Correction, Cosmoline, it was completely appropriate for the cop to ask. When a cop, even an off duty one, has a reason to believe that someone is armed then it is responsible for him or her to make sure that the armed person is legally armed.
was merely with a disgruntled officer of the law, rather than with a real BG.
if that off duty LEO had bumped into any of us and had not asked to see our CCL and then we had move on and we had opened fire for some unknown reason and killed 5 or six people and it was found that he had encountered the shooter and not asked about whether he had a CCL you would be out for his blood
Appendix carry solves that particular problem. They'll hit your arm instead of your weapon.
That would be based in the fact that carrying a concealed weapon without license is illegal in Tx, and that Tx requires you to present your CHL to a LEO during any confrontation. It is a Tx CHL holders responsibility to demonstrate to LEOs that they are legally carrying. If you have been made, it's a Tx officers duty to make sure that you aren't illegally carrying.But even in Texas, why does the officer investigate instead of presuming the man is legally armed? What gives him the right to act that way?
He could have said "None of your business." It should have ended there.
He could have said "None of your business." It should have ended there.
Do you honestly think that would have ended there? If you screw around with these robocops they'll put you in the grave and get a medal in the process. I don't see that he had any choice but to answer or face imminent deadly force. The officer's manner was threatening and his attitude was totally out of line, but as an LEO he can do pretty much whatever he wants.
Because if oneshooter had offered his opinion, no matter how politely, he could well have ended up in jail. Or worse…Deer Hunter: It's HIS opinion, and that's just FINE! Why are we making such a big deal? First ammendment rights are JUST as important as the rights given by the SECOND ammendment.
Because an "opinion" rendered at figurative gunpoint isn't an opinion. It's a DICTAT imposed by force on a captive audience.It's HIS opinion, and that's just FINE! Why are we making such a big deal? First ammendment rights are JUST as important as the rights given by the SECOND ammendment.
Because if oneshooter had offered his opinion, no matter how politely, he could well have ended up in jail.