Surviving a traffic stop

[mkm]

Michael you are WRONG, WRONG, WRONG!

I will never inform unless I have to by law. Never burden a police officer with more information than he needs to do his job. I have to inform by law here in NC, but anywhere else, I will not inform.

http://ncguns.blogspot.com/2011/11/michael-you-are-wrong-wrong-wrong.html

While I understand where you are coming from and the need to protect your rights, I respectfully disagree with never informing unless you have to by law.  If the gun is completely out of sight, not near anything you need to reach for, and it's not required by law to inform the officer, then there isn't much reason for mentioning the gun.

However, if it is possible to see it at all or near where you need to reach for documents, I think it's a better idea to infrom the officer.  What is more likely to result in an overreaction by the officer:  politely informing him when he first approaches or not telling him and letting him see it as you reach over it for your drivers license?

It's also more likely to keep you legal if you inform.  I know it's our responsibility to know the laws wherever we go; but, as the Denver example above demonstrates, there are subtle differences everywhere you go.

[JLawson]

http://ncguns.blogspot.com/2011/11/michael-you-are-wrong-wrong-wrong.html

I watched the "Busted" video embedded in this blog post and have a few comments.  First, I agree 110% that everyone should know what their constitutional rights are and how to properly exercise them.  This video, however, sends the wrong message.  While being very informative about our rights and their application, it seems to suggest that the best use of our rights is as tools to conceal illegal activity.  In the first scenario, we learn about self-incrimination and consent so that we can prevent our arrest for possessing illegal drugs.  In another scenario, we learn about the sanctity of our homes and the importance of search warrants so that we can prevent our arrest, again, for the possession of illegal drugs and their distribution.  There seems to be a pattern here that goes beyond knowing one's rights to prevent an abuse of power.

I may be just an old "stick in the mud" but my advice would go something like this... don't break the frickin' law to begin with.  Don't have illegal drugs in your pockets, your backpack, your car, or your house.  Don't throw crazy-a$$ parties that are going to draw anyone's attention.  Don't drive too fast or recklessly and make sure headlights, stop lights, and turn signals are working - don't give the police any reason to pull you over.  Tell the truth.  Know and obey the laws where you live or where you are travelling.

I seem to remember something about an ounce of prevention...

[mkm]

I watched the "Busted" video embedded in this blog post and have a few comments.  First, I agree 110% that everyone should know what their constitutional rights are and how to properly exercise them.  This video, however, sends the wrong message.  While being very informative about our rights and their application, it seems to suggest that the best use of our rights is as tools to conceal illegal activity.  In the first scenario, we learn about self-incrimination and consent so that we can prevent our arrest for possessing illegal drugs.  In another scenario, we learn about the sanctity of our homes and the importance of search warrants so that we can prevent our arrest, again, for the possession of illegal drugs and their distribution.  There seems to be a pattern here that goes beyond knowing one's rights to prevent an abuse of power.

I may be just an old "stick in the mud" but my advice would go something like this... don't break the frickin' law to begin with.  Don't have illegal drugs in your pockets, your backpack, your car, or your house.  Don't throw crazy-a$$ parties that are going to draw anyone's attention.  Don't drive too fast or recklessly and make sure headlights, stop lights, and turn signals are working - don't give the police any reason to pull you over.  Tell the truth.  Know and obey the laws where you live or where you are travelling.

I seem to remember something about an ounce of prevention...

I didn't watch the video; so, I'll take your word for it.  If it is using examples of hiding drugs from the law, that isn't something I would want to associate with legal carry of a firearm.  Those are oposite ends of the spectrum.

As to the second half of your post, I agree 100%.

[tombogan03884]

JLawson,  While you may not approve of the specific circumstances the facts are still accurate.
Another thing to keep in mind is that the "War on Drugs" is a failed, unneeded money pit begun purely as a jobs program for laid off Prohibition agents that has been consistently used as a smoke screen for the erosion of Constitutional rights and protections.
Which is why the drug scenarios are used. They offer so many examples of offialdom acting badly.

[Pathfinder]

I live in a state (ND) where you are not required to tell an officer during a stop if you are carrying or not. Assuming a routine traffic stop, I asked a County Deputy - in front of 2 Sgts. and a Captain - what would he do if a driver informed him the driver had a CCW and was carrying. His response - cuff the driver "for the officer's safety".

Granted, this was a twerp with the obligatory "operator" haircut and Oakley Razorblades (or whatever passes for "operator" tech in eye wear these days), but he was also a Field Training Officer for the County. He kinda glared at me when I then asked why he was so scared of a law-abiding citizen who informed him. He replied with "vigor" that he was not afraid, repeated that he would cuff the driver, and it was all for officer safety.

All of the other officers - including the brass - intoned zombie-like "It's all about officer safety".

So, no, I will not inform unless required to by law.

[Sponsor]

[JLawson]

JLawson,  While you may not approve of the specific circumstances the facts are still accurate.
Another thing to keep in mind is that the "War on Drugs" is a failed, unneeded money pit begun purely as a jobs program for laid off Prohibition agents that has been consistently used as a smoke screen for the erosion of Constitutional rights and protections.
Which is why the drug scenarios are used. They offer so many examples of offialdom acting badly.

Yes Sir, Mr. Bogan, I agree that the "War On Drugs" is a failure.  Lives have been lost and money wasted on an unbelievable scale.  My concern is that this video, which appears to be marketed to a young demographic, carries with its primary message an undertone of irreverence and disregard for those laws one deems to be wrong-minded.  The young and "unformed" in our culture have enough difficulties discerning right from wrong as it is.  I would hope that we could teach them to obey all laws - even the ones with which they don't agree.  Fight to change the law... but obey it until it is changed.

[robheath]

As a former LEO I agree with everything the artical says.

[fightingquaker13]

Yes Sir, Mr. Bogan, I agree that the "War On Drugs" is a failure.  Lives have been lost and money wasted on an unbelievable scale.  My concern is that this video, which appears to be marketed to a young demographic, carries with its primary message an undertone of irreverence and disregard for those laws one deems to be wrong-minded.  The young and "unformed" in our culture have enough difficulties discerning right from wrong as it is.  I would hope that we could teach them to obey all laws - even the ones with which they don't agree.   Fight to change the law... but obey it until it is changed.

Well Mr Lawson, I intend to piss you off. (Let me first say welcome aboard and I hope you keep posting because its all in good fun here, but sir, I intend to rip you a new one. Purely for your own good dontcha know ).

Oh yes, back to my point, solicitude for the newbie aside. I, much to your horror I presume, used to teach poli sci at the University of Texas. I taught intro to American and Texas government and Con Law. Essentially I was teaching the "young and uninformed". I taught them a lot of things, mostly facts that I hope they would remember, lessons about the founders and our philosophy of government which I pray they will remember, and then I taught them a few home truths about life. Among the latter, I stressed that the relationship between free citizens and the state and its agents, was one of master and servant.  Its the same relationship that exists between a dictatorship and its subjects. The difference being that in a free republic we are the masters, and the state and its employees are our servants, not the other way around. I explained that the state didn't see it that way, and unless we reminded them of this they might get to taking our compliance for granted. They would forget that they were working for us, not the other way around. Therefore, I told my students, they should always insist on exercising their rights because rights, like muscles, disappear if not used.

So I told them that in dealing with officialdom it was always a good and proper thing to be polite and not to lose one's temper, as that would accomplish nothing. HOWEVER, I did stress that the most important words they could learn when dealing with the police were "No sir".
"May I search your car"?
"No Sir".
"May I come in"?
"No sir".
"Would you let me look around"?
"No sir".

If "no Sir" didn't work, I told them to use five more. "Do you have a warrant"?
Failing that they were to use the words "I want a lawyer" and say nothing more.

I guess the reason I am laying into you is that you sound like an authoritarian. Someone who thinks that we should just obey unless and until someone in authority says we don't have to. Me? I'm a libertarian, and quite frankly I don't understand that authoritarian attitude. I believe that all authority should be questioned, and obeyed only if it is necessary. Note, I'm not an anarchist, I do believe in the law. I just think that we should be teaching the young and impressionable to question as a first reflex and obey as a second one. What's going to chap your ass is that over my years at UT I used your tax dollars to teach that very Jeffersonian argument to a few thousand of your neighbor's kids. Upside is that they all knew that I was NRA.
FQ13 who again welcomes you aboard.

[tombogan03884]

Then here's one you should be more comfortable with, It's a Law Profesor and a Baltimore Cop.
It's called, "Never talk to the Cops"

[ronlarimer]

As a former LEO I agree with everything the artical says.

That is what I was going for.  Thanks!