TexasCHLforum.com

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.

LAYGO wrote:

handog wrote:The 911 operators should be trained to ask the caller, what is the person doing with the firearm? Is he threatening any one? is it holstered? has he fired it? If the answer is, he is just carrying it, then, no law has been broken and the LEO should not have been dispatched. The LEO, in this case was obligated at that point to see if an actual crime was being committed.

Until that one time they had a call of a guy carrying a rifle on his back, not pointing it at anyone, but then later shot someone.

I'm all for our constitutional rights, but I would HOPE an LEO would at least talk to the person, w/o violating their rights, determine if they are up to no good, & be on their way. I'm sure if they ran into a guy fuming about some guy sleeping with his wife, they would take appropriate action, but a couple of guys walking expressing their right would be let on their way.

Granted, there's nothing from keeping a bad guy from doing the same. Walking down the street with a long arm & when confronted saying "I'm expressing my 4th, 5th, 6th constitutional rights" . . . then shooting who ever it was after the police leave.

gigag04 wrote:

handog wrote:Ofttimes it's man with gun = jail.

Stat?

tomtexan wrote:

jmra wrote: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!

I heard it at least on two different occasions during the entire event.