Honestly, it's a massive 2nd Amendment loophole that's begging for a case to be made.
If you have a legal right to bear arms, and you're walking around armed with a legal weapon, the police should be be permitted to take issue with that. They literally should not be allowed to factor that into their assessment as to whether you pose a threat. Because you have the right to have that weapon.
Any officer taking a hostile stance at spotting or being told about a weapon thus poses an immediate and lethal threat to the gun owner, who has done nothing to warrant the officer's reaction, and that should permit them to use deadly force against that officer to defend themselves. Legally.
And if that goes to court, the police department is gonna end up paying for pain and suffering for the shooter, who's not done anything objectionable.
Does that make sense to people? Because that's what the 2nd Amendment should mean. It can't be a "right" if the police can straight up kill you for making use of it.