Hard/Fast rules for OLL travel

[Amacias805]

Originally Posted by AYEAREFIFTEEN

Very good post BWO, and welcome back.



One other thing to watch out for would be if an LEO were to ask "do you mind if I search you vehicle?" Your first instinct would be to respond with a big fat "no" but now you have just told the LEO that you do not mind if they search your vehicle. Some people are naturally nervous or uneasy when confronted by law enforcement and can very easily make a mistake when responding to their questions.

An attorney once told me the best response to give a LEO when confronted with any kind of question asking for consent to search a vehicle would be "You may not search my vehicle." Simple, to the point, and very little chance to be misconstrued.

good point.... but to add to that.... if at anytime you are consenting to a search... you may withdraw you consent, and the search must end unless the cop has RS to continue seaching

[boxbro]

Originally Posted by Amacias805

good point.... but to add to that.... if at anytime you are consenting to a search... you may withdraw you consent, and the search must end unless the cop has RS to continue seaching

I believe the cop would have to have PC, not RS, to keep searching.
RS is enough to make a terry stop and frisk you but not enough to search your car.

[Amacias805]

Originally Posted by boxbro

I believe the cop would have to have PC, not RS, to keep searching.
RS is enough to make a terry stop and frisk you but not enough to search your car.

probably, but since i wasn't sure, i knew at the very least they would need RS.

[vintagedude88]

Originally Posted by M. Sage

...Case law has been posted that officers can check your gun out if they spot something that likely holds a firearm....

All the more reason to get a "Discreet" bag for your OLLs rather than a "gun shaped" tactical or rifle bag.

[robairto]

keep the upper off the lower? This is clearly legal. I don't assemble my OLLs here in Ca because I don't use BB's. All the above is good advice none the less but I travel to Nv to shoot and I don't assemble the guns till I'm there. Plus I take my high caps back and forth (yes I had them 20 yrs ago along with my RAWs). At some point, someone is going to be stripped of their guns,mags etc for no legal reason and the dept. will end up being sued. I see it as a civil rights violation now after Heller. Maybe I'm wrong because I'm not an atty. but just my personal thoughts. RB

[Matt C]

Originally Posted by robairto

keep the upper off the lower? This is clearly legal. I don't assemble my OLLs here in Ca because I don't use BB's. All the above is good advice none the less but I travel to Nv to shoot and I don't assemble the guns till I'm there. Plus I take my high caps back and forth (yes I had them 20 yrs ago along with my RAWs). At some point, someone is going to be stripped of their guns,mags etc for no legal reason and the dept. will end up being sued. I see it as a civil rights violation now after Heller. Maybe I'm wrong because I'm not an atty. but just my personal thoughts. RB

Are you saying you have built lowers that can accept a detachable magazine in CA? This is really not advisable.

[robairto]

Originally Posted by Blackwater OPS

Are you saying you have built lowers that can accept a detachable magazine in CA? This is really not advisable.

Yes, I have several complete lowers with NO uppers attached. They don't meet the requirements of an AW because they aren't a center fire rifle. I think that is a correct interpertation. They aren't rimfire or center fire. They are just assembled lowers. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think I am. Update:: If one of the experts can answer my question and clarify my statement about non-assembled guns (ie. no upper attached) I would appreciate it as I don't want to spread wrong information which would be harmful to someone. Thanks, RB

[Matt C]

Originally Posted by robairto

Yes, I have several complete lowers with NO uppers attached. They don't meet the requirements of an AW because they aren't a center fire rifle. I think that is a correct interpertation. They aren't rimfire or center fire. They are just assembled lowers. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think I am. Update:: If one of the experts can answer my question and clarify my statement about non-assembled guns (ie. no upper attached) I would appreciate it as I don't want to spread wrong information which would be harmful to someone. Thanks, RB

I agree with your interpretation, but there have been convictions for lowers in that config which did not have functional uppers. Your call.

[ADAM]

some good info gents

[COBRA MASTER]

hey its decent info but if a le ask you if you have any firearms AND YOU ANSWER NO AND YOU HAVE THEM IN YOUR CAR. THAT IS ILLEGAL TO LIE TO LE AND THEY ARE GOING TO SEARCH YOUR CAR ANY DAMN WAY. THEY DON'T NEED YOUR PERMISSION!!! IF YOU LIE TO THEM AND THEY FIND ANY TYPE OF FIRE ARM THEY ARE GOING TO ARREST YOUR ***. I DON'T KNOW WHAT PLANET YOUR LIVING ON BRO. ( HOW DO YOU LIKE MY CAPS LOL) THE SAFEST THING IS TO BE HONEST AND CARRY ALL YOUR PAPERWORK FOR THE GUN SALE AND COPIES OF LAWS DIRECTLY FROM D.O.J

Originally Posted by Blackwater OPS

It seems there has been another very avoidable arrest related to the OLL issue. While we know our firearms are legal, local police may not. So here are BWO's rules on how not to get arrested when traveling with an OLR or any firearm.

1. Don't break traffic laws while traveling with OLLs.

2.Do not have firearms or obvious firearm cases in plain sight. Do not have other items/stickers/clothing on your person or vehicle that would indicate firearm possession. This is a good idea in any case, you don't want to advertise to criminals either.

3. If stopped, signal and pull over promptly to a safe spot. Remain seated with your hands on the wheel. If it is night/dark, turn on your interior light and do not reach for anything (including wallet or registration/insurance papers) intill instructed to do so by the peace officer. When he/she asks, inform him/her that you will be getting them out of x area and ask if it's ok. Be VERY polite and sincere. Do not make excuses for whatever violation you are accused of, nor should you admit to any violation. Simply remain silent, or state something like "I understand officer/deputy/patrolman."

3.This is MOST FREAKING IMPORTANT! If asked any questions about the contents of your vehicle, or if you will permit a search, the ONLY answer is NO. You will not tell him what's in there as it is your private stuff, and you will not let him search for the same reasons. Say so respectfully not arrogantly. You never know what is really in your car unless you watch it 24/7 and no one is in it but you. Why invite trouble? Of course if you are carrying OLLs, than you already know there could be trouble.

While some OLL arrests were due mainly to unusual circumstances many others came from simple traffic stops and probably could have been avoided. Also, following the above is likely as anything to get you out of a ticket for whatever you were stopped for, since you will probably be the most pleasant traffic stop that cop has had all day.

ETA:

[glockwise2000]

Originally Posted by robairto

Yes, I have several complete lowers with NO uppers attached. They don't meet the requirements of an AW because they aren't a center fire rifle. I think that is a correct interpertation. They aren't rimfire or center fire. They are just assembled lowers. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think I am. Update:: If one of the experts can answer my question and clarify my statement about non-assembled guns (ie. no upper attached) I would appreciate it as I don't want to spread wrong information which would be harmful to someone. Thanks, RB

I believe you can not contest if your complete lower is a rimefire or centerfire if on your lower was marked 5.56. You can only claim it as either if it is marked as Multi Cal. Correct me if I am wrong.

[eighteenninetytwo]

Just my 2 cents worth on this but I have been stopped a couple of times with rifles in the car and always found that open/friendly/chatty responses got the best results. Because I know I'm legalit's easy. If I was a cop and someone gave me an ACLU minimal answer it would immediately raise my hackles.
Q: Have you got a firearm in the car?
A: Yep I'm on my way to the range at Chabot (or wherever) to try out my new toy. I'm super excited. Want to check it out? You guys must get to practice during work hours, that would be awesome etc etc

[Jagermonster]

Just to help clarify things for anyone that might be confused. I am a CA attorney. But, of course, this isn't legal advice in the strictest sense.

Reasonable suspicion allows a LEO to search any part of a car that is within the immediate control of the suspect. Such suspicion is only reasonable when the officer has a "reasonable belief" that you are in the commission of a crime.

Reasonable suspicion is a very low standard, so any strange behavior on your part could give a LEO reasonable suspicion. A "reasonable suspicion" search extends to the glove compartment, floor, your person, anything within your reach. Essentially, the entire cabin of the vehicle. If an officer should find any kind of contraband while performing a reasonable suspicion search, it may give him PROBABLE CAUSE to extend the search to the rest of the vehicle, INCLUDING THE TRUNK. Such contraband needn't necessarily be illegal, either.

Hypothetically, let's say you get pulled over and for whatever reason, you forget to act graciously and are instead argumentative. The LEO could claim that your behavior gave him reasonable suspicion to believe that you were engaged in illegal activity. This could allow the LEO to search the cabin of your vehicle. Let's also say that he found an empty mag or some shell casings that you didn't put in your range bag.

This could give them PROBABLE CAUSE under the "officer safety" doctrine, which could extend their search, WITHOUT NEED FOR YOUR CONSENT, to the rest of the vehicle, INCLUDING YOUR TRUNK. Once inside the trunk, he would find your OLL or what-have-you. At this point, worst case scenario, the LEO will assume you are in possession of an assault rifle. This is where it gets sticky, and you may have to jump through many subsequent legal hoops to prove that you are not, in fact, perpetrating any crime.

Basically, this is just a long-winded reiteration of previous posts; don't get pulled over. If you do, be gracious and apologetic. Just remember that if you don't act square with the LEO, it can escalate into a full blown search very quickly if he should be so inclined. DON'T GIVE A LEO ANY REASON TO SUSPECT YOU OF ANYTHING. Once you're pulled over, the LEO is in control of the situation. However, it is your job as an informed citizen to know the limits of his powers. If you do not CONSENT to a search and you are polite and gracious, an officer should have absolutely no reason to search you or your vehicle.

[botsdots]

Flying with OLLs? !!! CHECKED OF COURSE !!!

Any advice on dealing with TSA? Does anyone know if they'll alert the PD if they think anything is illegal. I'm trying to decide if I should even take it or not. I hate the fact that I'm walking on eggshells with something totally legal.

[Purple K]

My one experience with a cop while having firearms in the car went very well. I was running late to meet the guys at the range and got pulled over for speeding. I pulled over, rolled down the windows. Shut off engine and kept my hands on the wheel until the officer approached. Before taking my hands off the wheel I told him about the contents of my back seat (rifles, pistols, range bag, etc.). He thanked me for the info and we dealt with my speeding. Then..... He got this "kid in the toy store grin" and said whatcha got? He was a fellow Gun Nut, I showed him what I had in the back, we chatted guns for a bit and we both went our seperate ways. And no, I didn't get a ticket for speeding either.

[Packy14]

If my handgun is unloaded and locked in a safe in my trunk... i may have loaded mags in my trunk outside of the safe and in the car's cabin legally right?

[Glock21sfsd]

I have a question for you guys.............I drive to El entro allotand there is a border patrol checkpoint going both ways now. I read that if a LEO asks you to search your vehicle to say no, but almost half the time at the border patrol check points they want to look in my trunk and I let them. Should I say no and not let them? My thoughts are that if I say no they will pull me over to secondary and give me a hard time. So what would you do?

[Geo]

**** 'em. No warrent, no PC, no search. Or you can be a sheep.

[vintagedude88]

Originally Posted by Geo

**** 'em. No warrent, no PC, no search. Or you can be a sheep.

Enuff said

[bearing01]

Originally Posted by Glock21sfsd

I have a question for you guys.............I drive to El entro allotand there is a border patrol checkpoint going both ways now. I read that if a LEO asks you to search your vehicle to say no, but almost half the time at the border patrol check points they want to look in my trunk and I let them. Should I say no and not let them? My thoughts are that if I say no they will pull me over to secondary and give me a hard time. So what would you do?

I have this same question. Last weekend we went out to the desert and during the stop on the way we told them we were looking for a spot to go shooting. They actually told us where to go. Now, on the way back, they had a girl stopped in secondary and her trunk was open. There were at least two illegals sitting in her trunk with their head popped out. I am going to assume that if they want to search your car they will give you a hard time if you refuse.

[tombinghamthegreat]

Originally Posted by kenshinoro2007

If my handgun is unloaded and locked in a safe in my trunk... i may have loaded mags in my trunk outside of the safe and in the car's cabin legally right?

you can have the loaded mags right next to the gun, even touching in a locked container or open carried(UOC is another subject). Just as long as the gun is unloaded you will not violate PC12031 nor violate people vs clark

[916-DADDY]

"Sounds like , We are Guilty Untill Proovin Innocent"

I mite get some mud flaps for the rock crawler 4Runner B4 going to the Rubicon, And make sure all the turn signals and all work too.....

How sad in the USA.....

Maybe 2012 will be the ????????? times......

That is crap that alot of cops dont get schooled on whats legal and not!

[Cali-Shooter]

Originally Posted by Blackwater OPS

You are under no legal obligation to tell an officer about firearms that may be in your vehicle, but there is no reason to lie to him. Just say something like, "There is NOTHING illegal in this vehicle officer." If he asks again, say, "with all respect I already answered that." Don't give him anything else.

This is the best advice I have found here thus far. I've been stopped and searched once when I was coming back from a plinking trip by Riverside County Sheriff LEO's. Back then, I did not know how to handle being asked "Do you have any guns in the car?" Being naive as I was, I answered "Yes," believing simple honesty was the best policy. Moments after answering, I was told to step out of the car, was searched and handcuffed (I had the misfortune of wearing a black leather jacket, chains, and baggy pants), and sat in the back of a squad car while everything was searched. I had my Saiga 762, my Ithaca 37, Sigma 9mm, Universal M1 Carbine, and my Kel-Tec Su-16CA in the car, as well as a large amount of ammo. The whole damn ordeal was a royal pain in the ***. After everything was searched, the cops made nothing of wasting my time and I was off, paranoid about the "searching rights" of cops. If only I knew back then what I know now. I'll be ready and waiting for the next stop by LEO's this time.

Also, in my experience in that stop and search, it seemed that as long as the guns you have are not LOADED, it is just fine to have LOADED MAGAZINES and/or AMMUNITION in the same container as the UNLOADED gun (My Sigma was empty, but there were 4 loaded mags next to it in the same original box).

[Swatguy10_15]

Thats NOT great advice.. Yes, YOU ARE obligated to tell an officer you have weapons if he asks. Look up "officer safety doctrine" and all the associated case laws. If he asks you if you have any weapons, you give that kind of answer, he subsquently asks if he/she can search your vehicle and you reply no..He will find a reason to. At first hes limited to basically the interior of the vehicle "within arms reach"..If he is able to transition from suspicious to pc and then finds the weapons after youve said no..Now youre in kim chi..To what extent is arguable, but why go through the hassle?
Dont give them a reason to stop you for one.. Secondly, if youre asked a simple question,lying will not go over well..If youre weapons are legal and compliant then why lie/play word games? Stay legal and theres no issue even if you do have weapons.
No one seems to want to evaluate the reasoning behind the LEO's doing what they do. Youre in SO Cal, its a rough town. There is a HUGE gang problem and weapons are an everyday thing. Officers die because the wrong people have firearms.Civilians die, because of firearms in the wrong hands. Try placing yourself in theyre shoes... Traffic stops are THE most dangerous of all contacts with the public. Instead of just assuming theyre out to get you and that evil OLL, just talk to them like the humans that they are..The bullet buttons a pretty much accepted thing now..Stay safe, stay legal and all will be well.

[Cokebottle]

Originally Posted by Swatguy10_15

If he is able to transition from suspicious to pc and then finds the weapons after youve said no.

None of the advice on this thread has stated that we should lie to a cop and tell him "no" when we are in fact carrying weapons.

The advice is to avoid directly answering the question (which would be giving up our 4th and 5th rights) by clearly stating that we are carrying nothing illegal, and to refuse consent to search.

If he is asking for consent, he does not have RS or PC. If he has RS or PC, he will not ask for consent, and refusal of consent cannot be construed to RS or PC. The intimidation that many feel when faced by an officer makes them feel that refusal to consent would be used at RS.

If a person chooses to give up their 5th amendment rights and answer the question directly, then yes... it would be stupid and big trouble to lie.

[lawnrevenge]

Originally Posted by blackrazor

Someone needs to go back to law school. Day 1, Lesson 1 re: criminal defense, you DO NOT TALK TO THE POLICE, EVER, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES. PERIOD. It's not that hard folks. Do not give them directions to the grocery store. Do not discuss the weather. Do not talk to them about ANYTHING, ever. If they ask you questions, do not reply with anything other than "I do not consent to any search". There is simply no reason to speak, converse, discuss or reason with a police officer about anything outside of courtroom.

AMEN.

[Denver]

OK...

I really do see both sides of this. On the one hand lets say you get pulled over by a guy who is a real hole (you don't know this yet) and he asks you about firearms. In the effort to just be low key you could just say "I do, and they are all legal" you still do not have to consent to search if he asks.

This to me seems much more mellow and likely to make someone predisposed to hair trigger upset to let it pass. On the other hand if you evade the question it is likely to piss him off. Now a pissed off cop with a touch of corruption could be likely to search your vehicle w/o probable cause or consent. Remeber it is just you and him on the side of the road, he could tell the judge whatever he wants to say that he had PC.

You do not know who is pulling you over and it is much better to play the game than to be what appears to him/her as being in contempt of an officer. Notice the italics, I said appears.

The police can do anything they want, it's your word against them and the judge and DA usually side with the police.

Now you could just give them the silent treatment, they could cuff and stuff you, take your OLL and then you could get let go later on and get your OLL back in a couple of months (think beurocracy), but why the hasle when you could just play Mary Poppins for a few minutes.

Just my 0.02

BTW I know some pretty liberal CHP around here so this issue is much more complex than just staying silent.

[Cokebottle]

Originally Posted by Denver

OK...

I really do see both sides of this. On the one hand lets say you get pulled over by a guy who is a real hole (you don't know this yet) and he asks you about firearms. In the effort to just be low key you could just say "I do, and they are all legal" you still do not have to consent to search if he asks.

Catch 22.

If you admit to having weapons, then you cannot deny him his right to conduct an "e-check" pursuant to PC 12031e to verify that they are empty.

This puts you in the unfortunate position of having the vehicle open. If the vehicle is open and unlocked, then all contents become "plain sight" and subject to search without permission.

The only way around that would be the difficult procedure of getting out of your vehicle and locking the door, then moving to the trunk/tailgate, removing the gun cases yourself, placing them in the custody of the officer, and immediately re-locking the vehicle to prevent further search without consent.

[PBRStreetgang]

I hope to not make this too long so please bare with me. I am a retired cop, and avid gun owner. And as a LE I would like to put in my two cents. I have always been a good guy cop. I liked to treat everyone with respect until they did something that warranted my not doing so. However, with the advent of the “officer safety doctrine” and the Patriot Act, our department policy became a very simple one. Everyone was asked, traffic stop or FI, “do you have any weapons.” If someone responded “yes, they are in the trunk” I generally never asked another question about it, with the exception on the occasional stop where the individual(s) elaborated on what he/she had in the trunk, and we ended up having a nice conversation on the accuracy, and affordability of the weapon(s).

Now before I elaborate on the next paragraph please keep in mind a couple of things. First, I am lot older now, and have a much different attitude, and although it was my job, and stealing a line from “Cool Hand Luke” “calling it your job boss don’t make it right” at the time I was doing what our department dictated, and what I was taught.

I had on one occasion a person say something along the lines of “I have nothing illegal in my vehicle.” I asked him if he was LE or an Attorney, and how he was so certain that he had nothing illegal in his automobile. Again he stated he had nothing illegal in the vehicle. I felt that this was being evasive, and as such gave me reasonable suspicion to search his immediate area within the vehicle. Within the vehicle I found 2 spent 9mm casings. Since we were stopped in an area that had a “history” of violent crime, which one can argue is almost every major city in the US at some place and at some point, I felt I now had probable cause to search the rest of the vehicle.

Long story short, we went to court, the court found I was justified in my reasonable suspicion because “of what could be considered an evasive answer to my questions” and my probable cause search was justified because the “spent shell casings were consistent with type and caliber of known assaults in the area”.

The bottom line is two fold. First, if LE wants to look, they will find a way. It is really not that hard, and especially in the current political and world climate, it is almost too easy I am sorry to say. Second and ultimately the only real thing that matters avoid the problem and have nothing illegal in your vehicle. It is really the only defense you have in the long run.

We can write all day here in this forum about how to avoid problems with the police, be it OLL, concealed carry, or whatever. It really is about the facts. If you are breaking the law, you are getting a ticket, or going to jail. Do the innocent find themselves in bad situations unjustifiably? Yes it happens, and I am hopeful that the legal system, flawed in places it might be, can and will protect them.

Know the laws, obey them, and work to educate those who do not, and maybe we as gun owners can one day no longer be looked upon as potential “bad guys”, especially in a society where it is supposed to be our right to keep and bear them.

[Matt C]

A person told you that they were not doing anything illegal and that caused you to have a reasonable suspicion that they were doing something illegal? Does that make sense to you?

In any case, a search of a person (or in this case his immediate area in the vehicle) for weapons is always easy to justify, and courts have historically sided with officers in that respect. I guess I could then add, Don't have shell casings lying around your car, but I think it's pretty obvious that could lead to a search. You would not have been able to develop PC for a search without those things.

So basically to recap:

If a person says he has weapons (legal or otherwise) a search of the area(s) containing weapons is likely, and will probably hold up the way the law is currently written for unloaded checks.

If a person says “I have nothing illegal in my vehicle” there is no PC to search beyond the immediate area of the person (where he won't have anything that would give further PC if he has any sense). Regardless, a search seems less likely if the person gives the statement of “I have nothing illegal in my vehicle" and that statement is unlikely to be incriminating in any way.

It's all well to say "Know the laws, obey them" and hope the justice system will protect you, but the fact is many here have enough experience to know that simply is not good enough. You must protect yourself legally in any encounter with law enforcement and avoid situations where an officer's lack of knowledge (or worse) can lead to an arrest.

[bakokid]

Originally Posted by Denver

OK...

I really do see both sides of this. On the one hand lets say you get pulled over by a guy who is a real hole (you don't know this yet) and he asks you about firearms. In the effort to just be low key you could just say "I do, and they are all legal" you still do not have to consent to search if he asks.

This to me seems much more mellow and likely to make someone predisposed to hair trigger upset to let it pass. On the other hand if you evade the question it is likely to piss him off. Now a pissed off cop with a touch of corruption could be likely to search your vehicle w/o probable cause or consent. Remeber it is just you and him on the side of the road, he could tell the judge whatever he wants to say that he had PC.

You do not know who is pulling you over and it is much better to play the game than to be what appears to him/her as being in contempt of an officer. Notice the italics, I said appears.

The police can do anything they want, it's your word against them and the judge and DA usually side with the police.

Now you could just give them the silent treatment, they could cuff and stuff you, take your OLL and then you could get let go later on and get your OLL back in a couple of months (think beurocracy), but why the hasle when you could just play Mary Poppins for a few minutes.

Just my 0.02

BTW I know some pretty liberal CHP around here so this issue is much more complex than just staying silent.

good point on them saying what they want to a judge. i have personally seen a case and testified where the cop pulled the cop for "inoperable tail light" when asked that that meant he said "did not illuminate." the light was broken but covered by the red tape (completely.)
my testimony and investigators testimony and video tape proved the cop to be full of crap.....the prosecutions jaws hit the floor..but in the end the judge still took the cops word for it. talk about justice.

[PBRStreetgang]

"A person told you that they were not doing anything illegal and that caused you to have a reasonable suspicion that they were doing something illegal? Does that make sense to you?"

As an honest law abiding citizen, I do see your point, however you must have never been LE. As a police officer, I have rarely had any criminal ever say they were guilty and were doing something illegal. Almost everyone says they are "not doing anything illegal"

Good luck, and be safe.

[Mendo223]

I have a hard time believing that the cop is gonna accept a NO when he sees the big black case in my trunk. (i have suv so you can see into back seats and trunk area)

should i tint my windows?

what if they decide to make up some stuff like "i smell beer" (a bottle from a sixpack broke) or i smell smoke (my stoner brother always smells like weed and he was in the car earlier)

i like the thread but i still think a cop is gnna wanna see whats in the gun case or backpack or whatever. they are nosy invasive people.

[Mendo223]

pbr basically summed up my suspicions. cops can do whatever they want. i dont understand why they can just "protect and serve" instead of harassing and invading peoples privacys, causing troubles and ruining peoples lives, just to fill their quotas. i never want to become a cop, they must have no souls.

[Cokebottle]

Put a small guitar amp in the back next to it.... he'll see the amp and his brain will "click" into "guitar" when he sees the case instead of "gun".

He might then change the question to "do you have any drugs or needles in the car?", but won't mention guns

[bakokid]

Originally Posted by Mendo223

pbr basically summed up my suspicions. cops can do whatever they want. i dont understand why they can just "protect and serve" instead of harassing and invading peoples privacys, causing troubles and ruining peoples lives, just to fill their quotas. i never want to become a cop, they must have no souls.

unfortunately thats what our counrty has come to. we always hear about how bad law enforcement has it, how hard the job is, so then the answer is to make their job easier by taking away more rights of the people. then they get the da an judges on their side to, they all work together and the civilian who pays their bills is the dangerous outsider. not that there isnt good cops out there, they r just few and far between.

[Matt C]

Originally Posted by PBRStreeetgang

As an honest law abiding citizen, I do see your point, however you must have never been LE.

Wrong.

Originally Posted by PBRStreeetgang

As a police officer, I have rarely had any criminal ever say they were guilty and were doing something illegal. Almost everyone says they are "not doing anything illegal"

Which is why I would never bother asking. I either developed RS/PC, or had some other legal avenue to search the vehicle, or I let the person go. What you are basically saying is that this: "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." means nothing to you and you can search whomever you want.

[ja308]

I believe a re reading of the 4th amendment is in order.
ja308

[ja308]

thank you Blackwater Ops,for your service +knowledge.

[TURBOELKY]

I always thought if I told a cop "no you cant search", they would figure out somehow to search because you said NO. What are they going to do when you say no?? just say "ok, no problem, have a great day young man!"? Doubt it. If my stuff was not homebuilt, I wouldn't be so worried. But if I get pulled over and they find a ak-pistol (home built) in my pickup, they are more than likely going to flip! I did put some markings on it, and a personal serial number so they dont think I defaced the numbers, but there still is no registration. Although we may be aware there is no registration needed on a homebuilt gun, most of them are NOT! And that is what scares me....but I'll still go shooting with it.