Ohio Police Encounter - Notification

Status
Not open for further replies.
Oldman, it is not "The Law" that you are required to disarm me. Your interpretation is that the Law says if you feel threatened, you have the option of disarming me. You feel that since it is within the realm of possibility that any human may at any time lose their cool, the safe and sane thing is to disarm every citizen who has a gun.
I am not afraid to give up my gun if it is demanded that I do by a policeman, to the contrary, I would be stupid not to. I am saying that a policeman who feels as you do has a serious case of paranoia.
You sound as if you live in fear of a citizen going "Canton" on you each and every time you come across one. And since one-in-a-thousand may, you will take extreme measures to prevent it. I say there is also a one-in-a-thousand chance of a cop acting badly. Should then all cops be disarmed when approaching a traffic stop? After all, the Citizen must be protected, which is a cops job.
That logic is consistent and just as ludicrous.

Tell that to all the dead or injured cops that were shot by good citizens in a rage. The chances of a cop being shot by a permit holder is slim but then so is getting snake bit while hunting but I am not going in the woods barefooted.

As to the law, some states and I do not know how many, and not going to research the laws of each, requires disarming. I suppose it would be up to the officer if he wanted to do so. If something happened and he survived, I doubt his job would be waiting for him.

I do not deal with that part of the law but I will obey that law. As I stated a long time ago here, I have been stopped by an officer that did not know me for speeding. I allowed him to take my weapon. My hair looked nice, I was wearing a high priced suit, my western boots were shined and I did not look like a ruffian. He felt better taking my gun and if it made him feel better, then fine. It was comical when he returned it in the way that he had to move a gun to put mine under the seat. I did not get a ticket from him and was thanked for my attitude. Two weeks later he was sitting in a class I was teaching and remembered me.

I hate to say it but it appears some here are young with attitudes. Those in that group will not have their permits long. Seen it too often. They carry where they should not, they get an attitude with an officer on a traffic stop, they try to be an officer when they see a fight brewing while out with their girlfriends, wives or best buds to impress. I have the stats for a couple states as to why permits were suspended or revoked. The reasons are almost predictable. Yet you cannot tell these young guys about it. They have tunnel vision and it will be a few years before they vision is broadened.

I am not knocking anyone here. There is nobody on this forum I would not sit down with and buy them a cup of coffee. Depending on their attitude, I might even take them to an air condtioned indoor range with electronic targets.
 
Tell that to all the dead or injured cops that were shot by good citizens in a rage. The chances of a cop being shot by a permit holder is slim but then so is getting snake bit while hunting but I am not going in the woods barefooted.
So then similarly, I shouldn't trust police with guns because of:
Kathryn Johnston
Michael Pleasance
Patrick Dorismond
Amadou Diallo
Ronald Madison
etc., etc., etc.

Right?
 
I hate to say it but it appears some here are young with attitudes. Those in that group will not have their permits long. Seen it too often.
I'm by no means "young", and as I've previously noted, you're pretty free with the assertions and accusations, but pretty stingy with the evidence.

If 53 years have taught me anything, it's to not blindly take people's word for things, especially when i KNOW from experience that they're WRONG. When they REFUSE to provide proof for their claims, that only reinforces that lesson.

If that means I've got an "attitude", I'll PROUDLY own that.
 
How come we don't cede some of our rights to fishermen, loggers, truck drivers, etc, as well. If we're going to use the dangerous argument as to why we give away rights. All have more jobs as dangerous as police. Equal protection?
 
How come we don't cede some of our rights to fishermen, loggers, truck drivers, etc, as well. If we're going to use the dangerous argument as to why we give away rights. All have more jobs as dangerous as police. Equal protection?
If the dangerousness of the job was the sole criterion, convenience store cashiers would have the power of summary execution, like field grade South Korean army officers during the era of martial law.
 
And Texas eliminated the penalty for not notifying.

When?

Not according to Texas DPS.

When was this supposed to have happened?

I will be spending time with a DPS Supervisor on Wednesday. Maybe he can tell me when this took place.
 
When?

Not according to Texas DPS.

When was this supposed to have happened?

I will be spending time with a DPS Supervisor on Wednesday. Maybe he can tell me when this took place.
Sorry, no answers until you clear up the backlog of questions that people have asked you, starting with with your basis for calling me a "lawbreaker".
 
Something I've been seeing over the past few days is a trickle of posts in various places basically portraying the victim as a "wimp" for not shouting over the cop to notify.

One of the stranger examples was a guy who castigated the victim for not talking over the cop, then in the SAME post characterized Harless as "dangerously insane". Now let me get this straight, I'm supposed to ignore the direct orders of, and shout over, an ARMED man who is acting as though he's "dangerously insane". YOU first.

I suspect that the vast majority of those saying that the victim should have shouted over the hysterical cop ALSO say that you should NEVER "argue with a cop by the side of the road" over the law, even when the cop is dead wrong.

Well... I guess I would have to disagree with both sides.

I give the driver a pass for the first 6min until the cop approached the driver side of the car and opened the door. At that point the driver could have easily said [I have a gun permit and I am legally carrying a gun]. Instead, the driver babbled about where he was going, where he worked or used to work, that he got laid off, trying to find a number, trying to find a truck, he knew the girl from the past... blah blah blah... from 6:03 to 6:55. The driver did not notify until the cop noticed something in the driver's hand (I guess it was the permit) and asked about it. At that point the driver said he had a gun at around 6:55. It was at that time the cop began screaming and going hysterical. Before then, the cop wasn't screaming and hysterical. I heard what the driver was saying from 6:03 to 6:55 and the driver was not shouting. The notion that the driver could not have notified without having to shout over a screaming hysterical cop simply isn't the case.
 
Last edited:
Sorry, no answers until you clear up the backlog of questions that people have asked you, starting with with your basis for calling me a "lawbreaker".

Go back and read your own postings. It will answer the question you ask of me.

You may not be a killer, a thief or such but even some of the things you have posted are anti law.
 
What amazes me is that this officer ranted on like this , knowing full well it was being recorded. Or does the PD routinely erase dash-cam footage that may embarrass it.


i'll adopt your misinformed,stereotypical view with....no...the pd does not erase...only the guys in the navy do that
 
The overwhelming majority of people try to do right. That's why the notification law in those states is so terrible. It has no effect on criminals and needlessly sets up honest people for trouble. It sure seems anti-American that someone has to give out info, within seconds, without even being asked, or risk arrest, jail time, or execution. It's also anti-American to use the "well I'm just following the law." I wish you would have justified the law so I'd at least you where you're coming from. Now I can only assume things.

wow....it's certainly obvious that you have no dealing with the criminal justice system...you know of someone that has been executed for not advising they had a weapon?:eek:
anti-american...for following the law??:eek:
if you dont care for a law...work to have it changed...the police dont pick and choose to enforce some laws and not others..it's unclear to me what you are left to assume (to quote you)open your state code book and read the law that has you so confused
 
Go back and read your own postings. It will answer the question you ask of me.
That's not an answer.

You said I was a "lawbreaker".

What "law" have I broken?

You may not be a killer, a thief or such but even some of the things you have posted are anti law.
What does that mean? Do you even know?

As I said, you're long on assertions and accusations and short on proof.

You've accused me of being a criminal. That demands proof.
 
I hate to say it but it appears some here are young with attitudes. Those in that group will not have their permits long. Seen it too often. They carry where they should not, they get an attitude with an officer on a traffic stop, they try to be an officer when they see a fight brewing while out with their girlfriends, wives or best buds to impress. I have the stats for a couple states as to why permits were suspended or revoked. The reasons are almost predictable. Yet you cannot tell these young guys about it. They have tunnel vision and it will be a few years before they vision is broadened.
Hmmmm . . . . this is as offensive as it would be if I had posted;

"I hate to say it, but it sounds to me like oldman45 has the typical power-trip attitude a lot of cops have. He is probably too old to still be working, and he has that 'knock heads, take names, what I say goes on this highway, boy, you got what rights I say you got' attitude that was so common 40 years ago when he started. They get a belligerent attitude with every citizen they stop and take out their frustrations from home on those citizens. They want to impress the young guys who have been assigned to work with them with how tough they still are. They like to provoke confrontations with unsuspecting citizens just to impress the young guys."

I'm 62 years old, I abide by the laws of every state I go through, and I have been carrying for more than 40 years without having a run-in with a LEO. In fact, all the interactions I have had with them regarding carry have been good.

I would never post the things in italics about oldman45 for real, because I don't believe they are a true characterization of him. I just hate it that he takes the attitude that those of us who disagree with him are scofflaws, braggarts, and otherwise flawed and untrustworthy individuals.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top