looks like a good article to me.
But I wish he would have given more real-world examples applying the legal standards he talks about.
Just when is it "reasonable" for the cop to feel threatened by the armed citizen? Is it enough if the citizen is suspected of a minor traffic offense? What if the citizen is not a suspect, but a witness? What if the citizen is upset about something, but not making any threats against anybody? Suppose the guy is just PO'd that his local police decided to set up a random checkpoint and stop all motorists and demand to see their papers and shine flashlights through all the windows to visually inspect the passenger are inside each vehicle? Is that enough to disarm the citizen for the duration of the encounter?
Not a lot of concrete answers here.
But I do like the part where, if the citizen does not confirm being armed and does not voluntarily stop and answer questions, the cops are supposed to let the citizen walk away.