4th Amendment/Concealed Carry

[11B3XCIB]

Referring back to a previous thread where my legally carried pistol was taken from me and the serial numbers checked by the LEO that stopped me.

I spoke with a Greenville police officer two days ago that told me it is their department policy that ANY gun, whether CWP, rifle in the back of the truck, whatever, that they are required to run the serial numbers to see if they are stolen.

How does that comply with the 4th amendment? It's a department wide policy to do so, makes me wonder if it's not illegal or if the entire department is breaking the law.

 

[C_Carson]

Sounds like BS to me. What RAS do they have that it is stolen instead of lawfully possessed? Or are they just bypassing reasonable suspicion now? Can he cite some statute or code to back up his claim? (Betting NOT.)

Did you ask him if he also makes sure your car, watch, groceries, shoes, cash, etc, isn't stolen?

 

[11B3XCIB]

I said there's no reason to assume a legally carried weapon is stolen and just carrying it shouldn't be probable cause for running the serial number.

He just said "It's a department policy regarding guns. If there's a gun in a vehicle during a traffic stop, we are supposed to call it in to see if it's stolen."

There wasn't much else to say on it. He didn't make the rule, he was just following what he'd been told and it was obvious no one had ever asked about possible 4th amendment violation in regards to it.

 

[C_Carson]

There is a court ruling (can't recall which one at the moment) that the mere presence of a firearm does not constitute RAS of a crime. Running serials is definitely a violation of our 4A.

What was the officer's name, rank and department?

 

[11B3XCIB]

I'm a little hesitant to give out his name, but I definitely have it. He works for Greenville County Sheriff's Department (which is where the real issue resides if this is a departmental policy) and he was just a deputy; no advanced rank (CPL, SGT, etc) identified. Mid-to-late 20's, close cropped hair.

If it turns out this is NOT policy, just a misinterpretation on his part, I'd divulge his name privately so he could receive proper training on the matter.

 

[FunkyMonkey]

I put a small piece of electrical tape over my firearms' serial numbers. Covering them is not illegal, only permanently defacing them is.

I've never had someone attempt to run my gun. If it happens, I will not take the tape off. My response will be similar to being asked if it is alright to search my car when stopped: "I do not consent. If you had probable cause, you wouldn't be asking me this."

Sadly, this does not work on a Glock as the stock barrels are serialized also.

And yes, it is illegal to run a gun, department policy or not. Fight it.

 

[John Canuck]

He is required to do no such thing. Either he is full of crap, or their policy is. Just Keep your carry status to yourself and avoid the whole problem.

 

[C_Carson]

If it turns out this is NOT policy, just a misinterpretation on his part, I'd divulge his name privately so he could receive proper training on the matter.

Are you going to follow through with the department about the existence of this "policy"?

 

[Tigerstripe]

He is required to do no such thing. Either he is full of crap, or their policy is. Just Keep your carry status to yourself and avoid the whole problem.

isnt it a law that you advise or show a permit when stopped? not doing that would be worse than not handing over the gun.

id ALMOST bet they know by running your tag that you have a permit. if they cant now it will come soon.

 

[armaborealis]

In states like SC (and AK, alas) you have a duty to inform. So "keeping your carry status to yourself" isn't always an option.

Additionally, the cop can search you for weapons (terry frisk) without probable cause. On the street, that means a search of your person, and in your car it means a search of the "grabbable area" (pretty much anything that isn't in a seperate locked case or the trunk) based solely on "reasonable articulable suspicion." RAS is a much lower bar to meet than PC. A LEO can probably state, "Based on my training and years of experience, I know that individuals traveling after dark in this area are often armed, and I noticed the suspect was wearing a baggy shirt often utilized to conceal weapons, and thus felt a search for weapons for officer safety was required." That will probably fly for RAS.

So, what to do about the S/N issue?

I'd take a page from the open carriers.

Tape the S/N with masking tape. Document the presence of that tape with video and witnesses. Document the LEO encounter, and while you should physically cooperate, you should be verbally stating, "I do not consent to a search of my person or property." The LEO can still Terry frisk you, but they cannot conduct a more thorough search without PC or consent. Removing the electrical tape should count as a search as it goes beyond the immediate goal of identifying and securing weapons for officer safety. This is a tactic that has been used successfully in several jurisdictions (check out OpenCarry.org).

Of course, there is a potential issue of the LEO removing the tape and simply lying about it, or removing the tape to call in the S/N and then replacing it. Hence the importance of recording the encounter to the maximum extent possible. Ultimately it will probably come down to a lawsuit or threat of a lawsuit to get the offending dep't to change its behavior. I'd suggest, at a minimum, writing the Chief of Police with a complaint as well as their civilian leadership (city manager, county board, mayor, whatever). When you get stonewalled, write to the city attorney. If still turned down then you can decide if you want to go down the actual legal action route. Just politely informing the city attorney has gotten good results in some places, though and the threat of a lawsuit often has a positive effect too.

 

[John Canuck]

He is required to do no such thing. Either he is full of crap, or their policy is. Just Keep your carry status to yourself and avoid the whole problem.

isnt it a law that you advise or show a permit when stopped? not doing that would be worse than not handing over the gun.

id ALMOST bet they know by running your tag that you have a permit. if they cant now it will come soon.

(K) A permit holder must have his permit identification card in his possession whenever he carries a concealable weapon. When carrying a concealable weapon pursuant to Article 4 of Chapter 31 of Title 23, a permit holder must inform a law enforcement officer of the fact that he is a permit holder and present the permit identification card when an officer (1) identifies himself as a law enforcement officer and (2) requests identification or a driver's license from a permit holder. A permit holder immediately must report the loss or theft of a permit identification card to SLED headquarters. A person who violates the provisions of this subsection is guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, must be fined twenty-five dollars.

It's a requirement to present your CWP. I've not said one should do anything less, just that they should do nothing more.

 

[11B3XCIB]

If it turns out this is NOT policy, just a misinterpretation on his part, I'd divulge his name privately so he could receive proper training on the matter.

Are you going to follow through with the department about the existence of this "policy"?

I don't live locally to Greenville; not even close. It was a chance encounter with the officer in the first place. He was an acquaintance of a friend who stopped by while we were shooting so I took the opportunity to ask. Not exactly sure how I can chance an entire department's policy anyhow.