View Full Version : Texas OC DPS Arrest
Belmont31R
09-13-13, 18:39
http://youtu.be/S8UXEFhyBz4
FWIW they do have a separate line for CHL holders at the Capitol.
Mauser KAR98K
09-13-13, 18:52
This crap is getting out of control on both sides.
What did he do wrong, aside from pushing the agenda?
Belmont31R
09-13-13, 19:03
This crap is getting out of control on both sides.
What did he do wrong, aside from pushing the agenda?
Ignorance of the law is not an excuse unless you have a badge.
Mauser KAR98K
09-13-13, 19:29
Ignorance of the law is not an excuse unless you have a badge.
Roger that.:angry:
SilverBullet432
09-13-13, 20:10
Vid taken down? Says no feed.
Belmont31R
09-13-13, 20:11
Vid taken down? Says no feed.
Works ok for me hitting my own link.
SilverBullet432
09-13-13, 20:19
Damn youtube app
Belmont31R
09-13-13, 21:24
Damn youtube app
Sorry can't test it out myself. Just did a copy paste from the link. Works on my phone which is the only online access I have.
SilverBullet432
09-13-13, 22:52
Okay i saw it, i must say, im slightly ashamed to be a texan right now.
So they arrest the guy with the black powder handgun but the guy with the AK and AR are not scrutinized because they shouldn't be.
What am I missing here?
Mauser KAR98K
09-14-13, 10:46
Watching the first vid, it appears in which the "manner" the black powder pistol was carried, which I suspect with the hammer half-cocked for safety, and DPS saw is full cocked?
Watching the first vid, it appears in which the "manner" the black powder pistol was carried, which I suspect with the hammer half-cocked for safety, and DPS saw is full cocked?
So the open carrying of 1911s are a no go in texas?:confused:
Can someone enlighten the rest of us whom reside in free states?
Why was he arrested?
Why did the guys carrying long guns not get arrested?
Is there anything in Texas law about open carry of handguns?
Why did said jackass carry a blackpowder pistol? Was it to deliberately poke said bear until he attacked?
I understand an officer making a mistake and it was easy to do in this situation, but to continue to move forward after it has been clearly shown that you are in the wrong is inexcusable. It seemed that they new they were in the wrong, but did not want to admit the mistake and moved forward with the arrest anyway.
Can someone enlighten the rest of us whom reside in free states?
Why was he arrested?
Why did the guys carrying long guns not get arrested?
Is there anything in Texas law about open carry of handguns?
Why did said jackass carry a blackpowder pistol? Was it to deliberately poke said bear until he attacked?
x2 please
There are some pretty interesting body language and verbal cues with the cops.
A silly excuse to arrest someone and ultimately a waste of time and tax dollars.
SilverBullet432
09-14-13, 17:02
Can someone enlighten the rest of us whom reside in free states?
Why was he arrested?
Why did the guys carrying long guns not get arrested?
Is there anything in Texas law about open carry of handguns?
Why did said jackass carry a blackpowder pistol? Was it to deliberately poke said bear until he attacked?
http://www.texasgunlaws.org/texas-open-carry.htm
http://www.texasgunlaws.org/texas-open-carry.htm
So the instrument he was carrying was not firearm by definition nor was he carrying said instrument in manner that could be perceived to have been causing alarm, unless there is something more we don't know about.
Soooo a waste of time.. :rolleyes:
SilverBullet432
09-14-13, 17:27
meh, those cops where being pricks, why?
1.most likely they felt like badasses and knew they can get away with harrasing someone.
2. theyre anti gun (wtf, possible? :confused: ) cops.
3. they dont know the law.
4. the guy might have gave them lip, thus pissing them off and detaining him for "reasonable suspicion".
Moose-Knuckle
09-14-13, 18:56
I don't know the back story on this, so if you do help me out.
It appears this guy with the black powder pistol is playing the role of the an open carry "activist". A whole crowd around him with cameras at the ready, not just cell phone cams. Looks like the whole thing was done on purpose?
Whiskey_Bravo
09-14-13, 19:01
You can open carry a rifle but not a pistol here in Texas. The officer was in the wrong as the black powder revolver isn't considered handgun. After he was shown the exact wording of the law he still arrested the guy.
You can open carry a rifle but not a pistol here in Texas. The officer was in the wrong as the black powder revolver isn't considered handgun. After he was shown the exact wording of the law he still arrested the guy.
And does anyone in power think that is in the least bit stupid? The non OC'ing of pistols that is.
Unless you happen to be a badass firearms expect and can eyeball a gun from a mile away, would you know what this was? I sure as hell can't tell it's a black powder revolver from a standard revolver. How would you expect the LEOs to positively ID it just from looking at it holstered up? I don't believe this is the gun the guy had in the video but I would rather err on the side of caution and detain him.
If this happened where I live we'd have to confer with the DA's office anyway after a thorough examination of the gun. He'd be cut loose once it was discovered to be a black powder gun. But in other counties it can be treated as one of those "you can beat the rap but you can't beat the ride" type arrests.
http://media.midwayusa.com/productimages/880x660/primary/122/122203.jpg
MountainRaven
09-14-13, 20:47
All that I'm going to say in defense of the police is that it is pretty easy and fairly straightforward to convert most ball-and-cap revolvers to fire centerfire cartridges without substantially altering (and in many cases without even making any permanent alterations to) the revolver in question. To say nothing of the availability of reproductions of historical ball-and-cap-converted-to-metallic-self-contained-cartridge revolvers that are now available on the market.
Of course, they probably don't know any of that.
thopkins22
09-14-13, 21:03
The case will probably be dismissed before any precedent is created supposing that he was cooperative and the code does in fact exempt black powder. Similar things have happened to guys carrying "illegal knives" before much of the illegal knife laws were changed.
Per the code CHL holders are exempt(maybe), but it's a dangerous game to play.
Certainly the video camera operators were antagonizing them...didn't seem to come to a head either way though.
Why did the guys carrying long guns not get arrested?
Long guns are the only firearms in TX that can be carried open. The squabble seemed to be a difference of opinion on whether or not black powder firearms are considered firearms under TX code...if not then it's not actually a handgun under the law. He seemed to be carrying it for this reason...and he was probably legal in doing so under the law as it's pretty clearly written. I doubt anything goes to trial, it'll be a case of beating the case but not the ride. No doubt in a few months his lawyer will return with a form that the DA dropped the charges, "in the interest of justice."
We shall see I suppose.
SilverBullet432
09-14-13, 21:19
The case will probably be dismissed before any precedent is created supposing that he was cooperative and the code does in fact exempt black powder. Similar things have happened to guys carrying "illegal knives" before much of the illegal knife laws were changed.
Per the code CHL holders are exempt(maybe), but it's a dangerous game to play.
Certainly the video camera operators were antagonizing them...didn't seem to come to a head either way though.
Us texans are allowed to own switchblades now :)
thopkins22
09-14-13, 21:21
Us texans are allowed to own switchblades now :)
Yeah but they can't be double edged...then they're also daggers which are still illegal.
Just bought an OTF auto today in celebration of the new law.
SilverBullet432
09-14-13, 21:29
I want a benchmade auto, can we buy them online?
I want a benchmade auto, can we buy them online?
They've always been available online even before Sept 1. Some required credentials while others didn't care and left it up to the end user to be aware of local laws.
They've always been available online even before Sept 1. Some required credentials while others didn't care and left it up to the end user to be aware of local laws.
Any links to those who don't care? I haven't found any lol
Bladehq is one of the places. I haven't purchased from them in a long time though.
thopkins22
09-14-13, 22:56
I'm actually not sure how some dealers get around the federal laws on shipping switchblades, unless they just don't care(or their lawyers have determined "it doesn't substantially effect interstate commerce." I think you need to find a place in TX so as to not run afoul of the Federal law.
I think I'd just go face to face with a dealer.... Beckwith's Blades carries autos and they're in TX.
BladeHQ does it, but I'm not sure if they still do. They do have better prices though.
I'm not in Texas but was just curious. Trying to find stuff like that in my neck of the woods is an exercise in futility.
I'm not in Texas but was just curious. Trying to find stuff like that in my neck of the woods is an exercise in futility.
Just add to cart and find out. ;)
The law as it read says that the must be shipped via common carrier. The more interesting part is that they are generally prohibited unless you are a member of the Armed Forces or have one arm.
I'm actually not sure how some dealers get around the federal laws on shipping switchblades, unless they just don't care(or their lawyers have determined "it doesn't substantially effect interstate commerce." I think you need to find a place in TX so as to not run afoul of the Federal law.
I think I'd just go face to face with a dealer.... Beckwith's Blades carries autos and they're in TX.
BladeHQ does it, but I'm not sure if they still do. They do have better prices though.
I understand about the long gun part of the law, which is why I asked. It seems odd that they targeted this guy when others were carrying long guns.
Was this guy trying to make a point or did he bait them by carrying a pre-1899 pistol?
It seems like the legislature should focus more on the part of the law which revolves around carrying the firearm in such a way as to arouse people or cause worry. That seems very subjective and opens the way for abuse.
The case will probably be dismissed before any precedent is created supposing that he was cooperative and the code does in fact exempt black powder. Similar things have happened to guys carrying "illegal knives" before much of the illegal knife laws were changed.
Per the code CHL holders are exempt(maybe), but it's a dangerous game to play.
Certainly the video camera operators were antagonizing them...didn't seem to come to a head either way though.
Long guns are the only firearms in TX that can be carried open. The squabble seemed to be a difference of opinion on whether or not black powder firearms are considered firearms under TX code...if not then it's not actually a handgun under the law. He seemed to be carrying it for this reason...and he was probably legal in doing so under the law as it's pretty clearly written. I doubt anything goes to trial, it'll be a case of beating the case but not the ride. No doubt in a few months his lawyer will return with a form that the DA dropped the charges, "in the interest of justice."
We shall see I suppose.
thopkins22
09-15-13, 00:08
The law as it read says that the must be shipped via common carrier. The more interesting part is that they are generally prohibited unless you are a member of the Armed Forces or have one arm.
It was my understanding that this was a prohibition on federal property, Indian reservations, and territories such as Guam, and that those were the exemptions.
I just re-read something and you are probably right. The part I was having issue or trouble with was the "introducing such knife into interstate commerce". Even if it is shipped from say Oregon to Texas via Fedex it is still introduced into interstate commerce. Or so says the shithouse lawyer inside of me.
It was my understanding that this was a prohibition on federal property, Indian reservations, and territories such as Guam, and that those were the exemptions.
I just re-read something and you are probably right. The part I was having issue or trouble with was the "introducing such knife into interstate commerce". Even if it is shipped from say Oregon to Texas via Fedex it is still introduced into interstate commerce. Or so says the shithouse lawyer inside of me.
The stupidity of such restrictions/regulations never ceases to amaze me.. The most advanced and intelligent lifeforms on the planet and yet we still saddle ourselves with this nonsense..
... rant over..
Nightvisionary
09-15-13, 01:45
Texas is not the great bastion of freedom many think it to be.
Nightvisionary
09-15-13, 01:47
Unless you happen to be a badass firearms expect and can eyeball a gun from a mile away, would you know what this was? I sure as hell can't tell it's a black powder revolver from a standard revolver. How would you expect the LEOs to positively ID it just from looking at it holstered up? I don't believe this is the gun the guy had in the video but I would rather err on the side of caution and detain him.
If this happened where I live we'd have to confer with the DA's office anyway after a thorough examination of the gun. He'd be cut loose once it was discovered to be a black powder gun. But in other counties it can be treated as one of those "you can beat the rap but you can't beat the ride" type arrests.
http://media.midwayusa.com/productimages/880x660/primary/122/122203.jpg
I can tell at a half second glance that is a black powder firearm. It has nipples.
Nightvisionary
09-15-13, 01:55
I understand about the long gun part of the law, which is why I asked. It seems odd that they targeted this guy when others were carrying long guns.
Was this guy trying to make a point or did he bait them by carrying a pre-1899 pistol?
It seems like the legislature should focus more on the part of the law which revolves around carrying the firearm in such a way as to arouse people or cause worry. That seems very subjective and opens the way for abuse.
If we enact laws based on what arouses, worries, or offends some people we may as well just burn the Constitution right now.
Tell that to a college graduate police officer with zero firearms before the academy handling that type of scenario. Some can't tell the difference between a clip and a mag. I guarantee you 99.9% of the LEOs will see that as a revolver before taking a detailed look.
I don't see how this type of demonstration is beneficial to the cause. Stirring things up is not one of them. I have a feeling one day black powder handguns will be made illegal as well because of these shenanigans. There's a proper way of education.
If we enact laws based on what arouses, worries, or offends some people we may as well just burn the Constitution right now.
Absolutely! Freedom is a tough pill to swallow.
We have been doing it for a long time. I am specifically talking about fixing the wording of the law that allows for such an arrest to be made according to how it is now.
Long guns (rifles / shotguns) do not have to be concealed, but must be carried in a manner not calculated to cause alarm, and do not require a license.
If we enact laws based on what arouses, worries, or offends some people we may as well just burn the Constitution right now.
Nightvisionary
09-15-13, 03:08
Tell that to a college graduate police officer with zero firearms before the academy handling that type of scenario. Some can't tell the difference between a clip and a mag. I guarantee you 99.9% of the LEOs will see that as a revolver before taking a detailed look.
I don't see how this type of demonstration is beneficial to the cause. Stirring things up is not one of them. I have a feeling one day black powder handguns will be made illegal as well because of these shenanigans. There's a proper way of education.
So should police officer's also be excused when they arrest people for legally possessing oregano, powdered sugar, rock candy, and air soft pistols? Or do we expect them to be intelligent, use some common sense, and practice some police investigative techniques? All of the good police officers I ever worked with carried a pocket copy of the state criminal statutes just in case they ran into situations like this. I know first hand of an incident a few years ago where an officer made a traffic stop on a person who had an FAL rifle in the back of his car. For those not familiar, many FAL's have 3 position selectors. This is completely legal and does not make the rifle a machine gun. The citizen (with zero criminnal history) explained this. It made sense to the officer but he personally with his limited knowledge base was unable to confirm it. So what he did was seize the rifle then cite in lieu for possession of a machine gun. The next day he was able to have a range instructor who also built FAL's confirm it was semi-auto only. This was much less cut and dry situation than legal possession of black powder pistol yet the officer used some common sense and officer discretion.
So what then is the "Proper" way to educate? Stirring things up ins't the problem. We have gotten to this point because 2nd amendment constitutionalist have not stirred things up enough. The left has stirred things up for 45 years and has been quite successful. If you are against stirring things up just turn em in now because you have already given up.
Nightvisionary
09-15-13, 03:10
We have been doing it for a long time. I am specifically talking about fixing the wording of the law that allows for such an arrest to be made according to how it is now.
Long guns (rifles / shotguns) do not have to be concealed, but must be carried in a manner not calculated to cause alarm, and do not require a license.
What does that even mean:confused: For some busybodies there mere possibility of the existance of any firearm within a 100 mile radius will cause alrm.
So should police officer's also be excused when they arrest people for legally possessing oregano, powdered sugar, rock candy, and air soft pistols? Or do we expect them to be intelligent, use some common sense, and practice some police investigative techniques? All of the good police officers I ever worked with carried a pocket copy of the state criminal statutes just in case they ran into situations like this.
I think it stands to reason in LE work and every other level of professional employment there is the standard which is representative of the lowest common denominator needed to function and there are those individuals who choose to meet, exceed, and excel at their duties by their own volition..I'm preaching to the choir I know.
Just clarify- in some jurisdictions (I don't know about all) possessing oregano, powdered sugar, etc... with the intent to sell it as a narcotic is an arrestable offense.
I don't someone is going to be arrested for buying and transporting those items unless the intent is to use it for unlawful purposes.
As for your other points, I think some of it has to do with how YOU interact with the officer. Having cameras rolling and people screaming who's the NAZI in charge, etc... is not going to get you any friends.
If I even thought I was going to be arrested for some perceived firearms offense and I was in a reasonable state, I would be very calm about explaining what is/ isn't and I would probably be asking for a supervisor.
So should police officer's also be excused when they arrest people for legally possessing oregano, powdered sugar, rock candy, and air soft pistols? Or do we expect them to be intelligent, use some common sense, and practice some police investigative techniques? All of the good police officers I ever worked with carried a pocket copy of the state criminal statutes just in case they ran into situations like this. I know first hand of an incident a few years ago where an officer made a traffic stop on a person who had an FAL rifle in the back of his car. For those not familiar, many FAL's have 3 position selectors. This is completely legal and does not make the rifle a machine gun. The citizen (with zero criminnal history) explained this. It made sense to the officer but he personally with his limited knowledge base was unable to confirm it. So what he did was seize the rifle then cite in lieu for possession of a machine gun. The next day he was able to have a range instructor who also built FAL's confirm it was semi-auto only. This was much less cut and dry situation than legal possession of black powder pistol yet the officer used some common sense and officer discretion.
So what then is the "Proper" way to educate? Stirring things up ins't the problem. We have gotten to this point because 2nd amendment constitutionalist have not stirred things up enough. The left has stirred things up for 45 years and has been quite successful. If you are against stirring things up just turn em in now because you have already given up.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.