Your opinions requested. Lawful or unnecessary risk?

[tattedupboy]

Originally Posted by sambo42xa

I do not know the Laws for CA..Sounds to me that He wanted to be the "test case" because, if I read it right, didn't he say he has done this before and never had a problem? From reading His replies to the authorities sounds like TO ME that He wanted/expected this to happen, and wanted to see what would happen. If He has all the proper paperwork etc., I do see anything wrong except trying to prove something .
I DO agree with Glock Fan about giving out information. I do not give any out unless asked....period.

I agree that volunteering information about the fact that he had all those firearms was dumb and is pretty much asking to be harassed. Nevertheless, he shouldn't have been because he did nothing wrong.

[Glock Fan]

From what I understand of CA law, you're allowed to have the firearms secured in your vehicle as long as the cases are locked (hard or soft case). Pretty sure that there's nothing in the law that states that you need to travel "directly" between specific points. Here in PRHI, we're restricted to traveling between certain points like to and from the gun range, to and from a gunsmith or gun shop, to and from a gun show, etc.

I taught a firearms safety class today and on my way home noticed that I needed fuel. I stopped at a gas station for fuel where I was approached by a uniformed police officer. He recognized me from a recent gun show and asked if I was a firearms instructor. I told him that I was and he asked if I was heading home from the range. He asked me "where's your weapons?" I told him "I don't have any weapons." He then asked "what were you shooting at the range?" I told him that I had a few handguns that were properly cased in my vehicle. He then said "You know that you can be arrested for stopping, don't you?" I then told him that though the law states that you are to travel between specific points, there are two court rulings that have determined that it's o.k. for an individual to stop for gas because running out of fuel with a trunk full of guns and ammo is a lot worse than stopping for a few minutes for gas. He then said "Are you getting smart with me?" I told him "I wouldn't think of getting smart with a police officer, but suggest that you check with your supervisor or FTO." (The guy smelled like a rookie). The officer told me "finish fueling up, but dont' go anywhere." I asked if I was being "detained". He said "This will only take a few minutes." About 5 minutes or so passed when a sergeant arrived. I thought the guy looked familiar, but didn't say anything. The sergeant looked at me and waved, then went straight for the officer that initially approached me. After a brief conversation, the initial officer approached and apologized for "unnecessarily questioning" me. I asked him "Am I free to go?" He said "yes, sorry for the confusion and thanks for being polite and understanding."

Here's a clear case of an over zealous cop making several mistakes. I'm kind of irritated by the encounter, but not to the point of wanting to file a formal complaint. I'm sure his sergeant "straightened him out", and I'm sure that he'll be a lot more careful about messing with gun owners in the future.



gf

[Boomboy007]

What a great example of proper response to a police stop. For those of you wondering, although GF was already stopped getting gas, this is considered a stop. Nice to see that, despite the obvious "anti" feelings of the suspected rookie, he was straightened out immediately by a supervisor. The fact that he did not want to answer your question about whether or not you were being detained (as you already know, you were) is a sign of his being less than confident in the legality of his stop. It just goes to show you that this individual, recognizing you as a "gun guy", actually was "out to get you" (paranoids rejoice!). I also like the fact that the super said not a word to you, but proceeded to "educate" his officer.

I must admit that I would have considered filing a report, not because of the stop per se, but because of the "Are you getting smart with me?" comment. I have seen a lot of damage done to those with "smart mouths". It is one of the reasons I quit the job. If this guy has such little tolerance that even being presented with legal, local precedents supporting your right to stop and refuel, I doubt his long term suitability for the job. Nice to see that Hawaii is not the complete paradise that everyone thinks.

Kudos to you, GF, and to the un-named supervisor.