Ohio police threaten to execute permit holder video

[Fallguy]

That is correct. And there is no law that stops a LEO from treating you as a deadly threat if he sees a gun you have not told him about. Common sense works both ways.

Isn't that why some say Concealed means Concealed?

But I'm pretty sure this officers reaction would have been the same if the handgun was carried openly...probably even worse (if that is possible).

[Fallguy]

Another point. Here in TN, your permit number and driver's license number are the same. So he's going to know you have a permit whether you tell him or not. I haven't been pulled over since I got my permit, but I plan to hand it and my driver's license over at the same time. I'm not sure, but I don't think it's that way in Ohio.

They won't know till they run your DL number though. Many times a LEO may just ask to see your license and then hand it back and tell you to slow down, signal next time etc... and never actually run it.

But I agree you shouldn't let a LEO "discover" a firearm on you or in the vehicle without telling him. So if it looks like I will be searched for some reason I would inform him.

[Fallguy]

I remember a time, however, when at least the majority of LEOs could do that while still remaining friendly and respectful. Some still can and do. The problem, to my mind, is the increasing militarization of our civilian police forces. Instead of being a 'culture' where public service and being part of the greater community is the dominant attitude, many times the current 'culture' seems geared more toward acting like an occupying military force or, maybe, prison guards who consider us all 'inmates'. This might be a proper attitude for a SWAT team (of which there are far too many which are used far too often, IMO) but not for a traffic cop.

+1

[NRA]

A different, but similar situation, and a much different reaction from the Officer. I am going to find this man and send him a "Thank You"!

This a**hole purposely tried to bait the LEO. Why created the undue BS? like his job is not hard enough!

[BigK]

Just to avoid confusion I am no longer in LE. I walked away in 2005. I thought it was clear in the previous post but I need to reiterate I am no longer in LE.

I knew you were, no idea why I typed "is". You were very clear, I just screwed up.

... Officers, (particularly street officers) have a special bond with other officers they work with. You are counting on these people to back you up when the SHTF, and they expect the same of you. The dynamic is very similar to your immediate family. Would you easily turn in your brother, sister or child if they did something wrong? Rob a bank? Probably, but reluctantly. How about cheat on their income taxes? Where do you draw the line?

This is 100% understandable. Those who walk the "thin blue line" together are often even closer than family and for good reason. They put their lives in each others hands.

FWIW...I am VERY familiar with the strong sense of unity at play. My ex's father and her brother were cops and I learned a lot from them. In fact, when what seemed like half the LAPD watched a few cops beat Rodney King, I got a unique insight from them about the ordeal. He was on drugs, ran from them for a long time, putting multiple lives in danger, resisted arrest, and kept trying to get up for the sole reason that he wanted to keep fighting with them. I'm glad the cops didn't get in worse trouble than they did and angry that he got so much money. I'm not saying he deserved it, but I see why it happened.

In this case I don't see the cop's side at all and was mostly just curious to see if any current LEO would step up and denounce this guys actions or not. You know they are talking about it at the station.

Edited July 22, 2011 by BigK

[NRA]

I knew you were, no idea why I typed "is". You were very clear, I just screwed up.

This is 100% understandable. Those who walk the "thin blue line" together are often even closer than family and for good reason. They put their lives in each others hands.

FWIW...I am VERY familiar with the strong sense of unity at play. My ex's father and her brother were cops and I learned a lot from them. In fact, when what seemed like half the LAPD watched a few cops beat Rodney King, I got a unique insight from them about the ordeal. He was on drugs, ran from them for a long time, putting multiple lives in danger, resisted arrest, and kept trying to get up for the sole reason that he wanted to keep fighting with them. I'm glad the cops didn't get in worse trouble than they did and angry that he got so much money. I'm not saying he deserved it, but I see why it happened.

In this case, I don't and was mostly curious to see if any current LEO would step up and denounce this guys actions or not.

Not to try and justify this case but did the public ever hear 1/2 the facts like how Rodney was nothing but trouble a woman beating thief plus resisting arrest.

Edited July 23, 2011 by NRA

[DaveTN]

This a**hole purposely tried to bait the LEO. Why created the undue BS? like his job is not hard enough!

I’m surprised the clown posted it; the cop made him look like the loser he is.

Who walks around with an unloaded gun? And then refusing to give his name.

Here’s what dumb azzes like that guy cause…

Bill Banning Open Carry of Firearms Passes California State Assembly - Sierra Madre, CA Patch

[Guest WyattEarp]

Did you watch the entire video? The threats seem EXTREMELY clear to me. If someone says he should have taken two steps back, pulled his weapon, put 10 rounds in me, and then let me drop... I'm gonna take that as a pretty clear threat!!

yes I watched the entire video, yes the cop is out of control, and out of line, and unprofessional, needs to be fired, needs counseling, but he never said "I am going to execute you" or "I am going to shoot you".

The only real threat he made was that he said everytime I see your car, I'm going to pull you over, tow your ****, and take you to jail...that's a threat of harrassment.

talking about what you shoulda done and what you are going to do are two entirely different things. like I said, he walked a fine line, but I don't think he crossed it in terms of making actual threats of violence, but he crossed several others that will hopefully see him removed from the police force (or at least from duty on the streets).

If I get my ass kicked in a fight and afterwards I tell the guy that I was fighting, that I should have ducked when he swung, and broken his nose, that is not making a threat. all that is doing is elaborating/speculating on the action I should have taken.

a threat would be "Next time I pull you over, I'm pulling my gun and pumping 10 rounds into your chest". that would be a threat. Or if he'd have said, "consider yourself lucky, because next time you won't be alive to screw up again" that would be a threat. more than likely, the cop was trying to badger the guy into saying or doing something stupid, so he could engage him physically, seemed like he was looking for a fight or to escalate the situation, but the suspect didn't give him that satisfaction.

Edited July 23, 2011 by WyattEarp

[BigK]

Funny, I got the same impression. I thought he was trying to get the guy to smart off, so he could rough him up. The guy played it smart too, I think this cop would have loved to see him resist or something.

[JayC]

In most places "relieved of his duties" is paid leave, not termination.

Well apparently, as of today, the officer has been relieved of his duties which I guess means fired. Honestly though, he's pretty much like majority of the cops I've met. I've only met three who have been really decent with me. Two are female and one is a male and the only male cop I like. The two female cops rocked socks.

I'd rather have cops with a better demeanor than ones that act like this. I mean, the guy didn't even replay the events in his head. He completely lost it despite the guy actually saying that he was carrying and was holding his license out for the cop the entire time they were talking to him. Hell, if I were the cop, I would have just let the guy go. Thankfully, you're not required to notify cops here in TN.

[Worriedman]

This a**hole purposely tried to bait the LEO. Why created the undue BS? like his job is not hard enough!

The facts of the matter is, the guy was doing nothing wrong, (the Officer acted very professionally and said that he was within his Rights, and stated that he agreed with the person for exercising those Rights). The Officer responded in the manner that he should have. Once he determined the individual was not violating the law, he shook his hand, stated his name for the camera and gave his badge number.

This "a**hole" as you put it, was breaking no law, and the Officer certainly did not give the impression that he felt like he was being baited. We need more like him, and less like the jerk in the other video.

[Worriedman]

I’m surprised the clown posted it; the cop made him look like the loser he is.

Who walks around with an unloaded gun? And then refusing to give his name.

Here’s what dumb azzes like that guy cause…

Bill Banning Open Carry of Firearms Passes California State Assembly - Sierra Madre, CA Patch

The point of posting this video was to show that rational LEO's can approach a situation with respect for the Rights of others and still do their job.

And California has been out to limit firearms freedoms for years and years, this guy and a thousand like him expressing their limited Rights legally did not cause a bunch of anti-gun Liberals to further restrict their rights, it was going to happen anyway.

[wcsc12]

In most places "relieved of his duties" is paid leave, not termination.

Ah...not really hip to that type of terminology in reference to cops. For me, relieved of duties means a separation of employer and employee and that makes more sense.

I made one mistake though in the article. Apparently, the updated posted today was actually from what happened at some point in June.

UPDATE 7/22/2011: Canton Police announced Thursday that the officer was relieved of all duties in June following an internal investigation complaint filed in this matter.

So I have no idea what that means.

Although, has there been any update as to what's happening to William? It sucks that they haven't dropped the charges and are still planning to prosecute him even after he clearly stated he was carrying but then again, not our state.

Edited July 23, 2011 by wcsc12

[Guest nashvegas]

This cop has to know his dash cam is on right? Yet he still carries on in this manner.

To me that implies that he is not worried about any repercussions from his department for this kind of behavior.

Unsettling.

[Punisher84]

This a**hole purposely tried to bait the LEO. Why created the undue BS? like his job is not hard enough!

My opinion exactly. Good LEO. Douchebag camera guy.

[Guest DanE479]

yes I watched the entire video, yes the cop is out of control, and out of line, and unprofessional, needs to be fired, needs counseling, but he never said "I am going to execute you" or "I am going to shoot you".

The only real threat he made was that he said everytime I see your car, I'm going to pull you over, tow your ****, and take you to jail...that's a threat of harrassment.

talking about what you shoulda done and what you are going to do are two entirely different things. like I said, he walked a fine line, but I don't think he crossed it in terms of making actual threats of violence, but he crossed several others that will hopefully see him removed from the police force (or at least from duty on the streets).

If I get my ass kicked in a fight and afterwards I tell the guy that I was fighting, that I should have ducked when he swung, and broken his nose, that is not making a threat. all that is doing is elaborating/speculating on the action I should have taken.

a threat would be "Next time I pull you over, I'm pulling my gun and pumping 10 rounds into your chest". that would be a threat. Or if he'd have said, "consider yourself lucky, because next time you won't be alive to screw up again" that would be a threat. more than likely, the cop was trying to badger the guy into saying or doing something stupid, so he could engage him physically, seemed like he was looking for a fight or to escalate the situation, but the suspect didn't give him that satisfaction.

To make a fine point, the statements about the officer shooting the subject were in fact NOT threats. THey were, however, when taken in total with the officer's demeanor and other statments, enough to constitute a charge of "Menacing" or perhaps simple assault (a case for simple assault can be made when the statements of one are interperated as intending physical harm against another). The officer DID threaten the female subject when he told her that he would "put lumps" on her if he saw her again. That is more than enough to constitute an assault charge seeing as the female was posing no physical threat and complying with the officer's requests, orders and statments. The mere threat of phsyical violence to another is grounds for an arrest.

[MacGyver]

I think this thread has served it's purpose.

If anyone has an update or resolution to this story, PM me and I'll update the thread.

[MacGyver]

closed

[MacGyver]

Here's an update (hat tip to Garufa) http://www.fox8.com/news/wjw-canton-...0,337121.story

Offending officer has been fired.

[Fallguy]

Glad he was fired.

But there on investigation says:

"It is quite clear that his actions represent a pattern of behavior where inappropriate verbal abuse and threat of death and great bodily harm of the various complainants occurred. This escalating pattern of potentially dangerous behavior cannot be justified or excused and clearly illustrated the seriousness of the departmental infractions."

Seems like enough where he should be criminally charged to me.

[Fallguy]

Glad he was fired.

But there on investigation says:

"It is quite clear that his actions represent a pattern of behavior where inappropriate verbal abuse and threat of death and great bodily harm of the various complainants occurred. This escalating pattern of potentially dangerous behavior cannot be justified or excused and clearly illustrated the seriousness of the departmental infractions."

Seems like enough where he should be criminally charged to me.

I contacted the reporter of the article.

He said although not in his article, "in the safety director's ruling he stated that the City of Canton's Law Department commissioned an independent review of the case to see if criminal charges should be filed against the officer.

The independent prosecutor determined that criminal charges were not warranted."

So no criminal charges I reckon....