Police abuse CCW holder.

[Remmah2]

No reason for the cop to go heavy on the driver.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kassP7zI0qc

[gravity556]

1. That cop needs to lose his job.

He has some serious anger issues. Of course, some of the pro-criminal safety brigade would happily see every law abiding CCW holder treated like that. And officer number 2 shouldn't have been searching the car like that. Guess those silly amendments don't mean a fucking thing to some people..

I hope the driver sues and wins.

[Kennah]

2. A community role model

http://www.cantonohio.gov/police/

"We will strive to serve as role models for the community, applying professional standards and commitment to integrity, sensitivity and compassion to those we serve."

Hmmmmmmm. I'm having difficulty with judge/jury/executioner as a community role model.

[Euromutt]

3. At this juncture, I'm five minutes plus into the video...

...and it is entirely unclear to me what "reasonable suspicion" let alone "probable cause" exists for the LEOs in question to escalate the situation to the extent they are. At most, what appears to be going on is the occupants of the vehicle trying to engage the services of a prostitute. If that's your "probable cause," all you're entitled to look for is whether the suspects were carrying a sufficient amount of cash to meet the young lady's fee; whatever else might be in the vehicle is entirely irrelevant to the suspected offense, and any search is therefore a fishing expedition.

A few minutes along...
One of the cops is berating the guy for not telling the cops he was carrying licensed handgun, bitching "you're the reason cops get killed."
No, he's not; if he'd wanted to murder the cops in question, they gave him plenty of opportunities prior to that point. At this juncture, they're just taking out on him the realization that they had been behaving unprofessionally up to that point, and rather than actually correcting their behavior, they merely compound it.

What a pair of pricks.

[Glassunion]

5. A decent defense lawyer will indeed have a field day with this.

I would not be surprised if the charges are dropped.

[Historic NY]

7. Amazed they never confronted or identified the driver both officers need retraining...

and some long suspensions.

[Glassunion]

4. What surprised me most about the officers... Given the news lately.

Was that they didn't forget about the gun, and leave it on the trunk then drive away.

[ileus]

6. He deserves to be abused, all people with guns poking out and being impolite deserve this.

[Katya Mullethov]

8. THATS HOW COPS GET KILLED !!!!!11

HOW WOULD YOU LIKE IT IF I PULLED MY GUN AND PUT IT UP TO YOUR HEAD ? !? ?! ? !? ? !? ?

The projection is so thick you could park a ladder truck on it .

I swear........ that dude surfs this forum .

[Kurska]

9. He repeatedly tried to do his lawful duty and inform the officer of his gun.

But was shouted down and had his life threatened.

The driver did nothing wrong besides practice a civil right you don't like.

[eqfan592]

10. Pretty sure he was being sarcastic. ;) nt

[SteveM]

11. I believe so to. Pleae recall the naked guy w/ gun in a recent post. nt

[Glassunion]

12. Ditto.

[Kurska]

32. Woops my bad

honestly though sometimes it is hard to tell

[PavePusher]

18. ileus is on our side. S/he does satire/sarcasm.

S/he is aping jpak.

[Hoyt]

13. Police did overreact, but our new gun carrier shouldn't have been soliciting prostitution and

whatever else he was looking for. Confirms my belief that many who carry wouldn't need to if they weren't engaged in such activities.

Guy gets a permit a few weeks prior and then hits the streets engaging in criminal activity. If he had not been, he would not have been stopped, police would have not had to put their lives in jeopardy and none of this would have happened. Do guns embolden people in this respect? Apparently.

[ileus]

16. True this isn't a very good example of LEO's or CHP holders.

[Glassunion]

17. How do you know that he was soliciting or "whatever else"?

He was not charged with soliciting or "looking for something else". Let alone convicted of anything.

His only charge was failure to notify. His lawyer already declined to have the charge of failure to notify dropped, and is proceeding forward with the case. From what I have been reading, he has a smart lawyer.

[gravity556]

19. Watch the whole video

Driver says he knew the female from his days driving cab and gave her a lift. Did you see any evidence that he was soliciting? Or are you just going to presume that since he was carrying, he must be of a criminal bent? He wasn't charged with soliciting, and the female wasn't charged with solicitation, so why are you so eager to take Officer Apeshit's word for it? Or are you just looking for any slim chance to paint a gun owner as a criminal? Wait, I forgot, "Confirms my belief that many who carry wouldn't need to if they weren't engaged in such activities."

So you're on the "guilty until proven innocent" bandwagon. Should have guessed.

Officer Apeshit needs to lose his job and face charges for his terroristic threats-threatened to "put lumps" on the female" and threatened to "bash in your head" "pull mine (gun) and put it against your head" "take two steps back and draw my 40 and put 10 rounds into you and sleep well tonight" and "I should execute you right now and he'd (meaning his partner) make a great witness". Nevermind the search of the vehicle without consent. Oh, and don't forget the "Every time I see you, I'm going to pull you over and tow your car and take you to jail, no matter what". And all under color of law. Unbelieveable.

The only folks who think any of what that cop did was justified are other authoritarian thugs. The cop shat all over the driver's rights, and he started doing so well before he had any idea that the driver was armed. Hopefully, the driver sues the city for enough to ensure that its officers are properly trained and more importantly, properly screened. And I would also hope that the out of control cop faces charges for the crimes that he comitted-if a regular Joe threatened a handcuffed man with execution and physical assault, the police would happily take Joe to jail.

[Hoyt]

24. Hope you guys are better assessing a situations before pulling you gun or guns.

I think it was pretty clear what was going on here.

[Glassunion]

25. What was going on there?

The driver recognized the lady from his prior occupation. He was giving them a ride. All 3 of the people gave the exact same story. All 3 were searched, yet nothing illegal was mentioned by either officer.

If it was pretty clear, why did the officer let the lady and the passenger go? Why wasn't the driver charged with soliciting? Why wasn't the lady or passenger charged?

Just because the officer stated that she was a prostitute and the passenger was her pimp, does not make it so. This was the same officer who asked the passenger his name a few times(Jerry Gordon), and then said the name several more times in conversation and then after very short period of time accuse the passenger of giving a fake name to the officers after addressing him by a different name. If this was indeed the case, why didn't the officers charge the passenger with giving false information to an officer?

[Euromutt]

27. Two words: Confirmation bias

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

When you acknowledge that you have a pre-existing belief, and you subsequently interpret the evidence in a manner that confirms that pre-existing belief, don't be surprised if some people remain unconvinced.

I for one didn't see anything occurring that justified the cops' behavior, starting with the search of the vehicle or threatening to "put lumps" on the young lady, and again, as other posters have pointed out, nobody involved was charged with any offense except the "failure to inform" charge.

[gravity556]

28. It was quite clear what was going on.

A cop with anger management issues repeatedly threatened a handcuffed man with severe bodily injury, execution and promised constant harrassment. And another cop was complicit by not stepping in and getting his partner to chill the fuck out. Or did you watch a different video? Or didn't watch it all the way through?

Had there been ANY evidence that the driver had been soliciting, don't you think that Officer Apeshit would have also charged him with it? As to whether the woman was a prostitute, so what? Or don't you believe in freedom of association? We already know that the pro-criminal safety folks don't give a flying fuck due process (after all, you've already used some strange mental gymnastics to paint the driver as a criminal, even though there's not a single bit of evidence for it).

I'm glad that you don't carry-you'd probably shoot someone over a bumper sticker that offended your sense of self righteousness.

[Katya Mullethov]

33. He just knew somebody tossed a rock

All diggin' around in the back seat with the driver unsecured .....-THAT- is how cops get killed..... Officer Angry pants .


Here is an adult acting professionally , in case anyone forgot .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFzH5Oe-YL4
I would like to see more of these . Anyone seen better ?

[Hoopla Phil]

35. Who is talking about pulling guns??? As far as seeing what is going on here

it IS very clear. Some, when faced with the truth, invent shit up to stay secure in their own faith.

[Hangingon]

21. We will neberr know if he was soliciting a prostitute,

O1 sent her on her way. O1 exxceeded his probable cause. If you will look closely, you can see that the cops lives were in jeopardy because they failed to fo;llow proper procedures. These guys should not be wearing badges.

[Hoopla Phil]

34. First you deny that it happened. Now you try to pass it off as the lawful CHL holder

is engaging in solicitation without ANY evidence. Typical, and telling.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=436480&mesg_id=436553

[friendly_iconoclast]

37. No different than those who claim to find human and dinosaur footprints together.

True Believers will deny any and all evidence that doesn't fit their worldview, and have no problem manufacturing evidence that

does...

[tortoise1956]

42. Hey, it's true!

I saw pictures of the footprints online. If you want to look for yourself, go to the site with the alien autopsy video that the government is trying to suppress, and click on the "You're going to Hell if you don't do what I say!" link. It's right there in living color. Besides, if it wasn't true, it wouldn't be on the internet, right?

Now, aren't you sorry you tried to deny the truth?

[friendly_iconoclast]

36. You are either Sergeant Colon or America's Next Top Psychic...

...as no one was charged with any crime save "failure to notify" and even that was clearly bullshit.

[DWC]

14. Gross, vile assault / abuse

IMO this LEO should be, at a minimum, terminated; sent to prison for felony assault; and restricted from possession of a firearm for a long, long time.

I am confident the civil litigation will be huge.

This LEO appears to be that 1 in 1,000 really bad cop.

Semper Fi,

[spin]

15. With cops like these, who need criminals...

In Florida, the cops are so used to people who are legally carrying concealed that they don't even bat an eye when you hand them your permit along with your driver's license. You are not required to notify the officer but I do.

I can't believe an officer who knew he was being taped by a camera in his patrol car would be so stupid. I seriously hope he loses his job. He has absolutely no right to have a badge with an attitude like that.

[Glassunion]

20. Problem is there is a catch 22 in the law on notification.

According to Ohio Law. These two paragraphs are in the same exact section of the law.
Sec. 2923.12

(1) If the person is stopped for a law enforcement purpose and is carrying a concealed handgun, fail to promptly inform any law enforcement officer who approaches the person after the person has been stopped that the person has been issued a license or temporary emergency license to carry a concealed handgun and that the person then is carrying a concealed handgun;

(4) If the person is stopped for a law enforcement purpose and if the person is carrying a concealed handgun, knowingly disregard or fail to comply with any lawful order of any law enforcement officer given while the person is stopped, including, but not limited to, a specific order to the person to keep the person's hands in plain sight.

The problem is the officers gave several lawful orders(from paragraph 4) for the man to basically "shut up" which then put him in violation of paragraph 1. So... what trumps what?

[-..__...]

23. I think that would be a bit of a stretch...

I could see see paragraph 4 applying after an officer has been informed and made aware that the person is legally carrying a firearm (at least that's probably the intention of the law as written).

[Glassunion]

26. So, in your opinion paragraph 1 would trump 4?

[-..__...]

29. Just my opinion, mind you, IANAL.

Just seems to me that in order to be charged with Paragraph 4, the event(s) in paragraph1 would have to occur first.

In this case, it's pretty much moot at this point anyways... the Canton PD would have to be out of their minds to follow through on any charges

citing "failure to comply with any lawful order of any law enforcement officer" as a reason.

[Glassunion]

39. Not sure I agree.

Here is the entire section.

(B) No person who has been issued a license or temporary emergency license to carry a concealed handgun under section 2923.125 or 2923.1213 of the Revised Code or a license to carry a concealed handgun that was issued by another state with which the attorney general has entered into a reciprocity agreement under section 109.69 of the Revised Code shall do any of the following:

(1) If the person is stopped for a law enforcement purpose and is carrying a concealed handgun, fail to promptly inform any law enforcement officer who approaches the person after the person has been stopped that the person has been issued a license or temporary emergency license to carry a concealed handgun and that the person then is carrying a concealed handgun;

(2) If the person is stopped for a law enforcement purpose and if the person is carrying a concealed handgun, knowingly fail to keep the person’s hands in plain sight at any time after any law enforcement officer begins approaching the person while stopped and before the law enforcement officer leaves, unless the failure is pursuant to and in accordance with directions given by a law enforcement officer;

(3) If the person is stopped for a law enforcement purpose, if the person is carrying a concealed handgun, and if the person is approached by any law enforcement officer while stopped, knowingly remove or attempt to remove the loaded handgun from the holster, pocket, or other place in which the person is carrying it, knowingly grasp or hold the loaded handgun, or knowingly have contact with the loaded handgun by touching it with the person’s hands or fingers at any time after the law enforcement officer begins approaching and before the law enforcement officer leaves, unless the person removes, attempts to remove, grasps, holds, or has contact with the loaded handgun pursuant to and in accordance with directions given by the law enforcement officer;

(4) If the person is stopped for a law enforcement purpose and if the person is carrying a concealed handgun, knowingly disregard or fail to comply with any lawful order of any law enforcement officer given while the person is stopped, including, but not limited to, a specific order to the person to keep the person’s hands in plain sight.

I think given the language in (B)"shall do any of the following" refers to one's overall conduct during a law enforcement encounter and that each sub-section is a list of specific conduct violations during a stop.

The specific case in the OP would not apply here. But I can see someone with being charged with Sub-Section(4), by attempting to notify by ignoring a lawful order from the officer to remain quiet. Given the language(as it appears to me), the violations are completely separate and none of them depend on the other in terms of committing a violation. Below is the list of penalties for violating any of the subsections.

(3) Except as otherwise provided in this division, carrying concealed weapons in violation of division (B)(1) of this section is a misdemeanor of the first degree, and, in addition to any other penalty or sanction imposed for a violation of division (B)(1) of this section, the offender’s license or temporary emergency license to carry a concealed handgun shall be suspended pursuant to division (A)(2) of section 2923.128 of the Revised Code. If, at the time of the stop of the offender for a law enforcement purpose that was the basis of the violation, any law enforcement officer involved with the stop had actual knowledge that the offender has been issued a license or temporary emergency license to carry a concealed handgun, carrying concealed weapons in violation of division (B)(1) of this section is a minor misdemeanor, and the offender’s license or temporary emergency license to carry a concealed handgun shall not be suspended pursuant to division (A)(2) of section 2923.128 of the Revised Code.

(4) Carrying concealed weapons in violation of division (B)(2) or (4) of this section is a misdemeanor of the first degree or, if the offender previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to a violation of division (B)(2) or (4) of this section, a felony of the fifth degree. In addition to any other penalty or sanction imposed for a misdemeanor violation of division (B)(2) or (4) of this section, the offender’s license or temporary emergency license to carry a concealed handgun shall be suspended pursuant to division (A)(2) of section 2923.128 of the Revised Code.

(5) Carrying concealed weapons in violation of division (B)(3) of this section is a felony of the fifth degree.

If you violate subsection(1),(2) or (4) you can go to jail for not more than 6 months and be fined up to $1,000.
If you violate subsection(3) you can go to jail for not more than 12 months and be fined up to $2,500.

[aikoaiko]

22. I suspect that there are a lot of anti-RKBA DU members who love the behavior of the officer

Their absence in this thread is conspicuous.

[Hoopla Phil]

30. I believe that this incident was posted before, but without the video. The normal

anti crowd claimed that the incident was fabricated and didn't happen IIRC.

[Hoopla Phil]

31. Update: Officer that made threats is suspended. No word on the

partner that stood by and did nothing.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=b28_1311275784

[GKirk]

38. I hope relieved of duties....

...means he was fired. And I hope he finds a new line of work, hopefully not one involving dealing with the public in any manner.

[spin]

40. This cop needs a new job and anger management training ...

and I hope he never decides to apply for a concealed carry permit.

[ManiacJoe]

41. Not the first time this cop goes crazy after finding a gun.

http://www.cantonrep.com/news/x2014919089/Video-Officer-Harless-loses-his-temper-on-another-arrest

[Euromutt]

43. "the officers would have to react in a much more professionally forceful and focused way."

I’ll kill every one of you (expletive).
You (expletive) move, I’ll shoot you in the head.
I will shoot you in the face and I’ll go to sleep tonight.

Oh yeah, "(expletive) professional" is this (expletive)'s middle name.