[duckman1911]

Originally Posted by MathGeek

Having legally carried for many years some close relatives and I have had a number of occasions for interactions with law enforcement while armed. Most have been positive with good LEOs who appreciated and were committed to honoring RKBA with a few notable exceptions.

The exceptions tend to occur when the government employee does not really completely trust citizens with guns or some other factor tips the balance from what should be a respectful interaction into something less positive. As far as we can tell here are some things that tip interactions to the negative:

1. The gov't employee just does not trust citizens, even law abiding citizens, with guns.

Sometimes this is less obvious until they encounter a citizen with a configuration of legal guns of which they are more suspicious, such as an AR style. We've encountered it most often when the second lawfully carried pistol brings the grief. Hint: Answering the question, "Why do you need two guns?" with "For the same reason you do." Is not always the best plan.

2. The gov't employee or a buddy has an agenda.

A close family member started a new gun range near some land owned by the family of a local LEO who perceived their property values to be significantly decreased. Everything was legal, but the neighbors set out to harass him in person after their efforts with the zoning board and the local prosecutor failed.

3. Some member of the community has made an exaggerated report.

It is unclear why gov't employees place so much more trust in those making anonymous reports than in property owners, drivers, and CHL holders even after they know the property owner, driver, and/or CHL holder is law abiding.

All in all, our experience is that gov't employees more accustomed to rural areas are more comfortable with guns and less likely to infer that a report of a "man with a gun" or "shots fired" means that some kind of criminal activity is occurring. Wildlife officers tend to be the best, followed by deputies of rural agencies. The closer you get to urban areas, the worse it gets.

Other than long hair, lots of guns, and (sometimes) a hispanic appearance, our family does not tend to have actions or appearances that tend to suggest drug use or other criminal activities, so I'm not sure how tatoos, bling, a meth head appearance, slurred speech, or simply being black would further complicate interactions with law enforcement while armed.

Of all of the LE experiences I've had while armed only one was less than pleasant. It was right after Sandy Hook. Wass in the AT&T store to get a new phone. Been in there for ten minutes or so open carrying a full size 45. Guy walks in and stands beside wearing normal clothes. Then he asks what department I'm with. Told him I'm not LE. Then he asks if I have a cc permit. Told him open carry was legal so I didn't need a permit. He then pulls out a badge and starts telling me I'm wrong. We had a small discussion in which he said he was gona make a phone call (and did) so he could get a unit there. I agreed to put my gun in the truck. He made the call then after he came back in. He told me after Sandy Hook everyone is nervous. No unit showed up and I over heard his phone call. Whoever he called set him straight on the law but he never apologized or admitted he was wrong.