re: Why Must You Tell A Cop If You Have A Gun In The Car? Isn't A Search Warrant Required?

“ Where, you going, work. Where do you work, XXX.” (quote omg).

Those questions are to create a reactionary base line of honest interaction, kinda like the simple questions first asked in a lie detector test. So that the officer can gauge the potential threat level. Honest people should have no problem answering said questions. Of course if one views the ‘authorities’ as unjust, then the problem is much more complicated and increasingly dangerous than a traffic stop.

I know that is says to disclose that I have a firearm in my possession/vehicle when approached by an officer on my CC permit. Also, I do not have the right to arrest or detain someone, which kinda sucks.

I carry on my two o clock. Where my wallet is. I pull my wallet out immediately before the officer is ever at my window.

I hand him my DL and CL and tell him I am carrying on my 2 o'clock. Or if I am not carrying that day, I state that as well.

quote:

---

“ Where, you going, work. Where do you work, XXX.” (quote omg).

Those questions are to create a reactionary base line of honest interaction, kinda like the simple questions first asked in a lie detector test. So that the officer can gauge the potential threat level. Honest people should have no problem answering said questions. Of course if one views the ‘authorities’ as unjust, then the problem is much more complicated and increasingly dangerous than a traffic stop.

---

So you think it's perfectly reasonable for the government to demand to know where we're going and where we work.

quote:

---

Why Must You Tell A Cop If You Have A Gun In The Car?

---

Depends upon how your State laws are written.

It’s one of those exceptions made years ago as a reasonable precaution for officer safety…

Traffic stop alone is a basis to ask the question.

If you have a CHP/CCP and are carrying, you are required by law to advise the LEO if you are interacting with them in their LEO capacity (as opposed to standing next to each other in a check out line).

quote:

---

It’s legal for a cop to order you out of a car.

---

During a traffic stop.

But not if you're just sitting on the side of the road legally parked and there is no probable cause for them to suspect you of anything.

quote:

---

Honest people should have no problem answering said questions.

---

bullshite.

Let's say a robbery was just committed two blocks away and the perp drove away in the same kind and color of car you're driving (just like beaux duke's story above). Let's say that where you tell them you originally are coming from takes you generally past the scene of the crime. Further, let's say you skip telling them that you detoured for one block even closer to the crime scene and pulled in at the post office mail drop box because you forgot (it didn't even require you to get out of the car).

Now let's say that they find out that you omitted that stop and they interpret that omission as a lie. They "like" you for this crime—your car fits the exact description (of course, it's also the same description as every 6th car on the road, but they're cops, so they don't see it that way), and you fit the general description (which is only "white male, 180-220 lbs, light hair, wearing kahki pants"), so that together with your "lie" leads them to conclude that you are their main suspect in this crime.

They also decide that it provides probable cause to search your car, in which they find a bag from the store that was robbed (which you got last week when you stopped there to get a candy bar and a Coke, like you do almost every week since it's on your way home...but again, they're cops, so...). Now they are sure it was you, and the fact that you have $450 in cash in your wallet when $375 was stolen from the store, and the fact that you have it in your wallet is because you won some games of pool betting against strangers the night before doesn't sway them at all.

Let's say they have a "witness" who identifies you as the person in the store. Never mind that the "witness" only saw the perp from behind as he ran out the door. Now let's say it goes all the way to trial. Now you're on the stand trying to explain why you "lied" to the cops. And even if it doesn't go to trial, you could still lose your job over being arrested for it and you might incur serious legal expenses to defend yourself.

If you had just kept your mouth shut and told them, "Officer, I appreciate and respect the job that you do and will be gladly complying with every lawful order you give me during this traffic stop, but I will be invoking my 5th amendment right to remain silent at this time," they wouldn't have had the opportunity for all of that.

Sound crazy? Look up Kirk Bloodsworth. Incorrect witness identification sent that guy to death row (DNA exonerated him after nine years inside).

Or Leonard Mack. Same thing, witness misidentification. It took 47 years for DNA to clear him.

How about Philando Castile? That guy was pulled over for a minor traffic violation and the officer "became suspicious" because—just like my hypothetical above, there was a robbery that the officer thought he matched up for. He ended up being shot in the incident even though he wasn't the robber.

The moral of the story, do not talk to the po-lice without your attorney present. Not even about where you are coming from or going, or the weather, or how the Tigers are doing on Saturday. There is a reason that you have a right to remain silent and there is a reason that your Miranda rights contain the phrase, "Anything you say can and will be used against you," because it's true.