...it does nothing to diminish my concern that it will be abused by the bad apples among the cops.
We already have quite a few reports of cops seizing guns during traffic stops. Seems to be based mainly on a desired fishing expedition to run serial numbers, and complete lack of judgement (or refusal to use judgement), as aided and abetted by
PA vs Mimms, a US Supreme Court decision that says in so many words that a gun is in and of itself indicative of dangerousness during a traffic stop.
Terry v Ohio said in its holding that a cop needed 1) reasonable suspicion the detainee was armed, 2) reasonable suspicion that the detainee was dangerous, and 3) nothing in the initial stages of the encounter served to dispel the cop's reasonable concern for his and other's safety (meaning the cop had to use some judgement about what was occurring in the opening moments of the encounter)
. PA vs Mimms later basically said that gun = danger = authorization for seizure for officer safety, justified (rationalized) because of a so-called "inordinate danger to police during traffic stops".
So, basically some cops seem to just automatically seize guns during traffic stops because they want to run the serial number, and they can get away with it because
PA vs Mimms says they can do it. Nothing illustrates the ridiculousness of
Mimms better than the simple fact that plenty of cops
do not automatically seize guns during traffic stops. If armed motorists were so universally dangerous, many more cops would automatically seize guns.
Terry v Ohio: (see the last paragraph)
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0392_0001_ZO.html
PA vs Mimms: (scroll down to "Page 434 US 110)
http://supreme.justia.com/us/434/106/case.html