Houston - HPD TO HOST MEETING ON NEW OPEN CARRY LAW

[thatguyoverthere]

I finally had a chance to watch the recording of this meeting on youtube. Very interesting.

First off, kudos to the Chief. He had a lot more patience with some of these folks that I would have! I found myself saying to my computer screen: "Come on! Get to the point already!" But that's fine. All citizens deserve their turn to speak at a forum like this.

But I would like to mention one point about a possible encounter with a LEO. First, a couple of points that Mr. Cotton had earlier.

If, and that's a mighty big IF, people openly carrying are calm, non-confrontational, and statesmanlike when dealing with the police and public, then this scrutiny will quickly diminish.

Very sound advice. I agree 100%. Attitude makes a lot of difference, in a lot of situations.

But on another point. Again quoting Mr. Cotton from above:

You can tell from Terry Holcomb's question about when the right to detain a person ends (i.e. as soon as the CHL has been displayed and confirmed), they he will be preaching that everyone should show their license, then walk away without answering any further questions. That's the type of conduct that will cause problems.

Again, I agree with Mr. Cotton here, that an abrupt turn and walking away is not only discourteous, it is likely to invite further intervention from the LEO, right or wrong.

I do, however, share the concern that some others have mentioned, regarding a possible "fishing expedition" by the LEO. If that occurs, I would like to be able to determine how and when to "cut off" the conversation with the LEO once the proper identification and license has been provided. I've personally experienced (and seen many videos) of these "friendly little chats", with questions something like these from the LEO: "Where are you heading today, sir?" "Kinda late to be out in this neighborhood. May not be safe. Can I help give you directions to some place?" "Are you down here on business?" "Do you have friends or family in the area?"

Honestly, I don't want to be rude to the officer, and also, I have nothing to hide. But neither do I want to stand there and play 20 questions with a police officer.

So, yes, I think it's good for us to have a clear understanding of what is required of us in these type encounters, and to also clearly understand where the official identification ends and the consensual conversation begins. We are required to comply with one; we are not required to engage in the other.

But hey, lots of LEO's are great folks. If you're in no particular hurry and feel like doing so, enjoy the visit. I've done so myself!

[Pariah3j]

Don't think I could have articulated it any better myself.

[Abraham]

Perhaps, an ink stamp of approval with the date and time stamped on the back of your hand could be put into use once checked out by an LEO.

Then, if you encounter another LEO wanting to interrogate you for OCing, you could simply wave your hand and not have to go through the bother.

I'm only partially kidding...

What's to prevent multiple interrogations for OCing during the course of one day?

[Glockster]

Perhaps, an ink stamp of approval with the date and time stamped on the back of your hand could be put into use once checked out by an LEO.

Then, if you encounter another LEO wanting to interrogate you for OCing, you could simply wave your hand and not have to go through the bother.

I'm only partially kidding...

What's to prevent multiple interrogations for OCing during the course of one day?

And to carry that further, let's say that you start your day out heading somewhere down in Houston, and get stopped and checked there. And then head up the road a bit, and are outside of Houston but still inside Harris County and get stopped there. And then a little bit further up the road and are now outside of Harris and just inside of Montgomery County and get stopped there. You could get stopped many times, in many jurisdictions on a Saturday morning of going to a few stores.

[TexasGal]

Watching the video of the meeting was painful at times. The public is very uncomfortable with it at best. I wish they had done more to impress upon people that we are background checked thoroughly and didn't just pay money for a license. That we are not a threat. Period.

The guy who was so hung up on being asked for his ID. He was making such a bad impression. Ugghh. I do not see why there is such a chip on some shoulders about an officer asking for ID. The last thing anyone needs are hot heads on either side. The time to object to this is in the voting booth and on the phone with representatives. Not on the street where an officer is asking you for it. We need to be compliant and polite and take up any objection to it higher up the food chain. Otherwise, there will be some bad experiences that will do no one any good.

[charliee]

Watching the video of the meeting was painful at times. The public is very uncomfortable with it at best. I wish they had done more to impress upon people that we are background checked thoroughly and didn't just pay money for a license. That we are not a threat. Period.

The guy who was so hung up on being asked for his ID. He was making such a bad impression. Ugghh. I do not see why there is such a chip on some shoulders about an officer asking for ID. The last thing anyone needs are hot heads on either side. The time to object to this is in the voting booth and on the phone with representatives. Not on the street where an officer is asking you for it. We need to be compliant and polite and take up any objection to it higher up the food chain. Otherwise, there will be some bad experiences that will do no one any good.

LE should not have a right to ask for OCers license unless they have a reason to do so. Them doing so defeats our given lawful right to OC.

It's not that we will be asked just once. What if we are asked to show our license, say, 10 times daily? LE doesn't like OC and they are determined to defeat it, one way or another. Wait and see.

No one is more friendly and courteous than I am. But I don't see being so nice to the cops that needlessly stop us and violate our constitutional rights. After all, we do have a right to free speech.

The Texas Attorney General really should get involved in all this and give LE some guidance. Or do we really have an Attorney General?

[mojo84]

Watching the video of the meeting was painful at times. The public is very uncomfortable with it at best. I wish they had done more to impress upon people that we are background checked thoroughly and didn't just pay money for a license. That we are not a threat. Period.

The guy who was so hung up on being asked for his ID. He was making such a bad impression. Ugghh. I do not see why there is such a chip on some shoulders about an officer asking for ID. The last thing anyone needs are hot heads on either side. The time to object to this is in the voting booth and on the phone with representatives. Not on the street where an officer is asking you for it. We need to be compliant and polite and take up any objection to it higher up the food chain. Otherwise, there will be some bad experiences that will do no one any good.

LE should not have a right to ask for OCers license unless they have a reason to do so. Them doing so defeats our given lawful right to OC.

It's not that we will be asked just once. What if we are asked to show our license, say, 10 times daily? LE doesn't like OC and they are determined to defeat it, one way or another. Wait and see.

No one is more friendly and courteous than I am. But I don't see being so nice to the cops that needlessly stop us and violate our constitutional rights. After all, we do have a right to free speech.

The Texas Attorney General really should get involved in all this and give LE some guidance. Or do we really have an Attorney General?

I do not come in contact with 10 cops per month much less 10 daily. I think this concern is being way overblown. This argument is about as credible as people saying there will be blood running in the streets or the murder rate will go through the roof if people are allowed to open carry. Showing them our license until we all get used to it does not defeat our rights. The time to take up the Constitutional rights argument is not on the sidewalk at the time. All that does is escalate the situation. File a complaint or civil rights lawsuit afterward.

I think some on both sides of the issue are going too far trying to make the other side out to be the bad guys. Let's see how all this plays out before we get up in a tizzy over something that may not even come to fruition.

[charliee]

I do not come in contact with 10 cops per month much less 10 daily. I think this concern is being way overblown. This argument is about as credible as people saying there will be blood running in the streets or the murder rate will go through the roof if people are allowed to open carry. Showing them our license until we all get used to it does not defeat our rights. The time to take up the Constitutional rights argument is not on the sidewalk at the time. All that does is escalate the situation. File a complaint or civil rights lawsuit afterward.

I think some on both sides of the issue are going too far trying to make the other side out to be the bad guys. Let's see how all this plays out before we get up in a tizzy over something that may not even come to fruition.

Are you saying you don't believe in 'probable cause'? You can't have it both ways... either you believe in it or you don't. The concern of multiple stops per day is real.

[Glockster]

What I personally don't like about some of this discussion is the whole notion of dismissing being bothered about being stopped for ID because it won't happen often or too frequently or that it won't inconvenience me too much or for too long. I personally feel that this is a very steep and slippery slope. Once it begins, then it is established and is easier to continue with. And please don't try to tell me that there aren't officers somewhere who will take the stance that they can do it whenever they want and however they want. I respect LEOs, but I also have this thing called the Internet and so can readily find evidence that not all LEOs are apparently cut from the same constitutional cloth.

At what point would it be too whatever? The first time? The 10th time? Everyone has a different viewpoint of what may be too whatever. Absent official guidelines we are left debating it here, where it will have no meaning whatsoever on the street.

What I know is that when I listened to the hours and hours of debate over this issue I was left with the absolute understanding that without RAS/PC that I could no more be stopped in Texas than I could expect to see random DWI roadblocks. And that was given as one of the reasons that the specific language prohibiting stop/ID was removed from the final language. I did NOT hear that it was removed because we should not make a fuss, should not be impolite, or that it really wouldn't be too much of a bother. What I heard was that it was already NOT allowed in Texas.

Now, I'm hearing a whole different story. And that, my friends, bothers me the most. Not -- to be honest -- that I might get stopped. But that I heard what I heard and now gravity is apparently different in Texas.

[G.A. Heath]

When discussing he Dutton amendment the legislature felt it was not needed due to existing case law, among other things. If the legislature receives enough complaints that LE is harassing license holders who are open carrying a handgun lawfully the issue is likely to be revisited.

Keep in mind Grisham's little stunt in Oklahoma that gave anti-gunners a meme poster didn't help the Dutton Amendment, nor did the statement by militant OC groups and Stickland about Inadvertently/accidentally getting open carry, nor did all the bad press generated by OC groups who's leadership is ineligible for a Texas CHL. In the end OCT/CATI/OCTC/Ect. killed the Dutton amendment. Anyone who complains about LE stopping a license holder to demand their license needs to go thank OCT/CATI/OCTC/ect. and their leadership for the excellent job they did in killing the Dutton Amendment, and any bill it would have been attached to.

[Right2Carry]

I understand there will be stops once 1/1/2016 gets here and I plan to be civil and respectful as I always have but the officer must extend the same courtesy. I will have a problem if they detain me longer than a few minutes in order to check for warrants or some other nonsense. I will have a problem if they start asking questions like where are you going? Where are you coming from? These type of questions have no bearing on my ability to legally OC a firearm once I present my LTC. I view these stops no differently then pulling someone over just to see if they have a drivers license.

It shouldn't even be necessary to discuss this issue at all. I have a license to open or conceal carry and no LEO should be allowed to stop and ask you for your LTC based solely on a person open carrying a firearm.

I also find it insane that we still have to present a drivers license or state issued ID along with our LTC. What purpose does this serve if I am not driving a vehicle? I could understand this if our picture wasn't on the LTC, but really? I don't have to present additional ID when presenting my drivers license so why should the requirement be different for showing LTC when requested?

[Glockster]

I understand there will be stops once 1/1/2016 gets here and I plan to be civil and respectful as I always have but the officer must extend the same courtesy. I will have a problem if they detain me longer than a few minutes in order to check for warrants or some other nonsense. I will have a problem if they start asking questions like where are you going? Where are you coming from? These type of questions have no bearing on my ability to legally OC a firearm once I present my LTC. I view these stops no differently then pulling someone over just to see if they have a drivers license.

It shouldn't even be necessary to discuss this issue at all. I have a license to open or conceal carry and no LEO should be allowed to stop and ask you for your LTC based solely on a person open carrying a firearm.

I also find it insane that we still have to present a drivers license or state issued ID along with our LTC. What purpose does this serve if I am not driving a vehicle? I could understand this if our picture wasn't on the LTC, but really? I don't have to present additional ID when presenting my drivers license so why should the requirement be different for showing LTC when requested?

I personally agree with what you're saying, and especially about them turning a quick verification of CHL into something else. But I can't equate this to being pulled over to see if I have a DL, because as far as I know they aren't allowed to simply randomly pull me over for that either. And having a DL is not covered under 2A. I think that is hugely different, and in other states where it has been found that RAS/PC isn't met by the simple presence of an openly carried handgun in a holster.

[suthdj]

We need a website so we can log all the oc stops. Like the 3006 site. Then if there is an issue we have documented ammo. Do police log all their interactions with the public?

[Glockster]

When discussing he Dutton amendment the legislature felt it was not needed due to existing case law, among other things. If the legislature receives enough complaints that LE is harassing license holders who are open carrying a handgun lawfully the issue is likely to be revisited.

Keep in mind Grisham's little stunt in Oklahoma that gave anti-gunners a meme poster didn't help the Dutton Amendment, nor did the statement by militant OC groups and Stickland about Inadvertently/accidentally getting open carry, nor did all the bad press generated by OC groups who's leadership is ineligible for a Texas CHL. In the end OCT/CATI/OCTC/Ect. killed the Dutton amendment. Anyone who complains about LE stopping a license holder to demand their license needs to go thank OCT/CATI/OCTC/ect. and their leadership for the excellent job they did in killing the Dutton Amendment, and any bill it would have been attached to.

And I hear what you're saying, and frankly agree with your point about why the amendment got everyone's undergarments into a bunch. But their actions doesn't in any way diminish my own rights and has no reflection upon my law abiding status. But we're right back to my above question -- at what point are there "enough complaints" to revisit it? Is that 100 with minor issues vs. one where someone has a great YouTube video to go with their harassment claim?

To be clear, I will not be rude. I will not refuse to provide the ID. I DO however consider it to be harassment. Any stop. Period. I am a law abiding citizen, and I look like one right down to still having the same military haircut many years later. You would never pick me out of any crowd as someone that "might be trouble." I have undergone that in depth process to be vetted to receive my CHL. And let's be honest about it -- how many here actually believe that there are bad guys who will come January 1st start open carrying their illegal weapon because they believe they might just "fit in" with the rest of us? Bad guys don't OC. We know that, and I'm pretty sure that LEO knows that.

Perhaps though I'm only discussing this for the sake of supporting someone else's rights, as I personally may not even OC in TX. I just want to know that if my shirt rides up over my WB holster, that I'm not going to worry about that exposure. So carry on.

[Glockster]

We need a website so we can log all the oc stops. Like the 3006 site. Then if there is an issue we have documented ammo. Do police log all their interactions with the public?

THAT is a most excellent idea! Otherwise, we only have places like this to bring them up.