If Open Carry ever comes to Texas, I hope everyone has.........

[TheDan]

Anyway, you are to small to be a keeper.

Would an appropriate response be, "That's not what your mom said..."?

 

[Rum Runner]

Would an appropriate response be, "That's not what your mom said..."?

 

[shooterfpga]

And he would say, "You see all these people watching? I am showing them that I am giving them their money's worth. Somebody (or several somebodies) called because you were carrying that gun. Once they see us chat and see that I am OK with you, they will be OK with you. Anyway, you are to small to be a keeper. You guys take it easy"

i wish most encounters went this way but unfortunately, during the initial movement, most oc'ers were met with aggression. now that most stations have continual memos, this is less frequent.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

 

[Acera]

right, there were battles i would fight at 25 and 30 that i wouldnt today.....priorities and life change those things

I understand that, but there are battles I would fight today that I not considered when I was younger because I was so intimidated by a uniform and authority. Now I have a better understanding of the tactics and trickery that are used to get you to relinquish your rights so I am not such easy prey anymore.

The kid in the first audio clip is young, and testing the waters. Yeah, they were probably scared as hell and it showed in the quivering of his voice. He is an untrained amateur up against a trained professional. I thought he did a good job holding his own. If there is another encounter with the police I am sure he will be more seasoned, and a bit better prepared to handle the stress. It will come from experience. He did nothing wrong, or criminal.

I can appreciate Sage's POV. I certainly understand where he is coming from.

+1, and I appreciate the passion others have placed on display here.

I don’t see the young man in the video as doing that, nor do I see him achieving any major objectives using those methods.

Well he definitely got a lively discussion going on here, I hopes he finds this thread and reads it.

 

[Bithabus]

Not always the case.

Can you give an example?

I see no reason to ID in situations like this partly because I don't understand the purpose of the Police asking. They have no name to match up, no activity is being conducted that requires a license. Do they just want to check the person for warrants? Seems like all the citizen will get out of it is his name on a report.

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

I keep agreeing with la policia today. WTH is wrong with me?

Must...not...be...seduced...by...the...dark...side.....(duh, duh, duh, dunt-duh-duh, dunt-duh-duh...)

 

[TheDan]

I see no reason to ID in situations like this partly because I don't understand the purpose of the Police asking. They have no name to match up, no activity is being conducted that requires a license. Do they just want to check the person for warrants?

Yeah, that would be my guess... It's probably how they were trained. Whether official or not, they probably think it's SOP to ID and check for warrants everyone they question. They are bound to be guilty of something, right?

 

[Texan2]

Would an appropriate response be, "That's not what your mom said..."?

You do what you want....personally , I wouldn't use that line. (But those jackwagons in the OP video may...LMAO!)

i wish most encounters went this way but unfortunately, during the initial movement, most oc'ers were met with aggression.

Is this "fact" based on Youtube videos or real stats?

Can you give an example?

I see no reason to ID in situations like this partly because I don't understand the purpose of the Police asking. They have no name to match up, no activity is being conducted that requires a license. Do they just want to check the person for warrants? Seems like all the citizen will get out of it is his name on a report.

Yes, an example would be if an officer thought you were a witness to a crime. The law requires you to ID yourself if asked in this situation. It matters not if you actually WERE a witness, all that matters is if he thinks you are a witness.

As to the second part of your post, in a situation like the OP offered up, whether or not your ID yourself is up to you. Many on here have merely offered a view that just because you dont HAVE to do something doesn't mean it isnt in your best interest to do it anyway. Some of the same folks on here that bash cops for being so confrontational...go out looking for a confrontation with them. Ironic.

I keep agreeing with la policia today. WTH is wrong with me?

Must...not...be...seduced...by...the...dark...side.....(duh, duh, duh, dunt-duh-duh, dunt-duh-duh...)

You are just growing more and more wise as you age.

 

[shooterfpga]

real stats from the payrolled lawyers of the california open carry movement and a gun rights lobbyist, along with multiple threads, videos and documentation from people who had to seek legal advice from the original movement after being arrested, harrassed and weapons confiscated.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

 

[Bithabus]

Yes, an example would be if an officer thought you were a witness to a crime. The law requires you to ID yourself if asked in this situation. It matters not if you actually WERE a witness, all that matters is if he thinks you are a witness.

I was considering that part of "investigating a crime". In any case, I believe a crime is committed only if the witness gives a false ID.

As to the second part of your post, in a situation like the OP offered up, whether or not your ID yourself is up to you. Many on here have merely offered a view that just because you dont HAVE to do something doesn't mean it isnt in your best interest to do it anyway.

My question still stands though, in a situation where there is no reason to suspect crime is being committed, why would an Officer ask for ID? What is the purpose?

 

[Texan2]

real stats from the payrolled lawyers of the california open carry movement and a gun rights lobbyist, along with multiple threads, videos and documentation from people who had to seek legal advice from the original movement after being arrested, harrassed and weapons confiscated.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

I guess I am skeptical. I know people that live in open carry states that havent been harrassed. I have no doubt that lawyers will tell you that everyone get harrassed, but that simply isnt the case.

Multiple threads and videos doesnt prove that their situation is how it happens the majority of the time.
It simply means it happened to them.

There is no way to gauge how many OCers didn't get harrassed. Dont get me wrong, I know it has and does happen, I just dont think it happens as much as some would make you think. (BTW, there are videos of OCers not getting harrassed by police too.)

 

[shooterfpga]

I guess I am skeptical. I know people that live in open carry states that havent been harrassed. I have no doubt that lawyers will tell you that everyone get harrassed, but that simply isnt the case.

Multiple threads and videos doesnt prove that their situation is how it happens the majority of the time.
It simply means it happened to them.

There is no way to gauge how many OCers didn't get harrassed. Dont get me wrong, I know it has and does happen, I just dont think it happens as much as some would make you think. (BTW, there are videos of OCers not getting harrassed by police too.)

oh i know theres videos of the good confrontations along with the documentary evidence to back it up. i was just saying, intially that surely seemed to be the case of harrassment to the movement. but really, how many people post something good happened to them. so of course stats can be bias. example, a functioning gun, people rarely post a new thread saying hey everyone, my gun works. its usually damn something is wrong wtf.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

 

[Texan2]

I was considering that part of "investigating a crime". In any case, I believe a crime is committed only if the witness gives a false ID.

My question still stands though, in a situation where there is no reason to suspect crime is being committed, why would an Officer ask for ID? What is the purpose?

And the answer is the same as it has been, there are circumstances outside of a crime being committed that would warrant the check of an ID.

Article 14.03(a)(1) authorizes the warrantless arrest of a person found in a suspicious place and under circumstances which reasonably show that an offense has been or is about to be committed. Any "place" may become suspicious when a person at that location and the accompanying circumstances raise a reasonable belief that the person has committed a crime and exigent circumstances call for immediate action or detention by police. Swain v State (November 2, 2005, No. AP-74,854)

In a case such as the one above they would be identified.

i.e. if it is 2am and you are approaching the back of a business that is closed and you are dressed in all black and have gloves on and a a crow bar, you would be stopped and your identity ascertained. This is legal. Even though you have not yet committed a crime it is legal. In reality, the officer could arrest you.

 

[McDaniel]

Does anyone know if a bill will be pushed into legislation to allow OC'ing?

 

[Mexican_Hippie]

Does anyone know if a bill will be pushed into legislation to allow OC'ing?

Yes, in two years when TX legislature meets again. We have that long to continue arguing about it on the interwebz.

 

[Texan2]

Does anyone know if a bill will be pushed into legislation to allow OC'ing?

:sign0101:

 

[McDaniel]

:sign0101:

Oh hush. >:l It isn't thread hijacking, it's still related. I'm just asking a simple question.

 

[Bithabus]

And the answer is the same as it has been, there are circumstances outside of a crime being committed that would warrant the check of an ID.

Article 14.03(a)(1) authorizes the warrantless arrest of a person found in a suspicious place and under circumstances which reasonably show that an offense has been or is about to be committed. Any "place" may become suspicious when a person at that location and the accompanying circumstances raise a reasonable belief that the person has committed a crime and exigent circumstances call for immediate action or detention by police. Swain v State (November 2, 2005, No. AP-74,854)

In a case such as the one above they would be identified.

i.e. if it is 2am and you are approaching the back of a business that is closed and you are dressed in all black and have gloves on and a a crow bar, you would be stopped and your identity ascertained. This is legal. Even though you have not yet committed a crime it is legal. In reality, the officer could arrest you.

That is a good answer to some question, but not the question I was asking. We were talking about situations where there is no reasonable suspicion or PC for a detention or arrest. I know we have to give ID upon arrest.

The answer here may be that Police simply aren't going to ask for your ID unless you are being detained or arrested.

 

[Bithabus]

Does anyone know if a bill will be pushed into legislation to allow OC'ing?

There was a bill this last session to allow CHL holders to OC, but it failed. Will be another OC bill next session.

 

[Texan2]

Oh hush. >:l It isn't thread hijacking, it's still related. I'm just asking a simple question.

I was just messing with you.