Citizen...why would you even "Escalate" a perfectly fine situation by "politely refused consent to the encounter."
A number of reasons. These aren't meant to be argumentative. I'm nottrying to change your view, nor seeking agreement. Just giving you my reasoning. Take it for what its worth.
Read it all the way through before deciding to comment. The actual datum upon which it all turns for the OP's encounter is near the bottom.
Constitutional rights are under assault in this wonderfulcountry. I'm not now talking only about 2A.
Not enough people are doing something about it.
I can do something about it. Right where the rubber meets the road. Right where manypeople interact with government--police encounters.
One of my biggest reasons for OC is exercising my First Amendment free speech right toexpand support andreduce counter-opinion of the2ndAmendment. (If burning the American flag is protected speech,openly carrying a gun in a peaceable manner had goddam betternot be a problem.)
Policehave been and still can beacounter-effortagainst my OC. This is more than just an average counter effort. They are actual agents of government. Because of the circumstances surrounding their agency, they require more than common knowledge and more effort to push back against.
Ihave first hand experience with twopolice encounters where police twisted orpushed on my rights because of my lawfully carried handgun.
Ihave first hand experience with police lying to protectthemselves, and to protect their fellow officers.
I've first hand experience with policedepartments not doing much officially to take responsibility for theerrors of their officers.
My first hand experiences give me total certainty that too many policehave an unacceptable level of professionalism.
Good police oweus thanks for helpingidentify thequestionable ones. We're helping them police their own ranks.
Police, like anybody else, like to push the line. Eventually the line gets moved and the new locationbecomes accepted. Demanding full observance of the finest points of2nd and 4th Amendment rights draws the line farther from the goal I'm defending. I'd rather they try to move it from 4th and 15.
In the OP, theofficer is the one escalating. The officer is entirelyable to observe from a distance to first decide if he really does needtobother the citizen. Instead he decides to escalate from mere observation to contact. Certainly we ascitizen's don't owe it to him or society togrant him a convenience pass, letting himfirstcontact usto avoid the inconvenience of standing there andobserving at length for signsgiving rise toreasonable suspicion.A lawfully carried handgun is not alone reasonable suspicion.
If hefully respected both the 2nd Amendment and the citizen's quietenjoyment of the newspaper and the evening, he would not have inserted himself into it for so little reason.In the OP, the poster was being investigated. It wasn't a public relations chat. Neither was it a "Hey, cool, what are you carrying?" It was an investigation. Absent something else, that cop justproved he thinksthat a lawfully OC'd firearm is suspicious.Wrong attitude. Unacceptable attitude.
Now, having decided that it is an unacceptable attitude, I'm going to do something about it.
I urgeeveryoneelse to do so also. Set the standard high, and you'll get higher standards.