Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: 1st Encounter with a LEO while OC'ing

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Englewood, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    654

    Post imported post

    Well had my first encounter with a LEO last evening while OC’ing at my son’s work.

    A little background so you understand what happened. My son is 25 and unfortunately started having seizures this last February so he cannot drive for at least 6 months until they figure out what’s going on and get whatever medication he needs at the therapeutic levels.

    He just recently started working as a computer tech at the Speedway Corporate offices in Enon, OH. My wife takes him to work and I pick him up. When I first went there the building he works in is posted. There is a set of outer doors, which are not posted, and then you go into a small foyer to another set of double doors, which are posted. You are then in the receptionist area and from there is another set of double doors which are locked and card controlled for security.

    The middle set of doors is the only ones posted, and I must say it is very clearly marked on theses doors. Speedway corporate office grounds or parking lot are NOT posted.

    I usually just wait in the parking lot for my son to get off work and listen to my music or nap. Last night I stopped at the Speedway service station in Enon (separate location from the corporate offices) and got a little snack and some water. Funny thing is I OC’d there and have OC’d at many other Speedway’s and never had a problem.

    Well I got out of my truck to go throw the trash away and stretch my legs a little. While walking from my truck to the trash can a Speedway employee pulled up. I threw my trash away and when I turned to go back he must have saw my Beretta 92FS, in my OWB holster on my right hip. I returned to my truck and continued to wait for my son.

    Now this was right about the time my son was suppose to get off work, so I’m waiting and he comes out the doors and starts walking toward the truck, but he’s not walking to the passenger side like he normally does. He comes up to my window and says “Dad, we can’t leave yet”. I said “Why not”? He proceeded to tell me that when he was coming out the door a co-worker told him not to go outside because there was a man with a gun outside.

    My son said he started to laugh and got some funny looks for his co-workers. He then said “Is this guy about my height, heavy set, wearing a Marine hat, and in a white Ford Ranger pickup”? They said yes, how did you know? My son said, “That’s my Dad”.

    Well he then came out and told me they had called the Sheriff’s Department and they were dispatching a Deputy to investigate “Man with a gun” call. Well I knew what to do, and I really wasn’t nervous. So I started getting my license and even my CHL out. Just as I was doing that the Deputy pulled up behind me. I had already got my DL out and was trying to get my CHL out when I dropped my DL down between my door and my seat. I started to reach down and get it, but then realized what I was doing and put both of my hands on the steering wheel and just waited for the Deputy to get to my door.

    They had security cameras outside and must have reported my license plate to the Deputy. Because as soon as the Deputy approached I started to say good evening and was just starting to tell the Deputy that I was a CHL holder and was carrying when he politely said, “I know you have a permit sir, but thank you for informing me”.

    Well to make a long story shorter, we exchange the normal may I see your permit and ID stuff, he went into the office, and my son actually went back in to let him in the secured area, but someone met them in the reception area, which I could see from my truck thru the glass doors. They had some discussion for only a couple of minutes and he and my son returned to my truck.

    Well the Deputy gave some friendly advice about CC’ing vs. OC’ing. He wasn’t anti CC, but gave me the impression he really didn’t like people OC’ing. He did state that if Speedway wanted to push it a charge of "Inducing Panic" could leveled against me. I did briefly mention ORC 9.62 and he said he understood my point and right to OC, but again he suggested I CC. So I left it at that.

    Now one thing… this Deputy was very professional. Never gave me any impression that “He” wanted to arrest me for “Inducing Panic” but was just trying to give me an idea of the mindset of people in this community. So over all I was very pleased with the encounter.

    ***Just edited all the extra lines between paragraphs, I wrote this in Word then cut and pasted it into the message, for some reason Word adds a bunch of lines between paragraphs when cutting and pasting.






  2. #2
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Very good description of a very responsible and cooperativeinteraction between a law abiding citizen and an LEO. Both parties behaved in a professional, safe, matureand effectivemanner. And everyone (stoppee, stopper, bystanders) benefitted from the smoothly handled transaction.

    Kudos toLthrnck and the LEO.


    ETA: You might consider favorably writing the LEOupto his department.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,882

    Post imported post

    I've heard from LEOs and others that someone OCing can potentially be charged under the "inducing panic" statute. I thought it would be worthwhile to familiarize ourselves with the actual text, so here's the relevant section of the ORC (sorry if the cut and paste is inelegant):


    § 2917.31. Inducing panic.

    (A) No person shall cause the evacuation of any public place, or otherwise cause serious public inconvenience or alarm, by doing any of the following:

    (1) Initiating or circulating a report or warning of an alleged or impending fire, explosion, crime, or other catastrophe, knowing that such report or warning is false;

    (2) Threatening to commit any offense of violence;

    (3) Committing any offense, with reckless disregard of the likelihood that its commission will cause serious public inconvenience or alarm.
    -----

    The statutegoes on at length with various definitions and exemptions for emergency drills and such, but it seems obvious to me that this law doesn't apply to OC, absent some overt threat being made.

    Congrats on handling the matter without escalation or SWAT involvement or whatever the person calling it in expected.

    -ljp

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    No longer in Alexandria, Egypt
    Posts
    2,798

    Post imported post

    Looks to me like OC meets none of those items mentioned in "Inducing Panic" More like whoever wrote and passed that law is guilty of "Inducing Stupidity"

  5. #5
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887

    Post imported post

    Inducing panic, if that is all the text there is, would not work at all, because he was not committing an offense. Is there more text?

    Whatabout "Disorderly Conduct"? It can be twisted to cover just about anything.



    BB62

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358

    Post imported post







    http://onlinedocs.andersonpublishing...tm&cp=PORC


    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    § 2917.11. Disorderly conduct.

    (A) No person shall recklessly cause inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm to another by doing any of the following:

    (1) Engaging in fighting, in threatening harm to persons or property, or in violent or turbulent behavior;

    (2) Making unreasonable noise or an offensively coarse utterance, gesture, or display or communicating unwarranted and grossly abusive language to any person;

    (3) Insulting, taunting, or challenging another, under circumstances in which that conduct is likely to provoke a violent response;

    (4) Hindering or preventing the movement of persons on a public street, road, highway, or right-of-way, or to, from, within, or upon public or private property, so as to interfere with the rights of others, and by any act that serves no lawful and reasonable purpose of the offender;

    (5) Creating a condition that is physically offensive to persons or that presents a risk of physical harm to persons or property, by any act that serves no lawful and reasonable purpose of the offender.

    (B) No person, while voluntarily intoxicated, shall do either of the following:

    (1) In a public place or in the presence of two or more persons, engage in conduct likely to be offensive or to cause inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm to persons of ordinary sensibilities, which conduct the offender, if the offender were not intoxicated, should know is likely to have that effect on others;

    (2) Engage in conduct or create a condition that presents a risk of physical harm to the offender or another, or to the property of another.

    (C) Violation of any statute or ordinance of which an element is operating a motor vehicle, locomotive, watercraft, aircraft, or other vehicle while under the influence of alcohol or any drug of abuse, is not a violation of division (B) of this section.

    (D) If a person appears to an ordinary observer to be intoxicated, it is probable cause to believe that person is voluntarily intoxicated for purposes of division (B) of this section.

    (E) (1) Whoever violates this section is guilty of disorderly conduct.

    (2) Except as otherwise provided in division (E)(3) of this section, disorderly conduct is a minor misdemeanor.

    (3) Disorderly conduct is a misdemeanor of the fourth degree if any of the following applies:

    (a) The offender persists in disorderly conduct after reasonable warning or request to desist.

    (b) The offense is committed in the vicinity of a school or in a school safety zone.

    (c) The offense is committed in the presence of any law enforcement officer, firefighter, rescuer, medical person, emergency medical services person, or other authorized person who is engaged in the person's duties at the scene of a fire, accident, disaster, riot, or emergency of any kind.

    (d) The offense is committed in the presence of any emergency facility person who is engaged in the person's duties in an emergency facility.

    (F) As used in this section:

    (1) "Emergency medical services person" is the singular of "emergency medical services personnel" as defined in section 2133.21 of the Revised Code.

    (2) "Emergency facility person" is the singular of "emergency facility personnel" as defined in section 2909.04 of the Revised Code.

    (3) "Emergency facility" has the same meaning as in section 2909.04 of the Revised Code.

    (4) "Committed in the vicinity of a school" has the same meaning as in section 2925.01 of the Revised Code.[/quote]
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

    IANAL, however, the only possible state constructin support of disorderly conduct thatcould even grossly be stretched beyond belief wouldbe ORC 2917.11 -- (A)(5):

    (A) (5) Creating a condition that is physically offensive to persons or that presents a risk of physical harm to persons or property, by any act that serves no lawful and reasonable purpose of the offender.

    1) The condition *might* be personally offensive to persons but by no means physically offensive to persons.

    2) Simple OC does *not*, of itself, present a risk of physical harm to persons or property.

    3) The act serves a lawful and reasonable purpose of the 'offender'. i.e. Right to do so in Ohio and is prudent for defensive purposes.

    Disorderly conduct... no way at the state level by any stretch or construct of the ORC.


    If it were myself charged (and myself ONLY) I would absolutely enter a plea of not guilty and pro se a motion for dismissalreasoning #2 & #3 and supporting with recent Ohio Supreme Court ruling, Ohio Constitution, and the 'new' CCW law. I would contend that #1 *might* be personally offensive to persons, but could not be in any way physically offensive unless exercising a constitutional and legally protected right becomes physical even when no physical action was involved.

    Being of any color, religious belief, or holding any viewpoint might be personally offensive to persons, but can be in no way considered physically offensive; especially if it is a protected right.

    Again, IANAL and YMMV.


    BTW: There is no explicit exception for LE here so... if it is physically offensive to personsthat othersOC, then 'Lucy got some splainin to do'!
    Moreover, were he to return there, wouldn't he be rather bad at their game, no longer being accustomed to the darkness? - Plato

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    , Tennessee, USA
    Posts
    416

    Post imported post

    BobCav wrote:
    Looks to me like OC meets none of those items mentioned in "Inducing Panic" More like whoever wrote and passed that law is guilty of "Inducing Stupidity"
    I'm with BobCav.

    ProguninTN

  8. #8
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    No longer in Alexandria, Egypt
    Posts
    2,798

    Post imported post

    OC'ing is not disorderly conduct under that definition asit is not "reckless".

    The mere presence of a gun does not cause any more harm or annoyance than the presence of donuts cause fat.

  9. #9
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887

    Post imported post

    BobCav wrote:
    OC'ing is not disorderly conduct under that definition asit is not "reckless".

    The mere presence of a gun does not cause any more harm or annoyance than the presence of donuts cause fat.
    The only trouble is that one might have to go to court in order to defend oneself against a charge that it is.

    I don't disagree with you, I simply want to point out that those who decide to OC must be prepared for that eventuality - possibly repeatedly.

    On another subject - afterI was stopped at gunpoint by 3 police officers while OCing, I spoke to an attorney who said that there must be a pattern of such treatment to pursue successful legal action against the "offending" police departments.





  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    358

    Post imported post

    IANAL, however, AFAIK it does not necessarily need to be a pattern. It can simply be a second time by the same LE department.

    An interested civil rights attorney has a chance as smoking them on just the first stop... depending on how 'aggressive'LE gets and how 'compliant' the individual is.

    YMMV.
    Moreover, were he to return there, wouldn't he be rather bad at their game, no longer being accustomed to the darkness? - Plato

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    14

    Post imported post

    BB62 wrote:
    BobCav wrote:
    OC'ing is not disorderly conduct under that definition asit is not "reckless".

    The mere presence of a gun does not cause any more harm or annoyance than the presence of donuts cause fat.

    .

    On another subject - afterI was stopped at gunpoint by 3 police officers while OCing, I spoke to an attorney who said that there must be a pattern of such treatment to pursue successful legal action against the "offending" police departments.
    After the 3 officers figured out you weren't a gun crazed Postal worker(j/k) what happened? and were you in a big city? and did you everOC again and at the same spot the 3 officers stopped you before? and if so was it ANY of the 3 initial officers?
    Thank you
    Bob




  12. #12
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887

    Post imported post

    XD-40-Bob wrote:
    After the 3 officers figured out you weren't a gun crazed Postal worker(j/k) what happened? and were you in a big city? and did you everOC again and at the same spot the 3 officers stopped you before? and if so was it ANY of the 3 initial officers?
    This happened in Cincinnati, Ohio, within the city limits.

    I did OC again a number of times, in the same area, and never encountered any of the original three officers. The stopping officer was from Green Township, the second officer was a Hamilton County Deputy Sheriff, and the third was a Cincinnati K9 unit.

    I was reported as a "juvenile with a gun", but I'm more than twice the age of a licensed driver.

    In my OC walks afterward, one thing I did do, in Cincinnati, was to call their dispatch center beforehand and let them know I would be out and about. The policeare stretched thin there and I had no desire to strain their resources.

    Now, I just might OCin Green Township, though, because I'm getting back into OCing again...



    BB62




  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    14

    Post imported post

    BB62

    Thank you for the quick reply,,is BB62 for USS New Jersey? were you on it? I seen a Battle Ship when i was in Norfolk in 1983 or 1984and i THINK it was the Jersey but i can't be 100% positive,,I was on LPD-12 USS Shreveport,,Gator Navy,that Regular Navy would have BORED ME TO DEATH

    Out here in the Boonies where i live when us "country" people go for walks we always pack a pistol and USUALLY in our pockets,,the Sheriff's have stopped and asked if we were carrying guns and when we pulled them out of our pockets they didnt even care that we had a Pistol in our pockets,,BUT out here every household has about 20 guns each,,and more if there is a lot of kids,,my 2 boys are 15 and 17 and have 10 guns each,everything BUT a pistol,,the 17 y/o boy turns 18 on Nov 1st and he will get a pistol then :shock:I may get him an XD-45,he is on the 45 kick that i was when i was in the Military,,I did have a 7 shot Star 45 that fit PERFECT into my pocket and you couldnt even tell it,,he wants a 1911,,but we will see,,he is definately getting a .22 Revolver with the .22 and .22 Mag cylinders,,so on November 1st he may get the .22 Revolver AND the XD-45 or 1911 Springfield???

    BB62 i was just wondering about the USS New Jersey correlation to your BB62 name

    Thank You

    Bob





  14. #14
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887

    Post imported post

    XD-40-Bob wrote:
    BB62

    Thank you for the quick reply,,is BB62 for USS New Jersey? were you on it? I seen a Battle Ship when i was in Norfolk in 1983 or 1984and i THINK it was the Jersey but i can't be 100% positive,,I was on LPD-12 USS Shreveport,,Gator Navy,that Regular Navy would have BORED ME TO DEATH ...
    BB62 i was just wondering about the USS New Jersey correlation to your BB62 name
    Yep, my handle references the New Jersey! I've always like battleships, and I happened to meet a WWII vet (plankowner) whoserved aboard her.

    Long story short, I have attended a number of NJ reunions, been aboard the ship in places that "tourists" cannot get to, etc. all too cool!

    I don't know if the ship you saw was the Jersey, but if you Google BB62 you will find a number of pages, one of which I'm sure will tell you (or give you an e-mail address to write to) if BB62 was in Norfolk. Of course it also could have been one of the other Iowa class BB's - Iowa, Wisconsin, or Missouri.

    Check out the cool pic at the bottom of this page:

    http://www.ussnewjersey.com/

    btw - gotta get me a 1911 one of these days...


  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    14

    Post imported post

    I seen the battleship right when they re-commisioned them and moved some of them into Norfolk berths,,they were not as big as i thought they would be and i think that is because when i was a little kid all i ever heard was how BIG a battleship is,,well after being in the Navy for 2 years before they re-commisioned the Battleships and seeing some big ass Ships it just wasnt what i thought it was either,,plus we were coming back in from a 2 week jaunt and me and MOST of the other guys wanted to hit the beer pretty hard so i didnt pay much attention to the BB,,now if it had a big Budweiser sign on the hull i could have told you how many rivets was in bad boy

    But the history of the Battleship can NEVER be denied!!!

    Bob

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    190

    Post imported post

    BB62 wrote:
    Now, I just might OCin Green Township, though, because I'm getting back into OCing again...



    BB62
    I have been lately as well in GT.

    Just was in Subway, and had no problems. The people in there do already know me (and the manager already knows I carry as she's seen me open carry).

    Let me know if you do, I'd be interested to hear your experiences!

  17. #17
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887

    Post imported post

    JSK333 wrote:
    I have been lately as well in GT.

    Just was in Subway, and had no problems. The people in there do already know me (and the manager already knows I carry as she's seen me open carry).

    Let me know if you do, I'd be interested to hear your experiences!
    Well, we're just going to have to go somewhere together!

  18. #18
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Just a "wannabe" in Mtn. Top, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    1,441

    Post imported post

    BB62 wrote:
    ...On another subject - afterI was stopped at gunpoint by 3 police officers while OCing, I spoke to an attorney who said that there must be a pattern of such treatment to pursue successful legal action against the "offending" police departments.
    Sounds like you need to look for a competent attorney.
    Just like any other civilian, LEO only have to break the law ONCE to be sued and lose.



  19. #19
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Just a "wannabe" in Mtn. Top, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    1,441

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    Very good description of a very responsible and cooperativeinteraction between a law abiding citizen and an LEO. Both parties behaved in a professional, safe, matureand effectivemanner. And everyone (stoppee, stopper, bystanders) benefitted from the smoothly handled transaction.

    Kudos toLthrnck and the LEO.


    ETA: You might consider favorably writing the LEOupto his department.
    I'm not in agreement here. The LEO is not performing his duties professionally if he is compelled to offer his unsolicited opinion on a legal activity in a manner that suggests you do not partake in said legal activity.

    In such a situation, I would recommend reminding (politely) the LEO that his opinion carries no legal weight and that you would prefer/appreciate it if he would not offer such unsolicited advise that is contradictory to the LAW.

    This can be done with respect and non-confrontation. LEO are not your mommy, don't further his complex by accepting his mommy advise.




Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •