I live in a fairly conservative, gun toting area of Virginia, but I was shocked to learn of an incident that happened just a short drive from me in Roanoke. A man named Aaron A. Stevenson filed a lawsuit last week in U.S. District Court alleging that his constitutional rights were violated during a May 6 traffic stop in Roanoke. According to the Roanoke Times,
The lawsuit gives this account of Stevenson’s encounter with police:
Stevenson was driving along Williamson Road to pick up his daughter from church when Roanoke police Officer Jamie A. Kwiecinski stopped him. Stevenson was given a summons because his registration had expired.
Kwiecinski learned that Stevenson had a concealed carry permit and asked if he had a gun. Stevenson declined to answer.
Kwiecinski called for backup, and Officer Dwight W. Ayers arrived on the scene. Stevenson said the officers ignored his repeated invocation of his right to remain silent, and to have an attorney present during questioning.
The officers pulled Stevenson from his vehicle, the lawsuit said, took the .45-caliber handgun he wore in a belt holster, and put him in handcuffs in the back of a police car. Stevenson said he was threatened with loss of his permit, confiscation of his gun and indefinite detention while police investigated whether he was involved in anything criminal.
Officers never read Stevenson his Miranda rights, the lawsuit said, and Ayers told Stevenson the questioning would stop if he would admit to some criminal action.
As the incident continued, some of Stevenson’s co-workers drove past and his employer stopped to see what was happening. The officers asked the employer if Stevenson had mental problems.
Stevenson said the tight handcuffs injured his wrists.
Eventually, Sgt. Sandy Duffey, a police supervisor, said to release Stevenson.
In the lawsuit, Stevenson asked for unspecified monetary damages, injunctions to prevent future incidents and a declaration that his civil rights had been violated.
Online court records indicated that the expired registration charge against Stevenson was dismissed in June.
We only have one side of the story so far, but if Mr. Stevenson’s story is even remotely accurate, it is very disheartening. I’m guessing when Officer Kwiecinski pulled up Stevenson’s information on his computer he saw that Stevenson had a concealed carry permit. It seems that the officer used this information to contend that Stevenson was somehow breaking the law or was a criminal even though a clean criminal history is required to obtain a concealed carry permit.
What seems perplexing about this is that Stevenson was only stopped for a minor non-moving traffic violation (that was eventually dismissed). His firearm was not visible, he was not threatening anyone with it, and he was not breaking any laws. What reason did the officer have to ask if Stevenson had a firearm with him and why did it matter? What reason did the officer have to pull Stevenson from his car and put him in handcuffs? Was it ethical for the police to tell Stevenson that if he just admitted to a crime, they would stop questioning him? Was it right to threaten confiscation of Stevenson’s property (his firearm) even though he was not breaking any law? All Officer Kwiecinski had to do was give Stevenson a ticket for an expired registration and let him go on his way. Why did he feel the need to push and search for a crime that was non-existent? Why did he treat a law abiding citizen so poorly?
Does possessing a concealed carry permit somehow imply that the holder of the permit is a criminal? If someone chooses to legally exercise their right to carry a firearm and goes through the process of obtaining a permit, do they lose their right to the presumption of innocence? Is this infringing on our right to keep and bare arms? Is this an effective way for police to serve and protect their communities? I have lots of questions and I’m scared of what the answers may be.
Related posts:
I am not afraid to ask the questions.
A Virginia resident myself, a CC permit holder, and a hunter I have had a few loaded firearms in my vehicle.
I can just imagine what that overzealous deputy would have done if he would have taken a look in my truck in the last few weeks.
I am going to look for that story because I am interested to see if there was any disipline handed out to the officers
Rob, I’m also a CC permit holder and a hunter. If the cop in the story had stopped me during hunting season, he probably would have had a heart attack and called on the swat team for backup. It scares me that some police officers are treating CC permit holders as criminals. I would expect something like this to happen in New England, Maryland, or California. But not in SW Virginia!
When I got my CC permit, we were explicitly instructed that if you are ever stopped by the police, you let them know you are CC permit holder and whether or not you are carrying a weapon. If they find that you are a permit holder they will ask you, and you tell them the truth. This isn’t generally an assumption of criminality, but it is a safety protocol. If there is a loaded firearm in your vehicle during an encounter with the police, then the police have a right to know this. My first take is that this Stevenson guy should have just declared his weapon, gotten his ticket, and moved on. He was wrong to resist the officer in this situation.
It seems to me that the man in question, as Burro suggested, might have handled the initial question better.
Also, I do think that there is a growing bias against gun-owners. That is what the MIAC and DHS reports were all about.
I partially agree and think it would have been wise to say, “Yes, I have a firearm in the vehicle”. But he was also perfectly within his rights to refuse to answer questions that had nothing to due with the expired registration ticket he was given. A legally owned firearm that was legally concealed was of no threat to the officer and the officer had no reason to believe otherwise. If the officer believed that something illegal was going on he should have arrested the man. Instead, he put him in handcuffs, threatened the man, and told him to confess to a crime. This is textbook harassment. When a sergeant arrived on the scene, she ordered the guy released which I think adds to the evidence of harassment.
This man broke no law and committed no crime, but he was treated like a criminal because he was legally carrying a firearm and he refused to answer questions that were irrelevant to the situation. I think out of respect for the police you should always advise them if you have a weapon in the vehicle if you are ever pulled over. But, in Virginia at least, you are not legally required to do so.
Stevenson broke no law and there was no reason for the officer to think a law was being broken because he already knew that this man had a permit to legally carry a concealed firearm.
Here is an interesting thought. A car is similar to a home in the eyes of the law where searches and seizures are concerned. Let’s say a police officer shows up on your doorstep for some minor infraction, such as a stereo that is too loud. He writes you a $25 citation for a noise violation but as he turns to walk away he notices an NRA sticker on your car (or something else that lets him know you probably own a gun). He then asks if you have a gun on your person or in the house. Are you legally required to answer him? No. Does he have any reason to ask that question? No, of course not. But what if he then puts you in handcuffs, seizes your guns, and demands that you confess to some crime? The same thing happened here, but a car was involved instead of a home.
Disgusting what was done to him. He broke no law and had a permit. To drive him to his job like that was a clear case of intimidation by the police.
First of all let me be up front in saying that I’m not into guns. I have hand eye co-ordination for crap and figure I’d be more likely to hurt someone I wasn’t aiming for, so I don’t own one. Having said that I do know that there are plenty of sane, responsible gun owners. However I think what this person ran into has more to do with the “Law and Order” mindset than any particular prejudice against gun owners.
Many police, broadly speaking, in my experience have a kind of guilty until proven guilty mentality. Further more many of them have or develop an attitude that believes that it’s not criminals that are the problem, it’s the stupid “Citizens” (read with a tone of disgust similar to a Klansman uttering a certain “N” word.) who dare to question their Betters, or think they should do anything other than cower sheeplike waiting for police to act. While I know that not all cops feel and think this way, enough of them do that it makes situations like the one you cite all to common. But it’s really not about guns, that was just this particular cops excuse to act out.
On another note though, this is a perfect example of how “Leaders” on both sides are doing nothing good. By making it into an all or nothing ideological contest it kills dialog and only results in needless polarization. Frankly I think if you got reasonable people together you’d see a quick consensus on the following points;
1: People should be able to protect themselves.
2: Insane/ irresponsible people should not be allowed to amass arsenals.
3: Children should be kept from getting into guns and thinking they are toys.
Now obviously there would be details to iron out, but I don’t think any thinking person believes that someone wanting a gun for self defense is a bad person, nor someone wanting reasonable controls over fire arms.
Yet somehow we keep letting the most polarizing extreme voices of both sides high jack the conversation.
Take care.
Roy
Roy,
I agree with your assessment of the attitude of many police officers these days. Does anyone else remember when police officers were considered civil servants whose job was to serve and protect? Now we no longer call them PEACE officers but law ENFORCEMENT officers.
I have several family members who are police officers and they too have noticed a trend that many cops think everyone they pull over is a violent criminal who needs to be ruffed up or intimidated.
As the wife of an officer I find this story quite disturbing. I’ve e-mailed your post and asked hubby what he would do, as a gun enthusiast himself – he also wants me to get my CC and carry at all times.
On the other hand…we’ve had SIX officers gunned down and killed in the last three months in our state. All six were brutally stalked/lured and murdered in pure cold blood for no reason other than their profession. Officers here are understandably suspicious of each and every car/encounter they have.
If my hubby is more defensive and takes precautions that “infringe” on a concealed carrier’s rights…but he comes home to me and our newborn son…so be it. But that’s my emotional, girly, wife/mother reaction.
My logical, law abiding reaction is the cops were over zealous and treated the guy like a criminal for no reason.
Thank you for the comment and I would love to here your husband’s opinion. I understand an officer taking precautions because my own father is a retired police officer who was injured in the line of duty. What gets me upset with this story is that the officer knew the man had a CC permit before asking him if he had a gun. You have to go through an extensive background check to get a CC permit so the officer should have realized that this man was not a criminal. He should have just handed him his ticket and let him go on his way. I definitely think the man should have advised the officer right away that he had a firearm in the vehicle, but the officer had nothing to gain by pressing him about whether or not a gun was in the vehicle. The ticket had already been written and there was no indication of any crime being committed because the officer knew this man had a permit to carry a concealed weapon. What was the point of pulling this guy out of his car and harassing him when he was not doing anything illegal? Why not just hand him his ticket and tell him to have a nice day? Wouldn’t the officer’s time have been better spent actually looking for real criminals?
I have to agree with Burro, Matt, and Harrison. I, as most of you, have a CCW permit and we were also instructed to inform the police officer if we were carrying.
It seems to me that if an officer perceives his authority to be disrespected, then that officer is more likely to act outside the bounds of normal policing.
When I had a carry permit in PA (I’ve moved to several states since then), I would ALWAYS hand my permit to a cop, along with my driver’s license, if I got pulled over. The cop would always ask if I possessed a weapon at this time. I would always say, yes. (Once I had a fanny pack holster pulled around to rest on my belly … cop pointed to the pack and asked “is that where you keep it?” I said yes.)
I’ll have you know that I had absolutely no trouble each of the two times I was pulled over (I like to fly, what can I say) and calmly informed the office of my 2nd Amendment rights.
I’ll also have you know that each time I didn’t receive a ticket.
I have only been pulled over once since I’ve had my CC permit and I followed the same procedure you just outlined. I think the wise thing to do is to inform an officer that you have a weapon on you. However, the man in this story was doing nothing illegal and the officer had no reason to think anything illegal was going on. There was no reason to pull him out of his car, slap him in handcuffs, and detain him in the back of a police car. What crime did the officer suspect was being committed to justify detaining and questioning him? I think the police sgt. mentioned in the story recognized they had no right or reason to be holding this man and that is why she ordered him to be released. This story involves more than just 2nd amendment rights. It involves the 4th amendment as well. He was searched and had his property seized by the officer without a warrant or probable cause.
When I heard this on the radio, I wondered how long the man’s daughter was stuck at church, if anyone waited with her, and if she was worried about her father’s no-show! I also wondered if the sight of an employee in handcuffs, coupled with the police officer asking about mental problems, had any negative effect on the boss’ view of his employee. And as the wife of a retired officer, I know that cops who are gunned down are usually killed by criminals and thugs who are NOT carrying firearms legally. The bad guys have guns – we all know that – and they don’t even carry a permit or tell the officer they have one!
Makes me wonder: if this cop was able to pull up the guy’s gun ownership record with police records, I wonder if there will be a day, post Obamacare, when cops can view someone’s medical information from government records and pull them over if they aren’t up to date on all of their vaccine boosters…?
I don’t know how the officer knew the man had a concealed carry permit, but I am guessing it came up with is DMV record. The man could have told the officer that he had a permit, but that seems unlikely since he then refused to say if there was a gun in the vehicle. That is a scary point you brought up, and I can definitely see it happening one day.
As a side not to this story, a while ago the Roanoke Times was able to obtain a list of CC permit holders living in the area. They posted the list on their website along with names and addresses. Talk about an invasion of privacy! There was such an uproar and flurry of lawsuits that the list was taken down very quickly.
I’d really love to know if what we have here is a case of racial profiling. I notice this detail missing, among others. I know, if there’s one thing the white man fears most it’s a black man with a gun.
/white man
//married to a black woman
///CHP holder in VA