Ohio Man Illegally Arrested for Open Carry Sparks $3M Lawsuit

[RickN]

they let him go because eventually he did reveal his identity and the police were able to confirm he had a carry permit and no warrants. The more information that comes out on this the more it looks like the police behaved reasonably.

this!!!!!

 

[doctorjj]

They let him go because eventually he did reveal his identity and the police were able to confirm he had a carry permit and no warrants. The more information that comes out on this the more it looks like the police behaved reasonably.

If they thought a crime had truly been committed, (Rick's made up open carry in car scenario), these guys would have made him produce ID and would have thrown the book at him. For your argument to hold water, you'd have to conclude that these two reasonable officers let a criminal walk without even producing proof of who he was. He could have just made up that name for all they knew. Or maybe he's a hardened criminal about to commit mass murder and just have them his squeaky clean brother's info. They had nothing, so they had to let him go.

 

[RickN]

If they thought a crime had truly been committed, (Rick's made up open carry in car scenario), these guys would have made him produce ID and would have thrown the book at him. For your argument to hold water, you'd have to conclude that these two reasonable officers let a criminal walk without even producing proof of who he was. He could have just made up that name for all they knew. Or maybe he's a hardened criminal about to commit mass murder and just have them his squeaky clean brother's info. They had nothing, so they had to let him go.

Incorrect. If you read the link I posted they checked his ID and carry permit that were in his truck too.

 

[DFarcher]

If they thought a crime had truly been committed, (Rick's made up open carry in car scenario), these guys would have made him produce ID and would have thrown the book at him. For your argument to hold water, you'd have to conclude that these two reasonable officers let a criminal walk without even producing proof of who he was. He could have just made up that name for all they knew. Or maybe he's a hardened criminal about to commit mass murder and just have them his squeaky clean brother's info. They had nothing, so they had to let him go.

Your position requires more conjecture than Ricks. 90% of the posters on this sight think every yahoo with a gun is a patriot, gentleman and a scholar and every LEO is an A-hole and that is just not the case. Members here and LEO's both have a similar good dude to A-hole ratio as the rest of the population.

 

[MoBoost]

Incorrect. If you read the link I posted they checked his ID and carry permit that were in his truck too.

From your link:

"He eventually said he had no identification with him. This was actually a lie as his identification was approximately 50 feet away in his truck along with his CCW card," Jones' report said. "This was not found for several minutes. He told me he was exercising his Second Amendment rights to openly carry a gun."

So either they let him go without ID, or they illegally searched his vehicle .... making him $3.6M richer so much easier.

 

[MoBoost]

Members here and LEO's both have a similar good dude to A-hole ratio as the rest of the population.

Except LEO are held to a higher standard via oath. So when a cop decides to be an A-hole, disrespect the badge and disregard the constitution - the department is held responsible (financially in this case).

P.S. I am not sure how to take your "every yahoo with a gun" comment - I choose to believe that people (at least very vast majority) who own and carry guns are responsible and law abiding citizens; that's how I behave, that's how I try to portray myself and that's how I hope other's see me. What does it tell us about you?

 

[RickN]

From your link:


So either they let him go without ID, or they illegally searched his vehicle .... making him $3.6M richer so much easier.

Now that he might have a case on, but he is not suing for that.

 

[DFarcher]

Except LEO are held to a higher standard via oath. So when a cop decides to be an A-hole, disrespect the badge and disregard the constitution - the department is held responsible (financially in this case).

P.S. I am not sure how to take your "every yahoo with a gun" comment - I choose to believe that people (at least very vast majority) who own and carry guns are responsible and law abiding citizens; that's how I behave, that's how I try to portray myself and that's how I hope other's see me. What does it tell us about you?

But it is not at all clear from the facts available in this case that the Cops were unreasonable. If they did make a mistake it was just that and not worth 3.6 million. One of the biggest problems in our country is frivolous litigation. What the layers and judges have done and are doing effects us all in a huge way. If you think this guy deserves 3.6 million for getting his feelings hurt you are part of the problem. Common sense please, there seems to be very little left in this world.

P.S. Your P.S. made me LOL, thank you for explaining to me that you ARE a patriot, gentleman and a scholar!

 

[rebelracer79]

You can keep dancing around it but I believe the police had a reasonable cause to ask for ID and Call was just being an a$$.

What part about the cops broke the law do you not get? Whether you agree with the law or not, of you or I broke the law we would be held accountable, why shouldn't the cops be as well?

 

[RickN]

What part about the cops broke the law do you not get? Whether you agree with the law or not, of you or I broke the law we would be held accountable, why shouldn't the cops be as well?

Because according to the law as posted and what I have looked up, if there is reasonable suspicion of a crime having been, is being, or will be committed, they are allowed to ask for ID which is a very broad opening. Taking the word of a guy trying to sue for 3.6 million or his lawyer is not a possibility to a rational mind.

A few things from the Ohio Bar,

You should never lie to a law enforcement officer, however. If you do, you can get into trouble for “obstructing official business.”

The police do not have to tell you that you are a suspect or that they intend to arrest you, but if they use force or a show of authority to keep you from leaving, they probably consider you a suspect,

There is one exception to your right to silence: According to Ohio law since April 2006, if you are in a public place and under certain circumstances, you must give your name, address and date of birth to an officer. If you fail to provide this information under such circumstances, you will be committing a fourth-degree misdemeanor and may be arrested.

https://www.ohiobar.org/ForPublic/Resources/LawFactsPamphlets/Pages/LawFactsPamphlet-21.aspx

And more on open carry in a car.

You may not carry a "loaded" handgun in a motor vehicle in Ohio without a recognized Concealed Handgun License. The definition of "loaded" in Ohio means you must have no ammunition in the gun, and no ammunition in a compatible magazine or speedloader anywhere in the vehicle.

You may not carry a "loaded" (same definition) long arm in a vehicle, even with a recognized Concealed Handgun License.

http://www.ohioopencarry.org/legality-open-carry-ohio