTrader: 42 / 100%
Default

the moment you state that you have firearms in the car, current CA law allows for the officer to inspect the firearms to make sure that they are not loaded.
__________________
Jack



Do you want an AOW or C&R SBS/SBR in CA?

No posts of mine are to be construed as legal advice, which can only be given by a lawyer.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-01-2013, 7:44 PM
kygen's Avatar
kygen kygen is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: The People's Socialist Republic of Los Angeles
Posts: 3,295
iTrader: 50 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diablito View Post
If i get pulled over while transporting my firearms and the police ask if there are any weapons and I say yes, do i have to show them my guns and prove that they are legal and properly stowed? Do my 4th amendment rights apply?I choose to maintain as much privacy as the constitution grants me at all times. Thanks
"I do not have anything illegal in my car"
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by thrillhouse700 View Post
I have to wait until all the info is in before I make a statement. Obviously the family dogs had it coming.... other than that, waiting on more info.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-01-2013, 7:59 PM
Rickrock1's Avatar
Rickrock1 Rickrock1 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Inland Empire
Posts: 4,962
iTrader: 53 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kygen View Post
"I do not have anything illegal in my car"
And repeat if needed
__________________


“Silence makes cowards out of the best of men” –Abraham Lincoln

🇺🇸 ⚔️ 🦅


Wounded Knee is the prime example of why the Second Amendment exists, and why we shouldn’t be in such a hurry to surrender our Right to Bear Arms.
Without the Second Amendment we have no way to defend ourselves and our families.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-01-2013, 8:14 PM
durandal's Avatar
durandal durandal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: SF
Posts: 1,487
iTrader: 24 / 96%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kygen View Post
"I do not have anything illegal in my car"
Id say this..
__________________
---
WTB: old cz75 with round trigger guard & spur hammer, sf bay
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-01-2013, 8:31 PM
CSACANNONEER's Avatar
CSACANNONEER CSACANNONEER is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Thousand Oaks
Posts: 43,139
iTrader: 130 / 100%
Blog Entries: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kygen View Post
"I do not have anything illegal in my car"
Common code for "Of course I have guns in the car." depending on the officer, you might get a friendly nod or end up being detained until "the computer is back up".
__________________
NRA Certified Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun and Metallic Cartridge Reloading Instructor
California DOJ Certified Fingerprint Roller
Ventura County approved CCW Instructor
Utah CCW Instructor


Offering low cost multi state CCW, private basic shooting and reloading classes for calgunners.

CCW SAFE MEMBERSHIPS HERE

KM6WLV
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-01-2013, 8:41 PM
kel-tec-innovations's Avatar
kel-tec-innovations kel-tec-innovations is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Rancho Cucamonga, California
Posts: 4,151
iTrader: 131 / 100%
Default

I do not have any weapons.

Weapons: An instrument of attack or defense in combat

My tools do not fall under any of those at the moment or intend/plan to use it during the drive so NO its not a weapon, but a complex tool. No different than a hammer, nail gun, paintball gun, kitchen knife, scissors etc.

The answer "I do not have anything illegal is the proper answer"

If they ask you to step out, lock the doors behind you. If they insist on search "I do not consent to any searches" and keep repeating it. Do not physically resist or they will kick your arse, tase you, pepper spray or beat you into a pulp or shoot you and charge you with assaulting an officer.

Try to find a witness, if possible, or a camera, but the officer might smash your phone and kick your arse so watch out.

If the officer is an arsehole he will do it anyway. A calgunner here experience where the officer said "I can't hear you" and searches while the calgunner continue to say "I do not consent to any searches. "

Get the officers badge and name and call a LAWYER and file a complaint with the police department.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-01-2013, 9:27 PM
sargenv sargenv is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: West Contra Costa County
Posts: 4,446
iTrader: 35 / 100%
Default

Don't do anything to get pulled over and there is no reason to have to tell them anything..
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-01-2013, 9:52 PM
bill_k_lopez bill_k_lopez is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 2,841
iTrader: 20 / 95%
Default

When stopped by the police, immediately roll up your window and leave a one inch gap. Demand to speak to a supervisor and keep repeating you don't consent to any searches of your vehicle, and that whatever he is accusing you of doing is legal under the constitution.

Here is some real advice:

1) Make sure you are compliant with the laws regarding the proper storage and transportation of firearms - that means know what the laws are and follow them

2) Don't drive around in your illegal "look at me" lowered/raised, loud stereo bumping, tinted windows, broken tail light vehicle speeding or making illegal lane changes when transporting firearms.

I've been shooting for close to 40 years, I shoot every other Friday (for the last 4 years) and I have never been pulled over going to or from the range and Angeles is a 50 mile trip from my house.

Last edited by bill_k_lopez; 09-01-2013 at 10:01 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-01-2013, 10:02 PM
SVT-40's Avatar
SVT-40 SVT-40 is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Az
Posts: 9,527
iTrader: 31 / 100%
Default

Someone should make a sticky of this question..... It seems it's asked at least once a week........
__________________
Poke'm with a stick!


Quote:
Originally Posted by fiddletown View Post
What you believe and what is true in real life in the real world aren't necessarily the same thing. And what you believe doesn't change what is true in real life in the real world.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-02-2013, 12:32 AM
Librarian's Avatar
Librarian Librarian is offline
Administrator
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Concord
Posts: 39,072
iTrader: 4 / 100%
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SVT-40 View Post
Someone should make a sticky of this question..... It seems it's asked at least once a week........
Agreed. Stuck and cleaned up a bit.

As one may notice, there are several schools of thought here - but no 'one size fits all' answer.
__________________
No one will really understand politics until they understand that politicians are not trying to solve our problems. They are trying to solve their own problems - of which getting elected and re-elected are number one and number two. Whatever is number three is far behind.
- Thomas Sowell
I've been saying that for years ...

There is no value at all complaining or analyzing or reading tea leaves to decide what these bills really mean or actually do; any bill with a chance to pass will be bad for gun owners.

The details only count after the Governor signs the bills.


Gregg Easterbrook’s “Law of Doomsaying”: Predict catastrophe no later than ten years hence but no sooner than five years away — soon enough to terrify people but distant enough that they will not remember that you were wrong.


Not a lawyer, just Some Guy On The Interwebs.


Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-02-2013, 7:51 AM
Paladin's Avatar
Paladin Paladin is offline
Calguns Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: SFBA
Posts: 9,272
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sargenv View Post
Don't do anything to get pulled over and there is no reason to have to tell them anything..
I can't wait until ALL lights on a car (turn signals, rear license plate, etc), as well as brake lights are LEDs -- those suckers NEVER burn out....
__________________
Never mistake being delusional for being optimistic.

230+ examples of CCWs Saving Lives.

KnifeRights.org/images/KRbanner_468x60-1.gif
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-02-2013, 8:01 AM
GillaFunk's Avatar
GillaFunk GillaFunk is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Albany, Oregon (sometimes)
Posts: 2,110
iTrader: 35 / 100%
Default

I've been looking for some kind of camera I can mount in my car that records visual as well as audio via a microphone attached near my window to address situations just like this

Still looking
__________________
Im just a doode, playin' a doode, disguised as another doode


Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-02-2013, 10:01 AM
RickD427's Avatar
RickD427 RickD427 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: King County
Posts: 6,248
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

I am pleased to see this a sticky. The question does get asked all too often and never does seem to go away.

If an officer asks if there are weapons in the car, IMHO, the best thing to do is simply say "yes" or "no" as the facts of the circumstance dictate.

Many folks on this board seem to believe that officers are looking for an excuse to take anyone to jail, and will mistakenly take innocent folks to jail. When I read this in postings, I also note the absence of first hand experience. Officers are not perfect there will always be anecdotes of bad experience, but lets keep them in perspective.

A lot of folks recommend some version of denial when asked the question. That may prevent a search, and any issue from coming up. California has no broadly written statute (unlike the feds) that makes illegal to lie to an officer. There are many narrow instances where it is illegal to lie to a California LEO. The problem with this one is that if you're caught in the lie, stand by for the officer to take the maximum measures against you that are permitted by law.

Other folks recommend some version of "I have nothing illegal in the car." IMHO, this is the worst one of all. Here's why - The answer is evasive, and intentionally so. There is a large body of law concerning "adoptive admissions." Where a person refuses to answer a reasonable question (prior to Miranda being triggered), or is evasive in response to a question, the LEO is entitled to draw reasonable conclusions as a result. If the question was 'Do you have any guns in the car?" and the answer is "I have nothing illegal in the car", the officer has probable cause to believe there is a lawful gun in the car. That conclusion reconciles the evaded part of the question, and is consistent with the statement of the driver. If the stop occurs in an incorporated city, or in an unincorporated area where shooting is prohibited (which is nearly all of the state), the officer has the right to inspect firearms to determine if they are loaded. The law allows LEOs to search vehicles (without a warrant, and without consent) where there is probable cause to believe contraband is in the vehicle. A lawfully possessed weapon is not contraband, but California courts have allowed officers to search for firearms, for the purpose of inspection, under the same conditions. The net effect of "I have nothing illegal in the car" is that you just gave the LEO a "fishing license" to conduct a lawful search. Isn't that what you were attempting to avoid in the first place?

If you do answer "yes", then the officer has the same right to conduct an inspection to determine if they are loaded. Don't expect that to automatically happen. Officers generally do traffic stops for one of two reasons: 1) They're performing traffic duties, in which case they want to maximize the number of citations written, or 2) They're looking for criminals to place into jail. If your weapon is lawfully possessed, and there is not indication of deceit in your statement, and no other suggestion of criminality, it's pretty much a waste of my time to search. Additionally, there's kinda an unwritten code that we want to promote candor of the folks we interact with.

If for some reason, you just can't muster an honest reply, then the best thing to say is "Officer, no disrespect intended, but I'm declining to answer. Is there any law that compels me to?" This will avoid the whole "adoptive admissions" issue and will keep you on the best possible terms with the LEO. At the same time, it will prompt the officer to respond that there is no law compelling a reply. There are a few things we can compel a driver to do, but discussing guns with us isn't one of them.

Of course, always make sure your weapons are lawfully possessed and lawfully carried. If you do wind up being improperly arrested by a "one percenter" LEO, you'll want to create the most accurate record for your attorney to deal with. It happens, but happens very rarely.

Last edited by RickD427; 09-02-2013 at 2:19 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-02-2013, 1:11 PM
ewarmour's Avatar
ewarmour ewarmour is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: North Idaho
Posts: 907
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

State or local popo just say "no" or a variation thereof: nope, nada, negative, etc...

If it's a Federal officer just say "I do not talk to the feds, I don't consent to any search, am I being detained?"
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-02-2013, 10:31 PM
Maestro Pistolero's Avatar
Maestro Pistolero Maestro Pistolero is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 3,891
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sargenv View Post
Don't do anything to get pulled over and there is no reason to have to tell them anything..
Some things cannot be controlled. If it taillight or brake light suddenly burns out while you are going down the road, that's probable cause. Your and/or your vehicle might match the description of a suspect's car, and you could be pulled over. It does happen.
__________________
www.christopherjhoffman.com

The Second Amendment is the one right that is so fundamental that the inability to exercise it, should the need arise, would render all other rights null and void. Dead people have no rights.
Magna est veritas et praevalebit

Last edited by Maestro Pistolero; 09-02-2013 at 10:35 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-02-2013, 10:34 PM
Maestro Pistolero's Avatar
Maestro Pistolero Maestro Pistolero is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 3,891
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

My answer to the question of weapons in the car is no. I interpret that question to mean,"Do you have any illegal weapons in the car"? I will explain my interpretation if the need arises.
__________________
www.christopherjhoffman.com

The Second Amendment is the one right that is so fundamental that the inability to exercise it, should the need arise, would render all other rights null and void. Dead people have no rights.
Magna est veritas et praevalebit
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-02-2013, 10:43 PM
Tincon's Avatar
Tincon Tincon is offline
Mortuus Ergo Invictus
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,062
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RickD427 View Post
Many folks on this board seem to believe that officers are looking for an excuse to take anyone to jail, and will mistakenly take innocent folks to jail.
Yeah, where would we ever get that idea?

Oh right: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=65673

And even if you don't get a "bad" cop, you aren't safe. The problem is, you simply cannot be sure if you are innocent. The laws are far too numerous and unclear.

For example: you have to carry handguns in a secure container, but how secure does it need to be? Is the trunk secure if it has a pass through (which most cars do)? Is a container which is secured to the car a secure container (legal) or a utility compartment (illegal?) Wait, are you in a school zone? YOU SHOULD HAVE KNOWN!

You can't receive or import a large capacity magazine (capable of feeding more than 10 rounds), but what does that mean? If your new 10 round .40 Glock magazine holds 12 9mm rounds, and fits in your 9mm Glock, does that mean you illegally acquired a large capacity magazine? What about a 10 round Beowulf magazine that accepts 30 5.56 rounds? What if all you have is a spring? Is that a "conversion kit?

What if you have a brace that attaches to your gun, or a drop in trigger that has a shorter reset? Are these illegal SBR and machine-gun components?

I could go on and on. The wood in that fancy grip you bought might be from some endangered tree somewhere and evidence of a felony (Lacey Act).

Point is, you can't possibly know all the laws and their potential applications. NO ONE CAN. Go to your local law library and look at the stacks. Most of that could apply to you.

This is why every attorney in America will tell you to SHUT UP and ask for your lawyer, and refuse any searches. Just like I think you would Mr. Retired Cop.

I don't have a problem without your alternative answer, but I think "there is nothing illegal in the car" is still best. If you think that gives you license for a "fishing expedition", you are fishing for a 42 U.S.C § 1983 federal lawsuit.
__________________
My posts may contain general information related to the law, however, THEY ARE NOT LEGAL ADVICE AND I AM NOT A LAWYER. I recommend you consult a lawyer if you want legal advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship exists or will be formed between myself and any other person on the basis of these posts. Pronouns I may use (such as "you" and "your") do NOT refer to any particular person under any circumstance.

Last edited by Tincon; 09-01-2014 at 11:37 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-02-2013, 11:05 PM
Tincon's Avatar
Tincon Tincon is offline
Mortuus Ergo Invictus
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,062
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

ALSO: maybe this thread would make a more useful sticky: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=80571

__________________
My posts may contain general information related to the law, however, THEY ARE NOT LEGAL ADVICE AND I AM NOT A LAWYER. I recommend you consult a lawyer if you want legal advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship exists or will be formed between myself and any other person on the basis of these posts. Pronouns I may use (such as "you" and "your") do NOT refer to any particular person under any circumstance.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-02-2013, 11:23 PM
Nessal Nessal is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Fremont, CA
Posts: 2,176
iTrader: 34 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RickD427 View Post
I am pleased to see this a sticky. The question does get asked all too often and never does seem to go away.

If an officer asks if there are weapons in the car, IMHO, the best thing to do is simply say "yes" or "no" as the facts of the circumstance dictate.

Many folks on this board seem to believe that officers are looking for an excuse to take anyone to jail, and will mistakenly take innocent folks to jail. When I read this in postings, I also note the absence of first hand experience. Officers are not perfect there will always be anecdotes of bad experience, but lets keep them in perspective.

A lot of folks recommend some version of denial when asked the question. That may prevent a search, and any issue from coming up. California has no broadly written statute (unlike the feds) that makes illegal to lie to an officer. There are many narrow instances where it is illegal to lie to a California LEO. The problem with this one is that if you're caught in the lie, stand by for the officer to take the maximum measures against you that are permitted by law.

Other folks recommend some version of "I have nothing illegal in the car." IMHO, this is the worst one of all. Here's why - The answer is evasive, and intentionally so. There is a large body of law concerning "adoptive admissions." Where a person refuses to answer a reasonable question (prior to Miranda being triggered), or is evasive in response to a question, the LEO is entitled to draw reasonable conclusions as a result. If the question was 'Do you have any guns in the car?" and the answer is "I have nothing illegal in the car", the officer has probable cause to believe there is a lawful gun in the car. That conclusion reconciles the evaded part of the question, and is consistent with the statement of the driver. If the stop occurs in an incorporated city, or in an unincorporated area where shooting is prohibited (which is nearly all of the state), the officer has the right to inspect firearms to determine if they are loaded. The law allows LEOs to search vehicles (without a warrant, and without consent) where there is probable cause to believe contraband is in the vehicle. A lawfully possessed weapon is not contraband, but California courts have allowed officers to search for firearms, for the purpose of inspection, under the same conditions. The net effect of "I have nothing illegal in the car" is that you just gave the LEO a "fishing license" to conduct a lawful search. Isn't that what you were attempting to avoid in the first place?

If you do answer "yes", then the officer has the same right to conduct an inspection to determine if they are loaded. Don't expect that to automatically happen. Officers generally do traffic stops for one of two reasons: 1) They're performing traffic duties, in which case they want to maximize the number of citations written, or 2) They're looking for criminals to place into jail. If your weapon is lawfully possessed, and there is not indication of deceit in your statement, and no other suggestion of criminality, it's pretty much a waste of my time to search. Additionally, there's kinda an unwritten code that we want to promote candor of the folks we interact with.

If for some reason, you just can't muster an honest reply, then the best thing to say is "Officer, no disrespect intended, but I'm declining to answer. Is there any law that compels me to?" This will avoid the whole "adoptive admissions" issue and will keep you on the best possible terms with the LEO. At the same time, it will prompt the officer to respond that there is no law compelling a reply. There are a few things we can compel a driver to do, but discussing guns with us isn't one of them.

Of course, always make sure your weapons are lawfully possessed and lawfully carried. If you do wind up being improperly arrested by a "one percenter" LEO, you'll want to create the most accurate record for your attorney to deal with. It happens, but happens very rarely.

IMO, isn't what you said as the "better approach" is also defeated by your assertion of "adoptive assertions"?
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-03-2013, 2:22 AM
gobler's Avatar
gobler gobler is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: SGV near Azusa
Posts: 2,894
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

Follow Nancy Regen's advice... "Just say NO!"
__________________
Quote:
200 bullets at a time......
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-5/198981/life01.jpg

Subscribe to my YouTube channel ---->http://www.youtube.com/user/2A4USA
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-03-2013, 7:33 AM
A-J's Avatar
A-J A-J is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,246
iTrader: 8 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ke6guj View Post
the moment you state that you have firearms in the car, current CA law allows for the officer to inspect the firearms to make sure that they are not loaded.
This one here should have been /thread/ as it fully answers to OP's question. The threads similar to this about "what should I say" ALWAYS spin out of control between the "Don't say ****" crowd and the "If you're legal you have nothing to worry about" crowd and everyone in between.
__________________
It was not a threat. It was an exaggerated response to an uncompromising stance. I was taught never to make a threat unless you are prepared to carry it out and I am not a fan of carrying anything. Even watching other people carrying things makes me uncomfortable. Mainly because of the possibility they may ask me to help.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-03-2013, 8:26 AM
RickD427's Avatar
RickD427 RickD427 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: King County
Posts: 6,248
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessal View Post
IMO, isn't what you said as the "better approach" is also defeated by your assertion of "adoptive assertions"?
Nessal,

I don't believe that it is. To have an "adoptive admission" you really need to have silence in response to a question, or some form of evasion to a question. In the case of silence, you also have to have that before Miranda is triggered. The idea being that silence after Miranda is triggered can be attributed to the exercise of that right.

In my alternative, the driver is providing no evasion, and he's claiming the right to silence in response to the officer's inquiry, thereby triggering Miranda. I'm sure the officer's suspicions will be raised by the driver's statement, but it will be difficult for the officer to use the statement in support of PC due to driver's claim of the right.

The U.S. Supreme Court just gave a good treatment of silence and its contribution to PC in Texas v Salinas.

Last edited by RickD427; 09-04-2013 at 7:58 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-03-2013, 8:43 AM
RickD427's Avatar
RickD427 RickD427 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: King County
Posts: 6,248
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tincon View Post
Yeah, where would we ever get that idea?

Oh right: http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/s...ad.php?t=65673

I don't have a problem without your alternative answer, but "there is nothing illegal in the car" is still best. If you think that gives you license for a "fishing expedition", you are fishing for a 42 U.S.C § 1983 federal lawsuit.
Tincon,

Anybody has the right to file a lawsuit. Winning the suit is a different matter. To win the suit, you have to show that the officer clearly violated a right. Realistically, you have to do that by a margin. In my example, the officer is following the guidance of court cases already published and is led to a lawful search of the vehicle for weapons. For a plaintiff to win a 1983 suit, they would have to unravel the earlier cases and defeat the officer's reliance on their guidance. Where officers, in good faith, follow law subsequently found to be bad, they're entitled to "Qualified Immunity." Winning a 1983 suit would be just about impossible.

In more than 30 years in this business, I've successfully defended every lawsuit that's come my way.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-04-2013, 8:07 PM
Baja Jones's Avatar
Baja Jones Baja Jones is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 223
iTrader: 19 / 100%
Default

So, Roll down the window, say good afternoon officer, hand over your papers for inspection and shut up? This makes the most sense? God I hate being subservient to people I am paying. Just a foolish pride thing!
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-04-2013, 9:12 PM
Gryff's Avatar
Gryff Gryff is offline
CGSSA Coordinator
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Castro Valley, CA
Posts: 11,732
iTrader: 59 / 98%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ke6guj View Post
the moment you state that you have firearms in the car, current CA law allows for the officer to inspect the firearms to make sure that they are not loaded.
To stay on topic, this. LEOs have a right to verify that firearms are being transported legally if they can articulate that firearms are present (or you tell them).
__________________
My friends and family disavow all knowledge of my existence, let alone my opinions.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-04-2013, 10:04 PM
pastureofmuppets's Avatar
pastureofmuppets pastureofmuppets is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: California
Posts: 1,808
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baja Jones View Post
This makes the most sense? God I hate being subservient to people I am paying.
If you want a little context to make you feel better, you are paying the trash guys. You have to leave the trash cans on the street one specific morning each week. Does that make you subservient to them?

Nope, you are enabling them to do their job by cooperating with them or more specifically, fulfilling your part of the contract with them.

Another way to look at it is... you are fulfilling the contract you have with LE by co-operating. Dude is DOING the job "you" are paying him to do.

If you really want to think of it this way to protect your pride, when he/she pulls you over, the officer is doing the job "I" am paying them to do...
__________________
Host of the FAST OC podcast.

Last edited by pastureofmuppets; 09-04-2013 at 10:07 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-04-2013, 11:44 PM
Tincon's Avatar
Tincon Tincon is offline
Mortuus Ergo Invictus
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,062
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gryff View Post
To stay on topic, this. LEOs have a right to verify that firearms are being transported legally if they can articulate that firearms are present (or you tell them).
The hell they do! That there is such a law, as yet unchallenged Constitutionally, does not create a "right". It simply means they probably are going to check if they know (or reasonably suspect) you have firearms.
__________________
My posts may contain general information related to the law, however, THEY ARE NOT LEGAL ADVICE AND I AM NOT A LAWYER. I recommend you consult a lawyer if you want legal advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship exists or will be formed between myself and any other person on the basis of these posts. Pronouns I may use (such as "you" and "your") do NOT refer to any particular person under any circumstance.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-04-2013, 11:47 PM
MontClaire's Avatar
MontClaire MontClaire is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: *CLASSIFIED*
Posts: 4,842
iTrader: 94 / 100%
Default

Repeat as many times as you can " There is nothing illegal in the car ". The officer will understand what this means and that you know what you're doing. You should be ok if there is nothing else.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 09-07-2013, 7:22 AM
Nepa Nepa is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 42
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

In states where CCW permits shall-issue, at least in Pennsylvania, the standard advice was to hand over your LTCF with your license when stopped. This did disclose your weapons ownership, but it also established you as a law-abiding citizen who had passed a background check. It was also a polite way of disclosing that a firearm was in the vehicle, which may or may not have been required by law, depending on the state. I will say that the percentage of "warnings" I received increased, and the actual moving violation citations decreased after I began this. On the other hand, PA is way more gun-friendly and does not have a hysteria about guns, the way California seems to. Really wish obtaining a LTCF was as easy here as it was there. It took me 20 minutes in the rural county courthouse while I gazed at all the mounted animals on the Sheriff's walls and read his many framed pro-second amendment quotes on display. It was probably a great re-election strategy there.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 09-07-2013, 9:20 AM
RickD427's Avatar
RickD427 RickD427 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: King County
Posts: 6,248
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tincon View Post
The hell they do! That there is such a law, as yet unchallenged Constitutionally, does not create a "right". It simply means they probably are going to check if they know (or reasonably suspect) you have firearms.
Tincon,

I think you might be going off a little "half-cocked" with your assertion the loaded firearm check statute (Penal Code section 25850(b), formerly 12031(e)) has never been challenged on Constitutional grounds.

Please refer to People v. DeLong (11 Cal. App. 3d 786)

Last edited by RickD427; 09-07-2013 at 9:38 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 09-07-2013, 10:13 AM
MigNoche's Avatar
MigNoche MigNoche is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Coachella Valley
Posts: 1,422
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RudyCakes View Post
Rudy, that is a FANTASTIC video that should be required viewing for any U.S. Citizen. I have sent that link to everybody that I care about.
__________________
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/signaturepics/sigpic114369_6.gif
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 09-07-2013, 12:34 PM
Tincon's Avatar
Tincon Tincon is offline
Mortuus Ergo Invictus
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,062
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RickD427 View Post
Tincon,

I think you might be going off a little "half-cocked" with your assertion the loaded firearm check statute (Penal Code section 25850(b), formerly 12031(e)) has never been challenged on Constitutional grounds.

Please refer to People v. DeLong (11 Cal. App. 3d 786)
From People v DeLong:

Quote:
This does not mean that officers are entitled to open trunks of vehicles on the grounds of state institutions simply because there may be guns therein.
In any case, it does not create a "right"! It is a codification of what is a reasonable search, and IMO current application goes beyond what the Constitution allows and is subject to further challenge.
__________________
My posts may contain general information related to the law, however, THEY ARE NOT LEGAL ADVICE AND I AM NOT A LAWYER. I recommend you consult a lawyer if you want legal advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship exists or will be formed between myself and any other person on the basis of these posts. Pronouns I may use (such as "you" and "your") do NOT refer to any particular person under any circumstance.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 09-07-2013, 1:48 PM
RickD427's Avatar
RickD427 RickD427 is offline
CGN/CGSSA Contributor
CGN Contributor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: King County
Posts: 6,248
iTrader: 7 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tincon View Post
From People v DeLong:



In any case, it does not create a "right"! It is a codification of what is a reasonable search, and IMO current application goes beyond what the Constitution allows and is subject to further challenge.
Tincon,

You've made a good observation from DeLong. The standard for a search is "Probable Cause." That's what it has been all along. Conjecture that something "may" be present falls short of that standard. That's not news.

My point, was to respond to your assertion that the search authority had never been tested on Constitutional grounds when in fact is has been.

You're certainly entitled to hold your opinion on the matter, that's what makes for lively discussion in these threads, but until any further challenge produces a change in the law, what we now have stands.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 09-07-2013, 2:29 PM
gobler's Avatar
gobler gobler is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: SGV near Azusa
Posts: 2,894
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Default

I sill don't understand why some here don't get it. A simple "No Sir/Mam" and then shut up is all you need. You can lie to the police as long as it's not an investigation or they are Federal. Remember, they lie to you all the time. Not bashing here but I have seen first hand over the years of even good cops telling lies to get a confession of some one to self incriminate. They can play the "Cool Cop" kind of being friendly and say things like "Look, if you tell me where **** is I could just let you off with a warning. Then arrest after info is gained.... So yes, Just say NO Sir/Mam. Politely mind you.

Now if you have a LTC?CCW then that's a whole different game.

Some issuing agencies require you to notify the officers some don't. If I'm ever stopped I would hand over my DL, Insurance and CCW keeping hands at 10 & 2.
__________________
Quote:
200 bullets at a time......
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2003-5/198981/life01.jpg

Subscribe to my YouTube channel ---->http://www.youtube.com/user/2A4USA
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 09-07-2013, 4:04 PM
teg33 teg33 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 3,454
iTrader: 6 / 100%
Default

I have been stop by police on DUI check point. Officer ask me any weapon, I stated yes, secured unloaded inside locked container. Quick check by officer and less than 2 minutes later I was on my way. If you don't break law you don't have to worry.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 09-07-2013, 4:48 PM
Tincon's Avatar
Tincon Tincon is offline
Mortuus Ergo Invictus
CGN Contributor - Lifetime
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 5,062
iTrader: 2 / 100%
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by teg33 View Post
If you don't break law you don't have to worry.
I guess the founding fathers were a bunch of paranoid nuts then, no need for civil rights after all.
__________________
My posts may contain general information related to the law, however, THEY ARE NOT LEGAL ADVICE AND I AM NOT A LAWYER. I recommend you consult a lawyer if you want legal advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship exists or will be formed between myself and any other person on the basis of these posts. Pronouns I may use (such as "you" and "your") do NOT refer to any particular person under any circumstance.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 09-09-2013, 12:11 AM
Doheny's Avatar
Doheny Doheny is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Prescott, in the pines
Posts: 12,812
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gobler View Post
Now if you have a LTC?CCW then that's a whole different game.
For only the guns listed on your CCW.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 09-09-2013, 12:30 AM
Doheny's Avatar
Doheny Doheny is offline
I need a LIFE!!
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Prescott, in the pines
Posts: 12,812
iTrader: 3 / 100%
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Librarian View Post
Agreed. Stuck and cleaned up a bit.

As one may notice, there are several schools of thought here - but no 'one size fits all' answer.
Isn't this going to turn in to a mile-long sticky? How about a few posts from folks who we know post credible infomation (Rick and a few others), delete the "one time at band camp" stories and then lock it down? Otherwise, it's going to become a p*ssing contest disguised as a sticky.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 3:26 PM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Proudly hosted by GeoVario the Premier 2A host.
Calguns.net, the 'Calguns' name and all associated variants and logos are ® Trademark and © Copyright 2002-2018, Calguns.net an Incorporated Company All Rights Reserved.
Calguns.net and The Calguns Foundation have no affiliation and are in no way related to each other.
All opinions, statements and remarks made by Calguns.net on this web site and elsewhere are solely attributable to Calguns.net.