TexasCHLforum.com

jimlongley wrote:Massive civil rights violations, including a total lack of Miranda, and not one peep from the anti-TSA crowd.

I for one am part of the anti-abuse-of-authority crowd, so I guess that has to make me anti-TSA. Essentially, human beings tend to abuse whatever power they have and in order to prevent such abuses there have to be systemic checks and balances. Our system is in the process of creeping failure. Checks and balances are failing throughout the system at every level from local government right up to Congress and the President. The people who run the TSA have apparently decided they are going to do whatever they want, legal or not, and dare the public to do anything about it, and apparently, big Sis has the full support of Mr. Obama. Since we have a partisan ideologue for an Attorney General and a spineless Congress that services Wall Street instead of Main Street, that essentially means the TSA can do whatever its "leadership" calculates they can get away with, as do other Federal agencies like the BATF.

The TSA is a power hungry bureaucracy, and like all other bureaucracies it is going to act in its own interest and do everything it can to increase its power. It's not just at the airport anymore. It has already conducted illegal searches at train and bus stations, been suggested for screening students at the high school prom, and has stated publicly on numerous occasions that it intends reach out and search Americans everywhere people gather in public. They want to scan you at the mall and on the street and in your car. Accepting their ridiculous excuses for these actions and apologizing for their abuses is like paving a highway to a Police State.

chasfm11 wrote:

kyreb wrote:Lived in Ohio for 5 years. I am not anti- LEO at all but cops up there tend to be a different breed...especially the state troopers. I had one who lived a couple doors down from that refused to talk to me...even wave for that matter, despite the fact he would bring his kid by the house regularly to sell items to fund the little guy's various sports teams. (Which I did. The kid was a neat little guy).
Anyway, the Ohio cops fought the state's "new" CHL law with a vengence. They lobbied to disallow a CHL to carry unsecured in your own car. ( since repealed I believe). Your CHL was tied to the tags on your car and the cops would pull over CHLs regularly just to harass them. Needless to say, the wife and I did not bother to apply for a CHL while we lived there.
Oh, one more thing, in Ohio if you have an AR15 and a mag that holds over 30 rounds, state law classified your semi auto AR as an "illegal machine gun".
Ohio is definately not a gun friendly state unless said gun is a skeet shotgun, unloaded, locked up and completely inaccessable at all times.

God bless Texas ( and KY too).

I, too, am not anti-LEO. We have a number of good friends here in Texas who are or were LEOs.

I believe that a general LEO mindset is different in much in the Northeast and that the approach from these Ohio LEOs is not much different than that of LEOs in NJ and MD. I worked in Wilmington, DE for a number of years and had part of MD as my territory where I supervised service personnel. We lived in Northern NJ for a number of years and saw LEO interaction with the public. I consider neither of those States to be as gun friendly as Ohio. The interesting paradox for Ohio is neighboring PA. Outside of Philadelphia, PA is generally gun friendly, perhaps even more so than Texas. LEOs there (again outside of Phila.) have neither the same overall attitude nor are gun unfriendly as those in Ohio. What magic happens on the Ohio/PA border, I have no idea but it does seem to be a remarkable transformation.

I've never had an unprofessional stop by a DPS officer, nor any local officer in Texas for that matter. The same is true for Oklahoma.....in fact, I can't remember an unprofessional stop anywhere in the South. I can't say the same for the Northeast though.

Texas Dan Mosby wrote:Meh...

I don't have much sympathy for either party.

The LEO exhibited less than professional behavior, threatened to use unlawful force, and insinuated his partner would support him as a "witness". He's the guy that gives LEO's a bad name to those unwilling to accept the fact that most LEO's perform their duties lawfully and professionally.

The CHL holder had AMPLE time to notify BOTH officers and he FAILED. I'm not buying the "they wouldn't let me speak" excuse, nor am I buying the "...but officer, I wasn't picking up a prostitute" story either.

Fail all around.

While I would agree that the "prompt" notification requirement is indeed vague, you can't argue that the CHL in the video could have been more "prompt" with his notification.

Seriously? Your assessment is "less than professional behavior?" The cops says he hates people with carry permits. Threatens to murder a guy because he has one, and you think the problem is the CHL holder didn't get his words out fast enough? If you were on tape doing that where do you think you'd be right now? And since when is picking up a prostitute a death penalty crime? What would you do if someone with a gun threatened to murder you?

And what difference does it make what some other hypothetical cop does --these guys are on tape threatening to murder someone and stage a cover up, and say they can do it without even losing a nights sleep. These guys shouldn't have a badge or any position with power over another human being for the rest of their lives --they shouldn't even be allowed to manage a Burger King.