cb1000rider wrote:Handog has a pretty good example of an officer acting in what I'd consider bad faith. That officer arrested him and indicated handog's intent. It's the intent which made failure to conceal illegal, so clearly the officer, likely after some review (
as handog didn't get arrested straight away), KNEW that law well enough, but arrested him anyway. As far as I know, no legal pay back and no legal repercussion to RR PD, even though there is no reported factual basis for writing down that the exposure was intentional. Don't know what I'm talking about? Review:
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=31719
handog didn't get arrested straight away
because the officers were not the witnesses to the alleged "intentional failure to conceal." It was another person, inside the building, who witnessed his exposed gun, and
she called the police. He concluded his business and exited the building to the parking lot. Police arrived while he was on his way to his vehicle and drew down on him in the parking lot.
THAT is where and when he was immediately arrested. Police did not witness,
nor review the alleged infraction. They were too busy at the donut shop or wherever they hang out in Round Rock to see the "crime."
handog's pistol was exposed because he was carrying SOB and his shirt tail had ridden up while he was sitting in a chair, waiting for his number to be called at the tax office. His number got called, and he stood up to go to the clerk's window. That's when the lady behind him saw his gun. He wasn't there at the window very long, he concluded his business, and he exited the building. Some time between when he stood up and when he exited the building is when the cops were called, probably sooner rather than later since they arrived in time to intercept him in the parking lot. He had several weapons pointed at him. They disarmed and arrested him on the spot. The rest is history.
I would
like to think that police departments and prosecutors have
mostly gotten through the learning process of dealing with citizens who are lawfully carrying, but given that CHL was passed in 1995, and there have been 18 intervening years, sometimes it seems like it is a slow learning curve. You would
think that, given the now fairly high probability that LEOs will sooner or later interact with legally armed Texans, that their respective agencies (and the municipalities which employ them) would attach a higher priority to learning the law. The only reason I can think of for not attaching a priority to it is that some agencies/municipalities want to discourage the practice of CHL, and they don't particularly care if their ignorance results in the arrest of innocent law-abiding citizens. . . . .as long as it will intimidate those citizens into not exercising their rights. The individual officers may or may not be supportive of CHL, but they work in a corporate culture, just like everyone else does who works for a large employer, and their attitudes are going to be influenced by the internal departmental culture. And that culture is the product of the people who are in charge of the departments.
This is why I most particularly love that famous quote of Dr. Suzanna Gratia Hupp's
How a politician stands on the Second Amendment tells you how he or she views you as an individual… as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of.
How the city fathers view you will color how the Chief of Police will view you. And how he views you will color how his individual officers view you. . . . except when you encounter a truly free-thinking LEO. I don't say this to bash cops, but I think that they are largely a product of their communities. If there are fewer free-thinking people in the community, there will be fewer free-thinking cops. . . . . as well as fewer free-thinking police chiefs and city fathers.
I think that at the level of the individual line officer, his or her reaction to CHL is going to stem from whether they regard CHL as a hoop the rest of us have to jump through to express our God-given right, or whether they regard it as a permission extended to us which they can revoke at the drop of a hat. I think this difference of attitude can also be what drives the department and municipal cultures with respect to CHL.
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”
― G. Michael Hopf, "Those Who Remain"
#TINVOWOOT
It also costs you time, and clogs up the legal system.
