Join TexasGunTalk

OPEN CARRY CURRENT STATUS

Discussion in 'Texas LTC / CHL' started by leVieux, Feb 13, 2020.

  1. jrbfishn

    jrbfishn TGT Addict

    20,959
    4,196
    113
    Aug 9, 2013
    south of killeen
    Believe it or not, there are people that know what case law is besides LE and lawyers. And although you gave an apt description of it, you also showed what I said is true. It is a court decision in the absence of a law covering the situation.
    The example you gave of traffic doesn't really apply. Blocking traffic is not just for an officers safety but everyone else's as well. The other would not really apply either.
    In the OP, there is nothing threatening to the cop except their own fear. And in that situation, I can think of a lot of ways a cop would be in just as much or more danger from the weapon he doesn't see than the one on someone's hip.
    Case law to support your fear does not make it right. Or Constitutional.
    I generally support LE. Even in my younger days, when I was not such a nice person, I did. I count several of them as good friends and fair people. Unless someone is doing something else to make them suspicious, the gun you have on is just another item you have on. But they are still cautious. And rightfully so.
    YOU have missed my whole point.
    Actual Statute or not. Case law or not. YOU as a LE have NO more right to be safe than WE do.

    Sent by an idjit coffeeholic from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
     


    chcknhawk likes this.
  2. leVieux

    leVieux Old Guy "Have Gun; Won't Travel !"

    894
    614
    93
    Mar 28, 2013
    Saint Martinville, LA
    I don't think any of us on here is anti-LEO, but at my advanced age, I can certainly remember extremely abusive police. We do believe in giving officers much latitude, especially at "scenes" where they feel that they are in any danger.

    But, we feel need for some actual LAW backup to prevent any real abuse.

    Real "officer discretion" will be respected, by us and by courts, but we have seen incidents in which "discretion" is an obvious false claim designed to protect officer misbehavior.

    Indeed, Federal Judge Barbier in New Orleans had to get very specific with his threats to rein-in unjustified firearms confiscation from non-criminal citizens and subsequent weapons "disappearance" by errant NOPD officers who continued their illegal practice despite existing federal restraining orders. IIRC, he hauled a bunch of them in and told them bluntly: "If I catch any of you doing this one more time, you are going to prison, and it will be for a long time!" (not an exact quote, as it is from memory).

    When serving as expert "gunshot injury" or medical fact witness, I have seen a couple of severe malicious prosecutions of Blacks by DA Staffs, too.

    Yes, both officer abuse and prosecutorial "judgements" have improved considerably, but we still deserve legal guarantees.

    Now, someone please remind me how we got so far off topic?

    leVieux
     
    roadrunner, toddnjoyce and LaVbRef like this.
  3. Charlie

    Charlie TGT Addict TGT Supporter

    50,308
    6,453
    113
    Mar 19, 2008
    Kerr County
    I fergot! :green:
     
  4. oldag

    oldag TGT Addict

    7,095
    6,250
    113
    Feb 19, 2015
    giphy.gif?cid=790b76110777586c171ba5d819eacfbfad1a3a8030060cce&rid=giphy.gif
     
    leVieux likes this.
  5. cycleguy2300

    cycleguy2300 Active Member

    221
    141
    43
    Mar 19, 2010
    Austin, Texas
    So what is your arguement?
    That case law doesnt exist?
    That case law shouldn't exist?
    Thar you dont like the case law that exists?

    I am explaining what is. If there is a point of fact I am wrong about by all means say so, but I think your disagreement is that the facts don't fit with your desired ideal, which is a whole different discussion.

    Case law says officers can reasonably disarm people. You cannot like it, you can try telling the officer "no" but the case law exists and is a matter of fact. End of story.

    Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
     
  6. V-Tach

    V-Tach TGT Addict Forum Sponsor

    4,063
    4,276
    113
    Sep 30, 2012
    Rockport
    Ask me disarm for officer/public safety...sure......here it is.....because you aren't comfortable?

    Cops aren't the only one's to carry more than one.......or two......
     
    CyberWolf and toddnjoyce like this.
  7. cycleguy2300

    cycleguy2300 Active Member

    221
    141
    43
    Mar 19, 2010
    Austin, Texas
    So many tough guys around here [rolleyes]

    Sent from my SM-G965U1 using Tapatalk
     
  8. V-Tach

    V-Tach TGT Addict Forum Sponsor

    4,063
    4,276
    113
    Sep 30, 2012
    Rockport
    ..........
     
  9. jrbfishn

    jrbfishn TGT Addict

    20,959
    4,196
    113
    Aug 9, 2013
    south of killeen
    So many big tough cops that are afraid of honest people that just want them to do their job without trampling their lives.
    SMDH.
    Is there anything else you want to use as a feeble justification for violating someone's rights?
    Case law exists and it will continue to.
    But it should not be used in lieu of a statute. The fact it is means the legislature has failed.
    Because LE uses it as a means to quell their fear of people doing something legal on their own property does not make it right. Fear of their safety is a reason, not a justification for violating rights. No different from the liberals giving reason after reason to disarm the public but not a single justification.
    When your feelings and safety are the driving factor in your decisions on violating whether to allow citizens to do or have a legal object, it begs me to wonder what rights you are willing to violate to and for what reason?
    Just because a court, or 5 or 20, decided to let cops use their fear as a reason does not make it RIGHT. Because you use your personal safety as an excuse to violate a person's rights and allow the court to back you up is not a justification, but an excuse.
    LE and the courts are their to protect OUR rights and safety. Not YOURS. When YOURS outweighs OURS, you have become no better than the people you are supposed to be protecting us from. The only difference is, you have a badge and court backing. They a least don't need a badge to bully people.
    It doesn't matter who or how many say something is right, if it is wrong, it is still wrong. Period. It has simply become acceptable.
    If a cop is on my property without a warrant or probable cause to be there, he is there at my pleasure. If they are scared because I have a legal object on my person and I am following the law and don't like it, it will be my pleasure to inform them they are trespassing and can leave. Immediately. Our conversation is over.
    Case law be damned.
    I have nothing but respect for LE that follows the Constitution, the Law and treats people fairly and equally regardless of which side of the Law you are on at the time and regardless of case law. And I have met many that did exactly that. For those that can't do that,well........

    Sent by an idjit coffeeholic from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
     
    CyberWolf and roadrunner like this.
  10. leVieux

    leVieux Old Guy "Have Gun; Won't Travel !"

    894
    614
    93
    Mar 28, 2013
    Saint Martinville, LA
    But in real life, we now have very few "unreasonable" officers any more, especially compared to 40 or 50 years ago.

    That said, I'd tend to cooperate unless their order caused me to be in immediate danger.

    Say like if we were on MY property with an armed perp still running around loose.

    leVieux
     


    Last edited: Feb 22, 2020
    chcknhawk and Dred like this.

Share This Page