TexasCHLforum.com

handog wrote:

Zen wrote:I see no real value in baiting police to prove this point.

The same people would blame these cops if they drove by this guy and waved minutes before he shot up a theater, school, or group of people.

I think if we want respect as legal carrying folks, we can do it respectfully. There.is no harm in identifying oneself. Debating it and prolonging the interaction just delays cops from being elsewhere. And for what?

I would show my Id. I have nothing to hide and bigger fish to fry.

The problem with giving up your legal rights in exchange for respect is, in the end you will have neither.

Zen wrote:I see no real value in baiting police to prove this point.

The same people would blame these cops if they drove by this guy and waved minutes before he shot up a theater, school, or group of people.

I think if we want respect as legal carrying folks, we can do it respectfully. There.is no harm in identifying oneself. Debating it and prolonging the interaction just delays cops from being elsewhere. And for what?

I would show my Id. I have nothing to hide and bigger fish to fry.

I guess you would also let them search your car or your house without a warrant - after all, you have nothing to hide.

Texsquatch wrote:Open carry just to prove a point and bait cops into altercations is senseless and I think it just give anti-gunners more ammo. Be honest, some guy in black clothes comes walking down your street with a rifle over his shoulder... How would you react? I would get my son inside, get my weapon in hand and call the police and watch him as long as he was in my line of sight. My wife would be on her phone giving our neighbors a heads up. I'm not sticking around to ask if he's "supporting" my 2nd Amendment rights or is wacko on bath salts. How would cops know unless they interview him?

We have seen a number of examples of good cops having good encounters in these type of cases. There is no excuse for the behavior demonstrated by the officer in this video.

suthdj wrote:I did not watch to the end I skipped the last 5-10%. I fail to see a problem with how the LEO was doing anything wrong. He wanted the guy to identify, just give name and birthdate.Like most of these video's it is childish nit picking one way or another by LEO or citizen.

So you see nothing wrong with a LEO repeatedly threatening someone with arrest who has done absolutely nothing wrong?
You see nothing wrong with the officer repeatedly calling a law abiding citizen a retard and an idiot simply because an unlawful command is ignored?
You don't have a problem with the fact that neither officer on the video had the slightest clue about when a citizen is required to show ID?
What if the guy hadn't had a gun and someone called 911 because they were scared because some tatted up guy walking down the street looked scary. Would you still be ok with the same treatment?

Let me start by saying I don't go out looking for a confrontation with anyone, much less the police. That being said;
When will "ignorance of the law is no excuse" be applied equally to both LEO and the "Citizen"? If I don't know or fail to abide by the rules and laws regulating my industry, I get fired or even go to jail. If I had interacted with one of my "customers" the way this officer did, not only would I be fired but I would not be able to find a job anywhere in my line of work. I also could face civil rights violation charges.
Did I actually hear this officer use the term "retarded"? Unbelievable!
It's time for law enforcement to weed out members who are either incapable of learning (or are unwilling to learn) the laws regulating their industry and the rights of the citizens by whom they are employed.
I have a great respect for law enforcement. Most of the ones I encounter are extremely professional - this guy is not one of them.
Did anyone else catch him in at least one lie? The most obvious was when he stated that they were getting a lot of calls about this guy and his rifle. He then later states that they have a report of "one" call. He then again shows his ignorance of the law by stating that another call would constitute an offense which would result in an arrest. This guy should not be wearing a badge.
Did you see how the older guy changed his tune big time when presented with actual law? He had enough sense to realize he was wrong and handled himself very professionally when he realized he was in error.
I am totally amazed that an officer (both in this case) does not have the basic foundational training of when their "customer" is/isn't required to produce identification. Totally unacceptable!