Ordered to ground at gunpoint for open carrying by cleveland heights ohio police - Page 7
Page 7 of 22 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 219

Thread: Ordered to ground at gunpoint for open carrying by cleveland heights ohio police

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Close to Reading, PA
    Posts
    151
    Quote Originally Posted by Invisible_Dave View Post
    Also an armed man "pacing the block" could be enough to trigger a suspicious activity complaint and a search depending on state law.
    It might trigger a suspicious activity complaint, and it would be perfectly reasonable for the police to respond and investigate. However, based on that alone, it could not legally trigger a search and/or seizure unless being armed is illegal in that particular area for some reason.

    A person on public property has every right to be there, regardless of what the police say.

  2.   
  3. Quote Originally Posted by XD-Fender View Post
    On what justification?

    Would a "black man 'pacing the block'...be enough to trigger a suspicious activity complaint and a search"?

    What about a "white man 'pacing the block'"?

    Or maybe a "man with an anti-abortion poster 'pacing the block'"?

    What about a "woman with a 'Ron Paul for President' t-shirt 'pacing the block'"?

    See the point? Why is it any more acceptable or reasonable for a law-abiding person to be stopped, searched, etc. because the right s/he is exercising is the RKBA than it is any other fundamental right?
    I'd say any of those situations would be the same. A person of any race, creed, color, political idology pacing a block could be suspicious and trigger a complaint. My response didn't mention a side arm, only the potential behavior of the OP. Throw the gun out of the equation. You are sitting on the porch enjoying an adult beverage. You see a person pacing up and back around the block. I think it is a reasonable response to be suspicious, potentionally call in suspicious activity.

    Now the police arrive. They see a man fitting the discription of someone "acting suspicious." Remember they likely have no other information at that time. As they pull up they this man has on a firearm, and is reaching into his pocket and pulling something else out and point it at them. (We of course know this to be a cell phone used to video the encounter)

    Were the officers right? I don't know. I'm trying to play devils advocate.

  4. #63
    This may not make me popular, but of course the officers were right. To my knowkedge, the NRA only recognizes one circumstance where you surrender your piece, no questions, and that is at the request of a duly-appointed Law Enforcement Officer. Every NRA class I have taken has stressed this; black, white, myob, taking a stroll, doesn't matter: if an LE requests you surrender your weapon, do as directed. Be polite, and save the Constitutional rants for the OP ED page.

    There are also certain areas illegal to carry in: Indian Reservations, Forestry Land, bars and restaurants that sell alcohol, and any place else you are requested to remove it from. If you bring a gun ion my house, you will be asked to remove it from the premises or place it in my custody while you are here. I and I alone carry a pistol in my home, and it is up to my discretion whether to enforce that or not. However, if I do, comply or leave. As far as I am concerned, refusing to disarm in my home or vehicle places me in a life-and-death situation. A twelve-year=old "Crip" wannabe tried to "make his bones (kill someone)" on me in my house one time during a neighborhood gettogether. Someone else saw him about to stab me, and dragged him away. The only way I even learned of it was that I found the knife they took from him, and, not recognizing it, asked questions until I finally got the whole story. "Don't tell Kevin" was pretty much the rule of thumb in situations like that, as most people mistook me for a "shoot first, ask questions later" type. The truth is, I have carried a pistol since age 16 (I'm 54 now) almost all the time, and, though I have had to pull it on several occassions, I have yet to find it necessary to fire. When dealing with LE, my SOP is to tell them I am carrying and ask if they would prefer to hold it during our encounter. Generaslly, they take it, run the numbers and me, and return it, often in the same Condition One (loaded, cocked, and locked) as I surrendered it in.

    Word travels like lightening in the LE field, and more often than not, the officer tells me just to keep it holstered for the time being. Granted, one group of LEOs confiscated my .40 Taurus; I had to go to court to get it back, and when I did, they had broken the firing pin. But there were six of them and one of me, and the law was on their side (sic). Perhaps things did not go as they should have that day, but I am alive and well with my gun rights intact; that says something to me about the wisdom of politely complying. I know for a fact these officers, with whom I had had repeated encounteres with, akin to a "turf war", had no reservations about blowing me away. They tried everything short of planting evidence to get me on a felony charge, and when it became evident that was not going to happen, they tried to provoke me into a lopsided gun battle. I spent a night in jail on some trumped-up charge, which was dismissed immediately next morning, and am still around to tell of it. If a cop requests you to surrender your firearm, shut up and follow directions. My copy of the Constitution is not bullet-proof. screrw your rights; stay alive! Thank you.

    KBV

  5. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by kbv View Post
    ... screw your rights; stay alive! Thank you.KBV
    Your entire rant is well summed up by your final statement. You would fit right in in Nazi Germany, The U.S.S.R., or N.Y.C.
    The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first. - Thomas Jefferson

  6. #65
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    44
    Quote Originally Posted by kbv View Post
    [O]f course the officers were right.
    How so? What legal basis? Does the Constitution mean nothing? Would they have been "right" if, instead of exercising his 2A right, he was exercising his 1A right and carrying a sign protesting abortions or the Obama health plan, and they took away his sign?

    Quote Originally Posted by kbv View Post
    To my knowkedge, the NRA only recognizes one circumstance where you surrender your piece, no questions, and that is at the request of a duly-appointed Law Enforcement Officer. Every NRA class I have taken has stressed this; black, white, myob, taking a stroll, doesn't matter: if an LE requests you surrender your weapon, do as directed. Be polite, and save the Constitutional rants for the OP ED page.
    You are confusing "doing the smart thing" with what is "right"--of course the "smart" think in the situation is to turn over your gun; do you want to get into a shootout with a cop? But that doesn't make it "right" or "lawful" for the cop to order you to do so. It's also the "smart" thing to do to not try to fight the police off if they make an illegal search of your home or car--you take them to court on it later. But it doesn't mean that they acted legall in doing so.

    Quote Originally Posted by kbv View Post
    There are also certain areas illegal to carry in: Indian Reservations, Forestry Land, bars and restaurants that sell alcohol, and any place else you are requested to remove it from.
    True--and also mostly unconstitutional, when the 2A is properly applied. Unfortunately, we have to fight tooth and nail to return the 2A to its proper interpretation--and here's the kicker: Primarily because not enough of us law-abiding citizens have asserted and exercised our RKBA as freely as the guy did in this video. It is we who have allowed the RKBA to be repeatedly infringed by such laws, and now we are on the defensive in trying to reestablish the correct boundaries.


    Quote Originally Posted by kbv View Post
    If you bring a gun ion my house, you will be asked to remove it from the premises or place it in my custody while you are here. I and I alone carry a pistol in my home, and it is up to my discretion whether to enforce that or not. However, if I do, comply or leave.
    Perfectly within your rights. And I also will not be visiting you in your home. If I am not welcome there armed, I am not welcome there. And that's just fine.

    Quote Originally Posted by kbv View Post
    As far as I am concerned, refusing to disarm in my home or vehicle places me in a life-and-death situation.
    That's the kind of alarmist clap-trap that the antis spew all the time--we are dangerous and a threat to others when we are armed. What a load of crap. I know--and I can say this with certainty based on long experience--that I am far better qualified and able with my firearm than the average police officer (and that is not a slam on cops). Yet we don't pee ourselves over cops moving around all over our society with guns. I am no more a threat to you armed than I am unarmed (unless you attack me, of course).

    Quote Originally Posted by kbv View Post
    A twelve-year=old "Crip" wannabe tried to "make his bones (kill someone)" on me in my house one time during a neighborhood gettogether. Someone else saw him about to stab me, and dragged him away. The only way I even learned of it was that I found the knife they took from him, and, not recognizing it, asked questions until I finally got the whole story. "Don't tell Kevin" was pretty much the rule of thumb in situations like that, as most people mistook me for a "shoot first, ask questions later" type. The truth is, I have carried a pistol since age 16 (I'm 54 now) almost all the time, and, though I have had to pull it on several occassions, I have yet to find it necessary to fire.
    Nice stories--and completely irrelevant. The "crip wannabe" brought a knife to your house and he would have even if you told him not to. What does that have to do with a law-abiding citizen exercising his RKBA? Absolutely nothing.

    Quote Originally Posted by kbv View Post
    When dealing with LE, my SOP is to tell them I am carrying and ask if they would prefer to hold it during our encounter. Generaslly, they take it, run the numbers and me, and return it, often in the same Condition One (loaded, cocked, and locked) as I surrendered it in.***Word travels like lightening in the LE field, and more often than not, the officer tells me just to keep it holstered for the time being. Granted, one group of LEOs confiscated my .40 Taurus; I had to go to court to get it back, and when I did, they had broken the firing pin. But there were six of them and one of me, and the law was on their side (sic). Perhaps things did not go as they should have that day, but I am alive and well with my gun rights intact; that says something to me about the wisdom of politely complying. I know for a fact these officers, with whom I had had repeated encounteres with, akin to a "turf war", had no reservations about blowing me away. They tried everything short of planting evidence to get me on a felony charge, and when it became evident that was not going to happen, they tried to provoke me into a lopsided gun battle. I spent a night in jail on some trumped-up charge, which was dismissed immediately next morning, and am still around to tell of it.
    How, exactly, was "the law...on their side"? Unless you committed some kind of offense, what legal and constitutional basis did they have for confiscating your firearm, let alone damaging it? Unless you haven't told the whole story here, they grossly violated your constitutional rights, and should have been sued for doing so. Your story only reaffirms the point that our RKBA is at risk and can be--and too often is--violated by the government. I don't see how you think that this supports the position that the guy in the video was wrong and the cops were right. If anything, it's a point to the contrary.

    Quote Originally Posted by kbv View Post
    If a cop requests you to surrender your firearm, shut up and follow directions. My copy of the Constitution is not bullet-proof.
    Again, you are confusing "smart" with right. See my first point above.

    Quote Originally Posted by kbv View Post
    screrw your rights; stay alive! Thank you.
    Thank God that our Founding Fathers and the great patriots who threw off the tyranny of England in the 1700s didn't think the way you do...

    I'll keep my rights, thank you very much. Sure, I'll be smart, and I'm not going to fight an LEO that tries to violate them--at least not until I see him/her in court. Then I'll give him/her a nice, solid kick in the legal balls. Thank you very much.

  7. #66
    Second most of the above post.

    Me coming into your home or riding in your car while wearing my gun does not in any way place you in a "life or death situation". Say that in a courtroom and you're an idiot or trying to set yourself up for some sort of mentally disturbed plea.

    Likewise, there is no restriction in carrying on ALL Forestry Lands, you need to review your laws to determine the different types of lands they administer. Parks, Wilderness, National Forests, etc. are not all the same especially during hunting season and with the new Park carry laws changing in 2010.

    The carrying in bars and restaurants varies by state.

    I'm one of those who always identifies to a LEO that I'm carrying whether the state requires me to or not.

    More than likely I would surrender my weapon when "asked" but if ordered, I might just ask, "Why?"

    If the officer tells me that it's for his safety while we talk, that is probably good enough but depends on the situation.
    Reality, DEAL with IT!

  8. #67
    Beauty rant there XD! (I didn't have the time or attention span to compose my own rant last night)
    The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first. - Thomas Jefferson

  9. #68

    do you really blame them

    i dont mean to be a rant killer... but do you really blame them, I was always taught that if someones hand comes within 8 in of the weopon they carry then they are a threat. the problem with open carry when walking normally you hand swings that close. I may be mistaken but isnt this law a new one. so these cops arent use to it, give them a year or two and it will be alot more lax.

  10. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by infntrysuicdekng View Post
    ... I may be mistaken but isnt this law a new one. so these cops arent use to it, give them a year or two and it will be alot more lax.
    If you are talking about OC being legal, the answer is no, it is not new.

    ...do you really blame them, I was always taught that if someones hand comes within 8 in of the weopon they carry then they are a threat. the problem with open carry when walking normally you hand swings that close.
    7 years too late: Columbus Dispatch finally discovers open carry isn't a viable self-defense option for Ohioans

    3. Officer safety must always be a paramount concern and goal for peace officers. However, officers should not consider openly carrying a firearm as per se suspicious or criminal conduct. Openly carrying a firearm does not automatically equate into a Disorderly Conduct (R.C. § 2917.11) or Inducing Panic (R.C. § 2817.31) charge. To take this position would be tantamount to taking a position that a person may not exercise their statutory or constitutional rights without risking constant “Terry stops” or police arrest. This position is obviously problematic. Instead, the officer or the dispatcher needs to look at the totality of the circumstances. Is there reasonable, articulable suspicion that criminal conduct is occurring? What are the facts and circumstances, beyond the mere presence of a firearm, that indicate it is reasonable to suspect criminal activity?

    Simply reacting to every single “man with a gun” situation as an automatic “Terry stop” or felony stop will clearly have a chilling effect on the exercise of these rights by citizens, thus potentially opening the officer and the department up to civil liability. Officers and dispatchers should carefully question informants when being dispatched on these types of calls to verify what allegations of further suspicious or criminal conduct, if any, the suspect is engaged in. In a non-dispatch or informant situation, where the officer directly observes the conduct of the suspect, the officer should be ready to articulate what factors beyond the mere carrying of the firearm prompted the official police interaction with the suspect.
    The two enemies of the people are criminals and government, so let us tie the second down with the chains of the Constitution so the second will not become the legalized version of the first. - Thomas Jefferson

  11. As a retired police officer and a private citizen I see what you are trying to do. You just need to understand that even though it may be legal to openly carry your gun, you run the risk of being confronted by the police. Like it or not. They are justified in contacting a man carrying a gun in public. They are even have the authority to take you down at gun poin if the situation calls for it.. As the oficers said, they were called, they dont know who you are, and they need to investigate and detain you until they can determine what is going on. In some states open carry is only legal if the firearm is unloaded. In that situation the police can stop you in order to determine if the firearm is in fact unloaded. Open carry in California has been legal for a long long time as long as the gun is unloaded , carried open ly on the belt, not covered in the very least bit and you do not have ammunition on your body. In that 20 years I have never encountered someone openly carrying a firarm. Maybe someone else has but not me. So either get used to being stopped at times and possibley at gun point or carry concealed. You made your point but you could have also been killed.

    It is my opinion that you fully expected the police to do what they did. The only reason that you went "out for a stroll" was to bait the police and record their response. You were carrying a video camera device and the law book in your back pocket. Dont act surprised by what the police did. You fully expected it. It was wrong for you to go about things in this manner. If I was on patrol and saw you walking down the street with a video camera on your shoulder and a firearm strapped to your side I would think you were a nut. As a private citizen I think you are a nut ,only because of the way you went about things. I can bet you that the police already have a nick name for you down at the police department. You will be the PD's talk of the night for weeks. The last thing you want is for the police to know your name. I am all for the rights of private citizens to lawfully carry concealed and openly. I dont like the fact that we have to apply for and jump through hoops to get a CCW. I hope to see the day when carring concealed is up to the citizen provided he is not legally prevented. Dont forget that the poeple and the police still have all of the past and present school, mall, gym etc. shootings on their minds.

    DONT FORGET...it was a private citizen who called the police regarding your carrying a gun So maybe you should vent your anger at the citizen who made the call. Apparently she had a problem with it. The police just responded to the report.

    Open carry is something that will take time for the police and the general public to get used to.
    Last edited by eckersr; 08-13-2009 at 08:19 PM. Reason: needed to add something

Page 7 of 22 FirstFirst ... 5678917 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast