Official Police contact- What do you say?

[Rastoff]

I'm pretty sure this is not true even though many installations have placed signs at the gates stating such and referencing 18 U.S.C, Part 1, Chapter 44, Section 930.

For decades I transported shotguns and other firearms on and off base while a member of Scott's Rod & Gun Club. I even had several random inspections at the gate with firearms in the vehicle. A few years ago they closed the gun club for financial reasons and all of a sudden signs popped up at the gates stating it was illegal to carry firearms on the installation and the reference the exact US code I cited above.

The specific US code they are citing prohibits firearms inside federal facilities and very specifically defines facility as "a building or part thereof". I've been able to find no federal law that makes it a crime to possess a firearm while driving down the road through a military base and it really can't exist. Some bases, such as Tyndall, have US highways running right through the middle of the base.

You know what? I believe you're correct.

I just spent some time reading Title 18 › Part I › Chapter 44 › § 930, it's not long. They do indeed define a "Facility" as a building or part thereof. I've been in and around the military for so long, I just accepted it as truth. Hmmm...

Also, the penalty, for carrying in a federal facility, may be a misdemeanor or felony depending on what you do with the gun while there. Curiouser and curiouser.

Anyone that wants to read the law for themselves, it's here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/930 I highly recommend that you do read it. The more of us that know the law, the smarter we'll be about it.

This will require some more research.

 

[Rastoff]

It's a felony to bring a firearm onto a military installation...

I'm pretty sure this is not true even though many installations have placed signs at the gates stating such and referencing 18 U.S.C, Part 1, Chapter 44, Section 930.

OK, it took some searching, but I found the answer. It is indeed illegal, and may be a felony, to have a gun on a military installation if that installation has a standing order saying it's not allowed. Pay attention now because this can be a little confusing.

DEG is correct, the law he quoted, 18 USC Part 1, Chapter 44, Section 930(g)(1) says, "(g) As used in this section:
(1) The term "Federal facility" means a building or part thereof owned or leased by the Federal Government, where Federal employees are regularly present for the purpose of performing their official duties." So, yes, it only pertains to a building. However, it is never wise to attempt to use one technicality of the law unless you've searched the whole law, and law is huge. Here's where it gets sticky...

The US Constitution gives the military almost total authority within the areas of its control. Things like military discipline and conduct on military installations are outside of normal channels. Technically, they don't have to follow the bill of rights. Why? Because Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the US Constitution says:

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;

This clause gives Congress "carte blanche" to handle military bases as they see fit.

Then there is this...no, I'm going to stop here. You can look up all the references yourself. I have and they are many. The bottom line is, it is illegal to carry a gun on a military base. Any lawful order must be obeyed by both military and civilians as long as they are on a military installation. A "no guns" policy fits the rules for a lawful order and can be enforced. Security Forces, both military and civilian, have special dispensation because of their job.

Highways passing through? I don't know, maybe they have a special rule for that. Maybe they just overlook it. You may do as you please, but if I have to go through a gate, I'm not taking my gun in there on purpose.

 

[wingriderz]

Had this happen in Florida. You have no duty to inform. Officer.How I have always handle. It. If an officer doesn't. Ask about weapons I don't. Tell. If they do ask I say yes I a weapon. In right front pocket. How would you like me to procede. They will tell ya what to do from there. Bolth times they asked they bolth said your fine leave it in pocket. It works well. For me. I volunteer for my church sercuirty checks. And had to call a few times. Also with my years as a volunteer. E M T. I have a good dialog with P D.

 

[les.b]

I'm just happy to live in probably the only country in the world where this conversation needs to occur. Think about it: folks in England don't have to worry about being stopped while carrying, they aren't allowed to. I was stopped at Heathrow airport (London), just pre 9/11, had a little spyderco knife, and I mean little, on my key ring. The lady screening at the counter saw it and literally screamed "lock blade"!!!! It was about an inch and a quarter long. Security comes running up, and they take the knife. I was upset because it was a retirement present from a guy I worked with when I retired from the police force. So I call my buddy, who is a detective superintendent at Scotland Yard, and he drives all the way out to the airport, gets the knife and mails it to me back in the States. I still have it. Next time I went to London, I left it at home.

Point is, only in America do we need to have this conversation!!! Thank God for our freedoms!

PS .... I'm sitting in an Indian restaurant in London with this same Detective. We're eating hot Indian food, and he can't take off his jacket because he's worried that someone might see his... Guess what? Side arm? Nope. One of those little ASP expandable batons in a belt holster. I kidded him a little, he was (retired now) after all a detective on one of the major police forces in the world. He had trained often in the US and loved to come over here because the host agencies always let him shoot all different kinds of firearms.

 

[cmort666]

Please remember- Cops are human and prone to the same stressors as real people-but have deadly force at their fingertips. My advise: Always err on the side of caution.

You clearly view it as an adversarial relationship as do I.

I strenuously avoid all contacts with the police. To that end, I avoid people, places, things and activities which lead to contacts with the police.

I always carry a voice recorder of some kind, especially when armed, and use it.

I expect EVERYBODY to obey the law.

 

[Skeet 028]

Had to take some classes with the state police trainees when I was made a fire investigator for our FD. I was surprised that the new guys were taught that their job was adversarial... they were the good guys and everybody else were bad guys. Worked with cops all the time and I saw the change happening over time. As some have stated before...I avoid the police as much as possible. Most I know here in Wyoming are pretty laid back. No carry permits needed here and I think they just consider everyone to be carrying.

 

[ladder13]

You clearly view it as an adversarial relationship as do I.

I strenuously avoid all contacts with the police. To that end, I avoid people, places, things and activities which lead to contacts with the police.

I always carry a voice recorder of some kind, especially when armed, and use it.

I expect EVERYBODY to obey the law.

I've started setting up a cam to record any encounter should it occur. Pointed square at the drivers side window.

 

[cmort666]

I've started setting up a cam to record any encounter should it occur. Pointed square at the drivers side window.

In some places I would consider that virtually mandatory.

 

[Moe Mentum]

This is a simple one, No Declare State = No Tell
Declare State= Hand over your CCW permit + Drivers License....That's all there is to it.

 

[ladder13]

In New York State, I think that Troopers/Deputy Sheriffs/Local Police know if you have a pistol permit before they even walk up to your window, after you are pulled over.

Not in my part of the state, according to my county clerk who would release the info, but I've heard Broome County ties in DMV records.

 

[Varangi]

You clearly view it as an adversarial relationship as do I.

I strenuously avoid all contacts with the police. To that end, I avoid people, places, things and activities which lead to contacts with the police.

I always carry a voice recorder of some kind, especially when armed, and use it.

I expect EVERYBODY to obey the law.

No- I do not view contacts w/ the public as adversarial. What ever happened to the polite casual contact w/ a nice hello? My 13 year old daughter walked by a uniformed police officer this morning and with a big smile said, "Hello!" This put an ear to ear grin on the cop. I always tried to do something nice for someone when I was working because my job was to create and administer misery to the bad guys. If I made contact w/ an individual who put a tape recorder or a camera in my face, and he needed assistance- I think I'd go find a donut.

 

[cmort666]

No- I do not view contacts w/ the public as adversarial.

The attitude you displayed was adversarial. That's ok, because that's what the relationship is. Unlike others, I don't pretend otherwise.

If I made contact w/ an individual who put a tape recorder or a camera in my face, and he needed assistance- I think I'd go find a donut.

As I said, I avoid contact with the police by obeying the law and avoiding people, places, things and situations which make contact with the police likely. That means that you would be initiating contact with me, and probably for reasons not known to me. That being the case, I have as much interest in protecting myself as you do in protecting yourself. Recording the encounter goes a long way toward achieving that goal.

 

[kbm6893]

Recording a cop is a sure way to lose any chance of discretion and a friendly warning. Nobody wants a camera pointed in their face.

And nobody has ever really thought through the body camera thing. First of all, I guarentee you I would never give a warning to somebody who committed an offense. The next guy who got arrested or ticketed would claim racial or gender bias.

Can the cop turn it off when he goes to the bathroom? Doesn't he get any privacy? And if he can turn it off, what's to say he didn't turn it off before he did something else that he didn't want to be recorded?

It takes away a cops right to free expression. Riding with a partner for 8 hours, you have lots of time to talk. Partners are tighter than brothers. So no more bitching about the new sarge, or talking about your wife and kids. Commenting on the crackheads on the corner? All gone.

How about privacy for crime victims? Does the woman who was beaten and raped want to be taped? How about influential people? They call the cops too. Think the family of Robin Williams is gonna stand for cops videotaping Robin hanging from that closet? Or their anguished screams as they cut him down?

 

[cmort666]

Recording a cop is a sure way to lose any chance of discretion and a friendly warning. Nobody wants a camera pointed in their face.

I don't want a break. I want to be left alone. The best way to achieve that is to obey the law. I don't consider myself special or somehow specially entitled to violate the law. I hold EVERYBODY to that standard. Needless to say, there are people from all walks of life who disagree and consider themselves above the law.

As I said, I don't want ANY contact with the police. The best, albeit not foolproof way to achieve that is to avoid people, places, things and activities which attract the attention of the police.

If despite following that policy, I have involuntary contact with the police, I'm going to protect myself, just as they do. Recording all encounters achieves that result to a great degree.

 

[vito]

I'll admit I am of two minds on this issue, and based on the number of comments to this thread I think I am probably not alone feeling this way. I travel a fair amount, and since I might not be sure whether the state I am in requires disclosure or not would tend to favor a policy of always informing the LEO, either by handing my carry license along with my driver's license, and/or by stating "I am licensed to carry a concealed firearm and I am doing so". But I am also aware that what otherwise might be a short and routine traffic stop with me issued a ticket for speeding or whatever, might well become a big deal if I tell the officer that I am licensed and armed, and this makes me think that "Don't ask, don't tell" might be a more prudent policy. Since I have not yet been stopped by an LEO since I received my concealed carry license I am leaning toward saying nothing orally, but just handing both licenses to the officer when he approaches the window of my vehicle (along with my proof of insurance).

When I travel to NY, to visit my elderly mother, and need to pass through NJ on the way, the choice is easy. I don't carry for the entire trip so there is nothing to inform the LEO about. Of course it is frustrating to know that I can legally carry from my home state and all the states of my trip except NJ and NY but that keeps me from even keeping a firearm in my vehicle.

 

[cmort666]

I travel a fair amount, and since I might not be sure whether the state I am in requires disclosure or not would tend to favor a policy of always informing the LEO, either by handing my carry license along with my driver's license, and/or by stating "I am licensed to carry a concealed firearm and I am doing so".

Don't do the former in Ohio as it is not considered "notification" for the purposes of the statute. You must VERBALLY inform the cop (if and ONLY if you are actually armed) you are armed and have a valid carry credential. Failing to do so will make you subject to arrest and prosecution for "failure to inform".

Furthermore, you should verbally inform even if you have to shout over the cop or disobey an order to remain silent, as people have obeyed direct orders to remain silent, then been prosecuted for obeying those direct orders.

 

[ladder13]

Requiring EVERYONE to obey the law....if only.

 

[Old cop]

After reading through all these posts I have to say I'm sorry some of you had a bad experience w/an officer and you are now of a mind "not to make that mistake again." Understood, but I still stand by my initial advise to declare b/c it's the safest thing to do for everyone. The last thing you want is for one of these less than stellar cops to overreact and hurt you or someone else.

I was in police management for about 20 years and all of us in that position, then and now, share the frustration with the community re: bad cops. We want them to have their future freed up to seek employment in some other discipline.

 

[cmort666]

After reading through all these posts I have to say I'm sorry some of you had a bad experience w/an officer and you are now of a mind "not to make that mistake again." Understood, but I still stand by my initial advise to declare b/c it's the safest thing to do for everyone.

It may be or it may not be.

• Nothing may happen.
• You might get proned out in a felony stop.
• You might get shot.

My default position is "obey the law".

The law in Ohio requires me to notify. If stopped in Ohio, I will.

The law elsewhere does not require me to notify. In those places, unless there is imminent danger of exposure, I will not.

 

[Old TexMex]

Recording a cop is a sure way to lose any chance of discretion and a friendly warning. Nobody wants a camera pointed in their face.

And nobody has ever really thought through the body camera thing. First of all, I guarentee you I would never give a warning to somebody who committed an offense. The next guy who got arrested or ticketed would claim racial or gender bias.

Can the cop turn it off when he goes to the bathroom? Doesn't he get any privacy? And if he can turn it off, what's to say he didn't turn it off before he did something else that he didn't want to be recorded?

It takes away a cops right to free expression. Riding with a partner for 8 hours, you have lots of time to talk. Partners are tighter than brothers. So no more bitching about the new sarge, or talking about your wife and kids. Commenting on the crackheads on the corner? All gone.

How about privacy for crime victims? Does the woman who was beaten and raped want to be taped? How about influential people? They call the cops too. Think the family of Robin Williams is gonna stand for cops videotaping Robin hanging from that closet? Or their anguished screams as they cut him down?

Having issues with life on lifes terms?
The world has changed right under our noses.
If a workplace situation is beyond my control, I can accept it or get another job.