Just wondering as I came across this on another board. He was being fined for walking his dog in a State Park then they ran his DL# it showed he has AW registered and so he was searched and all his bags!

Is that legal??

Here is the link:
calguns.net/6/ubb.x?a=tpc&s=888602736&f=545600176&m=3216060511

Legal? Nope. But legal has nothing to do with CA procedures anyway so what's your point?  >gg<

Seriously, a cop has to have "probable cause" to search a person or their property. There are exceptions, of course, but this apparently didn't seem to fall under those. In case anyone hasn't figured it out yet, some cops do what they want, when they want. Cases may get dismissed from bad arrests but meanwhile the citizen has spent thousands of dollars for basically nothing but correcting a wrong done to him/her.

Clearly not all cops are like that but unfortunately the % seems to be getting bigger, not smaller.

California established the link between driver's license and AW registration back in 1990 in the 1st round of AW registrations. That linkage continued through this last round of registrations too.

Damn!!!
This explains a few things......

Sgtar15

sgtar15- Would you mind elaborating on an incident(s) you've had?

Quoted: Legal? Nope. But legal has nothing to do with CA procedures anyway so what's your point?  >gg< Seriously, a cop has to have "probable cause" to search a person or their property. There are exceptions, of course, but this apparently didn't seem to fall under those. In case anyone hasn't figured it out yet, some cops do what they want, when they want. Cases may get dismissed from bad arrests but meanwhile the citizen has spent thousands of dollars for basically nothing but correcting a wrong done to him/her. Clearly not all cops are like that but unfortunately the % seems to be getting bigger, not smaller.

It is possible that in certain jurisdictions (ahem, Orange County) the fact that you are registered as an AW holder at all automatically gives the police "reasonable suspicion" to conduct a stop/inquiry under Terry v. Ohio, at which point they will invariably come up with some sort of "reasonable suspicion", i.e. he looked like he didn't trust us when we talked to him, and thus the search.  All it takes is one judge on one day in one county to set the precedent for this.  Do you have the funds or the time to win on appeal on this issue?  Will anyone but gun-toting crazies and civil rights fanatics even notice your efforts?  

This is one of many reasons why the police databases of "individuals likely to commit crimes", which have been making the news recently, are a bad, BAD thing.  Soon someone who doesn't like you can put your name on this list, and its existence on the list will effectively throw out your 4th, 5th, and 14th amendment rights.  Wow what a great tool for people who are getting divorced to fuck with each other's lives, as if anonymous drug hotlines aren't getting out of hand already.

Keep your head low and watch out for big brother, because he is watching out for you.
Oh I'm sorry did I come off as anti-LEO in this post?  (here comes the thread hijack!)

why do they only know your handgun purchases back to 89?

What a bunch of stupid cops "lets search this guy he legally registered his rifle he must be a bad guy"

we should have bad guy registration all people who are going to commit crimes come foward.

All right, ready for the correct answer guys?

California Department of Motor Vehicles maintains the driver's license (CDL) files. Of course, any law enforcement agency may access the records in the database.

California Department of Justice maintains the Automated Firearms System (AFS). A data field in any record of firearm ownership includes a CDL number. These records also may be accessed by any law enforcement agency.

These two databases ARE NOT linked in any manner whatsoever. A check of a CDL during a traffic stop WILL NOT reveal what weapons are registered to you, nor whether you have a CCW permit. A check of your name or an individual firearm in AFS WILL NOT reveal anything about your driving record except your what your CDL number is.

I am a cop and am certified to teach the telecommunications course, so I'm very well versed in this area.  Sorry to bore you guys with the details but it just seems that people bag on California so much that they assume a bit too much.

In the particular case that this thread was based on, I would have to assume that the person was run specifically for weapons.  That's pretty darn unusual unless we are running a gun in a suspect's possession or are doing a threat assessment to determine what weapons are potentially going to be unlawfully used.

IAU149 is 100% correct.

When i run a drivers license through my agencies dispatch i do not get any firearm registration info.

For firearms registered to you I have to contact the county wide dispatch and specifically request a check for that info.

THANK GOD "IAU149" GAVE THE CORRECT ANSWER!!!!!  Geeze, I was gettn sick of the few that are "living room wanna be cops" that watch too much "COPS" on Fox channel every week, trying to give their opinion.

What IAU149 is ditto to what I was going to say.  Unless I have a gun in my possession I'll never access the AFS (automated firearm system) via my MDT in the patrol car.  

If by chance I run a person's name in the AFS file via my MDT, then I'll discover what (if any) AW's are registered to him/her.  Thats very very rare, unless I stop a gang member who is in possession of an AW (or any gun for that matter).

As far as a "link"....there is no link between CDL's and AW registration.  One's CDL is used on everything now a days...from college registration to Block Buster movie rentals etc....No employees at the DMV (except the sworn DMV investigator cops) have access to one's AW registration info via the AFS system.

Thanks for clearing the mud a little, officers!  Take care and be safe.

Thank you all for your input. This has been a very educational thread (for me at least). I am glad we got the answers from a good source.

The fact that your "assualt weapon" IS registered should indicate that you ARE a law abiding citizen and NEGATE suspicios behavior, NOT INDICATE suspicious behavior.

Good grounds for a lawsuit, I think.

Glad to help out, guys. And Troy, yes, officers can access your gun records from a patrol car's MDT. The officer needed to run your AFS record, which will display a maximum of 12 entries - or a gun's serial number can be directly run to show ownership or other associiation, like evidence, pawn, etc.

Thank you for the 2 LEO's for the correct answers. I am getting tired of just stupid answers (not here) of basically people saying too bad you live in the PRK.

I build command vehicles for a living so I can see what is on the Laptops (sorry, we don't use MDT's anymore) and I can see what is on my CDL. I think that Park Ranger had too much time on his hands. It's also none of the Ranger's business "why he owns that".

Yeah, it does say, "DO NOT ARREST BASED SOLELY ON THIS RESPONSE," or something very close to that.  It sure pissed me off the first time I saw it in relation to an assault weapon record.  That's the normal response when you run a parolee, damn it!

This, again, is further proof that DOJ is the originator of the AFS records as they also have the Supervised Release Files (parolees).

I have, ahem, a few assault weapons registered and it galls me a bunch that I have anything in my record that looks the same as a damn felon's record does.