I'll jump in here. The encounter was consensual so how about this. I see a guy in the gas station with a gun poking out of his waistband. I can engage him in a conversation. How about if I just asked him if he had a permit. His reply could determine if this consensual encounter turns into something else. If he smiles and says yes...question answered. If he hesitates, or otherwise acts like he is trying to think of something to say, maybe I need to see the LTCH.
I can see how, by phrasing it in "friendly" terms, it doesn't come across as a threat.
In another scenario though this could be seen as a definite problem, at least to me.
Let's say a cop sees a guy in a car sitting in a car in a parking lot but something just doesn't "feel" right (= I see a guy in the gas station with a gun poking out of his waistband). He can walk up to him & engage him in conversation (= During the course of the stop I can engage him in a conversation.) He just asks him if he can search the vehicle (= How about if I just asked him if he had a permit.). His reply could determine if this consensual encounter turns into something else. If the guy smiles and says yes...question answered. If he hesitates, or otherwise acts like he is trying to think of something to say, maybe the cop needs to see the search the vehicle because he is acting like he 'has something to hide'.
This sounds like a fishing expedition to me in both scenarios. Just because someone asserts their rights by denying the officers request to search his vehicle does not equal probable cause to search the vehicle anyway. If so then throw away the 4A as it's useless.
I think it has been stated here also that the mere act of carrying a gun by itself is not PC to think a crime is being commited. Wasn't everybody up in arms (pun intended) over the sherrif in Wisconsin stating that even though it is legal to OC that he would make it painful for anybody OCing in his jurisdiction? Isn't this the exact same thing?
Asking the right questions and measuring the responses will probably go farther in finding bad guys as well as minimize possible complaints.
I'm sure there isn't a single person alive that hasn't done something, anything, that could get them in legal trouble. Wouldn't it be safe to say that if the officer (or you) approached ANY person asking the right questions would eventually lead to an investigatory stop & potential charges being filed? This is not how our system of government is supposed to work. You're supposed to have PC or at least articulable suspicion (or whatever the phrase is - which to me even that isn't enough to possibly infringe rights but alas the SCOTUS doesn't agree with me) BEFORE stopping someone.