TexasCHLforum.com

It's easy to clear this up with a simple amendment like Wisconsin has:
REF: Wis. Stat. §§ 947.01(2) and. 66.0409(6)."

66.0409 (6) Unless other facts and circumstances that indicate a criminal or
malicious intent on the part of the person apply, no person may be in violation of, or
be charged with a violation of, an ordinance of a political subdivision relating to
disorderly conduct or other inappropriate behavior for loading, carrying, or going
armed with a firearm, without regard to whether the firearm is loaded or is concealed
or openly carried. Any ordinance in violation of this subsection does not apply and
may not be enforced.

Here's the policy that needs changing, as reported by the media:

San Antonio Police Chief William McManus agreed with the men’s charges, although they didn’t technically break any laws. He explained that the person carrying a firearm can be charged with disorderly conduct if at any time any person for any reason feels threatened.

Ref:
http://www.guns.com/2013/09/03/men-char ... cks-video/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Hopefully the Chief didn't say it like that.. As "not breaking any laws" and "charged with disorderly conduct" don't make any sense.
Clearly the officers that did this aren't going to face repercussions and IF there is to be reeducation, it's going to start from the top down. However, I don't think that will be the case...

Are they actually guilty of disorderly conduct?

I don't think it matters:
1) The PD solved the immediate problem that they were faced with.
2) The officers involved took actions that the top of the SAPD supports.
3) The fine for disorderly conduct maxes out at $500. So now these guys are faced with defending against a ticket that will cost them a fraction of their legal fees if they were to challenge it and likely lose the opportunity to defer the issue or have it otherwise adjudicated without conviction.

It's really not innocent until proven guilty on charges like this. It's guilty when charged, unless you have the time and the money to prove otherwise. BTW, It took me longer than it should have to learn this little fact personally. Law Enforcement Officers have one of the most powerful jobs in the USA, IMHO, especially if you can't afford a good legal defense.

I could be wrong, if the DA drops the charges.. And sometimes that happens in cases like this where we've got a camera...

We do not have a true right to display long rifles in Texas, especially not "black" ones... That's just the reality of it.

Keith B wrote: I think the officers knew it was more than likely not going to stick, and maybe even not valid, so the citation was more of a nuisance and if/when dropped by the DA there should be no lawyer fees, etc.

Good guy officers, if you're right... Solves the immediate problem without undue hardship on people that were not legally doing anything wrong. I like that.

The downside is that in most jurisdictions, in order to plead not-guilty you're going to pay a bond... There is a penalty here, it's just not as grand as the arrest. On paper, the charges are probably the same and are likely to have long term consequences.

Reprimanded for what? They were called and took an action. They could just have easily been reprimanded by the public (or media) for taking no action.
Don't get me wrong - I support the 2nd and think the LEOs did the wrong thing, but in the grand scheme of what is going to get you in trouble as a public servant, this isn't going to be one of those cases.
I was talking to an Austin PD officer just the other day, I actually didn't bring it up, but he indicated that he'd behave exactly the same way - only it wouldn't be a citation he was writing... If he had to come out because someone was acting "improperly" and wasting his time, there would be an implication... And the legal side of it could be worked out in the courts, but the problem would immediately be solved from his perspective.

I take comfort in seeing some videos on the internet where LEOs indicate that they will take action and they're properly corrected by higher ups... And in this case, the LEOs did issue citations, instead of having these individuals take a ride.

For you guys that think this isn't the appropriate way to behave - what are the alternatives that allow us to retain our rights to handle a long gun in public? I understand the public's concern, certainly... But we need to collectively choose that we want to be overly cautious or we choose to accept what rights are granted in the constitution. Personally, I'm conflicted on it... But the bad arrests/citations really bother me.