One minor technical correction first. Not all crimes are in the Penal Code. There are many codes which have crimes, such as the Transportation Code (all of those traffic tickets are actually crimes), the Education Code (some interesting ones about failure to ID on a college campus and for displaying a firearm on any campus), the Health and Safety Code (where most drug laws and illegal cigarette smoking laws are), and the Alcoholic Beverage Code (underage drinking, etc.). I agree with the rest of your statement about needing reasonable, ARTICULABLE, suspicion of a crime and just looking like a mook won't cut it.ScottDLS wrote: ↑Tue Oct 19, 2021 1:26 pmA "Terry Stop" requires a (specific) reasonable, articulable, suspicion that a crime (penal code violation in TX) is being committed or is about to be committed, OR it is not lawful. "The guy looked like a mook" doesn't cut it. And now with unlicensed open carry being legal, neither is openly carrying a handgun, though I would argue even before unlicensed carry it still wasn't "reasonable suspicion".
My other point, which may be more important for an academic discussion or training police, is on just what constitutes reasonable suspicion. Unfortunately, the term is not very well defined and courts have generally taken the same attitude as they have with pornography - "I know it when I see it". I was taught that it is when the officer comes into possession of such facts that would lead an average person to believe that a crime is or may be committed. The behavior might be legal, but it must be more likely to be illegal than legal. This lifts the standard way over mere suspicion but not quite as high as probable cause. I point this out because I do not agree with you that when licenses were required that seeing a person with a firearm would not have made the cut as reasonable suspicion. When licenses were required, I think more people were still carrying illegally (other than the unlawfully carrying they were not all criminals, some just did not believe a license was required) than were licensees, so it may not have made the cut on "more likely to be illegal".
Obviously, this is moot now for the scenario of just seeing a gun. There is no way any officer could justify this as meeting the requirements of reasonable suspicion since it is plain legal in at least 95% of the cases.
And while we are on the subject of what Terry authorized, the frisk portion of that decision is one of the most abused searches I have seen. It was a good decision for the specific case facts, but a very bad decision overall. I keep hoping it will be overturned. But I will not hold my breath waiting for that.