A "first" when stopped by DPS last night

[gigag04]

Seems standard - he lost me on the disarming but its within his right to do so so meh...

The questions might annoy you, but are great tools to lead million dollar cartel cash seizures, dope, and stolen guns. It wasn't anything personal to you, he just has a job he's trying to do to likely provide for his family. What I have found is that a little patience, perspective, and understanding from both parties can make things go much easier.

[Stripes Dude]

I have had many encounters with LEOs that put me on the defensive.

A recent one happened where we called the non-emergency police number to report vandalism in our alley. I live in Allen, northeast of Dallas, and the houses in my neighborhood are 250k-ish, so it's a decent area. Anyway, cop shows up, and immediately runs my wife's license, looking for warrants. Did he have the right to do that? We were standing in our driveway, not in or near our car. He then proceeded take the complaint down in a report, and promptly left. By the way, he looked all of 25, so I'm assuming he was just pounding his chest to show us who was in charge.

My point is, I bet we all have a personal story like this - a cop doing something that isn't 'by the book', or seems slightly outside of their authority or even the law. We can file complaints, talk to their superior, but its not likely going to change. In my case, his running of her license was questionable and made him look like a fool (we were the victim) but following up on it would have ensured anytime I left the neighborhood I would get pulled over for something. It's not right, it's not ok, but sometimes it's better to just move on. I'd love to push back when these things happen - but they can make your life miserable and sometimes it isn't worth it.

At some point, these bullies with badges will take it one step too far and get their wings clipped. Then you'll see them riding segways through your local mall.

[VMI77]

Seems standard - he lost me on the disarming but its within his right to do so so meh...

The questions might annoy you, but are great tools to lead million dollar cartel cash seizures, dope, and stolen guns. It wasn't anything personal to you, he just has a job he's trying to do to likely provide for his family. What I have found is that a little patience, perspective, and understanding from both parties can make things go much easier.

Just curious...would you lean inside a vehicle to retrieve a gun with a "suspect" 15 feet away if you hadn't searched him first....or even if you had? It seems like a pretty vulnerable position to me, and if the officer is trusting the suspect enough to believe he's got a gun in the center console, and no weapons on his person, then what's the point in retrieving the gun?

[texas-sig]

Do you actually know how many stolen weapons are registered in NCIC/TCIC, thousands. If your gun was stolen wouldn't you like it recovered? Or your vehicle? Same thing. Specially in TX with all the cartel and gang members that are living here. What you read or see in the news is not even a fraction of what actually goes on out in the streets. Public safety is first priority. Regardless.

[powerboatr]

The vehicle was not "searched" - as I understand it from what OP posted, the officer simply opened whatever compartment contained the gun, removed the gun, proceeded with stop.

actually I think the vehicle was searched
the officer gained entry to the vehicle and then opened the glove box in the center console to remove the firearm
i dont know about anyone else but if i open my truck and lean in to open the center glove box...my eyes pretty much are looking all over the place in periphery and it would be easy for me to see my wife left an empty bag of mms on the floor
did he ask to retrieve your firearm? or did you volunteer the entry by chance


weird stop
and he was fishing, to bad you didnt have a pole in the back seat

a few things that bother me about safety for both parties on late night stops
its very dangerous for him
he needs to be very diligent and protective of himself

you are an unknown quantity. so prudence would dictate maximum caution
but once you gave up the game story and are dressed as such
he may have thought DRUNK

but when you also offered up the chl, he knew you were most likely a good guy, but still we have bad pennies.

i do not see the point of the search and checking your firearm for if its stolen....that part is odd
i would feel weird to if stopped and that was brought up, i would have to think quickly
your conscience helped you make your decisions, your a good guy with nothing to hide....you feel like your not an issue.
he was probably near the end of a shift and was bored and needed to kill time

for fun call your local dps guy and ask about the stop, but name no names, just be curious

[puma guy]

When you stepped out of your vehicle you should have turned it off, took the keys with you, and locked your doors.

If he ask why did you do that just as friendly as you can say, "it is a habit."

I like this idea in theory... until I pictured it with my wife still inside ."

Only Aggies get locked inside their cars. Before all the Maroon blooded folks get upset, my dad, a die hard Aggie Class of 1940, told me that joke.

Scott, I had a "different" stop by DPS that I posted. It was different for a other reasons, but I refused to stand in front of the troopers cars when directed to do so. I think it was a rookie. She had me stand three feet in front of her while she held up my TDL and checked back and forth three times to make sure it was me. BTW it was 1 o'clock on a sunny summer day. The picture was only a year old at the time and 64 year olds don't change all that much anyway.
It's a difficult thing to do to stand for your rights when you're thinking maybe you'll get off with a warning. However, for me, I will politely refuse any searches. I would of course comply with the officer taking the weapon, but if he/she did a serial number check I would report him/her. That's an illegal search in my opinion as there was absolutely no cause whatsoever to suspect it's stolen. After experiencing my stop I will never answer any questions that are irrelavent to the stop or CHL/CCW.

I never considered refusing to stand in front of the LEO's car?? Puma could you provide the link to the above encounter?

PM Sent

[bulletslap]

At least he didn't drop your handgun.

http://texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php? ... 30#p711539" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[puma guy]

The questions might annoy you, but are great tools to lead million dollar cartel cash seizures, dope, and stolen guns. It wasn't anything personal to you, he just has a job he's trying to do to likely provide for his family. What I have found is that a little patience, perspective, and understanding from both parties can make things go much easier.

I would expect the same patience, perspective and understanding when I refuse to answer.

[CEOofEVIL]

I've had something similar happen two year ago outside of Presidio on my way to Alpine with a buddy.

We had just hit the outskirts of Presidio when we see a DPS car on the side of the road. My buddy was not speeding or driving suspiciously - he likes to avoid interaction with LE if he can. As soon as we pass the DPS car, he pulls out and lights us up. We pull over. It was a single trooper, and he pulled my buddy out of the car politely and took him back to his squad car to talk to him. He didn't bat an eyelash at me at the time, just took him back to the car and left me sitting there so I didn't have any opportunity to hand him my ID's (and yes, I was carrying at the time). Eventually he makes his way back up to passengers side of the car and asks me the open the door for him so he could talk to me. This is when things got, well, odd. I guess my buddy had told him we were on our way to Alpine to shoot at the range there, and so he asked me if we had guns in the car. As I said yes, I handed him my ID's - he just looked at me and said "oh thats ok, I don't need those" and didn't take them. I told him I had my carry weapon in a bag at my feet and he told me just to leave it there and that it was "ok". I'm still seated in the car at this point, and he asks where the other weapons are. I told him that there were in cases in the rear of the vehicle (Ford Explorer) so he states that he's going to go open the cargo door and take a look at them. I requested to get out of the vehicle to accompany him and he responded with a firm "No, please stay seated in the vehicle". All this time my buddy is still hanging out at the troopers car (he wasn't cuffed or anything, just standing by the front of the squad car). He begins to open the cases and says "I'm going to run the serial numbers on these". I asked him if he was allowed to do that, and he replied "It is a department thing. We do it when we feel it is necessary".

All of the time he was asking me questions about the types of guns, and some random questions about me. "Where are you from?", "How do you know him? (my friend)", "What are you doing down here?", "What do you do for a living?" were all asked. Never once did he ask my name. He got to the point where he uncased my Saiga 12 and said "What is this 'saiga 12 gauge? Is this a .22 or something?" and I seriously had to try not to laugh at him. At that point it was pretty clear to me that he was trying to see if the weapons actually belonged to me by determining if I was knowledgeable about them. Probably because he thought we were running guns. I responded with "No sir, that is a 12 gauge shotgun based on the AK design that is fed from detachable box magazines." and he said "Oh. That's pretty neat. Where'd you get it?", "A gun show in El Paso" and then he moved on to checking on the other guns. Aside from my buddies few handguns, that was the only weapon in the vehicle that looked like an Evil Black Rifle. In trying to be helpful (and admittedly probe him to see what he would say) I told him that I had a single shot bolt action .22 in the same case and talked to him about that, to which he volunteered "That's okay, I don't need to check that one". He then proceeded to ask me about my interest in guns and shooting and I explained to him that I was just guy who loved shooting and firearms.

With that he ceased his questioning, went back to his car for 10 or so minutes, came back, said "Thank you", closed the tailgate and walked away. He didn't check my carry gun, a G17 that was in the bag at my feet the whole time. Shortly after my buddy came back to the car and told me that we were clear to go. We drove off. I felt irritated, shocked, and sort of abused. He was pretty angry about the whole situation. He said that the DPS officer was grilling him at the car, asking similar questions to the ones he asked me but even more. He said the officer told him that he pulled us over because the rear left brake light wasn't working, which is a dubious claim at best. Why? Because my friend didn't brake at all (since we weren't speeding) until after the officer lit us up to initiate the stop. How could he possibly have seen the light was out before that? Additionally, he gave him a hard time about the registration of the vehicle, as it was originally done/under his mother-in-laws name and not his. I'm not 100% as to why the registration was in her name, but I believe it was because his In-laws had gifted the vehicle to him and their daughter prior to us being pulled over, and I'm guessing he hadn't done the registration (which was current, by the way) since then. At any rate, he was pretty seethingly upset by all of it because he felt violated and trampled for no apparent reason. The officer didn't ticket him for anything. By all rights, it seemed like it was simply a terry stop to try and bust someone for anything the DPS officer could find.

I learned many things from that. Mainly, that while many folks say just to say the whole "I do not consent to searches" line, that it is awfully hard to do when you have a DPS officer taking a somewhat imposing and threatening demeanor with you. Not that I disagree with being responsible for upholding my own civil rights, but I'm not ashamed to admit that the tactic of being bullied into giving something up was successful with me. I take issue with the approach the DPS officer used with me. As soon as he got the information he wanted, he was nothing but polite. At the time I felt sick knowing that as a responsible, law abiding citizen and supporter of the law that I was treated like a subjugated individual. I now know that regardless of how uncomfortable I might be made to feel, that I need to stand up for my rights. I've always been a 'goody two shoes' and have never been on the wrong side of the law, and I think that was actually used against me to gain my compliance. The whole "Well if you are a law abiding citizen, you don't have anything to worry about" approach. I still think it was very bizarre that he never asked my name, nor took ID from me to determine who I was, nor did he care about my CHL.

So, yes, I don't think incidents like yours and mine are at all rare. I've since heard a handful of other stories similar to ours where during a DPS stop the troopers ran checks on any firearms in the vehicle.

Do you actually know how many stolen weapons are registered in NCIC/TCIC, thousands. If your gun was stolen wouldn't you like it recovered? Or your vehicle? Same thing. Specially in TX with all the cartel and gang members that are living here. What you read or see in the news is not even a fraction of what actually goes on out in the streets. Public safety is first priority. Regardless. .

By the by, I lived in El Paso for my entire adult life until last march and I never felt like I was in any higher danger of being harmed and I live my life with heightened situational awareness. Lots of people talked trash about Northeast El Paso being unsafe (just like other 'choice' parts of town) but I never once witnessed an act of violent crime while living in different areas of town. Doesn't mean they didn't happen, of course. I treated my safety in El Paso while I was living there the same way I treat it here - anything can happen to anyone at any time. Just because El Paso is separated by a fence from one of the most dangerous cities in the world doesn't absolutely mean that it is actually less safe. EPPD, EPSO, USCBP, and all of the other LE/alphabet agencies operating in conjunction with DHS in El Paso keep it good and safe compared to what it could be. They do some hard work to keep it one of the safest cities in the US. Just my respectful opinion, however. :)

[bizarrenormality]

What part of the OP indicated/triggered this part of the law " reasonably believes it is necessary for the protection of the license holder, officer, or another individual."?

Why did the officer believe it was "necessary" to disarm the driver beyond having him get out of the car?

The officer didn't believe that. Once he got out of the vehicle at the officer's command, the gun in the center console was not on or about his person, it was not within lunge and grab distance, and the officer had no good reason to believe it was necessary for him to touch the gun inside the vehicle. He also had no reason to run the serial number except being a bully.

In summary, it was harassment. No excuses.

[C-dub]

I'm torn between my friendly good nature and my general distrust of anyone asking me questions like that when I know they aren't really interested and not wanting to be taken advantage of or having my rights violated.

In a situation like this, if I do politely refuse the search and the officer knows he is unable to go ahead and search the vehicle anyway, I pretty sure I'm going to get the ticket. So, now, I'm also torn between my desire to stand up for my rights and my desire to not get a ticket I would have little to no chance of fighting successfully.

[tobasco]

My view is that discretion is a two way street. You have the discretion to answer their general questions or not and the officer has the discretion to ticket you or not. I had a similar situation a couple of weeks ago although he didn't run my gun serial numbers or search the vehicle.

When I was in high school ('86?) coming home from my part time job I was stopped once and they asked to search the entire car so I said ok. I had nothing to hide and I was a teenager vs. two cop cars and several officers. . They searched the trunk, under the seats, everything. In the end they said my car just fit the description of some criminals they were looking for and sent me on my way without the speeding ticket I deserved.

I don't think most LEO's are Buford T. Justice types trying to throw their weight around. I think they are just gathering information and what they get from you, even if not incriminating, might help them connect the dots about something important.

Of course we could all avoid being questioned by just not breaking the law in the first place.

[A-R]

The vehicle was not "searched" - as I understand it from what OP posted, the officer simply opened whatever compartment contained the gun, removed the gun, proceeded with stop.

actually I think the vehicle was searched
the officer gained entry to the vehicle and then opened the glove box in the center console to remove the firearm
i dont know about anyone else but if i open my truck and lean in to open the center glove box...my eyes pretty much are looking all over the place in periphery and it would be easy for me to see my wife left an empty bag of mms on the floor
did he ask to retrieve your firearm? or did you volunteer the entry by chance

LEO doesn't need to ask to disarm a CHL and temporarily hold onto their handgun during a lawful stop. LEOs have the authority to do this without asking for consent. To do so, they must articulate the reasonable need, but this doesn't have to be articulated to the CHL holder directly (it would need to be articulated in a report, and perhaps later - if feathers were ruffled enough to take further action - to superiors, judges, etc.) ... but we DON'T KNOW what the trooper may have sensed to articulate the need to disarm the OP.

Government Code 411.207. AUTHORITY OF PEACE OFFICER TO DISARM. (a) A peace officer who is acting in the lawful discharge of the officer's official duties may disarm a license holder at any time the officer reasonably believes it is necessary for the protection of the license holder, officer, or another individual. The peace officer shall return the handgun to the license holder before discharging the license holder from the scene if the officer determines that the license holder is not a threat to the officer, license holder, or another individual and if the license holder has not violated any provision of this subchapter or committed any other violation that results in the arrest of the license holder.

Any further SEARCH of the vehicle interior and the running of the serial number is a much grayer area. But anyone who thinks a LEO in Texas needs your permission to disarm you should freshen up on their understanding of CHL law.

[srothstein]

1. It's not a fishing expedition, the Texas statute gives LEOs clear authority to disarm a CHL

I disagree. The questions were a fishing expedition and had nothing to do with the officer's authority to disarm.

2. Armed and carrying are clearly defined in Texas law as "on or about" a person, in other words, "within reach" and by case law as including the "lunge area" of vehicles even when subject is temporarily outside the vehicle. It would be highly dangerous for an officer to obtain weapon from inside vehicle by reaching in while subject is still inside - thus, remove subject, then remove weapon (this is all of course dependent on officer having justification to do this in first place - a grey area)

Citation for case law:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_v._Ohio#section_5" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

n Michigan v. Long, 463 U.S. 1032 (1983), the Supreme Court ruled that car compartments could be constitutionally searched if an officer had reasonable suspicion that the suspect is armed and dangerous. Thus the compartments are viewed as an extension of the suspect's person. This is known as "frisking the lunge area," as an officer may protect himself by searching any areas the suspect could grab a weapon from

I also disagree with this point, as the case law has since changed. In 2009, in Arizona v. Gant, the SCOTUS ruled that once a person had been removed from the vehicle, there was no longer any legal authority for the police to reenter the car. That case did include the suspect being secured in the patrol car, so it is not exactly on point. But the inside of the car is not generally considered the lunge area when a person is outside the car. In some cars, even under Long, the whole passenger compartment was not friskable if the car was large enough that the driver could not reach the area.

As of right now, I think the disarmed question is a gray area under the law. If the gun is in the car and the person is not, it is certainly arguable that the person has been disarmed. If the car is locked at the same time, as previously suggested, it would almost definitely not be in the lunge area and the person would be considered disarmed. The Gant case specifically allowed for a search if the person could still go for the gun, so without locking the car might not be to gray but is arguable (the disarmed law being different from allowing a search and going in to the car to get the gun to run the serial number is a search, not a safety of the officer question).

Now, having said that I think the cop was wrong and fishing, I will repeat my advice that the side of the street is not the place to argue with the officer, or even question the law. You will not win those arguments and will not enjoy the results. The final result of the OP's stop shows why there are other tactical considerations to consider. He left with a warning and a weird story to tell. That is not a bad result and I certainly cannot fault him. I would not have faulted him if he had politely declined to answer any questions either, nor would I fault him if he had locked the car and declined to give the officer permission to search. All of those are just standing on your rights.

If you do lock the car and the officer asks for the keys, clearly state that you do not give consent for the search and are handing him the keys simply to obey his orders. Anything else would come under that caution about not arguing with officers on the side of the street.

[carlson1]

If you do lock the car and the officer asks for the keys, clearly state that you do not give consent for the search and are handing him the keys simply to obey his orders. Anything else would come under that caution about not arguing with officers on the side of the street.

Excellent Advice.