Concealed Carry = Probable Cause
A federal district judge in Atlanta has ruled that a officer who sees your gun has reasonable suspicion. Your carry permit is an affirmative defense. Court documents here.
13 Responses to “Concealed Carry = Probable Cause”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
December 16th, 2009 at 11:00 am
This is similar to the recent Texas law on concealed carry being legal in an automobile while traveling. When the new law was passed, clarifying that driving in one’s car was indeed “traveling” and met the laws requirements, the Houston DA informed the police that “traveling” was an affirmative defense, to be decided at trial, and anyone found with a loaded handgun in their car was to be arrested.
The purpose of the TX law was to stop local police and DAs from exactly such shenanigans.
The GA case appears to be one of many that are trying to make self defense with firearms as great a legal risk to the defender as possible.
December 16th, 2009 at 11:24 am
I haven’t heard about this case until now. I thought the SCOTUS had ruled that possesion of a firearm by itself is not probable cause?
December 16th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
I wonder if our new Mayor in Houston will kick the dumb ass DA in the butt and resend that rule? Our idiot police chief is being shit canned by Parker, one can only hope.
(Ok, the idiot police chief is quiting the day before Parker takes office because she made it public knowledge that he was gone if she became mayor, is quiting before you are fired still a face saving measure if it’s public knowledge you are going to get fired?)
December 16th, 2009 at 12:32 pm
The standard involved is reasonable suspicion.
The judge ruled that since Joejuh criminalizes carrying a handgun, the permit is merely a defense, the officer had reasonable suspicion to do an investigatory stop.
The fix is thus: Joejuh needs to modify their statute to make lack of a permit an element of the statute.
December 16th, 2009 at 12:41 pm
“The judge ruled that since Joejuh criminalizes carrying a handgun, the permit is merely a defense, the officer had reasonable suspicion to do an investigatory stop.”
Substitute “driving a car” for “carrying a handgun”, and “drivers license” for “permit”. What is the difference ?
Endless mischief ensues.
December 16th, 2009 at 12:53 pm
“I haven’t heard about this case until now. I thought the SCOTUS had ruled that possesion of a firearm by itself is not probable cause?”
That was my first thought as well, but an investigative stop may be allowed because it’s carrying in a manner that is generally illegal. I doubt that the affirmative defense argument will hold up in a higher court, though – once you show (by presenting your carry permit) that you are legally carrying, there should be no probable cause for anything further, and especially not for an arrest. It’s an attempt to use intimidation to discourage people from legally carrying, and I sincerely hope that there’s a federal suit brewing over it.
“is quiting before you are fired still a face saving measure if it’s public knowledge you are going to get fired?”
It’s not so much “saving face” as it is that it lets him say “no” when he applies for another job and gets asked if he has ever been fired.
December 16th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
Hmm…
I didn’t RTFA, but Reasonable Suspicion isn’t enough for arrest. As Shootin’ Buddy pointed out, it’s enough for an investigatory detention (such as a Terry Stop), but if you can produce your permit then the cop doesn’t have Probable Cause. I could see it if you accidentally forgot your wallet and couldn’t provide the permit, but that’s not what’s meant.
December 16th, 2009 at 4:04 pm
Yep, the judge was full of crap, and is covering for the locals. He needs a reversal slapped on his record.
RAS can result in a detention, however. Courts have held that if you can’t move to a full arrest in about 20 minutes or so of investigating, you need to stop detaining.
As soon as the permit came out, RAS went away, and the cop should have ended the detention.
December 16th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
I went through the same crap on a Tri-met train in Portland … showed permit, transit cop argued that CCW was against rules.
I asked him to show me the regulation. He did so. I backing him up to the paragraph that excluded cops and CCW holders from enforcement of this entire section of the ORS.
After I called his bluff, he radioed a supervisor, and was told to back off and leave me alone. Which is how the MARTA stop should have ended, but didn’t.
December 16th, 2009 at 4:24 pm
“It’s not so much “saving face” as it is that it lets him say “no” when he applies for another job and gets asked if he has ever been fired.”
For regular people, being fired might be a detriment. For cops, it doesn’t matter too much.
December 16th, 2009 at 8:24 pm
By this goofy judicial reasoning, anyone driving a car can be pulled over, dragged out of the car and detained on suspicion of driving without a license, despite having a license.
Individuals who are engaging in licensed activity should not be subject to police harassment and detention merely as a result of engaging in that activity.
December 16th, 2009 at 8:25 pm
As a concealed carry instructor, I continually tell my students that you can avoid most problems while carrying concealed if you understand that CONCEALED MEANS NOBODY CAN SEE THAT YOU ARE CARRYING A GUN!!!
December 17th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
Dann,
That’s what I was thinking. If the cop saw the gun, then the person wasn’t carrying concealed. Open carry is illegal in GA and thus does warrant a few questions. Since the judge ruled that a permit is an affirmative defense against open carry violation, it seems like what the judge really did was legalize open carrying for permit holders.