Interesting twist on routine traffic stop

[chipbennett]

Maybe you got a Gun Friendly cop and he wanted to warn you about Ohio's laws (If he could actually tell you were coming from Ohio?) <-- I wish this came to my head immediately, instead of the "this could of ended badly" that did.

If that were his intention, he could have offered that information regardless of the answer to the question - or without asking the question in the first place.

Maybe he was conducting business first and asking out of curiosity. If I was an officer I guess I'd wonder, how many people with a ltch actually exercise their right to carry and do so on a regular basis? Obviously they don't have to answer truthfully so kind of skews the survey. What does surprise me is how many people that I know personally do not carry and do have a ltch.

But idle (or even professional) curiosity and the compulsion of an arrest don't mix. I couldn't imagine many people who are especially willing to "talk shop" in a manner that violates fourth amendment-protected rights during a traffic stop.

 

[VUPDblue]

I always ask and always at first contact. I do phrase the question in reference to anything illegal and I'm not so much interested in what you answer but rather how you answer.

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

But idle (or even professional) curiosity and the compulsion of an arrest don't mix. I couldn't imagine many people who are especially willing to "talk shop" in a manner that violates fourth amendment-protected rights during a traffic stop.

What "compulsion of an arrest"? Contrary to what most INGOers and the general public believe, not all police officers are out looking to arrest someone during every traffic stop/investigation/etc. And perhaps you you should peruse Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977) when speaking about 4th Amendment rights during traffic stops.

 

[phatgemi]

Ah, another Franklin county resident doing the daily commute to the buckeye. I did for 22 years. Thank God for the Utah permit.

 

[Roland of Gilead]

What "compulsion of an arrest"? Contrary to what most INGOers and the general public believe, not all police officers are out looking to arrest someone during every traffic stop/investigation/etc. And perhaps you you should peruse Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977) when speaking about 4th Amendment rights during traffic stops.

Am I being detained! Am I being detained!

JBT "Your tire is low."

I don't have to talk to.....oh.

 

[stephen87]

If that were his intention, he could have offered that information regardless of the answer to the question - or without asking the question in the first place.



But idle (or even professional) curiosity and the compulsion of an arrest don't mix. I couldn't imagine many people who are especially willing to "talk shop" in a manner that violates fourth amendment-protected rights during a traffic stop.

How is "talking shop" a violation of the fourth amendment rights? Was property seized? Was it illegal for him to ask? Were rights violated? What was searched? Can I talk to my lawyer now? DId you smell the Krispy Kremes? Oh, sorry. Got carried away.

 

[Force10]

I always ask and always at first contact. I do phrase the question in reference to anything illegal and I'm not so much interested in what you answer but rather how you answer.

I don't think I would have minded the question so much had it been during the first encounter. Given the time I was on the road, it seems logical to assess for any possibility of crime. I suppose it was the timing of his question that really made me scratch my head.

 

[Force10]

Ah, another Franklin county resident doing the daily commute to the buckeye. I did for 22 years. Thank God for the Utah permit.

Year 3 now for me, and I live West of Metamora. 52 miles one way... Thank God for 12 hour shifts!

 

[VUPDblue]

I don't think I would have minded the question so much had it been during the first encounter. Given the time I was on the road, it seems logical to assess for any possibility of crime. I suppose it was the timing of his question that really made me scratch my head.

Time and location shouldn't matter to any good cop asking such question. You just never know where you'll encounter a bad guy

 

[chipbennett]

What "compulsion of an arrest"? Contrary to what most INGOers and the general public believe, not all police officers are out looking to arrest someone during every traffic stop/investigation/etc. And perhaps you you should peruse Pennsylvania v. Mimms, 434 U.S. 106 (1977) when speaking about 4th Amendment rights during traffic stops.

A traffic stop IS an arrest, albeit a temporary one.

 

[chipbennett]

How is "talking shop" a violation of the fourth amendment rights? Was property seized? Was it illegal for him to ask? Were rights violated? What was searched? Can I talk to my lawyer now? DId you smell the Krispy Kremes? Oh, sorry. Got carried away.

Perhaps you misread what I quoted, and my response. I never said that "talking shop" was a violation of fourth-amendment rights. Rather, I said that, while under arrest (a stop for enforcement of traffic laws being a form of arrest), people are not likely to be amenable to "talking shop".

 

[stephen87]

You never stated during an arrest. A traffic stop is not an arrest. A traffic stop is a temporary detainment. An arrest, if I understand correctly, means you are going to some sort of jail, albeit temporarily. A detainment just means that an officer is going to speak with you about something that happened and possibly cite you if it was illegal.

 

[chipbennett]

You never stated during an arrest. A traffic stop is not an arrest. A traffic stop is a temporary detainment. An arrest, if I understand correctly, means you are going to some sort of jail, albeit temporarily. A detainment just means that an officer is going to speak with you about something that happened and possibly cite you if it was illegal.

No. Legally, a temporary detainment (investigatory or traffic enforcement) is a form of arrest. More accurately, such temporary detention is a form of legal seizure, even if it doesn't constitute "typical" arrest. Refer to Terry v. Ohio.

Whatever term you choose to use: if you are held under compulsion of law and are not free to leave of your own volition, you have been legally seized, wither as an investigatory detention, a traffic stop, or a traditional/formal arrest. My point was that, in any such circumstance - including a traffic stop - people are are less likely to be amenable to "talking shop" than they would be during a consensual encounter with a police officer.

 

[Dirtebiker]

Agreed. The "reason" he pulled me over had been adequately addressed, and since I was doing nothing else illegal, it was a moot question. Even if I was doing something else illegal such as speeding, it was still moot. If I did have my firearm with me, and had answered "Yes", what would he have done? If he felt in danger, he should have asked when he first approached the vehicle, not as the final question.

Because if you meant to do him harm you would have been honest!?

 

[Frank_N_Stein]

A traffic stop IS an arrest, albeit a temporary one.

Well, I guess no more asking drivers their reasoning for committing whichever infraction I stopped them for without advising them of Miranda first. Just go straight to the citation and save us both the uncomfortable conversation.

 

[RobbyMaQ]

Curious if having the ltch tied to an Indiana drivers license pops up that info in other states?

 

[Brian Ski]

Curious if having the ltch tied to an Indiana drivers license pops up that info in other states?

Is it tied to the license now??? I heard talk about it. Not sure if they are doing it. It would not bother me. If you think about it, the people that have a carry permit would probably be the ones to do the police officer the least harm.

 

[TheSpark]

So when police in Indiana run your drivers licenses the LTCH does popup? I was never sure if it did or not.

I got pulled over a couple months ago for the same thing (license plate light out) but the officer never asked me about the LTCH or weapons. He was actually very nice during the stop and at the time I had no issue.

Only thing about my stop that made me a little mad is when I got home I checked the light and it was as bright as ever. I honestly think they were just pulling random people over for no reason to check them out. I even did a google search and found out that it is not uncommon for police to do that and use the license plate light as an excuse.

 

[cziemer]

At least in Carroll County, when the dispatch returns information they inform the officer of the LTCH. I've heard this first hand when a Deputy called in a me and friend's DL's for a nuisance call. ( We were making a bunch of noise shooting, made his neighbor mad, but the Deputy was more interested in whether my buddy's AR would set off Tannerite...) but when the call on him come back the response was "his name, Operator License with Motorcycle Endorsement, LTCH, and his address."

 

[TheSpark]

At least in Carroll County, when the dispatch returns information they inform the officer of the LTCH. I've heard this first hand when a Deputy called in a me and friend's DL's for a nuisance call. ( We were making a bunch of noise shooting, made his neighbor mad, but the Deputy was more interested in whether my buddy's AR would set off Tannerite...) but when the call on him come back the response was "his name, Operator License with Motorcycle Endorsement, LTCH, and his address."

I have no issue with that except them broadcasting it to all the people with scanners. Some people don't want others to know they carry and them having a LTCH is a likely indicator they do. Sounds like this is more of a per county thing then. Some will let the officer know some wont.

The plus side to the officer knowing is if they see one of your guns they are less likely to be alarmed if they know you have a LTCH.