NM Court: Traffic Cops Can Seize Guns Even if No Law Has Been Broken

The New Mexico Supreme Court ruled unanimously this week that police may legally confiscate a gun from a motor vehicle during a traffic stop, even if they have no reasonable suspicion that the motorists pose a threat. The Supreme Court justices asserted that police officers are justified in removing a firearm resting in plain sight inside of a vehicle, so long as the act of doing so protects the safety of the officers involved. If the seizure is conduction as such, said the justices, it does not represent a violation of the Fourth Amendment, which protects individuals against unreasonable search and seizure.

The case in question involved a 2008 traffic stop in which police spotted a handgun resting on the rear floor of a vehicle that was stopped for expired license plates. Officers promptly confiscated the gun and arrested a passenger, Gregory Ketelson, after determining not only that he was the owner of the firearm, but also a convicted felon in the neighboring state of Texas.

In writing the Court’s opinion, Justice Petra Jimenez penned, “We conclude that removing [the] defendant’s firearm from the vehicle in order to ensure that it was beyond the reach of any of the occupants of the stop was a reasonable and minimal intrusion, which does not outweigh legitimate concerns of officer safety.”

The decision was hailed as a victory for police safety by some, and scorned by others as a blatant shirking of both the Second and Fourth Amendments.

New Mexico Attorney General Gary King praised the ruling, saying, “We are pleased that the safety of police officers was held as being the most important issue in this case. As the justices pointed out, our police officers face danger and uncertainly in almost every traffic stop.”

Critics of the decision are left to wonder if the “danger and uncertainty” posed during “almost every traffic stop” are an excuse to temporarily ignore the rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment. This sentiment was echoed by documents filed in the case by the NRA, which stated, “Even a short-termed violation of the statutory right to possess a firearm — if effectuated solely because a motorist is exercising his right to carry while traveling — contravenes the express language of the law. For this reason alone, the per se seizure of a lawful firearm in a vehicle is intolerable.”

The Supreme Court also clarified that their ruling did “not depend on any requirement of particularized suspicion that an occupant is inclined to use the firearm improperly.” In other words, suspicion on the part of police officers is apparently not a prerequisite for seizure of a visible firearm during a traffic stop.

Previously, both District and Appellate Courts ruled that there was no basis for police to seize the defendant’s gun.

Latest Reviews

  • Four Years Later: IWI Tavor SAR Revisited

    Though IWI's X95, released in 2016, usurps the SAR, my Tavor SAR is still part of the family. For those just now coming across this model, how has it stood up over the years? Let's find out.

    Read More
  • Scope Review: Leupold VX-Freedom FireDot Twilight Hunter

    The budget-friendly line of American-made Leupold VX-Freedom riflescopes found a welcome audience last year, but 2020 sees even more interesting additions to the family, with our hands-down favorite being the illuminated-reticle FireDot line.

    Read More
  • Ruger AR-556: An Outstanding Gateway AR

    It should come as no surprise the Ruger name is synonymous with value, and its’ AR-556 looks to fit this mold as an entry-level AR-15 with a reasonable MSRP. So how does the no-frills Ruger AR-556 perform when put to the test? Read on to find out.

    Read More
  • A Look at the Sig P238, A Year Later

    The Sig Sauer P238 was the first .380 ACP BUG to grace my gun safe, a welcomed addition to the 9mm polymers, .38 SPL revolvers, and .45 ACP 1911s. After more than a year's worth of use, where do I stand on the P238? Let's find out.

    Read More

Loading