Md CCW holders and AR pistols

[Stoveman]

while hiring a lawyer to defend yourself against a possible lying to the cops charge.

not worth the hassle to me just to prove a point.

But YMMV.

How is "nothing illegal" lying to the cops?

 

[Schipperke]

Well this is interesting.. "IF ASKED"

 

[Stoveman]

Do you have a cite to a MD Statute?

 

[Blaster229]

How is "nothing illegal" lying to the cops?

That doesn't answer the question. He didn't ask if you are carrying anything illegal.

"Do you have a weapon on you?"
"Nothing illegal."

Really? That's a proper answer?

 

[Stoveman]

That doesn't answer the question. He didn't ask if you are carrying anything illegal.

"Do you have a weapon on you?"
"Nothing illegal."

Really? That's a proper answer?

Yeah, I'd say that's a proper answer. What's wrong or inaccurate with it?

 

[Stoveman]

This:



Not to either of the quoted posters or anyone really, just a general observation.

I sometimes feel some people think when they are carrying that when they tell a LEO they are, they think they become part of the cool kids club or will be looked at as a "good guy/gal with a gun" or the like. This is far from the truth. Not to all LEO, however to many , your first name just became "suspect" and it's just a matter of finding a way to justify charges at that point.

Here is a clip from an actual stop in Maryland:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/rlemedia/4203.mp3

10-32 means man with a gun in cop code. I think this LEO saying ("suspect") is carrying and he isn't even a cop is kind of telling how she felt about a non-LEO carrying. Not all but most other LEO (10 of them?) encountered regarding this stop put off the same vibe.

I'm far from anti-LEO, however as a very general statement that I think applies across the country, coming from the top brass, is that their mission has changed from helping people to what can we charge a person with.

There are some very fine men and women wearing the badge but their marching orders still come from the top so think very long and very hard about how the top feels about non-LEO carrying in Maryland (remember, the stroke of a pen could make self defense quality as a G&S in the time it took you to read this post) before you admit to carrying to a LEO.

Parting thought and most won't believe it but there are some good LEO at the MSP LD that have stood up for what was right in the face of peers AND superiors. Most would be shocked at their names and ranks. There are even a few even higher up the chain that we all should be honored they "protect and serve" as well. They all aren't out to get you but without a doubt some are (the good LEO think those I'm speaking of are jerks as well). Benefit of the doubt, even if 100% legal and legit, will not go in your favor. Charge and let the courts figure it out is the SOP. Good luck, wish you didn't need it but reality is anyone carrying does.

And this right here is exhibit A in why you don't inform if not required. The citizen who was stopped in that audio recording went through Hell after "doing the right thing".

I was at his hearing before the HPRB when he received an unrestricted permit in large part I believe because of what he went through.

 

[knastera]

That doesn't answer the question. He didn't ask if you are carrying anything illegal.

"Do you have a weapon on you?"
"Nothing illegal."

Really? That's a proper answer?

I agree. I don't understand the oppositional attitude. If you're carrying legally, what's the big deal? Courtesy always wins the day. In my mind, informing the officer that you are armed without copping an attitude is not trying to prove that you're cool. You're contributing to that officer's safety. I don't think anyone appreciates evasive answers. To me, if someone was giving me evasive answers, I'd think that person had something to hide.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Stoveman]

I agree. I don't understand the oppositional attitude. If you're carrying legally, what's the big deal? Courtesy always wins the day. In my mind, informing the officer that you are armed without copping an attitude is not trying to prove that you're cool. You're contributing to that officer's safety. I don't think anyone appreciates evasive answers. To me, if someone was giving me evasive answers, I'd think that person had something to hide.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If a cop stops you only for having a lead foot why is he asking about firearms? I've had my share of traffic stops and never once been asked if I was carrying or had a firearm in the vehicle.

Why would I then volunteer the information and possibly suffer the same consequences as the person in the incident described above? The person who was the subject of that audio clip had a valid MD permit, was carrying within his restrictions, volunteered that info to MSP and was still cuffed and stuffed because of a "clerical" error with the MD Gun Center.

None for me, thank you....

 

[knastera]

How is "nothing illegal" lying to the cops?

It's evasive. That in itself may not be illegal, but why give the officer grounds for suspecting you? If I was an officer receiving that answer, my response would be, "do you have a firearm, yes or no?"

I'm all for Fourth Amendment protections from illegal search and seizure, but if I get taken in, I don't want it to be because my poor attitude made the officer suspicious.

There is a great Bible verse that addresses this situation, “The wicked flee when no one pursues, but the righteous are bold as a lion.”
**Proverbs‬ *28:1‬ *ESV‬‬
http://bible.com/59/pro.28.1.esv

If you have nothing to hide, why act like you do?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Stoveman]

It's evasive. That in itself may not be illegal, but why give the officer grounds for suspecting you? If I was an officer receiving that answer, my response would be, "do you have a firearm, yes or no?"

I'm all for Fourth Amendment protections from illegal search and seizure, but if I get taken in, I don't want it to be because my poor attitude made the officer suspicious.

There is a great Bible verse that addresses this situation, “The wicked flee when no one pursues, but the righteous are bold as a lion.”
**Proverbs‬ *28:1‬ *ESV‬‬
http://bible.com/59/pro.28.1.esv

If you have nothing to hide, why act like you do?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Because legally carrying is none of their damn business on a routine traffic stop.

Let me ask you this, would you consent to the search of your house if a cop stopped by to sell you tickets to the benevolent fund bingo night? If you have nothing to hide you'd invite him right in, right?

 

[knastera]

Because legally carrying is none of their damn business on a routine traffic stop.



Let me ask you this, would you consent to the search of your house if a cop stopped by to sell you tickets to the benevolent fund bingo night? If you have nothing to hide you'd invite him right in, right?

That's a poor analogy. If you are in your home, you've done nothing to warrant an officer's involvement in your life. When I am on a public road and I've done something to warrant a traffic stop, that officer is not stepping into my life without cause and is not being unreasonable in wanting to protect his or her safety. The Fourth Amendment protects you from unreasonable searches, not all searches. An officer doesn't need a warrant to search you if the officer has probable cause. Avoiding the provision of a clear answer to a simple question could be seen as probable cause. Besides, do you honestly think that an evasive answer is anything different from telling the officer that you are armed? An unarmed person will gladly tell the officer that he or she is unarmed.

Think of it this way, you see someone you don't recognize walking away from your home and you ask that person, "what are you doing by my house?" If that person answers, "nothing illegal" are you going to be convinced? I wouldn't be.

This is also why I carry USCCA insurance. If I am brought in after having done nothing wrong, I already have an attorney on retainer. I just never want to give the slightest hint that I had anything to do with my apprehension, even if that thing is giving a smart-@ssed answer.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Stoveman]

That's a poor analogy. If you are in your home, you've done nothing to warrant an officer's involvement in your life. When I am on a public road and I've done something to warrant a traffic stop, that officer is not being unreasonable in wanting to protect his or her safety. The Fourth Amendment protects you from unreasonable searches, not all searches. An officer doesn't need a warrant to search you if the officer has probable cause. Avoiding the provision of a clear answer to a simple question could be seen as probable cause. Besides, do you honestly think that an evasive answer is anything different from telling the officer that you are armed? An unarmed person will gladly tell the officer that he or she is unarmed.

Think of it this way, you see someone you don't recognize walking away from your home and you ask that person, "what are you doing by my house?" If that person answers, "nothing illegal" are you going to be convinced? I wouldn't be.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let me phrase it differently. If you called the police because your neighbors are dealing drugs and the officer comes to your door to question you about it before contacting the neighbor. The officer then asks you if you have any guns in the house. Do you offer up the info and welcome him in to see for himself?

Of course you wouldn't because the fact that you may or may not have firearms in the house has nothing to do with what you called them about. Same thing with a routine traffic stop.


ETA: Since you added to your post I will agree with you that having a good attorney on retainer is a must. Mine is in my phone contacts under G for Gun Lawyer.

However, I hope to not avail myself of their services by not offering up information I'm not required to give as in the instance described in post #64 above. YMMV

 

[knastera]

Let me phrase it differently. If you called the police because your neighbors are dealing drugs and the officer comes to your door to question you about it before contacting the neighbor. The officer then asks you if you have any guns in the house. Do you offer up the info and welcome him in to see for himself?



Of course you wouldn't because the fact that you may or may not have firearms in the house has nothing to do with what you called them about. Same thing with a routine traffic stop.

That is still a poor analogy. You are making something known as a "straw man argument." I have to have done something wrong to warrant a traffic stop. I have done nothing wrong by reporting a crime. Also, only a select number of Marylanders are allowed to transport loaded firearms. Any non-prohibited Marylander may have firearms in the home. The officer's request in your straw man argument is unreasonable and would be a clear violation of my Fourth Amendment rights.

Think of it from a risk/reward perspective. If I risk answering a straightforward question evasively, what is my potential reward for such behavior? None. If the officer really wants to hassle me, he can detain me and get a warrant. If I risk answering candidly, respectfully, and plainly, I have the potential to gain the reward of getting the officer's trust. My only risk there is if the officer is a jerk, and tries to hassle me. If I behave like a jerk, a jerky officer will find some way to legally hassle me. It is safer to improve my chances.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Stoveman]

That is still a poor analogy. You are making something known as a "straw man argument." I have to have done something wrong to warrant a traffic stop. I have done nothing wrong by reporting a crime. Also, only a select number of Marylanders are allowed to transport loaded firearms. Any non-prohibited Marylander may have firearms in the home. The officer's request in your straw man argument is unreasonable and would be a clear violation of my Fourth Amendment rights.

Think of it from a risk/reward perspective. If I risk answering a straightforward question evasively, what is my potential reward for such behavior? None. If the officer really wants to hassle me, he can detain me and get a warrant. If I risk answering candidly, respectfully, and plainly, I have the potential to gain the reward of getting the officer's trust. My only risk there is if the officer is a jerk, and tries to hassle me. If I behave like a jerk, a jerky officer will find some way to legally hassle me. It is safer to improve my chances.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Do you have a Bible or Koran in the vehicle?"

Read post #64. The person in that incident did just as you prescribe and was still cuffed and stuffed and has the legal bills to prove it. I'm sure he wished he would have simply said "No, officer, I don't know why you stopped me.", took his repair citation for a broken tail light and been about his business.


You can do what you want.

 

[knastera]

Read post #64. The person in that incident did just as you prescribe and was still cuffed and stuffed and has the legal bills to prove it.



You can do what you want.

That is why I have USCCA insurance. I'd be foolish if I didn't acknowledge the fact that there will be some jerky officers out there who will not appreciate my respect and candor. However, I believe in the vast majority of situations, I'm dealing with an officer that simply wants to get home safely that day and is a decent person who responds to respect respectfully. The odds are in my favor if I respond kindly and with respect, regardless of the quality of the officer.

A jerk will be a jerk without provocation. A jerk will be a bigger jerk with provocation.

A borderline person may respond kindly if I am kind and respectful.

If you draw up a logic table, my behaving nicely and cooperating only gets me in trouble 25% of the time whereas me being evasive gets me in trouble 75% of the time.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ironpony]

I am guessing there will be no correct answer and there is the fact that MD does not want you to have a firearm at all much less ccw.
"I have nothing illegal officer but I do have USCCA insurance, and an attorney on retainer ... am I being detained?". sarcasm

 

[knastera]

I am guessing there will be no correct answer and there is the fact that MD does not want you to have a firearm at all much less ccw.
"I have nothing illegal officer but I do have USCCA insurance, and an attorney on retainer ... am I being detained?". sarcasm

Yeah. In MD, NJ, NYC, Chicago, and CA, The Pope could get pulled over with a Super Soaker and end up in jail on weapons charges.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[knastera]

With all due respect, please read your policy. USCCA will do nothing if you weren't involved in an "act of self defense" and carrying alone isn't an act of self defense. Good reminder for all of us to review our coverages really, I'd be willing to wager most of us aren't covered nearly as well as we think we are.





https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/faq/

Thanks for the info. I just sent USCCA an email message asking for confirmation of coverage in the traffic stop scenario. In one place in the policy, it reads as you stated. In another place, it reads that it covers criminal matters in regard to the legal carrying of a firearm. I'll reply back here with their response.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Schipperke]

Because legally carrying is none of their damn business on a routine traffic stop.

Let me ask you this, would you consent to the search of your house if a cop stopped by to sell you tickets to the benevolent fund bingo night? If you have nothing to hide you'd invite him right in, right?

It is if they make it their business. You go ahead and argue to the Judiciary in this state that the question is unreasonable as if asking about a Bible in the car. That kind of logic reminds me when I was pushing back at the law in my teens.

"Do you have a Bible or Koran in the vehicle?"

Read post #64. The person in that incident did just as you prescribe and was still cuffed and stuffed and has the legal bills to prove it. I'm sure he wished he would have simply said "No, officer, I don't know why you stopped me.", took his repair citation for a broken tail light and been about his business.


You can do what you want.

The incident, did he offer it up, or was he asked? To be clear, I'll never volunteer the information in any state that has no duty to initially inform.
Every other state I can carry in legally, I would have no concern at all answering the question if asked in the affirmative if carrying. The rest of the states I can carry in are sane, it is a binary right, not conditional up for interpretation of restrictions. I think people are making a grave error, that when state's are silent on initial duty to inform, interpreting this as some "right" they do not to if asked. If the case we are pointing to, he was asked and answered honestly, I actually think his response was appropriate. Damned if you do, damned if you don't if asked. If you won't answer, and they are in the mood to search, trust me they will find probable cause. (been there) When they find the gun then, they are going to exert some pain physically and pain by the book. As bad as the person was treated for being honest, I have no doubt it would of ended much worse if he played the won't answer game, and then they find it. It is a crapshoot. The times we were asked, our answer no was sufficient. Cops are pros, if you are not going to answer directly, they have already got the answer. If I'm carrying and answer no, it will be the time they spot some vibe no matter how cool I believe to be, and start pressing me.

 

[Blaster229]

Because legally carrying is none of their damn business on a routine traffic stop.

Let me ask you this, would you consent to the search of your house if a cop stopped by to sell you tickets to the benevolent fund bingo night? If you have nothing to hide you'd invite him right in, right?

Terrible analogy. The cop is not at your house for a legal PC interaction.

But you said you've never had a cop ask you this on many traffic stops, so how can you say that you would engage in the suspicious behavior? Avoiding answering a simple yes or no question IS suspicious. So you don't trust cops.

I find it funny that you would go to a rally in Pennsylvania cheering on the police as they march by but wouldn't have the manners to answer a simple yes or no question asked by the same cops.
Contradict much?