Roadblocks???
 

I recently got my CCW. During a roadblock should I show it to the officer or should I just simply show him my DL?

Thanks.

It is my understanding, that if you are requested for ID, you must show both permit and ID.

nc

This is true.

MS statute as printed...

45-9-101 (1)(b)
The licensee must carry the license, together with valid identification, at all times in which the licensee is carrying a concealed pistol or revolver and must display both the license and proper identification upon demand by a law enforcement officer. A violation of the provisions of this paragraph (b) shall constitute a noncriminal violation with a penalty of Twenty-five Dollars ($25.00) and shall be enforceable by summons.

Ox,

I disagree. The statute is in reference to being asked to specifically display your CHL. In MS, it IS NOT mandantory according to state statutes to inform the officer of your concealed handgun nor are you required to show your CHL unlessed specifically asked for your CHL.

In a traditional roadblock, only a DL and possibly proof of auto insurance is asked for and required.

Upon being asked to display your CHL, you must also display another valid ID along with the CHL, such as your DL.



In some other states, upon a traffic stop or road block, you are required to immediately notify the officer of your concealed weapon and display your license to carry said weapon.

Maybe. However, of the many attorneys, local DA's office, and small handful of judges we have discussed this with, they all are in agreement that you must present your CCW along with your DL when carrying.

To me, I don't see the need in taking a chance of not informing a LEO, and risk a charge. Chances are you would never find out, but why risk it?

What if you have the permit, but no weapon?

Are you saying that the law still requires you to show the permit?

(I know, it's crazy and all that to not be carrying, but if you are going to a ballgame on a school campus or to work on a Federal facility, you are not supposed to carry.)

No. It is my understanding that you are not required to show it if you are not carrying. This reasoning comes from the statement, "at all times in which the licensee is carrying a concealed pistol or revolver."

I agree. There's no point in risking it. I was just pointing out that it is not required by state statute. But that doesn't mean one doesn't use common sense to make things move smoothly and safely.

Personally, this is the way I handle it. And this is just me. If it is just a random road block, I present my DL and that's it. If for some reason the stop progresses, I inform of the presence of the handgun and where. It's not illegal to have a handgun in the vehicle without the CHL, to begin with, so informing is strictly optional.

If I am stopped for a traffic infraction, I inform, just out of courtesy. I don't want any surprises and think it's the best way for me to handle the situation.



But, again, if you are asked to show your ID, you're are only required to show a valid ID (DL). If you are specifically asked to show your CHL, then you are required to show it and another valid ID. MS does not have anything in it's statutes that requires the licensee to present the CHL unless specifically asked for it. This is in contrast to some states that specifically require you to inform an office of the presence of a firearm and present your CHL.

There's a difference between what's "smarter" or better and what the law requires. Personally, I'm not one of those that feel that THE MAN is infringing if he touches my weapon. I understand the tension at a stop and want to remove as much tension as possible and informing does that. If he suspects me of being drunk or on drugs and asks me to exit the vehicle and I print, I would rather him not have to draw on me..... but that's just me.

I hear the noise your makin'! :supergrin:

Seriously, I see where you are coming from. However, what concerns me is that some in the legal community that I have talked to see it differently. I guess the courts are there to interpret the law, but that costs money in legal bills.

Just hand him your DL.

A: Your in your car, you don't have to have a CCP to CC in your car.

B: The law says when requested (the permit, not your DL) by the LEO, like PARAGON said, and like he said, its not required by law.

C: Generally, he/she couldn't care less.

ETA:

D: Letting him know you have a gun without him asking wouldn't make me feel better. Ignorance is bliss.

E: In the 23 times I have interacted with an LEO on a traffic stop (19 in MS) and 2 road blocks I have had the pleasure of traveling through, a grand total of 0 have asked about guns/weapons, 0 times I volunteered.

I have a very intelligent friend (PhD, hunter, NRA member, CCW permit, gun owner) who told me recently that when he is stopped for speeding or rolling through a stop sign, he gets out of his truck as the LEO is approaching his vehicle and tells them that he has a CCW permit and that he has a gun on his person and 2 in his truck.

I told him that I thought he was stupid to do that.

His behavior could easily be perceived as threatening to the LEO.

LEOs are nervous in such situations anyway and for good reason.

Big +1 to that NRA dude!

How the courts will interpret the law is more important, in most cases, than what the law states. This one is written vaguely and can be taken both ways. Some say that you have to have a permit to carry a weapon ON YOUR PERSON, even in a vehicle. However, if you take it out of the holster and put it on the seat, you don't. Others thing that because you are in the vehicle, you don't need one at all.

Same thing for the presentation of the permit along with your DL. Some say yes, some say no. If you DO present it, you are in compliance IF the "yes" people are right. However, if you don't, you run the risk of losing it, or facing charges, if the court is run by a "yes" man.

I mean no disrespect to anyone, but it doesn't matter what YOU (or I) think the law reads. It matters what the courts have said it means. And again, I have talked to several members of the legal community (lawyers, judges, etc) who feel the law requires you to present it along with your DL. Are they right? Who knows. Do you have the disposable funds to fight a legal fight to prove they are? That's up to you. Presenting your permit would eliminate all of that hassle up front.

And those people are wrong, simple letter of the law on that one.

And I'd say they are right. The way I understand it the definition of concealed in MS is any part of the gun not being visible. Since its impossible for it all to be visible, then technically its impossible for it to not be concealed.

In order for it to get to the courts, it must first be handled by the cops. From my experience with cops in MS, most are quite level headed unless you give them reason to act differently. I have never been pulled over by a PITA cop, although I have interacted with a few.

Furthermore, copied from your first post on the thread:
I have $25 bucks to spare, charges? loose it? hardly.

In order for you to be searched, they have to have probable cause. Acting like a normal respectful citizen of the great state of MS keeps probable cause at bay and the cops friendly like. Since this thread was asking about road blocks, random occurrences. They ask for your license and proof of insurance, check the inspection sticker and you're on your way. If they asked for the CCP, hell give it to them, otherwise I see no reason to volunteer info, it slows down the process and serves no purpose.


Same here, I am just chatting. And yes, I have $25 bucks to BLOW on such a infraction of this questionably questionable law. Presenting my permit outside my vehicle would be a misdemeanor with a $500 fine and/or 60 days in jail, provided the officer cared enough about it to fill out the paper work. If they do feel that way its highly probable I was doing something reckless deserving something far worse.

What if games are endless, I think its time for us as citizens to mold the law to us, not us to the law. The law was made to serve the people, Mississippi could finally lead in something other than teen pregnancies.

I was in downtown Washington, DC recently. Eating the free breakfast in a motel when two young DC policemen came in and began eating next to me.

I got to talking with them a little and mentioned the fact that I had a Mississippi CCW permit and showed it to them.

They seemed a bit amazed that folks could legally carry concealed. Of course, they had heard about such things, but had not seen a real permit.

They said that such things were definitely not allowed in DC, and they seemed glad, but naively so.

The financial cost I was talking about was not the legal penalty. I was referring to the huge amount of legal fees you will pay to your attorney to contest the charge. The going rate around here for a rookie staff attorney fresh out of law school is $100/hour. By the time you make it through court, you can spend thousands for a misdemeanor.

A judge may be wrong in his interpretation of the law. However, what is going to happen if he is? Nothing to him. Everything to you. Now, you have to spend more money to file an appeal to another judge. What if he agrees? Another appeal. There is nothing that really states a judge has to be right 100% of the time. That is why we have an appeal process. But, that process costs money.

The easy fix I see is to just show the CCW along with your DL. I know a couple of people who have taped them together. One side is the DL. The other side is the CCW. Legally, do you HAVE to show it? Maybe not. But, why even screw with it and take that chance? You are right that most MS LEOs are level headed and don't care. However, that doesn't mean all of them are. There are some who will slap a charge on someone just for the stats. I know. I have worked with one like that.

Why one anyone fight a "noncriminal violation" who's penalty was $25? Its a cheap traffic/parking ticket. Court costs would add another $150 bucks, but the DA/ADA probably would settle out of court if it was the only infraction, assuming it made it that far. Furthermore, you have the right to defend yourself, I have done so and it has been a fun/entertaining/learning experience. If I went through law school, the DA said I had a job with him for the taking, plain and simple.


From the cops perspective, why would he go through the hassle of giving you such a pathetic violation unless you were doing something to deserve it? Getting cross examined on the stand is rarely an enjoyable event.

I have had many a day on the stand. It ranks right up there with a root canal. In those days, I have seen people fight stupid charges just because they could.

In the case of a CCW, I would think someone would be interested in contesting the charge in order to keep their permit. If you are convicted of a permit violation, that permit could be revoked. Seems like a a pretty big gamble for 'proving' you are right on the side of the road. (Notice I have intentionally refrained from the "Besides, what do you have to hide?" line. :supergrin: )

From the Mississippi State Highway Patrol web site on carrying concealed weapons:



Note the "concealed in whole or in part . . . in any motor vehicle."

Source:
LINK

Hey NRA Dude, don't get all technical!


ETA :tongueout:

I didn't consider the lack of ability renewing your permit Ox. However, I think being convicted is still a stretch.

I agree that a conviction is a stretch. However, I think we are debating two separate angles of this thing.

While I can see both sides of the legal interpretations of the law, I am trying to point out that, while you may win the fight in the end (by not showing your permit), is the cost and hassle really worth it? Would it be better to just show your permit to the LEO, even if you technically don't have to? Better safe than sorry?

That is something that has no uniform right/wrong answer. That can only be determined by each individual. Personally, I don't see an issue with showing the permit, and have never had a problem or second glance on the few times I have.

Maybe we can get Nolo (Stephen) to get this addressed this summer when he works with the senators.

I agree with your point that its easy to enough to hand him the extra card, I think its unnecessary however. I guess my issue is that the law is interpreted differently, similar to how the 2nd Amendment can be interpreted. Plain letter law would be a lovely thing. Case law in our favor (guns in general) would be another lovely thing.

I am for taking back our rights, not conceding them to higher levels of control and personal invasion. There is a line and it shouldn't be crossed.

Been a good debate/conversation I think. I know I learned from it :)


Does anyone know offhand what the law says (regarding the penalty) for carrying without a permit?

The statutes regulating permits and concealed carry is Title 45, Chapter 9, section 101 (45-9-101), and can be found BY CLICKING HERE.

The only thing I can find in there regarding open carry is near the bottom with 45-9-101 (18). It states, Nothing in this section shall be construed to require or allow the registration, documentation or providing of serial numbers with regard to any firearm. Further, nothing in this section shall be construed to allow the open and unconcealed carrying of any deadly weapon as described in Section 97-37-1, Mississippi Code of 1972.

Now, 97-37-1 is in the section dealing with crimes and details out the penalties for carrying a weapon without a permit. However, it only talks about "concealed in whole or in part".

Much thanks Ox. I forgot the link to the MS code page, bookmarked now!


Carl