TexasCHLforum.com

anygunanywhere wrote:...I stated that questioning the disarming is appropriate. Resisting is not. Questioning events during a stop is not illegal...

I don't disagree with you in theory. I think questioning a disarming on the scene is a bad choice and I don't think you'll get much support if you question it after the fact.

Tom

...the officer reasonably believes it is necessary for the protection of the license holder, officer, or another individual.

How hard do you think it would be to say, "I reasonably believed it was necessary?" The law is very vague on this issue.

Tom

anygunanywhere wrote:...most stops involving CHLs do not involve disarming and the act actually exposes all parties to ND due to unnecessary weapon handling.

From the poll ran on this site, there are very few instances of a CHL being disarmed. While there may be a few LEOs who disarm as a general rule (and I think this is a tiny percentage), the vast majority of times there are not any problems.

If the CHL acts foolishly or makes the LEO feel uneasy, I can't blame the LEO for taking appropriate action. I agree that any handling increases the chances for an ND, but if the LEO feels threatened, the risk of the ND is outweighed by his/her need to feel safe.

I don't think the probable cause test applies to disarming from my reading of the law. If the CHL tells the LEO that the weapon is in the glovebox and the LEO decides to disarm, then looking in the glovebox for the weapon seems reasonable and anything else found in the glovebox would fall under the "plain view" doctrine.

Tom