freedom_fighter777
New member
.
Ordered to ground at gunpoint for open carrying by cleveland heights ohio police
- Thread starter freedom_fighter777
- Start date
gdcleanfun
Banned
I'm so glad that the sheriff's deputies "get it" in this little town of mine. We are never treated like this. I've open carried in Wal*Mart. No one bats an eye lash.
HootmonSccy
New member
I would expect places like Nevada, Wyoming, etc to be more gun friendly than Ohio etc..
I personally would not open carry unless I was out hunting, etc.
It only invites situations like this one (Someone called in to complain) - and in a bad situation, the Bad Guys know to deal with you first..
Concealed carry is a better option for me..
I am not saying there should NOT be open carry, I'm just saying it would NOT be MY choice.
utimmer43
New member
If you're willing to deal with the harrasment, I say fight the good fight. I'm not a lawsuit happy person, but these unfounded, unconstitutional violations need to stop. In these cases, I'm all for the lawsuit. Keep it up, make national news if you can. Just make sure you remain within the law at all times.
2beararms
New member
Personally I have ZERO respect for anyone who thinks they are important enough to troll and taunt the police into wasting their time, and my tax money, to make a video of their stupidity. How long did you walk back and forth on that street until someone made a complaint call, illiciting the response that you so desired ??
I for one think you were handled with great restraint and respect. YES, police DO have the right to stop, inquire, and detain individuals until they are satisfied that no law is being broken. If they are not satisfied, they have a period of time to detain you in holding until they must either file charges or let you go. This "you are breaking the law" by detaining me is not correct.
Our community works very hard to keep an image of sane, trained and responsible individuals being armed for their own REAL self protection and intentionally taunting the police to get You-Tube video does not help the cause with lawmakers.
Remember, the "founding fathers" were nothing more than law makers, they were not Gods of some kind and the constitution and the rights that we so want to protect are simply laws on paper. Laws that new law makers CAN change today if desired. The second amendment COULD be repealed with enought support, and the first move to attempt that is always the same ... to show that 2nd amendment supporters are simply nut cases with guns ...
don't give them any more to work with than they already have!
I for one think you were handled with great restraint and respect. YES, police DO have the right to stop, inquire, and detain individuals until they are satisfied that no law is being broken. If they are not satisfied, they have a period of time to detain you in holding until they must either file charges or let you go. This "you are breaking the law" by detaining me is not correct.
Our community works very hard to keep an image of sane, trained and responsible individuals being armed for their own REAL self protection and intentionally taunting the police to get You-Tube video does not help the cause with lawmakers.
Remember, the "founding fathers" were nothing more than law makers, they were not Gods of some kind and the constitution and the rights that we so want to protect are simply laws on paper. Laws that new law makers CAN change today if desired. The second amendment COULD be repealed with enought support, and the first move to attempt that is always the same ... to show that 2nd amendment supporters are simply nut cases with guns ...
don't give them any more to work with than they already have!
freedom_fighter777
New member
.
Seems to me that alot of open carry people try to bait the police...Why else would you carry a video camera? Yes you were right and they were wrong but in thier response they have to detain you and check you out in the course of a radio call, think of the liability if they had not...of course you probably already knew that. Carrying a video camera and taping the police and carring the law with you. And your probably the type to try to sue over it and waste more taxpayers money. JMHO
knighted4
knighted4
Sidewinder
New member
I seem to be having a lot of mixed feelings on this one:
Being black, I certainly try to avoid ALLpolice encounters. Its not like I dress like a thug or anything, but they just treat me differently. And wow, if I was open carrying, I'm afraid I would be shot if I made a false move.
I do appreciate people "Fighting the Good Fight" but I don't think police entrapment is all that helpful. I believe there needs to be a strategy to enlighten the public so they don't make those GWAG calls(although I was shocked how the LEO in the video was like, "not everyone can have a gun"). Yes this is true but BGs usually don't use kydex/leather OWB holsters.
Being black, I certainly try to avoid ALLpolice encounters. Its not like I dress like a thug or anything, but they just treat me differently. And wow, if I was open carrying, I'm afraid I would be shot if I made a false move.
I do appreciate people "Fighting the Good Fight" but I don't think police entrapment is all that helpful. I believe there needs to be a strategy to enlighten the public so they don't make those GWAG calls(although I was shocked how the LEO in the video was like, "not everyone can have a gun"). Yes this is true but BGs usually don't use kydex/leather OWB holsters.
JCWohlschlag
New member
This is completely and utterly incorrect. Police must have reasonable, articulable suspicion (RAS) that a crime is being committed or is about to be committed before they may detain a suspect. Since the open carry of a firearm is completely legal in Ohio, there is no reason to suspect someone open carrying a firearm to be committing a crime. Despite Ohio having a “stop and identify” statute, the Ohio courts have ruled (such as in Ohio v. Holly, referencing Florida v. Royer) that police cannot simply detain an individual simply to ascertain their identity without proper RAS, which would be exactly what they did in this case.
The incident was recorded on a cellphone.
I stand corrected about the video camera, but why would he record a walk around the block if not for exactly what happened? Don't get me wrong i agree with the 2nd amendment and I agree with open carry too, just saying that if you open carry in this day and age you need to accept the response of those who do not agree or understand. JMO
knighted4
knighted4
JCWohlschlag
New member
From Ohioans For Concealed Carry Discussion Forums • View topic - Ordered to Ground for Openly Carrying a Firearm:
freedom_fighter777 said:
If you don’t mind, could you elaborate on what you mean by “accept the response of those who do not agree or understand”? Are you saying that persons who open carry a firearm should just “accept” having the police order them to the ground at gunpoint for doing nothing wrong?
S&WM&P40
New member
You need to look up Terry Vs Ohio then get back at this. What he did was well with in his rights and more and more people are not laying down and putting up this Bullshit from the police. Some states do not have open carry laws and that's fine your lost but for the states that have them people are going to use the right. In one of the last remaining FREE states in the US New Hampshire. A police officer stopping someone simply for the fact that he is open carrying does not work. They can not hold you and you can walk away. You also do not have to give any information to the officer,Name,address, Concealed carry permit you have to give him nothing. Just keep saying am i free to do? Am i free to go? Call porcupine 411 and a group of people will come to help and with video cams. No more can we afford to lay down like dogs and let them take our rights or voices. Next time you get stopped for OC ask the cop why he is open carrying and if you can run his information and SN on his gun. Get his name and badge and file a complaint with the department.
S&WM&P40
New member
It's not just about open carrying. Do you think that if a person or police officer saw your concealed firearm they would be fine with that? No they would come up to you and harass you and do they vary same crap they do to the people who open carry. The sad fact of the matter is police officers show more respect to Gamesters/Thugs and other low life's. When dealing with them and gun matters then they do to the Good guys who carry a gun for the same reason the police do " TO PROTECT THEM SELF'S". The fact of the matter is everyone already thinks your a nut job for carrying a gun everyday to start with. It does not matter how you carry it they still think what they think. Someone feeling unsafe or uneasy is not enough of a reason to suppress our rights..
utimmer43
New member
Well, I was planning on replying to this after my "Daddy-Daughter Date" at Chuck E. Cheese, but it looks like it's already been taken care of.
However, I will add that this is NOT wasting tax payer money. On the contrary, a bad cop or an entire bad police department is where the tax payers money is wasted. If it takes a lawsuit against the PD to restore our rights, then that is well worth it. If the tax payers don't like losing money over this, they themselves need to realize the nature of the waste and make the necessary changes to their local government.
It is OUR complacency that has got us to where we are today, with such a negative attitude toward guns. We hide our guns from the public so as not to scare them. Our children can't even utter the word "gun" in some schools at the risk of being expelled. The more we try to play nice by their rules, the more restrictive their rules get. THAT is how the 2A could ultimately be repealed.
And I'm not saying we don't still need to be cordial and personable. By all means we must remain polite and non-belligerant. This is the way to inform the uninformed, and to promote 2A. I have actually thought about doing something like this, except that I would print out a pamphlet with a couple facts/ laws/ quotes/ stats/ etc. and take a walk around the city, OCing. Anyone who inquires would get a smile and a pamphlet and hopefully a nice 5-10 minute conversation. There would also likely be a camera present just incase of an "encounter".
S&WM&P40
New member
They are trying to Fear us/you in to complacency. They think they can beat you down into submission and you will not put up a fight and forget you even have rights. You ever wounder why a pack of 30 or more sheep stay in line and do as they are told by one human and a dog? FEAR! The sheep think the Human and Dog are there protector and will keep them safe so they stay in line and do as they are told. But they can never protect them all almost always a wolf or some other hungry animal gets to the pack and kills one of the sheep. The sheep do not realize they have the god given right to protect themselfs. One sheep on it's own is easy picking for the dog to get back into the pack or for a hungry animal to eat. They do not realize that if they band together as one all thirty of them they can choose for themsel's how they want to live and together they can fend off wolves. If you want nothing more in life then to lead a life of complacency and to be spoon fed the crap they tell you. Then by all means do so please lay down and roll over for them. We can not win this as single people fighting the good fight. The only way we stand a chance of winning a battle is by banding together and trying to get through all the years of bullshit people have been spoon feed and brain washed with. Only by showing them that not all people who carry guns are the next Theodore John Kaczynski or the next timothy mcvay. Not all people who own guns are crazed cop killers who want nothing more then to have their vary own Waco. That guns cant jump out of a holster and start killing people. We have to push the master reset button on their brain's. Only together do we stand a chance against all the people who wish we did not have the rights we have.
JCWohlschlag
New member
The point isn’t that you should “scour the internet” for other posts on the subject; it is that you should not assume things to be fact which were never stated in the information available to you in order to support your overall opinion.
What I do not like is the police thinking they can do whatever they want, and I especially do not like citizens who just cater to that belief. I see that you are from Pennsylvania; I suggest giving the following document a read:
Link Removed
(Document page 50–51; PDF page 6–7)
Officers should be aware that citizens may become alarmed or concerned when they witness persons engaged in open carry. This may be due in part to individual sensibilities regarding firearms and the fact that persons engaged in open carry are infrequently encountered in Pennsylvania. However, a citizen’s alarm or concern does not alone negatively impact the rights of a person engaging in the lawful open carrying of a firearm. Officers receiving citizen reports of a “man with a gun” would be prudent to respond to determine the nature of the report. However, the rights of any person engaged in the lawful open carrying of a firearm must be carefully considered when interacting with such person. [HIGHLIGHT]Persons engaged in the lawful open carrying of a firearm are not subject to seizure of their person or property based solely on the fact that they are engaging in open carry, nor may they be required to produce identification or other documents.[/HIGHLIGHT] A person who is engaging in open carry in Philadelphia or in an area of declared emergency may be required to produce a valid and lawfully issued license to carry a firearm or establish an exemption. Of course, a person engaged in the open carrying of a firearm may engage in violations of other laws or handle the firearm in an inappropriate manner which could constitute offenses such as: disorderly conduct, reckless endangerment, simple assault by physical menace, etc. However, merely engaging in the open carrying of a firearm would not necessarily constitute such an offense.
As you can see, the MPOETC has produced specific training for Pennsylvania municipal police officers because of previous open carry incidents like this one. Not only do the police incur liability when they illegally seize a person open carrying a firearm, but even when the person they seized turns out to be a criminal and they subsequently get arrested, the evidence against them gets thrown out of court due to it stemming from the illegal seizure (fruit of the poisonous tree).(Document page 50–51; PDF page 6–7)
Officers should be aware that citizens may become alarmed or concerned when they witness persons engaged in open carry. This may be due in part to individual sensibilities regarding firearms and the fact that persons engaged in open carry are infrequently encountered in Pennsylvania. However, a citizen’s alarm or concern does not alone negatively impact the rights of a person engaging in the lawful open carrying of a firearm. Officers receiving citizen reports of a “man with a gun” would be prudent to respond to determine the nature of the report. However, the rights of any person engaged in the lawful open carrying of a firearm must be carefully considered when interacting with such person. [HIGHLIGHT]Persons engaged in the lawful open carrying of a firearm are not subject to seizure of their person or property based solely on the fact that they are engaging in open carry, nor may they be required to produce identification or other documents.[/HIGHLIGHT] A person who is engaging in open carry in Philadelphia or in an area of declared emergency may be required to produce a valid and lawfully issued license to carry a firearm or establish an exemption. Of course, a person engaged in the open carrying of a firearm may engage in violations of other laws or handle the firearm in an inappropriate manner which could constitute offenses such as: disorderly conduct, reckless endangerment, simple assault by physical menace, etc. However, merely engaging in the open carrying of a firearm would not necessarily constitute such an offense.
There is no reason citizens should “accept” illegal police procedure. It would be much better for the protection of the lawful citizen, and the prosecution of the unlawful citizen, for police to “accept” proper training instead.
utimmer43
New member
A big +1. That's worth printing out and keeping on hand. I'm curious if there exists such a document in Ohio (as well as any other OC state).
BTW, Welcome to USA Carry!
Sidewinder
New member
Wow, that is SO true. I just wish we could try and explain to the public that we aren't paranoid. I wish they could understand that I care about my life and my family more than the police do. Is there an easy way to convey this message to the bleeding hearts?
Red Hat
New member
I think he did the correct thing once he saw the patrol car. If it got out of hand he had the proof on his cell phone. If we had OC here in SC I would OC a lot. I'm a firm believer that if you don't exercise your rights you will lose them. If it's legal then LE should have civilized procedures in place to handle OC situations.
