VA: might get illegally shot by PD for possessing license to carry

"Oddly enough, Fairfax doesn't allow open carry, yet here in southern VA we do. "

Fairfax has absolutely no say in the matter of open carry.

State law preempts any Fairfax City or County laws on the matter.

Spoot. Two others beat me to that tidbit.
 
Slugthrower said:
See post #18.
Click to expand...

Reading post 18 in light of the previous post by Ivan (number 15) it looks to me as if he is saying he would hand over his permit card and not his gun as a way of letting the officer know he carries a gun.

He goes on to say that he wouldn't WANT the officer handling his gun, and I later explained that I would not either, and said why, but I also said I would definitely hand it over if asked. Ivan did not seem to me to be saying that he would defy such an order. Maybe he'll come along and clarify his meaning.

Meanwhile, do you have other examples? Your post did say "some of the responses" in the plural.
 
During a routine traffic stop, I would hand over my CCP PERMIT CARD and make the officer aware of the gun and its location. I wouldn't hand it over unsolicited, but if he asked for it, I would let him have it for that temporary time we are stopped on the side of the road.

I know some things are not the law here in Colorado, like notifying him of my premit or the gun. But, no need to get shot due to lack of common courtesy and sense.

I wouldn't want to "HAND" him the gun myself though. If he asked for the weapon, I would do the following: If it was on me, I would ask if I could get out and he could take it off me. If it was in my car, I would ask if I could get out and he could get the gun out of the car himself. Last thing I want to do is go waving a loaded, cocked & ready to go gun around in front of a policeman. I know they have a certain sense of nervousness with each encounter they have. It is just their job and I don't mind making them a bit more at ease, while saving myself from taking a bullet.

Being courteous is not going to make him go to his superiors and complain about the laws, possibly moving slowly up the chain. Being belligerent and arguing with the cop such as the example in this story will make him go complain to his superiors.
 
I think the officer was out of line, but I personally have always notified when pulled over because it seems like a good idea. If a LEO spots a gun he is probably going to assume the worst, not the best. I don't think I'll get shot, but I do think I'm going to be treated a lot differently.

I was pulled over on a traffic stop last night. I had a 1911 IWB and a P2000sk in a tool bag on the passenger seat. The first thing I did was to inform the officer I was licensed and carrying. He said, "Oh, okay," and asked for my DL, CCW card, and proof of insurance. He then asked why I was driving so fast, and I told him, "Stupid reason, I'm late for work." He then asked for the 1911, which I handed him grip first. He unloaded it, handed me the mag and chamber round, and then set the gun on the roof of my car. The same procedure was repeated for the HK. The officer was exremely polite. He even half-joked when he asked for the first one, "I assume since you told me about it your not going to shoot me," and admired my choice in firearms. He then said, "I don't like to mess with working people, and you obviously know your guns, so I'm probably going to let you go. I'm going back to my car to run your license and I'll be done as quickly as possible."

He was true to his word and let me go with a note saying I was late to work because I had been stopped, and a "slow your ass down."

I had a similar experience with an officer of another department about a year ago. I notified him as well and he disarmed me in the same way before going back to his car to run my license.

Anyway, all I'm saying is that it's probably better to avoid an ******* by being polite enough up front to inform a LEO (who has to worry about getting shot every day) that you are armed. It shows respect for his/her position as well as avoids any nasty surprises on the officers part (if they were to spot the gun on you before knowing you were legally carrying, as opposed to finding out you have a CCW).
 
Hmmm

The Officer is wrong because he said this first "had you gotten out of the car you would have been shot... Without a doubt.

I don't think he should be roasted out over a fire and stripped naked. You never know this guy might be a amazing cop 99% of the time. Saved people from all sorts of things and done a outstanding job.
That day he didn't make the best choice of words and got caught. Give the man training on the subject. Let him make restitution by having to train the rest of his department in his off time and making a apology to the guy that taped all this and let him go on about his job.

What about all the tapes of LEO's doing there jobs everyday perfectly or being extremly tolerant of all the a**holes they have to deal with every day and the dangers that are always in there minds.

Also if you notice the officer never yells, he doesn't lose it. I think he realizes in the middle of the conversation he probally shouldn't have said what he said and changes "without a doubt" to "Could have"
 
Last edited:
Question: If the person stopped had been an off-duty LEO carrying concealed & the stopping officer was aware of this, would he have threatened to shoot him for getting out of the car?...
Tomac
 
Just to be a troublemaker let me question the necessity of officer's actions in handling and unloading the guns and placing them on top of the vehicle in public view...
Given that the driver has a CCW and notified the officer promptly and was civil in his tone and demeanor:
1. The driver has a legal and licensed right to have a weapon the same as the officer has a legal and licensed right to have weapon...
2. That the officer is enforcing traffic regulations does not change the status of either of them in respect to their licensed weapons...

I submit that if I were a judge and there came an issue over the handling and exposure of the gun(s) in public I would not be ruling in favor of the officer...

denny
 
Just to be a troublemaker let me question the necessity of officer's actions in handling and unloading the guns and placing them on top of the vehicle in public view...
Given that the driver has a CCW and notified the officer promptly and was civil in his tone and demeanor:
1. The driver has a legal and licensed right to have a weapon the same as the officer has a legal and licensed right to have weapon...
2. That the officer is enforcing traffic regulations does not change the status of either of them in respect to their licensed weapons...

I submit that if I were a judge and there came an issue over the handling and exposure of the gun(s) in public I would not be ruling in favor of the officer...

denny
Click to expand...

I have a legal right to have them, but he also has a legal right to disarm me for his own safety. This is a result of me being under arrest at the point on being stopped.
 
This is not that complicated.

Police are trained to, and have a duty to, not use deadly force unless life or limb of themselves or another is threatened. This means an aggressive posture with a weapon - a *viewed* weapon.

This officer freely admitted that he would surely and gladly use deadly force in direct contravention of his training - the mere act of exiting a vehicle without ANY weapon being brandished whatsoever, let alone a gun. That's a plan to commit a voluntary, intentional illegal killing.

Period.

End of story.

No two ways about it.

This officer should be reprimanded and required to go back and repeat the force continuum portion of the academy.
 
He unloaded it, handed me the mag and chamber round, and then set the gun on the roof of my car.
Click to expand...

Damn, I'm glad I live in a free state! I'd be pissed at that. That could scratch the finish on my roof!

Here, they don't ask, they don't care, you don't need to tell them. I feel sorry for all you people who live in states where trusting legal CCW's isn't an inherent thing. The people they should be worrying about do not have licenses anyway!
 
Let me see if I have this straight. Citizens tries to do the right thing and gets a ccw permit. Citizen then attempts to stay within "the Law" and not divulge he's carrying. The cop would not have known he was carrying if not for the ccw permit. Cop gets anxious because now he knows that they guy is carrying. Situation goes downhill because cop is anxious and citizen was (presumably) having a bad day and came across as anything other than an obsequious (sp?) serf.

I agree the cop has a right to try to live until the end of his shift. I also believe that the citizen who is trying to do the right thing should get uh...respect for his effort to be a law abiding citizen. Being clean enough to even get a ccw should elevate one's status to respectable citizen. This time it did not, why? Why did this potentially friendly situation degrade into feelings of rightious indignation (by both actors)?

Why the ccw permit of course. It was the source of the cops trepidation, and the source of the citizens lawful indignation. It worked against both the cop and the citizen.

How did having a ccw permit benefit anyone in this incident? It didn't benefit the cop, it made him nervous and fearful. It didn't benefit the citizen, it put him on the wrong side of the cops mind. NOT AT ALL WHAT THE PERMITS ARE SUPPOSED TO DO IN THE FIRST PLACE!

So why even have them? It puts you on the naughty list. When that cop reads his computer after running your plates it will not say "Lawful CCW please treat this man with respect" it will say "Man with Gun Man with Gun" and the citizen will have a worse day for trying to do the right thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top