Can I see your receipt?

For proof of ownership and insurance reasons I take a photo of my guns next to a tattoo on my arm. It proves it has been in my possession before and that it belongs to me. I keep a copy on my computer, and on a flash drive I always keep on me.
 
I'd say that I might still have the receipt and then I'd ask to see his receipt for his gun.


I have a BIL that an L.A. LEO and know other officers too. I have the upmost respect for them but I'm not a pinata either.


I once had an officer ask me "do you have a problem understanding english?" when I asked him to repeat what he said. With the traffic noise I couldnt understand him.

Without bring race into it... I speak perfect american and neither of us had a problem hearing each other except for when traffic went by.

He was just being a tool.

My reply to him was .... I cant hear you because of the traffic noise.. if we can go to that parking lot you'll be safer from being hit and I'll be able to hear you better.... OR ... we can just call for a supervisor and have him translate for us.

He didnt say much after that and was a little nicer. I think he realized.

Yes, I got the ticket.
 
I think that some of you guys may be making more out of this than it deserves. I know a couple of cops and I asked them about this and they said what I thought - the officer was just looking for an answer. He didn't care if the OP had a receipt or not...what he was listening for was some sort of evasive answer. It's just an investigative tool, that's all. It's the sort of question that rattles a guy who, say, has stolen that handgun.
 
Very politely and sincerely respond as if you think he likes your gun...

..."No sir, I don't have the receipt with me....it's not for sale anyway. But if you really like it, they have them at a good price at(insert fav. LGS) for a really good price and I think they give LE discounts. I've had good luck with it as its been very reliable,accurate and shoots anything I feed it, the recoil etc. etc. ....

He'll stop you eventually with the cars zipping past getting closer and closer.:D


This question to be asked by an LEO would be ridiculous unless the LEO, after talking to the person being questioned, felt that said person:

a. has acquired the gun illegally

b. is stupid and 'windy' enough to incriminate themselves if they did acquire it illegally.
 
b. is stupid and 'windy' enough to incriminate themselves if they did acquire it illegally.
Click to expand...

According to my buddies, that's exactly what happens. Lots of nervous talk until they talk themselves into a corner.

Kind of in that vein, I got pulled over for something or other and couldn't find my proof of insurance. The officer took what I had and while he was back in his car, I went through the glove boxes and consoles, but couldn't find it. I guess he was watching me through the back window because when he came back, he chuckled and said not to worry about it - the guys who don't have insurance tend to make up a quick story and wait, but the guys who do keep trying to find it.

The long and the short of it is that it's just behavior that the police are looking at. But I like the idea of telling him that he can get a good deal on one at the LGS!
 
I think most posters are giving this cop way too much credit. IMO he's just a jerk, who dont have a clue what he's doing. As far as some reversed psychcology trick questions?...LOL I dont think he run's that deep. I think he was just being a jerk to the best of his ability... At best trying to manufacture a crime where there was non... So he could be the hero... On second thought... he's just a jerk.
 
I said:
Interesting. So in your work, you never assessed the attitude or countenance of someone you were observing?
Click to expand...

Glenn Dee said:
Zukiphile..

Nope... I never cared one way or another what a persons attitude was. ***
Click to expand...

Glenn, I think what a reader might find perplexing about your denial about observing attitudes is that the balance of your response is about how peoples' attitudes changed your response. Your anecdotes seem to support the idea that a PO may assess the attitude of a person with whom he is interacting.

It would be an extraordinary thing for him not to.
 
I have a specific box for each firearm i purchased at a gun shop; i keep the receipt in the box. If i am going to a "range" (pasture) for some target practice, the receipt should be available. If most any LEO asked to see a receipt for one of my firearms in a traffic stop, i would assume they were looking for someone in possession of stolen firearms and show them any receipts available (don't have for BP arms).

If the LEO asking were a member of the local Sheriff's Department here, i would respond that i was not absolutely certain of the location of EACH & EVERY receipt and offer to supply them at a later date (may have fallen from container or been eaten by termites). I would also offer the name of the shop from which i purchased the firearm in question and mention that the shop should have me on record as a purchasor in their "bound book" politely and without making any sudden movements that could get me shot. That department has been, in general but certainly NOT in its entirety, untrustworthy and deserving of suspicion/mistrust for my entire life.
 
Although any type of firearms registration is expressly forbidden by PA law , the PA State Police have illegally maintained a so-called 'record of sale' database for handguns sold within the state , despite Supreme Court orders to dismantle it.


§ 6111.4. Registration of firearms.

Notwithstanding any section of this chapter to the contrary, nothing in this chapter shall be construed to allow any government or law enforcement agency or any agent thereof to create, maintain or operate any registry of firearm ownership within this Commonwealth.



If you are stopped carrying a handgun and it is not in this registry , or registered to someone else , you just might have it confiscated till you can prove ownership , and even that might not be enough. This includes guns you may have inherited , or even bought legally while the resident of another state. The PSP even freely admit , this database is 'incomplete at best'.

It could lead to a long and expensive battle with you having to get a lawyer , and I think that's their agenda. Who's gonna pay thousands of dollars to get a gun worth a few hundred back.
 
Last edited:
What part of "Officer, the weapon is mine. Unless you have evidence to the contrary, there is no further need for discussion..." is so hard to wrap one's head around?

The officer can react is three ways.
Two will get his department sued.
 
Although any type of firearms registration is expressly forbidden by PA law , the PA State Police have illegally maintained a so-called 'record of sale' database for handguns sold within the state , despite Supreme Court orders to dismantle it.

If you are stopped carrying a handgun and it is not in this registry , or registered to someone else , you just might have it confiscated till you can prove ownership , and even that might not be enough. This includes guns you may have inherited , or even bought legally while the resident of another state. The PSP even freely admit , this database is 'incomplete at best'.

It could lead to a long and expensive battle with you having to get a lawyer , and I think that's their agenda. Who's gonna pay thousands of dollars to get a gun worth a few hundred back.
Click to expand...

All of that should get me and my lawyer a tidy sum. Maybe enough to purchase the custom 1911 I have been lusting for.:D
 
Zukiphile...

OK... First allow me to present my bonifides.

I spent 25 years working as a police officer, and then a detective in New York City. I have worked in every kind of neighborhood from the worst public housing to Rockafella center. I have made arrests for every crime imaginable. I have participated in all kinds of investigations, I've exicuted hundreds of warrants, I've answered every kind of call for service imagineable (even loose livestock). Hopefully this would qualify my statements in your mind.

A persons attitude has very little if any bearing on how I do my job. I treat everyone equal. Good attitude, or bad. When you treat everyone equally, people tend to react in a positive way. I dont think I'd be able to treat everyone equally if I got side tracked by their attitude. 99 9/10's% of all people want to be treated with respect, and fairness. If and when treated with respect, and fairness people tend to respond in a positive way.

Also when you dont respond to a persons attitude they soon get bored with themselves and forget what they were angry at in the first place. When your concerned with a persons attitude you become at their effect. They begin to steer your attitude, and actions. Then you become part of the problem, and not part of the soloution.

Again I did say that attitude may have little effect on me in the course of my duties. The police have in some cases some distreation. More often a person with a positive attitude would cause me to consider using whatever discretion I may have on their behalf.

Perhaps your confused with what the police actually do. The highest priority any officer has isnt to get a bad guy, or write X amount of tickets, or even to save the world. A sane police officers highest priority is to go home at the end of his tour in the same condition he came to work.

Zukiphile I hope this clears up any questions you may have. real police work is nothing like on TV... and is mostly quite boring.

Glenn Dee
 
Last edited:
I've been some kinda Cop for 34 years. IMO, the problem with some agencies and the public is that the only contact the public ever has is a contact/complaint of some sort. If you want good Cops, get involved with your local government, meet Cops every chance you get and find out what the local Police Administration is like. The more Cops are a part of their community and the more the community is a part of that Police agency the better YOUR Cops will be.
 
Glenn Dee said:
First allow me to present my bonifides.
Click to expand...

Glenn, you have my apology if you read my question as a doubt of your good faith. It wasn't.

My observation was about the logic of denying that attitude or countenance are observed in an interaction, while simultaneously noting how they affect a PO's treatment of an individual.

Glenn Dee said:
I dont think I'd be able to treat everyone equally if I got side tracked by their attitude. 99 9/10's% of all people want to be treated with respect, and fairness. If and when treated with respect, and fairness people tend to respond in a positive way.

Also when you dont respond to a persons attitude they soon get bored with themselves and forget what they were angry at in the first place. When your concerned with a persons attitude you become at their effect. They begin to steer your attitude, and actions. Then you become part of the problem, and not part of the soloution.
Click to expand...

That sounds like a very fine outlook.

Glenn Dee said:
Perhaps your confused with what the police actually do.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, it is informed by what they do. Given your experience, I know you will not claim your attitude to be universal.
 
Zukiphile...

Of course I dont claim my methods to be universal. I also take to task the Officer were discussing. I believe I called him a jerk who had no clue to what he was doing. Or perhaps he's trying to manufacture a crime where there was none for his own self agrandizement(sp). This is NOT a professional.

However I think you would be surprised at the number of Officers who allow a persons attitude effect their service. It's gonna be very low. If we let every dolt with a bad attitude get to us we'd go nuts within the first few years.

It's all about going home at the end of the tour in the same condition as you came to work.
 
A persons attitude has very little if any bearing on how I do my job. I treat everyone equal. Good attitude, or bad. When you treat everyone equally, people tend to react in a positive way. I dont think I'd be able to treat everyone equally if I got side tracked by their attitude. 99 9/10's% of all people want to be treated with respect, and fairness. If and when treated with respect, and fairness people tend to respond in a positive way.


Glenn, when you have the upper hand in a given situation that is precisely the correct attitiude.
When a situation arises that you may not have the upper hand emotions can over ride common sense and allow things to escalate.

While serving in the military I always had the upper hand and my attitude was exactly as yours. I other personal confrontations, I didn't have the confidence nor the backing of the U.S. military to reinforce my attitude so things didn't always work the way I expected them to.

Thanks for your civil service. I am originally from NY and have friends that are SP as well as local LE. It is a tough state to be in law enforcement.
 
Glenn Dee said:
Of course I dont claim my methods to be universal. I also take to task the Officer were discussing.
Click to expand...

Good. This should leave you open to the possibility that the PO in question was indeed administering an attitude test, making a request for the purpose of drawing a response he could use to evaluate the individual.

Glenn Dee said:
This is NOT a professional.
Click to expand...

You may be right. That wouldn't make the conduct uncommon or unforeseeable.

Glenn Dee said:
However I think you would be surprised at the number of Officers who allow a persons attitude effect their service.
Click to expand...

"Effect their service"? That's an odd way to express the idea that a question may be asked primarily for the purpose of evaluating the speaker.

You write as if you are battling a misconception born from television portrayals and an ignorance of police work. If attitude tests were mere fiction, "contempt of cop" wouldn't be the problemmatic situation it so frequently is. You may believe that members of the bar only see these things when they go wrong and have a skewed view (a critique that may have real merit), but these incidents are frequent enough that we can foresee them and warn against them.
 
OK Zuhkophile

Now I have a tad more insight into the conversation. Perhaps a better understanding of your point of view.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS CONTEMPT OF COP!!!!... It's a made up thing. The term is found no where in the letter of the law. I believe it's a defense attorney term used in attempt to impeach an officer in court. In fact I've had it used on me probably a few times when a defense attorney didnt have much of a defense they always seem to attack the cop or the victim. And thats OK with me... Thats what I signed on for. I understand the whole "Entitled to the best defence available" thing. And I dont mind saying that if I were on trial I'd want my lawyer to give me the best defense available.

I have been at trial and examined by some really good attorneys... Including Ron Kuby, Mel Sachs, and a few whom I cant remember their name.

Now having said that... THERE IS NO ATTITUDE TEST!... what?... and if I dont like the attitude?... then what? Manufacture a crime? Illegally detain someone?... Issue a summons for a nonexistant violation? That would make me the criminal... no? LOL Evaluate the individual? for what?... to what end? I dont know if this "attitude test" is common, uncommon, or unforseeable. I can only state my own experiences, and those where I have been present.

Again... I dont believe the officer was correct in his actions, and questioning. So I certainly dont agree that the officer was asking a question to evaluate a person.(speaker) As I said ... I dont believe this officer had a clue as to what he was doing. He may have thought he was fishing... IMO If both radio cars were parked to block the citizens exit... That Officer should have given him miranda warnings. The police dont get to make it up as they go along. There are law's, and rules. Contrary to what some may believe we dont yet live in a police state.

Contrary to popular belief... The police provide service. Police science 101. Law enforcement is only one component of the service the police provide. The police are in the service of their comunity, their local government, and their state. Though it may be hard for some to understand... sometimes the police may provide the service of protecting you from yourself.

Well... I dont think I'm battling anything. There always have been misconceptions about the police, and always will be. In every medium.

I think probably there is a lack of training, and professionalism in some departments. I truely believe that a police department is reflective of the comunity they serve.

If an officer acts improperly he can be impeached at trial. Then spend the rest of his career as a unich.

AHAAHHH! Now I remember the whole contempt of officer thing. First coined by William Kunsler... and ridden the wheels off of by his protege' Ron Kuby.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top