Ohio Law Enforcement Harasses Man for OC Carry


PDA






BigV
July 11, 2008, 11:41 AM
Here is a thread on OFCC (Ohio For Concealed Carry) about a guy in Northwood, Ohio being harassed by the local LE for outside carrying his gun while at an ice cream stand with his daughter. LE threatened him and broke his DL in half before giving it back.
Are we living in Nazi Germany???
THREAD HERE (http://ohioccwforums.org/viewtopic.php?t=21257&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0)

If you enjoyed reading about "Ohio Law Enforcement Harasses Man for OC Carry" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
.cheese.
July 11, 2008, 11:55 AM
I tend to think he wasn't singled out because he was open-carrrying, I tend to think he was singled out because he was covered in tattoos and riding a motorcycle.

I'm not saying what the officers did was right - it wasn't. I'm just saying that concealed vs open carry isn't the only issue at play.

doc2rn
July 11, 2008, 12:56 PM
C.S.S.

wally
July 11, 2008, 01:02 PM
tend to think he was singled out because he was covered in tattoos and riding a motorcycle.

If he had been of middle eastern ancestry, the ACLU would be all over it :)

Hope he got a badge number and files a formal complaint. Asking for the DL and maybe calling in for a warrant check or to see if otherwise illegal to be carrying (restraining order, etc.) is pretty much fair game, but breaking the DL is vandalism pure and simple and shouldn't be allowed to go unchallanged.

--wally.

Mainsail
July 11, 2008, 01:06 PM
Asking for the DL and maybe calling in for a warrant check or to see if otherwise illegal to be carrying (restraining order, etc.) is pretty much fair game…
No, not at all. Seizing someone without reasonable articulable suspicion that the person is involved in a crime is a violation of his or her civil (privacy) rights. If the carry is lawful, the police cannot detain someone to look for a crime.

wyocarp
July 11, 2008, 01:07 PM
It would be nice to have the names of the officers involved and their side of the story as well would be good.

Happiness Is A Warm Gun
July 11, 2008, 01:37 PM
Asking for the DL and maybe calling in for a warrant check or to see if otherwise illegal to be carrying (restraining order, etc.) is pretty much fair game

No it isn't. I am suprised how many people have no clue of the their rights.

A police officer can't just ask for ID PERIOD.

If you are walking down the street and police officer stops you and asks you for ID the proper response is "what am I being detained for". If he says "nothing I just want some ID" the response is "If am not being detained I am leaving. If I am being detained I want to know the reason why I am being detained".

The police do not have unlimited authority to stop and detain people at will. The founders did not want a police state.

This is why I am against permits for lawful carry. As soon as the state starts issuing permits for a RIGHT it is no longer a RIGHT. It is permission (hence the term permit). When something is a permission from the state they DO have the AUTHORITY to confirm that you have been PERMITTED (like a subject) to do something (like drive, sell insurance, hunt, conceal carry).

If you have to show proof of something via a permit it is not a right. I conceal carried for a long time before recently started open carrying. The reason I switched is because in VA open carry is a RIGHT. Conceal Carry is PERMISSION. I believe in rights and recently have become fundamentally opposed to requesting permission for something that way already my right.

There is no requirement to have proof of ID to surrender to the police on demand. A DL is a permit (permission) to DRIVE. Last time I checked a permit was not required to buy ice cream, be out with your daughter, stand in line, have tattoos, own a motorcycle, or lawfully open carry a firearm (in OH). Now if Ohio had a permit system in place for open carry and the law requires someone carrying to provide proof by showing permit on demand that would be another issue. Even so the officer should have requested the PERMIT not the DL.

If people start believing that the state has right to demand identification at any tme for any reason then lets just get it over with. Issue a national ID card. Make it a crime to not have ID card at all time. Then we can relive the police state of Nazi Germany; "papers. have your papers out."

ilbob
July 11, 2008, 01:50 PM
while there is certainly no authority granted by the constitution that would require one to produce some kind of ID, many states have laws on the books that do require it, and courts have upheld them.

wally
July 11, 2008, 02:02 PM
The police do not have unlimited authority to stop and detain people at will. The founders did not want a police state.

True enough, but a spineless Supreme Court cowering to the "Wars" on Drugs and Terrorism has got us mostly there. The 4th Amendment has gone the way of what the anti's wish for the Second.

I seem to recall the ACLU ultimately losing the case of a black man who liked to walk at night in the ritzy part of town and eventually got arrested for refusing to give his name or produce an ID. While no "carry your papers" requirement exits nationwide as far as I know, you have to give up your name if asked by Police based on this ruling.

Fine points of Ohio law I can't comment on, but in Texas if you are where alcohol is served (drinking or not) you have to carry DL or DPS ID. Its enforcement is minimal, but thats the way it is unless they've changed the law since I last took the TABC bartenders course (haven't tended in many years).

--wally.

ilbob
July 11, 2008, 02:12 PM
The 4th Amendment has gone the way of what the anti's wish for the Second.

What is somewhat ironic, and very sad, is that the way the amendments are written, the 2nd provides a much stronger protection than the 4th. The second says "shall not be infringed". The fourth uses the terms "unreasonable" and "probable cause" which are very low standards by comparison.

Deanimator
July 11, 2008, 02:18 PM
I seem to recall the ACLU ultimately losing the case of a black man who liked to walk at night in the ritzy part of town and eventually got arrested for refusing to give his name or produce an ID. While no "carry your papers" requirement exits nationwide as far as I know, you have to give up your name if asked by Police based on this ruling.
You recall incorrectly. He won the case. In fact, I saw cites to it somewhere yesterday, probably on usenet. That was one of the cases I learned in law school. I used it to mercilessly bludgeon a senile old leftist in FidoNet years ago. He claimed to be "one with the ACLU" on EVERY issue... until he claimed that gun registration was necessary to trip up people caught by police, "late at night in the WRONG neighborhood". I cited directly from my con law book. Funny how he couldn't define the procedure for determining the "wrongness" of a person for a neighborhood. He was quite put out by my statement that he no doubt used the "paperbag test".

Mainsail
July 11, 2008, 02:19 PM
I seem to recall the ACLU ultimately losing the case of a black man who liked to walk at night in the ritzy part of town and eventually got arrested for refusing to give his name or produce an ID. While no "carry your papers" requirement exits nationwide as far as I know, you have to give up your name if asked by Police based on this ruling.


I’d like to see some citation on that case, not that I don’t believe you but there may be much more to the story than you’ve presented. I cannot speak for Ohio, but I can tell you that here in Washington the courts “jealously guard” our version of the 4th Amendment; Article 1 § 7. In fact, the police stopped a man in Port Townsend for openly carrying two rifles wrapped in a towel. He admitted to being a felon and they found drugs in his backpack. He walked. The police cannot seize you for lawful behavior, and carrying a firearm (or two) is lawful behavior here.

My last encounter with the police about my open carry pistol ended without me surrendering any identification or CPL, even though it was demanded of me.

.cheese.
July 11, 2008, 02:39 PM
If he had been of middle eastern ancestry, the ACLU would be all over it

True, and I agree that profiling sucks - but no matter how many times I say so, it still will continue to go on all over the world.

jahwarrior
July 11, 2008, 03:07 PM
http://www.ohioccw.org/content/view/4022/83


Willowick to Help Spread Word Open Carry Is Legal
Written by Daniel White
Thursday, 03 July 2008

Tonight, OFCC Director Daniel White, along with Coordinators Mike Kinsey and Tom McNaughton, joined member Bryan Ledford in meeting with representatives from the City of Willowick (the Chief of Police, a Lieutenant, the Sergeant involved, a City Councilman, and the Law Director) to discuss issues raised as a result of the harassment Bryan received while openly carrying a firearm in the City.

While the discussions were, on the whole, positive and fruitful, we will be continuing to work to try to prevent something like this from happening again elsewhere, and Willowick has indicated they will assist with this goal.

One of the first things to be discussed was the treatment Bryan was subjected to by the police officers on the scene. Chief Lazor reiterated what he had told us before, that Sergeant Turner had a basically clean record with only very minor infractions such as dings in a patrol car.

After reviewing the recording prior to the meeting, the Chief agreed that the Sergeant was in violation of department policy and was given a written reprimand for his behavior on the scene. Sergeant Turner informed us he was under the mistaken impression that open carry was a violation of the terms of a concealed handgun license and he though Bryan was breaking the law at the time. He claimed his treatment of Bryan was uncharacteristic of his typical conduct on the job.

The Chief told us that in addition to sending out a memo to the departmental mailbox of every officer on the force reiterating that open carry is legal, it has also been made part of several daily briefings. The Lieutenant informed us that he has had many one on one conversations with various officers concerning the issue and that open carry was the hot topic of conversation in the department since the incident came to light in our forums.

Chief Lazor said open carry will be made part of the mandatory annual training all Willowick officers receive and may even be integrated into training scenarios. One issue we were not able to agree on, however, was making carry status part of the SOP for dispatchers. Our position was that citizens who call in a "man with a gun call" should be asked if the firearm is in a holster. While we have no objection to a gun call being checked out by an officer, we feel that it is valuable information for the officer to have that he is likely entering a situation where no crime is being committed. For various reasons, the Chief said he would suggest it, but not make it a mandatory part of procedures.

The Chief did acknowledge that word of the incident and the legality of open carry is already spreading through neighboring departments via word of mouth, as well as from this website and our forums. In an effort to help prevent something like this from happening in a department where officers have not been educated regarding open carry, the chief offered to write a letter to the Attorney General asking for a letter to be sent to all police departments in the State from that office. The Chief's letter will be made available to OFCC.

The Law Director agreed to contact the Lake County prosecutor to request a formal opinion from the Attorney General regarding open carry that can again be used to help educate the law enforcement community.

OFCC will be supplementing these efforts with steps of our own in an attempt to prevent any further misunderstandings between law enforcement and law-abiding citizens exercising their Second Amendment rights. It is our hope that we can turn this negative incident into a positive for gun owners. It has always been our intent to educate instead of vilify, and we acknowledge that the vast majority of law enforcement are on our side. We are primarily interested in ensuring that the legality of open carry is known to all law enforcement officers to protect those who choose to carry in that fashion. After all, we're all on the same side in the end.

Happiness Is A Warm Gun
July 11, 2008, 03:12 PM
while there is certainly no authority granted by the constitution that would require one to produce some kind of ID, many states have laws on the books that do require it, and courts have upheld them.

Do you have any cite? I am interested.

The SC has held you are required to provide the police your name. Some states have laws that require additional information such as address or birth date that have not been challenged yet.

As far as being required to present and ID card the SC said no:

In upholding his conviction and the mandatory identity-disclosure law, the majority justices also said the law only requires that a suspect disclose his or her name, rather than requiring production of a driver's license or other document.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0622/p01s01-usju.html

If you are driving you need to produce a DL.
If you are fishing you need to produce a fishing license.
If you are hunting you need to produce a hunting license.
If you are carrying a gun you need to produce a weapon license (in states that require it).

In all these instances you have been granted a permission to do something.
Any permission granted can be taken away.

The very idea that police could demand a permit or license from someone for lawfully being on the streets would indicate that just being a citizen is a permission, one that can be taken away. If that doesn't concern anyone I fear for our country.

Old Grump
July 11, 2008, 04:06 PM
It is a right all free men had as understood by the authors of the 2nd. amendment. Putting it in the Bill of rights was acknowledging that right not giving us that right. He doesn't need a permission slip from ma ma state to bear arms.

BigV
July 11, 2008, 05:11 PM
Please read the article below posted by the Site Administrator for OFCC. He has been in contact with Chief Thomas Cairl as well as Brian Ballenger, law director for Northwood

Written by Daniel White

Update: Brian Ballenger, law director for Northwood, has contacted OFCC. He said he is well aware of the fact that open carry is legal and wants to work with us to resolve this incident. As he is out of state all of next week, we agreed to pick this up the following week after he gets back.

Yet another Ohioans For Concealed Carry member experienced harassment from police ignorant of the laws in Ohio regarding open carry.

OFCC member Edwin Farbrother took his eighteen-year-old daughter out for ice cream on her birthday in the evening of Saturday, July 5th, 2008 in the City of Northwood. After being there for approximately ten minutes, a police car roared up and skidded to a stop. The officer approached a man later identified as an off duty police officer (department unknown at this time) who pointed Farbrother out to him. Farbrother knew immediately that the officer was there because he was openly carrying a firearm, and he was correct.

Farbrother immediately informed the officer that he had a concealed handgun license, but the officer was not interested in that. Instead, he immediately began berating Farbrother for openly carrying a gun where children were present, and told Farbrother that he was breaking the law by doing so. The off-duty officer and the uniformed officer continued to argue with Farbrother, despite his attempts to explain that open carry is legal. Soon after, a third officer showed up.

The third officer joined in the conversation again asserting that open carry is illegal and told Farbrother that the Ohio Highway Patrol had lied to him when he confirmed with them that open carry is legal in Ohio. During the conversation, they also allegedly threatened arrest for impersonating a police officer. One officer insisted that if they were responding to a burglar alarm and saw Farbrother carrying a firearm that he would be the first one they would "take down," and that he risked getting "popped". They then informed him that they were letting him go, but if he did it again he would be arrested and they would let the judge sort out who was right and who was wrong.

The initial officer responding to the scene had demanded Farbrother's drivers license, which had recently been issued and was kept in a protective cover. During the conversation, the officer was allegedly witnessed by both Farbrother and his daughter bending the license in his hand. At the end of the stop he returned it broken in half. When Farbrother pointed out the license was broken, the officer shrugged and said, "oh, well."

Farbrother later found out that the officers had gone to a Speedway that he frequents and questioned an employee regarding if she felt threatened by him. She told them that, in fact, she felt safer when he was there. During an earlier incident at Speedway, Farbrother had been involved in a similar incident with one of the officers in this incident, who had told him that time as well that open carry is illegal.

Through a friend, Farbrother contacted OFCC hoping that we would be able to help him as we had helped OFCC member Bryan Ledford in the Willlowick case.

After several email contacts to gather information, today I emailed and called the Northwood police chief. The initial conversation was not very productive.

Chief Thomas Cairl was very adamant that open carry is illegal in Ohio, despite not being able to quote the section of the Ohio Revised Code that supported his position. He argued that the concealed carry manual published by the Ohio Attorney General did not say open carry was legal, to which I countered it didn't say it wasn't legal. He then said he would refer the matter to his attorney.

When I mentioned the broken drivers license, he became even more agitated and demanded to know if I was accusing his officers of willful destruction of property. I replied that I was simply relating facts as they were brought to my attention. The license was intact when handed over, and broken when returned. At that time, I could see the conversation wasn't going to result in anything positive, so ended it.

Afterward, I sent the Chief an email containing the links to the Willowick articles on our website and directed his attention to the memos from the Hamilton County prosecutor and Akron police department affirming that open carry is legal. I let him know I would be calling him back tomorrow to again try to make progress towards a resolution. It is my hope that after talking to his legal counsel that he will realize his error and be more receptive.

Incidents like this highlight the need for clear and direct training regarding the legality of open carry to be issued from the Ohio Peace Officer Training Commission at the direction of the Ohio Attorney General. Law abiding Ohio citizens should not be in fear of being detained, harassed, or "taken down" for legally exercising their right to openly carry a firearm for their personal protection.

wally
July 11, 2008, 06:31 PM
Like refusing to sit at the back of the bus, maybe some good will ultimately come from this!

--wally.

Sebastian the Ibis
July 11, 2008, 06:36 PM
Asking for the DL and maybe calling in for a warrant check or to see if otherwise illegal to be carrying (restraining order, etc.) is pretty much fair game
No it isn't. I am suprised how many people have no clue of the their rights.

A police officer can't just ask for ID PERIOD.

Yes, the police can make you identify yourself:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiibel_v._Sixth_Judicial_District_Court_of_Nevada

TexasSkyhawk
July 11, 2008, 07:40 PM
During the conversation, the officer was allegedly witnessed by both Farbrother and his daughter bending the license in his hand. At the end of the stop he returned it broken in half. When Farbrother pointed out the license was broken, the officer shrugged and said, "oh, well."

If there was any advantage to being a fed, it was that with "officers" like that, I enjoyed eating them for lunch and crapping them before supper. Those kind of danger-ranger cops are the epitome of "jackbooted" and should have their Sam Browne's wrapped around their damn heads.

Yeah, a good chief supports his men. A great chief supports the law.

Thank God I'm out of that lunacy of a career field.

Jeff

Standing Wolf
July 11, 2008, 07:43 PM
The very idea that police could demand a permit or license from someone for lawfully being on the streets would indicate that just being a citizen is a permission, one that can be taken away. If that doesn't concern anyone I fear for our country.

"Concern?" I believe the founding fathers would have revolted.

wheelgunslinger
July 11, 2008, 07:52 PM
heh. great post, jeff/skyhawk.

I was hesitant about the whole open carry thing for a long time, but I'm starting to think it is a good idea, if for no other reason than to do what THR is all about. Which is a good thing.

Happiness Is A Warm Gun
July 11, 2008, 08:16 PM
Yes, the police can make you identify yourself:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiibel_...ourt_of_Nevada

The only thing Hiibel stated is that you can not refuse to give an officer your name.
The court clearly stated the state has no right to demand identification.

Think of it this way:

IF the state can demand an ID from anyone at anytime then the next issue will be some people don't have any ID.

So the state makes a national ID then the next issue will be some people won't get an ID. I know I wouldn't. Anyone could refuse to give their ID card by simply stating they have no ID card (and thus make the law meaningless).

So the state makes it a crime to not register yourself then the next issue will be some people will leave their ID at home. Think about it if you are a criminal and are required to give your ID card to any officer when they ask why would you even keep your ID card.

So the state make it a crime to not have your ID at all times.

We are essentially 4 steps removed from a totalitarian state.

Hiibel does not require you to give a DL or any other form of ID card, papers, or other supporting documents to a police officer.

armedandsafe
July 11, 2008, 09:10 PM
Actions similar to this are not at all unusual for a FEW of today's LEO. We are hearing about more of them because of the improved communications we have today.

What has always irritated me is that they are almost always "resolved" by placing a letter in the offending officer's file. I have never heard of the police department, DA or any judge which has pressed the criminal (misdemeanor) charges which are MANDATED by state. law.

Pops

jahwarrior
July 11, 2008, 11:19 PM
in the state of PA, a LEO cannot compel a person to provide identification without RAS, or reasonable suspicion. this includes a person who is OCing. if a cop asks me for ID, because i'm walking down the street, i can refuse, and be on my merry. our county DA had to make a public statement stating this, in light of the Old Country Buffet debacle.

Contacted by The Times-Tribune, Lackawanna County District Attorney Andy Jarbola declined to comment on this specific case, but said people have a right to openly carry a weapon without having to show identification or a permit.

“Police can ask, but if they don’t want to give it, they don’t have to,” he said. “It’s going to be surprising to the public, but that’s the current state of law.”

FieroCDSP
July 11, 2008, 11:23 PM
Northwood is a Toledo suburb. Toledo had a city ban on the usual gun-parts suspects (high-caps, etc) along with Cinci, Columbus, and Cleveland. The state pre-emption law passed a few years ago took the wind from their sails and they've been fighting it ever since. Cleveland seems to be getting better at following the law, despite Frank Jackson, but the others are apparently needing it to be beaten into their collective skulls through incidents such as this.

The Bryon Ledford incident has gotten the gears turning, and hopefully the state AG's office will crank out a memo to all departments outlining open carry, and to officers on how not to screw themselves by berating and otherwise infringing on civil rights of lawful citizens.

DWFan
July 11, 2008, 11:34 PM
The answer is simple. Consult an attorney. If the officers violated the law or the person's civil rights, press charges.

Aguila Blanca
July 11, 2008, 11:43 PM
while there is certainly no authority granted by the constitution that would require one to produce some kind of ID, many states have laws on the books that do require it, and courts have upheld them.
No, the courts have not upheld them.

The Terry case, and the subsequent Hibbel case that was decided under Terry, have established that before a police officer can stop someone and ask him/her to identify him/herself, there must be a reasonable suspicion based on clearly articulable facts that a crime has been committed, is being committed, or is about to be committed. Without that, an officer has no basis on which to interfere with a citizen.

Since open carry is legal in Ohio, as ruled by the Ohio Supreme court, there can be no argument in this case that there was any reasonable suspicion of a crime. Absent that, the officer had no basis on which to even ask for a name, let alone to demand identification.

JWarren
July 11, 2008, 11:45 PM
At the VERY least, the cop who broke the Driver's License in half should be punished by having to stand in line at DMV for the guy's replacement.

DMV is the 9th level of hell in Dante's Inferno.


-- John

Aguila Blanca
July 11, 2008, 11:56 PM
Yes, the police can make you identify yourself:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiibel_...ourt_of_Nevada
Re-read that article. It is clear that they upheld the stop and the request in Hibel because there was a suspicion of a crime (specifically, an assault). The Nevada law spelled out that a request for a "suspect's" name could be made only when there is a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity.

The case you cited in no way makes it lawful for arbitrary stops and requests for ID in the absence of suspected criminal activity.

Hook686
July 12, 2008, 12:37 AM
Unfortunately no matter how right you think you are, you are wrong. You are up against the system and I've learned that even the court can alter 'records'. As someone else said no one was shot, arrested or hurt. ... every thorn has a rose.

If you enjoyed reading about "Ohio Law Enforcement Harasses Man for OC Carry" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!