That's true, but he did, and at the end of the day someone lawfully exercising their right to open carry being questioned as suspicious is a right of the arresting officer. A police officer has every right to question and examine the paperwork of someone carrying, concealed or
openly, and the only safe way to do that does involve the officer disarming them before they check the paperwork.
If officers never questioned the papers and permits of people who carried, how would you ever catch someone who was not legitimately carrying a weapon with proper authorization until they actual start to commit a crime? The papers and permits are essentially useless if nobody ever asks for them. All that essentially does is add an extra charge to tack onto an offense after
it is carried out.
If the officer even has a hunch
that someone is carrying without a permit to carry, they have every right to demand that proof, and upon that proof being furnished, to apologize and let the civilian go free, no harm, no foul, to either party. Everyone acts like handcuffs automatically mean being under arrest. To a police officer, handcuffs are seen as a safety tool that are frequently used when questioning someone as insurance
that they don't take any steps to harm the officer, especially while the officer is going over paperwork or doing something else that requires their attention to be elsewhere. So the situation itself is completely justified, the way it was handled was not
The AR-15 is responsible for 95% of all deaths each year. The rest of the deaths are from obesity and drone strikes.