This is What Happens When You Arrest An Open Carrier for Open Carrying Where Open Carry Is Legal

0cf184f

According to a suit filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, Michael Weitzsacker was arrested on August 3 of last year for the crime of “inducing panic.” How, you may ask, did Mr. Weitzsacker manage to do that while wearing a t-shirt, shorts and riding his bike to his local ATM? Simple, at least in the eyes of Brooklyn, Ohio police officers Daniel Meadows and Scott Mielke. He was also wearing a holster in which he was legally and openly carrying a handgun . . .

In their report, the officers claimed the gun was actually concealed (at least partially). The bank’s security cameras apparently showed otherwise. If you believe the complaint filed by Weitzsacker’s attorney, David Fetters, once the prosecutor saw the pics, all charges were dropped.

Mr. Weitzsacker is now seeking $2 million plus attorneys fees from the city of Brooklyn, officers Meadows and Mielke as well as two unidentified individuals because of a search and arrest he contends were made without probable cause.

comments

  1. avatar Frank Masotti says:

    Typical police behavior in every city in every state where open carry is legal.

    1. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

      Not true Frank.

      1. avatar Carry.45 says:

        +1 never had an issue. Spilled a large iced coffe all over the straw and napkin stand at a dunking while ocing once. There happened to be three cops in there as well. The only thing they said to me on the way out the door was “bad luck buddy” with a big old smile. Which I got a kick out of.

        1. avatar Clark says:

          did anyone else think it was funny that your story included a Dunking (I’m guessing you meant Dunkin’ Donuts) and three cops?

    2. avatar Jandrews says:

      I open carried in NC without issue when I lived there.

      Since moving here to AZ, same thing.

      I will grant you: I have never lived in a highly urban area in either state, because why would anyone subject themselves to that?

      1. avatar savaze says:

        You must live in Phoenix or Tempe. I live out on the west end of the valley and I’ve never had a problem. I also see people open carrying just about everywhere on this side. I was worried the first time I had a cop walk up behind me while I was in line at a Paradise Bakery, but nothing came from it. I’ve been in more conversations on why I carry a revolver over an autoloader than anything else.

        Maybe people are less threatened by seeing someone carry a combat-sized revolver versus the active campaign to villainize all modern firearms?! I don’t think that’s the case though. Just yesterday I saw a guy walk out of a McDonalds while open carrying a Glock something or another as he walked into a crowd of women and children at a crosswalk. It was very easy to see he was carrying – Hispanic guy dressed in all white with a black holster and gun. I see more of the odd open carriers at Walmart or near ASU, but the ASU guys usually have police trailing them a block back.

        1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          odd open carriers at Walmart

          Well, duh! It’s WalMart! 😀

        2. avatar Rob1285 says:

          “Maybe people are less threatened by seeing someone carry a combat-sized revolver versus the active campaign to villainize all modern firearms?”

          I wouldn’t be surprised if this was really the case. I know a few people who aren’t “anti-gun” per say, but get freaked out whenever I have any of the semi autos out when they are around. None of them have any problem with the wife’s wheel gun though. Strange, that.

          Ah well.

          Sic Transit Gloria Mundi.

        3. avatar Bob20 says:

          I live in Sun Lakes, AZ, which is South of Phoenix. I see open carry all the time, and no one cares except for tourists from LA. Most people will debate which gun is better or complain that they don’t get enough time at the range.

    3. avatar Zed says:

      Yea not true at all. I ride my motorcycle all the time and my pistol and holster are showing, and LEO just looks but has never harassed me or questioned me.

    4. avatar Dan says:

      Not true. Everyone is armed in Arizona. I carry, along with many others, all the time. I have never once been stopped by the police for my sidearm. In fact I have good encounters with the police while armed. They’re used to it here.

    5. avatar brad says:

      Ignorant statement there bud, sorry. I’m a police officer and I see people carrying openly almost everyday here and I and other officers have no problem with it whatsoever, UNLESS we get a call from a citizen in reference to this person. If so, we are then obligated to make contact and I.D. But if you cooperate then off you go with your gun and I’m happy to have a law abiding citizen carrying as far as I’m concerned. Where we run into a problem is with these street lawyers that “know” their rights and want to be assholes from the beginning. But anyway, I rarely have a problem with open carry citizens as the ones in this area are very cooperative and understand the law quite well.

      1. avatar Chris says:

        Thank you, brad. You hit the nail on the head. There are way too many people out there who “know” the law and don’t know squat. They are exactly the people who earn gun owners a bad name.

        1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          I’m assuming you would say the same thing about police who think they know the law and arrest people on bogus charges.

        2. avatar Chris says:

          It’s pretty obvious to me you have your stinger out for all law enforcement

        3. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          So then you wouldn’t say the same thing about police who think they know the law and arrest people on bogus charges.

        4. avatar Chris says:

          Again, that is the exception, not the norm

        5. avatar Jeremiah says:

          Chris, there are plenty of LEO’s out there that don’t have an adequate understanding of the protections guaranteed by the Constitution. This story illustrates that very clearly. As for so called street lawyers that supposedly don’t know squat or are assholes from the get go, well, respect is a two way street. Your badge gives you authority, not respect, know the difference. You can have your opinion that I have a “stinger” for LEO, and I could tell you about all my close personal friends and family that are LEO, but you would just dismiss that and continue to denigrate me and others that call for mutual respect and accountability, whatever happened to policing your own?

        6. avatar Chris says:

          Just so you know. I am not an LEO and I fully agree respect goes both ways. As a volunteer fire chief I’ve worked with a lot of local and state LEO,s and from my experience most of them are decent and respectful. Yes, I’ve worked with a few who were egotistical jerks and I’d just as soon knock them on their ass as talk to them. My comments were to the gentleman who appears to have a beef with all LEO’s. From my experience most of them are decent, respectful individuals.

      2. avatar Danny Griffin says:

        Just curious what state your agency is in that is a “Must ID” state.

        1. avatar AndrewinDC says:

          A number of states allow for various ID demands when officers have “reasonable suspicion” of criminal activity (AKA ‘Terry stop’).

          Ohio is one of those states. With that being said, whether of not open carrying warrants a terry stop is open to debate.

        2. avatar Hannibal says:

          If you decide not to ID and you are not legally compelled to do so the police officer might just decide to keep watching you as long as you’re in public (until you jaywalk, etc).

        3. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          the police officer might just decide to keep watching you as long as you’re in public (until you jaywalk, etc)

          So much for the lie about taking police away from real police work. If they really had other things to do, they wouldn’t be sitting in a car waiting for someone to jaywalk.

        4. avatar John in Ohio says:

          @AndrewinDC: Openly carrying a firearm isn’t a crime by itself in Ohio so there isn’t reasonable suspicion of a crime when someone is merely carrying openly. I and many others have refused to identify under those circumstances. One does not have to identify just because they are open carrying. Check out “sterile carry” in Ohio.

      3. avatar Cecil says:

        Hey Brad, Do the higher-ups at whichever police agency you work for ever consider some training for the 9-1-1 dispatchers regarding a little careful questioning of the paranoid, anti-gun callers, something along the lines of…

        Is the person with a firearm doing anything other than carrying the firearm?
        Is there any specific action being taken by the person which, if they did not have a firearm, you would find threatening or suspicious?
        Are you aware that the Second Amendment recognizes the Right of citizens to keep and to BEAR arms?
        Please provide your full name and address for our records, as our District Attorney aggressively pursues criminal charges when persons file false police reports, including false reports of persons creating disturbances by lawfully exercising their Constitutionally protected Rights.

      4. avatar Ed says:

        Brad…why are you obligated to I.D. just because someone called, if the person is not doing anything illegal? What if they refuse to show I.D.? Do you then arrest them?

        1. avatar Chris says:

          Just asking, but why refuse to ID yourself if you have nothing to hide?

        2. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          There are a number of reasons to refuse to ID. If you have been following firearms rights activities you could think of a handful off the top of your head. A lot of it revolves around the police serving you with notices of various and sundry law violations long after the fact. This has happened in Michigan and Pennsylvania, to name two states. As a matter of fact, the cops in Pennsylvania have been particularly egregious about this. They have gone so far as to videotape people, take pictures of all the nearby cars and license plates, and tried to match them up to get IDs because people started to refuse to ID after the cops started pulling BS tactics like I said above.

          Also, if you are not required to ID by law, why should you? What else do you think you should be forced to do that you are not legally required to?

          In short, it can’t help you, but it could potentially hurt you. And if it’s not required, then…

        3. avatar Chris says:

          So what is the law in PA?

        4. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          In PA you don’t have to ID. That’s why carriers began refusing to ID, because cops were abusing it. I thought I made that clear, but apparently not.

        5. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          Just asking, but why refuse to ID yourself if you have nothing to hide?

          Re-read the fifth amendment, and then get back to us.

          The only reason for a police officer to request an ID of someone for whom the officer doesn’t have reasonable suspicion of unlawful activity is to conduct a fishing expedition. By getting the person to hand over the ID willingly, the officer dupes the person into giving up fifth-amendment rights against self-incrimination.

          Under the principle of innocent until proven guilty, the “if you have nothing to hide” canard/guilt trip is exactly backward. Unless the officer has some reasonable suspicion, he has no need for ID.

        6. avatar Bobby C King says:

          If your a police officer, you should know that you DO NOT have the right to ask for a persons ID. This in NOT Nazi Germany. “SHOW ME YOUR PAPERS”? This is the mentality of a police state and WE THE PEOPLE are fed up with this conduct.

          Its like you have to have an I.Q. below 80 to be a Police Officer these days. And by the way, my I.Q. is 168. And I am dyslexic.

          I often post comments that are aimed at baiting responses. Like typing Hay for the word Hey. Its bait for a Jack Ass! And most cops are quick to point out the misspelled word like they have some type of high intelligence. Anyone ever noticed that a lot of Police Officers have heads that are flat in the back? Just saying!!!

          Learn your limits. In the United States Police have limited power. They must be shown that acting like the Judge, Jury and Executioner comes with a price. Learn your limits and stay within the confines of those limits. The Officer that crossed that thin blue line and violated my Civil Rights will see his day in Federal Court. That is not a threat, its a promise. And his immunity was removed by the Chief as I had given notice to the whole Department of SCOTUS rulings and requested that the officers be properly trained. Immunity is for honest mistakes. When proper notice is shown to have occurred, immunity is removed. If a few of these RAMBO police officers get in the crosshairs on a personal level, news of personal liability will travel fast through the rank and file.

        7. avatar John in Ohio says:

          Just asking, but why refuse to ID yourself if you have nothing to hide?

          Why not consent to a search if you have nothing to hide? Your question represents the same old attempt to circumvent constitutional protections.

      5. avatar Mike says:

        Brad. I have to agree. 99 percent of officers are professionals. But when the 1 percent target an innocent person, the victim is cuffed, likely abused, placed into a cell, loses work, loses court fees, and earns a negative reputation from an employer if the employer is already anti-2A biased. As for the 1 percent bad police officer, he or she simply gets to go home at the end of the night. So, citizens might be correct to respond like “street lawyers that ‘know’ their rights and want to be assholes from the beginning”. After all, if they cooperate, give permission for a search or answer questions about what they were doing or where they are going, the 1 percent officer can assure that whatever the person says “can and will be used against [him].” If we do not assert our rights, what follows becomes partially our own fault. I work with law enforcement officials who boast that they are great at talking people into surrendering their rights. I say this with full respect for the 99 percent.

        1. avatar Phillip says:

          Sorry, Mike, but it is FAR more than any 1%. Detroit, Albuquerque, Seattle, LAPD, NYPD, New Orleans, Cleveland, Cincinnati, and about 10 other departments, according to the Department Of Justice, are GUILTY of systematically violating citizens civil rights with abuse, false arrest, bogus charges, excessive force and deadly force. You are out of touch with the problem.

      6. avatar Rolf says:

        Newsflash, Brad: No one cares whatsoever what you or your fellow “officers” have a problem with. You are not paid (by us) to interpret the law nor regale us with your thoughts on the law, etc.

        You are a meter maid with a gun: your job is to generate revenue by writing citations for (actual) infractions of the law.

      7. avatar Phillip says:

        Brad. If they are not committing a crime, what doe it matter that you get a call? How do you have the authority to stop and ID when there is no RS or PC? Sounds like you were in the habit of conducting illegal stops and searches. If it’s not a Terry stop, you have no authority to ask for ID. Please explain.

    6. avatar Dr. Kenneth Noisewater says:

      Get them sacked, get their pensions, and drive them to penury and ruin.

      Examples must be made.

    7. avatar Quiet Professional says:

      No issues here in metro Hotlanta. Only time I’ve seen anyone dunned for OC was at a July 4 celebration on Army Corps of Engineers property–applicability of state laws permitting concealed or OC murky. And even then, the guy was just induced to leave by the local PD.

      1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

        Carry on property managed by USACE not allowed except in California. Glad the carrier didn’t get arrested. Although we either need more lawsuits to expand this or the .gov to appeal the ruling to expand it as I don’t think the ban would survive a legal challenge in the other 57 states.

    8. avatar IdahoPete says:

      NOT true in Idaho, except maybe in the liberal pestholes of Sun Valley, Hailey, and the NorthEnd of Boise. Friend of mine is a Viet Nam Marine – he not only open carries every day (including in WalMart), he makes sure his T-shirts coordinate with his handgun – S&W T-shirt with a S&W .357 revolver (his preferred carry), Ruger T-shirt with his Ruger 1911, Volkswagen T-shirt with his Luger ….

      Has never been hassled by the local police/sheriff deputies, other than a few semi-auto fanatics who give him grief for carrying a revolver with “only 6-shots”. (His usual reply is “you never need more than 6 with a .357”.)

      Man, I love Idaho.

    9. avatar Joe Davis says:

      I live in Wooster Ohio, and our police dont flinch a bit when we open carry our handguns. Not all Ohio cities are criminal cities. My hometown of Lancaster o. Also arrests citizens for legal opencarry. I plan to open carry there to shut these crooked cops down, with a law suit.

    10. avatar Becca says:

      In Louisville, KY, the officers are very nice and generally well educated about open carry. In IN, you have to have a permit for open or concealed, but I have found the local law enforcement to be very supportive and upstanding for the right to carry.

  2. avatar MiniMe says:

    Booyah! And so it goes.

  3. avatar rethin says:

    Good deal if you can get it.

  4. avatar Gunr says:

    Heeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeere we go again! I’m gonna stay of of this one.

  5. avatar Kale says:

    This just made my day.

  6. avatar Mark N. says:

    There have been more than a couple of LEOs who have posted here claiming that most police officers support the rights of citizens to carry. If this is the case, why do we have so many stories posted here of cops looking for any excuse to arrest open carriers? The usual charges are some version of disturbing the peace, or displaying a weapon threatening manner, interference with a police investigation and so on. This is the third story jus in the past week. Don’t police read the news? Do they not pay attention in squad briefing? Or are they just as politicized as everyone else in this country?

    1. avatar CBI says:

      Well, if 90% of police *and* 90% of DAs support open carry, that means that there is a 0.25% (statistically) percent that an open carrier will encounter a non-supportive policeman in a place with a non-supportive DA. So . . . if during a week, there are 1000 open carriers who encounter a policeman, 2-3 will be arrested *and* charged by the non-supportive LEO and DA.
      Assuming that most LEOs and DAs *really* don’t know the law in their area (or don’t care: also a possibility), then, in other words, three a week is not unexpected. A key is educating LEOs and DAs: something open carriers are attempting to do.

      1. avatar Hasdrubal says:

        Once is too many, but you’ve got somewhere around 800,000 police/troopers/deputies nationwide, and who knows how many people who freak out and call 911 about open carry because they think they’re under attack by a Soviet paratrooper division or something. Combine that with the easy availability of news stories around the country that in decades past would have been strictly local, and the ever more antagonistic political debate in this country, and you’re going to see more of this kind of nonsense as time goes on. Until we fix it, I suppose.

      2. avatar Bud says:

        Because when cops take no action when they see someone legally caring a firearm……………………….

        wait for it…………………………..

        here it comes…………………………………………………….

        It’s not news and no one reports it!

      3. avatar JT says:

        “Assuming that most LEOs and DAs *really* don’t know the law in their area (or don’t care: also a possibility)”

        Cleveland area, they know the law and don’t care. Cleveland and the surrounding suburbs are still pissed that preemption was passed in Ohio and their local anti-gun ordinances were gutted.

        1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          So much for “cops are pro-2A and respect the rights of gun owners.”

    2. avatar Accur81 says:

      And our breaking news story coming at 6 o’clock: local cop doesn’t shoot dog, writes some tickets, files charges against a misdemeanor hit and run driver, writes 7 speeding tickets, and gives directions to an old lady who got lost. Not.

      If we’re doing what we are supposed to, there isn’t much of a news story. I’ve been on the local news a bunch of times, but it’s always been positive.

      Now when LAPD ventilates a pickup truck with olde ladies delivering newspapers, everybody hears about that. Ditto for Doerner going postal.

    3. avatar Mike Parker says:

      Because SOME cops are just douchebags…………NOT all, but some…………you know it, I know it and the people know it

    4. avatar Bob20 says:

      I have said this in a number of blog entries in the past, but here it is again. There are thousands of different police departments across the US. Each one is different in some way: different managers, different training, and different culture. If anyone knows there is a difference, it is the police officers, for they criticize other departments for their actions all of the time. Think of police departments like small businesses. If you get bad customer service at one store, do you stop going to stores. No. You go to another store where you get better service. I used to live in Oregon where a few cities did everything they could to arrest those who carried legally. I now live in Arizona where I may have a friendly argument with a police officer about Glock versus Sig Sauer versus M&P.

      1. avatar BHirsh says:

        It’s called “voting with your feet”, and it is one of the best features of a federal republic.

        BUT….

        Fundamental rights in a federal republic are in force EVERYWHERE, and one shouldn’t HAVE to “vote with your feet” because of unconstitutional attacks on your right to exercise them.

    5. avatar Joe Davis says:

      Most of the cities that arrest patriots for legal open carry have a lot of problems on many issues. No one needs crooked cops.

    6. avatar rlc2 says:

      Hasty Generalization fallacy, Mark N. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hasty_generalization

  7. Based only on the account posted here, appears he was legally open carrying, was not out to make a statement, or “teach the cops a lesson” and he definitely looks of legal age.

    Score one for legitimate, responsible open carry.

    Now if he had been riding his bike with an AR at the low ready and had he gone to Chipotle…

    🙂

    1. avatar Excedrine says:

      Except not even “Chipotle Ninjas” meet your definition of “Chipotle Ninja”.

    2. avatar Bob says:

      You make it sound like open carrying to “make a statement” is somehow wrong or bad. Would you scorn someone for exercising their 1st amendment right because they wanted to “make a statement.?”

      And by “teach the cops a lesson”, well, obviously there are very many cops who are not getting the lessons they need in their training program. What problem do you have with someone exercising their natural right to self defense because they say they want to develop a culture of acceptance of open carry? What difference does it matter what their reason is, if what they are doing is not harming or threatening anyone?

    3. avatar Lars says:

      Shut it Paul. When it’s deemed ok by the majority you condone it when it’s controversial you condemn it. You would be a good politician.

    4. avatar Chip Bennett says:

      So, who died and left you in charge of determining what open carry is legitimate, and what open carry is not?

      If it’s lawful, it’s legitimate. The reasons people choose to exercise their rights is not up to you to condone or to condemn.

      1. And who died and left YOU in charge, Chip, old bean?

        When it comes to open carry, never go full retard.

        1. avatar Chip Bennett says:

          And who died and left YOU in charge, Chip, old bean?

          When it comes to open carry, never go full retard.

          You’ll note that I’ve left my personal opinion of the wisdom and efficacy of various open carry tactics out of the discussion. I’m merely standing up for the general principle that rights are rights, that their exercise is inherently legitimate, and that one needs the permission of no one else in order to exercise them.

          From your comments, and those of a handful of others, I can come to no other conclusion that some of you simply believe that all open carry of long guns, for any reason, should be condemned by second amendment supporters.

  8. avatar Another Robert says:

    Why do they do that? Cops, I mean? Accur81? Hannibal? You guys or some of your compatriots here have any insight? I mean, where it’s legal to open carry, why do they want to try to arrest someone for openly carrying?

    1. avatar Gene says:

      IIRC, a few years ago, there was a similar incident in Fairfax county, VA. It was considered a “training issue”.

    2. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

      Honestly, I have no idea. My perspective is different, so I simply can’t understand why these idiots would arrest the guy.
      Here’s a short story of one open carrier I was dispatched to…
      Graveyard, about 2 a.m., a local Shari’s restaurant called and says there’s a guy wearing a pistol in a holster in the restaurant.
      I get there and the manager greets me at the door, he points and whispers telling me where the guy is. I asked, “what’s he doing?” He replies, “eating”.
      I walk over and ask if I can join him. He’s just a regular looking guy, wearing a western style holster with a single action in it.
      I ask him why he’s wearing the gun, he says he and some friends were up in the woods 4-bying and shooting all day, he’s just now back in town and stopped for some food. He points to his truck and says he couldn’t leave his heater in the truck because it has no doors. (It’s one of those stripped down older toyotas).
      So I let him know that he can carry concealed if he’s on the way to or from target shooting, hunting or fishing. He didn’t believe me so I showed him the statute. I advised him to always carry a fishing pole, or shot up targets in his truck. It’s easier than a permit and it’s free.
      Then we talked about shooting, 4x4ing, hunting and fishing.
      I didn’t ask him for his ID, I didn’t need to. Didn’t arrest him.
      So, I just don’t get it.

      1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

        In your story, if the manager didn’t want him there (whether he thought it was legal or illegal) he could have simply refused to serve the guy and told him to leave. Sounds like he wanted the guy’s money.

      2. avatar Gunr says:

        Way to go Tom, good contact.

      3. avatar 45acp says:

        @Tom in Oregon: We need more cops like you.

    3. avatar Hasdrubal says:

      Why? I can only guess, being one of those who likes open carry.

      Their chain of command leans as far left as any of the classic big city departments?

      Their training standards are abysmally low?

      They work with a shady prosecutor who they know will move forward with a bad case?

      They’re actually one of the stereotypical bullies who didn’t appreciate being corrected on the law by a “lowly civilian?”

      They were lied to by a politically motivated reporting party full of unjustified but loud moral outrage and pretend fear (less likely, I know, but it could happen)?

      In case of the above, combine it with the video not being available until the manager/owner/IT guy comes in three days later from vacation?

      Can’t think of more right now. Anyone care to add to the list? Note that any version of “they’re JBTs, Nazis, Communists, etc, will likely be covered by the ‘bullies’ one.

      1. avatar Another Robert says:

        I’d say you came through pretty well, there. thanks for the perspective. Just seems too dumb, courting this kind of lawsuit so willfully.

        1. avatar Hasdrubal says:

          Almost forgot, a little over five years ago, when I was going through the academy here in WA, we were told that a local lawyer was open carrying and going from city to city. He would go to someplace public like a car dealer, start asking perfectly normal questions about cars, and wait for police. At some point in the following conversation, he would ask “am I free to go?”

          If he was told no, he would sue. I’m told he got settlements from more than one city, because for some reason at that time in the King County area, police didn’t really have open carry on the radar and a lot of officers apparently had no idea it was legal here. I suppose on my list, you could put that under abysmal training.

        2. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          The arresting officers had to write something down with a corresponding law violation, right? What was the charge?

        3. avatar Hasdrubal says:

          They didn’t tell us in the academy, it could well have been that no cases were filed- but at the point where someone asks if they are free to go and police say no, that’s an unlawful detention unless you can explain damn well why it wasn’t.

      2. avatar Russ says:

        With over 900,000 law enforcement officers city, county, state, federal the percentage is about 00.01 that you get to hear about in these kind of stories. Most officers like people to carry. It gives more armed good guys on the street. I don’t know how you know about training but I go through it and it is fine. Everybody always wants to judge all officers by the very and I mean very few that get reported on , or a story they heard. I and a lot of officers have the same thing we tell people why they should carry. ” Seconds count when the Police are minutes away!” I think I’ll start using your attitude though. Everybody is a criminal because I arrested a guy robbing a liquor store. And everybody is speeding because I clocked (1) one car on radar. Thanks.

    4. avatar Hannibal says:

      Dunno, I work where there is no open carry except for uniforms (cops, security guards, etc) so it’s not much of an issue. I don’t see the big deal with someone having a holstered gun… much less so than someone carrying around a rifle in my opinion.

  9. avatar B says:

    They don’t like it. So they bully people to get their way. Only they have power over life and death.

    1. avatar Bob says:

      And no-one in the police department will even get a wrist slapped and the taxpayers will foot the bill. The only punishment there will be is extra paid vacation to the perpetrators.

      1. avatar SuperiorPosture says:

        Ding ding ding! We have a winner. This is exactly what will happen. Ain’t America grand?

  10. avatar Jake says:

    You wanna know why this stuff gets reported so much? Because it’s conflict, and conflict sells.

    Kind of like how every negligent child death in which a family member owned a firearm is reported as an “Evil Baby Killing Gun Death.” With all the reports, you might think they happen left, right, and center.

    Except, there are ~700 firearms related “accidents” (not my word) per year. And almost every single one gets reported, especially nowadays with the gun control hot-button.

    Know what doesn’t get reported? The tens of millions of gun owners who don’t kill anybody each day. (Thought experiment: replace “millions” with “thousands,” “gun owners” with “law enforcement professionals,” and “kill anybody” with “abuse their authority.)

  11. avatar David says:

    I say use the other side’s tactics and sue them for all they are worth. Once they learn better, it becomes a right defended, rather than a right lost.

    1. avatar Dirk Diggler says:

      as part of any settlement, there should be a condition that both officers have to resign from the force and agree to stay out of law enforcement. for ever.

      1. avatar clay says:

        I don’t think they need to resign. They should have to go on Television and read a primetime PSA explaining their mistake, and that it IS LEGAL and acceptable to open carry.

  12. avatar James St. John says:

    The officers themselves need to be sued, not the taxpayers.

  13. avatar Carry.45 says:

    It’s bogus for the cops to hassle the guy for excercising a right. It’s equally bogus for this guy to take 2 mil of tax payer dollars for a fairly minor issue. I really hope he’s highballing and expecting to settle at half a mil plus lawyer fees.

    1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

      False arrest is not a minor issue.

      1. avatar Carry.45 says:

        Agreed, but is it a 2 million dollars of taxpayer money issue?

        1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          I guess that will be up to a jury to decide. If the state and PD don’t want these lawsuits, they could simply tell their cops not to falsely arrest people. Wouldn’t that be easier?

        2. avatar Carry.45 says:

          The only action in the story I condone is the guy openly carrying a handgun. I disagree with the cops actions and his desire for an easy pay out. I call it easy because if I could get two mil for getting falsely arrested if quit my day job and open carry hoping to a big payout. But I would never take taxpayer dollars for something that wasn’t a life altering event. But yes it would be nice of cops would stop hassling gun owners yadda yadda

        3. avatar LarryinTX says:

          Danny, I think that is the idea! Really!

        4. the 2 mil would come out of the city,s budget which would tick lots of hand out muchers .which inter would come out of the police department budget for the next cycle . this would lead to less money for cop toy,s and no money for more officer. so 2 mil would be good thing i think

      2. avatar Rusty Shackleford says:

        It’s not a trivial thing at all.. It’s kidnapping, but with costumes. …and guns …under color of law.

    2. avatar Another Robert says:

      I’d say a settlement for less than the original claim is always a likely outcome.

    3. avatar lizzrd says:

      Half a mil? I don’t see him getting a dime from a jury of normal people.

  14. avatar tjlarson2k says:

    In cases where the police cite that you are “causing alarm” or “inducing panic”, it’s time to call the police out and ask them who exactly is panicking about your legal carry. And that moment is your chance to direct the police that now that your legal right to carry is not the issue, it’s the homophobes that need proper education about OCers and what constitutes lawful actions with a firearm.

    Is this a case of yelling “FIRE” in a theater? Hoplophobes that incite panic should be liable for their false reports to the police. Ignorance of carry law does not allow you to falsely accuse a person just because they are OCing. Technically, the PD should be accountable for arresting the legal OCer while the hoplophobes who called in about the OCer should also be liable to pay for his fees and any damages.

    This is yet another case where hoplophobia and ignorance of firearm carry law are the problem, not the method of carry or the carrier.

    If people can be held accountable for what they call the police for, maybe then people will stop and think before reporting “a person with a gun” any time they see one.

    1. avatar tjlarson2k says:

      Ugh, nasty copy/pasted sentence in the 2nd line. Meant to read:

      “And that moment is your chance to inform the police that your legal right to carry openly is not the issue, it’s the hoplophobes that need proper education about Open Carry and how to identify lawful and unlawful use of a firearm in public.”

      1. avatar 2A says:

        I knew what you meant,…but I still found it hilarious.

        1. avatar tjlarson2k says:

          The 5 min timers on the reply feature kill me every time… why are they even a thing? Makes people rush responses… 😛

      2. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Hey, I’m sure the homophobes need training, too!

  15. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

    Carry 45, I wouldnt consider an arrest a minor thing, but 2 million is a bit steep.

    1. avatar Carry.45 says:

      I should have bolded the word fairly

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Huh. I haven’t even figured out how to do that.

        1. avatar Carry.45 says:

          Lol hence my woes

  16. avatar Chris says:

    We as gun owners are supposed to be on the same side as law enforcement. Why do we make such a big deal out of these kinds of confrontations. When I carry, I carry concealed. It is not my goal to “show off” my firearm and cause conflict. Yes, it is our right to carry but we don’t need to be obnoxious about it. We have no idea what situation an officer may have just dealt with. There are a lot of crazies out there who carry and the police don’t always know who is who. Be respectful of your law enforcement, not confrontational.

    1. avatar Another Robert says:

      Sometimes open carry is the only legal option. Sometimes it is the more practical option between two legal options (ie spend a lot of money and time that you would rather spend on something else in order to ask the government for their permission to carry concealed, or carry openly for free without having to get a “permit” ).

      1. avatar Chris says:

        I guess it’s different in PA. I walk into the sheriff’s office, take a few minutes to fill out some basic paperwork, every five years, and I can carry concealed with no issue. I don’t kiss the state’s backside. It’s the same basic paperwork I fill out every year for my drivers license or hunting license. If open carry is your only option, then so be it. It’s not so in PA. I just prefer not to open carry.

        1. avatar Another Robert says:

          It’s different, to varying degrees, in all of the states. That’s why comments along the lines of, “I don’t know why anybody open carries; I carry concealed, so should everybody else” aren’t particularly persuasive

        2. avatar Chris says:

          Wow Robert, you must be from the media or a liberal. I never said I carry concealed and so should everybody else. I said it’s not my intentions to show off my firearm when I carry. Even in rural PA, there are people who are not exposed to firearms on a regular basis and it’s not my goal to brandish my firearm if I don’t need to. If we truly carry for our protection and the protection of our families, what statement are we trying to make by walking into our local walmart or wherever, brandishing a side arm? I don’t need to prove I’m a big man carrying a gun

        3. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          Brandishing a gun is waving or displaying the firearm in a threatening manner. I should hope you are not doing that! However, the open carry of a holstered pistol is not brandishing.

        4. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          Yes, you are asking permission to conceal carry. And you are paying for it. In 30 states you don’t have to ask permission to open carry.

          And even if you want to conceal carry, sometimes you can’t. You might be under 21, or you might have a disqualifying event. Every state is different, but I’ll use Michigan as an example. There are something like 83 different things that will disqualify you from obtaining a concealed carry license. Have a few beers and ride your off road four-wheeler? Disqualified. Have a few beers in your boat? Disqualified. Get in an argument in public and get a disorderly charge? Disqualified. Peel out and a cop sees you? Reckless driving. Disqualified. And don’t forget the ever-present PPO from a pissed off spouse you just filed for divorce from. Disqualified. 83 of these things will disqualify you from getting a CPL in Michigan.

        5. avatar Chris says:

          Most, if not all of those reasons are absurd for refusing a CC permit but in today’s world, do not surprise me. You are correct. I pay for my CC permit but I don’t mind. it’s the way PA operates

        6. avatar Another Robert says:

          I didn’t say that’s what you said. I said “comments along the lines of”. Like maybe that one about ” I don’t have to prove I’m a big man by carrying a gun”, like that’s what the people who open carry are trying to do. Guess what, I don’t open carry either. I have other options that I can avail myself of at present. But I understand that other folks don’t, so I don’t react to their undeserved difficulties (like being illegally arrested) with dismissive comments like , “Gee, I only concealed carry and that stuff never happens to me”.

        7. avatar LarryinTX says:

          You guys are missing the concept of a BBQ gun, such as engraved, nickel plated, fancy grips, multicolor holsters, etc. If TX ever gets open carry, I’m gonna be spending some fancy money. Maybe even the Doc Holliday rig from Cimmaron.

        8. avatar Matt inTX says:

          BBQ GUN! Already got mine just need a fancy holster. Can’t wait.

    2. avatar Danny Griffin says:

      When I carry, I carry concealed.

      Good for you. Mr. Weitzsacker doesn’t. And from reading the complaint, it doesn’t appear that he has a concealed carry license so he cannot legally carry concealed if he wanted to. What makes you think he was trying to “show off?”

    3. avatar tjlarson2k says:

      The problem here is systemic hoplophobia brought to you by our kool-aid-guzzling anti-2A “OMG anyone with a gun = mass shooter” media.

      Well that and the fact the PD don’t seem to be fact-checking reports of “OMG I saw a person with a gun, 911”. Granted, they can’t question every call and they just get whatever is sent from 911, so maybe it’s the 911 operator’s job to fact check callers.

      That and the police should really learn to recognize lawful OCers vs. suspicious behavior. I somehow doubt criminals are going to have the foresight to accurately cite 2A rights and justifications for their carry if they are already illegally carrying.

      Maybe the NRA or someone with legal gusto should write a good Fact Sheet that accurately give guidelines on “lawful” and “unlawful” firearm and carry practices with the aim to help educate the hoplophobes of Merica so they can stop wasting our tax dollars on bogus calls to 911 and tying up the police and preventing them from stopping and asking every lawful OCer about their gat.

      1. avatar Chris says:

        You’ve obviously never worked in emergency services. A 911 dispatcher is not going to assume the responsibility of asking a few questions and then dismissing the callers complaint. They are going to radio the police and let the professionals handle it. Yes, obviously there are officers and even departments who mishandle these situations and then we blow it out of proportion the same way the media does every time somebody is killed with a firearm. Again, we need to work with our law enforcement, not set up walls that are hard to break down. Let’s not run down every officer because of a few who abuse their powers.

        1. avatar tjlarson2k says:

          “You’ve obviously never worked in emergency services. A 911 dispatcher is not going to assume the responsibility of asking a few questions and then dismissing the callers complaint. They are going to radio the police and let the professionals handle it. Yes, obviously there are officers and even departments who mishandle these situations and then we blow it out of proportion the same way the media does every time somebody is killed with a firearm. Again, we need to work with our law enforcement, not set up walls that are hard to break down. Let’s not run down every officer because of a few who abuse their powers.”

          You do realize you just contradicted your previous statement? At what point is a 911 dispatcher responsible for the accuracy of the information being told to them then? Obviously I’m not saying they should question information that is obviously a legitimate “OMG help me now” emergency. But surely they can ask a few follow up questions to a person that is describing a person no where near them (ie. they are not in immediate danger) with a firearm.

          What is this person with a firearm doing? What are they wearing? Are they pointing the firearm at anyone? Is the firearm holstered?

          All easy questions to ask… and this is all information that is important to give to the responding officers.

          I think officers would respond differently to these reportings:

          911 Report 1:
          “Report of a person wearing a white tshirt with a firearm was last seen near an ATM”

          911 Report 2:
          “A person wearing jeans, white tshirt and with a holstered firearm was reported to be using an ATM.”

          Describing your actions is paramount, and if someone sees you with your firearm and is able to report it, surely they can offer up more pertinent information if the right follow up questions are asked. A lack of training doesn’t excuse misleading information.

          This is why so many self-defense experts tell you to describe what you’re wearing, what you’re doing, and that you’re armed, when it comes to calling 911 during a DGU. So if the 911 operator can be responsible for relaying that sort of information to the police, they should be able to extract that same information from a person describing an armed citizen.

      2. avatar Dennis says:

        Two of my long-time LEO friends have told me that in a combined 32 year career that they have seldom seen someone legally carrying a handgun not use a holster (the few exceptions are some small pocket pistols) and they had never seen a criminal using a holster.

    4. avatar John in AK says:

      We can and should be respectful of law enforcement, or at least the concept of law enforcement, so long as law enforcement respects US. It is easy to respect those that adhere strictly to duty and are honourable and forthright in the upholding of the law, easy to look up to those who risk life and limb for the public good, who are even-handed in fairly enforcing law with common sense, tact, and compassion.

      Then there are those other guys, the puppyshooters and hostage-whackers and power-mad thugs who emulate Judge Dredd: “I AM the law!” Those don’t get any respect.

      1. avatar Chris says:

        I agree 100%. I’ve seen quite a few comments on here though, where it appears some people assume all law enforcement are egotistical maniacs and that simply isn’t true. Yes, there definitely are some and they are a disgrace to the good ones.

        1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          So then what do you think about a cop that says he’s “lucky he didn’t resist”, because the cop would have “shot and killed [him] right there” and that he “didn’t want to deal with that before his vacation?” Good cop or bad cop? How about one that fabricates charges? Good cop or bad cop? How about one that just wants to arrest someone for something because he’s afraid he’ll get in trouble if he doesn’t? Good cop or bad cop?

        2. avatar Chris says:

          All bad cops, in my opinion. But, are they the exception or the norm?

        3. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          There seem to be an awful lot of them. How can you tell if the cop that’s stopped you for whatever reason is a good cop or bad cop? We keep hearing cops support gun owners, yet this crap keeps happening over and over and over.

          Think this cop supports gun owners?

          http://www.therivardreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/gatheringforgunsense.jpg

        4. avatar Chris says:

          Obviously not. But again, is he the exception or the norm? This is probably a poor strategic move in hopes to advance his career in the future. I can tell you, this is not the norm in my area.

        5. avatar Danny Griffin says:

          So in America’s police agencies, you advance your career by being anti-gun and anti-liberty? Something is wrong.

        6. avatar Chris says:

          I agree but we all know it happens

        7. avatar Fuque says:

          Chris,
          I think the same attitude applies to the cops view of the public..the majority of the public are honest law abiding people.. yet because of the very, very few that are not,cops treat every single encounter with the public as a potential criminal..

          If cops get a pass to treat each and every person they make contact with as a threat, why shouldn’t the public treat each and every cop as a potential puppy/ innocent person, killer??

          whats good for the goose, is good for the gander..

        8. avatar Chris says:

          So you’re saying respect goes both ways. I think that should be the basic laws of the universe whether it’s parents and children, employee and employer and yes LEO,s and citizens. I don’t believe I said anything contrary to rhat

    5. avatar David says:

      It is unbelievably easy to tell legal carry from illegal carry. The illegal carry people (otherwise known as thugs, gang members, terrorists, and crazies) don’t normally wear holsters so they can ditch it if necessary and not have any evidence on their person that they were carrying a gun. And if they do the gun is concealed until they deploy it in an illegal act. In which case your concern over open carry is moot. Legal carry people almost always wear a holster or a sling and are not in the middle of committing a crime. Crime + no holster = bad guy. No crime + holster = good guy.

      Cordially,

      David

      1. avatar tjlarson2k says:

        Or simpler still:

        Crime = Bad guy
        No crime = Good guy until proven otherwise

        1. avatar JR_in_NC says:

          tjlarson2k: That comment deserves the two million dollars.

          BIG “right on” for that.

          Threat assessment is not the gun. It’s the behavior.

          We try to harp on the idea all the time that the gun is just an inanimate object without it’s own will.

          By that same token, we should not allow “man with a gun” to even be PERCEIVED as a ‘reportable crime.’ If he’s not DOING anything illegal, he’s not committing a crime.

          The media has effectively brainwashed a LOT of people into thinking “gun = crime.” That’s our current fight in the culture war.

    6. avatar PavePusher says:

      Because Constitutional Rights do not require camouflage?

  17. avatar Bobby C King says:

    I have a carry permit. Just 10 days ago, I was illegally arrested for having my weapon on my person. I believe that the officer was trying to get me to resist arrest. I have contacted an attorney and will in all likelihood be filing a Federal Civil Rights complaint.

    Police today have the idea that the have autonomous authority. They don’t. In the encounter, which started because the officer said I was clocked speeding, the officer told me to turn around and put my hands behind my back. I did as requested. The officer then used excessive force causing injury to an arm I was already getting physical therapy on. Funny thing is, a little over a year ago, the Chief of Police told me I would be arrested for carrying my weapon when I questioned him about his department not investigating threats made against my life if I carried a weapon due to the failure of the Department to investigate. The cause for the failure to investigate is because I am a political activist and I truly believe that if the threats were investigated that the IP address of the computer that the threats were posted from would have came back to a publicly owned computer.

    In the United States today, if you speak out you become a target. Unfortunately we live in a society today where the ordinary citizen is to accept any conduct of the public authority and keep their mouth shut or suffer. When I was threatened by the Police Chief, I informed him of a few SCOTUS rulings; Prouse, Deberry, Brown, McDonald, Heller and a couple more cases on point. It certainly look like the Chief wanted revenge for my being able to bring to his attention Federal rulings concerning my right to protect myself. Most of the time Public officials have immunity unless you can show that they knew or should have known that their conduct was illegal, then their conduct can be challenged as malicious.

    A few months later some local police officers in a neighboring town were caught on tape making threats to kill that City’s Police Chief. The District Attorney was prevented from prosecution of those officers because of the paper trail that I have in my possession wherein the District Attorney was blamed for no investigation in my case with the statement that the District Attorney found making threats against a persons life is not a crime. Corruption is alive and well, just open your eyes and you can easily find it in your town too.

    I applaud the subject of this story. I too plan to stand up for my rights. Its time We the People took our Nation back from the thugs who wish to impose their illegal will upon us. We the People are the rightful masters of the Public Authority.

    1. avatar Bobby C King says:

      I forgot to mention I am right now running for Constable against the Chief of Police’s brother. Ya think that will have any bearing????

      1. avatar Hasdrubal says:

        Very curious where and when this happened, and if it made much impression in the news.

    2. avatar Danny Griffin says:

      If you have a carry permit, what the arresting charge?

      1. avatar Bobby C King says:

        There was no valid charge. If I had refused to turn around and put my hands behind my back, I would have been charged with resisting arrest. That was what they wanted me to do so they had a valid charge. But under the law, you are technically under arrest when your told to place your hands behind your back. I did as they said, what the Police do not understand that there is existing case law that says that I was technically under arrest when I was told to turn around and put my hands behind my back.

        Now the fact that they had no charge is their problem, as well as my injury’s. They were trying to bait me.

        1. avatar John in AK says:

          Technically, you are correct: The request to turn around and place your hands behind you is universally understood as conveying that you are not free to leave, and if you are not free to leave, then you are, for the purposes of the law, under ‘arrest’ should Miranda or Mapp come into play.

          However, there are circumstances where an officer is permitted to restrain a person, including with handcuffs, for the purpose of ensuring his own safety and that of a possible offender, and the courts generally hold that such restraining is NOT a full-on ‘arrest’ for the purposes of the 4th and 5th Amendments. An example, which may apply in your case, is during a ‘Terry’ stop which entails frisking for weapons in the cause of officer safety; You can certainly be handcuffed during the frisking, and it is not considered an ‘arrest.’ The ‘reasonableness’ standard applies in such things; You are much less likely to be injured, all things considered, as is the officer less likely to be injured, if you are lawfully and reasonably restrained during a body pat-down IF the circumstances reasonably warrant handcuffing.

          I did this quite often, and always legally; The officer’s actions only have to be ‘reasonable’ given the facts. You may or may not have a case; I am not an attorney, and I have not recently stayed at any famous-name hotels.

    3. avatar tjlarson2k says:

      “We the People are the rightful masters of the Public Authority”

      So… you aim to stick it to the man, by what… being the new “master”? What does that even mean? Ah wait, you mentioned you’re a political activist. Well, that’s a red flag when it comes to believing your story right off the bat…

      For one thing, the notion of anyone being “master” over anyone else is bogus. The government is elected by the people and there is due process both ways (well in theory). Since you provided no visual or audio evidence of your traffic stop incident, no video or anything to corroborate your side of things, all we have is your one-sided account. An accounting that is full of holes.

      Why was your CCW permit even in question when your stop was speeding related? Why did you even exit your vehicle? Do you have any priors? If you have a permit for your firearm, did you not present your CCW permit to the officer? Did the officer ask for your permit? How did you respond? Were you under the influence of any alcohol or drugs? How far over the posted limit were you going? Was there an emergency? Was this your first speeding violation? Etc etc. All of that is vital information you simply left out of your story.

      With such vagueness and so little information, I’m a little suspect of your cut and dry version of this false arrest. People tend to do things for a reason, even if that reason is a bad one. But if this officer did exactly as you claim, then it seems pretty reasonable that you’ll win your suit against them. But I have a feeling it wasn’t as neat as that….

      1. avatar Bobby C King says:

        You need to study your history. One of our Founding Fathers made the statement about the people being the rightful masters.

        Public officials can not be trusted today. They work for the paycheck, not the people.

        As far my being an activist. The final check and balance over our Government are the people. If your not part of the solution, your part of the problem.

        I would venture to say your paid with pubic funds.? Wanna tell us?

        1. avatar John in AK says:

          Whether or not he’s paid with public money is a moot point; He is merely pointing out to you that if you leave out pertinent facts, or indulge in hyperbole, or sloganeering, or blanket statements, it makes our task of weighing your veracity more difficult.

        2. avatar tjlarson2k says:

          I’m not military, LE, or working for the government if that’s what you’re asking. I’m just your average citizen working for a public company in the entertainment industry. So yeah, I have zero agenda.

          My reference to you being a political activist only serves to highlight the fact that you are probably well versed in the manipulation of the written word. Which means your story is not just an accounting of what happened from your point of view, but also a well-crafted version of it — to serve your own ends. In this case, making the officer that arrested you look like they did something wrong. They very well may have. But we’ll never know unless we have all the evidence necessary (ie. a police report, witnesses, etc.).

          We didn’t get any objective accounting of what the officer did or said, or your responses. So we have nothing really to go on. All we have is your side of the story….

          I’m not saying you’re lying nor am I defending the officer, I’m just trying to be objective towards a story that is clearly missing the information necessary to make any sort of objective conclusion that is representative of what really happened.

    4. avatar Hannibal says:

      You sound like a lot of weird shit gets attracted to you. Maybe it’s you.

      1. avatar Bobby C King says:

        Well, a lot of weird stuff seems to get attracted to any person that stands up for Liberty and Freedom these days.

        In my case, I have been standing up for decades, and yes, the first “weird” thing that really happened to me for standing up was getting a copperhead snake put in my mailbox. This was a federal crime. Prosecution could not proceed as the evidence, (the snake) went missing. This happened in 1984.

        In 2007 I discovered from the wife of a retired detective who worked for the local Police Department that she recently discovered the snake that was placed in our mailbox while cleaning out her freezer.

        Weird or an intentional cover up.

        The placing of the snake in a US mail receptacle was not only criminal, but a booby trap. The problem with a booby trap is you never know who will be the victim. What if a child riding his bike in my neighborhood had driven by and noticed that the mailbox was left cracked open as to provide air for the live snake? That child would have been a victim of a trap set for me. Why did a local police detective remove evidence? Could it be that the snake was placed in the mailbox by a person he wanted to protect. Someone like a fellow officer in the Department? I think so.

        As to comment that I attract these issues. Again any person who stand for their rights becomes a target. Coming full circle now I have a pattern of conduct that goes back decades that shows I have been discriminated against for political reasons based on my political views, publicly speaking out on my views against the powers that be. Tenacity pays off and everything goes full circle.

  18. avatar Mediocrates says:

    I vote in favor of the plaintiff

    1. avatar John in AK says:

      Facts not in evidence, counsellor.

  19. avatar ThomasR says:

    I’ve OC’d for five years Chris because I can do so as a free man without needing permission from the state. Or, I can go with bended knee; beg permission from NM to CC a weapon,making the second amendment a privilege and the state my master.

    In those five years of OCing in NM, especially in Albuquerque; I’ve had nothing but good reactions from the police and the citizens. Not one “panic” call of a man with a gun.

    So the idea that I am causing negative reactions by OCing is just fear mongering by a bunch of gun owners as irrational as any gun grabber. Many of those same gun owners seem to use the same tactics of ad-hominem attacks as the gun grabbers do; it makes me wonder at times if some of those people are just gun grabbers plucking at low hanging fruit of an already divisive issue to create factions among gun owners. Divide and concher has worked well for many governments through out history.

  20. avatar DNS Guns says:

    I like the officer who told the guy as long as he was going hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, etc OR to and from such activites that it was legal to carry concealed.Exactly the way FL statues read. Very few people know that’s the law here and I even showed it to an owner of a gun shop who teaches the CCW classes here. He had a book he hands out in class and had never notices the EXCEPTIONS to the law.I carry a fishing pole and a walking stick in my truck at all times for that very reason. One other exception to the law is FFL holders do not need a permit while conducting business or going to and from such business. 99% of the time I am doing at least one of the exceptions or could claim I was. As long as that’s the law here I won’t part with my hard earned money to pay for the privilege of excersing a right.

  21. avatar ThomasR says:

    Bah; “conquer”, I get analretentive about my spelling.

  22. avatar Lfshtr says:

    The more law suits, the more OC will get attention and the law enforcement issues will be resolved. Being sued will make the arresting officers think more about it before doing the arrest. I’m for one think we need to be more acertive with our gun rights. Let’s all watch our flank!

  23. avatar former water walker says:

    I hope he gets $2000000. Or at the very least a check and an apology. Is “inducing panic” as bad as disturbing the peace? Or is it up there with jaywalking and loitering?

  24. avatar Dan says:

    That $2 million needs to come from the pockets of the officers at fault and the two unnamed individuals, not the taxpayers.

  25. avatar DerryM says:

    I hope the plaintiff gets the $2 Million, and if it comes out of the Taxpayer’s pockets, it cues the Taxpayer’s to start demanding their Police act in a more informed, responsible manner.

    1. avatar Fuque says:

      It doesnt..cities have insurance to cover lawsuits like these.. thats why city government will NEVER admit wrong doing..

      1. avatar DerryM says:

        You know, THAT’S what I thought, but another comment kind of made me doubt my thinking. Thanks for your comment Fuque. I appreciate it!
        I guess the insurance premium comes out of the Taxpayer’s pocket, though…maybe it will go up when the Carrier has to pay $2 Mil for these Cops’ screw-up.

  26. avatar Full Cleveland says:

    I support Mr. Weitzsacker’s suit. It is the only recourse a citizen has against police who make up laws or wrongfully apply a law to support illegal arrests. SCOTUS has ruled the police are not responsible for protecting citizens. Police need to understand that the citizen has the right of self defense.

    1. avatar tjlarson2k says:

      Bingo, as citizens that are responsible for our own safety, we should be afforded protections against organizations that attempt to overstep their authority in matters of civilian self-defense and firearm ownership.

      Proponents of self-defense have offered their advice for using certain language and terminology for dealing with officers, and none of them suggest arguing with the officers or refusing information. It’s one thing to verbally invoke 4th / 5th amendment protections, it’s another to just refuse giving officers needed information with no reason as to why you’re withholding (ie. that’s when you invoke your rights) as in the case of the kid that was OCing a shotgun in a previous TTAG article.

  27. avatar Anonymoose says:

    The Cleveland area is pretty bad when it comes to gun laws. The city and some suburbs have a 10 round mag cap and tried to ban concealed carry and the city tried to make a registry of “salt rofls” before the Ohio supreme Court said they couldn’t supersede state law with bogus limitations on our RKBA, which is written into the Ohio state constitution (unlike NY, CA, and some other unfree states).

  28. avatar Yohon says:

    The only good cop is a dead cop. They are the enemy of the people.

    1. avatar Chris says:

      You are an idiot.

      1. avatar Full Cleveland says:

        +1

        1. avatar lizzrd says:

          +2

    2. avatar John in AK says:

      Congratulations! You have won the Interwebs for the most psychotic, juvenile, irrational comment yet posted on this date. However, the day is young; Maybe you, or some other whackjob, can top it. Please ask your mom to pick up some more Doritos when she goes out, OK? We wouldn’t want you to get hungry and lose that journalistic edge, down there in the dark.

    3. avatar Bobby C King says:

      Most are indeed like snakes today. They don’t keep their oaths of office. The work for the paycheck, not the people. The exploit the immunity laws that protect them to abuse their power.

      Jefferson said; In order for Liberty and Freedom to be sustained, we must have a revolution ever 20 years. We are way behind in having a revolution to throw the rascals out if Jeffersons theory was correct, and I believe our Founders were Profits of the one true and living God of Abraham as well as genius’.

    4. avatar Fuque says:

      troll much?

    5. avatar Chip Bennett says:

      Moby alert, Aisle 7.

      So how was your weekend soiree in Denver?

  29. avatar howard says:

    Been a CA street cop for 34 years in a mid-size bay area city. This is how it should go down.
    Dispatcher: 911 what’s your emergency?
    Caller: There is a man with a gun in this cafe at 22345 Any st. Please send an officer.
    Dispatcher: Where is the gun, is he threatening anyone with it? Describe the man and the gun for me.
    Caller: It’s a black scary gun in a holster on his side. He is WMA mid 50s, 5’9″ tall, gray hair with glasses.
    Disp, Has he removed the gun from the holster or made any threats to harm anyone?
    Caller: No, he’s just sitting at the counter by himself eating.
    Disp, Ma’am open carry of a firearm is legal in this State, and, by your account, he has done nothing to warrant a response by the police.
    Caller: But I don’t feel safe with him here.
    Disp: I’m sorry you feel that way. Have a nice day. Good by…….click.

    No cop sent there to possibly make a legal situation worse. An educated and experienced dispatcher who knows how to ask the right questions and has the ability to say NO is invaluable.

    1. avatar Hasdrubal says:

      I am curious what percentage of the officers you work with could be described as gun guys, and if you see this changing over the length of your service? The first part because I’ve never worked in CA, but the stereotype is that CA officers around the big cities don’t like guns in the hands of the public. The second part because I’ve only been on the job for five years, and there hasn’t been much hiring in that time.

      1. avatar Rolf says:

        It needs to be understood that it does not matter what cops like, only whether something is actually legal or illegal.

    2. avatar Hannibal says:

      I only wish the dispatchers in this area could say “no.” Er… with regards to calls. They’ll send police to all sorts of calls where an officer will have to take the time to go there only to say “This is not a police issue” and leave.

      1. avatar Chris says:

        Don’t you think dispatchers dispatch a PD to relieve themselves of any liability. With all of the lawsuits nowadays, I just don’t think they want to assume that kind of liability.

        1. avatar Hannibal says:

          Oh I wouldn’t be surprised. Liability is the source of lots of wasted time in modern life. It might also be because people have come to expect the police to tell them how to live life instead of learning some common sense “Hey, police, someone is being mean to me on facebook, can you arrest them?”

        2. avatar Chris says:

          It’s a sad world we live in. I think we need more attorneys out there coaxing more people into trying to sue. That will make the US a better place to live. A little sarcasm there of course.

  30. avatar Geoff says:

    Damn Democrats and RINOs keep rejecting attempts to make OC legal here in South Carolina. 1 of only 6 States where we can’t. When the temperature and humidity are both in the 90s, concealed carry is REALLY uncomfortable.

  31. avatar Henry Kadoch says:

    Provided the facts of the case are as stated, this lawsuit is EXACTLY what we should all do if illegally arrested. That is the only way the abuses of the law by over-zealous police departments will be curtailed.

  32. avatar Jay-El says:

    @Danny Griffin
    There seem to be an awful lot of them. How can you tell if the cop that’s stopped you for whatever reason is a good cop or bad cop? We keep hearing cops support gun owners, yet this crap keeps happening over and over and over.

    Think this cop supports gun owners?

    http://www.therivardreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/gatheringforgunsense.jpg

    He doesn’t look very happy to be there, so I’d say he just might support gun owners, and he was assigned to be there.

    By the way, that photo is prima facile evidence of Shannon Watts and her PR pedigree in action. Aprons? What better way to make her group look all wholesome than to suggest that this is a bunch of moms who came directly to this event to demand “action” against an activity that’s Constitutionally protected and just as much an American tradition as the pies Shannon & Co would like us to believe they just spent the morning putting up.

    Finally, what is that bag in the foreground of the photo? It looks like it’s full of crap.

    1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

      Kinda like Obama handing out lab coats to doctors on the White House lawn.

  33. avatar Ralph says:

    I had a conversation a few years ago with a Chief on Cape Cod. He was (is?) very supportive of gun rights and stated to my face that guys like us (licensed carriers) help law enforcement. As Chief LEO of his town, he quickly approves every application that meets the minimum requirements of MA law.

    The unrestricted MA LTC-A that I held (and hold) is not a concealed carry license. It’s a carry license and there is no prohibition in MA law against open carry.

    So I asked the same LEO what he would do if I open carried in his town. First he asked “why would you do that?” Then he said if there was a complaint from some twit, an officer would stop me, check my license, admonish me and if I did not conceal he would cite me for a violation or a misdemeanor charge of “disturbing the peace” or some such nonsense.

    So even “supportive” cops aren’t so supportive of people who exercise their rights in a manner that police don’t like. The niceties of law don’t matter. On the street, they are the law.

    But in court, not so much.

  34. avatar JAFO says:

    The really sad thing is that this suit will go nowhere. I live in Ohio. Cops are immune from these types of suits and the plaintiff has to show actual loss for damages. The lawyer just robbed him with a pen. Even though the charges where dropped, the arrest will still come up on a background check.

  35. avatar Teddy says:

    The cops lied? Thank goodness there were photos because 80% of jurors believe the cops over the innocent until proven guilty and that why some lie.

    1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

      The cops lied?

      This is my shocked face.

  36. avatar Gunluvr says:

    I thought anti-gunners had learned their lesson, I guess not. They’d better learn Ohio is not NYC and that people from Ohio don’t just roll over like the sheep from NYC do. An expensive lesson but a necessary one.

  37. avatar Rich says:

    These two idiot cops never read their instructions from the Ohio Attorney General. Mike Dewine in the Ohio CCW laws. It states specifically the open carry is legal. Dumb nut cops need re-education. I hope it is very costly for violation a civil, constitutional, natural, God given right.

  38. avatar JoeVK says:

    I was open carrying a 20 dollar bb gun while walking to a friends house when i was a kid. The cop who stopped me told me i couldnt do that and confiscated it. He also said he had his gun halfway out of its holster when he realized what I was carrying (one handed, at the end of the stock, muzzle pointed at the ground, btw). It was a tiny little boring town where the only “action” the local cops had was traffic stops.

  39. avatar Jeremy says:

    I live in Mesa AZ and I open carry everywhere because I’m too skinny to concealed carry my HK USP. Unless I put in in my waistband in front, but I don’t because it gets scratched. I’ve never had any leo give me any problem over it. I have however had people ask questions about it, like what kind of gun, stuff like that. A few days ago a guy got my attention at the store by saying sir. When I responded he thanked me for carrying. That’s AZ for you.

  40. avatar HarleyGirl05 says:

    Let me start by saying I have had my Concealed Carry Permit for more then 20 years, I live in PA. which is also an open carry state but I personally wouldn’t DREAM of doing it. Do you people who push the envelope with open carry understand the risk you run, and I don’t mean with the law I’m talking becoming the target for a criminal. If you’re in a store waiting to check out and someone comes in and plans to rob it…who’s the threat to them ? The old lady in line with her cat food, NO you with the firearm out in the open. I have mine concealed for a reason and that is because I want to look as if I’m just the average person so they’ll not even look my way so I have the opportunity to un holster and shoot my target while he’s focusing on the person with the gun out in the open. If you think it’s a deterrent think again it’s an invitation to getting shot first.

    1. avatar Danny Griffin says:

      Carrying a concealed firearm presents to a criminal that you are unarmed. People like you who want that “element of surprise” from a hidden pistol always assume they will simply be a bystander instead of the target victim.

      Transitions are always the most dangerous part of any journey: the transition from your house to your car, the transition from the store to your car, the transition from your office to your car. If someone’s going to attack you, they’re most likely to strike when you’re between “safe” places. Parking lots and gas stations are two of the most likely places you’ll need your gun, places where you’ll be largely alone and the target of an attack. Chances are high you won’t be getting into a situation on your terms, but those of your attacker. If a criminal has pulled a weapon on you, he has already made up his mind on his course of action. Your element of surprise plays no role in deterring the criminal’s decision to attack you.

      Your scenario presupposes that the criminal is going to come in shooting every conceivable threat, and you’re just the first if you get noticed. The fact is that criminals typically have tunnel vision and are focused on the object of their attack. They are looking at the clerk behind the counter to make sure he doesn’t pull a gun, not the shopper getting ice cream from the frozen dairy counter. There have been instances where robbers have held up convenience stores with uniformed police in the store because they are focused on one thing, the cash register and getting in and out as quickly as possible. The possibility of you being the target when you are alone is exponentially higher than if a criminal is walking through a 7-11 shooting all the shoppers, starting with the open carrier first, before he robs the store.

  41. You are listed with Negative or Poor Rating on the internet; Your current rating on the internet needs immediate attention. Your profile is not trustworthy and people will avoid using your services. Don

  42. avatar Cassandra (of Troy) says:

    Note that brad makes the initial comment starting a LE/non-LE then goes POOF, defenders of brad’s position come out of the woodwork & further cloud the issue by making even more inflammatory & distractive statements, & the instigator gets away unscathed. I’ve seen this pattern repeated endlessly on pro-2A/similar sites & wonder why people seldom get hip to the tactic. And Chris, your obvious evasion of Danny Griffin’s 04Aug14@06:38 question while successful was at best a tacky move & the use of the equally hoary “Since the majority of cops I know are great most cops nationwide should be great too” & “If you don’t support cops you’re anti-LE/pro-criminal/pro-anarchy” ploys was just as tacky.

    Why that kind of behavior’s allowed to continue’s a puzzlement.

  43. avatar Lt Cmdr G. M. Roland says:

    Thankfully I retired to Rural Kentucky (Anderson County) and the local constabulary here consider us (OC’er) as equals. My Local Sheriff (Troy Young) has even stated openly that he considers the Residents of Anderson County who Carry sidearms the “Backup” for his Officers. Several times in the past it has happened that a Deputy was struggling with a Criminal and one of the Citizens pulled to the side of the road and rendered assistance. As for Open vs Concealed carry, it is your own Choice. I personally OC every day, I do not feel it will make any difference to a criminal except to thwart his Robbing McDonald’s or Walmart while I am in line. I have had numerous encounters with LEO’s outside of my county, all have been respectful and knowledgeable concerning Open Carry laws in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. God Bless the Commonwealth.

  44. avatar Cassandra (of Troy) says:

    LtCmdr Roland/07Aug14@11:40,

    “Several times……assistance.”

    Used to be that way out here before California became a People’s Democratic Republic, someone who saw a cop in a tight spot & had the wherewithal to help did so & LE was grateful. I remember as a kid seeing/reading about commendations given to citizens who aided embattled LEOs, local govts/LE also saw people who took out armed robbers/hot burglars as assets & lauded them publicly for contributing to community safety. Do that now in the former case & LE will tell you to stay out of it/likely arrest you & in the latter case local govt/LE/press will label you a ‘trigger happy vigilante’ & the D.A. will do what he/she can to lock you up for ‘recklessly endangering the public/taking the law into your hands’.

    My how times have changed, & not for the better.

  45. avatar Anson says:

    Ohio is not a terry stop state. Ignorance of the law is no excuse. Not even for police misconduct.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email