Ohio Police Encounter - Notification

[cmort666]

Bad Police Encounter
Hopefully this will finally kill the requirement to notify in Ohio.

This is at least the second time police have abused this requirement here. They can't be trusted with it and it needs to be taken away from them.

 

[27145]

Those particular Cops cannot be trusted, that doesn't mean the law should be abandoned.
As a retired Cop, telling me you have a weapon and handing me a carry permit is just one level below seeing a Police id card and shield. It would put me at ease knowing I am dealing with a "good guy" who has had a background check.

Usually bad guys just pull out the gun and shoot, I doubt if they ever tell the Cop they are carrying. Letting a Cop know you have a ccw should end any problem of inadvertant exposure of the weapon and being drawn upon with a Cop's gun.

If 2 concealed carry licensee's screwed up, should we all demand that ccw end?

 

[hatt]

Those particular Cops cannot be trusted, that doesn't mean the law should be abandoned.
As a retired Cop, telling me you have a weapon and handing me a carry permit is just one level below seeing a Police id card and shield. It would put me at ease knowing I am dealing with a "good guy" who has had a background check.

Usually bad guys just pull out the gun and shoot, I doubt if they ever tell the Cop they are carrying. Letting a Cop know you have a ccw should end any problem of inadvertant exposure of the weapon and being drawn upon with a Cop's gun.

If 2 concealed carry licensee's screwed up, should we all demand that ccw end?

Usually, telling the police you have a legal gun results in you being disarmed and your numbers ran, etc. Not sure how that's safer for anyone involved. Thankfully Florida doesn't have such a nonsense requirement. If the LEO feels he needs to know he'll ask. They usually don't ask.

 

[mg357]

the mean behavior of these two specific law enforcement officers makes me sick, and they give a black eye to all of the brave law enforcement officers everywhere who do there very best to protect and serve.

 

[27145]

Anyone have a link for the video? I could not find it, just read the transcript.

 

[cshoff]

Why is it any of the officer's business whether or not a person is armed? And most especially, why should that information be of an arbitrary nature? IMHO, this issue is the same as issues that involve race, religion, and sexual orientation. It's really none of their business. If the officer asks and a person wants to answer, then fine. If not, it should be protected information under the 5th Amendment.

Note: I am not saying this protection exists/should exist when exigent circumstances exist or when probable cause standards have been met.

 

[The Big D]

I'm still trying to figure out how this ended up in charges against the citizen. Moreover, what were the charges?

Be safe.

 

[walnutred]

Those particular Cops cannot be trusted, that doesn't mean the law should be abandoned.
As a retired Cop, telling me you have a weapon and handing me a carry permit is just one level below seeing a Police id card and shield. It would put me at ease knowing I am dealing with a "good guy" who has had a background check.

Here in Ohio the CCW is tied to your cars plates. As soon as the LEO runs your plates they know. So the LEO knew before he walked up to the car that the driver was a "good guy".

 

[cshoff]

Anyone have a link for the video? I could not find it, just read the transcript.

The video is not available yet. It is being held as evidence in an ongoing investigation/case.

 

[27145]

Here in Ohio the CCW is tied to your cars plates. As soon as the LEO runs your plates they know. So the LEO knew before he walked up to the car that the driver was a "good guy".

Not really, he may not have been the owner of the car.

I think you all can understand my way of thinking, unfortunately it is abused.

 

[27145]

Why is it any of the officer's business whether or not a person is armed? And most especially, why should that information be of an arbitrary nature? IMHO, this issue is the same as issues that involve race, religion, and sexual orientation. It's really none of their business. If the officer asks and a person wants to answer, then fine. If not, it should be protected information under the 5th Amendment.

Note: I am not saying this protection exists/should exist when exigent circumstances exist or when probable cause standards have been met.

The 5th amendment is the right not to incriminate yourself. If you lawfully carry and inform the officer, you are not incriminating yourself.

 

[walnutred]

In the original posting on the OFCC web site the initial post stated that the driver was in his vehicle.

 

[27145]

In the original posting on the OFCC web site the initial post stated that the driver was in his vehicle.

Ya but when the Cop's approached they have no way of knowing it is his car and he has a gun. Running the plate will reveal that the registered owner has a cc permit.

 

[Vartarg]

Good Law

I don't have a problem with the law.....I've notified a couple of LEOs in LA and TX stops, and had no repercussions. The problem here was the particular cops who made the stop and took out their nasty attitude on the CHL holder.

Re the question: why should the officer be entitled to know.....it's the simple fact of life that there's no such thing as a "routine" traffic stop, and often times the person stopped is a felon or some other variety of villain. It's about officer and public safety.

JMHO.....YMMV.

Cheers

 

[Steve in Vermont]

If this is all true, when I wore a uniform had I done something like this I'd be looking for another job the next day. And to compound this, the officers had to know they were being recorded. Talk about stupid, there it is for all to see. I hope the citizen doesn't back down, I wouldn't. These jerks (and I'm making the assumption the facts are as stated) need to be held accountable, otherwise history will repeat itself. And you can't "fix" behavior like this, a warning to them would be a joke. They'd just be more careful (to not get caught) in the future. Some people just can't handle the authority without abusing it. They should be weeded out, ASAP.

 

[The Big D]

WHY WAS THE CITIZEN CHARGED? (Pardon me for shouting.)

I read (or tried to) the 16 page linky...no reason was given and it was referenced the DA was willing to drop charges.

Thank you to whomever answers, in advance.

Be safe.

 

[27145]

WHY WAS THE CITIZEN CHARGED? (Pardon me for shouting.)

I read (or tried to) the 16 page linky...no reason was given and it was referenced the DA was willing to drop charges.

Thank you to whomever answers, in advance.

Be safe.

It doesn't say, but probably the usual dis-con resisting and obstructing. Just a guess.

 

[blujax01]

Ohio law states that if a CC permit holder finds themselves in the presence of a police officer, they must immediately declare - and I mean immediately. If you say: "Nice Day, isn't it?" before declaring, that is technically an infraction.
It is obvious to me that the cop in question knows this and duped the citizen. Unfortunately, due to "privacy issues" we will never know just what his discipline will be. I can only hope justice will be served.

I have been pulled over twice while armed and both times, I rolled down my window, placed my hands on the wheel at 10 and 2 and as soon as the officer appeared I stated in a loud, clear voice "Hello Officer, I have a concealed carry license and I am armed. How would you like to proceed?"
Both times, I was treated with courtesy and respect, was not removed from my vehicle and was not required to disarm.
In short, it was a non-event.

And this whole "Declaration should not be required" argument has been hashed out almost as much as the voluminous "Open Carry" thread.

 

[ladder13]

Re the question: why should the officer be entitled to know.....it's the simple fact of life that there's no such thing as a "routine" traffic stop, and often times the person stopped is a felon or some other variety of villain. It's about officer and public safety.

Wow, sanity and reason...who'da thunk it?

 

[cshoff]

The 5th amendment is the right not to incriminate yourself. If you lawfully carry and inform the officer, you are not incriminating yourself.

Except that ANYTHING you say could be incriminating. Even disclosing that you are legally carrying a firearm could be incriminating. That is why, in most states, you CANNOT be compelled to provide ID without RAS or Probable Cause.