• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Armed Traffic Stop

M-Taliesin

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
Messages
1,504
Location
Aurora, Colorado
Howdy Folks!
I had just transported a fugitive to the 4 Corners area in order to turn him over to agents from Arizona.
Because I arrested him late in the evening, it was pushing 5am the next morning by the time I got as
far as Durango on the return trip.

After a pot or two of coffee to stay awake, I continued driving toward the infamous Wolf Creek Pass.
Somewhere west of there, I was pulled over by a county deputy. Opening the window on the driver
side, I turned on the interior lights and put my hands on the steering wheel and waited for the officer
to approach.

When he walked up to the car, I said "Evening officer. I know I do not have a duty to inform, but
just so we are candid, I am armed strong side."
The deputy smiled and said "Ill make a deal with you. You don't reach for yours, and I won't reach
for mine!".

We both had a laugh at that, and I told him I'd need to reach for my wallet on the same side as
the gun, but I was happy to move slowly. He checked out my credentials and said I was going
a bit over the speed limit. I apologized, and he let me off with a warning.

What made this encounter good, for both the officer and myself, I was open and honest and
didn't go off on a rant about my rights. I made certain he could see me as he approached, and
that my hands were on the wheel. I accorded him respect, and received respect in return.

While there is no "Duty to Inform" law in Colorado, it is nearly redundant when you are
open carrying anyhow. The best policy is don't let the guy find out by surprise. It tends
to irk them in a serious manner.
 

solus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2013
Messages
8,680
Location
here nc
do you mean the nice LE wasn't razzled and dazzled by your agent 99 tactic kool outfit or your bounty hunter badge..

oh wait he was mesmerized as he let you off since i am sure you filled the conversation with who you knew in the senior ranks of the men in blue throughout the state.

you do not oc mel as you are always under the color of law so please quit misrepresenting your comments as such.
 
Last edited:

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
OP, are you a bounty hunter? if yes, do bounty hunters swear an oath to uphold the Constitution?..

Thank you for your reply.

Regards
CCJ
 

Maverick9

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
1,404
Location
Mid-atlantic
When he walked up to the car, I said "Evening officer. I know I do not have a duty to inform, but
just so we are candid, I am armed strong side."
The deputy smiled and said "Ill make a deal with you. You don't reach for yours, and I won't reach
for mine!".
.
The law requires, if demanded during a stop by an LEO to produce PERMIT and photo ID, and says NOTHING about talking about the firearm.

The permittee shall carry the permit, together with valid photo identification, at all times during which the permittee is in actual possession of a concealed handgun and shall produce both documents upon demand by a law enforcement officer.
Another person who should know better who doesn't know the law and can't follow it, and yet brags about it. Pitiful. You're training the LEO that he has a right to know about the firearm instead of it being about producing your permit upon demand.

Why not know the law and follow it?
 

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,312
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
......He checked out my credentials and said I was going a bit over the speed limit. I apologized, and he let me off with a warning....
So, what conditions existed that caused the officer to pull you over? Did he say the speed you were traveling at was unreasonable or not prudent under the conditions at the time he pulled you over? From your little story I bet he didn't. And if he didn't he had no business pulling you over unless, of course, you were over 75 MPH.

It sure appears you and the officer don't know what Colorado's Revised Statute (§ 42-4-1101) actually says. Or the officer just chooses to ignore the law.
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,826
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
So, what conditions existed that caused the officer to pull you over? Did he say the speed you were traveling at was unreasonable or not prudent under the conditions at the time he pulled you over? From your little story I bet he didn't. And if he didn't he had no business pulling you over unless, of course, you were over 75 MPH.

It sure appears you and the officer don't know what Colorado's Revised Statute (§ 42-4-1101) actually says. Or the officer just chooses to ignore the law.
U.S. Route 160 in Colorado would appear to be a surfaced, four-lane highway which according to the referenced § 42-4-1101, has a speed limit of sixty-five miles per hour.

According to the OP's telling of the tale, a Sheriff's Deputy approached his vehicle and informed him that he was "going a bit over the speed limit." Exceeding sixty-five miles per hour on a surfaced, four-lane highway by even 1 MPH is therefore illegal, and prima facie evidence of a violation of § 42-4-1101(2)(g) unless I'm reading the CRS incorrectly.
 
Last edited:

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,312
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
U.S. Route 160 in Colorado would appear to be a surfaced, four-lane highway which according to the referenced § 42-4-1101, has a speed limit of sixty-five miles per hour.

According to the OP's telling of the tale, a Sheriff's Deputy approached his vehicle and informed him that he was "going a bit over the speed limit." According to CRS § 42-4-1101(12) (a) A violation of driving one to twenty-four miles per hour in excess of the reasonable and prudent speed or in excess of the maximum lawful speed limit of seventy-five miles per hour is a class A traffic infraction.

Exceeding sixty-five miles per hour on a surfaced, four-lane highway by even 1 MPH is therefore illegal, and prima facie evidence of a violation of § 42-4-1101(2)(g) unless I'm reading the CRS incorrectly.
And yes, I was expecting this type of response. You were suckered into jumping to that conclusion. Ohio speed law is somewhat written in a similar vein. Read the statute closer. In court the officer would have to show you were traveling at a speed that was unreasonable for the conditions. Ohio's uniform traffic ticket, at the top, has a check box (unsafe for conditions) that must be checked for a speeding charge. At the bottom are a slew of other check boxes which deal with conditions. 99% of the time the boxes at the bottom (checked or unchecked) of the ticket will contradict the unsafe for conditions box checked.

Colorado law basically says the same thing. The state has to prove exceeding the posted prima facie speed was unreasonable first before any other part if the statute kicks in.
 
Last edited:

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,826
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
Colorado law basically says the same thing. The state has to prove exceeding the posted prima facie speed was unreasonable first before any other part if the statute kicks in.
I would draw the gentleman's attention to § 42-4-1101 (4).
(4) Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (c) of subsection (8) of this section, any speed in excess of the lawful speeds set forth in subsection (2) of this section shall be prima facie evidence that such speed was not reasonable or prudent under the conditions then existing. As used in this subsection (4), "prima facie evidence" means evidence which is sufficient proof that the speed was not reasonable or prudent under the conditions then existing, and which will remain sufficient proof of such fact, unless contradicted and overcome by evidence bearing upon the question of whether or not the speed was reasonable and prudent under the conditions then existing.
Now, tell me again, being in excess of what speed is prima facie evidence of such speed being not reasonable or prudent.
 
Last edited:

M-Taliesin

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
Messages
1,504
Location
Aurora, Colorado
OP, are you a bounty hunter? if yes, do bounty hunters swear an oath to uphold the Constitution?..

Thank you for your reply.

Regards
CCJ
Hello CCJ!
We prefer Fugitive Recovery Agent but bounty Hunter is technically correct. While we do not take the oath of a law enforcement officer, we do adhere to a code of ethics. We also must adhere to law. Failing to do either can result in having a real short run in this line of work.
We carry a variety of weapons, especially handguns, and we practice the "use of force" continue idea using escalation/descalation tactics to accomplish our task with as little fuss as possible.
 

M-Taliesin

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
Messages
1,504
Location
Aurora, Colorado
do you mean the nice LE wasn't razzled and dazzled by your agent 99 tactic kool outfit or your bounty hunter badge..

oh wait he was mesmerized as he let you off since i am sure you filled the conversation with who you knew in the senior ranks of the men in blue throughout the state.

you do not oc mel as you are always under the color of law so please quit misrepresenting your comments as such.
Hello!
That night I was wearing jeans and a tee shirt. Badge on my belt stong side would have been out of sight. So wrong there.

Next, we never discussed anybody's name in the LEO community or mine, so, wrong again.

Then there's the color of law thing. We are not law enforcement, and do not present as such. We clearly state we are Bail enforcement, not cops. So, third fallicy dispatched.

When I'm not on a case, I don't wear markings that identify me as an FRA, So wrong again.

So enjoy your ad hominem vitriol but try to have some semblence of fact when you do.

Any agent, worth the moniker, knows the best way to commence an investigation, get facts, and apprehend a fugitive is plain clothes. That's how we go.

There is a time for tactical gear; when the defendant is known to be armed and willing to shoot. IIIA becomes a matter of survival, not an element of theatrics.

It is interesting your assessment of things you know little or nothing about.
 

M-Taliesin

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
Messages
1,504
Location
Aurora, Colorado
Doesn't everyone know about the Bounty Hunter's Creed]
Hello!
The "Bounty Hunter's Creed" is the ficticious creation it appears to be. Nobody I know would give it much thought. We have ethics and laws we abide by.
That said, the one statement "no bounty is worth dying for" is a matter of common sense
 

M-Taliesin

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
Messages
1,504
Location
Aurora, Colorado
Good grief, is this guy for real? Somebody please pat him on the back before he breaks an arm...

The smug... it burns.
Hello!
I am proud of the work I do, just as anyone else is of their work... Whether a painter, Baker, banker or FRA.

As for smug, what is more so than having such poor self esteem that it can only be raised by tearing others down.
 

M-Taliesin

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
Messages
1,504
Location
Aurora, Colorado
The law requires, if demanded during a stop by an LEO to produce PERMIT and photo ID, and says NOTHING about talking about the firearm.



Another person who should know better who doesn't know the law and can't follow it, and yet brags about it. Pitiful. You're training the LEO that he has a right to know about the firearm instead of it being about producing your permit upon demand.

Why not know the law and follow it?
Hello.
The officer did not ask to see my permit, which would have been irrelevant, as it wasn't concealed by anything apart from my body.
 

M-Taliesin

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
Messages
1,504
Location
Aurora, Colorado
So, what conditions existed that caused the officer to pull you over? Did he say the speed you were traveling at was unreasonable or not prudent under the conditions at the time he pulled you over? From your little story I bet he didn't. And if he didn't he had no business pulling you over unless, of course, you were over 75 MPH.

It sure appears you and the officer don't know what Colorado's Revised Statute (§ 42-4-1101) actually says. Or the officer just chooses to ignore the law.
Hello.
He did State the reason for the stop. But the topic had to do with being armed during the stop and how it went well by the simple expedient of showing him respect which tends to keep such a stop at a comfortable level for both of us.
 

M-Taliesin

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2011
Messages
1,504
Location
Aurora, Colorado
Hello folks:
This thread has gone wildly off topic, which was conduct on a traffic stop while armed.

Can we agree to stick to the topic, please.
 
Top