Concealed Carry and contact with Law Enforcement

[HuskerXDM]

Would this, per chance, be the officer who spoke to the Well Armed Woman group last night? 

I heard today that a local LEO told a local Firearms Group that it is MANDATORY that you disclose you CCW right away, whether or not you are carrying at the time.
I know we all have differing opinions on this.  I for one let them know either way, just to not have any hassle. BUT does the law state as such? Maybe we should get a opinion from the AG? settle this once and for all?
 

[NE Bull]

Maybe.. my source wishes to remain anonymous, so..

Sent from my C771 using Tapatalk 2

[Dan W]

I suggest that the group call out the LEO... send him a bunch of emails and tell him he needs to get trained up

[Gary]

Opinion:  in a traffic stop, there is a magical point where the officer is on the fence as to whether he likes you or not.  He hits you with buzz word tests to compartmentalize you into nice neat mental boxes. 

Once you fail one test, no matter how small, you are on his ticket book, and not on his warning book, or verbal warning book. 

One thing that gets tested is honestly and beyond that, openness.   

If you have a CHP, and do not desclose that in the first chat moments, carrying or not, you go from the on the fence area, to someone that does not disclose things. 

It is your right to not disclose a CHP permit if you have no gun concealed on your person, but it his his right to give you a deserved ticket if you have one coming. 

I think if a person goes out of their way to work with LEOs, they will be willing to work with us.   In this case, the OP got a ticket, and I would suggest this is going to be the usual outcome of not volunteering the CHP.

The officers have a hard job, and if we make them feel a bit more at ease, it is better for them, and us.  Showing your CHP, instantly lets them know you have passed an FBI background check and should be no threat to their safety. 

Each officer has a family, and at the end of a shift, they want to go home to them.  Your CHP permit takes stress out of the traffic stop, and makes their job easier.

[OnTheFly]

Showing your CHP, instantly lets them know you have passed an FBI background check and should be no threat to their safety.

I would have to disagree.  If the LEO finds out through their dispatch that you have a CHP, are you NOW considered a threat?  How does notifying the LEO even if not carrying change a person's honesty, or the fact that they went through an FBI background check?  Either way, that person is a law abiding citizen.  If they inquire as to whether you are carrying, a polite "No sir/ma'am/officer.  I know that if I am carrying, I am obligated to inform you, and I definitely would do that." should suffice.  If a LEO finds out that you have a CHP and have jumped through all the hoops an individual is required to just so they can exercise this constitutional right, why would this give them cause to be uncomfortable.  If this is the mindset they have, then they need some reeducation. 

If the difference of getting a ticket or a warning is not following the law, but living by their personal standards, then the problem is not us.  It is how they look at us.

Your CHP permit takes stress out of the traffic stop, and makes their job easier.

I don't think this statement is false, but how we are treated shouldn't change due to the manner in which they find out we have a CHP.

Fly

[JTH]

I heard today that a local LEO told a local Firearms Group that it is MANDATORY that you disclose you CCW right away, whether or not you are carrying at the time.

Who said that, and to whom?  (edited to add:  Just saw that you don't want to say.  That's fine, but....)  .....that firearms group should send a polite but clear letter to that LEO's department about making sure that their officers know the requirements of the law.

Because we, as CCW permit holders, DO know the requirements of the law.  And apparently that particular LEO doesn't.  If that belief exists throughout that department, that may cause a problem---and the LEO is wrong.

As in "if the LEO uses that incorrect belief to escalate a situation, they will be in the wrong, and not only will that reflect badly on their department, but it opens that department to civil suits" sort of wrong.

And if that firearms group you mentioned is taking that particular LEO's word as gospel truth, they should be informed that not only is that person incorrect, but it casts into doubt other things they might have said.  (If they are wrong about something so straightforward and well-known, how correct are they about other things?)

[HuskerXDM]

I've decided to take down my original post since I don't have proof of what the instructor said.  I'm sure plenty of my students have walked away and not heard what I wanted them to hear. 

I get the "it's a good idea to inform either way" and I tell my CHP students that it my *opinion*  It would be incorrect to tell a group that informing is required even if not carrying... If indeed that is what happened.

[bullit]

IF this is the group and meeting, HE of all people should know better.... I may have to give him the benefit of the doubt and he was misunderstood. ..especially since he too is a CHP instructor. ..

[OnTheFly]

IF this is the group and meeting, HE of all people should know better.... I may have to give him the benefit of the doubt and he was misunderstood. ..especially since he too is a CHP instructor. ..

Personally, I don't think an attack via email bomb is appropriate at this juncture.  Maybe someone on the NFOA board with an official sounding title could contact the person of interest and ask for clarification.  If they support their belief of this misinformation, then maybe more drastic measures are called for.

Fly

[NE Bull]

^ Rod? 

[OnTheFly]

^ Rod? 

Now WHY didn't I think of that.   

Fly

[RN4Guns]

This sounds like a lot of he said she said. If this is just being taken as hearsay from one person, could they have misinterpreted what was presented? There is a lot of information missing. Since the source does not want to be identified perhaps NeBull you can seek clarification directly from the source instead of speculating. You know what happens when we ass u me..

[Gunscribe]

Opinion:  in a traffic stop, there is a magical point where the officer is on the fence as to whether he likes you or not.

I am glad it is only your opinion. It has nothing to do with like or hate. It has everything to do with public safety.

Most Peace Officers (and some have been trained to) have their mind made up before exiting the patrol vehicle whether it will be a ticket, written warning or verbal warning for the infraction that required the stop.

The buzz word tests as you refer to them are an investigate technique designed to illicit information that may indicate other crimes; DUI, Minor in Possession, etc...

 

I think if a person goes out of their way to work with LEOs, they will be willing to work with us. 

I didn't pull you over to work with you. Or become best buds. Or swap spit in the shower. I initiated contact because you were in violation of a motor vehicle violation. I have a job to do. I will be professional and I will treat everyone exactly the same whether I let them off with a verbal warning or whether I have to hook them up (cuff) and transport them to jail for a more serious crime.

If it is obvious that you are going out of your way to make me happy will have me wondering what you could be trying to divert my attention from.

Your CHP permit takes stress out of the traffic stop, and makes their job easier.

B.S. I don't know where you got that from but you could not be more wrong. I don't think you have any idea about the dynamics of a traffic stop from a trained Peace Officers point of view.

If I pull an off-duty officer over for DUI am I suppose to lower my guard when I find out he is a fellow officer? If I pull a vehicle over and the driver is an elderly woman am I suppose to lower my guard?

I can guarantee that every officer I know including myself will be in condition orange until the stop has been completed and you have departed the scene.

There is absolutely nothing you can do or say that will take the stress out of the stop or make my job easier.

You are right about one thing though; I want to go home at the end of my shift so whether you have a CCW, have gang tattoos or are wearing a priests collar you will be treated just like everyone else for the duration of the contact.

[zofoman]

Showing your CHP, instantly lets them know you have passed an FBI background check and should be no threat to their safety.

Just like taking tests in school/college or driving exams....people can pass these things and the basic facts were good at the time.  Time passes quickly.  Proof of that is that we have a lot of idiots running around regardless of their education and we have a shipload of bad drivers on the road.  Whose to know the current state of mind with any CHP holder on any given day?  For LEOs (including those who live in Mayberry), the guard should never go down.

[Gunscribe]

For those of you that are not familiar with the dynamics of a traffic stop from the other side of the badge I hope you will find this enlightening.

http://www.policemag.com/channel/careers-training/articles/2012/11/traffic-stops.aspx

[Gary]

There are apx 500 police officers killed in the line of duty each year. The number is higher, sorry I do not remember the exact annual average.

How many of these murders are part of a traffic stop and the outcome was not anticipated at the start of the traffic stop ?

Now, how many of these murders of LEOs were by licenced CHP holders?

From 1996 to date, I think the number of police officers killed by CHP holders is 14.   Was the last time I looked it up.

So, as a group, on average, CHP holders are not usualy a threat to LE.

[JTH]

The below is not particularly relevant to this actual discussion, as the discussion assume a number of things about the LEO's state of mind, which in general, is not something you know.

However, I'm curious:

From 1996 to date, I think the number of police officers killed by CHP holders is 14.   Was the last time I looked it up.

Citation?  Where did you get this information?

I'll note that the only listing of "14" I can find is from the Violence Policy Center, a notorious anti-gun think tank.  And their listing of 14 is inaccurate as it includes cases where there has been no conviction.

In a number of the cases where there was a conviction, it was for various versions of manslaughter, which is a very different situation than murder.  Doesn't change the fact that an LEO was still killed, but it is rather different than VPC's contention that CCW holders murder LEOs.

And lastly, a number of those that were actual murders had nothing to do with concealed carry---the person just happened to also have a CCW permit, which had nothing to do with the crime itself.  However, since it supports the "concealed carry killers" narrative of the VPC, they include them.

(Oh, the VPC also includes includes cases where the criminal shouldn't have legally had a CCW permit in the first place, too.)

Main part of my point:  As almost none of these cases occurred in a traffic stop, I'm really not thinking it makes any difference to LEO's attitude about CCW permit holders during traffic stops.

Far as I can tell, only three of the cases were a murder that occurred with a concealed firearm.

Here's the VPC link:  http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/ccwlawenforcement.pdf

Is this where you got your information?

[Gunscribe]

So, as a group, on average, CHP holders are not usualy a threat to LE.

True, I agree completely.

The point I am making is having a CHP will not make a Peace Officer all warm and fuzzy as you suggest.

Yes, you have a CHP that was issued a year ago, two, four years ago. How do I know in that time you haven't committed any crimes that you haven't been caught for yet and when I pull you over you think the hammer is finally going to drop on your misdeeds because I lit you up.

It doesn't matter who you are or what permits you have, what collar you are wearing, or what tattoos you have, From the time I light you up until you depart the scene I will courteously and professionally treat everyone the same from awareness level "condition orange" until you have left the scene.

[ILoveCats]

It doesn't matter who you are or what permits you have, what collar you are wearing, or what tattoos you have, From the time I light you up until you depart the scene I will courteously and professionally treat everyone the same from awareness level "condition orange" until you have left the scene.

True, but I still think the concept of "good first impression" is a sound and relevant one from the perspective of the person being pulled over. I used to work at a "public counter" type environment and it was not a super-fun job, but it did tell you a lot about the science of "reading" people. After some experience you could pretty much tell how the encounter was going to go (if the person was prepared, legitimate, and going to get the benefit he was seeking) as he was walking up to the window and before he even opened his mouth. Clothing, posture, tattoos, mannerisms, smells, accent, figures of speech, eye contact and other "micro expressions" all can tell you an amazing amount of information in a couple of seconds. Many people use that instinct to some extent, and there is some very good training on reading micro expressions to help build on that human nature.

Only time I've ever been pulled over recently (and only second time in my life) was going through Omaha very late one night (~1:30am) after a delayed flight. A tail light was out and I didn't know it. Officer came along passenger side, saw me still in a suit and tie, heard me say that I was just heading home after a delayed flight from New York, glanced at my license and wished me a good evening. It was literally over about as fast as it took me to type that just now. He had bigger fish to fry apparently, and sped off before I could even get my license back in my wallet.

Would it have gone differently with some face tattoos, 20-inch rims and the driver's seat leaned way back? Yep.

Bottom line is, regardless of legal requirements, I don't know that it wouldn't hurt to have the license, registration and CHP all in hand as he's walking up, and, when asked for paperwork, say, "here you go sir, and by the way I'm a CHP holder too but not carrying anything today."

[HuskerXDM]

Back on the original topic, I've had contact with a person who was at TWAW presentation and the presenter did NOT, according to her, say that you were required to notify an officer even if you aren't carrying.