OC police training pdf file.

[nightmare69]

I have a 16 page pdf file that was used a couple of months ago when I took my required TCOLE legal update. This portion was over firearms and mostly open carry. It's goes into good easy to follow detail explaining the authority of a peace officer when it comes to OC. I would like to make this available to members here so if moderator could PM me an email I will sent it your way. This training answers a lot of questions regarding OC you see daily on the forum.

[Richbirdhunter]

Thank you PM sent

[nightmare69]

I want an mod or admin to send it too so they may upload it on the site so I don't have to email everyone. I'm getting a bunch of PMs of members email but unfortunately the only Internet I have is my phone with limited data. I've sent it to a few but I cannot anymore unless you are a mod or admin.

[Keith B]

Here is the document attached.

Keith B
Moderator

[WildBill]

Here is the document attached.

Keith B
Moderator

Thank you Keith and Nightmare69!

[nightmare69]

Thanks, Keith. This training was really easy to understand. Let's face it, if TML writes it where cops can understand it, then anyone can.

[Deltaboy]

Thanks that was well written and easy to understand.

[The Wall]

Having a locked sticky for the chart at the end would be great. Thanks for posting this.

[rotor]

There is an updated one listed as Oct.2015 with fewer errors but it is too large for me to attach here.

[nightmare69]

There is an updated one listed as Oct.2015 with fewer errors but it is too large for me to attach here.

What errors?

[Papa_Tiger]

Hmm... Interesting that the question on page 14 "What federal law governs a police officer’s authority to question a person who is legally carrying a firearm?" discusses when an officer can legally question/detain someone is completely undermined by a very dishonest reading of the law in the question on page 15 "Are there specific rules relating to whether a police officer can question or disarm a person who is openly carrying a holstered handgun in public?"

The disarming portion of it, I understand (IMO it should be rare that an officer feels the NEED to disarm a license holder "is necessary for the protection of the license holder, officer, or another individual"). The previous entry discussion of GC 411.205 is a completely dishonest interpretation of the law that was PRESCRIPTIVE for how an encounter with an officer when legally detained and required to provide ID should play out. GC 411.205 in no way grants authority to the officer to demand the ID in the first place.

It seems based on the way this is being presented is that the trainers are glossing over the first question and then dishonestly and intentionally misinterpreting GC 411.205 to give authority where no authority is granted by the law.

If this is so, I'm EXTREMELY disappointed by the way this training is being presented to officers and hope that it is quickly fixed in the next legislative session.

Edit: Fixed error of PC 411 - it should read GC

[mojo84]

The interesting thing is, TML also operates a self insured risk pool from which many cities and county government obtain their insurance coverage. In the event someone sues an entity insured by TML risk pool, they will be the ones to provide the coverage and defense. They have a lot riding on this.

[nightmare69]

Hmm... Interesting that the question on page 14 "What federal law governs a police officer’s authority to question a person who is legally carrying a firearm?" discusses when an officer can legally question/detain someone is completely undermined by a very dishonest reading of the law in the question on page 15 "Are there specific rules relating to whether a police officer can question or disarm a person who is openly carrying a holstered handgun in public?"

The disarming portion of it, I understand (IMO it should be rare that an officer feels the NEED to disarm a license holder "is necessary for the protection of the license holder, officer, or another individual"). The previous entry discussion of PC 411.205 is a completely dishonest interpretation of the law that was PRESCRIPTIVE for how an encounter with an officer when legally detained and required to provide ID should play out. PC 411.205 in no way grants authority to the officer to demand the ID in the first place.

It seems based on the way this is being presented is that the trainers are glossing over the first question and then dishonestly and intentionally misinterpreting PC 411.205 to give authority where no authority is granted by the law.

If this is so, I'm EXTREMELY disappointed by the way this training is being presented to officers and hope that it is quickly fixed in the next legislative session.

I may not be following you. The way I understood your concern durning training was, if a LEO decides to disarm the LTC holder then he has already established good probable cause to detain the individual and demand he produce his permit to carry. The LEO has performed a Terry Stop and decided to disarm the individual for officer safety.

[Papa_Tiger]

Hmm... Interesting that the question on page 14 "What federal law governs a police officer’s authority to question a person who is legally carrying a firearm?" discusses when an officer can legally question/detain someone is completely undermined by a very dishonest reading of the law in the question on page 15 "Are there specific rules relating to whether a police officer can question or disarm a person who is openly carrying a holstered handgun in public?"

The disarming portion of it, I understand (IMO it should be rare that an officer feels the NEED to disarm a license holder "is necessary for the protection of the license holder, officer, or another individual"). The previous entry discussion of GC 411.205 is a completely dishonest interpretation of the law that was PRESCRIPTIVE for how an encounter with an officer when legally detained and required to provide ID should play out. GC 411.205 in no way grants authority to the officer to demand the ID in the first place.

It seems based on the way this is being presented is that the trainers are glossing over the first question and then dishonestly and intentionally misinterpreting GC 411.205 to give authority where no authority is granted by the law.

If this is so, I'm EXTREMELY disappointed by the way this training is being presented to officers and hope that it is quickly fixed in the next legislative session.

I may not be following you. The way I understood your concern durning training was, if a LEO decides to disarm the LTC holder then he has already established good probable cause to detain the individual and demand he produce his permit to carry. The LEO has performed a Terry Stop and decided to disarm the individual for officer safety.

I agree that an officer, once they have determined that the person carrying has an LTC and they feel the need to disarm them for safety's sake may disarm the LTC holder of their weapon. That action and power is granted in the law under GC 411.207 and the recommendation is on solid legal ground IMO.

The way the question, "Are there specific rules relating to whether a police officer can question or disarm a person who is openly carrying a holstered handgun in public?" is asked, it is assuming that an officer has the authority to demand ID. The law they cite as the source of the authority to demand the ID is GC 411.205 which in no way grants that authority. It states "If a license holder is carrying a handgun on or about the license holder’s person when a peace officer demands that the license holder display identification, the license holder shall display both the license holder’s driver’s license or identification certificate and the license holder’s handgun license." That only says what the responsibility of the license holder is if they are carrying a handgun on or about their person and the officer demands identification. It in no way grants authority to the officer to demand the ID in the first place.

In reading the question on page 15 that I refer to above, it seems there is an assumption that authority is already granted to investigate, including detaining an individual solely on the basis of an openly carried firearm. That I disagree with. Texas, to my knowledge, does not give officers of the law the power or right to demand ID unless a person is being detained (Terry Stop). If the person is being detained there must be reasonable suspicion that a crime has been or is about to be committed. Carrying a handgun openly in a shoulder or belt holster is legal in Texas if an individual has an LTC come January 1, 2016.

In my opinion, an officer has as much authority to detain an individual solely because they are openly carrying a handgun in a shoulder or belt holster and check for a license as they have to detain any random individual driving on a Texas highway who has committed no other driving infraction to check for a license. That is none.

That being said, the sidewalk is not the place to play lawyer with an officer. Object, comply, gather information (Open Records Request) and take it up with the officer's chain of command/lawyers after the fact.

Edit: Fixed PC 411 - now reads GC 411

[rotor]

There is an updated one listed as Oct.2015 with fewer errors but it is too large for me to attach here.

What errors?

Don't know all of them which is why there is a newer version. Look in the back about hospital and nursing home carry if you have a CHL. This says not allowed. Law says needs a 30.06. Oct 2015 version has not corrected this one yet. All of this is complicated and easy to make errors with. It is a very good document though.