TexasCHLforum.com

HighVelocity wrote:The bicyclist doesn't sound like any CHL holder I know.

He definitely doesn't sound like anyone here.

casingpoint wrote:

the handle of a Glock pistol protruding from a mesh pocket on the man’s backpack

All the cops saw was the grip.

Exactly the same as IWB with no cover garment.

nitrogen wrote:

Morgan wrote:Just curious how you guy would like someone walking by your desk at work and making some random jerkish comment about your competence. Nosey jerk, looking for trouble... well he found some. I'll prefer to assume the police didn't lie on the report. it's certainly possible they did, but one would guess that if they randomly searched his backpack and found the gun instead of seeing it, the story would be very different.

As far as I know, it's not against the law to be a nosy jerk.

And as others have pointed out, he wasn't arrested for being one.

But in the average person's job if someone, without provocation is a complete JERK to that person and they have it in their power to make said JERK a little miserable for it in the course of said job, most people will do it. Golden Rule...treat people how you want to be treated.

Quote"Golden Rule...treat people how you want to be treated."

that's funny I was always told the golden rule was....The man with the gold makes the rules!

Broncrider wrote:Quote"Golden Rule...treat people how you want to be treated."

that's funny I was always told the golden rule was....The man with the gold makes the rules!

They're both right. Here's my updated Golden Rule:

The man with the gold makes the rules, so treat him like you would expect to be treated if you were the one with the gold.

Morgan wrote:

nitrogen wrote:

Morgan wrote:Just curious how you guy would like someone walking by your desk at work and making some random jerkish comment about your competence. Nosey jerk, looking for trouble... well he found some. I'll prefer to assume the police didn't lie on the report. it's certainly possible they did, but one would guess that if they randomly searched his backpack and found the gun instead of seeing it, the story would be very different.

As far as I know, it's not against the law to be a nosy jerk.

And as others have pointed out, he wasn't arrested for being one.

But in the average person's job if someone, without provocation is a complete JERK to that person and they have it in their power to make said JERK a little miserable for it in the course of said job, most people will do it. Golden Rule...treat people how you want to be treated.

Having the ability to punishing someone for a snarky comment and then doing so, to me, would be an abuse of power.

Reminds me of an old Jim Croce song...

You don't tug on Superman's cape...
You don't spit into the wind...
You don't pull the mask off the ol' Lone Ranger...
And you don't mess around with Jim!

The point being that if you intentionally annoy someone with more power/authority than you - you should not be surprised if they react by demonstrating that power/authority.

I think we're pretty much in agreement that if he had rode past silently, none of us would be reading about him in the paper today.

Opinions can vary about the professionalism of the officers who suddenly decided to enforce a law they would have otherwise ignored. Personally, I don't want robots policing the streets. They would ALWAYS write that ticket for riding at night without the headlight. At least with a cop I have a chance of having him ignore it, or let me off with a warning... or I can make a jerk out of myself and pretty much take that option off the table.

Darwood wrote:
Having the ability to punishing someone for a snarky comment and then doing so, to me, would be an abuse of power.

AGAIN, he wasn't punished for making a snarky comment. His voluntary snarky comment got the unwanted attention of the LEO, who found violations. I guess he should have either kept his mouth shut, OR ensured he was fully compliant with all laws before drawing the attention of a LEO. If he had a crack pipe hanging out of his mouth after the snarky comment, and was arrested for possession, would you say THEN that he was "punished for a snarky comment" and the LEO was "abusing his power"? Just curious.

He asked for it. He got it.

'Nuff said.

Excaliber wrote:He asked for it. He got it.

'Nuff said.

It's one thing to make a stupid comment, but trying to run from the police will get anyone arrested. He should have just stopped, taken his ticket for no light and been on his way. Heck he may have even gotten a warning.

Sangiovese wrote:Reminds me of an old Jim Croce song...

You don't tug on Superman's cape...
You don't spit into the wind...
You don't pull the mask off the ol' Lone Ranger...
And you don't mess around with Jim!

The point being that if you intentionally annoy someone with more power/authority than you - you should not be surprised if they react by demonstrating that power/authority.

I think we're pretty much in agreement that if he had rode past silently, none of us would be reading about him in the paper today.

Opinions can vary about the professionalism of the officers who suddenly decided to enforce a law they would have otherwise ignored. Personally, I don't want robots policing the streets. They would ALWAYS write that ticket for riding at night without the headlight. At least with a cop I have a chance of having him ignore it, or let me off with a warning... or I can make a jerk out of myself and pretty much take that option off the table.

+1 Nicely put.

Quote: "Most of the general population would not know there was a handgun present just by seeing the grip, but would merely think it was a short, black 2X4 at a bad angle."

Yeah, and he could spend two or three house payments for a criminal defense lawyer to try and sell that - and still wind up losing. Good judgement comes from experience. Experience comes from ... poor judgement, which it sounds like the biker had in spades.

One less spandex wearing yuppie screwing up traffic....works for me. Hope they took his bike . What on earth was this clown thinking? Popping off at cops in the middle of an arrest??? I wonder if he could also be charged with some kind of interfering in an arrest type charge.

No, the law specifies that interference cannot be verbal only.

In reality, the guy was wrong and got what he needed to learn not to be a smart aleck. He is being charged with two misdemeanors beside the ticket (one article did say he was charged with evading arrest). I think he can beat the unlawfully carrying charge very easily since the way I read the story, the cops actually found the gun when they searched him for the evading arrest. That does not mean the gun was not exactly how they said (partially unconcealed), just that they did not notice it.

And, the cops really need to learn to ignore idiots like that. If they get irritated at everyone who makes this type of comment, they will get ulcers and have other stress related problems before they get very far into their career. Who really cares how they mouth off as they are leaving, as long as they are leaving?

srothstein wrote:No, the law specifies that interference cannot be verbal only.

In reality, the guy was wrong and got what he needed to learn not to be a smart aleck. He is being charged with two misdemeanors beside the ticket (one article did say he was charged with evading arrest). I think he can beat the unlawfully carrying charge very easily since the way I read the story, the cops actually found the gun when they searched him for the evading arrest. That does not mean the gun was not exactly how they said (partially unconcealed), just that they did not notice it.

And, the cops really need to learn to ignore idiots like that. If they get irritated at everyone who makes this type of comment, they will get ulcers and have other stress related problems before they get very far into their career. Who really cares how they mouth off as they are leaving, as long as they are leaving?

Very well said.