List your notification horror stories here

[Mustang380gal]

I removed a fight that had strayed off of the original topic.

Please know that we are doing out best to put these stories to good use, and are sharing them with legislators to show the impact that notification has on is. On our last legislative action day, many of these stories were copied and inserted into a packet given to the senators.

Keep in mind that there will be calls for proponent testimony and other face to face opportunities to help get notification removed. Be ready to assist when the call to action is given.

[M-Quigley]

Recently I was talking to a guy I know who is a cop about civilian concealed carry. He mentioned something that happened to him recently. He does not want his city or department named. His department hired a new guy (new to the department but who had been a cop for a number of years in a near by city.) They had a traffic stop where he (the new guy) asked the driver at one point, "Is there something you need to tell me?" She didn't know what he was talking about, so he told her "about your gun." She told him that yes she had a CHL but didn't have her gun with her at that moment. He told her she was still supposed to notify that she had a CHL and show it to him, and then to tell him that she didn't have the gun with her. She told him that's not what she was told in her CCW class, and he said that her instructor was wrong. He wasn't going to charge her with anything, he just wanted to let her know to inform in the future. The other cop that saw this called him over and quietly informed him that she was right and he was wrong, that the driver didn't have a duty to inform if she wasn't carrying. The guy then asks, "When did they change the law?"

[3FULLMAGS+1]

Recently I was talking to a guy I know who is a cop about civilian concealed carry. He mentioned something that happened to him recently. He does not want his city or department named. His department hired a new guy (new to the department but who had been a cop for a number of years in a near by city.) They had a traffic stop where he (the new guy) asked the driver at one point, "Is there something you need to tell me?" She didn't know what he was talking about, so he told her "about your gun." She told him that yes she had a CHL but didn't have her gun with her at that moment. He told her she was still supposed to notify that she had a CHL and show it to him, and then to tell him that she didn't have the gun with her. She told him that's not what she was told in her CCW class, and he said that her instructor was wrong. He wasn't going to charge her with anything, he just wanted to let her know to inform in the future. The other cop that saw this called him over and quietly informed him that she was right and he was wrong, that the driver didn't have a duty to inform if she wasn't carrying. The guy then asks, "When did they change the law?"

.......ya , when DID that law change?.....LOL.....SMH.

This is another point that we need to get across to out legislators, (not that those who head to our statehouse every year aren't trying to do this), not only are there cops who will use notification as means to harass, but there are other LE that are NOT bad cops, (as far as being anti-carry), but don't know the laws as well as they should, and when confronted by a citizen who carries and that citizen tries to correct them on a law, the officer refuses to hear them out. It's an attitude problem, we all have one.......to a varying degree......it's human nature. And some of us don't want to admit when we are wrong, much less apologize, and the part about not wanting their city or department mentioned, proves that they would rather sweep the incident under the rug, instead of putting it out there as an example to learn from. And I didn't see an apology from the leo, mentioned above and I never got one from the leo that wanted to arrest me on two different issues, (when he was wrong), that I posted about earlier in this thread. I think too many LE have the wrong attitude when in uniform and even a simple misunderstanding of the laws can get blown out of proportion in even the most ordinary, day to day LE interactions and "we" end up taking the brunt of it. And our legislators are refusing to take our concerns seriously. And this lack of concern by our legislators who refuse to put this issue at the top of their priority list is going to continue to cause those of us who carry, problems such as harassment, arrest or poss. worse.

Are we trying to get rid of notification completely, not really, we are trying to get the "duty to notify "FIRST" off our backs by putting a "duty to ask" on LE, (if the officer wants to know). Maybe it's how we are communicating this to our legislators, because it's not that we, (OFCC) are anti-cop, we are just trying to fix a very bad law.

Whoo, that vent felt good, now lets get back to those notification stories......


Sorry about my post hear looking like a quote. I'm not sure how that happened, but I don't have time now to fix it.

FTFY - JaS

[WestonDon]

Are we trying to get rid of notification completely, not really, we are trying to get the "duty to notify "FIRST" off our backs by putting a "duty to ask" on LE, (if the officer wants to know). Maybe it's how we are communicating this to our legislators, because it's not that we, (OFCC) are anti-cop, we are just trying to fix a very bad law.

I for one do want to get rid of notification completely. Including the notification that occurs via our license plates. Without which there would be no reason for LE to ask unless he asked everybody he ever stopped, which I think would get real old real quick.

I acknowledge that's not going to happen anytime soon.

[3FULLMAGS+1]

Are we trying to get rid of notification completely, not really, we are trying to get the "duty to notify "FIRST" off our backs by putting a "duty to ask" on LE, (if the officer wants to know). Maybe it's how we are communicating this to our legislators, because it's not that we, (OFCC) are anti-cop, we are just trying to fix a very bad law.

I for one do want to get rid of notification completely. Including the notification that occurs via our license plates. Without which there would be no reason for LE to ask unless he asked everybody he ever stopped, which I think would get real old real quick.

I acknowledge that's not going to happen anytime soon.

What I meant was that "when" we get rid of notification.....and I'm trying to be positive....... as it is now, there's probably going to be something in there that will state that when asked by LE if we are armed, we have to answer.

And yes, I'd like to see the license "pop up" go away too.

And I agree with ya, I think it would get old . Wonder how many LE ask in those states that require no license.

[Chuck]

It is already against the law to lie to a cop if he asks you if you have a gun, so what's the big deal?

They don't need more "special language" that only repeats what the law already is.

All this requires is striking several lines of infringement from the ORC

[3FULLMAGS+1]

It is already against the law to lie to a cop if he asks you if you have a gun, so what's the big deal?

They don't need more "special language" that only repeats what the law already is.

All this requires is striking several lines of infringement from the ORC

I agree with you Chuck. I know it's illegal to lie to LE, but if our legislators want to insert "special language" that repeats what the law already spells out, just to keep them happy, then fine, let them have that crumb. That's what "we" seem to get most of the time.

And yes, all that's needed is the removal of a few lines in the ORC, and the problem is solved. For you and I, that sounds pretty freaking easy, but for our legislators, doing such a simple thing is apparently to much to ask.

But if adding language, (even though it's not needed), makes them "feel" like they are appeasing law enforcement, and looking out for the LEO's safety, they may seriously consider striking notification.

Maybe I'm wrong in my thinking here, but our past attempts at getting notification off the books has failed, regardless of all the effort we've put into this, so......

If LE ask now, we have to answer truthfully anyhow, so what changes if they DO put such language in a bill.

[M-Quigley]

And some of us don't want to admit when we are wrong, much less apologize, and the part about not wanting their city or department mentioned, proves that they would rather sweep the incident under the rug, instead of putting it out there as an example to learn from.

Well, from what I was told, it was a learning experience for that cop anyway. He's not new to LE but he's new to them. They're at least watching and listening what he's doing and saying for now. It makes me wonder how many years and how many other people he's said this to in the other city where he was at.

[M-Quigley]

This isn't my story, but saw a story from someone else on Channel 7 Dayton news at 11pm Sunday 5/28/17. The news was doing a segment on possible legislative changes, one of them being repealing notification. Christopher Clements from Dayton said he was in the car with a co worker of his (co worker had a CHL) and when he was pulled over, the co worker did the required notification. "They put us all up against the car because he said he had a gun, and I was like, wow, but he was a carrier." Mr. Clements is black, and it's possible the co worker was black also. Whether that was an issue is unknown, but I've heard from at least one case of a black CHL holder who received similar treatment, after getting pulled over for the heinous crime of having a license plate bulb out.

[Chuck]

I found it
Thanks!

[JosephElliott]

Recently I was talking to a guy I know who is a cop about civilian concealed carry. He mentioned something that happened to him recently. He does not want his city or department named. His department hired a new guy (new to the department but who had been a cop for a number of years in a near by city.) They had a traffic stop where he (the new guy) asked the driver at one point, "Is there something you need to tell me?" She didn't know what he was talking about, so he told her "about your gun." She told him that yes she had a CHL but didn't have her gun with her at that moment. He told her she was still supposed to notify that she had a CHL and show it to him, and then to tell him that she didn't have the gun with her. She told him that's not what she was told in her CCW class, and he said that her instructor was wrong. He wasn't going to charge her with anything, he just wanted to let her know to inform in the future. The other cop that saw this called him over and quietly informed him that she was right and he was wrong, that the driver didn't have a duty to inform if she wasn't carrying. The guy then asks, "When did they change the law?"

.......ya , when DID that law change?.....LOL.....SMH.

This is another point that we need to get across to out legislators, (not that those who head to our statehouse every year aren't trying to do this), not only are there cops who will use notification as means to harass, but there are other LE that are NOT bad cops, (as far as being anti-carry), but don't know the laws as well as they should, and when confronted by a citizen who carries and that citizen tries to correct them on a law, the officer refuses to hear them out. It's an attitude problem, we all have one.......to a varying degree......it's human nature. And some of us don't want to admit when we are wrong, much less apologize, and the part about not wanting their city or department mentioned, proves that they would rather sweep the incident under, instead of putting it out there as an example to learn from. And I didn't see an apology from the leo, mentioned above and I never got one from the leo that wanted to arrest me on two different issues, (when he was wrong), that I posted about earlier in this thread. I think too many LE have the wrong attitude when in uniform and even a simple misunderstanding of the laws can get blown out of proportion in even the most ordinary, day to day LE interactions and "we" end up taking the brunt of it. And our legislators are refusing to take our concerns seriously. And this lack of concern by our legislators who refuse to put this issue at the top of their priority list is going to continue to cause those of us who carry, problems such as harassment, arrest or poss. worse.

Are we trying to get rid of notification completely, not really, we are trying to get the "duty to notify "FIRST" off our backs by putting a "duty to ask" on LE, (if the officer wants to know). Maybe it's how we are communicating this to our legislators, because it's not that we, (OFCC) are anti-cop, we are just trying to fix a very bad law.

Whoo, that vent felt good, now lets get back to those notification stories......


Sorry about my post hear looking like a quote. I'm not sure how that happened, but I don't have time now to fix it.

FTFY - JaS

I get where you're coming from, that makes a lot of sense.