BF2S Forums Canton, Ohio Police Officers threatens man legally carrying firearm

Whether or not the guy lied to him, the fact still remains the cop handled the situation very poorly. It is beyond reproach IMO. Surely their training covers how to not fly off the handle and threaten to assault a woman, harrass the driver in any future sightings of him in his car and intimidation by stating he should've executed him with no remorse - all whilst incorrectly following procedure that endangered not only his own life but that of his partner's.

Dilbert_X wrote:

SEREMAKER wrote:

the search : was bc they pulled out the black male passenger and they just began a search of the area of where he was sitting at in the back of the car.

Being black justifies a search?

No, but from the vid the passenger was clearly black and since we are only provided evidence that is shown in the vid, the viewers witness a black male passenger sitting in the back right passenger seat - OF removes black male passenger from back right passenger seat - OF begins search of area that black male passenger was sitting in adjacent of the vehicle

in conclusion : the passenger is male and black - he was sitting in the right rear seat of the vehicle - he was removed out of vehicle by OF - OF began search of vehicle where the black male passenger was sitting

SEREMAKER wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

SEREMAKER wrote:

the search : was bc they pulled out the black male passenger and they just began a search of the area of where he was sitting at in the back of the car.

Being black justifies a search?

No, but from the vid the passenger was clearly black and since we are only provided evidence that is shown in the vid, the viewers witness a black male passenger sitting in the back right passenger seat - OF removes black male passenger from back right passenger seat - OF begins search of area that black male passenger was sitting in adjacent of the vehicle

in conclusion : the passenger is male and black - he was sitting in the right rear seat of the vehicle - he was removed out of vehicle by OF - OF began search of vehicle where the black male passenger was sitting

Still don't understand why the vehicle was stopped or searched at all.

Dilbert_X wrote:

SEREMAKER wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Being black justifies a search?

No, but from the vid the passenger was clearly black and since we are only provided evidence that is shown in the vid, the viewers witness a black male passenger sitting in the back right passenger seat - OF removes black male passenger from back right passenger seat - OF begins search of area that black male passenger was sitting in adjacent of the vehicle

in conclusion : the passenger is male and black - he was sitting in the right rear seat of the vehicle - he was removed out of vehicle by OF - OF began search of vehicle where the black male passenger was sitting

Still don't understand why the vehicle was stopped or searched at all.

bad neighborhood known for prostitutes and the hour of the night and a lady approaching from the right to the vehicle

Little BaBy JESUS wrote:

If you carry a gun in public then you can expect that every now and then someone will be unnerved by it. Other people want to feel safe and the police are well within their rights to check the permit of a man carrying a gun in public. The last thing they want to happen is for someone to report a person carrying a gun, police don't respond and 10 minutes later that person shoots up a shop or something with an illegal weapon.

I don't believe the police are "in their right" to stop and check a permit and what the man is doing unless what he is doing is illegal. That's like the police pulling over a car, just to make sure they have a drivers license, registration, insurance and are not intoxicated. It's no different in my opinion. He's following the law, yet he's being stopped simply because someone called the police. What if I called the police and said I saw a man driving down the street. Are they going to stop him and check him out? No, they're going to ask me what he's doing, whats the issue, why are you calling us. Should be same thing with someone legally carrying a firearm.

Plus if someone is carrying a gun to go commit a crime they're probably going to carry it concealed - especially in California where you'll probably be harassed by the cops just for carrying.

-Sh1fty- wrote:

Oh wow I had no idea that was from California! I had to watch it again to hear he was from Oceanside.
Anyway, do you need a permit to carry an unloaded weapon with a loaded magazine on you that isn't in the gun?

I don't believe you need a permit to open carry in California. The pistol must be carried open and unloaded. You can carry a loaded magazine, but it cannot be in the firearm. Of course there are always prohibited areas (schools, etc.) where you cannot carry. Laws may also vary between counties, cities and towns. If it's something you're considering I suggest you check out some Cailfornia firearms forums and the laws in your area to see whats legal. Read the laws for yourself.

SEREMAKER wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

Still don't understand why the vehicle was stopped or searched at all.

bad neighborhood known for prostitutes and the hour of the night and a lady approaching from the right to the vehicle

Sere, do you think that's a good reason to stop and search? Just because someone lives in a bad neighborhood it's OK to assume they're doing something illegal? I really don't know how/why cops are getting away with his bullshit. Just because a known prostitute walks up to a car doesn't mean a crime is being committed. It's a slippery slope.

west-phoenix-az wrote:

I don't believe the police are "in their right" to stop and check a permit and what the man is doing unless what he is doing is illegal. That's like the police pulling over a car, just to make sure they have a drivers license, registration, insurance and are not intoxicated. It's no different in my opinion.

Plus if someone is carrying a gun to go commit a crime they're probably going to carry it concealed - especially in California where you'll probably be harassed by the cops just for carrying.

I don't know about where you live, but cops do that here, it's called a random breath test so I'm not exactly sure what your point is.

Secondly, your last sentence only makes sense in the current context. Yes at the moment you would probably carry concealed if you were going to commit a crime. But what you are suggesting is that police shouldn't be able to question anyone over a firearm they are carrying unless they are currently committing a crime. In that context, why would criminals feel the need to carry concealed? The cops can't stop them or question them and so people would be able to carry weapons in public with impunity whether those weapons are legal or not and whether they are going to commit a crime or not.

I'm sorry but making carrying guns in public legal, and then removing the police's authority to maintain some sort of order in relation to publicly carried firearms is simply ludicrous.

Exactly. So if the police decides to check that legality and you are carrying a permit, there really is no argument either way.

Jaekus wrote:

Exactly. So if the police decides to check that legality and you are carrying a permit, there really is no argument either way.

Stopping a citizen without a clear suspicion of a crime having been committed is really skating on thin ice, with regards to probable cause and 4th Amendment rights, as far as I can tell.

Jaekus wrote:

RAIMIUS wrote:

Jaekus wrote:

Exactly. So if the police decides to check that legality and you are carrying a permit, there really is no argument either way.

Stopping a citizen without a clear suspicion of a crime having been committed is really skating on thin ice, with regards to probable cause and 4th Amendment rights, as far as I can tell.

Well yeah, I don't know how it works over there, but the argument re: being randomly stopped in your car for a licence check isn't a very good comparison then, because any cop can stop any motorist here for a random breath test. I've been stopped a few times at 8:30am on a Monday and Tuesday on my way home from work. It's a small inconvenience and they're polite enough about it.

Surely a permit check for someone carrying a firearm would be pretty quick? Just an "excuse me sir, could I please see your permit?" *show permit* "thank you sir, have a good day".

I see no reason to perform such a check, as most people do not CCW so you would be wasting a lot of time.

I have never been pulled over since I started CCWing, but if and when I am pulled over  Iwill have my drivers license and my CCW permit in hand to present to the cop. With both hands on the steering wheel of course.

Trotskygrad wrote:

ohey, example?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LngS1nD … r_embedded

Good cop. Pity the gun carrier didnt show the trust and respect he was given back. Why would he refuse to tell him his name? I kow he doesnt have to but he should have shown the same trust the cop showed him.

Dilbert_X wrote:

SEREMAKER wrote:

If I was the ranking officer on scene, then I would have also done a search but my intention would be looking for possible drugs due to not being able to prove that a transaction of prostitution was in-effect.

So having had flimsy evidence to stop him in the first place you would use that as a pretext for looking for other evidence to support some other crime you have no indication for either?

probable cause

Dilbert_X wrote:

Being black and sitting in a car is probable cause eh?
Police in the US are out of hand.

I think the probable cause is being parked with that woman leaning into the car in that part of town (solicitation).