OC carry caused some problems for me today

[greyhound47]

In closing, I am pretty pleased w the response I got. I know a lot of county and city cops and most of them are real good guys and gals who wear the badge well. I remember being a rookie. I didn't know s$&@ from shinola either. I bet he learned from this.

 

[melensdad]

In closing, I am pretty pleased w the response I got. I know a lot of county and city cops and most of them are real good guys and gals who wear the badge well. I remember being a rookie. I didn't know s$&@ from shinola either. I bet he learned from this.

As long as you are happy with the results that is a win.

Hopefully both the new officer and his supervisor both apologized to you, hopefully all the officers in the department now understand that OC on your own property does not require any license at all, and OC in public is also legal as long a you have a LTCH.

 

[Titanium_Frost]

+1 to the OP! Good conclusion, good job.

 

[Scutter01]

As long as you are happy with the results that is a win.

Hopefully both the new officer and his supervisor both apologized to you, hopefully all the officers in the department now understand that OC on your own property does not require any license at all, and OC in public is also legal as long a you have a LTCH.

 

[jsharmon7]

I just finished reading this thread. I'm glad you were able to talk to someone in a position above this officer and were able to come to a satisfactory conclusion. I still can't believe the stupidity though. It's bad enough that some officers don't know that OC is legal, it's worse that he would approach you on your own property about it. Add in the d-bag way he spoke to you and you get a whole boatload of fail.

 

[Suprtek]

After spending the last hour reading through this thread, I think its safe to say that this was an unfortunate act of ignorance and arrogance that appears to have an ending with a little bit of education for some that desperately needed it. That can be a good thing but it shouldn't have to come at the expense of the OP enduring harassment.

I do have a thought that I'd like to add and hear opinions about though. There's no disputing the fact that this particular officer didn't handle this well. However, an officer responding to a call like this really has no idea who this person is or if they actually live there. Yes, it should appear obvious that a man casually mowing a lawn most likely does live there, but I don't think any good officer is going to make any assumptions. Given this fact, maybe asking for a LTCH may not have been such a ridiculous thing to do if done properly. When the OP questioned the officer's reasons for asking for it, the officer could have simply explained in a professional manner that he doesn't know who he is or where he lives and once that is established he will likely just be on his way. Of course the officer could simply ask for ID to establish his residence but given the fact that a firearm is involved dealing with that first by requesting his LTCH could be considered a prudent thing to do. Again, its all about how its done, not necessarily what is done.

 

[critter592]

To the OP so what was the outcome? Is the whole department getting training on this or just this officer?

And THANKS for taking it to the higher ups at all instead of letting it go. +1!

 

[sharkey]

Can't rep you again, sorry...

Got him.

 

[Dead Duck]

I'm sure the problem was from carrying a Glock while sitting on a Snapper.
All of this could had been avoided if you were sporting a Sig on a Deere.

 

[Hooker]

-1 to the neighbor for sticking a nose where it doesn't belong.
Why do people love to impose themselves into situations where they are ridiculously ignorant.

"I thought it was illegal" Pssshhhhh.
Being stupid should be illegal.

I can see getting your panties in a twist if I'm racking the slide and walking toward your door, but mowing the lawn? Seriously?

 

[Bunnykid68]

After spending the last hour reading through this thread, I think its safe to say that this was an unfortunate act of ignorance and arrogance that appears to have an ending with a little bit of education for some that desperately needed it. That can be a good thing but it shouldn't have to come at the expense of the OP enduring harassment.

I do have a thought that I'd like to add and hear opinions about though. There's no disputing the fact that this particular officer didn't handle this well. However, an officer responding to a call like this really has no idea who this person is or if they actually live there. Yes, it should appear obvious that a man casually mowing a lawn most likely does live there, but I don't think any good officer is going to make any assumptions. Given this fact, maybe asking for a LTCH may not have been such a ridiculous thing to do if done properly. When the OP questioned the officer's reasons for asking for it, the officer could have simply explained in a professional manner that he doesn't know who he is or where he lives and once that is established he will likely just be on his way. Of course the officer could simply ask for ID to establish his residence but given the fact that a firearm is involved dealing with that first by requesting his LTCH could be considered a prudent thing to do. Again, its all about how its done, not necessarily what is done.

This is just me but if I am on my own property I will tell that officer or anyone else to either arrest me or get off of my property. I am on my property, I have nothing to prove. I will not show you my papers. You prove I do not belong there and then we can talk.

 

[DaddyFixSemi]

After spending the last hour reading through this thread, I think its safe to say that this was an unfortunate act of ignorance and arrogance that appears to have an ending with a little bit of education for some that desperately needed it. That can be a good thing but it shouldn't have to come at the expense of the OP enduring harassment.

I do have a thought that I'd like to add and hear opinions about though. There's no disputing the fact that this particular officer didn't handle this well. However, an officer responding to a call like this really has no idea who this person is or if they actually live there. Yes, it should appear obvious that a man casually mowing a lawn most likely does live there, but I don't think any good officer is going to make any assumptions. Given this fact, maybe asking for a LTCH may not have been such a ridiculous thing to do if done properly. When the OP questioned the officer's reasons for asking for it, the officer could have simply explained in a professional manner that he doesn't know who he is or where he lives and once that is established he will likely just be on his way. Of course the officer could simply ask for ID to establish his residence but given the fact that a firearm is involved dealing with that first by requesting his LTCH could be considered a prudent thing to do. Again, its all about how its done, not necessarily what is done.

Just like every coin has two sides, there are always different ways of handling things. however in situations like these it also comes down to the PO's personality. I know that a very good vast majority of police officers are good people and only want the best for the public that they serve, but it's the one's that put on that shield and carry the mind set that they are the one's in charge and they will be obeyed not matter the right or wrong of it. It's those officer's that we see and hear about in the news and from our friends. it is those officer's that place the burden mistrust upon all those with-in law enforcement.

It is sad to say that the only time or rather most of the time i should say. that we only hear of those police that are good and do their jobs, after they have either lost their lives or done something heroic.

 

[VERT]

After spending the last hour reading through this thread, I think its safe to say that this was an unfortunate act of ignorance and arrogance that appears to have an ending with a little bit of education for some that desperately needed it. That can be a good thing but it shouldn't have to come at the expense of the OP enduring harassment.

I do have a thought that I'd like to add and hear opinions about though. There's no disputing the fact that this particular officer didn't handle this well. However, an officer responding to a call like this really has no idea who this person is or if they actually live there. Yes, it should appear obvious that a man casually mowing a lawn most likely does live there, but I don't think any good officer is going to make any assumptions. Given this fact, maybe asking for a LTCH may not have been such a ridiculous thing to do if done properly. When the OP questioned the officer's reasons for asking for it, the officer could have simply explained in a professional manner that he doesn't know who he is or where he lives and once that is established he will likely just be on his way. Of course the officer could simply ask for ID to establish his residence but given the fact that a firearm is involved dealing with that first by requesting his LTCH could be considered a prudent thing to do. Again, its all about how its done, not necessarily what is done.

I sort of agree but not completely. Yes the officer needs to establish who a person and that may mean asking for ID. But my understanding is that a person does not need to have an LTCH on private property if the owner gives them permission to be there. Pretty safe to assume that a random person did not just decide to start mowing the lawn without the knowledge and permission of the homeowner. So in this case it could be argued that it really doesn't matter who the person is. The gun is irrelevant. How would people like it if the police just went around asking for identification?

As a side note I almost always carry a handgun when mowing my lawn and I never carry my wallet. Because it is my property and I don't have to. Besides stainless revolvers and glocks handle back sweat better then leather wallets.

 

[mrortega]

Sorry for your bad encounter. I assure you that not all LEO's are that way. I have to admit that firearms laws aren't one of the training topics normally brought up in annual training, but my former department did keep us updated with laws as they changed, and the state posts those changes. The individual officer needs to take the initiative to make sure he/she knows at least the most common laws concerning firearm carry.

May all be true but lack of training doesn't make someone an a**hole. That was his personality coming out. Some type of anger management should be taught. His whole attitude speaks volumes for why he wants to be a cop.

 

[Wwwildthing]

Two words - Canton, Ohio

 

[halfmileharry]

Just like every coin has two sides, there are always different ways of handling things. however in situations like these it also comes down to the PO's personality. I know that a very good vast majority of police officers are good people and only want the best for the public that they serve, but it's the one's that put on that shield and carry the mind set that they are the one's in charge and they will be obeyed not matter the right or wrong of it. It's those officer's that we see and hear about in the news and from our friends. it is those officer's that place the burden mistrust upon all those with-in law enforcement.

It is sad to say that the only time or rather most of the time i should say. that we only hear of those police that are good and do their jobs, after they have either lost their lives or done something heroic.

Just observation but I have a thought that the "Serve" seems to have moved to serving a department, policy, or idealism moreso than it means to Serve the Public anymore.
It used to be that we were glad to see LEO in our neighborhoods, restaurants, etc. They were a welcome part of our smaller neighborhoods and a comforting presence. Our friends.
Now it's gotten to the point if you see a cop you that paranoia sets in and you cover your arse. Check the speedometer, rear view mirror, and just see if you've done something wrong.
Cops have become like a "stranger coming to the door" There's almost never good news from the visit.
My mindset is IF I see a bad guy type I know what to expect and avoid the situation. IF I see a cop I never know what's up. Hard to avoid them. Paranoia? probably so but there's reason for it
I just wish we could resurrect that trust and comfort with LEO again.
I think we're all being shorted without that comforting presence.
I don't like the "US vs. THEM" feeling. There's got to be a way to drop the "Them" from all of this and just make it "US" again.
I don't know the mindset of LEO at all. I don't know why "US vs. THEM" exists on "THEIR" side. I do know why it exists on "OUR" side.
I support and thank our LEOs but I'm not too fond of the means or perceptions.

 

[Hooker]

Just like every coin has two sides, there are always different ways of handling things. however in situations like these it also comes down to the PO's personality. I know that a very good vast majority of police officers are good people and only want the best for the public that they serve, but it's the one's that put on that shield and carry the mind set that they are the one's in charge and they will be obeyed not matter the right or wrong of it. It's those officer's that we see and hear about in the news and from our friends. it is those officer's that place the burden mistrust upon all those with-in law enforcement.

It is sad to say that the only time or rather most of the time i should say. that we only hear of those police that are good and do their jobs, after they have either lost their lives or done something heroic.

Good point
Haven't we heard multiple times from LEOs who say if we are respectful to them, they will return the favor?
Well, shouldn't they expect citizens to get an attitude when one is given?

 

[DaddyFixSemi]

Just observation but I have a thought that the "Serve" seems to have moved to serving a department, policy, or idealism moreso than it means to Serve the Public anymore.
It used to be that we were glad to see LEO in our neighborhoods, restaurants, etc. They were a welcome part of our smaller neighborhoods and a comforting presence. Our friends.
Now it's gotten to the point if you see a cop you that paranoia sets in and you cover your arse. Check the speedometer, rear view mirror, and just see if you've done something wrong.
Cops have become like a "stranger coming to the door" There's almost never good news from the visit.
My mindset is IF I see a bad guy type I know what to expect and avoid the situation. IF I see a cop I never know what's up. Hard to avoid them. Paranoia? probably so but there's reason for it
I just wish we could resurrect that trust and comfort with LEO again.
I think we're all being shorted without that comforting presence.
I don't like the "US vs. THEM" feeling. There's got to be a way to drop the "Them" from all of this and just make it "US" again.
I don't know the mindset of LEO at all. I don't know why "US vs. THEM" exists on "THEIR" side. I do know why it exists on "OUR" side.
I support and thank our LEOs but I'm not too fond of the means or perceptions.

I agree with you 100% it has become an "US vs "THEM". However, here is where the line get's blurred, is the fact is we as a society have given the law enforcement community seemingly more power over us as a whole every year. We have let the government enact more and more restrictions on us every year. It's gotten to the point that "WE" the common people of this country don't know and even less understand the laws that are in place and yes this part will even extend to many police officer's themselves.

Laws that protect one part of the public, yet condemn another part. Laws that say we have these rights, yet another law restricts those same rights to only certain places or times.

Most people who get pulled over in a traffic stop or some other encounter with the police just, want the encounter to over quickly. So they let the officer(s) act how they see fit. They just keep their heads down and let the ego ridden, foul tempered officers trample all over their civil rights.

To any current or former Leo reading this, this next part is MY own personnel beliefs. The HELL with that... I refuse to let another person trample over my rights wither they be just another person walking down the street or a police officer who has pulled me over for speeding.

I didn't spend 5 years serving and some times bleeding for my country, defending our way of life and our civil rights, to just let another person walk all over them.

Now does this mean that every time a police officer is rude to me or what not, that I will go all out to see that they themselves are humiliated and drummed out of a career that they may or may not love with a passion... no I won't just like greyhound47 didn't this time. not every situation calls for extreme actions, some times it is better to get your point across with a few well chosen words then by million dollar lawsuits and bad press. Now having said that there are times where those actions are needed and work better then just a few words.

Like i said before there are two sides to a coin.

 

[phred]

I would have dropped a dime or two on him. He needs to learn the laws he's attempting to uphold.

Scott

 

[Suprtek]

I sort of agree but not completely. Yes the officer needs to establish who a person and that may mean asking for ID. But my understanding is that a person does not need to have an LTCH on private property if the owner gives them permission to be there.

You are absolutely correct. However, you are ignoring the fact the the officer has a duty to respond to the call regardless of the fact that the call may be unnecessary. If an officer approached me in a similar situation and that officer was professional and courteous, I would see no reason not to cooperate. I can't blame the officer for the stupidity of my neighbor. Now if he crossed the line to harassment, it would be a different story.

Pretty safe to assume that a random person did not just decide to start mowing the lawn without the knowledge and permission of the homeowner. So in this case it could be argued that it really doesn't matter who the person is.

Again, the officer does not have the luxury of making such assumptions, no matter how obvious things may seem. If the officer was familiar with the neighborhood and residents, then I would certainly agree with you on this.

The gun is irrelevant.

In a perfect world, maybe the gun would be irrelevant. We all know our world is far from perfect. Expecting an officer responding to any MWAG call to ignore the fact that someone is carrying is unrealistic at best. (see above about making assumptions)

How would people like it if the police just went around asking for identification?

Of course that would be completely unacceptable. But that is not what happened here. Again, the officer was responding to a call, not randomly stopping in front of his yard.



Let me make it perfectly clear that I am in no way defending the way in which the officer in questioned handled this situation. From the info that was provided, he was obviously a major D-bag. I'm simply trying to illustrate the fact that there ARE ways that citizens and LEOs can interact in these types of situations where everybody wins but it takes both sides to make it work. There are times when LEOs need to understand how their demeanor will affect someone. There are times when we as responsible citizens need to understand that LEOs are required to respond to the call they are sent even if they know the call should never have been made. As was mentioned previously, some education for the dispatchers and the officers involved could have prevented the situation from ever happening in the first place but that could be a completely separate issue because I don't know how much latitude the police have to determine if a call actually requires a response. A little understanding on both sides can go a long way.