First LEO encounter while OCing

[prospectpuppet]

Hello all, I just wanted to share with you my first open carry encounter with a LEO. I thought it was an interesting interaction. I was at the 7/11 in trenton at west road and grange. Every time I go there, there are two officers inside seemingly just hanging out, talking with the cashier, drinking coffee, etc. Whenever I go in there, they don't pay attention to me. OC'ing or not. Today was different. When I pulled into the lot, (I was with one friend and a family member, 3 of us total) the officers were joking around with the female driver of an SUV parked two spaces down. We walked in, bought our items and upon returning to the vehicle....the senior officer did the old "double-take" in my direction. I stood outside the vehicle talking to my friend because I knew the officer was going to approach me. I thought it'd be best to give him the fair opportunity to do so before I entered the vehicle. But he just stared at me. We made eye contact a few times but he said nothing. I decided that it was time to go, opened my door and sat down. Before I even closed the car door the officer said something to me about having a cpl. I didn't catch it so my response was, "what was that, sir?" He says, "you know, even though open carry is legal, you need a cpl to get into your vehicle with it. Otherwise it's a crime." I replied, "I know, I have one." At this point I realized that through his eyes, I very well may be breaking the law. He doesn't know. So I decided to voluntarily offer up my cpl and ID to help put him at ease. It worked...he glanced at my cards and asked why I chose to open carry. I informed him that I'm a member of MOC and that "this is what we do in order to educate and desensitize the public to the practice of open carry." His reply was "wow...well have a nice day then." His partner (still chatting with the SUV driver) turned asked if everything was ok. The officer I spoke with told him all was good and I returned to my vehicle and left without further issue. A great experience and I think it shows that open carry is becoming more accepted at least in the law enforcement community. I don't believe that encounter would have gone down like that only 5 year ago. Anyway, thanks for reading guys. Keep doing what you do, we're making history here. I'll be keeping you updated on my OC experiences in the future. Until then, keep calm and carry on.

[TheQ]

When he approached the vehicle I would have disclosed/provided my CPL and d/l as required by law.

[prospectpuppet]

Do you think I'm going to start reaching for something as an officer who knows I have a firearm is walking to my vehicle??? Hell no. He said I need one to carry it, I said I have one and asked if he'd like to see it. I'm not going to start reaching for anything until he knows what I'm going after. That's how you get shot and I'd rather be judged by 12 of my peers than carried by 6 of them.

[gryphon]

Even though it bothers me that he asked you why you chose to open carry, overall it was a good encounter.  Good job.

[TheQ]

Do you think I'm going to start reaching for something as an officer who knows I have a firearm is walking to my vehicle??? Hell no. He said I need one to carry it, I said I have one and asked if he'd like to see it. I'm not going to start reaching for anything until he knows what I'm going after. That's how you get shot and I'd rather be judged by 12 of my peers than carried by 6 of them.

Absolutely. You need to say, "I have a CPL and I'm carrying. My ID and CPL are in my wallet in my back pocket,"


...then wait for his move.

[WilDChilD]

Do you think I'm going to start reaching for something as an officer who knows I have a firearm is walking to my vehicle??? Hell no. He said I need one to carry it, I said I have one and asked if he'd like to see it. I'm not going to start reaching for anything until he knows what I'm going after. That's how you get shot and I'd rather be judged by 12 of my peers than carried by 6 of them.

I am pretty sure Q was saying don't offer up your cpl and dl. If they ask that's one thing but when you say "here look at this" you give up some 4th amendment rights.

[gryphon]

When he approached the vehicle I would have disclosed/provided my CPL and d/l as required by law.

When LEO was approaching he had not made a stop so I don't think it was required by law.  OP disclosed upon officer making contact.  I see no foul.

[Super Trucker]

Do you think I'm going to start reaching for something as an officer who knows I have a firearm is walking to my vehicle??? Hell no. He said I need one to carry it, I said I have one and asked if he'd like to see it. I'm not going to start reaching for anything until he knows what I'm going after. That's how you get shot and I'd rather be judged by 12 of my peers than carried by 6 of them.

You might want to tone it down a notch or three.
TheQ didn't say to suddenly grab for anything, he said to do what the law says to do. "Yes Mr Popo I do have a CPL and as required by law am disclosing that to you right now"

[TheQ]

I'm a for not disclosing/providing ID while OCing. The moment you sit in your car, the game changes.

[gryphon]

The moment you sit in your car, the game changes.

Seems to me you advocated for disclosing before the LEO even got to the car.  LEO and his partner are apparently c**k-hounds, having nothing better to do than routinely chat up the female Stop-and-Rob employees and customers.  He could have been walking toward some other nubile young lady on the other side of the OP who just pulled up.

I have no problem if the OP waits until the LEO actually reaches his car and says something--which is exactly what he did.  No foul.

[CV67PAT]

Absolutely. You need to say, "I have a CPL and I'm carrying. My ID and CPL are in my wallet in my back pocket,"


...then wait for his move.

Can you please provide a cite for this?

I"ve searched everywhere and can find no requirement to immediately disclose the possession of a CPL.

[TheQ]

Seems to me you advocated for disclosing before the LEO even got to the car.  LEO and his partner are apparently c**k-hounds, having nothing better to do than routinely chat up the female Stop-and-Rob employees and customers.  He could have been walking toward some other nubile young lady on the other side of the OP who just pulled up.

I have no problem if the OP waits until the LEO actually reaches his car and says something--which is exactly what he did.  No foul.

As soon as it becomes apparent you are being "stopped" while in a vehicle and as soon as the LEO is within normal conversation distance , disclosure us appropriate IMHO

Someone should school the cop the OP needs a CPL to even OC a gun at 7/11.

[TheQ]

Can you please provide a cite for this?

I"ve searched everywhere and can find no requirement to immediately disclose the possession of a CPL.

28.425f

(3) An individual licensed under this act to carry a concealed pistol and who is carrying a concealed pistol or a portable device that uses electro-muscular disruption technology and who is stopped by a peace officer shall immediately disclose to the peace officer that he or she is carrying a pistol or a portable device that uses electro-muscular disruption technology concealed upon his or her person or in his or her vehicle.

Ok...no mention of saying you have the CPL but....

(2) An individual who is licensed under this act to carry a concealed pistol and who is carrying a concealed pistol or a portable device that uses electro-muscular disruption technology shall show both of the following to a peace officer upon request by that peace officer:

(a) His or her license to carry a concealed pistol.

(b) His or her driver license or Michigan personal identification card.

[gryphon]

As soon as it becomes apparent you are being "stopped" while in a vehicle and as soon as the LEO is within normal conversation distance , disclosure us appropriate IMHO

Oh, come on!  Like I'm going to yell back to a MSP trooper as soon as he's within hearing distance as he's walking up to me?

The OP hadn't even been approached.  Some random LEO was walking toward him in his general direction.   No contact had even been made yet.

I disagree with you.

[CV67PAT]

28.425f

(3) An individual licensed under this act to carry a concealed pistol and who is carrying a concealed pistol or a portable device that uses electro-muscular disruption technology and who is stopped by a peace officer shall immediately disclose to the peace officer that he or she is carrying a pistol or a portable device that uses electro-muscular disruption technology concealed upon his or her person or in his or her vehicle.

Ok...no mention of saying you have the CPL but....

(2) An individual who is licensed under this act to carry a concealed pistol and who is carrying a concealed pistol or a portable device that uses electro-muscular disruption technology shall show both of the following to a peace officer upon request by that peace officer:

(a) His or her license to carry a concealed pistol.

(b) His or her driver license or Michigan personal identification card.

 The couple times I have been "stopped" I immediately told the cops "I have a gun."

They asked where it was and said don't reach for it. They then asked for my I.D.

The only time I have been asked for a CPL was when I wasn't even carrying. The trooper asked if I had a CPL. When I responded in the affirmative, he asked if he could see it. I showed it to him and he sent me on my way with a warning to not do what it was thatg caused him to stop me in the first place.

[TheQ]

Oh, come on!  Like I'm going to yell back to a MSP trooper as soon as he's within hearing distance as he's walking up to me?

The OP hadn't even been approached.  Some random LEO was walking toward him in his general direction.   No contact had even been made yet.

I disagree with you.

I said normal conversation distance. Didn't say anything about yelling.

[prospectpuppet]

Guys relax. The officers were both about three or four feet away from my car door before he began his approach toward me. Would that qualify as conversation distance? Should I have shouted "officers! I have a gun and a license to carry it!" As I entered my vehicle within arms reach of them? I think not. Regardless of what anyone's opinion is, I handled it fine. I'm not dead or in jail and neither is the cop. I'll call it a win. 

[gryphon]

I just usually wave my gun around in my hand yelling, "I have a gun!"  But your way worked, too, which I think was perfectly appropriate.  Any time a LEO doesn't go slide-lock on you is a good encounter.

[CV67PAT]

Guys relax. The officers were both about three or four feet away from my car door before he began his approach toward me. Would that qualify as conversation distance? Should I have shouted "officers! I have a gun and a license to carry it!" As I entered my vehicle within arms reach of them? I think not. Regardless of what anyone's opinion is, I handled it fine. I'm not dead or in jail and neither is the cop. I'll call it a win.

You did fine. This is all just commentary. Don't take any of it personal. Especially from TheQ.

[prospectpuppet]

You did fine. This is all just commentary. Don't take any of it personal. Especially from TheQ.

I'm not taking anything personally you're all a great group of people (including TheQ) and I support everything you do, of course. Just friendly conversation...anyway, thanks for your thoughts everyone

[ocdetroit]

+1 P. P. Carry On.

[METL]

Since I already have my gun in my hand while IHOCing, it can be tough for me to get to my wallet... I don't want to set my gun down and risk scratching it... so when the cops draw and train on me, I just try to shove it in my pocket the best I can.

[bagz013]

I probably woulda handled it about the same way.

Good job.

Question, Did you have a audio recorder with you?

[prospectpuppet]

I probably woulda handled it about the same way.

Good job.

Question, Did you have a audio recorder with you?

I don't currently. It's crossed my mind a few times to pick one up but you know how life is...others become a higher priority.

[bagz013]

I don't currently. It's crossed my mind a few times to pick one up but you know how life is...others become a higher priority.

I understand but I would highly recommend getting one.

Even if its something as simple as an App on your phone(assuming you have smartphone) it is worth it.

[grampajeep]

All joking aside, I just say to the officer that I am armed and I have a license to carry it. The word GUN is a red flag to leos, I think it is best not to use that word.

Gerry

[Lapeer20m]

the couple of times i've been stopped while driving, i say something like "I have a concealed pistol license and i am carrying"  Both times the officers had no reaction when i disclosed. 

[Lapeer20m]

I am happy to hear that you handled yourself well.  I think you acted appropriately. 

Here is some food for thought....

Did the officer have RAS to make a stop?  If so, at what point? 

ie:  would it have been lawful to detain an individual for oc'ing a pistol while he got into a car?
       
           How about detaining an individual for possessing the pistol on the premises of an establishment licensed by the liquor control commission?
     
or
        how about detaining an individual who was in a public park simply to make sure that he is licensed to possess a pistol?  After all, it is unlawful   to possess a pistol anywhere in this state unless you have a license to do so, (or meet another exemption.  )

[wayne]

I will probably get schooled here by the more experienced members, but #1 there is no such thing as OC when you enter a vehicle, at that point it become CC and individual would need CPL to be legal.  Same goes for OC on site licensed under the liquor control act, must have CPL to OC, but generally parking lots are not considered to be part of the establishment.

No, a person could not legally be detained for carrying a pistol on state land.  You are not required to have a license to OC, other than that the weapon must be registered to you and you must have obtained a purchase permit to acquire it.  Simply carrying a weapon would not give LEO PC to stop you.  They might approach and attempt to interview you, in such circumstance you are under no obligation to talk to them and you should simply ask if you are being detained or if you are free to go.  If they do not tell you that you are detained, it is best to not speak to them any further and leave / go on about your business.  Check out the video why you should never speak to the LEO.

[TheQ]

Actually carry in a vehicle while "OC" is best legally described as "carried otherwise" (see MCL 750.227). Yes, it's illegal (felony) w/o a CPL.

By the way, what's in what thread can he find a link to that video you mentioned?

[Hammurabi]

Seeing unconcealed carry in a vehicle described as 'concealed carry' bothers me more than it probably should, especially coming from 'experts.' The penalties may be the same, and unlicensed concealed carry may be addressed in the same code section as unlicensed vehicular carry, but "concealed or otherwise" shows that legislation recognizes that not all vehicular carry is concealed.

I'd like to see vehicular carry opened up, but that will be no mean feat when so many people equate it with concealed carry.
That said, I do understand why some people tend to just lump the two together and call it all concealed.


As for there being no license to carry openly, there is no requirement to carry a license beyond 30 days after the purchase.
MCL 28.422:

(1) Except as otherwise provided in this section, a person shall not purchase, carry, possess, or transport a pistol in this state without first having obtained a license for the pistol as prescribed in this section.
...
The licensee may carry, use, possess, and transport the pistol for 30 days beginning on the date of purchase or acquisition only while he or she is in possession of his or her copy of the license. However, the person is not required to have the license in his or her possession while carrying, using, possessing, or transporting the pistol after this period.

The license is required, they can perform a query by serial number, and stopping just to check for a license is apparently acceptable. Why would they not have grounds to stop a person to run the pistol's serial, and confirm that a license was obtained, or to stop and confirm an exemption from licensure?

[gryphon]

Even though registration is law, I would say there is no RAS to suspect the OCer is committing a crime.

[CV67PAT]

Seeing unconcealed carry in a vehicle described as 'concealed carry' bothers me more than it probably should, especially coming from 'experts.' The penalties may be the same, and unlicensed concealed carry may be addressed in the same code section as unlicensed vehicular carry, but "concealed or otherwise" shows that legislation recognizes that not all vehicular carry is concealed.

I'd like to see vehicular carry opened up, but that will be no mean feat when so many people equate it with concealed carry.
That said, I do understand why some people tend to just lump the two together and call it all concealed.


As for there being no license to carry openly, there is no requirement to carry a license beyond 30 days after the purchase.
MCL 28.422:
The license is required, they can perform a query by serial number, and stopping just to check for a license is apparently acceptable. Why would they not have grounds to stop a person to run the pistol's serial, and confirm that a license was obtained, or to stop and confirm an exemption from licensure?

You are right. Not all vehicular possession of a firearm is carrying. Readily accessible is also "otherwise."

[scot623]

I agree with the OP and his approach here. I too wouldn't have disclosed until I was in the car and officially approached by the officer. Only then would I comply with the lawful request of producing my ID and CPL while carrying in a manner which required disclosure.

[prospectpuppet]

I'm sure you all are already aware but concerning being stopped by an LEO based solely on OC, here's a reminder: per MSP legal update #86: "...officers may not stop a person on the mere possibility the person may be carrying an unregistered pistol."

Also...

"Officers are also reminded there is no general duty for a citizen to identify himself or herself to a police officer unless the citizen is being stopped for a Michigan Vehicle Code violation." I didn't have to say anything until I entered the vehicle (even if he approached me and started questioning me before I got into the car). At the point I entered the vehicle, he got his PC because it's illegal for me to do such a thing without a license. However, he can't stop me and check my weapon just because of OC. And he didn't. He waited until I entered the vehicle....he knew his place and as far as I see, he didn't cross any lines. Carry on y'all.

[Hammurabi]

If I'm not horribly mistaken, carrying a pistol in a car without the appropriate paperwork in order would be a violation of Michigan Penal Code, rather than Michigan Vehicle Code, so there's no duty to identify per that.
The police are barred from stopping to verify registration, because there is no reason to believe that a pistol is unregistered. Likewise, with no reason to suspect that you had entered the vehicle without a CPL, he should have not approached.

Don't get me wrong. I'm glad that the encounter was not more severe, but I don't think approaching and making unofficial quasi-stops because a person "could be" committing a (victimless)crime should be praised.

[prospectpuppet]

If I'm not horribly mistaken, carrying a pistol in a car without the appropriate paperwork in order would be a violation of Michigan Penal Code, rather than Michigan Vehicle Code, so there's no duty to identify per that.
The police are barred from stopping to verify registration, because there is no reason to believe that a pistol is unregistered. Likewise, with no reason to suspect that you had entered the vehicle without a CPL, he should have not approached.

Don't get me wrong. I'm glad that the encounter was not more severe, but I don't think approaching and making unofficial quasi-stops because a person "could be" committing a (victimless)crime should be praised.

I certainly agree. I wouldn't put him up or an "officer of the year" award or anything but he was by no means harassing me. I was totally ok with it and I understood. He handled it better than I expected. Although he had no LEGAL ground to stop me, I think there's something to be said about his morals. I'm a criminal justice student at a local college. I'm almost done with my degree and I'll be starting the academy next fall and with any luck, I'll be in uniform this time in two years. Keeping that in mind, I also strongly support our second amendment rights and I open carry more than I conceal...and I never leave home without a gun (or two). I've put myself in that position mentally and to be totally honest, I'd probably strike up a conversation with someone openly carrying too. I wouldn't attempt to illegally detain them but if they'll talk with me so I feel a little more confident that they know the laws and know what they're doing, awesome. It's a police officers job to keep guns away from criminals (in theory) and the way I see it, he politely did his job. If he didn't talk to me, who would? They don't know if I'm a second amendment supporter or a dude who is about to go shoot up a bunch of cars on 96 for example. But I have nothing to hide and I think after our brief encounter with each other he realized that and quickly ended it. I'm not going to sit here and complain. Nor will I call the department and recommend him for promotion. He simply fulfilled his moral obligation to do his best to keep his beat safe while he has that badge on. You can't blame him really. I'd rather the police be curious about it to make sure we're on our toes than to have them do nothing at all. When they become complacent, the criminal will start to open carry because the cops "don't seem to care". Then what? We don't know who's good and who's bad anymore right?

[gryphon]

the criminal will start to open carry because the cops "don't seem to care".

I don't know that I agree with that.  Criminals will always want to keep their deeds in the dark.  It's the nature of evil and criminal intent.

[CV67PAT]

I don't know that I agree with that.  Criminals will always want to keep their deeds in the dark.  It's the nature of evil and criminal intent.

I have to agree with that. Evil likes the darkness.

[prospectpuppet]

Currently, yes. But you don't think that if it came to the point where there were more people in this country OCing than not and where LEOs paid no attention to it that some of those carriers wouldn't be legal? If the majority carried openly, a criminal who is doing the same thing is still "in the dark" right? He blends in. (Not that this is a realistic possibility. Its a possibility nonetheless)

[CV67PAT]

Currently, yes. But you don't think that if it came to the point where there were more people in this country OCing than not and where LEOs paid no attention to it that some of those carriers wouldn't be legal? If the majority carried openly, a criminal who is doing the same thing is still "in the dark" right? He blends in. (Not that this is a realistic possibility. Its a possibility nonetheless)

You are correct. It is a possibility.

[gryphon]

But you don't think that if it came to the point where there were more people in this country OCing than not

I don't think we have to worry about 150 million people OCing.  And if 150 million people do begin OCing, that will eliminate many criminal problems!

[CV67PAT]

I don't think we have to worry about 150 million people OCing.  And if 150 million people do begin OCing, that will eliminate many criminal problems!

Yes it would.

[ocdetroit]

+ 1`Carry On.