Hammerhead
Master
N8RV, let me give you a bit more information. I've posted this before, but it's always good for a refresher for the new people.
The cited case, Washington, provided one point that protects people against aggressive LEOs. Washington provided that if the person was separated from the danger, then officer safety didn't allow a search. In this case, the suspect was cuffed and sitting on the curb outside of his vehicle and his firearm was inside under the seat. The officers didn't have PC or RAS to search for the firearm because the danger was no longer valid.
What most of the LEOs on there don't understand, or know, is that there is another case that protects legal carriers from LEOs. This case is State v. Richardson. The IN Supreme Court ruled in this case that once a valid (verified) LTCH is presented, all questions into firearms must cease. A LEO can ask to see your LTCH to run a check on it. After that, any further action violates this ruling.
But, that's not all. There's something else. Terry v. Ohio states that one must be armed and dangerous AND have been, currently are, or will be committing a crime to be disarmed. Some people forget that there are three specific points in Terry, armed AND dangerous AND crime afoot. If you are just armed, that's not enough.
But wait, there's more. In Indiana, LEOs must, by law, be able to go in front of a judge and specify what danger you presented in order to sieze your firearm. There is no wiggle room about officer safety or only seizing it for a short time to illegally run a search on the serial number or while he's back at his vehicle running your information. In case you want to look it up, it's IC 35-47-14-3. This means that if during a traffic stop the LEO takes your firearm, he's just put himself in the position to follow that section of the law.
Let's review. Three of the four legal points I've just spoken about refer to the person being dangerous or dangerous AND breaking a law. The other stops questioning or further action once your valid LTCH is verified. If we combine this with the lack of duty to inform that you're carrying, you not only have a compelling argument to not inform, but also a lot of solid legal ground if you do and the officer violates your rights.
How do you ensure your rights are protected? Keep your mouth shut. Don't answer questions unnecessarily. Don't bring the presence of your firearm into a traffic stop that has nothing to do with anything other than the traffic stop. I also recommend that you carry a digital voice recorder to record any interaction with LEOs, if not using your phone or something to video record the interaction.
IANAL, but there are several here on INGO that I've discussed this with. If you want to ensure that you're exercising your rights properly, I'd suggest speaking with one of them.
The cited case, Washington, provided one point that protects people against aggressive LEOs. Washington provided that if the person was separated from the danger, then officer safety didn't allow a search. In this case, the suspect was cuffed and sitting on the curb outside of his vehicle and his firearm was inside under the seat. The officers didn't have PC or RAS to search for the firearm because the danger was no longer valid.
What most of the LEOs on there don't understand, or know, is that there is another case that protects legal carriers from LEOs. This case is State v. Richardson. The IN Supreme Court ruled in this case that once a valid (verified) LTCH is presented, all questions into firearms must cease. A LEO can ask to see your LTCH to run a check on it. After that, any further action violates this ruling.
But, that's not all. There's something else. Terry v. Ohio states that one must be armed and dangerous AND have been, currently are, or will be committing a crime to be disarmed. Some people forget that there are three specific points in Terry, armed AND dangerous AND crime afoot. If you are just armed, that's not enough.
But wait, there's more. In Indiana, LEOs must, by law, be able to go in front of a judge and specify what danger you presented in order to sieze your firearm. There is no wiggle room about officer safety or only seizing it for a short time to illegally run a search on the serial number or while he's back at his vehicle running your information. In case you want to look it up, it's IC 35-47-14-3. This means that if during a traffic stop the LEO takes your firearm, he's just put himself in the position to follow that section of the law.
Let's review. Three of the four legal points I've just spoken about refer to the person being dangerous or dangerous AND breaking a law. The other stops questioning or further action once your valid LTCH is verified. If we combine this with the lack of duty to inform that you're carrying, you not only have a compelling argument to not inform, but also a lot of solid legal ground if you do and the officer violates your rights.
How do you ensure your rights are protected? Keep your mouth shut. Don't answer questions unnecessarily. Don't bring the presence of your firearm into a traffic stop that has nothing to do with anything other than the traffic stop. I also recommend that you carry a digital voice recorder to record any interaction with LEOs, if not using your phone or something to video record the interaction.
IANAL, but there are several here on INGO that I've discussed this with. If you want to ensure that you're exercising your rights properly, I'd suggest speaking with one of them.
That is exactly the same point of view I have on this.
