Part of my reason for purchasing S&W was their partnership with the LE community so want to tap into that today. Am I mis-reading things or do you experience the distrust? What is driving the divide? Should I be more careful/cautious? Is the LE community supportive of law-abiding people arming themselves?
In my experience, non-police gun carriers often expect law enforcement to assume they're "the good guys" because they look a certain way, act respectful and complied with the law's very low standards to obtain a CPL. From the law enforcement officer's perspective, or from THIS law enforcement officer's perspective, the way you look means nothing, the way you initially act means nothing and the fact that you have a CPL means nothing at the side of the road at 3:00am. Some people seem to expect a friendly conversation about guns and a break on a speeding ticket when they inform the officer they have a custom Kimber and a CPL. Some of the most polite people I ever dealt with were penitentiary veterans of violent crimes. They learn to act this way and they cultivate this persona as a way to manipulate the unwary.
In my line of work, guns are tools, not a conversation starter on a traffic stop. I make no assumptions about the people I deal with at work based on how they look, what they're wearing or the fact that they have a CPL. It has nothing to do with "trust". Trust is something you "develop". Any officer who "trusts" someone they just met while taking care of business on the job is a fool. While I don't assume someone is a criminal because they're armed, I certainly don't assume they're a good guy either. In fact, the only assumption I make is that they have a gun and it's up to them whether they shoot me or not. It's up to me to figure out what their intentions are before they do.
There's no big deal with a "lack of trust" when there's no basis for trust to begin with. Too many gun carriers mistake impersonal but professional interaction with some sort of disdain or rudeness.
While there are plenty of cop haters on gun board and plenty of arrogant cops who seem to think only they should be allowed to carry guns, I think there are more cop haters, per capita, than I think there are cops who hold legal gun carriers in contempt.
I don't care one way or the other if people choose to carry guns. It's their right and I support that right, but the fact that someone is legally armed never influenced my decision to arrest or ticket or to not arrest or ticket anymore than the color of their eyes.
Another thing....Imagine this: You're an appliance repair man who is dispatched by radio. You get 30 minutes for lunch. You can count on getting another call as soon as you say "clear from lunch" on your radio. Try to imagine how annoying it would be to have someone expect you to carry on a 20 minute conversation about the multi tool you have in a holster strapped to your belt. Do you have any idea how hard it is to "be nice" to someone like that for 20 minutes, and not appear to be rude in getting the message across that you don't want to be their friend and talk about multi tools and hang out with them? Some people think that 30 minutes of companionship at lunch time comes with the taxes they pay for police service. Others seem to think that they're part of the police fraternity because they have a CPL. They're not. In general, being the police is about .2% gun-related. In the ghetto, it might be about 1 or 2% gun-related.
Most LEO do not like the CCW Laws. The reason is there are too many legal guns on the street, in the hands of the drunk or enraged people.
I disagree (27 years on). Most cops I know have no problem with Michigan's "shall issue" law or the CPL law in general. In fact, I'd rather have someone carry concealed than open, and open carry has always been legal in MI. My position has nothing to do with the fact that they may prevent crimes in progress or be a deterrent, but simply is based on the fact that I believe it's their right to carry. Over the years, I've probably had as many problems, per capita, with armed off-duty cops doing stupid things with guns than legally-armed non-cops. The young guys don't seem to hang out like the guys did in the "old days". I guess they're at home playing video games or something....Or maybe at the gym working out......But over the years I learned it would be best to avoid the cop bars on paynights. Not that I avoided them much, I just learned it would be best.....
Playing Devil's advocate, the argument would be LEO's run your tag, run your DL, your vin# sometimes, so what's the difference? Guns are a very common stolen item, sometimes simple stop and talks yield big arrests.
Legally, LEO's can stop you, pat you down, look in your car for plain view items and even cuff you for officer safety. That being the case SCOTUS certainly would allow running your gun.
Actually, I think that's sort of a gray area. You can run a car's plate because it's open to public view. In order to run a number on a handgun, you have to seize something that wasn't initially in plain sight. I don't know that there has been much case law that says you can seize someone's gun just because they're armed. The standard for patting someone down for weapons is a reasonable belief that they're armed AND potentially dangerous, not just "armed". There is no "officer safety" exception to the search warrant rule. Just because someone is armed, doesn't NECESSARILY mean it's reasonable to believe they're dangerous. (Would you run up and pat down every plain clothes Secret Service guy you see when the president's in town? He's armed but do you have a reasonable belief that he's dangerous?). Any cop worth his salt could probably articulate reasonable suspicion for a pat-down of an armed guy at the side of the road at 3:00am, but there is no law that says you get a free pass for "officer safety". There has to be a reasonable belief that the person is armed and potentially dangerous for a Terry search.
I politely informed him that nowhere in the state laws does it say I can't. All I got was a hurumph!
