TexasCHLforum.com

A-R wrote:

mojo84 wrote:I will have to think about the wording but I like the idea. Many cops take the current wording as carte blanche approval to disarm someone even if they have no reason to believe it necessary.

Think about it like this:

"Reasonably believes" ( very generally) is what a LEO needs to frisk someone for safety (Terry v Ohio)

"Probable cause" is what a LEO needs to arrest someone

Probable cause is a much higher standard.

You only need "reasonable belief" (among other tipping points like immediate necessity, imminent threat) to defend yourself with force or deadly force.

Raising the standard to probable cause puts LEO's lives in danger by lessening their ability to control a scene.

And don't forget, we're only talking about temporary disarm not confiscation. Under current law the LEO SHALL return the firearm to the rightful owner upon completion of the interaction (unless there is probable cause to arrest or confiscate).

Currently if a LEO has made contact with, for example, 2 or 3 subjects who are all armed, he can temporarily disarm them for his safety if he can articulate why (outnumbered, previous interaction, known history, articulable body language etc).

Under this new standard, the LEO would be required basically to articulate the equivalent of an arrest merely to temporarily disarm the subjects.

Now, put yourself in the LEOs ' shoes: you're out alone at night with 3 armed subjects who are acting squirrelly ... would YOU feel safe if you were required to let them each keep their guns until you developed enough info to basically arrest them? Or would you prefer to temporarily disarm them while you conducted your investigation, alone?

Certainly LEOs past, present, and future have abused this authority to disarm. But that's not reason to throw out the baby with the bath water.

G.A. Heath wrote:
How about instead of touching 30.06 lets leave it and 30.05 alone and let any sign ban OC and a 30.06 ban licensed CC?