Court Rules that Firearm Possession Forfeits Fourth Amendment rights

Guns America ^ | January 30, 2017 | Jordan Michaels

[boatbums]

In Florida, you must inform the officer that you have a concealed carry permit and where the firearm is located in the vehicle. If requested, you produce your CCL along with your driver's license but NOT your gun unless the officer specifically asks for it. It sounds like this Fourth Circus ruling would give the LEO the authority to force you out of the car, restrain you and conduct a search of your car AND confiscate your firearm just because you have a legally carried gun with you.

[blu]

In Michigan, CPL holders are required to inform an officer that they (the driver) have a CPL and also tell where the gun is. So, the following part of the ruling would make a search invalid.

” Accordingly, law enforcement officers may frisk lawfully stopped individuals whom the officers reasonably suspect are carrying a firearm because a detainee’s possession of a firearm poses a categorical “danger” to the officers”

I have been stopped a few times (expired plate, headlight out) and always roll my window down and put both hands out the window...cos I know that before they’ve hit their lights, they’ve run my plates and know I have a CPL.

This method also worked well on n Iowa, when I was taking a snooze just off the freeway. Evidently, out there if you’re sleeping with the seat laid back and cowgirl booted feet up on the dash, they think you’re either dead or drunk :) The officer did appreciate my little performance, once I was awake enough!

So, the moral of the story is this: If you pretend cops are like bears and are more afraid of you than you are of them, go the extra mile to assure them that you are not a danger to them, right from the beginning.

[WildHighlander57]

From what you said, it looks like their ruling doesn’t apply in Texas....

spel_grammer_an_punct_polise wrote:

““The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (in case citations, 4th Cir.) is a federal court located in Richmond, Virginia, with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts: District of Maryland. Eastern District of North Carolina. Middle District of North Carolina.””

[boatbums]

I guess it would depend upon it getting to the Supreme Court and who is on it at the time whether this is overturned. I would hope whoever is ruling would see the inherent danger in denying the Fourth Amendment rights of citizens against "unlawful" searches and seizures just for exercising their Second Amendment rights!

[boatbums]

From the article:

Not only are people with guns inherently dangerous, but people with guns also forfeit their Fourth Amendment rights:

Accordingly, the majority decision today necessarily leads to the conclusion that individuals who elect to carry firearms forego other constitutional rights, like the Fourth Amendment right to have law enforcement officers “knock-and-announce” before forcibly entering homes. . . . Likewise, it is difficult to escape the conclusion that individuals who choose to carry firearms necessarily face greater restriction on their concurrent exercise of other constitutional rights, like those protected by the First Amendment.

So, according to the United States judicial system, not only do guns = dangerous, but guns = forfeit constitutional rights.

Since when does exercising one constitutional right bar an American citizen from exercising others?

It shouldn’t, but that’s exactly the kind of faux logic peddled by the anti-gun “elites.” If guns are inherently dangerous, then those who carry guns must be equally so.

[boatbums]

According to Wikipedia:

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (in case citations, 4th Cir.) is a federal court located in Richmond, Virginia, with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts in the following districts:

District of Maryland
Eastern District of North Carolina
Middle District of North Carolina
Western District of North Carolina
District of South Carolina
Eastern District of Virginia
Western District of Virginia
Northern District of West Virginia
Southern District of West Virginia

[boatbums]

I agree! Exercising one right shouldn't mean you forfeit other rights. Where else does this even occur?

But for this case to even get a USSC ruling, it has to be moved up to it and accepted by them first. I would hope the current (and soon to be future) make up would very much like to address this rights issue. Can you imagine if Hilliary had been elected and got to name the justices?!

[imardmd1]

What is W. Va.'s code on this matter?

Was he violating state law?

Why did this wind up in Fed. Court?

This looks as though it could and would affect the reciprocity agreement for licensed carrying of a concealed weapon which exists between my state and WVa.

(Exclamation point)

[JudgemAll]

So basically it is what you have not what you admit or are found convicted of?

That is one heck of a Marxist ruling.

What next? Guilty because you got
money!? But idiot bourgeois scared of guns but who like money always fall for this trap of division

[spel_grammer_an_punct_polise]

“From what you said, it looks like their ruling doesn’t apply in Texas....”

I have no idea if it applies to Texas although it is a federal court. I copied/pasted that info from wiki. ;-)

[JudgemAll]

Obama pressured the fed court to revise its decision which initially sided with the plaintif

[boatbums]

Good advice! I have several dear family members in Law Enforcement and I respect the heck out of them. Today, they risk their very lives doing what only a few years ago was mundane cop work. Routine traffic stops, domestic disturbances and the like have all resulted in cops getting killed recently. They deserve all the respect and appreciation we can give them. The majority of them are just regular people trying to do their jobs the best they can.

[imardmd1]

Now, that comes as a great surprise, doesn’t it? And here I thought the judicial branch was supposed to be immune to badgering by the executive (prosecution) branch. < /sarc >

[xrmusn]

Well, I can just see this spiraling out of control.

Following the logic that if I am carrying a concealed weapon and am a danger to those around me wouldn’t that naturally lead a female officer to believe that since I am a male and in possession of a penis that I am capable of sexually assaulting her?

I have raised this ‘argument’ before....

Our legislature in Virginia has just passed a bill that would prohibit the State Police from releasing carry records to states that do not recognize our permits.

A ‘major’ problem is the Route 50 area in West Virginia (gun friendly) there is a short portion that runs through Maryland and the MD police have been known to stop VA & WV cars and try to find weapons....

It has passed the VA Senate (by a veto proof margin) and now is in front of the Congress - which is usually gun friendly.

[FredZarguna]

[Rannug]

After the cop pulls you over, and before he walks to your car, he has already radioed your license plate number in. He knows before he approaches if you have a CC permit or not.

I put my window down and put my hands on the top of the steering wheel. When he gets to my door I advise him I have a CC permit and am armed. Not one has asked to see my permit nor my gun. Not only is that the law in Ohio, but also common courtesy. And I know to sure and certain that there are crooked cops out there.

Just saying.

[cpdiii]

I have been stopped twice in Texas for a traffic violation. When the officer approached the car I had licence, insurance, and concealed carry license in my left hand. The first thing I said to the officer is I am armed and tell him where the weapon is.

I was always treated with respect and not asked to surrender my firearm. In fact once I said I was armed the officer knew I was a law abiding citizen and posed him no threat. Those that wish to harm an officer of the law do not tell them they are armed.

This is Texas and I love my state.

[MHGinTN]

Yes, the newly aligned scOTUS will toss this out as improperly ‘making new law’, which the fourth circuit leftist puke has done, clearly.

[imardmd1]

So, according to the United States judicial system, not only do guns = dangerous, but guns = forfeit constitutional rights.

It also means that driving a car = dangerous = forfeit constitutional rights, doesn't it?

[boatbums]

I didn't get my CCL until we moved back to Florida a year and a half ago. Before then, only my husband had a CCL and we only have the one car. So, if I was stopped, checking the plate wouldn't tell the officer that I had a gun in the car nor did we always have one with us in the car when we rode together. But you are right that the best thing to do is show both hands and inform the officer that you have a concealed carry permit and whether or not you have a firearm in the car with you and be ready to produce them if requested.

From the article, it sounds like you could forfeit your right against unreasonable searches and seizures just for having a legally carried handgun. I agree that most cops will be courteous when you follow the rules and are respectful towards them. The LAST thing they want to happen is someone getting shot - you OR themselves. Most of the real danger is with those who have unlicensed guns or who are not legally allowed to have them.