Open carrier stopped in Dayton

[BB62]

The Beavercreek video is still being worked on, but in the meanwhile…

Police Reports:

Dayton 2/21/14 morning: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7HpWKzHSEroMm5jS0tFWmVXZWs/edit?usp=sharing

Dayton 2/21/14 afternoon: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7HpWKzHSEroQVh2NHRhaTVuTjQ/edit?usp=sharing


Beavercreek 2/22/14: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7HpWKzHSEroZFJZcDlWUUk0OFk/edit?usp=sharing

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

"... Off. Majercak later responded to the station do download the recordings of Ivins and Seaton, and Sgt. Molnar was going to send a teletype to surrounding agencies warning them of the attempts by Seaton to entice them into a rights violation so he could "get some money..."

I Love that, it may have just the kind of "chilling affect" needed. An ill-trained officer who's thinking "it may or may not be legal, but as long as I'm "operating in good faith" may just take a step back and reconsider.

 

[Primus]

I Love that, it may have just the kind of "chilling affect" needed. An ill-trained officer who's thinking "it may or may not be legal, but as long as I'm "operating in good faith" may just take a step back and reconsider.

You realize this guy is stealing taxpayers money right? So not only does he appear to be tying up police resources (paid to look for real crime right?) , he's blatantly trying to "get paid". That money if he won a lawsuit would becoming out of taxpayers pockets.

Yea.... go him..... doing a great job making us gun owners look good and waste time and money at the same time.

Is it too hard to just get a job and go about your daily life while carrying your guns to normalize it? For every step others (right on this very forum I bet) have taken to make gains and further the goals, this guys seems to be trying to take then all back to paid quick.

He should just go play in a free way. Let gin get smash end by a car and sue someone that way. If he survives he'll never do it again.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[Grapeshot]

I'm disturbed by the offer to split the money with the officer - if that in fact was said - recording should verify.

I'm also troubled by the officer "trespassing" the gentleman from the property - did a representative of the property owner request that?

While I do not look to put anyone (LEO or not) in a bad position, I will use whatever legal tools are available to right a particularly egregious wrong.

Lots of questions - few answers. I'll standby.

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

I'm disturbed by the offer to split the money with the officer - if that in fact was said - recording should verify.

I'm not at all disturbed by it as I only see it as a technique or tactic ("verbal judo" is the term I've heard bandied about) to place an opponent on unsure footing.

As far as I'm concerned it's just as valid a tactic to use against the officers as an officer lying and saying that he has evidence that he actually doesn't in order to goad/entice a confession out of someone.

If what it takes to make an ill-informed officer back off, reconsider his inopportune actions, and respect legal behavior is telling them that my primary purpose in carrying is to subject them to legal action, then I only have two questions....

How much are stamps today and who do I address my letter to?


Last time I had an interaction with an officer I told him he had nice legs and pretty eyes... it definitely put him off-balance, which was the intent.

 

[BB62]

Update: I called the very pleasant Beavercreek records officer, Sgt. Wesseler, this morning. He understood what the problem was (the proprietary video file format) and indicated that he would be glad to see what he could do to be responsive to my request for a more widely used format.

After contacting those more knowledgeable than myself about video formats, I called him back and told him that the preferred format would be MP4, high quality, or AVI, high quality.

He indicated that he would contact the in-car system manufacturer and find out what could be done.

 

[RCall]

I'm disturbed by the offer to split the money with the officer - if that in fact was said - recording should verify.

I'm also troubled by the officer "trespassing" the gentleman from the property - did a representative of the property owner request that?

While I do not look to put anyone (LEO or not) in a bad position, I will use whatever legal tools are available to right a particularly egregious wrong.

Lots of questions - few answers. I'll standby.

I believe the property he was trespassed from was a public housing complex.

 

[BB62]

I got a call this afternoon from the friendly Sgt. in Beavercreek, who told me that his call to L3 Communications turned up the fact that they would be glad to supply him with the necessary software to make a more usable video file - if they had a premium contract.

I thought it was all over, since not only had all my efforts failed, but I also hadn't heard from my VERY technically capable friend , but before posting that all was in vain, I gave him a call and found out that he had made the distributable video LAST NIGHT!! :banana:


My sincere thanks to my friend, and without further ado, here for your viewing pleasure (or in my case total disgust) is the money-grubbing Adam Seaton (and his friend) with Officer Majercak of Beavercreek:

http://youtu.be/EdVKKsQRFdo

 

[Werz]

"Obviously, if we get the call again, it's gonna be me that comes out here ... it ain't gonna work today. And to be honest with ya, I'm gonna let everybody else know, so it's never gonna work."

:lol: I like that guy.

Edit: And you know there's not going to be an argument over identification when the officer is still rolling up and says, "I'm gonna be out with 'em in the McDonald's parking lot; it will be Mr. Seaton."

 

[solus]

bb62, thanks for your junk yard dog intensity to track this down...

ipse

 

[Primus]

I got a call this afternoon from the friendly Sgt. in Beavercreek, who told me that his call to L3 Communications turned up the fact that they would be glad to supply him with the necessary software to make a more usable video file - if they had a premium contract.

I thought it was all over, since not only had all my efforts failed, but I also hadn't heard from my VERY technically capable friend , but before posting that all was in vain, I gave him a call and found out that he had made the distributable video LAST NIGHT!! :banana:


My sincere thanks to my friend, and without further ado, here for your viewing pleasure (or in my case total disgust) is the money-grubbing Adam Seaton (and his friend) with Officer Majercak of Beavercreek:

http://youtu.be/EdVKKsQRFdo

Good work BB62. Appreciate the effort you've put in.

This guy is a tool. Actually sounds more like his buddy is the provocateur. Sounded like Seat on said he never needed to carry in his hometown until the other guy pushed him. Then they talk about the other guy was on the news and seat on was mad "the cops were being so cool". "Trying to get paid".



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[BB62]

You're all welcome, and I'm glad that I was able to, with help, get everything posted. I learned a few things along the way.

I didn't hear one particular thing on the video - that being the (paraphrased) "How about if you take my gun and throw me to the ground?" that was in the police report.


P.S. - I'm going to be largely out of computer range for the next week, so please don't cause this thread to be closed in my absence!

 

[fjpro2a]

Come on, now

CAN'T, CAN'T, CAN'T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG?? :banghead:

 

[RCall]

It's obvious to me that this Seaton fellow is only interested in stirring up trouble as he makes the comment that he's mad that every cop is cool with his open carry.

 

[Fallschirjmäger]

You realize this guy is stealing taxpayers money right? So not only does he appear to be tying up police resources (paid to look for real crime right?) , he's blatantly trying to "get paid". That money if he won a lawsuit would becoming out of taxpayers pockets.

Yea.... go him..... doing a great job making us gun owners look good and waste time and money at the same time.

Is it too hard to just get a job and go about your daily life while carrying your guns to normalize it? For every step others (right on this very forum I bet) have taken to make gains and further the goals, this guys seems to be trying to take then all back to paid quick.

He should just go play in a free way. Let gin get smash end by a car and sue someone that way. If he survives he'll never do it again.

Theft is illegal, Primus, you should realize that. That he hasn't been accused by anyone competent or been indicted speaks volumes as to any supposed 'illegality'.
The 'tying up of police resources' is entirely voluntary on the department's side. He lacks the authority to compel them to respond. He lacks the authority to compel them to expend resources reacting to legal conduct. Perhaps the coppers should be looking for 'real crime' as you suggest.

In order for him to "get paid" someone has to first do something wrong, something actionable. Saying he's only looking to 'get paid' is like saying the police run radar on the side of the road 'just to get paid' by collect speeding fines. If Officer Friendly doesn't do anything wrong, then he has nothing to hide and nothing to fear.

Any monies he's awarded or settles for goes right back to the community, something that cannot be said for fines collected by the courts as a result of police operations. As for 'that money comes out of taxpayer pockets" that claim is specious at best; whose pockets do you think fines for business transgressions comes from, the magic pocket genie?

Lastly, as regard to 'never do it again', if a police department gets sued a time or three, I'll bet they never bother anyone displaying lawful behavior again (at least if the department is capable of learning.)

 

[Primus]

Theft is illegal, Primus, you should realize that. That he hasn't been accused by anyone competent or been indicted speaks volumes as to any supposed 'illegality'.
The 'tying up of police resources' is entirely voluntary on the department's side. He lacks the authority to compel them to respond. He lacks the authority to compel them to expend resources reacting to legal conduct. Perhaps the coppers should be looking for 'real crime' as you suggest.

In order for him to "get paid" someone has to first do something wrong, something actionable. Saying he's only looking to 'get paid' is like saying the police run radar on the side of the road 'just to get paid' by collect speeding fines. If Officer Friendly doesn't do anything wrong, then he has nothing to hide and nothing to fear.

Any monies he's awarded or settles for goes right back to the community, something that cannot be said for fines collected by the courts as a result of police operations. As for 'that money comes out of taxpayer pockets" that claim is specious at best; whose pockets do you think fines for business transgressions comes from, the magic pocket genie?

Lastly, as regard to 'never do it again', if a police department gets sued a time or three, I'll bet they never bother anyone displaying lawful behavior again (at least if the department is capable of learning.)

I agree. It would actually be more like larceny by false pretenses. False pretense being that he had civil rights violated.

The "can't make a good person do bad things" is utter BS. I wouldnt put it past these clowns to blatantly lie and say things were said and done to make a case to sue. So even if the coo was legit these kids could easily say they were beat or violated and then make a false claim for compensation. This isn't a vacuum and it works both ways. Cops lie to cover stuff up so why can't a citizen lie to get paid?

I don't see him getting money as going back to the community. Unless you count the local Walmart where he buys his Xbox then the local liquor store where he buys his kegs from the "community".

The money would directly come from the city coffers which are filled by the taxpayers. If a "business transgression" occurred THAT person would pay, not the whole community. Not really sure why you brought that up its apples and oranges.

Why does the department need to get sued? This cop was smart enough to call this kid on his BS without even needing a suit. The kid was dumb enough to admit to it "mad cops are so cool about this" "trying to get paid". And the cop spread the word to the other guys when they see that idiot ignore him or engage him knowing he's fishing.

Lastly.... your comparison with running radar and trying to get a lawsuit are so far off. If/when you get pegged doing 60 in a 45 its because.. . Wait for it ... YOU were doing 60! See how that works? Its illegal so you pay the fine. This kid was doing a scam. Now if you said they set up radar and were falsifying the tickets or were doing in a place where say the speed changed abruptly from one speed to another and were trying to intentionally get you..... then maybe you'd have an argument. Maybe.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[BB62]

...This guy is a tool. Actually sounds more like his buddy is the provocateur. Sounded like Seat on said he never needed to carry in his hometown until the other guy pushed him. Then they talk about the other guy was on the news and seat on was mad "the cops were being so cool". "Trying to get paid".

Agreed. I rate pond scum higher than either Seaton or his friend.

 

[Bikenut]

-snip-

Why does the department need to get sued? This cop was smart enough to call this kid on his BS without even needing a suit. The kid was dumb enough to admit to it "mad cops are so cool about this" "trying to get paid". And the cop spread the word to the other guys when they see that idiot ignore him or engage him knowing he's fishing.

-snip-

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Regardless of who thinks what about Seaton and/or his choice of firearms and/or his motives... the part of your post I put in bold is even better than him having to sue since now the cops know not to mess with someone who is engaged in legally carrying a firearm because there could be a lawsuit involved if they do.

And it didn't clog up the courts nor did it require Seaton pay an attorney... and only cost the taxpayers whatever was spent on the initial response.

I personally would call that a win for the right to bear arms, in this case legal open carry.

And for those who don't like the idea of citizens baiting cops please consider:

Only a criminal will take the bait. And it doesn't matter if the criminal is wearing his pants around his knees... or is wearing a uniform. Honest citizens and honest cops don't take the bait.

 

[Primus]

Regardless of who thinks what about Seaton and/or his choice of firearms and/or his motives... the part of your post I put in bold is even better than him having to sue since now all the cops know not to mess with someone who is engaged in legally carrying a firearm because there could be a lawsuit involved if they do.

And it didn't clog up the courts nor did it require Seaton pay an attorney... and only cost the taxpayers whatever was spent on the initial response.

I personally would call that a win for the right to bear arms, in this case legal open carry.

And for those who don't like the idea of citizens baiting cops please consider:

Only a criminal will take the bait. And it doesn't matter if the criminal is wearing his pants around his knees... or is wearing a uniform. Honest citizens and honest cops don't take the bait.

You missed the THAT IDIOT part..... nothing to do for anyone else carrying guns.... doesn't affect a regular normal open carrier. Its on that dude that they will avoid. The word that HE is trouble will be spread. Hence them knowing him on a first/last name basis.

If anything he's drawn NEGATIVE attention to normal people so they'll be paying extra attention to the next guy who is a good dude.

No matter how this is spun,.. he's setting the movement back not forward, undoing hard work of others.

This video is now on the internet for every anti to post and "look at these crazy gun dudes".


Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

 

[Bikenut]

You missed the THAT IDIOT part..... nothing to do for anyone else carrying guns.... doesn't affect a regular normal open carrier. Its on that dude that they will avoid. The word that HE is trouble will be spread. Hence them knowing him on a first/last name basis.

If anything he's drawn NEGATIVE attention to normal people so they'll be paying extra attention to the next guy who is a good dude.

No matter how this is spun,.. he's setting the movement back not forward, undoing hard work of others.

This video is now on the internet for every anti to post and "look at these crazy gun dudes".


Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

And I suppose those cops won't be much more careful how they treat someone carrying a long gun who isn't Seaton?

Folks may not agree with the methods Seaton used or even his motives but one thing cannot be denied.... a bunch of cops learned a lesson that there will be consequences for those who try to intimidate the next long gun open carrier.

This really isn't about the type of gun nor is it how Seaton behaved or what his motives were. This is about some cops getting a lesson in being powerless to arrest or even intimidate someone who is engaged in a legal activity. And it is about the cops who learned that first hand spreading the word to many other cops.... and it wasn't even necessary to take anyone to court in order to achieve the same thing.

Like it or not... the cops had a choice with Seaton.... observe a citizen engaged in a legal activity and not breaking any laws without even engaging him.. or taking the bait. They took the bait.

I have exactly the same amount of sympathy for cops who take the bait as I have for criminals who try to steal bait cars set out by cops to catch someone stealing a car or johns trying to pick up a decoy prostitute and recording them as they take the bait so...goose... meet gander.