bronco78 wrote:Happy your satisfied with the contact..
I am, would be, disappointed, confused, alarmed, frustrated that a Leo feels the need to disarm a citizen who has proven to the state in numerous ways to be one of the good guys.. Who has specifically shown to the officer in question he intends no harm to that officer.. (BG's do not announce to the officer they plan on shooting, Hey I have a gun it's RIGHT HERE) Reality is,, it's the gun of an owner they do not know about who is not verified, certified, inspected by the state that should worry the officer.. And regardless of what reality continues to show.. We continue to see officers or maybe department policies that cause guilty until proven innocent lawful citizens to be disarmed.
Arrrrgggg, now all worked up again before going back to work,,,,LOL… Tme for an hour of PT, that will fix me for the morning.
Bronco. This LEO's action was unnecessary and potentially put the good guy in danger in a bad area with looky-loos. I wish departments would train officers that CHL's are on their side and can help them out in such a case - where the officer is all alone and could use backup if a problem arises. Sad to say the department I was with never gave us any training about interactions with CHLs. Until I retired, got my CHL and started reading this great forum, I really did not know the law re CHL and the problems some folk are having with my former colleagues. Never heard of a problem with any of my department's officers but reading about plenty here.