Where are all of the "printers"?

[striker55]

While visiting the Alamo I checked for signs and not seeing any I went in. As I'm standing in the main room a trooper tapped my shoulder and asked if I had a license. I was a little shocked that he spotted me, I asked him if it wasn't allowed. He said only if I didn't have a license, he took me to the side and I proudly showed my ltc. I asked if I was showing, he said no that he could spot people carrying. Wished me a good day.

Unless the trooper had reason to believe that you were committing a crime, that was improper of him, I believe. I wonder if he randomly pulls over drivers to check on whether they have a driver's license?

Whether or not it is "proper," I don't have a problem with any LEO asking to see my license, anywhere. They are going to know at that point that I am not a BG. Not saying its right or wrong, I just don't care if they ask me.

To me it is about both the principal of the issue as well as a practical aspect.

I don't like LEO's or other assuming that I may have stolen the car I am driving because I am dirty from working in the yard, or assuming that I might be a felon because I am carrying a weapon, or anything in between. Then again I also (politely) decline to give permission to search my vehicle during a random traffic stop even if "I have nothing to hide".

There is a principal, involved, and while, it's well within the officer's authority, to inquire about an LTC, to do so, just because, "he can spot someone carrying" is, in my opinion, not really justified. I have had nothing but positive interactions with LEO while carrying, and have only shown my LTC, when stopped for a traffic violation. I OC the majority, of the time, and have never been questioned by LEO. I believe that unless he had reason to do so, i.e. MWAG report etc. There was no reason to check your legality. I haven't been to the Alamo, in several years, was this a Texas State Trooper, who questioned you?

It was about 6 years ago, not sure what agency.

[RossA]

There is a principal, involved, and while, it's well within the officer's authority, to inquire about an LTC, to do so, just because, "he can spot someone carrying" is, in my opinion, not really justified. I have had nothing but positive interactions with LEO while carrying, and have only shown my LTC, when stopped for a traffic violation. I OC the majority, of the time, and have never been questioned by LEO. I believe that unless he had reason to do so, i.e. MWAG report etc. There was no reason to check your legality. I haven't been to the Alamo, in several years, was this a Texas State Trooper, who questioned you?

I have to disagree that a MWAG report is a reason for police to question someone anymore. It is perfectly reasonable for me to carry my gun either concealed or openly without having to answer to LE. In the old days, MWAG could almost be presumed to be illegal since we couldn't legally carry. Nowadays, MWAG is legally equivalent to "man with a car." Unless you see something additional besides the mere presence of a gun or a car, there is no reasonable suspicion that a crime has been or is about to be committed. Thus, no reason for police to question me.

[Soccerdad1995]

There is a principal, involved, and while, it's well within the officer's authority, to inquire about an LTC, to do so, just because, "he can spot someone carrying" is, in my opinion, not really justified. I have had nothing but positive interactions with LEO while carrying, and have only shown my LTC, when stopped for a traffic violation. I OC the majority, of the time, and have never been questioned by LEO. I believe that unless he had reason to do so, i.e. MWAG report etc. There was no reason to check your legality. I haven't been to the Alamo, in several years, was this a Texas State Trooper, who questioned you?

I have to disagree that a MWAG report is a reason for police to question someone anymore. It is perfectly reasonable for me to carry my gun either concealed or openly without having to answer to LE. In the old days, MWAG could almost be presumed to be illegal since we couldn't legally carry. Nowadays, MWAG is legally equivalent to "man with a car." Unless you see something additional besides the mere presence of a gun or a car, there is no reasonable suspicion that a crime has been or is about to be committed. Thus, no reason for police to question me.

I would go further and say that a MWAG call, by itself is not sufficient reason for police to even respond to the call. Rather, I would hope that the person taking the call would ask further questions to determine if there actually might be a problem.

I like your analogy to a "man with a car" call. If I was to call 911 and say that I saw a man with a car, hopefully the operator would ask me why I thought that might be a problem. Is the man possibly drunk? Is he driving recklessly / aggressively? Did he smash the window and hotwire the car? Similar questions should be asked of anyone who makes a MWAG call, IMHO, unless another reason was volunteered by the caller (MWAG is threatening to kill people, etc).

[Jusme]

There is a principal, involved, and while, it's well within the officer's authority, to inquire about an LTC, to do so, just because, "he can spot someone carrying" is, in my opinion, not really justified. I have had nothing but positive interactions with LEO while carrying, and have only shown my LTC, when stopped for a traffic violation. I OC the majority, of the time, and have never been questioned by LEO. I believe that unless he had reason to do so, i.e. MWAG report etc. There was no reason to check your legality. I haven't been to the Alamo, in several years, was this a Texas State Trooper, who questioned you?

I have to disagree that a MWAG report is a reason for police to question someone anymore. It is perfectly reasonable for me to carry my gun either concealed or openly without having to answer to LE. In the old days, MWAG could almost be presumed to be illegal since we couldn't legally carry. Nowadays, MWAG is legally equivalent to "man with a car." Unless you see something additional besides the mere presence of a gun or a car, there is no reasonable suspicion that a crime has been or is about to be committed. Thus, no reason for police to question me.

I would go further and say that a MWAG call, by itself is not sufficient reason for police to even respond to the call. Rather, I would hope that the person taking the call would ask further questions to determine if there actually might be a problem.

I like your analogy to a "man with a car" call. If I was to call 911 and say that I saw a man with a car, hopefully the operator would ask me why I thought that might be a problem. Is the man possibly drunk? Is he driving recklessly / aggressively? Did he smash the window and hotwire the car? Similar questions should be asked of anyone who makes a MWAG call, IMHO, unless another reason was volunteered by the caller (MWAG is threatening to kill people, etc).

I agree that a MWAG report, does not fully justify, asking for proof of LTC. I just used it as an example. Unless there is reasonable suspicion, that a person has committed a crime, or is carrying in a place known to be off limits to LTC holders, then any other excuse, is pretty shaky My point was that simply "spotting" someone who is carrying definitely doesn't justify, being stopped and asked to provide proof of LTC.