A DISCLAIMER

[Venator]

imported post

Liko81 wrote:

Venator wrote:

Disregard. This person is against or doesn't understand the open carry movement. LEO's can arrest you for ANYTHING, the reality is they usually don't arrest youfor the lawful open carry of a handgun. Exceptions yes, but for the thousands of hour a day that people open carry in this country, it's a small risk.

By all means if you can't handle the responsibility of exercising a RIGHT then don't, but don't repeat the same old propaganda that is so easily proved wrong.

:quirkyThere is a difference between choosing to exercise a right and having to defend it. The majority of Americans have neverserved in the military; are you saying thoseAmericans, who are unwilling or unable to volunteer to stand up and defend the Constitution,somehow don't deserve the rights afforded them? That's the whole reason a warrior chooses to fight; so that those behind him can go on with their lives.

Perhaps if I lay out what prompted this thread, it will explain my position. I got a rude awakening when shown the docket for Garland Municipal Court, showingseveral pending cases for"unlawful carry of a weapon".Short background; it is legal in Texas to conceal a handgun without a permit while in your vehicle; the statute covering UCW specifically excludes that situation. Garland doesn't give a flying flip and is pressing charges against people they catch with a gun in their glovebox and no CHL. I've been concealing in my car since I was shown the statute, and drive through Garland on a regular basis. :shock:Garland probably knows it's totally illegal. Why do they do it? Because even though they can't make the charge stick, they can use the opportunity to misinform and intimidate until they get their way in their fair city.

I continue to conceal a handgun in my car and drive through Garland, but had I not known Garland was bucking the State I would have been ill-prepared to confront the officer on the issue had I been pulled over for something minor. I'd have played the good CHL applicant, notified the officer that I was concealing, but lacking the plastic, the next thing I'd knowI wouldbe wearing the silver bracelets, hiring a lawyer, and out thousands of dollars for my criminal defense. In short, a willing exerciser of 2A rights turned into an unwilling defender of same.

Now that I knowwhat they're trying to do,what the Garland PD doesn't know won't hurt them, or me,till my plastic is in hand. My handgun is concealed in a place other than where I keep my insurance papers and where I'm not likely to need to reach for any purpose whatsoever during a stop. OTOH, I know what I'm getting into, and should I be pulled over for 5 miles over on 635 (which any Dallasite knows is a total BS stop) and being arrested because they found the gun, I will wholeheartedly defend my actions and the carry laws in general. Can't sayI didn't ask for it.

Scenarios like this happen every day across this country; that's why I posted this, capped the title, and bolded the main point. People need to know, not just State law, but local ordinance whether technically enforceable or not, and their own LEA's policy of education and enforcement (or counter-enforcement) of the law.

Do I smell a lawsuit agaist the Garland PD? Seems ripe for one.

 

[Liko81]

imported post

Venator wrote:

Do I smell a lawsuit agaist the Garland PD? Seems ripe for one.

Well sure, but who do you want as the plaintiff? A guy who knows he's right and the Garland PD is wrong, knew it before he was stopped, can quote chapter and verse to back himself up, and is willing to battle in court to prove it? Or do you want someone who was told he could do it by a friend, then does it and gets arrested, misinformed, and intimidated until he just wants the whole thing behind him? You might be able to make the case that the second guy is the more damaged and therefore the one, if shown he can get it all back with interest, who would be more able to stick it to City Hall, but I personally would pick the guy who's gung-ho about it from the beginning even if hiscompensatory damages, andthus punitive damages, are less.

That's my point; I never said "don't open carry cause you could be arrested". I said "make sure you know your own situation,the chances of you taking a ride based on your local LEOs, andyour willingness and ability to take the ride if it comes to that, before you decide to OC". Yes, it's black and white on paper, but justice is blind.