Ohio Police Encounter - Notification
- Thread starter cmort666
- Start date
- Status
You were the one defending the practice. That's why I was asking you. If a lawmaker shows up I'll ask him.
I see you really can't answer the deep questions. Maybe you'll evaluate your position further to see that notification is indeed unnecessary and potentially dangerous. If an officer needs to know the best practice is for the officer to ask vs having millions of different ways a citizen will attempt to inform you.
Last edited:
CelticSire
US Veteran
I did answer the question. It is the law. Laws are enforced, right or wrong.
Laws were origially based on biblical principle. Now they are based on need and revenue generation. All lawss create revenue in some way. Need follows public safety and good of the community.
Apparently states are seeing the need in having notification in their laws. A few states started the law with the provision built in. Other states have and are adding it into their law. There are many laws I do not see the need of but they have to be enforced as long as they are on the books. Personally I do not see why any officer would cite anyone for improper backing but they can since it is a law on the books in all states. It also carries a large fine.
I see the good in notification. I would certainly hate to ask people if they are armed because many will lie about it even though they have a permit. If a gun is found on someone, or if they are wrongfully shot after failure to notify, then someone goes to jail and loses the right to carry.
I believe you are treating law-making like some sort of serious process. From what I can tell, most laws are developed by persons who appear to not have the slightest idea what they are trying to do - except possibly the part about "revenue."
"Notification" is stupid and dangerous. If a policeman learns that I have a permit and wants to know if I am armed, all he has to do is inquire. I will gladly follow his instructions (since I have no other choice).
"Notification" is stupid and dangerous. If a policeman learns that I have a permit and wants to know if I am armed, all he has to do is inquire. I will gladly follow his instructions (since I have no other choice).
ChattanoogaPhil
Member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2009
- Messages
- 14,601
- Reaction score
- 20,622
OldMan45,
I sometimes struggle to fully understand your positions and do not always agree with them. However, I admire the manner and tone in which you present your thoughts. I have enjoyed the discussion.
I sometimes struggle to fully understand your positions and do not always agree with them. However, I admire the manner and tone in which you present your thoughts. I have enjoyed the discussion.
Last edited:
The laws all read similarly in that it allows disarming if deemed necessary. Where most of us have a problem is that apparently some LEO's have taken that to mean that it is always necessary.
You are retired, right?
LOL. You're running around all over the place. "It's the law" isn't an answer to any question I've ever asked. And now you're telling me you didn't mind pulling the person over but you'd hate to have to ask them a question.
Last edited:
The laws all read similarly in that it allows disarming if deemed necessary. Where most of us have a problem is that apparently some LEO's have taken that to mean that it is always necessary.
You are retired, right?
Nope. I work 24/7. On call all the time. I now reconstruct crime and accident scenes where serious injury or loss of life takes place. I testify as to what happened, what the law says and what laws may have been broken. Been doing this for longer than I want to admit to and have seen things that never should have happened, many of which involved firearms. I spent three hours Tuesday looking, measuring and photographing a motel fire site where a man lost his hands and feet but still lived. I spent three more hours diagraming the area and putting 201 photos on CD. Then another 2 hours writing a report that I kept rewriting in order to make things crystal clear to anyone that reads it, all four typewritten pages of it.
I retired in 1988 but kept being called back to testify in cases that I did years earlier or else called to look at things that others did not have experience with. I saw I could not live on a third of what I already could not live on so I returned to work as asked. Retired again in 1999 but, again was asked to work for LEA across the country and found myself going to a lot of states to look at scenes so I went back to work. Now I do it as a consultant to several agencies as needed, routinely for six court districts and about a dozen attorneys and insurance companies as well as sit on a few advisory boards. Then I serve paper when need be.
No I am not. I follow the law as I feel everyone should. Unfortunately it appears some do not feel the law should apply to them.
I have asked so many people questions and got nothing but lies from them. I have asked if they were armed and told no, only to find them to be in possession of several weapons. I keep a digital recorder in my pocket just to record the lies people tell on scene in statements. One man involved in a recent shooting denied having a gun on him but a video showed him pulling it. Chemical testing showed powder on his hands and wrists.
If someone fails to give notification, then when caught they WILL lose their permit for a long time to come. Whereas if they lie about having a gun, it is no big deal since they were not under oath and giving false statements does not amount to much penalty.
That's some serious bona fides. Sounds like you are taken seriously when and where you are called to consult. I admire your work, we just disagree on this point. We cool?
I do not have a problem with anyone here. Each person has opinions and the right to say what they feel.
My skin is tough and it has to be. Remember, when anyone, not just me, goes to court, there is someone in the courtroom that does not want them there. In my case as an expert in the field at hand, either the defense attorney or plaintiff attorney or prosecution attorney does not want me to testify. They try to impeach on education, past testimony, experience or whatever in trying to keep the factual evidence out of court and away from a jury. I got use to the "shoot the messenger" syndrome long ago. College never prepared me for this and it took years to learn not to get riled. If a person lets emotions overcome them, then they begin to make mistakes. I aided an agency in FL as they worked up a case against the men that raped, beat and ultimately caused my sister's death. Trust me, emotions were difficult to hold in but my sister asked them to let me work the prosecution evidence and I did. Testimony was difficult without becoming emotional but they will never see the light of day as free men.
...You are retired, right?
Hey, now! Oldman45 may disagree with some of us on this but he's earned his stripes. No need to play the "old dinosaur card"!
(People do that to me all the time, so I know it when I see it.
)
Last edited:
I feel any qualified citizen should be armed. I do not think the permit system is legal. There should not have to be a permit system but I understand why it is law.
I also know people love to blow smoke about how they will not give up their guns until their dead fingers are lifted and then I see where they dropped their guns when caught armed in a bar and then denied the gun being theirs. I have heard people brag about how they would shoot a robber in a heartbeat and then take the statements as to how they turned their gun over to the robber in fear. I have seen people cry on a witness stand over the mistake they made with a weapon. I have also had to pull my sidearm many times and use it a few. I know what it is like to shoot a man when they are facing you. I know what their face looks like as they fall and I never forget those faces. Yet those people took the worng direction in life and made their choices. I have dealt with those that have killed multiple people and still walk the streets after little jail time. I have gone into the slums of the ghettos alone while looking for the one witness or the one item needed to get a conviction. I have testified against people that would love to see me dead. Yet I want everyone to have a gun that is legally able to do so and mentally and physically responsible enough to have a gun.
It hurts me to see people lose their right to own a gun or in some cases, even be around a gun. My daughters began shooting early in life. They all have their own guns. I take neighborhood people to the range with me so they can learn firearms first hand and not from the media's slanted views.
People should exercise their right to own firearms and vote. I just feel they should know what they are doing in each right.
mkk41
US Veteran
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.
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.
Nope. Anyone erasing anything would be fired immediately. I cannot second guess what this officer was thinking. Sometimes people get burned out in any field of work. I have seen it in LEO, Judges, lawyers and doctors. They just go off the deep end.
My guess in the case at hand is the officer has been in that area too long, seen too much of the same thing, heard the same lies over and over, saw the same faces and been to too many LEO funerals. The permitee had ample opportunity to be heard but once the gun was introduced into the mix, the officer thought about how things could have gone south and his nerves took over his brain. I feel he should be allowed to retire but never be allowed back on the streets as a police officer. He is dangerous to the publci and to himself.
Many here may not know it but suicide is common among veteran police officers. Stress gets to you after a time. You get tired of putting someone in jail only to have them back on the streets before you finish the paperwork or else you show up for court to testify against them and their lawyer appears for them asking for the trial be continued at a later date. I had a case down south where I was in court six times, driving 125 miles each way to testify against a person and his attorney kept getting new trial dates. It takes a toll on a person.
Never assume anything. But I can tell that you never have been in law in any form and likely was never in the military.
Not sure what that has to do with anything. My viewpoint is just as valid as any other. Yes it's going to default to citizen's rights. If I were a LEO I'd likely go the way of increased LEO power. Your suggestion is similar to one where you can't question the decisions of those in DC because you're not in DC. That might work if everything's going fine but we're $15,000,000,000,000 in debt with no end in sight and sporting double digit unemployment.
FYI, I tried to get into the military. Nailed the ASVAB. Got to MEPS passed everything. Ran into a problem when someone noticed I had had minor knee surgery. My knee was good enough to play basketball everyday, and after this MEPS episode I played college ball. Sent me to a specialist. If I had lied on the app I would have sailed right through. But now I'm a second class citizen.
Last edited:
DUH! Double DUH!!!! There was an officer in the car with him!!!! You've seen the video...obviously..deny that FACT!!!!.
Not sure what that has to do with anything. My viewpoint is just as valid as any other. Yes it's going to default to citizen's rights. If I were a LEO I'd likely go the way of increased LEO power. Your suggestion is similar to one where you can't question the decisions of those in DC because you're not in DC. That might work if everything's going fine but we're $15,000,000,000,000 in debt with no end in sight and sporting double digit unemployment.
FYI, I tried to get into the military. Nailed the ASVAB. Got to MEPS passed everything. Ran into a problem when someone noticed I had had minor knee surgery. Sent me to a specialist. If I had lied on the app I would have sailed right through. But now I'm a second class citizen.
None of us that are informed like the way the nation is headed. Yet the way to change that is with informed voting, letter writing and phone calls.
Neither are you a second class citizen but rather an arm chair quarterback. My middle daughter died a couple yrs ago and her attitude was that the world should turn the way she felt and not the way it worked. She did not vote but had a good education. She was against drug laws but did not want her kids to follow in her footsteps. She was against the welfare system but only because it did not pay enough to her but too much to others. She had a great education but chose to seldom use it. She could not stay married because she did not want to work at marriage. She died partly due to her lifestyle. FWIW: When she broke the law with drugs and petty theft, I was the one that took her in to be booked. The law applied to her just as it would anyone else. I loved her but hated her lifestyle and her attitude.
Unless a person has been there, their judgement is often flawed. Without seeing people killed, you cannot fully understand the impact of murder on the family, community or the system. It is easy for me to say how the President should run the country but then I have not been President or had to make decisions on that level. I did not vote for the current person in office but I will vote against him while not wanting to have to make the decsions required by the office holder.
You may disagree with the laws but they have reasons for being in place. If you were in law, either a lawyer, police officer, court official or otherwise in the legal system, you would see it differently. You do not deal with those outside the system and you do not understand their lifestyle. You cannot understand what you have not faced. None of which makes you a second class citizen. You likely know your job and how it works or how to run it far better than I would and that makes you a citizen, nothing about it would be second class.
Sometimes being there can flaw your judgement. Apparently this has happened to many LEO and they're now of the mine that citizens are out to get them. If citizens were actually out to get LEO you'd see a whole lot of open positions because cops would be resigning en masse. You realize it's more deadly to be a garbage collector than a police officer? Maybe we should give them some power?
.
Really? Where did you get that stat? A taxi driver? Yes. I have never heard of a sanitation worker being killed by a civilian.
It's common knowledge. Just google it. And the main killer of cops is traffic crashes.
ChattanoogaPhil
Member
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2009
- Messages
- 14,601
- Reaction score
- 20,622
Yes they have a reason, and that reason may be quite flawed and dangerous.
The false assertion that a majority of states had a requirement to notify was used to bolster your position. To the contrary, the overwhelming majority of states do not. All of these states have [ lawyers, police officers, court officials or otherwise in the legal system ] but have no such law-- they see it differently according to their laws.
I'm not interested in pointing out that you made a false assertion, but I am curious that since the premise you relied upon is not valid, how does that impact your position?
Last edited:
OP
cmort666
Member
That cop has a LOT of complaints against him, 16 I think. And the only one sustained? He failed to turn on the dashcam. I wonder what happened in those other incidents that DIDN'T end up on video...
OP
cmort666
Member
Your argument is NOT his argument. He COMPLETELY ignored the video and talked about incidents completely different from those in the video, including people waving guns around and getting out of their cars without being instructed to do so. Did you see the victim do any of that in the video?DUH! Double DUH!!!! There was an officer in the car with him!!!! You've seen the video...obviously..deny that FACT!!!!.
That of course leaves aside the fact that the victim tried to notify BOTH of them. They simply wouldn't let him.
OP
cmort666
Member
I spent four years on active duty as an infantry officer in the Army.
I don't have the SLIGHTEST hesitation in saying that Ohio's notification requirement is an asinine abomination concocted to derail lawful concealed carry, and failing that to be used as a tool of harassment against lawful CHL holders. And that's EXACTLY what it's been. It needs to be put out of its misery and given a hasty burial.
Springfeildkid585
Member
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2011
- Messages
- 487
- Reaction score
- 141
What state do you serve in? You have compleatlty changed my opinion of notifying officers of my being armed. I live in a state where I don't have to notify. I had planed to do so in the event of being stoped(I obey traffic laws very closely and have yet to be pulled over) as a matter of mutual respect. I no longer will as the officer may turn out to attempt to disarm me.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
