"The clerk was carrying concealed, which in that state is a FELONY without a permit. I.e., probable cause of a crime in progress. The cop saw the clerk carrying a concealed pistol - there's the probable cause of a crime in progress. The cop simply snatched the pistol from his belt (Mexican carry), and then checked to see whether the felon in question had a permit (he did not). The result was a valid arrest."
Cart/Horse. IMO, there was no probable cause WHEN he took the action of disarming the clerk. It would have been reasonable for the cop to ask to see the clerk's permit upon seeing that he was carrying concealed (as much as I see needing permits to carry concealed as anti-2A, you shouldn't need a permit by the Gov't to engage in a guaranteed right). WHEN the clerk could not produce the permit, THEN and only THEN does he have reasonable suspicion that a CRIME has been committed. At that point the firearm should be seized and the clerk detained and arrested. Just the mere fact that he was carrying a pistol is NOT REASONABLE suspicion of a crime, unless you are saying that it is REASONABLE for a cop to think all people who carry guns are criminals. IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING??
My reading comprehension is just fine thanks and I dare say a damned side better than yours.
A. learn the difference between probable cause and reasonable suspicion.
B he only reds reasonable suspicion to initiate a terry stop, including the seizure of possible contraband
