CCW Status Linked to License Plate Number?
- Thread starter Carlos Danger
- Start date
- Replies 178
- Views 3,763
One thing I like about SC law is the sign requirement - not much vague about it. It defines the size, location, and required wording as I recall - nothing like our "conspicuous" description.
How many “conspicuous” postings have you seen? I kind of suspect that was the point.
What I meant was that our law says nothing about the wording, size, specific location (other than just "at the entrance"). The one bank that I do business with has a small gun busters sticker down at the very bottom of the door. Sometimes I miss it altogether.How many “conspicuous” postings have you seen? I kind of suspect that was the point.
I've seen signs that make me think the businesses, or some of its employees at least, which posted them KNEW the requirements and yet seemed to deliberately post them outside those requirements.
Like the Simpsonville Public Library, for example. It's the correct sign, but it's literally posted at shin level when there is plenty of space to mount it higher, where it should be. I'll take a picture of it some time.
Boss: Here, post this No concealable Weapons Allowed sign by the door.
Employee: OK. *gets on hands and knees to post the sign*
Like the Simpsonville Public Library, for example. It's the correct sign, but it's literally posted at shin level when there is plenty of space to mount it higher, where it should be. I'll take a picture of it some time.
Boss: Here, post this No concealable Weapons Allowed sign by the door.
Employee: OK. *gets on hands and knees to post the sign*
Texas has huge signs, I noticed them at a Cheesecake Factory at the front entrance. 30.06 is the name of the penal code.How many “conspicuous” postings have you seen? I kind of suspect that was the point.
Texas No Gun Sign Laws Explained | Walker & Taylor Law
Texas "no gun" sign laws explained by attorneys. Learn all about 51%, 30.05, 30.06, 30.07, blue signs, oh my!
www.walkertaylorlaw.com
I can't really say one way or the other puts me at ease faster or quicker, but as long as it's early in the process and the circumstances of the stop are not crazy wild. As stated earlier the manner of the behavior and disposition of the person goes the farthest. The usual stuff everyone knows-interior lights on, hands on wheel, passenger(s) hands visible, even windows down (if not raining or bitter cold obviously), and so on.
the driver said he had a permit, but did not 'know' where the pistol was in the car... the search showed it was lawfully located in the glove box... but the big bag of weed "got him"
cannot remember the reason for the initial stop (am i remembering this correctly?_)
Perhaps, since the gun was in glove box it was legal to be there without a permit. He told Brown the gun was on the floorboard.
I believe he answered yes when Brown asked if he had any weapon(s) in the car.
Last edited:
With reciprocity you typically still have to follow state laws. So you still are supposed to inform…
Yes- and I will- but help me out- I'm worried about the NC links to my drivers license, which links to my plate (if I'm driving my car). Does doing the AZ conceal carry avoid the NC database? Not so much for NC, but the horror story of the Maryland guy above.
Last edited:
Maryland is a small state. You should be able to get to the other side before the spike strips are deployed.
I have no idea on the answer to that one… but I seriously doubt that my Arizona concealed carry permit is linked to my North Carolina drivers license. That would mean that the Arizona department of public safety would’ve had to take the time to notify the North Carolina Department of motor vehicles. Or the NC DMV is somehow actively reaching out to every state public safety office getting a list of concealed carry permit holders.
Maybe @Average Joe or @Big Dave could say.
If that were the case, then would there would basically already be a partial national firearms owner database. You could argue that the state CHP/CCW registries already do that even if they’re not directly connected though.
Average Joe
Just A Everyday Joe
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Benefactor
Life Member
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
You are correct. However, there is one possibilities that I do not have the answer for right now.
1st Example, if you have a permit in another state. Then move to NC, your other state’s CHP is still recognized by NC as long as you have valid ID.
2nd Example, and the possibility. I need to research this more. Some states issue non-resident CHPs. I do not know the process on how these types are issued and if they are connected to your NC driver’s license.
Great question by the way.
I still think that, either way, they have no right to search your vehicle because you simply have a CCW. You have a duty to inform with a CCW, but that does not mean you have surrendered your 4th amendment right. Or any other rights.
Average Joe
Just A Everyday Joe
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Benefactor
Life Member
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Could not agree with you more!!! If the case that was brought to us is true and occurred just like someone is trying to get us to believe. Then that search by Maryland officers was way beyond being unconstitutional.
dbarale
Well-Known Member
That is correct. It doesn’t even rise to the level of reasonable suspicion. The new officers are also taught to not ask to see the gun or handle it in any way, unless of course the driver will be detained (DUI).
Last edited:
COLTIMPALA
Yo homie... is that my briefcase?
Unpopular opinion; I loosely assume if LE sees I have CHP, maybe they'll realize I'm not a complete $#!tbag and be more inclined to cut me a break. Most traffic stops I've had start with me telling the officer before he even gets to the window " hey officer, before you get up here I just wanna let you know I have a chp and xyz on me in this location" the result of this has 9 out of 10 times yielded favorable results.
Information I want LE having? NONE.
Information I'll provide to help myself? I have no issue telling them I'm packing. It's how you tell them that helps you.
Maybe I'm just a nice guy and they dont write me and I'm completely wrong in my assumption.
Information I want LE having? NONE.
Information I'll provide to help myself? I have no issue telling them I'm packing. It's how you tell them that helps you.
Maybe I'm just a nice guy and they dont write me and I'm completely wrong in my assumption.
commiecuriocollector
Well-Known Member
hmmmm, so i have got some thoughts and questions here, having now read this entire dern thread front to back.....
First off, I have always wondered what the deal was with folks driving old cars with invalid plates. I just figured they were too poor to keep up paying the tax and registration fees. I had to google "YOM plates" cause I didn't know what that was....
WTH? How is that legal? Forget it, I don't care, I just need, and I can't believe it's possible for me to say this, an older car. And for that matter, when did NC stop pounding the year into the plates? Wasn't it in the 80's? Can I have a YOM plate from a different state? If so, does anyone know any states that were still pounding the year on plates in 1996? I'm planning ahead. Oh happy day! Boy I wish I had kept my '91 Civic now, warts and all.
Next, to play devil's advocate and not trying to push anyone's buttons: It's been said by a number of you that NOT informing while having a CHP/CCP/CWP/WTFever it is, is NOT justification for a search. OK fine, but is this assertion for occasions to which, when asked if you are carrying, you then answer ....yes? Cause, well, I dunno, regardless of what one thinks about searches, that sounds like pretty good justification to me. I know I have been searched for far less, and even searched for following the law, which apparently ticks some folks off enough to do a non-consent search. Perhaps I am mis-reading some of this stuff here, and ya'll are only saying a search is not justified when one doesn't inform that one is not carrying? That I fully understand, but I am not clear if that's what ya'll are saying or not.
Anyway, to prove I am playing devil's advocate, I never consent to searches, even when justified. I don't interfere, I politely decline and, if need be, get out of the way.
I also play the old school way, as one used to do before CHP's were the "in" thing, because I am hard headed. So my informing is performed in the way that it was once commonly done in this state, by putting whatever is within leap or lunge range on the dash, before cutting off the car, cutting on the dome light, rolling down the window, putting my hands on the steering wheel, and putting on the biggest grin possible. It has often been a bumpy experience. To the point that for many years I just left everything in the trunk because I got tired of arguing over the fact that a gun in plain sight does not require one to have a license to carry concealed. But now I am older, and dumber, and keep one within reach again. I haven't been pulled over since I re-started this practice and I really don't look forward to my next "it's not concealed if you can see it" interaction.
So my query here is, for those of you that still do traffic stops/DUI/DWI checkpoints in the course of daily business, or have in the recent two or three years, how often do you interact with folks who opt for the "in plain view" (on the dash) method of carry? I imagine with the proliferation of CHPs that it isn't encountered as often as it once was. Should I expect even jumpier behavior due to this? Just with the younger generation?
It seems those of you on this forum who do stops/checks are level-headed, intelligent, rights respecting folks, whom I don't have reason to be concerned interacting with, but social norms have changed over the years and I would be interested in how you think things will go with everyone else.
Not that I expect to give anyone good cause to pull me over in the future. Just, ahem, hypothetically speaking.
First off, I have always wondered what the deal was with folks driving old cars with invalid plates. I just figured they were too poor to keep up paying the tax and registration fees. I had to google "YOM plates" cause I didn't know what that was....
WTH? How is that legal? Forget it, I don't care, I just need, and I can't believe it's possible for me to say this, an older car. And for that matter, when did NC stop pounding the year into the plates? Wasn't it in the 80's? Can I have a YOM plate from a different state? If so, does anyone know any states that were still pounding the year on plates in 1996? I'm planning ahead. Oh happy day! Boy I wish I had kept my '91 Civic now, warts and all.
Next, to play devil's advocate and not trying to push anyone's buttons: It's been said by a number of you that NOT informing while having a CHP/CCP/CWP/WTFever it is, is NOT justification for a search. OK fine, but is this assertion for occasions to which, when asked if you are carrying, you then answer ....yes? Cause, well, I dunno, regardless of what one thinks about searches, that sounds like pretty good justification to me. I know I have been searched for far less, and even searched for following the law, which apparently ticks some folks off enough to do a non-consent search. Perhaps I am mis-reading some of this stuff here, and ya'll are only saying a search is not justified when one doesn't inform that one is not carrying? That I fully understand, but I am not clear if that's what ya'll are saying or not.
Anyway, to prove I am playing devil's advocate, I never consent to searches, even when justified. I don't interfere, I politely decline and, if need be, get out of the way.
I also play the old school way, as one used to do before CHP's were the "in" thing, because I am hard headed. So my informing is performed in the way that it was once commonly done in this state, by putting whatever is within leap or lunge range on the dash, before cutting off the car, cutting on the dome light, rolling down the window, putting my hands on the steering wheel, and putting on the biggest grin possible. It has often been a bumpy experience. To the point that for many years I just left everything in the trunk because I got tired of arguing over the fact that a gun in plain sight does not require one to have a license to carry concealed. But now I am older, and dumber, and keep one within reach again. I haven't been pulled over since I re-started this practice and I really don't look forward to my next "it's not concealed if you can see it" interaction.
So my query here is, for those of you that still do traffic stops/DUI/DWI checkpoints in the course of daily business, or have in the recent two or three years, how often do you interact with folks who opt for the "in plain view" (on the dash) method of carry? I imagine with the proliferation of CHPs that it isn't encountered as often as it once was. Should I expect even jumpier behavior due to this? Just with the younger generation?
It seems those of you on this forum who do stops/checks are level-headed, intelligent, rights respecting folks, whom I don't have reason to be concerned interacting with, but social norms have changed over the years and I would be interested in how you think things will go with everyone else.
Not that I expect to give anyone good cause to pull me over in the future. Just, ahem, hypothetically speaking.
Last edited:
COLTIMPALA
Yo homie... is that my briefcase?
A ton. Seriously. I average 2-3 a year now but used to get pulled every other month. Mostly for stupid stuff that isn't exactly wrong. For example I was looking at vettes one night after hours at a Chevy lot and a cop pulled my wife and I leaving because we"looked suspicious" and too young to be driving a Vette". They seriously thought I was stealing one of them that was literally my own car.
Also been pulled because they want to see my car or ask unrelated questions about cars. I've sold my vettes since and nobody seems to care about my old pickup anymore. That'll change once I get my m35a2 on the road most likely.
Last edited:
commiecuriocollector
Well-Known Member
I know the feeling on all that. Photography tends to draw alot of LE attention too. And perhaps making efficient use of one's time traversing lonely roads.
And just how do you plan to stop a cop that is intent on searching your car?
When did I say I would stop him? I’d be giving a verbal refusal and taking their ass to court if they violate my rights.
Last edited:
I'm not sure on that either.
Open carry is still legal in NC-I taught the State mandated block for my agency back in 15 or 16 on Firearms and Citizens that came from the Justice Academy. Now granted, as has ALWAYS been the case I remind everyone that the discretion that officers have in these matters is HUGE, and there is not always a cut and dried answer, as bad as some might think there is always a policy for every conceivable scenario. I'm old school, pro-gun, and work a rural area so of course I may be more open to it and accepting that other officers (?)
Last edited:
I verbally refuse consent; comply with all instructions, and find a good attorney because imma make bank in my lawsuit.
commiecuriocollector
Well-Known Member
Hmmmm, I guess that answers my question, though reading it 4 or 5 times now, I'm still not totally sure, but I get what you are trying to convey and I appreciate that.
Now knowing that there is a state mandated block, that warms the cockles of my heart. I can't imagine any agency other than perhaps the NCSHP being that thorough. There any chance that Firearms and Citizens course material is openly available somewhere? Or perhaps maybe just the syllabus? I am rather intrigued. Thanks for the input.
Don't know if available publicly-I Googled it and searched for a minute or two and didn't find the lesson plan, only the archived information that it was a topic in 2016 and officially called "N.C. Firearms Laws: Citizens and Guns"
The BIGGEST takeaways for most officers was that open carry was still legal and that (unlike all agencies and officers were taught prior to the CHP law) officers could NOT seize or force a CHP holder to surrender their firearm IF the purpose of the stop (and remember that "stop" doesn't only mean vehicle stops for traffic violations) was not involving the weapon or a reasonable threat of violence. Again-bear in mind that throughout history this was pretty much SOP and had never been shot down by the courts that I'm aware of. Granted an officer could still ASK for the gun, but that's bad business. Now saying that, I am NOT giving legal advice, and even I would comply if asked ( I *might* clarify and state my understanding of the law briefly) because AGAIN the side of the road is not the place to get into a "knowledge" contest. Another funny thing for me that I personally took away was that while a CHP holder can not consume ANY alcohol or have an alcohol in their system, there is NO REQUIREMENT FOR THIS for open carry. IN NO WAY is it a good idea to mix them, and other laws come into play (if you guys think CCW is a broad legal charge with a huge leeway for officer discretion, then look up "Intoxicated and Disruptive" and "Disorderly Conduct"!)
And this was required for all agencies by the State Training and Standards Commissions (Sheriff's and Criminal Justice) or SHP probably wouldn't have skimmed over it...
The BIGGEST takeaways for most officers was that open carry was still legal and that (unlike all agencies and officers were taught prior to the CHP law) officers could NOT seize or force a CHP holder to surrender their firearm IF the purpose of the stop (and remember that "stop" doesn't only mean vehicle stops for traffic violations) was not involving the weapon or a reasonable threat of violence. Again-bear in mind that throughout history this was pretty much SOP and had never been shot down by the courts that I'm aware of. Granted an officer could still ASK for the gun, but that's bad business. Now saying that, I am NOT giving legal advice, and even I would comply if asked ( I *might* clarify and state my understanding of the law briefly) because AGAIN the side of the road is not the place to get into a "knowledge" contest. Another funny thing for me that I personally took away was that while a CHP holder can not consume ANY alcohol or have an alcohol in their system, there is NO REQUIREMENT FOR THIS for open carry. IN NO WAY is it a good idea to mix them, and other laws come into play (if you guys think CCW is a broad legal charge with a huge leeway for officer discretion, then look up "Intoxicated and Disruptive" and "Disorderly Conduct"!)
And this was required for all agencies by the State Training and Standards Commissions (Sheriff's and Criminal Justice) or SHP probably wouldn't have skimmed over it...
Last edited:
Here is a good resource I DID find in the above searching:
Nothing because there is nothing you can do if a cop wants to search your car although I did lock my keys in the car once to make it hard on one.
fieldgrade
waiting...
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Life Member
Benefactor
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Don't think I'm a Roy fan because I linked a document with his name on it. And all documents from that source will have the governor's name in it as a formality...the legal part was done by mostly John Aldridge, a well respected Deputy Attorney General. John Aldridge even presented/narrated a chunk of the required In Service Training video during the "classroom portion" of annual firearms training officers are required to attend each year for the last 10+ years or more.
I posted it as @commiecuriocollector had asked for one of our lesson plans which I couldn't find publicly and this was the closest I could find. I'd add also that (while dated) this document IS a valid reference guide and would be used for quick reference in an agency where a question might come up, and is based on best patterns and practices, case law, and legal interpretations. I felt like it was close to what was being discussed. At the end of the day, the target audience was LEOs but it isn't some kind of "classified" document-I wanted to share what and how LEOs are trained in this subject matter. This is how officers are taught, and their actions would be gauged in court, where it matters. I just thought this was where the thread direction had went. Sorry it pissed some of you off.
Last edited:
BigWaylon
Head philatelist
Staff member
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Life Member
Benefactor
Supporting Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
The problem is the reference guide doesn’t stick to the law...it’s an opinion piece. It’s definitely slanted in the wrong direction. And the biggest problem with it is it spread around and gets quoted like it is the law.
I'll grant that some of it is opinion based on the statutes (which are black and white) but it's the opinion of the AGs office which officers would be expected to follow (in court and by their agency) and would be foolish to go out "on their on" and decide something else, which could feasibly leave them "hung out to dry" by the agency. And while I agree it is somewhat dated (as I said) it also would still be relevant to establishing best patterns and practices. I get that liberal vs conservative administrations can affect interpretations, I didn't see anything in my skimming of that document I'd say was vastly unrealistic. Please remember I have said many times I'm a very pro 2A LEO.