Opposite of concealed carry

[easy rider]

In the winter I conceal carry, mainly because a jacket makes it more convenient. I have open carried, most times, for the past 5 years. To each their own really, but I'm trying to think of the downside to paranoia. Hyper awareness sounds to be a positive to me.

 

[DoubleDuty]

Seems to me if more people were open carrying, then maybe we would be safer outside our homes.

 

[rotor]

There is nothing preventing a Texas Peace Officer from seeing your pistol and asking you about it, any more than anyone else can. It only becomes a detention when you are not, or reasonable would not feel free to leave.

I often begin an encounter as a consensual encounter if I have mere suspicion, for example an occupied car sitting running, but legally parked (did it last night). I'll knock and talk if they choose to engage. Sometimes its nothing, other times I can develop RS/PC for a detention or search through plain view or odor while we chat.

If a cop came up to me while I was open carrying and immediately asked/demanded an LTC , which I don't need (2a & PC46.15), I would likely be a bit put out, but I would still present my department ID or explain whats up. Why bow up? I'm proudly showing off my big scary pistol, why not show a LTC when asked. Do you have to without being detained. No, they cannot "demand" to see it without a detention as you are no longer free to refuse. I would remind the officer afterwards they are dancing in the razor's edge of an illegal detention and if the officer got snappy, I'd ask for his supervisor.

Sent from your mom's house using Tapatalk

This is a very reasonable answer. What concerned me was the claim that it was a San Antonio policy to stop every open carry person and ask for ID. To me that is a very frightening abuse of police power, the 4th amendment protections, and just shall we say a gestapo police attitude. I can't believe that this would be a written policy but may perhaps be a verbal don't put it in writing policy. Hopefully this is not still going on. The retired individual would not clarify.

 

[Axxe55]

Seems to me if more people were open carrying, then maybe we would be safer outside our homes.

Personally, I'd like many more law abiding citizens carrying, whether open or concealed.

I do believe that if more law abiding citizens and gun owners carried, that would be a small form of deterrence against crime. But, IMO, not one that can be proven. We may never know of the crimes that were never committed because criminals feared armed citizens.

 

[Right2Carry]

This is a very reasonable answer. What concerned me was the claim that it was a San Antonio policy to stop every open carry person and ask for ID. To me that is a very frightening abuse of police power, the 4th amendment protections, and just shall we say a gestapo police attitude. I can't believe that this would be a written policy but may perhaps be a verbal don't put it in writing policy. Hopefully this is not still going on. The retired individual would not clarify.

I agree.

 

[easy rider]

This is a very reasonable answer. What concerned me was the claim that it was a San Antonio policy to stop every open carry person and ask for ID. To me that is a very frightening abuse of police power, the 4th amendment protections, and just shall we say a gestapo police attitude. I can't believe that this would be a written policy but may perhaps be a verbal don't put it in writing policy. Hopefully

There is nothing preventing a Texas Peace Officer from seeing your pistol and asking you about it, any more than anyone else can. It only becomes a detention when you are not, or reasonable would not feel free to leave.

I often begin an encounter as a consensual encounter if I have mere suspicion, for example an occupied car sitting running, but legally parked (did it last night). I'll knock and talk if they choose to engage. Sometimes its nothing, other times I can develop RS/PC for a detention or search through plain view or odor while we chat.

If a cop came up to me while I was open carrying and immediately asked/demanded an LTC , which I don't need (2a & PC46.15), I would likely be a bit put out, but I would still present my department ID or explain whats up. Why bow up? I'm proudly showing off my big scary pistol, why not show a LTC when asked. Do you have to without being detained. No, they cannot "demand" to see it without a detention as you are no longer free to refuse. I would remind the officer afterwards they are dancing in the razor's edge of an illegal detention and if the officer got snappy, I'd ask for his supervisor.

Sent from your mom's house using Tapatalk

Just asking for the sake of asking is not a legal reason. You can respectfully decline. Now, as you, I would show my I.D. to avoid a confrontation, but depending on the officer's demeaner, there is nothing stopping me from lodging a complaint.

 

[rotor]

Just asking for the sake of asking is not a legal reason. You can respectfully decline. Now, as you, I would show my I.D. to avoid a confrontation, but depending on the officer's demeaner, there is nothing stopping me from lodging a complaint.

I probably would just have shown my ID too, until I heard that it was an illegal department policy to stop every open carrier. Who would you complain to if this came down from the top of the department? ACLU? No, I respect law enforcement but not if they have a written or unwritten policy (most likely unwritten as who would be stupid enough to write it) to deny 4thA rights to law abiding citizens. I can see why our retired guy does not want to go further with this.

 

[TexasRedneck]

It's likely another city mandate, similar to the one they had for anyone carrying a loaded long gun many years ago. Never could get one of them to cite me for it, or for refusing to unload it. Even their LEO's knew it was BS.

 

[rotor]

It's likely another city mandate, similar to the one they had for anyone carrying a loaded long gun many years ago. Never could get one of them to cite me for it, or for refusing to unload it. Even their LEO's knew it was BS.

That's the problem with government workers, if you end up getting a win on a lawsuit the taxpayer pays. The only way to really win is to sue the individual and even then the taxpayer probably pays for their malpractice insurance.

 

[satx78247]

That's the problem with government workers, if you end up getting a win on a lawsuit the taxpayer pays. The only way to really win is to sue the individual and even then the taxpayer probably pays for their malpractice insurance.

roror,

EXACTLY CORRECT. = It's NEAR IMPOSSIBLE to actually PUNISH the real EVILDOERS in any government bureau/agency/department, as the SWAMP will FOREVER protect its own.

The former Director & the other CROOKS on the 7th floor of the FBI come immediately to mind.
What he/they OBVIOUSLY DID was NOTHING SHORT of TREASON.

OFFHAND, I can think of NO lawful way to adequately PUNISH that CLOWN-CAR of CREEPS, CROOKS & HATERS.

yours, satx

 

[cycleguy2300]

cycleguy2300,

AGREED, though other court decisions have found that simply stopping random people/checking a DL and/or "operating a DWI/DUI check-station" is NOT "an unlawful detention" under TERRY. = SORRY but that is FACT.
(MD,VA & WV are VERY ACTIVE in operating "check stations" that MAY delay some drivers for up to an hour. = I've seen "lines of cars & trucks" that were at least a MILE in length.)

FYI, I once got a VA Deputy Sheriff "in deep kimchi" because he stopped me (He later claimed because of my NRA Life-member sticker on the PU) & demanded that I tell him why I was carrying a total of 9 CASED rifles/shotguns/handguns in the cab of my F250 truck.
(I started out POLITELY saying, "I'm moving to Berkeley County WV & this is SOME of the last possessions that I'm moving.")

When the deputy "got ugly" & started RANTING that "- - - nobody needs that many guns", I politely asked that he call a supervisor.
(I'll never know how UGLY that things MIGHT have gotten between us inasmuch as I was tired./cold/hungry & wanted to get to my new place, as a VA State Trooper arrived on the scene, talked to the deputy & then to me, returned to his unit & called "somebody" on the radio. = About 10 or less minutes later, a SD lieutenant arrived at the roadside scene, walked over to me & said, "Unless you wish to make a formal report, you are free to leave." (PAUSE) "Let me handle this situation within the department. - Is that OK with you??" - I said, "YES. That's fine.", I handed the LT my business card, with my new phone number written on the back & went on to The Mountain Lair for supper. = About 2 weeks later, I heard "through the cop grapevine" that the nasty-tempered/hateful deputy was no longer employed by the SD.)

yours, satx

The courts said they can run check stop under very specific conditions, one of which they have to stop EVERY vehicle, not just red ones or ones with white walls, or ones with a rifle rack.

At the very least demanding a LTC simply for open carrying a fire arm would be on exceptionally thin ice, thin enough I would push the limits if someone wanted to be a jerk about asking.

Sent from your mom's house using Tapatalk

 

[Axxe55]

The courts said they can run check stop under very specific conditions, one of which they have to stop EVERY vehicle, not just red ones or ones with white walls, or ones with a rifle rack.

At the very least demanding a LTC simply for open carrying a fire arm would be on exceptionally thin ice, thin enough I would push the limits if someone wanted to be a jerk about asking.

Sent from your mom's house using Tapatalk

Some of the same criteria is placed on discrimination. If they are applying the same checks or standards to everyone, then it's not considered discrimination. If they are only applied to a certain group or a person, then it could be considered discrimination.

 

[satx78247]

The courts said they can run check stop under very specific conditions, one of which they have to stop EVERY vehicle, not just red ones or ones with white walls, or ones with a rifle rack.

At the very least demanding a LTC simply for open carrying a fire arm would be on exceptionally thin ice, thin enough I would push the limits if someone wanted to be a jerk about asking.

Sent from your mom's house using Tapatalk

cycleguy2300,

SO, I would presume from what you admit about about what courts have said about "DL & DWI checks" that checking EVERY person that an officer SEES carrying a firearm to determine if they are LICENSED is exactly equivalent to stopping EVERY vehicle to see if EVERY DRIVER has a valid DL and/or "is under the influence" of alcohol/drugs. = NOT just some people who are seen with a firearm of any sort whatever and/or "certain colors", NOR every 3rd person, NOR whether you like the person's looks or NOT BUT rather EVERY PERSON, who is carrying a firearm.
Thus NO "unlawful discrimination" upon what the federal Civil Rights statutes call: "based upon any non merit factor" AND therefore NO "Terry" violation.

THANK YOU for making the case for me on how SAPD/BCSD & the Bexar County Constables can LAWFULLY check "open carriers" for CCW licenses. = You did that VERY WELL & made a better explanation than I did.
BRAVO & 'OLE.

ADDENDA: I would be remiss in this discussion IF I did not tell everyone the genesis of the policy of all the BEXAR COUNTY LE agencies. = It started because of merchants complaints about people carrying RIFLES/SHOTGUNS/CARBINES/HANDGUNS openly IN & NEAR their business premises & allegedly "frightening their customers" & "making some people uneasy/uncomfortable".
(This is the FAULT, if fault it is, of the CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CROWD & the DIMocRATS.)

yours, satx

 

[cycleguy2300]

cycleguy2300,

SO, I would presume from what you admit about about what courts have said about "DL & DWI checks" that checking EVERY person that an officer SEES carrying a firearm to determine if they are LICENSED is exactly equivalent to stopping EVERY vehicle to see if EVERY DRIVER has a valid DL and/or "is under the influence" of alcohol/drugs. = NOT just some people who are seen with a firearm of any sort whatever and/or "certain colors", NOR every 3rd person, NOR whether you like the person's looks or NOT BUT rather EVERY PERSON, who is carrying a firearm.
Thus NO "unlawful discrimination" upon what the federal Civil Rights statutes call: "based upon any non merit factor" AND therefore NO "Terry" violation.

THANK YOU for making the case for me on how SAPD/BCSD & the Bexar County Constables can LAWFULLY check "open carriers" for CCW licenses. = You did that VERY WELL & made a better explanation than I did.
BRAVO & 'OLE.

ADDENDA: I would be remiss in this discussion IF I did not tell everyone the genesis of the policy of all the BEXAR COUNTY LE agencies. = It started because of merchants complaints about people carrying RIFLES/SHOTGUNS/CARBINES/HANDGUNS openly IN & NEAR their business premises & allegedly "frightening their customers" & "making some people uneasy/uncomfortable".
(This is the FAULT, if fault it is, of the CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CROWD & the DIMocRATS.)

yours, satx

Opperating under the checkpoint philosophy, courts would want to see LEO asking EVERYONE for an LTC, they could be carrying concealed after all.

I cannot imagine any court would ever allow such a thing. A detention without RS.

Making polite conversation is as far as my authority would go for simply seeing someone open carrying, just like someone carrying a long gun. I've run scenarios where the "subject" was OC or had a long gun and the point was to make sure we did not detain based on the firearm.

It's a fine line between can and do.
I don't like another LEO asking I show that I am allowed to do something legal, but I don't find it onerous enough to put up a stink unless they start the stink. Should they be demanding a LTC be shown? I dont think so, but if people dont have a problem, it probably isn't that big a deal.

I am not willing to get in a tiff over demanding to see and LTC absent other facts.

SATX78247, I hope that explains my thought process on it.
Should they ask? Probably no.
Is it a big deal? Probably no.

Sent from your mom's house using Tapatalk

 

[toddnjoyce]

...Here in The Alamo City OPEN CARRY will get you "checked" by any LEO who is nearby, to see if your are licensed 100% of the time....

I’ve never experienced that in CoSA jurisdiction. Leon Valley, Olmos Park, and some of the other jurisdictions do have history related to OCT efforts related to open meetings, though.

Leon Valley hit with lawsuit over ‘auditor’ arrests

The lawsuit accuses Leon Valley Police Chief Joe Salvaggio and at least eight of his...

www.mysanantonio.com

 

[Axxe55]

Opperating under the checkpoint philosophy, courts would want to see LEO asking EVERYONE for an LTC, they could be carrying concealed after all.

I cannot imagine any court would ever allow such a thing. A detention without RS.

Making polite conversation is as far as my authority would go for simply seeing someone open carrying, just like someone carrying a long gun. I've run scenarios where the "subject" was OC or had a long gun and the point was to make sure we did not detain based on the firearm.

It's a fine line between can and do.
I don't like another LEO asking I show that I am allowed to do something legal, but I don't find it onerous enough to put up a stink unless they start the stink. Should they be demanding a LTC be shown? I dont think so, but if people dont have a problem, it probably isn't that big a deal.

I am not willing to get in a tiff over demanding to see and LTC absent other facts.

SATX78247, I hope that explains my thought process on it.
Should they ask? Probably no.
Is it a big deal? Probably no.

Sent from your mom's house using Tapatalk

Very similar to an officer making a routine traffic stop, late at night, and asks the driver where he's been, or where is he going. Actually, unless the driver is under suspicion of some other crime than the cause for the traffic stop, it's really none of the officer's business to know. Now the driver can answer, or not. Most people do answer, but they aren't under any authority to answer.

 

[satx78247]

Seems to me if more people were open carrying, then maybe we would be safer outside our homes.

DoubleDuty,

ImVho, IF a LOT more people (Who can shoot WELL) carried firearms concealed/unconcealed, we would all be safer.

To quote an old/dear (& now sadly departed to Eternal Glory) friend, who was once THE Senior CPT of our Ranger Service, "IF we had 10 times as many licensed people who are competent marksmen & are armed, we would all be better off".

yours, satx

 

[Frank59]

Tactically I think it's stupid as hell to carry a firearm in your back pocket with the grip sticking out

 

[Frank59]

Very similar to an officer making a routine traffic stop, late at night, and asks the driver where he's been, or where is he going. Actually, unless the driver is under suspicion of some other crime than the cause for the traffic stop, it's really none of the officer's business to know. Now the driver can answer, or not. Most people do answer, but they aren't under any authority to answer.

In the world of law enforcement there is no such thing as a "routine traffic stop"

 

[tonelar]

the opposite of concealed carry isn’t open carry