TexasCHLforum.com

I actually got pulled over for doing 80 in a 60(yes I was guilty, and I knew it).

Anyways, the officer, upon receiving my CHL with my DL, he asked if I was armed. I said yes. He asked where it was, and I said,"On my hip." And the magical words that he said "Alright, I'll be right back."


He didn't care!!!
Why is he cool with it, yet this Harris LEO didn't share the same view?
Your personal opinion of people shouldn't enter into your job when you're wearing the badge. Your intuition should still be keen, but if you don't care for something that someone is legally doing, you shouldn't voice it.

O6nop wrote:

What's wrong with replying, "OK, thanks."?

:roll:

Nothing's wrong with those things; he said what he said...just because he didn't reply with exactly what you would want him to say doesn't mean he's harrassing you!

Other things he could have said maybe better, maybe worse...
"That's fine, thanks"
"Here's your ticket please show up to court on the date specified..."
"Leave it at home next time"
"Oooh, can I touch it?!?!"
"I'm wearing pink panties!"

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I was suggesting that a simple "OK, thanks" was an appropriate reply to the officer. No need to make his bad day worse, or get annoyed by something trivial. His instruction to keep the sidearm in place may have been meant as a courtesy.

AV8R wrote:Quote:
"...and he said "Then just leave it there."

What's wrong with replying, "OK, thanks."?

Thats what I was implying...Never would I escalate or create anything that would distract an investigation in cases like this...

I've been in a situation like this and think its great we discuss these things...

All I was posting, was an introspective "scratching of my head" wondering why it always seems this statement creeps into an already tense situation...And we are not the ones creating it...

But in defense of Law Enforcement as well...It may be something that should kinda remind you that since they know you have one, just be a cool customer, and help them out by not giving them a reason to be nervous about this fact...

I would also probably already have my cell phone out in my (non-shooting hand ) just so that I wouldn't have to be fumbling around in my jacket or pockets for "anything"...

Just something else to keep in mind I guess...

Original post:

k5dmb wrote:...and he said "Then just leave it there." and handed back the CHL.
He then proceeded to do his normal accident report work; the CHL, etc. never came up again.

I've only had the very best experiences from our Precinct 4 guys.

Follow-up posts:

stevie_d_64 wrote:

"...and he said "Then just leave it there."

... "Okey Doky Smokey"

What else would I do...

Sorry, my sarcasm levels are a bit high today for some reason...

kauboy wrote:yet this Harris LEO didn't share the same view?

Seems to me the original poster was happy with the response and tone...
How did anyone turn this into a bad experience?

O6nop wrote:Original post:

k5dmb wrote:...and he said "Then just leave it there." and handed back the CHL.
He then proceeded to do his normal accident report work; the CHL, etc. never came up again.

I've only had the very best experiences from our Precinct 4 guys.

Follow-up posts:

stevie_d_64 wrote:

"...and he said "Then just leave it there."

... "Okey Doky Smokey"

What else would I do...

Sorry, my sarcasm levels are a bit high today for some reason...

kauboy wrote:yet this Harris LEO didn't share the same view?

Seems to me the original poster was happy with the response and tone...
How did anyone turn this into a bad experience?

Some folks just seem to want LEOs to behave exactly as they want them to. I think it is a problem with authority. Remember the ego states from CHL training. In the child state we react with things like, "I would have, you should have, why didn't you", etc.

The officers comments were appropriate, acceptable and professional. The problem lies with those who it would bother.

txinvestigator wrote: The officers comments were appropriate, acceptable and professional. The problem lies with those who it would bother.

No, the problem exists with those in denial. We all know the reputation of Harris County, and he was expressing that negativity toward CHL'ers it in as subtle a fashion as possible.

I've never heard any stories on here of an officer here in Ft.Worth making a comment like that. Its usually an "Alright", "Ok", or some other single word response.

"Then, just leave it there." insinuates a reaction to an action. In the back(or maybe front) of his mind, he had some idea that that gun might come out. Since I have been cleared in a similar manner to him by the state and FBI to carry a handgun, would it have been also entirely appropriate for me to respond, "Same for you?"

TXI will say no, but why? His authority as an officer doesn't give him special gun handling powers. He is human too, and could just as easily become violent like anyone else.

Believe me, I respect law enforcement. They provide an invaluable service for us. I have never resented an officer who has pulled me over. I was breaking the law and got caught. Simple as that. I have no "problem with authority". Authority is what keeps this crazy world from falling over the edge of insanity.

I do, however, have a problem with the bureaucratic crap people have to go through to get a ticket taken care of. Its insane the stuff you have to do. (but thats another story)

k5dmb wrote:I've only had the very best experiences from our Precinct 4 guys.

I'm in Precinct 5, but echo the sentiment. Our office building used to house a branch constabulary office, and I got to know several of the officers. Good group of folks.

kauboy wrote:

txinvestigator wrote: The officers comments were appropriate, acceptable and professional. The problem lies with those who it would bother.

No, the problem exists with those in denial. We all know the reputation of Harris County, and he was expressing that negativity toward CHL'ers it in as subtle a fashion as possible.

I've never heard any stories on here of an officer here in Ft.Worth making a comment like that. Its usually an "Alright", "Ok", or some other single word response.

Just pay attention ON THIS SITE alone, and you will read references to the same comments made by LEOs everywhere.

"Then, just leave it there." insinuates a reaction to an action. In the back(or maybe front) of his mind, he had some idea that that gun might come out. Since I have been cleared in a similar manner to him by the state and FBI to carry a handgun, would it have been also entirely appropriate for me to respond, "Same for you?"

Actually YOUR clearance and his are different, his training is greater and more specific, and he has AUTHORITY under law. He is simply making it clear that you are to leave the weapon there. If you have a problem with that, it is YOUR issue.

I would tell you the same thing. Having been a cop, I know how people can do things that are just plain stupid. I could write a book.

TXI will say no, but why? His authority as an officer doesn't give him special gun handling powers. He is human too, and could just as easily become violent like anyone else.

No, but IT does make him a target for violent people and the recipient of stupid acts. And that has nothing do to with him telling you to keep your gun holstered.

Believe me, I respect law enforcement. They provide an invaluable service for us. I have never resented an officer who has pulled me over. I was breaking the law and got caught. Simple as that. I have no "problem with authority". Authority is what keeps this crazy world from falling over the edge of insanity.

That is inconsistent with your issue with an officer making a simple statement that can prevent something as an accident to a tragic incident.

In my opinion any response other than "I am now going to disarm you" means the LEO was not anti-CHL.

Its not inconsistent at all. If I am in an accident obviously caused by another person, and I have done nothing wrong, AND I have presented him with a CHL, there is no need to remind me of where to keep my gun. It wasn't out when he showed up, and it won't be coming out. Why can't we just be trusted by officers? Statistics prove that a CHL'er is not the person that he should be worried about. I think too many officers let their personal opinions enter into their jobs when they are supposed to be somewhat objective.

I'm sorry to the OP for driving this topic into the nearest wall.

kauboy wrote:Its not inconsistent at all. If I am in an accident obviously caused by another person, and I have done nothing wrong, AND I have presented him with a CHL, there is no need to remind me of where to keep my gun.

Mark this one down for posterity: TXI and I agree on this one.

Where you perceive him as not trusting you, my take is that he was just saying, "That's fine. I'm not going to disarm you."

Kevin

Why would you ever be disarmed if you didn't commit the infraction?

kauboy wrote:Why would you ever be disarmed if you didn't commit the infraction?

Because the law allows it. Thats why.

kauboy wrote:Its not inconsistent at all. If I am in an accident obviously caused by another person, and I have done nothing wrong, AND I have presented him with a CHL, there is no need to remind me of where to keep my gun. It wasn't out when he showed up, and it won't be coming out. Why can't we just be trusted by officers? Statistics prove that a CHL'er is not the person that he should be worried about. I think too many officers let their personal opinions enter into their jobs when they are supposed to be somewhat objective.

NO, statistics do NOT show that. All they show is that CHL holders are more law abiding than the general public. I have taught HUNDREDS of CHL students, and I can tell you that their propensity for being careless, stupid and jerks is the same as the general population. They don't WANT to be, it is just human nature. If an admonition to keep your gun holstered from a cop bothers you, then it is YOUR problem.

I have BTDT with citizens.

This is not a stab at CHL holders. Its just that there is a certain percentage of people who are jerks, stupid and careless. That same percentage seems to filter down. I don't think that those who are serious enough and smart enough to seek out places like this fit that description.

But it is not reasonable for you to expect the general population to think, act and behave like you. (YOU is used in the general sense of members here, not to anyone specific)

And I will add that officers that are "objective" when it comes to their safety tend to get dead more than those who learn to pay attention to what they have learned "personally". I would rather go home alive and you "offended" than walk on egg shells and get dead.

txinvestigator wrote:

kauboy wrote:Its not inconsistent at all. If I am in an accident obviously caused by another person, and I have done nothing wrong, AND I have presented him with a CHL, there is no need to remind me of where to keep my gun. It wasn't out when he showed up, and it won't be coming out. Why can't we just be trusted by officers? Statistics prove that a CHL'er is not the person that he should be worried about. I think too many officers let their personal opinions enter into their jobs when they are supposed to be somewhat objective.

NO, statistics do NOT show that. All they show is that CHL holders are more law abiding than the general public. I have taught HUNDREDS of CHL students, and I can tell you that their propensity for being careless, stupid and jerks is the same as the general population. They don't WANT to be, it is just human nature. If an admonition to keep your gun holstered from a cop bothers you, then it is YOUR problem.

I have BTDT with citizens.

This is not a stab at CHL holders. Its just that there is a certain percentage of people who are jerks, stupid and careless. That same percentage seems to filter down. I don't think that those who are serious enough and smart enough to seek out places like this fit that description.

But it is not reasonable for you to expect the general population to think, act and behave like you. (YOU is used in the general sense of members here, not to anyone specific)

And I will add that officers that are "objective" when it comes to their safety tend to get dead more than those who learn to pay attention to what they have learned "personally". I would rather go home alive and you "offended" than walk on egg shells and get dead.

Hmmmm...

If we are to accept this line of reasoning, then wouldn't some LEO fall into the same category?