NFOA MEMBERS FORUM
General Categories => Carry Issues => Topic started by: Wildgoose on November 01, 2014, 09:14:51 AM
-
Reading some of the discussions on carrying and transporting reminded me of an issue that can and in some cases in other states has been a problem for those of us who own firearms like AK/AR pistols and SBR's. Be aware that not all LEO's are well versed in what is legal and what is not. If you are transporting your evil looking AK pistols and SBR's, even with the Class III paper work required for the SBR, and are stopped you can have issues. In the cases I am referring to above things were eventually sorted out but at great time and inconvenience to the owner. And in a couple of cases a night in jail was involved. This doesn't mean that you shouldn't do it or that you will have this problem if stopped. But if for some reason the guns you are in possession of is looked into be aware that if you are transporting this type of gun mistakes can happen. For this reason I don't ever transport my SBR,s out of state. Just thought I might pass this thought along to those who have or are looking at picking one up.
-
But never forget the 4th Amendment that unless the LEO can present Reasonable Articulable Suspicion (RAS), Probable Cause(PC) or you are arrested, DO NOT allow them to search your vehicle .... and thus there is no problem ..... you are under NO obligation to inform the LEO you are legally (my word) transporting a gun(s) ..... (CHP informing per whatever that statesrequirement not withstanding)
-
and then a "gun sniffing" dog will show up and "hit" on your vehicle, thus providing your probable cause...
66bigblock
-
Studies and tests in 2009 on US and foreign currencies revealed that upwards of 90% of all paper bills had some trace amounts of cocaine on them. This would be sufficient to trigger a sniffer dog to "hit" on the vehicle or person then it would be a small leap to move to the next level. Search / arrest / confiscate / charge....
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/aug/17/cocaine-dollar-bills-currency-us (http://www.theguardian.com/world/2009/aug/17/cocaine-dollar-bills-currency-us)
-
and then a "gun sniffing" dog will show up and "hit" on your vehicle, thus providing your probable cause...
66bigblock
Which is sad for several reasons. First, studies show that 80% of all "hits" are wrong (http://www.smh.com.au/environment/animals/sniffer-dogs-get-it-wrong-four-out-of-five-times-20111211-1oprv.html), despite the fact that in Florida vs Harris (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_v._Harris) the court said OK, under certain conditions, to dog "hits", and, since you have a constitutional right to face your accusers and question them, how does your attorney cross examine a dog?
Dogs noses are pretty good. For such failure rates to occur I suspect that the dog's nose is being overridden by the officer's desire to establish "probably cause" and thus 80% of all "hits" are actually misses because there is another bit of training that goes on after the dog's "official" training which teaches the dog to indicate a "hit" when it sees subtle signs from its handler. This does not include cases where the officer plants narcotics just to get some scum off the streets.
-
This brings up a question about Nebraska CHP law and the duty to inform. Say I'm stopped for a traffic violation. As required, I inform the LEO that I have a CHP and identify the location of my concealed handgun. What if the LEO asks if there are any OTHER firearms in my vehicle? On any given trip to the range, I might have what the media would call a small arsenal in my car. They may be in the range bag on the passenger seat, or long guns lying on the back seat or back in the hatch of my SUV. If they are visible to the LEO, I would identify them, but what if they are stored out of sight? Do I disclose them and, if the LEO requests, must I open the hatch and allow them to be secured by the LEO?
I realize that most LEO contacts don't go down this way in NE. But it does raise the question - is a CHP holder required to consent to searches?
-
One thing I found out talking to a hand full of LEO's is they have no clue about class 3 paperwork or to ask for it. Granted these were all LEO's ok with firearms but still they had no training covering it.
I had a problem with a young Cass County Sheriff Deputy awhile back where he was incorrect about a law which finally got worked out where I wasn't cited but from there on out when I know I am 100% in the right I will be that dick and make them cite the state statute or get their supervisor involved.
-
is a CHP holder required to consent to searches?
No, but the LEO is allowed to disarm you during the stop, so that limited "search" for the Concealed handgun(s) you have already declared is part of the law in Nebraska. I can't in any way imagine how that would extend to any long arms that are not in plain view, or any firearm that is stored outside the passenger compartment.
That being said, I am not a lawyer. And I am pretty certain that the carrying of a concealed handgun with a valid permit does not meet the requirements of probable cause or Reasonable Articulable Suspicion for a search without your permission.
-
This brings up a question about Nebraska CHP law and the duty to inform. Say I'm stopped for a traffic violation. As required, I inform the LEO that I have a CHP and identify the location of my concealed handgun. What if the LEO asks if there are any OTHER firearms in my vehicle?
I experienced this scenario somewhat with an LSO Deputy in 2009. He pulled me over on N 48th as I was going "faster" than he was ... I was going 34/35 in a 35, but he was leading "the Parade" in his lane at 30 mph. He didn't like that I guess. Anyway my carry gun was rolled up in my pants in the passenger seat as I had just left the gym. I informed him appropriately and where the gun was. He asked about other guns in the vehicle and I told him "yes, I have legally owned and properly cased firearms in the vehicle". He did attempt to enter my vehicle from the driver side after asking me to exit. I asked him not to as I was not comfortable nor consenting for him to enter my vehicle. He told me he had PC due to me informing him. I told him that I was respectfully challenging his LOGIC on the PC as I had properly informed him of my CHP/Carry gun and answered his question with LEGALLY transporting my other firearms. Long story short, he didn't push the issue (and I suppose I was being a little bold, but .....) He did not cite me after 1) he had no idea how fast I was going and 2) me reminding him that although he elected to go slower than the post limit, that by no means make it the new speed limit. He did conclude our encounter by THANKING me for informing him I was carrying, etc.
Take home lesson..... had he pushed the issue to proceed to "search", I would have QUIETLY and respectfully allowed such and THEN followed up through the courts ..... AND NO I DID NOT FILM ALL OF THIS TO BE AN A$$ ON YOUTUBE ......
-
One thing I found out talking to a hand full of LEO's is they have no clue about class 3 paperwork or to ask for it.
Why would they need to know to ask for it in the first place? Was there a particular problem in your case you are willing to share?
-
Why would they need to know to ask for it in the first place? Was there a particular problem in your case you are willing to share?
The Sheriff's deal was about him stating that you can not put your old plates on a privately purchased vehicle for the 30 day period and wanting to write me for factitious plates which is a phony charge. In the state of NE you can do that. Paper homemade intransit's are illegal and putting the old plate on is better than running around w/o plates entirely for up to 30 days.
Bottom line is most LEO's have no idea what to look for when dealing with class 3 weapons because it isn't covered in training.
-
Now I am really confused ..... what do your license plate issues have to do with Class III weapons? That being said, I agree with you to an extent on training. It is covered, but like MOST laws, many LEOs are the last source you want to inquire to when it comes down to it .....
The Sheriff's deal was about him stating that you can not put your old plates on a privately purchased vehicle for the 30 day period and wanting to write me for factitious plates which is a phony charge. In the state of NE you can do that. Paper homemade intransit's are illegal and putting the old plate on is better than running around w/o plates entirely for up to 30 days.
Bottom line is most LEO's have no idea what to look for when dealing with class 3 weapons because it isn't covered in training
-
LOL I'm not going to break it down long winded quote version like a lot do on here.
Cliff notes:
The OP stated that even when you are following the law you can have problems.
Be aware that not all LEO's are well versed in what is legal and what is not. If you are transporting your evil looking AK pistols and SBR's, even with the Class III paper work required for the SBR, and are stopped you can have issues. In the cases I am referring to above things were eventually sorted out but at great time and inconvenience to the owner. And in a couple of cases a night in jail was involved.
My comment is a lot of LEO's at least 10 that I've spoke to have no idea about class 3 items or that you need to carry paperwork to prove you are legal. My second comment simply agrees with the OP that even if you are following the law you can have problems.
Clear as mud? lol
-
Chris C. Just to show that all cops are not out to get you. Nebraska Revised Statute 60-369 allows you to operate a motor vehicle for 30 days without license plates or in-transit's as long as you have proof of ownership.
60-399(a) states it is illegal to operate any motor vehicle with plates not assigned to it.
-
Chris C. Just to show that all cops are not out to get you. Nebraska Revised Statute 60-369 allows you to operate a motor vehicle for 30 days without license plates or in-transit's as long as you have proof of ownership.
60-399(a) states it is illegal to operate any motor vehicle with plates not assigned to it.
Thank you for stating the obvious. Running around without plates 1 is in an invitation to be pulled over and 2 wasting taxpayers money when you can easily just put the old plates on.
EDIT: Was just able to read the second portion of your comment.
Where I found out that you can put your old plates on a a privately purchased vehicle was from a OPD friend (one of many I might add for those who think I may be a cop basher) who was told face to face by Marty Conboy. You CAN do this. I will also add NSP also confirmed this is LEGAL. If anyone knows what the true laws are it's NSP and Mr. Conboy.
Now maybe WE can get back on topic!?
-
Where I found out that you can put your old plates on a a privately purchased vehicle was from a OPD friend (one of many I might add for those who think I may be a cop basher) who was told face to face by Marty Conboy. You CAN do this. I will also add NSP also confirmed this is LEGAL. If anyone knows what the true laws are it's NSP and Mr. Conboy.
Can you by chance tell us what law makes this legal? Because I can't (when asked by an LEO who has stopped me) just say "Mr. Conboy said it was okay."
:)
What law makes that legal? I would have thought that taking plates registered to one particular vehicle, and placing them on another (that they are not registered to) would be rather an issue.
-
Believe it or not I told the Deputy that. I told him a OPD friend was told that face to face and why would Marty Conboy lie being the Omaha City Prosecutor? We went back and fourth for a few minutes where I kept telling him he was wrong. He went back to the car got on the radio and then wrote a warning. Whoever he radioed must have corrected him. I in turn called my OPD friend as soon as I pulled away who said the Deputy was wrong which I already knew. Stopped by the Troopers HQ and the Trooper (it was the big black Trooper that you always see on TV with the crash simulator) agreed that my friend and Marty were in the right.
I don't know how it works but it does.
-
Can you by chance tell us what law makes this legal? Because I can't (when asked by an LEO who has stopped me) just say "Mr. Conboy said it was okay."
:)
What law makes that legal? I would have thought that taking plates registered to one particular vehicle, and placing them on another (that they are not registered to) would be rather an issue.
I just bought a new vehicle. Can I put my old plates on it during the 30 days I have to register?
Yes. Just be sure to carry your ownership documents with you so that in the event you are stopped by law enforcement you can provide the proper evidence of ownership.
http://www.dmv.nebraska.gov/dvr/faq.html#useoldplates (http://www.dmv.nebraska.gov/dvr/faq.html#useoldplates)
-
I just bought a new vehicle. Can I put my old plates on it during the 30 days I have to register?
Yes. Just be sure to carry your ownership documents with you so that in the event you are stopped by law enforcement you can provide the proper evidence of ownership.
http://www.dmv.nebraska.gov/dvr/faq.html#useoldplates (http://www.dmv.nebraska.gov/dvr/faq.html#useoldplates)
Exactly what I needed. Thanks!
-
Just because someone on the internet says something happens does not make it so. Not one of the original posters claims of things that happened had any documentation, the sheep just fall in belief since it's on the internet it must be true.
-
There is an obvious contradiction between what is in the law and what is in the FAQ.
60-399 states: (http://nebraskalegislature.gov/laws/statutes.php?statute=60-399)
No person shall attach to or display on such motor vehicle or trailer any (a) license plate or registration certificate other than as assigned to it for the current registration period,...
AND what the DMV says (http://www.dmv.nebraska.gov/dvr/faq.html#useoldplates) in their FAQ:
]I just bought a new vehicle. Can I put my old plates on it during the 30 days I have to register?
Yes. Just be sure to carry your ownership documents with you so that in the event you are stopped by law enforcement you can provide the proper evidence of ownership.
The law is the law. An FAQ is not. Anyone want to pay attorney fees and risk conviction in order to clear up the matter? I don't.
-
Are you people still saying this is untrue? For **** sake go ask Marty Conboy or a Trooper.
-
I didn't say it was untrue. I said the FAQ was contradictory to the law. Both statements cannot be true.
Marty Conboy is/was just the Omaha City prosecutor. The best resolution would be for the State Attorney General to issue a clarifying statement or get the DMV to change their FAQ.