WSP's policy re: traffic stops. (Washington State)

[k22fan]

I'm in WA which does not require us to inform LE we are armed unless they ask but since running our license plate brings up the vehicle owner's carry permit AND list of retail handgun purchases I figure they'll assume I have a gun and hand them my carry permit along with my driver's license.

My last traffic stop the state trooper didn't want to take my licenses back to his car saying that if he did WSP's policy was that he take possession of my handgun and unload it. He only jotted down my info on a shirt pocket not pad and gave me a little driving instruction. Fact is he never asked if I had a gun and I didn't say I only had my bullseye pistols unloaded in their traveling case. I wasn't getting a ticket, so to use a salesman's expression, "Don't talk past the close."

If that is WSP's policy I can imagine situations where it would be a royal PITA for someone traveling in the rain with a lot of pistols. If perchance a WSP employee reads this I'd appreciate comment on your policy.

 

[Smoke]

Why don't you contact WSP and ask them?

 

[b_san]

If that's the policy it's a highly annoying and IMO an unsafe one for both the troopers and citizens, the more times a loaded handgun gets handled the more chances there are that something goes wrong.

 

[Kanewpadle]

I was pulled over by WSP last summer. He asked for my license. I also gave him my permit. He handed it back to me and thanked me. Nothing else was said about it.

I highly doubt they have access to all gun transactions.

 

[venomballistics]

If that's the policy it's a highly annoying and IMO an unsafe one for both the troopers and citizens, the more times a loaded handgun gets handled the more chances there are that something goes wrong.

Amen brother
keeping ones booger hooks off the piece is a policy that has helped keep my ND numbers right at zero for decades.

 

[BaldEagle1313]

Interesting. Was pulled over about three years ago, handed him my license, registration, insurance but not my CPL, notification not being mandatory here. Wasn't asked a single question concerning a permit or whether or not I was presently armed - and it was 12:30 AM. He was more concerned about if I'd been drinking (no, never) and whether I had seen the sign dropping the speed limit from 60 to 50 a mile back (again, no). Sixty-four in a fifty zone, $125, thank you very much for your donation to the state general fund. First ticket since Jimmy Carter was president.

Just curious, how do you know him running my plate brings up not only my CPL but my retail purchases? I know the technology isn't hard, and it makes sense from their standpoint to link the info, but having this state actually get anything done seems so unlikely.

 

[Doug M.]

I think it depends on how the radio operator runs the plate and DL info. They have about the worst dispatch protocols in the state, and until a few years ago not only did not call out stops before making them, but often didn't run any of the data while in contact and before writing a ticket. They are less awful now, but their software is out of date. (Then there is that offender assisted suicide position for contact. Gawd. That would be a fail in FTO in my old agency and most others, and even doing it in the academy would get one dinged pretty hard.) I'm aware of a couple getting hits on cars or drivers while in contact; not sure how much of that was attributable to operator and how much to software.

I would use the MDC before a stop most of the time, running the plates and driver. Updated software in about 2011 allowed most checks to by run just with one key, instead of cutting and pasting the DL #, and then pasting it again into the local system. Slow, stupid and unwieldy. I NEVER ran the recent purchases on anyone during a contact, because one should assume that all persons contacted are armed and I had no reason to care unless I might be jealous that they were making more good purchases than I was. The CPL data was pulled up by our operators and reported by code, but I believe the newer software does it faster and more easily. Didn't really care about that, either, for most traffic based stops.

The relevant policy and training academy materials would be available by public records request; contact info is at Welcome to the Washington State Patrol. The Washington Association of Prosecuting Attorneys has a search and seizure manual on its website at http://www.waprosecutors.org/MANUALS/search/May%202012%20%20final%20Search%20Seizures%20and%20Confessions.pdf. Pam is contracted by WSP through WAPA to teach search and seizure at the WSP academy and the manual and her teaching overlap. If you go through the table of contents, at pp 130-135 is "weapons frisk" and related discussion. I am not sure of the source of the return an empty weapon paradigm; I think it pisses people off for no good reason, and an unfamiliar configuration is risky. I recall a poster on another forum telling the story of a trooper coming back to his car and asking the driver why the decocker did not work (on a 1911). That is a disaster waiting to happen.

HOWEVER, there is no legal authority of which I am aware (and I have done a lot in that area of the law, including a book on Terry Stops, which is what a traffic stop is, and teaching the material) that would even allow for such a policy as described. If there is such a policy, it is unlawful and needs to be fixed. It would not be the first time they have had policies that are BADLY flawed/blatantly unlawful.

But: I was asked once on a stop (trooper must have been BORED, I was 5 over at 2100 on the way home from work and had no DUI indicators) about being armed. "Of course" was not likely the answer he expected, but he did not ask to see; just some form of reasonable request not to do anything consistent with drawing.

 

[Doug M.]

I got curious enough to reach out to a source, a senior officer with whom I have had many positive contacts over the years. He confirms that there is no such policy. My suspicion is that the trooper misspoke or was just discouraging you.

If you want, drop me an email (works better than PMs, generally), we can figure out the District in which this encounter occurred, and I can help you get a decent point of contact. None of us needs this happening, including that trooper and his peers. Better to get some informal communication and address it than to have someone make a significant error in the future.

 

[k22fan]

Thank-you for your efforts and research. I think it is VERY unlikely anyone driving around mid-day would have been stopped for the weak excuse he used, so my presumption is his primary purpose was to learn who was moving around at that hour. In bedroom communities and small towns where they darn near could roll up the streets at night that's what I expect patrolmen to do. The stop ended friendly and with no consequences so good for him and I don't see any point in making a fuss. From what you wrote I doubt I'll hear what he said is WSP's gun policy again, it's not my job to correct LEO behavior and I do not want to risk getting on the bad side of one.

 

[Doug M.]

Roger that. I can see why, and the way I have dealt with a few of things is through connections who know I don't want a record made - just a friendly chat over coffee. (I have a couple of connections such as this one. I have had "a few" conflicts with the Executive Staff, to the extent that the Chief called me at home, and so my PITA reputation makes it harder to do stuff quietly with a few exceptions. I use them to pass stuff on so the agency does not get jammed up if the right message can be passed along.) I have a great deal of respect and affection for the troopers (and most Sergeants) with whom I have worked; the Captains and above, not so much.

If you were out at a "less conventional" hour, shall we say, I can see a stop being made for weak reasons. At some hours of the night, >25% of all drivers are impaired, and that's a bread and butter enforcement action for WSP. The other part of that is that aggressive traffic enforcement is the best single method for finding and suppressing most criminal actors. (Google "Kansas City Experiment" if you are curious. I looked a few years ago, and have not found any other research that contradicts that outcome. I would not be surprised if some "intelligence based policing" will have an impact on certain criminal actors, but that's not inconsistent with the prior research as far as I know.) WSP spends a lot of time poking around in the vehicle code (Title 46, for you Washington nerds) and other laws that will impact vehicle operation. They live in the arcana of that stuff.

 

[hotrod150]

I've lived in Washington for 22 years, had a carry license for 21-1/2. Been pulled over maybe four times by WSP and once by town cops. One ticket by WSP for no seatbelt & one by the townie for speeding. Never been asked about my carry license, or whether I was carrying or had a gun in the vehicle.

 

[Doug M.]

My last traffic stop the state trooper .... He only jotted down my info on a shirt pocket not pad and gave me a little driving instruction.

*
I had to come back and look at this to confirm my recollection and horror. I am mortified that he tied up his hands like that while in contact with you. His FTO should have torn about 10 pounds off his backside for it when he was a cadet. I would not have tolerated that from a trainee. That would be a discipline issue (violation of safety standards) in most agencies.

 

[Malpasowildlifer]

I worked in WA for four years and my agency, in WA contracts with WSP for dispatch. I moved in February. I never heard of the policy.