Originally Posted by redbaron007
But even in an advisory capacity, could not those LEA choose to follow his advisory...especially if they are somewhat anti-gun? It may not provide 100% cover, but through litigation, they could say they were following the advice of the AG; thus potentially releasing them from violating ones right?
IMHO, problem is, if the case is upheld, it creates bad case law. Hence, why the Florida Open Carry filed their brief.
It reminds me of the cliche': Guilty till proven innocent.
This brings back another conversation recently discussed. I know a LEO in my area who makes it a point to tell people 'if you don't tell my you have a firearm concealed; you will spend time in cuffs and the back seat/station until "I" figure it out. It could take hours.' Our state is not required disclosure state.
And... JMHO... what is wrong with simply telling the officer " I have a concealed handgun and a permit, and how do you wish me to procede?"... whether your state law requires it or not? It does prevent a sudden surprise to the LEO (when I was in that line of work we figured "The best surprise was no surprise.") and seems like a reasonable thing to do if you are facing a LEO.
Do that, and the incident RE: concealed handgun is over.
Why not simply do that? It certainly is a lot easier than being a totally assertive jerk & and a rampaging fool who wishes to argue for the sake of making a point on YouTube (which, a careful observer might rename the Stupid/Tube). Arguing about a concealed gun with a LEO in a street interview is about as STUPID as you can get! Just tell them up front, and the problem is solved.