Vehicle stop. Courtesy? Yes? No? Hell no?

Please explain why FOPA did not apply, in not clear on this. Was NJ her destination? It was my understanding that she took a wrong turn that landed her in NJ.

Anyway you slice it, crap like that is unconstitutional. If you live near the border of a state that won't issue non-resident permits, are you then unable to defend yourself and your loved ones because you might take a wrong turn? I'm not sure what to do on this one. Keep mouth shut, of course. Not carry? Not so clear on that.

I don't dispute that it should be unconstitutional but the "law on the ground" doesn't see it that way.

Most of these FOPA cases involve storage that was far out of compliance with the BS set forth in the law. She probably had it in the car with her, either in her purse or on her person. So she couldn't claim FOPA.

-Mike
 
So - back to NJ and the woman from PA. She disclosed to the trooper that she had a gun. He arrested her. Pretty clear cut. The DA was a douche, but again, she was clearly breaking the law and NJ is known to fck over gun owners when they can. The NRA got involved, the righteous indignation of the public got involved and this woman got cut loose as I remember.

I don't think you suggested I meant this but to be clear, I didn't mean to suggest she was not in violation of NJ law, I am aware she was. My point was that had she not volunteered the fact that she was carrying, none of the stuff that happened to her would have happened to her. That's the point I was offering in response to the OP's question.

Now, since she was technically breaking NJ law, the LEO was within his rights to arrest her. I don't dispute that but I still think he was an A-Hole. Cops have discretion, they let people go from stuff all the time, especially if they are fellow LEO. So in my opinion he could have determined she was lost and didn't know she was in NJ, was a single mother with kids in the car and just said, "Mam, you are not allowed to be in NJ with that firearm, get back on the road this way and get out of NJ as fast as possible.". He may have even escorted her over the border. I understand that there would be risks for him doing that, like if she gets pulled over again and they found out she had a gun and was stopped earlier etc... but what i am saying is if the LEO wanted to help her he could have.

The AG was a douche, as you note, and could have made this go away but didn't and actually tried to make of an example of her so my opinions on that stand as is.
 
I don't think you suggested I meant this but to be clear, I didn't mean to suggest she was not in violation of NJ law, I am aware she was. My point was that had she not volunteered the fact that she was carrying, none of the stuff that happened to her would have happened to her. That's the point I was offering in response to the OP's question.

Now, since she was technically breaking NJ law, the LEO was within his rights to arrest her. I don't dispute that but I still think he was an A-Hole. Cops have discretion, they let people go from stuff all the time, especially if they are fellow LEO. So in my opinion he could have determined she was lost and didn't know she was in NJ, was a single mother with kids in the car and just said, "Mam, you are not allowed to be in NJ with that firearm, get back on the road this way and get out of NJ as fast as possible.". He may have even escorted her over the border. I understand that there would be risks for him doing that, like if she gets pulled over again and they found out she had a gun and was stopped earlier etc... but what i am saying is if the LEO wanted to help her he could have.

The AG was a douche, as you note, and could have made this go away but didn't and actually tried to make of an example of her so my opinions on that stand as is.

The thing you're forgetting is it's NJ. An inordinate amount of NJ cops are engineered to be dicks by design.

-Mike
 
2 heart attacks and battled cancer with chemo and radiation a year ago. Oh, and I got my Purple Heart back in 1983 along with quite a few others


If you've already conquered all that, I almost feel bad for the poor sap up against you if you ever, God forbid, have to use your gun in a self-defense situation. Doesn't sound like it's going to end well for them!


Thanks for starting this thread. I haven't been pulled over while carrying, but had always figured I would disclose it to the officer for his peace of mind. Sounds like it'd have the opposite effect, so mum's the word!
 
I suppose that woman could've tried to argue that she left from PA and her destination was also PA and NJ was somehow on the way but in any case her firearm wasn't being transported legally (per FOPA).


...yes, I am one of those M*******s you beep at, yell at and give the finger to because I won't go much over the speed limit as you want me to.
Don't do it in the passing lane and most people won't care.


I know that we are not required to tell any officer that there is a weapon in our vehicle, but I would really like to know why you would not?
...
I trust no one...
Answered your own question there [wink]


...as a retired Marine I have earned my right to carry if I so desire to.
You don't earn rights...
 
What if your car is a LEASE? The plate is linked to the leasing company...not your name....or, is it??

Usually your registration has your name on it most of the time, unless its something like a car rental, or some kind of a front company that gets set up that operates the cars. (like for example, for the rare guys who still have company cars, a lot of times the company will have a front that operates as a leasing company etc. ).

None of this matters anyways as soon as they get your DL they're going to get the info that way anyways. It does raise a fun question though of what if you created an LLC or something and put your cars running under the LLC, etc.

-Mike
 
Usually your registration has your name on it most of the time, unless its something like a car rental, or some kind of a front company that gets set up that operates the cars. (like for example, for the rare guys who still have company cars, a lot of times the company will have a front that operates as a leasing company etc. ).

None of this matters anyways as soon as they get your DL they're going to get the info that way anyways. It does raise a fun question though of what if you created an LLC or something and put your cars running under the LLC, etc.

-Mike

In my leased car, the Registration is Kia, not me....just sayin...
 
i've been stopped twice while carrying concealed. you know, it never came up in my mind to tell him, i was too busy being pissed thinking about the surcharge on my insurance so my mind was at that place. there's a lot of chatter here regarding whether this info comes up when he runs your plate #, if you are a ltc holder. the consensus is that info is indeed given so he/she knows there is at least a chance there is a firearm in the vehicle. any leo i've spoken to regarding this has never confirmed this and i wasn't asked at the time of each traffic stop, so.....

if there's no law stating we have to tell, why bother?

I can confirm via a friend who works dispatch in the town of Dartmouth, MA that it DOES come up when they run your plate and they DO disclose it to the reporting officer in the field. It's especially noted on domestics.
 
I can confirm via a friend who works dispatch in the town of Dartmouth, MA that it DOES come up when they run your plate and they DO disclose it to the reporting officer in the field. It's especially noted on domestics.

Isn't that the same thing ?

Either it comes up on everything ("when they run your plate and they DO disclose it to the reporting officer in the field"),
or it only comes up on domestic ("It's especially noted on domestics").

*BTW , not all PD has the same software.
 
If the car is leased, the owner comes up as the name of the company but, in most cases, the name of the lessee also pops up. I don't know if LTC info comes up for the lessee or not but with just a few keystrokes (at most) the officer would be able to run the lessee's info.
 
Isn't that the same thing ?

Either it comes up on everything ("when they run your plate and they DO disclose it to the reporting officer in the field"),
or it only comes up on domestic ("It's especially noted on domestics").

*BTW , not all PD has the same software.

So you're saying not all PDs have access to CJIS in MA? I find that hard to believe. Not all having access to QED or a similar app, that I would.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
FWIW, happened to be listening to police scanner today. I believe it was FPD control to officer after a stop, say, "he has 6 firearms registered and has a valid LTC...". First time I heard something like that on the scanner.
 
So you're saying not all PDs have access to CJIS in MA? I find that hard to believe. Not all having access to QED or a similar app, that I would.

Last I knew there were a handful of towns "out West" where PD had no Internet service. Don't know if they had electricity yet out there either. [wink] [laugh]


FWIW, happened to be listening to police scanner today. I believe it was FPD control to officer after a stop, say, "he has 6 firearms registered and has a valid LTC...". First time I heard something like that on the scanner.

I hear this frequently but I'm listening to towns in a radius of >35 miles.
 
I hear this frequently but I'm listening to towns in a radius of >35 miles.

I listen to the State Police every night I drive home.
Occasionally you'll hear them run a 11 and 14 (license status and check for warrants) and the dispatcher will come back saying the statuses and also mention they have a LTC, but never have I heard them say 'use caution' when reading back a LTC.
Pretty sure unless it's a newbie or a LEO with a grudge against citizens with firearms, it's a non-issue. Be polite and you're on your merry way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
So you're saying not all PDs have access to CJIS in MA? I find that hard to believe. Not all having access to QED or a similar app, that I would.

see below [wink]


....... For the NES braintrusts, we don't "already know". Some of us actually make a stop and only run stuff if there's an issue. Also we all use different software, LTC status isn't part of it, that requires using an online system through the state, which most ( some ) of us don't access in the car.......
 
see below [wink]

Okay so - I would say it's incorrect to say they all don't have access to the same info, but it depends on who it is and if they choose to use it if available.

If a LEO is on a stop and then hops out, sure, he or she won't know.
Or if their laptop or tablet is down, then they'll have to radio the information in.
But at the end of the day, I would surprised in 2017 if a municipality didn't have access to CJIS.

But yes, obviously there are times where the LEO on the stop may not know (yet).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
All LE agencies in Mass have CJIS access. How they access it varies. The old CJIS was not internet based per se, but was client server with a dedicated line. CJIS Web is internet based. I find it hard to believe that no Dept isn't connected by internet today, although it's possible, if so it will have a dedicated CJIS terminal with a dedicated CJIS line coming out of the hub at Chelsea. Not all cruisers have mobile data terminals so some departments still have to call the info into dispatch. In CJIS Web when a general inquiry is made a response will prompt in the BOP FI checklist indicating the person run has or had a LTC or an FID. Now whether this is uniform across the system or not I don't know because the software I used was MSP specific not generic like you might think. The info I'm sharing is now a year and a half old, so I don't know what's current, but I suspect it hasn't changed too much.
 
Last edited:
IIRC, it was in her glove box. She told the trooper about it before she dug out the reg. and he arrested her. Similar to the CO, also from PA that had his gun under his seat. Both only escaped prosecution because Christie still had a shot at the Republican nomination.

BTW, I use the "Legal Heat" app when I travel.


I don't dispute that it should be unconstitutional but the "law on the ground" doesn't see it that way.

Most of these FOPA cases involve storage that was far out of compliance with the BS set forth in the law. She probably had it in the car with her, either in her purse or on her person. So she couldn't claim FOPA.

-Mike
 
So funny story that's related.....sort of.

I've been having some problems with one of my sons and my ex-wife lately. I'll spare you most of the ridiculous details. Shortly after getting home from work on Friday night, someone is pounding at the door. I barely have my coat off. Turns out the crazy Ex called the cops, because she was "concerned for he son's safety". We've been through this before with her, multiple times. I open the door. I've got my Shiled in an IWB holster. I look at the young rookie cop, his partner behind him, and the Sergeant coming up the walk. They're doing their job, I don't have a problem, and they ask to come in. I say "Sure, but before you do, I just want to inform you that I am a licensed LTC holder, I have a 9MM shield in a holster at my 4 o'clock that is loaded with the safety on. How would you like to proceed?" after a half second pause, the rookie kid looks at me and says, and I quote again, " Thanks, how about you don't reach for yours, and I won't reach for mine?" How's that for an unexpected response? We all did what we had to do, no problems, thanked them and told them to keep safe on their way out the door.
 
So funny story that's related.....sort of.

I've been having some problems with one of my sons and my ex-wife lately. I'll spare you most of the ridiculous details. Shortly after getting home from work on Friday night, someone is pounding at the door. I barely have my coat off. Turns out the crazy Ex called the cops, because she was "concerned for he son's safety". We've been through this before with her, multiple times. I open the door. I've got my Shiled in an IWB holster. I look at the young rookie cop, his partner behind him, and the Sergeant coming up the walk. They're doing their job, I don't have a problem, and they ask to come in. I say "Sure, but before you do, I just want to inform you that I am a licensed LTC holder, I have a 9MM shield in a holster at my 4 o'clock that is loaded with the safety on. How would you like to proceed?" after a half second pause, the rookie kid looks at me and says, and I quote again, " Thanks, how about you don't reach for yours, and I won't reach for mine?" How's that for an unexpected response? We all did what we had to do, no problems, thanked them and told them to keep safe on their way out the door.


You must not have a dog.
 
So funny story that's related.....sort of.

I've been having some problems with one of my sons and my ex-wife lately. I'll spare you most of the ridiculous details. Shortly after getting home from work on Friday night, someone is pounding at the door. I barely have my coat off. Turns out the crazy Ex called the cops, because she was "concerned for he son's safety". We've been through this before with her, multiple times. I open the door. I've got my Shiled in an IWB holster. I look at the young rookie cop, his partner behind him, and the Sergeant coming up the walk. They're doing their job, I don't have a problem, and they ask to come in. I say "Sure, but before you do, I just want to inform you that I am a licensed LTC holder, I have a 9MM shield in a holster at my 4 o'clock that is loaded with the safety on. How would you like to proceed?" after a half second pause, the rookie kid looks at me and says, and I quote again, " Thanks, how about you don't reach for yours, and I won't reach for mine?" How's that for an unexpected response? We all did what we had to do, no problems, thanked them and told them to keep safe on their way out the door.

Smart move.
 
So funny story that's related.....sort of.

I've been having some problems with one of my sons and my ex-wife lately. I'll spare you most of the ridiculous details. Shortly after getting home from work on Friday night, someone is pounding at the door. I barely have my coat off. Turns out the crazy Ex called the cops, because she was "concerned for he son's safety". We've been through this before with her, multiple times. I open the door. I've got my Shiled in an IWB holster. I look at the young rookie cop, his partner behind him, and the Sergeant coming up the walk. They're doing their job, I don't have a problem, and they ask to come in. I say "Sure, but before you do, I just want to inform you that I am a licensed LTC holder, I have a 9MM shield in a holster at my 4 o'clock that is loaded with the safety on. How would you like to proceed?" after a half second pause, the rookie kid looks at me and says, and I quote again, " Thanks, how about you don't reach for yours, and I won't reach for mine?" How's that for an unexpected response? We all did what we had to do, no problems, thanked them and told them to keep safe on their way out the door.

That's exactly the right way to handle that situation.
 
All LE agencies in Mass have CJIS access. How they access it varies. The old CJIS was not internet based per se, but was client server with a dedicated line. CJIS Web is internet based. I find it hard to believe that no Dept isn't connected by internet today, although it's possible, if so it will have a dedicated CJIS terminal with a dedicated CJIS line coming out of the hub at Chelsea. Not all cruisers have mobile data terminals so some departments still have to call the info into dispatch. In CJIS Web when a general inquiry is made a response will prompt in the BOP FI checklist indicating the person run has or had a LTC or an FID. Now whether this is uniform across the system or not I don't know because the software I used was MSP specific not generic like you might think. The info I'm sharing is now a year and a half old, so I don't know what's current, but I suspect it hasn't changed too much.

Your info is still correct. Also, on CJISWeb directly below the BOPFI is a tab marked FSI, which is "the list" of what firearms the state knows you have/that have been entered into the e-fa10 system
 
Back
Top Bottom