View Full Version : Getting pulled over while carrying in vehicle is an extension of home?
TriggerHappy
10-22-2010, 17:44
Got pulled over today for tint, I can say that it was (allegedly) illegal and I was aware of it (own my own tint shop, could be a worse thing). The cop loved to throw out all the laws like he memorized the book, d-bag (I have no problems with cops, both parents were cops, but he was a d-bag about it). I was concealing and he made it clear that I had to provide a CCW. Correct me if I am wrong but I read that your vehicle is an extension of your home and you can conceal legally and do not have to inform an officer of the weapon (as you would in your home). I would have loved to have informed him of the "state Statute" as it reads. He better never do anything wrong while operating on my airport, his supervisor will be getting a phone call and he will get no leniency from me, it will be by the book and then some.
Thanks, I'm done.
twitchyfinger
10-22-2010, 18:00
Correct me if I am wrong but I read that your vehicle is an extension of your home and you can conceal legally and do not have to inform an officer of the weapon (as you would in your home).
You are correct or so as I have been told by the LEO who was at my CCW class. The words I was told by him which I live by as for dealing with any LEO when being pulled over "volunteer nothing comply with everything!"
Colorado Revised Statutes 18-12-105 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll/cocode/1/2dc8f/31d7c/31da6/31df2?f=templates&fn=document-frame.htm&2.0)
18-12-105. Unlawfully carrying a concealed weapon - unlawful possession of weapons. (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=115d17d4.210a391e.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2718-12-105%27%5D)
(1) A person commits a class 2 misdemeanor if such person knowingly and unlawfully:
(a) Carries a knife concealed on or about his or her person; or
(b) Carries a firearm concealed on or about his or her person; or
(c) Without legal authority, carries, brings, or has in such person's possession a firearm or any explosive, incendiary, or other dangerous device on the property of or within any building in which the chambers, galleries, or offices of the general assembly, or either house thereof, are located, or in which a legislative hearing or meeting is being or is to be conducted, or in which the official office of any member, officer, or employee of the general assembly is located.
(d) (Deleted by amendment, L. 93, p. 964, § 1, effective July 1, 1993.)
(2) It shall not be an offense if the defendant was:
(a) A person in his or her own dwelling or place of business or on property owned or under his or her control at the time of the act of carrying; or
(b) A person in a private automobile or other private means of conveyance who carries a weapon for lawful protection of such person's or another's person or property while traveling; or
(c) A person who, at the time of carrying a concealed weapon, held a valid written permit to carry a concealed weapon issued pursuant to section 18-12-105.1 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=jump&iid=COCODE&d=18-12-105.1&sid=115d17d4.210a391e.0.0#JD_18-12-1051), as it existed prior to its repeal, or, if the weapon involved was a handgun, held a valid permit to carry a concealed handgun or a temporary emergency permit issued pursuant to part 2 of this article; except that it shall be an offense under this section if the person was carrying a concealed handgun in violation of the provisions of section 18-12-214 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=jump&iid=COCODE&d=18-12-214&sid=115d17d4.210a391e.0.0#JD_18-12-214); or
and
CRS 18-12-201 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=115d17d4.210a391e.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2718-12-201%27%5D)
18-12-201. Legislative declaration. (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=115d17d4.210a391e.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2718-12-201%27%5D)
(1) The general assembly finds that:
(a) There exists a widespread inconsistency among jurisdictions within the state with regard to the issuance of permits to carry concealed handguns and identification of areas of the state where it is lawful to carry concealed handguns;
(b) This inconsistency among jurisdictions creates public uncertainty regarding the areas of the state in which it is lawful to carry concealed handguns;
(c) Inconsistency results in the arbitrary and capricious denial of permits to carry concealed handguns based on the jurisdiction of residence rather than the qualifications for obtaining a permit;
(d) The criteria and procedures for the lawful carrying of concealed handguns historically has been regulated by state statute and should be consistent throughout the state to ensure the consistent implementation of state law; and
(e) It is necessary that the state occupy the field of regulation of the bearing of concealed handguns since the issuance of a concealed handgun permit is based on a person's constitutional right of self-protection and there is a prevailing state interest in ensuring that no citizen is arbitrarily denied a concealed handgun permit and in ensuring that the laws controlling the use of the permit are consistent throughout the state.
(2) Based on the findings specified in subsection (1) of this section, the general assembly hereby concludes that:
(a) The permitting and carrying of concealed handguns is a matter of statewide concern; and
(b) It is necessary to provide statewide uniform standards for issuing permits to carry concealed handguns for self-defense.
(3) In accordance with the findings and conclusions specified in subsections (1) and (2) of this section, the general assembly hereby instructs each sheriff to implement and administer the provisions of this part 2. The general assembly does not delegate to the sheriffs the authority to regulate or restrict the issuance of permits provided for in this part 2 beyond the provisions of this part 2. An action or rule that encumbers the permit process by placing burdens on the applicant beyond those sworn statements and specified documents detailed in this part 2 or that creates restrictions beyond those specified in this part 2 is in conflict with the intent of this part 2 and is prohibited.
and CRS 18-12-204 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=115d17d4.210a391e.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2718-12-204%27%5D)
18-12-204. Permit contents - validity - carrying requirements. (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=115d17d4.210a391e.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2718-12-204%27%5D)
(1) (a) Each permit shall bear a color photograph of the permittee and shall display the signature of the sheriff who issues the permit. In addition, the sheriffs of this state shall ensure that all permits issued pursuant to this part 2 contain the same items of information and are the same size and the same color.
(b) A permit is valid for a period of five years after the date of issuance and may be renewed as provided in section 18-12-211 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=jump&iid=COCODE&d=18-12-211&sid=115d17d4.210a391e.0.0#JD_18-12-211). A permit issued pursuant to this part 2, including a temporary emergency permit issued pursuant to section 18-12-209 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=jump&iid=COCODE&d=18-12-209&sid=115d17d4.210a391e.0.0#JD_18-12-209), is effective in all areas of the state, except as otherwise provided in section 18-12-214 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=jump&iid=COCODE&d=18-12-214&sid=115d17d4.210a391e.0.0#JD_18-12-214).
(2) (a) A permittee, in compliance with the terms of a permit, may carry a concealed handgun as allowed by state law. The permittee shall carry the permit, together with valid photo identification, at all times during which the permittee is in actual possession of a concealed handgun and shall produce both documents upon demand by a law enforcement officer. Failure to produce a permit upon demand by a law enforcement officer raises a rebuttable presumption that the person does not have a permit. Failure to carry and produce a permit and valid photo identification upon demand as required in this subsection (2) is a class 1 petty offense. A charge of failure to carry and produce a permit and valid photo identification upon demand pursuant to this subsection (2) shall be dismissed by the court if, at or before the permittee's scheduled court appearance, the permittee exhibits to the court a valid permit and valid photo identification, both of which were issued to the permittee prior to the date on which the permittee was charged with failure to carry and produce a permit and valid photo identification upon demand.
(b) The provisions of paragraph (a) of this subsection (2) apply to temporary emergency permits issued pursuant to section 18-12-209 (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=jump&iid=COCODE&d=18-12-209&sid=115d17d4.210a391e.0.0#JD_18-12-209).
(3) (a) A person who may lawfully possess a handgun may carry a handgun under the following circumstances without obtaining a permit and the handgun shall not be considered concealed:
(I) The handgun is in the possession of a person who is in a private automobile or in some other private means of conveyance and who carries the handgun for a legal use, including self-defense; or
(II) The handgun is in the possession of a person who is legally engaged in hunting activities within the state.
68Charger
10-22-2010, 18:04
http://www.rmgo.org/gun-law-faqs/carrying-in-a-vehicle
specifically:
18-12-204. Permit contents - validity - carrying requirements.
(3) (a) A person who may lawfully possess a handgun may carry a handgun under the following circumstances without obtaining a permit and the handgun shall not be considered concealed:
(I) The handgun is in the possession of a person who is in a private automobile or in some other private means of conveyance and who carries the handgun for a legal use, including self-defense
I carry copies of the relevant statutes in my car, is that weird? [LOL]
twitchyfinger
10-22-2010, 18:08
I carry copies of the relevant statutes in my car, is that weird? [LOL]
That is smart CYOA!!! [Beer]
i got pulled over a year or o ago for window tint, i had just got the truck a week prior and the cop pulled a razor and made me cut the tint off the two front windows and the windsheild then he wrote me a ticket. ohwell nothing i could have done
SideShow Bob
10-22-2010, 19:09
i got pulled over a year or o ago for window tint, i had just got the truck a week prior and the cop pulled a razor and made me cut the tint off the two front windows and the windsheild then he wrote me a ticket. ohwell nothing i could have done
Did the officer use a "tint level device" (don't know the proper techie name) or just his calibrated eyes ? In Kansas, at least in the K.C. metro area, the police use a device they place on both sides of a tinted window to determine if the tinting is illegal before you can be ticketed and forced to remove the tinting. There were too many calibrated eyeball police officers giving out tickets.
i got pulled over a year or o ago for window tint, i had just got the truck a week prior and the cop pulled a razor and made me cut the tint off the two front windows and the windsheild then he wrote me a ticket. ohwell nothing i could have done
In that situation, I'd get arrested. That's why I don't have tint.
TriggerHappy
10-22-2010, 19:39
I carry copies of the relevant statutes in my car, is that weird? [LOL]
I am starting to think about printing off a copy. Not weird.
TriggerHappy
10-22-2010, 19:40
Did the officer use a "tint level device" (don't know the proper techie name) or just his calibrated eyes ? In Kansas, at least in the K.C. metro area, the police use a device they place on both sides of a tinted window to determine if the tinting is illegal before you can be ticketed and forced to remove the tinting. There were too many calibrated eyeball police officers giving out tickets.
"tint meter"
no he didnt use one, but i learned not to talk back, im hispanic with tattoos so i dont want to go on alley ride.
As everyone else has told you TriggerHappy, you are correct. I've personally been pulled over while carrying concealed without a CCW. He didn't take anything did he?
El Paso Cty hands you a copy of the statues during the permit process.
The one time I've been pulled over in CO (resident for 10 years) the Trooper was completely nonchalant about the CCW.
TriggerHappy
10-22-2010, 21:11
As everyone else has told you TriggerHappy, you are correct. I've personally been pulled over while carrying concealed without a CCW. He didn't take anything did he?
Nope, he didn't take anything, he was just a d-bag. My parents "weren't" d-bag cops, I tend to take it personally. It makes "them" all look bad, and that normally isn't the case.
TriggerHappy
10-22-2010, 21:15
I am sure there are some LEO's on here, they know what I mean. Its too bad because it can put a target on all LEO's to a person that is not rational or unrealistic. I am lucky enough to have not lost my parents to someone killing or injuring a cop for that reason, not to say I haven't heard some good stories and close calls.
that sucks the guy was a douche. I was pulled over at the airport several years ago and the guy had a tint meter and informed me it was illegal and wrote me a $50 ticket, but I wasn't forced to cut it. I would refuse to do so anyways.
as for the CCW you are in no way or form required to produce a CCW license in a private vehicle. that is an extension of your home and does not require a CCW.
I have had a cop tell me I needed to inform him of that and I pulled out the statutes previously posted and asked him to show me where in the law it says I am required to do so.
It also helps my dad has known the sheriff for 25+ years.
I was let go with a warning on that one[Beer]
What is the darkness limit on tinting? Is that for the driver/passenger windows? Does a truck topper or rear windows of an SUV fall under the same law?
theGinsue
10-22-2010, 23:01
I'm sure our local tint-meister would know specifically, but it's my understanding that there is a darkness limit on the side windows of the front seats of the passenger compartment as well as NO tinting below the top 6 inches of the windshield. Other windows are usually exempt form darkness limits. This doesn't stop LOTS of vehicles from having super dark tint on the front door windows.
At least, this is my understanding.
What is the darkness limit on tinting? Is that for the driver/passenger windows? Does a truck topper or rear windows of an SUV fall under the same law?
rear and side windows do not matter except for the front windows and windsheild.
front side windows must be 27 or 28% or better. most tint places will use 35% because glass has about 3-5% of natural tint obscurity.
topper and rear windows don't matter. they can be limo tint.
That's not quite correct. You can tint the rear windows as dark as you want (you can paint them solid black if you want), IF, and only IF, the front two windows have no tint at all. If you have tint on the front two windows, then the limit is 30% or less all the way around. Think of every limo you've ever seen. Front windows (and windshield) have zero tint and the rest are all limo tint.
I do know that people do as low as 5% all around and even tint the windshield. Seems dangerous to me. It's pretty popular on the coasts right now I think.
lead_magnet
10-23-2010, 00:53
That's not quite correct. You can tint the rear windows as dark as you want (you can paint them solid black if you want), IF, and only IF, the front two windows have no tint at all. If you have tint on the front two windows, then the limit is 30% or less all the way around. Think of every limo you've ever seen. Front windows (and windshield) have zero tint and the rest are all limo tint.
I do know that people do as low as 5% all around and even tint the windshield. Seems dangerous to me. It's pretty popular on the coasts right now I think.
Not trying to be a dick or anything but I believe your incorect here sir. The reason for me knowing this law off-hand is I recently graduated a POST academy and was driving a jeep cherokee that I had replaced the back and rear-most back windows with steel (don't ask).
Here it is from the CRS, oddly enough the only law (at least that I could find, correct me if I am wrong) about having an opaque rear window was in a statue about mirrors
42-4-226. Mirrors - exterior placements. (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=115d17d4.210a391e.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2742-4-226%27%5D)
(1) Every motor vehicle shall be equipped with a mirror or mirrors so located and so constructed as to reflect to the driver a free and unobstructed view of the highway for a distance of at least two hundred feet to the rear of such vehicle.
(2) Whenever any motor vehicle is not equipped with a rear window and rear side windows or has a rear window and rear side windows composed of, covered by, or treated with any material or component that, when viewed from the position of the driver, obstructs the rear view of the driver or makes such window or windows nontransparent, or whenever any motor vehicle is towing another vehicle or trailer or carrying any load or cargo or object that obstructs the rear view of the driver, such vehicle shall be equipped with an exterior mirror on each side so located with respect to the position of the driver as to comply with the visual requirement of subsection (1) of this section.
(3) Any person who violates any provision of this section commits a class B traffic infraction.
Hope this helps
lead_magnet
10-23-2010, 00:56
Here is a little more on the tint issue (not intending to hijack this thread)
42-4-227. Windows unobstructed - certain materials prohibited - windshield wiper requirements. (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=115d17d4.210a391e.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2742-4-227%27%5D)
(1) (a) Except as provided in this paragraph (a), no person shall operate any motor vehicle registered in Colorado on which any window, except the windshield, is composed of, covered by, or treated with any material or component which presents an opaque, nontransparent, or metallic or mirrored appearance in such a way that it allows less than twenty-seven percent light transmittance. The windshield shall allow seventy percent light transmittance. The provisions of this paragraph (a) shall not apply to the windows to the rear of the driver, including the rear window, on any motor vehicle; however, if such windows allow less than twenty-seven percent light transmittance, then the front side windows and the windshield on such vehicles shall allow seventy percent light transmittance.
There is a crapload more in that statue but its odds and ends stuff.
lead_magnet
10-23-2010, 01:17
Sorry, one last point to make here...
Conceal something else in your car, a tape recorder.
I carry copies of the relevant statutes in my car, is that weird? [LOL]
You're not weird. You're an "extremist". Least ways that what I was called by a guy when he found out I had a copy of the US constitution in my car.
Have Fun
Got pulled over today for tint, I can say that it was (allegedly) illegal and I was aware of it (own my own tint shop, could be a worse thing). The cop loved to throw out all the laws like he memorized the book, d-bag (I have no problems with cops, both parents were cops, but he was a d-bag about it). I was concealing and he made it clear that I had to provide a CCW. Correct me if I am wrong but I read that your vehicle is an extension of your home and you can conceal legally and do not have to inform an officer of the weapon (as you would in your home). I would have loved to have informed him of the "state Statute" as it reads. He better never do anything wrong while operating on my airport, his supervisor will be getting a phone call and he will get no leniency from me, it will be by the book and then some.
Thanks, I'm done.
how did he know you were concealing? did you tell him?
TriggerHappy
10-23-2010, 07:27
Here is a little more on the tint issue (not intending to hijack this thread)
42-4-227. Windows unobstructed - certain materials prohibited - windshield wiper requirements. (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=115d17d4.210a391e.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2742-4-227%27%5D)
(1) (a) Except as provided in this paragraph (a), no person shall operate any motor vehicle registered in Colorado on which any window, except the windshield, is composed of, covered by, or treated with any material or component which presents an opaque, nontransparent, or metallic or mirrored appearance in such a way that it allows less than twenty-seven percent light transmittance. The windshield shall allow seventy percent light transmittance. The provisions of this paragraph (a) shall not apply to the windows to the rear of the driver, including the rear window, on any motor vehicle; however, if such windows allow less than twenty-seven percent light transmittance, then the front side windows and the windshield on such vehicles shall allow seventy percent light transmittance.
There is a crapload more in that statue but its odds and ends stuff.
Don't worry about hijacking this is good stuff, not really a hijack IMO
This is exactly what I was quoted.
TriggerHappy
10-23-2010, 07:31
how did he know you were concealing? did you tell him?
Yes, I did. I work with ACSO all the time on the airport. I have a car number that I use at work for assistance. If I am close to the airport I will generally tell them as courtesy, hopefully expecting the same. I normally get it.
[Bang]
Pancho Villa
10-23-2010, 07:41
My policy is that if you don't absolutely need to know, I don't tell you.
I wouldn't tell a random stranger on the street, or a cashier I am working with, "Hey I am carrying a pistol right now" because its irrelevant and they may or may not have the brains to not freak out about it. Servants of the state are people too, and in my experience there is nothing special about them. My rule is if I wouldn't tell a random unarmed fellow civilian, I won't tell a cop unless legally compelled to.
Here is a little more on the tint issue (not intending to hijack this thread)
42-4-227. Windows unobstructed - certain materials prohibited - windshield wiper requirements. (http://www.michie.com/colorado/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=query&iid=115d17d4.210a391e.0.0&q=%5BGroup%20%2742-4-227%27%5D)
(1) (a) Except as provided in this paragraph (a), no person shall operate any motor vehicle registered in Colorado on which any window, except the windshield, is composed of, covered by, or treated with any material or component which presents an opaque, nontransparent, or metallic or mirrored appearance in such a way that it allows less than twenty-seven percent light transmittance. The windshield shall allow seventy percent light transmittance. The provisions of this paragraph (a) shall not apply to the windows to the rear of the driver, including the rear window, on any motor vehicle; however, if such windows allow less than twenty-seven percent light transmittance, then the front side windows and the windshield on such vehicles shall allow seventy percent light transmittance.
There is a crapload more in that statue but its odds and ends stuff.
Good find...guess all my vehicles have been illegal!
Most tint places will only tell you 27%. And they put on 35% film. Even the cop that pulled me over years ago told me 27%.
steveopia
10-23-2010, 09:28
"volunteer nothing comply with everything!"
The guy who instructed my CCW class told us to let the cop know right away that I am a CCW permit holder and I do have a loaded firearm in the car.
Am I clear in understanding that everyone here says to do the opposite?
No.
In traffic stop situations, I always tell them. It hasn't gotten me out of tickets, but every time the officer has really appreciated it.
These guys deal with rejects and smart-asses every day and it really helps them to be treated well by citizens.
Now the other day I was in line at sev with a couple of CSPD. I didn't tell them I was packing, though I was fully prepared in case I printed or flashed and they asked me.
Even if you get in a situation where a cop is being a king shit baton buffer, be polite and cooperative and if necessary sue later.
I have always been of the school that says"Better to get ahead of the situation". I know that SOME counties put permit holders into the database that comes up with a license check as a "person of interest". So, I will provide my permit to the officer along with my license and insurance card, along with a statement along the lines of "Officer, I have a concealed carry permit, and I am (or am not) armed. How would you like me to proceed?" This does a number of things: It eliminates any surprises when he runs your license, it stops him from becoming nervous if you inadvertently expose your weapon, and it lets him know you've passed an extensive background check, so you're PROBABLY not a "bad guy". Just my opinion, but the above has most likely got me out of at least 1 ticket.
That excerpt about having your rear view blocked says that you have to have side mirrors, which most cars do. Just like a cargo van with not other windows, or a single cab truck with a box on the back (like a Uhaul).
OneGuy67
10-23-2010, 12:22
No.
In traffic stop situations, I always tell them. It hasn't gotten me out of tickets, but every time the officer has really appreciated it.
These guys deal with rejects and smart-asses every day and it really helps them to be treated well by citizens.
Now the other day I was in line at sev with a couple of CSPD. I didn't tell them I was packing, though I was fully prepared in case I printed or flashed and they asked me.
Even if you get in a situation where a cop is being a king shit baton buffer, be polite and cooperative and if necessary sue later.
While I hardly ever agree with Elhuero, I must agree to his point on this (what is the world coming to?) .
During the many years I was on patrol and doing traffic enforcement, I appreciated it when the person stopped, be it a LEO or a CCW holder, told me there was a gun in the car and where it was located. I would then proceed with that in mind and we could conclude our business. If the gun was in the center console along with their vehicle documents, it gave me that little bit of security and not the surprise when they opened it and began reaching for the area where both were located. I can tell you, I do know officers in other agencies who would screw a gun into the driver's ear if they saw a gun or an imprint during the stop and that led to the uncomfortable tap dance that always followed.
My $.02 from the other side of the door.
OneGuy67
10-23-2010, 12:27
I have always been of the school that says"Better to get ahead of the situation". I know that SOME counties put permit holders into the database that comes up with a license check as a "person of interest". So, I will provide my permit to the officer along with my license and insurance card, along with a statement along the lines of "Officer, I have a concealed carry permit, and I am (or am not) armed. How would you like me to proceed?" This does a number of things: It eliminates any surprises when he runs your license, it stops him from becoming nervous if you inadvertently expose your weapon, and it lets him know you've passed an extensive background check, so you're PROBABLY not a "bad guy". Just my opinion, but the above has most likely got me out of at least 1 ticket.
Beginning in 2003, when the shall-issue began, a lot of the sheriff departments were putting the CCW entries into CCIC, but there wasn't (and still isn't) a specific code to list it in there, so they would list it as a warrant. I can't tell how many vehicles I ran the plate of, that the registered owner came back with a warrant hit and I began to follow them until I could open the warrant hit to determine what kind of warrant I was dealing with (Some warrants are local and valid in their jurisdiction only; Denver is huge on this) and that the listing was in fact a CCW. I'm sure there were a number of people who saw this cop car following them pretty closely, then veer off after a minute or so and wondered why.
Beginning in 2003, when the shall-issue began, a lot of the sheriff departments were putting the CCW entries into CCIC, but there wasn't (and still isn't) a specific code to list it in there, so they would list it as a warrant. I can't tell how many vehicles I ran the plate of, that the registered owner came back with a warrant hit and I began to follow them until I could open the warrant hit to determine what kind of warrant I was dealing with (Some warrants are local and valid in their jurisdiction only; Denver is huge on this) and that the listing was in fact a CCW. I'm sure there were a number of people who saw this cop car following them pretty closely, then veer off after a minute or so and wondered why.
My understanding is the county has the option to "tag" you as "a person of interest", without specifying why. I know Jeffco does not do this, and last I heard, Adams and Arapaho did...dunno about Denver, but it sounds like something they would do....
twitchyfinger
10-23-2010, 13:20
The guy who instructed my CCW class told us to let the cop know right away that I am a CCW permit holder and I do have a loaded firearm in the car.
Am I clear in understanding that everyone here says to do the opposite?
I think that this is the problem. Everyone has their own opinions though the law says upon demand. LEO's are people too and also have their own opinions. I like what OneGuy67 has said above and if I were an LEO I would appreciate knowing in advance too. Then again there are LEO's out there who will use that info against you and that is the reason for not volunteering that info. The point being "like a box of chocolates" you never know what you are going to get when being pulled over. For me anyway I am polite, answer everything, but do not volunteer any info as I am being cautious just like the LEO is. Now if I were to have my personal info in a glove box along with my firearm, (does not sound wise to me) before I even attempted to reach for my personal info of course I would inform him I was carrying and that my firearm was in the glove box along with my personal info.
It's a judgment call I guess. If and when I am pulled over the first thing I do is roll down my windows, turn off the engine, turn on my dome light if dark outside, and make sure both my hands are in plain view and then wait for the LEO to approach my vehicle and instruct me on how to proceed. I think that goes along way in letting the LEO I intend to comply with him/her.
twitchyfinger
10-23-2010, 13:35
My understanding is the county has the option to "tag" you as "a person of interest", without specifying why. I know Jeffco does not do this, and last I heard, Adams and Arapaho did...dunno about Denver, but it sounds like something they would do....
Not so sure about that one TFOGGER. The one time I have been pulled over was in Jefferson County. I was coming down the hill on 285 just entering turkey creek canyon. I was pulled over by a female LEO for having a cracked windshield and yes it was cracked bad. I told her that I was driving down to Castle Rock to meet a guy who was buying my truck and that is why it was not replaced yet. She took my personal info and went back to her vehicle. Not 2 min later two other police vehicles showed up. I sat there for about 30 min before she returned and the first thing she asked me was "you have a CCW don't you?" I replied yes and proceeded to open my wallet again to produce my permit and was told that was not necessary. She handed me back my personal info and told me I was free to go. The last thing she asked me was if I was wearing my seat belt when she pulled me over because she forgot to check. I told he I was but undid it when she asked me for my personal info because my wallet was in my back pocket. She said ok and I then drove off.
Brandon on here was pulled over once before he even picked up his card from the sheriff. On the way up to his truck, the office stopped at the tail gate and just yelled to him, "Brandon, do you have your pistol on you now?"
Pretty weird.
Not so sure about that one TFOGGER. The one time I have been pulled over was in Jefferson County. I was coming down the hill on 285 just entering turkey creek canyon. I was pulled over by a female LEO for having a cracked windshield and yes it was cracked bad. I told her that I was driving down to Castle Rock to meet a guy who was buying my truck and that is why it was not replaced yet. She took my personal info and went back to her vehicle. Not 2 min later two other police vehicles showed up. I sat there for about 30 min before she returned and the first thing she asked me was "you have a CCW don't you?" I replied yes and proceeded to open my wallet again to produce my permit and was told that was not necessary. She handed me back my personal info and told me I was free to go. The last thing she asked me was if I was wearing my seat belt when she pulled me over because she forgot to check. I told he I was but undid it when she asked me for my personal info because my wallet was in my back pocket. She said ok and I then drove off.
What county was your permit issued by? Jeffco told me that they do not currently enter CCWs into the database, but that might have been different in the past. My permit was issued in 2/09....
twitchyfinger
10-23-2010, 17:18
What county was your permit issued by? Jeffco told me that they do not currently enter CCWs into the database, but that might have been different in the past. My permit was issued in 2/09....
I was registered in Jefferson co at the time I was pulled over and that was like 4-5 years ago.
68Charger
10-23-2010, 18:37
I think RMGO has a list of sheriff's and whether their policy is to put you in the Database- Fremont county (where I live) is one that does, so I'll immediately volunteer the info to LEOs, whether I'm carrying or not...
twitchyfinger
10-23-2010, 18:47
I think RMGO has a list of sheriff's and whether their policy is to put you in the Database- Fremont county (where I live) is one that does, so I'll immediately volunteer the info to LEOs, whether I'm carrying or not...
Thanks for the reminder 68Charger I forgot all about that list. Jeff co says 3792 entries into the criminal data base. The list has not been updated since 2007 though.
Note: CBI and the Sheriff's Association are now refusing to update this information, despite repeated attempts by RMGO staff and State Legislators. (9/2010)
http://www.rmgo.org/concealed-carry-guide/criminal-database-entry-updated-3/15/07
I was told that Denver and Aurora do not recognize the right of non CCW permit holders to have a handgun in their car for protection and will confiscate the gun and charge you with a misdemeanor. Is there any truth to this?
I was told that Denver and Aurora do not recognize the right of non CCW permit holders to have a handgun in their car for protection and will confiscate the gun and charge you with a misdemeanor. Is there any truth to this?
I wouldn't doubt it, the cops in denver do a lot of stupid shit. They (and their corrupt overlords) are part of the problem.
bYblyIhkRJs
Byte Stryke
10-24-2010, 06:46
I wouldn't doubt it, the cops in denver do a lot of stupid shit. They (and their corrupt overlords) are part of the problem.
[ Video ]
What did they charge him with? Unlawful possession of a camera phone?
and they wonder why no one trusts them.
TriggerHappy
10-24-2010, 09:16
I was told that Denver and Aurora do not recognize the right of non CCW permit holders to have a handgun in their car for protection and will confiscate the gun and charge you with a misdemeanor. Is there any truth to this?
That could make a great court case against them, State law overrules county/city law.
OneGuy67
10-24-2010, 16:33
I was told that Denver and Aurora do not recognize the right of non CCW permit holders to have a handgun in their car for protection and will confiscate the gun and charge you with a misdemeanor. Is there any truth to this?
Prior to 2003, yes, that was the case in Denver. They had a lot of gang gun crime issues and put some laws on their municipal books about guns in vehicles. However, the new laws as of 2003 overrode the municipal laws and they are no longer in effect.
There is still a lot of rumor about it though floating around and people spread it through the "rumor mill". I was just as clueless to it until I read the new state laws and confirmed it with a DPD buddy of mine.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.