Court Rules Police May Ask Drivers about Guns

CNSNews ^ | 9/06/01 | Susan Jones

[G.Mason]

"The case stems from a traffic stop in 1999, in which an Oklahoma Highway patrol officer stopped a car at a seatbelt checkpoint</FONT COLOR="RED"> and asked the driver if he had a gun in his pickup truck."

Seatbelt checkpoint?

This seems so common today no one gives it a second thought, though blatently offensive and IMHO, unconstitutional.

Now, was it a seatbelt checkpoint or an "anything I can find" checkpoint?

Bye Bye American Pie

[error99]

If the officer asked the motorist if he had a loaded gun in the car,
and the motorist truthfully answered "yes",
then why was the officer "searching" the car?
If an officer asks me the question, I guess I am legally bound to answer truthfully...
would "in my car" include "on my person"?

[Highest Authority]

Your papers please!

[unamused]

Yeah...I'm sure that the guy who has decided he is going to blow away the cop would answer truthfully......right.

[marktwain]

IMHO, you are not bound to answer. You can say, my attourney advises me not to answer questions such as these. Am I the subject of a criminal investigation? There is an attorney in Phoenix who gives out little cards to read in these exact circumstances. I'll see if I can find a copy, and post it to this thread.

[Gil4]

...and asked the driver if he had a gun in his pickup truck. The driver said yes;

I guess the correct answer to that question is "none of your business."

[Libertarian_4_eva]

If the officer asked the motorist if he had a loaded gun in the car, and the motorist truthfully answered "yes", then why was the officer "searching" the car? If an officer asks me the question, I guess I am legally bound to answer truthfully... would "in my car" include "on my person"?

You are legally bound to lie or do anything you want intill you get into the courtroom then you have to tell the truth. Even then you only have to tell enough of the truth that they can prove beyond a resonable doubt in a purgy trial. Just a little factoid for some of you.

[Libertarian_4_eva]

I guess the correct answer to that question is "none of your business ".

Look above for my post on what you should have the right to in almost every state in the union. Saying what you stated would give the officer a right to search your car. You have to answer him it just does not have to be the truth. Another thing if your ever pulled over by the cops they have the upperhand because most people think they can talk themselfs out of it. You can't and they work on that. Infact its legal for them to lie right to your face and make deals that don't exist. My advice would be to only say I want a lawyer. If everyone that got arrested would do that instead of trying to talk their way out of the case many many many less people would ever go to jail.

[DWSUWF]

"...I guess the correct answer to that question is "none of your business."..."

Which -to the cop- simply means "Yes."

I thank God that my parents cared enough about me to see to it that I wasn't burdened with a slave's mentality. It would never enter my head for a single instant to act against my own interest in such a situation.

I was taught that truth is a precious thing. Far too precious a thing to waste on an enemy.

Now consider this... Is a cop who has detained you at a 'checkpoint' your friend? Or is he your enemy? Hint: He's one of the two, and he cannot be both.

No one can untie this knot for you. You have to unravel it yourself. But you should realize that the stakes are high, and that embracing the 'wrong' answer will cost you your liberty or your life.

[Dallas]

"The terrifying truth is that officers face a very real risk of being assaulted with a dangerous weapon each time they stop a vehicle," the full court said in its ruling, issued Wednesday.

This flies in the face of constitutional laws, which are supposed to protect a person against self-incrimination.

[Right Face]

Uh, no officer, that's not a gun in my pocket. I am just so excited that you pulled me over.

[bvw]

Ditto. IMNHO, you can lie to save yourself from false imprisonment or other great harms. In this case a refusal to answer would reasonably be viewed by the police officer as a YES, and his consequent actions endangering to you. A non-lie approach might be to explain, immediately to any officer that stops you, that it is your policy not to answer any but the most minimal of questions. Remember you are then being stopped for suspicion about yourself -- not as some by-standing witness to some other crime.

I'd be interested to know if the Federal Court placed any prohibitions on inferences made by the officer on the basis of a refusal to answer.

Just to note, I don't see why the officer can't ask anything, if it is you are already stopped for some other cause and the questions are not lengthly.

[bvw]

Yet this is, on the face of it, a silly question to ask. It is like the "Are you sleeping?" question. The only true yes is a non-answer.

[packrat01]

Cops can ask any dang thing they want to ask.

"Have you stopped beating your wife, yet?"

"Did that beer you were drinking make you drunk?"

"Did you bury the body real deep?"

Do you have to answer truthfully? That's the real question.

[packrat01]

bump

[Joseph Kraig]

This is really a good example of what ignorance can do for you.

In most states (all states) you have the right to ask if and why you are being detained. You do not need to answer any but the most basic questions and then only if they have to do with the reason for being detained and then only with a lawyers help if you want it.

So you simply ask, "What am I being stopped for?" If the officers response is "We are checking for wearing seatbelts." You continue that you are wearing your seatbelt. "Is there anything else I am being "detained" for?" If they are detaining you they have to have a reason. Most good policemen will try nearly anything to search your car. Fine if you are ignorant of your rights they will get to. If you know that they can't push you around they will let you go and try to get an easier catch. It is possible they could arrest you but it would be extreemly rare.

DONT'T LET THESE PEOPLE PUSH YOU AROUND!

[Reelect President Dubya]

"Just say no."