Gun ownership probable cause to for search and seizure?

[theDoctorisIn]

The wife stating that the gun was in the in car is what prompted, and justified, the search.

Exactly what justified the stop in the first place? He said he wasn't violating any laws. The cop violated the mans 4 amendment rights and should be prosecuted for 4 counts of kidnapping and false imprisonment. He had no right to stop and hold them.

Of course. He must be telling the truth - no one ever lies about getting pulled over, right?

The rest of your post is too ridiculous to even address.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

so? was he under arrest? under on-going investigation? under suspicion of committing a crime?

what's the big problem with contradiction? husband and wife remember almost everything differently.

why the heck did the cop need to search for the gun if the guy has a lawful permit to have it? Even if there were ten times more contradictions?!?

Because un-secured guns, even legally owned ones, make cops very uncomfortable during traffic stops.

unsecured? what the heck does it mean?

he had the right to have a gun.

would it be better to have it on his belt?

Not in Maryland traveling on public roads absent a permit, or engaged in other qualifying activities, which was not the case.

Consequently the location of the firearm is irrelevant.

 

[SwimExpert]

Of course, if the driver believes his civil rights were violated, he’s at liberty to file suit in Federal court.

But until a Federal court rules otherwise, no civil rights violations have occurred.

That's question begging.

 

[SwimExpert]

Not in Maryland traveling on public roads absent a permit, or engaged in other qualifying activities, which was not the case.

Consequently the location of the firearm is irrelevant.

Again, and you continue to ignore it.....The cop had no legal authority to detain to the main in order to engage in a fishing expedition. The fact that the man owns a gun is not sufficient to suspect that he is currently transporting said gun in his vehicle in an unlawful manner.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

so? was he under arrest? under on-going investigation? under suspicion of committing a crime?

what's the big problem with contradiction? husband and wife remember almost everything differently.

why the heck did the cop need to search for the gun if the guy has a lawful permit to have it? Even if there were ten times more contradictions?!?

Because un-secured guns, even legally owned ones, make cops very uncomfortable during traffic stops.

Bullshit.
The guy was a permit holder. The incidence of permit holders shooting cops during traffic stops is, let me check, yeah zero. None. He should have seen he had a law abiding citizen and waived him on.
The whole thing came because he was a "armed men are either cops or criminals" kind of cop. I.e. an asshole and goose stepper.

Nonsense.

Again, a Florida concealed weapon license isn’t valid in Maryland.

And if you are pulled over and have a firearm anywhere in your vehicle, tell the LEO what kind, how many, and where, give him your driver’s license and CWL if you have one, and ask him how he wishes to proceed.

 

[OKTexas]

The wife stating that the gun was in the in car is what prompted, and justified, the search.

Exactly what justified the stop in the first place? He said he wasn't violating any laws. The cop violated the mans 4 amendment rights and should be prosecuted for 4 counts of kidnapping and false imprisonment. He had no right to stop and hold them.

Of course. He must be telling the truth - no one ever lies about getting pulled over, right?

The rest of your post is too ridiculous to even address.

Do you have a Concealed Handgun license?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Gun ownership probable cause to for search and seizure?

No, of course not – the notion is ridiculous.

But that’s not the issue here, the issue has nothing to do with ‘gun ownership.’

A search can be conducted, however, pursuant to reasonable suspicion, such as telling LEO there’s a gun in the car in the context of conflicting information from the driver.

Had the driver told LEO there was no gun in the SUV and had that been confirmed by the wife, the incident likely would not have happened.

Understand that no one is defending LEO’s actions, he likely violated a number of policy guidelines; but it’s inane to infer that LE is targeting gun owners for a Terry Stop simply because they own a gun, and it’s also inane to infer that some sort of civil rights ‘violation’ occurred.

 

[OKTexas]

Gun ownership probable cause to for search and seizure?

No, of course not – the notion is ridiculous.

But that’s not the issue here, the issue has nothing to do with ‘gun ownership.’

A search can be conducted, however, pursuant to reasonable suspicion, such as telling LEO there’s a gun in the car in the context of conflicting information from the driver.

Had the driver told LEO there was no gun in the SUV and had that been confirmed by the wife, the incident likely would not have happened.

Understand that no one is defending LEO’s actions, he likely violated a number of policy guidelines; but it’s inane to infer that LE is targeting gun owners for a Terry Stop simply because they own a gun, and it’s also inane to infer that some sort of civil rights ‘violation’ occurred.

A Terry stop requires a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, I don't see a justification for a stop.

 

[SmedlyButler]

He stopped the vehicle because a tag check revealed the owner of the vehicle to be a gun owner. No other reason has been suggested. Unless the State has some law permitting anyone who owns a gun to be stopped even if no criminal activity is suspected. Even then when the gun owner says it's in a safe at home that's where it should have ended. The ditsy wife opining "it might be here or it might be there" has no relevance.

 

[SwimExpert]

A search can be conducted, however, pursuant to reasonable suspicion, such as telling LEO there’s a gun in the car in the context of conflicting information from the driver.

And yet AGAIN, you ignore the fact that the cop had no justification to require the driver to step out of his vehicle, for the purpose of locating his gun.

By the time the cop asked the wife about the gun, the cop had already violated the man's 4th amendment rights. The ONLY reason he extended the scope beyond that of a standard traffic stop was because the cop found out the guy owns a gun.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Doc- Hopefully you have malpractice insurance because you're getting smoked here.

Do you realize the different type of CCW permits available and how they work?

I can wait

-Geaux

I don't really understand the question you're asking, but I do know that Maryland does not recognize CCW permits from Florida, nor from any other state.

Reciprocity

These states recognize Maryland permits: Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin
Maryland recognizes permits from: None

NRA-ILA | Maryland

True.
But what crime did the cop suspect was being committed that gave him authority to detain and search?

exactly

i think the cop ran the plates

then ran the name of the owner of the plates

discovered he had a cc

then pulled him over

i could be wrong but

this explains the long length of time the cop hoovered behind them

before pulling him over

the public records of the calls between the cop and dispatch

are one of the things requested in the public records request

 

[jon_berzerk]

None. The cop ran the license because he was out of State found out he had a CCW permit and then decided to pull him over. Then he demanded to know where the firearm was. When told it was home in a safe he got upset and so created a false claim of lies.

Further we know this was not normal nor acceptable behavior by the cop because the driver got profuse apologies all up the chain of command for that idiot cop.

Hopefully he gets fired.

Also incorrect.

Again, the wife stated there was a firearm in the car.

The man broke no laws. As evidenced AGAIN, by the fact no ticket was issued and his superiors APOLOGIZED for his behavior.

It is illegal to run the license learn he has a CCW and then pull him over to see if the firearm is on him. The incident never should have happened. The Cop had no reasonable reason to pull him over.

Again I repeat this is evidenced by the profuse apologizes issued to the driver by the cops superiors.

plus it is under investigation

from the article

(According to Kally and John (but not MTAP, which, pending investigation, could not comment),)

 

[Geaux4it]

Because un-secured guns, even legally owned ones, make cops very uncomfortable during traffic stops.

Bullshit.
The guy was a permit holder. The incidence of permit holders shooting cops during traffic stops is, let me check, yeah zero. None. He should have seen he had a law abiding citizen and waived him on.
The whole thing came because he was a "armed men are either cops or criminals" kind of cop. I.e. an asshole and goose stepper.

Nonsense.

Again, a Florida concealed weapon license isn’t valid in Maryland.

And if you are pulled over and have a firearm anywhere in your vehicle, tell the LEO what kind, how many, and where, give him your driver’s license and CWL if you have one, and ask him how he wishes to proceed.

No, no.... You do not ask, you are told how he wants to proceed. I would answer, 'I don't have anything illegal in my car' and leave it at that.

-Geaux

 

[Geaux4it]

Gun ownership probable cause to for search and seizure?

No, of course not – the notion is ridiculous.

But that’s not the issue here, the issue has nothing to do with ‘gun ownership.’

A search can be conducted, however, pursuant to reasonable suspicion, such as telling LEO there’s a gun in the car in the context of conflicting information from the driver.

Had the driver told LEO there was no gun in the SUV and had that been confirmed by the wife, the incident likely would not have happened.

Understand that no one is defending LEO’s actions, he likely violated a number of policy guidelines; but it’s inane to infer that LE is targeting gun owners for a Terry Stop simply because they own a gun, and it’s also inane to infer that some sort of civil rights ‘violation’ occurred.

Ok- Then why was he stopped?

-Geaux

 

[Kosh]

The far left wants the government and the criminals to have guns.

 

[chikenwing]

that's not what happened.

He asked the wife if the gun was in the car, and she said that it might be in the glove box or the center console.

That's why the car was searched - because the husband and the wife's stories didn't match.

it doesn't ******* matter whether the gun is the glove compartment, taped to his forehead, or dangling from the car mirror.

He has a right to life and to defend the same.

.

.

Your cartoonish view of "rights" aside, the law is the law.

Don't like it? Fight to change it, or break it.

But if you break it, the consequences of that are on you, not the cops.

So bright spark just what laws where broken? I think it might be here or there is hardly an excuse and that's all it is for a search,not probable cause in the slightest.

 

[The Rabbi]

I don't really understand the question you're asking, but I do know that Maryland does not recognize CCW permits from Florida, nor from any other state.



NRA-ILA | Maryland

True.
But what crime did the cop suspect was being committed that gave him authority to detain and search?

Transporting a firearm in Maryland absent a permit.

Why would the cop think he was transporting a firearm in Maryland? And btw that is perfectly lawful as per FOPA.

 

[The Rabbi]

Because un-secured guns, even legally owned ones, make cops very uncomfortable during traffic stops.

Bullshit.
The guy was a permit holder. The incidence of permit holders shooting cops during traffic stops is, let me check, yeah zero. None. He should have seen he had a law abiding citizen and waived him on.
The whole thing came because he was a "armed men are either cops or criminals" kind of cop. I.e. an asshole and goose stepper.

Nonsense.

Again, a Florida concealed weapon license isn’t valid in Maryland.

And if you are pulled over and have a firearm anywhere in your vehicle, tell the LEO what kind, how many, and where, give him your driver’s license and CWL if you have one, and ask him how he wishes to proceed.

Bullshit.
I responded to the statement that cops get nervous with unsecured weapons. So the legality of it is irrelevant here.
If you get pulled over it is no one's busines whether you have a weapon or not. The FL resident did exactly what you suggested and we see the result. Had he told the officer to go pound sand none of this would have happened.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Incorrect.

This has nothing to do with purchasing a firearm, it has to do with Florida law concerning possessing a concealed weapon license:

(2)Information made confidential and exempt by this section shall be disclosed:

(a)With the express written consent of the applicant or licensee or his or her legally authorized representative.

(b)By court order upon a showing of good cause.

(c)Upon request by a law enforcement agency in connection with the performance of lawful duties, which shall include access to any automated database containing such information maintained by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.

Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

Yes. Maryland can verify he has CCW. But not use to create criminality absent criminality.

He has lawful CCW so we know he must be hiding a gun or unlawfully possessing one is not probable cause.

And unlike Florida, it’s unlawful in Maryland to transport a gun in a private vehicle absent a permit from that state:

It is also unlawful for any person to knowingly transport a handgun in any vehicle traveling on public roads, highways, waterways or airways, or upon roads or parking lots generally used by the public.

NRA-ILA | Maryland

FOPA. Simple. I can travel in/through a state which otherwise prohibits guns ownershipif my lawful gun is secured from my immediate access and unloaded.


There is no reciprocity with regard to Florida and Maryland concealed weapon permits, consequently any firearm in the car would be illegal in Maryland even with a Florida CWL.

Moreover, 4th Amendment search and seizure jurisprudence is much broader with regard to motor vehicles and the occupants’ expectation of privacy, where probable cause is not necessary to make a Terry Stop based on reasonable suspicion.

There is nothing to be reasonably suspicious of.

Indeed, the conflicting responses from the driver and the wife – who admitted there was a firearm in the SUV, and where that was not the case is irrelevant – manifested reasonable suspicion and warranted the search.

she said she DIDNT KNOW..you're now spinning the facts as known

Any law enforcement officer can ask you anything he wants, how you respond often makes all the difference.

However trite and a cliché, it is nonetheless true: with rights come responsibilities, and ignorance of the law is no excuse.

It might be argued that it’s unreasonable to expect the driver and wife to anticipate the stop and make sure they had their stories straight beforehand.

Perhaps.

But it can also be argued that as a concealed weapon license holder the driver should have been aware of the fact that Florida law allows the state to release his license information to any law enforcement agency, that Maryland has no reciprocity with Florida, and at least make his wife aware of the fact that there was no gun in the SUV should they be stopped.

Had he taken this simple precaution the incident likely would not have occurred.

There was no law to be ignorant of.

 

[OODA_Loop]

Understand that no one is defending LEO’s actions, he likely violated a number of policy guidelines; but it’s inane to infer that LE is targeting gun owners for a Terry Stop simply because they own a gun, and it’s also inane to infer that some sort of civil rights ‘violation’ occurred.

You're defending his actions.

Its not inane to think they were targeted because of the CCW.

It is why they stopped him.