TexasCHLforum.com

bubba84 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 20, 2019 9:36 pm

anygunanywhere wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 5:39 pm

bubba84 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 5:17 pm He didnt need a RAS or PC as he had consent.

I realize the citizen gave consent.

Shouldn’t the normal situation be that there is RAS or PC before a cop wants to search law abiding citizens?

Why did he want to run the weapon? What led him to think it might be stolen? Does the deputy make it a habit of pulling these unnecessary searches on all citizens exercising their 2A rights? The 4A protects against these searches.

The 4th wasn't violated as he had consent.

Bubba, I stated that I realized that the citizen gave consent. I know that his 4th was not violated.

My point is what is in large red text. Why did the deputy believe it was necessary to run the weapon to see if it was stolen? He had no PC or RAS.

carlson1 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 5:52 pm If you have violated no law other than a Class C misdemeanor traffic law I wished Texas would change the part of disarming unless the LEO can show he had some thought of a threat on your part other than a holstered weapon.
We all know the more you handle a firearm the more chances of having a ND.

bubba84 wrote: ↑Sat Aug 17, 2019 5:17 pm He didnt need a RAS or PC as he had consent.

I realize the citizen gave consent.

Shouldn’t the normal situation be that there is RAS or PC before a cop wants to search law abiding citizens?

Why did he want to run the weapon? What led him to think it might be stolen? Does the deputy make it a habit of pulling these unnecessary searches on all citizens exercising their 2A rights? The 4A protects against these searches.

Last night I was watching Live PD. A county sheriff from MO pulled over a man for no front plate. I have my own thoughts on such bull scat stops but will not focus on that. The deputy asked the man if he had any weapons and he replied that he was concealed carrying on his right hip.

The deputy replied that if he (citizen) kept his in the holster that he (deputy) would keep his weapon in the holster. I thought "Excellent".

The deputy then asked if he had his carry license. The citizen replied that he did not. The deputy then stated "Then you are carrying under constitutional carry." and the citizen said Yes. I again thought "Excellent!"

Then the deputy said "Do you mind if I run your weapon to see if it is stolen?"and my "ecxcellents" turned to "What the hey?!?!?!?!"

He ordered the citizen out of the car, ten fingers on the fender, disarmed him, unloaded his Ruger LCP.

I turned it off before the end of the show to go night night but did have some thoughts.

What RAS or PC did the deputy have to do such a search? The actions he took directly went counter to the you keep your holstered... garbage he spouted. He also increased the likelihood of a negligent discharge by unnecessarily handling firearms.

I do believe if I am ever presented with this scenario I will say yes I mind. Get a warrant.