Understanding Law Enforcement Tactics in Open Carry States

In recent years, open carry laws have become a point of interest across various U.S. states, particularly in states like Texas. When Texas first allowed licensed open carry, the issue of police identification of potential threats was briefly a hot topic. Police officers often face the challenge of determining whether a person with a visibly carried firearm poses a genuine threat or not.

Initial Police Tactics: Holsters, Holsters, and Holsters

Years ago, a veteran police officer penned an article for a police trade magazine suggesting a straightforward method for identifying good guys vs. bad guys. He proposed that if a firearm was in a holster, the person was likely not a threat, while a gun placed directly into the waistband indicated a more dangerous individual. This approach was based on a simple assumption: a holster implies a measured approach, and a non-holster gun suggests a more impulsive or threatening behavior.

That being said, the practical application of these tactics becomes problematic. In a state like Colorado, for instance, the police policies can sometimes lead to serious consequences. A neighbor reported a man seen carrying a machine gun near his house, but 911 dispatchers instructed that police would only be dispatched if this individual was seen actively threatening someone. Tragically, this man went on to commit a senseless shooting, highlighting the risks of such policies.

Communication and Training: The Reality Behind the Scenes

Those who have become police officers after finishing college often share that the scenes from movies and TV shows are quite accurate. If a person has a gun in plain sight but not holstered, the immediate reaction from the police is to draw their weapon. This quick response is not based on personal biases but rather on well-defined training and protocols.

The use of a dictionary is often not necessary for defining terms like "carrying" and "brandishing," as these concepts can be easily understood through basic training and experience. Most police officers know that "carrying" a firearm in a holster is very different from "brandishing" it. The former is a legal act when the firearm is securely held, while the latter is a potential threat to public safety.

Pragmatic Approaches Based on Logic and Reason

Using logic and reason, officers can easily determine the level of threat a person poses. If a person is acting normally and the firearm is holstered, they are not a threat. However, the moment a firearm is taken from a holster or becomes visible, the person is immediately perceived as a potential threat.

In cases where an individual is redrawing their weapon (taking the gun from a holster), this is a critical moment for the police. The complete act of drawing the weapon is a clear sign of potential aggression, especially if the person does not have a valid reason (such as defending themselves against an immediate threat).

Challenges and Ethical Considerations

The challenge of differentiating between a threat and someone simply carrying a firearm legally is an ongoing issue. It's important to recognize that some individuals may carry guns for defensive reasons or due to their jobs (e.g., security personnel). Ethical considerations come into play when deciding whether to use force or escalate a situation.

The core principle in the police training is the safety of the public. If there is any doubt, it's better to err on the side of caution. This philosophy helps to ensure that potentially dangerous situations are handled appropriately without making presumptions based on appearance or race.

Conclusion

The issue of law enforcement tactics and open carry laws remains complex. While training and procedures provide a framework for police officers, the underlying challenges require ongoing dialogue and improvement. It's essential for both law enforcement and the public to understand these principles to foster safer, more informed interactions in open carry states.