TexasCHLforum.com

nightmare69 wrote:Deberry v US says a firearm lawfully carried cannot be the only cause for a stop. So I could open carrys rifle lawfully and legally the police could not stop me right?

I'm not an attorney, so your mileage may vary:

You are correct in a legal sense. They cannot detain you without an reasonable (articulable) suspicion.

Just be aware that there is nothing stopping and officer from "investigating" and "asking" questions. They can approach you. They can ask. It's a very fine line between an officer asking and inquiring to commanding compliance. You may not be aware when it shifts from asking to commanding.

Also be aware that if you were reported by a neighbor and that neighbor provided an articulable suspicion, such as pointing the gun, acting in defined unusual way, they can detain you. It matters not if it is true. And you're not going to know either way up front, so you're disadvantaged.

Generally the way you can get a LEO to tell you if you're just being "asked" or if you're being "detained" is by asking him/her if you're free to leave. If the answer is no, you're detained. If there is no answer or the answer is yes, continue on your way.

Also note that in Texas, people exercising these rights have been arrested and at least one of the more recent incidents hasn't made it through the court yet.

TexasCajun wrote: And exactly how are the police supposed to determine what is actually happening (whether the behavior in question is legal or not) without directly responding to the call?????

Based on the available information, there could be enough unreasonable behavior to go around. Heck, it could actually turn out to be a nexus of unreasonable where you have a militant pro 2a guy bent on making the YouTube hall of fame surrounded by the most ardent Blomberg-Obama acolytes. If this were the situation, I believe the cops would be forced to put everyone on notice that another call to the neighborhood would result in everybody going to jail. But most likely, the true situation probably lies somewhere in the middle. So the cops can either continue to respond to the calls, inform the neighbors about exactly what constitutes a credible threat, or ask the guy to take up a different hobby.

I'm not advocating that they don't respond. I'm advocating that they start with the person making the complaint before they detain someone for lawful behavior.
How should they respond:
Ma'm: Is the neighbor pointing the gun at anyone?
Ma'm: Is he acting in a threatening manner?
Ma'm: Has he fired the gun?
Ma'm: Is there anything else you'd like to tell us?

Based on the response to those questions, then they either provide some legal advice to the person making the complaint or they investigate the Man with A Gun. If the neighbors provide untruthful information, they've got a problem.

How is this any different than a neighbor calling the police on me for riding a motorcycle in my own yard? I might be illegal if I'm riding without a license, but you won't know until you stop me and ask me for my license.. The default action cannot be to "assume" a crime is in progress, otherwise we all can be stopped and questioned. There has to be some culpable suspicion of a crime that is being committed or is about to be committed.

TexasCajun wrote: Unfortunately, the police have a duty to respond to all calls.

There is absolutely no duty to respond to a call about legal behavior. I'd say that the duty to respond, if there is one, is to go see the people that called in MWG and explain the law to these folks.

A lot could be resolved neighbor to neighbor with a simple conversation instead of calling the PD.

RPBrown wrote:No law broken so nothing they can do.

Actually, there is a lot they can do. None of it is stuff they "should" do, but it happens quite a bit.

If there was really nothing they could do, there would be no reason for the police to make contact with the home owner. IE - "we've got no cause to investigate". They already got that wrong.

To me, the video taping is him letting the LEOs know that they need to be careful and do things correctly. It's too bad that it's sometimes necessary.
It's funny though, if you strap on an AR-15 and walk down the street, which is essentially exercising the same rights, people get a lot more contentious about it.

My neighbor was shooting a .22LR in his back yard about a month ago. I heard the gun, walked back there, saw that he was shooing at a target with a rotten 2x6" backstop. I casually mentioned that his shots were going through that backstop and certainly stopping somewhere down range (there is a house within 1/4 mile downrange). I suggested that he find another backstop. No problems...

I agree with above.
I assume you don't want this guy to open carry in his yard or don't think he should be able to do so and want something done about it?

Alarming the neighbors stinks, but it's guys like this who make sure you can open carry your pistol to the car that's parked in your yard.

I am semi-surprised that the PD hasn't arrested him, but it sounds like you've got some level-headed LEOs over that way.

I also open carry in the yard, but we're on enough property to have a pistol range.. And my property is completely fenced.