Back by request. We had the pleasure of meeting with Evan Nappen, one of the most known gun lawyers in America. He gave us advice that is of service for all gun owners who want their rights protected and for those who wish not to be pushed around by the police. His advice can be seen at the "piggy bank" icon at:
National CCW Reciprocity Foundation http://www.NationalCCW.com

All better.

I have a problem when he says, [blue]" Second, ask for your attorney. You have a right to have an attorney present during any questioning. By asking for your attorney, you may not be interrogated. ..."[/blue]

This is confusing.  My understanding has been that your Miranda right to have an attorney present begins when you are in police custody.   And that in a traffic stop you are initially not in custody (under arrest), you are being detained.  

Has this changed?  Is it incorrect? How? Please tell me under what ruling(s) there is a pre-arrest right to an attorney.

So it would seem that the time to ask for an attorney is when you are informed that you are under arrest or maybe when you are asked to sign a citation for a misdemeanor (instead of an infraction).  Could you get Evan Nappen to clarify this?

I agree on the remaining silent part, even though it may mean that you get a ticket instead of a warning.

Finally, could you get him to say someting about what can an officer legally order you to do in a traffic stop?  Stay in the car?  Get out of the car?  Search your pockets for the keys and then open the trunk with them? Take the field sobriety test?

[red]P.R.K.

A traffic stop is not an arrest & interrogation, it is a detention. Althought the detention will turn into an arrest if you refuse to provide the basic info needed to fill out the citation, or refuse to sign the promise to appear.

Some peaple are under the mistaken impression that if they say they want their lawyer, that the cops will go fetch them one. It doesnt work that way.

Many more people are confused about Miranda. The only time I have to Mirandize you is: if I believe a crime has been committed, you are in custody, and I want to ask you questions about that crime. If I am questioning you at your home or in your car, you are not in custody, and no Miranda warning is needed. If I am just trying to establish if a crime was actually committed, no Miranda needed.

There are some peaple that NEVER have to be Mirandized. Such as Judges, Lawyers, & Cops. the courts have ruled repeatedly that these peaple are clearly aware of their rights and no advisement of rights is needed before questioning.

The fact of the matter is, if you are arrested the cop on the street doesnt have to, and most likely will not Mirandize you. If you are later interrogated by an investigator while you are in custody, he will mirandize you.

You always have a right to your attorney, no matter what the circumstances. Now the cop may not run out & get your lawyer for you at the side of the road. Just remain silent. What is the cop going to do, arrest you? On what grounds? This would be false arrest & there are many lawyers like Mr.Nappen who would then sue the cops senseless.

So, I get pulled over and the LEO asks "Do you have any guns in the car?". So I say, "Why are you asking me that question?" So he says, "Please answer my question, do you have any guns in the car?" and I say, "Why are you asking me that question?" Again he asks "Do you have any guns in the car?", and I say "Why are you asking me that question?". Just about that time he slaps me upside the head and searches my car anyway. There's got to be more to it than this.

The police report will say things like; "When I asked Mr mattja if he had any weapons he became evasive & aguementative. I repeated the question and Mr mattja became increasingly irritated and hostile. Not knowing if Mr mattja was armed, and fearing for my safety because of his increasingly agitated state, I pepper sprayed him and placed him under arrest for CPC 148 "Obstruction".

Mr. Nappen is one of the NRA's most aggressive lawyers, he's also one of their top 2 lawyers. And yes, if he slaps you, you sue. If he illegally searches the car, you sue. If there is anything illegal in the car, that evidence will be suppressed. It's time we stand up and exercise our rights! If you notice society is getting tired having cops shoot unarmed people or putting plungers up their a*ses, as in NYC.

This is the land of the free, isn't it?

Well said and real good.

prc, it's true that custodial interrogation is what Miranda addresses.  LawDawg is right in that detention and the associated questions are not custodial interrogation, though it might feel like it.  How, for instance, do you know the second that you're free to go from a traffic stop?  The cop doesn't have to tell you, and they often won't.

Nat'l CCW, IIRC you do not always have a right to your attorney.  There is at least an appeal or a sentencing procedure where you are not allowed an attorney as of Federal right.  States may provide rights as they see fit though, so maybe that's what you're thinking of.

mattja and LawDawg, that is a hilarious look at the real world.

In my extensive traffic stop experience (as a detainee), a couple of rules of thumb have always served me well.  Be polite, and if you simply must break the law, make sure it's a traffic violation.  Don't have anything stupid on you or in your car.

I have found if you are polite and courteous, you generally won't have a problem.  I have never been asked if I have a gun in the car and since I tend to have a lead foot and drive a sports car, I have had my share of traffic stops.  I have found if you answer questions like 'where are you going', etc you usually don't have a problem.  In fact, many times politeness has resulted in a warning instead of a ticket.

Cops starting getting antsy when you start asking them why they are asking you a question.  They feel you are being suspicious and evasive.  It is best to have cordial dealings when possible.  If one is being a butthead and giving you a hard time, then you refuse to answer questions, because he is trying to create a situation.

I was kinda thinkin what Larry said, and then some....

Being from SW Ohio, AND with a tan, and with a father LEO while I was growing up, I KNEW as a young kid a few FACTS....


2 answers to any LEO...Yes Sir, No Sir...PERIOD...

I have a permanent target on my forehead/ass...Move VERY slow, and announce any/all movements....

NEVER act like I have rights or freedoms and I SHOULD not be assaulted for no reason with a plunger , etc.

I have ALWAYS had my wallet out, all few thousand times I was pulled over for no reason, I always use 'due diligence' when moving...

I realize the cop is WAY more scared of me then I am of him, AND I am usually smarter than he is also. Bottom line, the thin blue line is the biggest gang in Amerika, that can ruin your day...eternally..Play it safe, and slow and PRAY you have a chance to sue...

    hmmmnnn Good Advice, traffic stops are one of the most dangerous things LEO's do...I think I heard once that it was the number one cause of police fatalities.  Unfortunately, LEO's can't assume that everyone they pull over will be a "good person".  
    My personal experience is that when I pull somebody over it's for a VERY VALID reason, I'm not looking to "drop the bomb" on somebody and ruin their day.  I just let them know what the problem is and usually let them off with a warning...simple right?  
    On the other side of the coin, you have people that talk themselves right into a summons and let me tell you there are many more of these types in NYC than the polite types. "Yes sir, no sir, I'm sorry, I did not realize, etc." works on me 100% of the time.  I've heard some amazing stuff come out of people's mouths during carstops, so basically you get what you deserve.

I was told by a exLEO friend he was trained that it was OK to lie to a suspect in order to get them to incriminate themselves.

It would not surprise me that with the number of stops LEOs make, if one goes to court that they look at their arrest record (that is self serving & protecting) & then have a selective memory.  

I have had this happen to me in the past.  The arresting officer was not a witness to any of the events leading to a complaint. He listened to various people at the scene make accusations & then later (after reading his report just before trial) testified to them as being factual as if he had seen them personally.  Luckily my witnesses were more believable & my attorney was good.  It was a trivial matter but also one of principals.

before you go lippin to a cop...

Supreme Court Allows Minor Traffic Offense Arrest
April 24, 2001 10:35 am EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In a decision affecting the nation's 185 million licensed drivers, a divided Supreme Court ruled on Tuesday that individuals can be arrested for minor traffic violations punishable only by a fine.
The high court, by a 5-4 vote, said the Constitution's Fourth Amendment, which bans unreasonable arrests and searches, does not limit police discretion to make arrests for routine traffic violations.

"The question is whether the Fourth Amendment forbids a warrantless arrest for a minor criminal offense, such as a misdemeanor seat-belt violation punishable only by a fine. We hold that it does not," Justice David Souter said for the court majority.

Souter, normally one of the court's most liberal members, was joined by four conservatives -- Chief Justice William Rehnquist and Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas.

Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, a moderate conservative, dissented, saying, "The court neglects the Fourth Amendment's express command in the name of administrative ease" and it "cloaks the pointless indignity" that the woman in the case suffered "with the mantle of reasonableness."

The LAST thing you want to do is cross a cop on the side of the road.  Even if he is dead wrong don't argue with him.  If he has probable cause to search your vehicle and you have a gun then you got a problem.  The only prob cause he could have for a search is if he see's guns, drugs or alcohol or oberves behavor that could be a result of being stoned.  If your going to be drinking or whatever, leave your guns at home.  Speeding is NOT probable cause unless its going 90 in a 35.  The whole thing with LE is they have to demonstrate probable cause to get a warrant.  Don't give them a chance.

I have been stopped with guns in the car.  Since I have a permit I simply announced I have them and the LFO was cool.  Long as it's legal to own them in your state then you're on the way to shoot, right?

I try to treat everyone with respect. Usually not a yes sir or no sir unless they are my senior. If its not good enough to keep me from getting a ticket so be it. I am very specific about who I bow down to.

also try not to give the officaer Probalble coase by saying stuff like "why the Hell do you care" etc etc etc one other thing ALWAYS be polite! yes getting a traffic ticket is a pain in the ass and yeah there were probly 30 other people speeding but try to be polite dont yell at him/her etc etc etc

LawDawg, what would be the appropriate and prudent course of action for a citizen to take in such a situation? Thanks.

No Officer, I don't have any handguns in my vehicle Sir....

"I asked if you had a firearm or any weapons in your vehicle..."

Sir, I have no handguns in my vehicle Sir...

"Son, are we having a communication problem...?  I'll Ask you one more time... Do you have any weapons or Firearms in the Vehicle? "

Sir, Yes sir...  I have an AR15 with high capacity mag Locked and loaded behind my seat Sir....

"Why do you find it necessary to carry that weapon in your vehicle"

Sir, For protection Sir...

"Why do you feel it necessary to carry this particular weapon for protection?"

 Sir....... My 50 caliber Barret wouldn't fit behind my seat Sir........ [;)]

realist, that wouldn't fly in CA. I wish it would!

Mattja,

That's a shame...  You should consider moving to Texas... We've got plenty of room and lots friendlier gun laws... [:)]

Something to keep in mind.

MOST car stops are either video taped by the camera in the patrol car or audio taped by the officer. Most cops were leary of this technology. But we have found in the 5 or 6 years we have been using the video cameras is they make it much easier to convict and they are great for discrediting false claims of abuse. When the jury or the judge see's you on tape acting like an a**hole, and the cop is acting polite and proffessional, you are going to lose.

Some states even allow officers to sue motorist who make false allegations on misconduct. Although collectiing on the judgements has been spotty at best.

NationalCCW mostly fixed their web page!  They had line heights and table heights hard coded in pixels so that most people couldn't read the text.  If the text was larger than the space allowed, table cells appeared on top of each other.  I had thought it was intentional (another rabid anti-gunner appearing in sheep's clothing), but maybe it was just their web designer that hates us.  

Be very careful with DavidF150's advice to simply announce that you have guns in the car.  For many departments, the officers are told they have to investigate any known firearm to make sure that it is stowed legally.  In other words, if you tell them you have a rifle in the trunk, they're told to search the trunk.  It sucks, but that's the way it is for many departments.  A coworker of mine, now a security guard, was fired from a local department for not searching a car, even though he didn't have probable cause.  From DavidF150's post, it sounds like he has a SC CWP.  With our state's CWP, you must have the permit with you at all times, even on private property whether or not you're actually carrying a concealed weapon.  For him, announcing he has the permit is required, and possession of a weapon is implied (I'm still waiting on Condon to reverse the automatic implication).  For the rest of us, be more discrete.

From the website.

We at NCRF were lucky enough to meet Evan F. Nappen, who is most likely, the greatest personal firearms attorney in the country. It was refreshing to find a lawyer who did not believe in giving away our rights & who deeply believed in our Second Amendment right to bear arms. He gave advice for all gun owners on what to do if the police stop you. First, remain silent. You are only required to give your name, address, & drivers license (only if driving) to the police. Do not volunteer information or answer any questions. Mr. Nappen's advice when asked if you have guns in the car is to reply by saying, "Why are you asking me that question?" You see the police can only search if there is something in plain sight or if they have probable cause. If there is nothing in plain sight & you refuse to answer any question, the police will lack the cause to search you or your car. The only way of giving police probable cause is to answer their questions, which are designed to trap you. Do not consent to a search! As Mr. Nappen puts it, "Men & women died for our rights, the least I can do is to exercise my rights." Second, ask for your attorney. You have a right to have an attorney present during any questioning. By asking for your attorney, you may not be interrogated. Third, do not consent to giving up your rights. Do not consent to a search without a warrant or sign statements without an attorney's advice. A right given up is a right lost. If the police stop you; do not resist physically, give your name & address only (license if driving), you do not have to answer questions or consent to a search without a warrant. If arrested say, "I want my attorney." Do not be tricked, threatened, or persuaded into giving up you rights. Without a warrant or probable cause, evidence against you will most likely be thrown out in a criminal court case. For the many who are wrongly arrested for not consenting to police searches, Mr.Nappen will sue the police because they have violated your civil rights. Police departments who wish to settle civil rights cases need to pay up $3,000 per hour that you were wrongly in jail or risk a federal suit $! (4/24/01)

realist, an entire department at my company was transferred to Dallas last month. I was so jealous I couldn't crap for a week. :) One of the guys called me last week and said he already has his CCW weapon selected. I am so bummed.

ROTFLMAO

AR15fan you have it right concerning the use of video, a picture is worth a thousand words. Most officers stop you and take care of business. The majority don't ask about weapons unless you are doing something stupid to arouse their attention. If you start acting out at the onset of the contact especially with a rookie your liable to end up with the kind of trouble that you don't need. A majority of officers especially those who honor the Constitution will not be asking these questions. A simple no if asked will suffice if you don't act stupid and try to be a store front lawyer, unless in the course of stop the officer establishes probable cause for an arrest, and then the matter is moot. He will find the weapons anyway no matter what you said. The Courts have long ruled that a traffic stop is not a custodial detention that requires Miranda.

To National CCW I take offense at your initial statement concerning being pushed around by the police. What are you talking about?  A situation that an officer will put himself in that can get themselves fired, risk a civil suit or federal action just to get their rocks off pushing someone around? Your blanket statement shows the defining characteristic of a liberal that is to attack groups you want to malign, isn't this the same tactic they use against those of us who and the right to keep and bear arms. You want to look at pushing citizens around, look at the alphabet soup groups. There are the groups that have no regard for the Constitution or the rights granted therein.

Ya you stupid civilians don't even know what is good for you.

I haven't seen anyone post this.  It is a link to info by the ACLU, maybe there are good for something after all??

[URL]http://www.aclu.org/issues/criminal/bustcardtext.html[/url]

Once in a while I agree with the ACLU. But more often than not they upset me.

Here's a question for you lawyers. Say you rent a house with a couple of guys and each of you has your own room, which you keep locked. Say the LEO's get a warrant to search Mr. X's belongings. Does that mean they can search the rooms occupied by the other roommates? I would assume it does, but I hope it doesn't.

If you haven't done anything wrong you should have nothing to hide and they should search your room just to be sure.

Yup, LawDawg made a funny. :) The unfortunate thing is that's how it would probably go down!

That's why I have a difficult time with that advice. Answering a question with a question is never a good way to establish rapport with someone, unless they're British perhaps.

Imbrog|io, do you think if I have coffee and doughnuts ready and the latest copy of "Oriental Hotties" available they would let me off the hook? he he

This has got me thinking and I have a question, In what type of situation can an arrest be made without reading miranda rights? This happened to me once when I was 18 or 19, after they found what they were looking for in the car (which they had not asked permission to search) My lawyer said that since we (me and my buddy) were sitting there in the car and the cop could smell what it was we were doing (probable cause?) it made it all perfectly legal I assumed he was right because that just makes sense, but I thought you always had to be told you were under arrest and had your rights read to you, of which neither happened to us we were just hauled off (we were already cuffed and in a cruiser) it doesn't make a difference to me, I got busted I was guilty and it's over with but I'm curious.

erickm, the police never *have* to read you your rights.  They only have to read your Miranda rights to you when they have decided to arrest you (you are in custody) *and* they are going to question you.  They can and do routinely arrest people without questioning, hence no reading of the rights.

Some of you people apparently live in jurisdictions where judges actually grant motions to suppress.  Wow.  I don't, because it always comes down to suspect vs. cop in a swearing contest and I have yet to see a cop lose a swearing contest.

What LawDawg said pretty much hits it on the head.

I'm not a lawyer, but I have served plenty of search warrants.
We can only search Mr. X's bedroom and the common areas of the house, kitchen, garage, family room, ect. If we find something in a common area we will try to link it to one of the occupants. (Such as drugs found under a stack of your mail is more likely to be linked to you than Mr X). If we find something in a common area and we are unable to link it to one person, and nobody admits ownership at the scene, EVERYONE goes to jail.
Choose your roommates carefully.

My rules for a routine traffic stop.

1.  Pull off the side of the road.  Never stop in the middle of the road.  If you have to drive a short distance to get off the road, turn on your hazard lights to let the officer know that you are aware that he is there.

2.  Look ahead and keep both hands at the 12 O'Clock position on the steering wheel.   Wait patiently for the police officer to direct you. Follow his directions exactly and announce to him what you are going to do and why you are doing it.

3.  Be very polite and cordial.  Do not volunteer any information about "things" concealed in your vehicle.   Do not lie!  If the officer asks you a question that you don't want to answer, then try to redirect and avoid in a polite manner.  If he persists, then use the advice of Mr Nappen and ask him why he is asking you the question.

4.  If you were speeding, never give a speed.  Tell the police officer that you were driving a safe and prudent speed, when he asks you how fast you were going.

5.  If the traffic stop is for a routine traffic violation be warm considerate, charming and do everything but ask the officer to let you off.  When the officer turns to go back to his cruiser, he has made up his mind what he is going to do.  Ask the officer if he is giving you a warning.  If not, get him to justify his decision.

I was very nearly killed in a not so routine traffic stop many years ago.  Since then I am very cautious.

Edited for spelling.

[b]Do not lie! If the officer asks you a question that you don't want to answer, then try to redirect and avoid in a polite manner.[/b]

Actually playing the evasive game is just going to buy you more trouble and pique the officer's curiosity.

Who would advocate lying?  But it seems to work for those who can do it with a straight face and get away with it . . .

I don't think that is true.  Police officers are aware of the law, and they will try to get you to give up your rights.  If you volunteer information and forfeit your rights, then that is just that much easier for the officer.  

Most police officers know this and will not push it.  A polite ignore/evade is all that most officers require.   If the officer is persistent, then you have to use the more direct method.

i almost forgot keep your hands in plane site and dont make any sudden movements

WRONG.  For constitutional purposes, and specifically for Miranda purposes, you are in "custody" when physically restrained OR when a reasonable person would not feel free to disregard the officers request (to remain on scene, to answer questions etc.)  This is the standard set, years ago, in the Mendenhall case.  There are hundreds of cases where the court found the defendant to be in "custody" for Miranda purposes when he was in his/her car and even his/her own home.  It all turns on that "feel free to leave" test.  Also, even IF LE simply asks you to answer questions, not demand, that may implicate Miranda as well.  Think about it, if uniformed officers ask you to answer a few questions in the context of a criminal investigation that may point to you as the suspect, would you feel like you could just get up and walk away from them?

An idea I've been toying with:  Since cops have video equipment in their cruisers, why not install some in your own vehicle?  When he comes up to the window, make sure the camera on the dash is pointing right up at him and make sure he knows he is being recorded so that your rights are not violated.  Amazing how polite people get when someone whips out a camera and starts to record everything for posterity.  Of course, if you live in NYC, you'll probably get shot for making a fast move and pulling out what "looked like a gun."

I actually have not been stopped since I was a teenager.  Funny thing is that I speed all the time and I don't have a radar detector.  I bought that book "Driving Fast Without Tickets" and the advice in there is excellent.

Be polite, but know that the modern highwaymen wear uniforms and they are definitely not your friends and are not to be trusted under any circumstances.

trickshot

I have known people who have installed hidden video or audio recording devices in their cars. I believe there is a famous firm in Virgina that handles such devices. It's not a crazy idea, just a sad fact of our modern world.

I am affraid so many of you are confused by what is law, and what is Hollywood.

You are NEVER required to talk to the police.  When you see cops on the Boob-tube forcing info from folks using gestapo tactics, it's all peacock strutting, with NO legal basis.

For example, let's take the average tv cop show dialogue:

Cop:  Ok Shorty, who robbed the store.
Shorty:  I don't know.
Cop:  We know that you know, and if you don't answer, we will charge you as an accomplice.

Ok, maybe.  But what if Shorty refused to talk to the police.

Look at it this way.

"knock, knock."

Shorty answers door:  Yeah?
Cop:  Shorty, we need to talk to you about this murder.
Shorty:  I have nothing to say (and then closes door)

What can cops do?  NOTHING.  Well, not quite.  They can take what evidence they have (less Shorty's statements) to the DA and try to empanel a Grand Jury.  At the Grand Jury shorty can then be compelled to talk.

One of the first posters to this string asks when do police have to mirandize.  And do the miranda warnings apply even if not arrested.
No, and yes.

The police NEVER have to mirandize.  They only do so to protect any evidence obtained WHEN YOU ARE IN CUSTODY that you happen to divulge.

But this does not mean that your constitutional rights do not kick in until miranda, rather, you must take the burden of excercising them when not in custody.  When in custody, that burden falls to the police.

ANCIENT CHINESE PROVERB:  "When a wise man and a foolish man argue, it is often difficult to tell the two apart."

Point?  Don't argue with a foolish man.  Take the same lesson and apply it to law and constitution.  Don't argue with a cop.

Why do you suppose that cops chit chat with you?  To establish a pattern of your behavior.  Lawdawg posts about how the cop will mace you for becoming "more" belligerant.  If you never esablish a "pattern" of conversation with the cop you give them nothing to go on.

MANY OF YOU ARE MISSING THIS MAIN POINT;  the cop can't argue with you or converse with you if you don't talk with him/her.

I don't like at all the "Why do you ask."  Once again, you are engaging in a conversation with the cop.  The cop can then say, "Do you have something to hide?"  And you reply, "Why do you ask."  Call me crazy, but the cop just asked if you are being evasive, and you are evasive to that question.  In some places (PRK for example), many cops would use this to "go fishing."

If you must, how about, "I have nothing to say." If the cop pushes, "I was advised by my attorney, to never talk to any cop regardless of the circumstances unless he was present.  I refuse to talk to you unless he is present.  If you wish to cite me for please do so, if not, I'll be on my way."  Of course you don't leave until he allows you to.  But you have made it clear of your desire to leave, so any further detainment on his part of you must be justified or you will be considered "detained."

...continued

You have now take all of the cops options away.  You have (technically) requested a lawyer before questions, and have refused to talk to him.

Do you want a perfect example of this?  The Joan Benet-Ramsey case.  Parents refused to talk, and only answered police questions in writing.  This prevented their stories from getting tripped up later.

As I live in Texas this stuff doesn't apply to me as Texas cops rarely tear your car apart like I've had done to me 2 dozen times by PRK Stormtroopers.  But those of you with "ASSAULT RIFLES" in the PRK had better be very careful what you say to cops when pulled over.


I think back to when I was pulled over by a Arkansas State Trooper back in the Spring of 98.

Trooper:  Do you know why I pulled you over?
Me:  No.
Trooper:  You were speeding.
Me:  Silent (I knew I was getting a ticket as I'd passed a half dozen signs that swore "no tollerance")
After a long 60 second pause...
Trooper:  Where are you going?
Me:  Eastbound
Trooper:  No I mean specifically, where are you going?
Me:  Like I said, I'm going Eastbound.
Trooper: (getting slightly pissed off) Where are you coming from?
Me:  From the west (as I motion over my shoulder)
Trooper:  Specifically where are you coming from? (getting visibly angry)
Me:  Last I checked it's a free country and I don't have to answer your questions, so as far as I'm concerned, it's none of your business.

He went back to his car, ran my plates, ran my license, and came back with my citation.  What else could he do?  He had no grounds for anything whatsoever.

Perhaps had I told him I was going to Tennessee from Dallas he could have cited some drug ring that imports drugs from Texas to a judge and could have convinced the judge that I "fit the profile" of a drug dealer.  By talking to me he could have percieved whatever I told him in any way he wanted.  By saying little, I gave him no ammo.

If a cop ever asks you "Do you know why I pulled you over."  Never say yes.  Just say no.  Take your ticket and move on.  Don't play the fishing game, leave that for the low IQ riff raff you see on "Cops."

I remember an episode of "Law and Order."  Where they were exaggerating scene with a Hollywood Producer who had some info about a murderer.  He was surrounded by 4 lawyers and during the entire interview, he never said a word.  Every time the cops asked him a question, he remained silent and let his lawyer answer for him.  It was almost like he was catatonic.

I wonder if every defendant did this how hard cops jobs would be.  Well I'm glad the criminals are stupid, but when it comes to you and your 2nd amendment rights, you don't have to be.

You forgot to add that subject to the arrest I INVENTORIED his vehicle and found weapons which were impounded.........at least that is what we do in GA

I no longer work the streets (except in some rare SWAT vehicle take downs..not very normal event)...us CID people are like that....but when I did I would advise on the following.

1. WHen you see the lights come on and you think it is ALL over...pull over immediately.

2. DO NOT make any sudden movements--like reaching for the glove box or under the seat.

3. ALWAYS use "Yes Sir/Mam" and "No Sir/Mam" (and DO NOTY get them confused, man I hate the smart ones).

4. Always ask permission before making ANY movement--getting your wallet, insurance card.

5. Now that you set the stage that you are cooperative answer the LEOs questions completely...any evasion makes his ears perk up....

6. I have NEVER given a ticket for ANY violation when a violator was coorperative, except for DUI, Reckless Driving, Person hit by Auto....(now if you fall into one of those many violent violaters...than you are mine)

7. I have stopped several individuals with weapons in vehicles (in GA it is legal if they are in view or in the glove box/trunk (not under the seat--it is considered concealed then)as they are considered an extension of one's residence) and not made an arrest.

8. Miranda comes in like LawDawg (sp) said and his advise is very good.

Be cooperative and respectful and it will get you a long way.

Since I have worked Internal Affairs I know all too well about the bad seed we have in some departments (and I have arrested many)....but in my experience there are many more good LEOs out there than bad. Also there are several false complaints filed every year for which I have arrested the complainant for filing false police reports.

Although I agree, as a practical matter, with everything you write about common sense cooperation, you got it wrong on Miranda.  You have probably, like a lot of LE, not had to worry about it for a whole host of reasons, however, "custody" for constitutional purposes takes on a different meaning than what you and Lawdog have in mind.  I'm not just saying that because the Sup. Ct. says it's so, it also makes common sense as well.  

No flame, just wanted to further "educate" other members on what the law actually is regarding when Miranda applies.  

Also, I am fully aware that a Miranda violation might not mean squat in a criminal case; I have often found it to be fruitless since there was nothing gained as a result of the Mirandaless interrogation.