Traffic stop, implied consent?

[quiggly]

Okay so we have seen on this forum in several other threads the discussion about tell or no tell as it relates to informing an officer that you have a handgun. (See I said handgun not weapon.)

We have also seen on this and other forums where officers appreciate the notice however they will some times ask to disarm you.

We have heard several ways this may happen, the most reasonable to me is that they would ask you to step out of the vehicle then they would retrieve your shooter and unload it.

Here is where I have concerns. When you let them retrieve your weapon, (oops), does this give them an implied consent to search your vehicle?

Would it be out of line for the person being stopped to suggest to the officer that you just step out of the vehicle and lock it?

I know I know you are all saying that you shouldn't have told them to begin with, and I agree with that, mainly for the reason that I am asking about. BUT what about you Ohioians or if you are somewhere where informing is required?

Again is there such a thing as implied consent?

Just curious.

 

[TheDude]

I would say that anything (Read illegal) in "Plain view" on route to find your weapon would be used against you. Is this what your asking?

 

[Episcopus]

like the 4th amendment/Terry Stop thread from a couple of weeks ago, the answer is "it depends." Probably not, but it depends. The 4th amendment is very very fact specific.

 

[quiggly]

I would say that anything (Read illegal) in "Plain view" on route to find your weapon would be used against you. Is this what your asking?

I guess what my real question is.... Would it be reasonable to just ask the LEO to allow you to exit and lock your vehicle without him handling your firearm?

In regards to the "Terry Stop". This would be different because could this be considered giving consent? Especially if the offers asks? instead of instructs?

I am not sure the Terry Stop could be used here.

 

[Metro 40]

.

 

[esrice]

I guess what my real question is.... Would it be reasonable to just ask the LEO to allow you to exit and lock your vehicle without him handling your firearm?

So are you leaving the firearm in your vehicle before you exit? If it is on your person and you are unholstering to leave it in your car, and the cop sees you pull out a weapon, its probably "go" time for him.

 

[Episcopus]

There is no implied consent with regards to vehicle searches. Absent probable cause for a crime, an officer must specifically ask for consent to search your vehicle. Disarming a motorist and performing a search are 2 separate things.

Basically, anything in plain view within the passenger compartment of the vehicle can be confiscated and used as evidence of a crime. Anything NOT in plain view would have to be found during a search, either by consent or probable cause. You don't have to consent to a search, and personally, I wouldn't. In my experience, officers rarely ask for consent to search random vehicles that are stopped for traffic violations.

Good response

 

[dclaarjr]

In Ohio we must notify when we are stopped. If the LEO wishes to disarm us, he can do so. In this case he removes the handgun from our person. He does not have the right to search our vehicle. He must still show probable cause, and obtain a warrant unless we give permission.

I do not agree with having to notify and letting the LEO disarm us, but we have to live with it.My biggest concern with having a LEO disarm someone in a traffic stop is a NG when he is removing the handgun. I have been told a lot of nightmare stories where the CHL holder was swept with his own loaded gun.

 

[agentl074]

There is no implied consent with regards to vehicle searches. Absent probable cause for a crime, an officer must specifically ask for consent to search your vehicle. Disarming a motorist and performing a search are 2 separate things.

Basically, anything in plain view within the passenger compartment of the vehicle can be confiscated and used as evidence of a crime. Anything NOT in plain view would have to be found during a search, either by consent or probable cause. You don't have to consent to a search, and personally, I wouldn't. In my experience, officers rarely ask for consent to search random vehicles that are stopped for traffic violations.

Yup - if they have to ask you for consent to search - they do not have PC. Ofcourse there are situations where it would be good to consent to search:

An example of U.S. controlled property that extends behind the exclusive jurisdiction (gate):
It would be best to consent to the search when asked by the Military LEO even though it is not mandatory until you enter the installation.

They could always search afterwards if they are suspicious - but it always made me think that the person has nothing to hide if they allow me to search.

 

[quiggly]

An example of U.S. controlled property that extends behind the exclusive jurisdiction (gate):
It would be best to consent to the search when asked by the Military LEO even though it is not mandatory until you enter the installation.

Holy crap I would think this is the last place that I would consent to a search if I was carrying. I would just opt to turn around and leave at that time.

If you consent and are caught carrying, then you are in DEEP. I would just politely say, oops I forgot something, and ask for permission to back the hell off federal property before going through the gates. You are still on federal property usually before going through the gate. NSWC comes to mind when I saw them draw on someone that made a mistake at the gate. Several years ago mind you but still sticks in my mind.

 

[dburkhead]

Holy crap I would think this is the last place that I would consent to a search if I was carrying. I would just opt to turn around and leave at that time.

If you consent and are caught carrying, then you are in DEEP. I would just politely say, oops I forgot something, and ask for permission to back the hell off federal property before going through the gates. You are still on federal property usually before going through the gate. NSWC comes to mind when I saw them draw on someone that made a mistake at the gate. Several years ago mind you but still sticks in my mind.

 

[Seancass]

I have heard a dirty rumor that when they ask to search your vehicle is is perfectly legal to decline. However, you declining gives them probable cause to search your vehicle, so they can do it anyways.

Is there any truth in this???
oh, and this isn't strictly gun related, just in general.

 

[dburkhead]

I have heard a dirty rumor that when they ask to search your vehicle is is perfectly legal to decline. However, you declining gives them probable cause to search your vehicle, so they can do it anyways.

Is there any truth in this???
oh, and this isn't strictly gun related, just in general.

False. There are court cases explicitly on that issue.

 

[4sarge]

I have heard a dirty rumor that when they ask to search your vehicle is is perfectly legal to decline. However, you declining gives them probable cause to search your vehicle, so they can do it anyways.

Is there any truth in this???
oh, and this isn't strictly gun related, just in general.

Read this Post

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...-7_exceptions_to_the_search_warrant_rule.html

 

[quiggly]

https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/politics_laws_and_2nd_amendment/12028-7_exceptions_to_the_search_warrant_rule.html[/URL]

I found this to be very interesting as it relates to kids.

Age is also considered in legally defining consent. A child can’t give consent, so you must know the age a person is considered to be a child in your state. Likewise, a parent may consent to the search of a child’s room where no rent is paid, but a hotel manager or landlord may not provide legal consent to search unless the room or apartment is abandoned.

Does this mean that kids who are old enough to drive, but not 18 yet, cannot legally give consent to search a vehicle they are driving? This could really be a quagmire for officers.

 

[DocGlock86]

This is a very honest question.
Do you all have pot or something in your car that you would be afraid of them finding or are LEO's that crooked that they will make up some BS to put you in cuffs?
My thinking is if I have nothing to hide I have nothing to worry about. But I've never had a bad run in with a LEO.

 

[dburkhead]

This is a very honest question.
Do you all have pot or something in your car that you would be afraid of them finding or are LEO's that crooked that they will make up some BS to put you in cuffs?
My thinking is if I have nothing to hide I have nothing to worry about. But I've never had a bad run in with a LEO.

It's not about whether we have "something to hide" or not. It's about rights. The 4th amendment needs to be guarded every bit as much as the others:

"If a man neglects to enforce his rights, he cannot complain if, after a while, the law follows his example."
Oliver Wendell Holmes.

 

[DocGlock86]

It's not about whether we have "something to hide" or not. It's about rights. The 4th amendment needs to be guarded every bit as much as the others:

"If a man neglects to enforce his rights, he cannot complain if, after a while, the law follows his example."
Oliver Wendell Holmes.

Point taken.

 

[MinuteManMike]

I completely agree, dburkhead.

If I'm pulled over, unless I have reason to think they're going to search my person (without my consent) I'm not saying a thing about my pistol. It ain't their business. I'm not pulling it so it's not an issue.

If it comes to them preparing to search me, I will say "in my wallet there is a carry permit and I am doing so right now. It is (wherever). How do YOU wish to proceed?"

At this point, I would hope any cop would know I'm not much less likely to be trying to hurt him.

Here's a few videos on YouTube from the ACLU & others about your rights, including during a traffic stop. It's all well worth watching.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqMjMPlXzdA]YouTube - BUSTED: The Citizen's Guide to Surviving Police Encounters[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik]YouTube - Don't Talk to Cops, Part 1[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE]YouTube - Don't Talk to Cops, Part 2[/ame]

 

[agentl074]

Holy crap I would think this is the last place that I would consent to a search if I was carrying. I would just opt to turn around and leave at that time.

If you consent and are caught carrying, then you are in DEEP. I would just politely say, oops I forgot something, and ask for permission to back the hell off federal property before going through the gates. You are still on federal property usually before going through the gate. NSWC comes to mind when I saw them draw on someone that made a mistake at the gate. Several years ago mind you but still sticks in my mind.

Oh lol well I didnt think about that, but I always knew not to bring a firearm on base unless it was issued - or immediatly enroute to the armory to get it registerd and stored.

Now I carred M4's, M9's, 203's and M240's on base all the time - when I was on duty and in those nice blue SUV's with the light bars on top .