Canton OH Police CCW Holder Encounter

Status
Not open for further replies.
Seems Ohio has more then its share of 'officer discretion' or 'professional courtesy' lurking about.

Not to awfully long ago a judge was stopped for DUI. She cussed that trooper out, left the scene only to be pulled over down the road by another. Don't believe she was booked either. I know she lost her driving privileges but was still able to sit the bench while her case was pending. Our state tax $'s also got spent picking her up for work so she could pass judgement on others while her case was under way. :mad:
Wonder how many DUI cases she was docketed while she herself was being investigated.
 
talking about holding a LEO to a higher standard.
It appears that Pinal County Sheriff Babeu, National Law Enforcement Officer of the Year, is about to go down.

The Phoenix Media has figured out that his threatening of his expartner is part of an ongoing pattern of illegal behavior which has been evident since his days as a Chandler AZ police officer.

When the dust clears it will probably take out the AZ AG, the Pinal County Prosecutor, a County Supervisor and some key managers in the Pinal County Courthouse. These people appear to have covered up his activities, participated in them and benefitted from his actions.

This will come about because a few good men did not stand by and let evil prevail.

One of them is a former Marine Sniper and Special Operator. He showed great restraint in responding to the overt threats to himself and his family and friends made by Babeu and his croneys.

I salute this man SEMPER FI.
 
Last edited:
talking about holding a LEO to a higher standard.
Click to expand...

I would just be happy holding them to a standard equal to a regular citizen.

If I were taped/proven of threatening to pull my gun on a defenseless person and shooting them, I would be arrested. Period!

A badge should in NO WAY be a free pass to do the same. The Harless case is just one example that proves there are two different sets of legal rules that are sometimes applied at will.
 
So here's what we do.

We make each cop buy their own insurance policy against abuse lawsuits - a bond. Lose a suit, insurance costs go up, they voluntarily get out of the biz or pay more in which case they have an incentive not to screw up again.

Big payouts no longer put the taxpayers on the hook.

And departments with a history of screwups (Canton OH, Oakland CA, Phoenix AZ) will cause higher insurance prices for all the cops of those departments, which is their just and proper penalty for not cleaning house on their own earlier. They sure as hell will then.

Thoughts?
 
Good idea. LEO pay would need to increase to offset most of the initial premium for such insurance to avoid a pay cut for the vast majority of LEOs who are not responsible for the public costs of LEO abuse lawsuits.
 
Sure. Or better yet, let that initial increase happen based on an average of all the insurance costs for every officer. The good ones will actually get a raise, the bad ones will pay more right off the bat.

Better yet: let this raise be based on the average for ALL departments across the state. Cops in, say, the Oakland PD are initially going to get creamed, and that's exactly as it should be: they'll finally be forced to internally clean house the way they should have done generations ago.
 
Jim March said:
So here's what we do.

We make each cop buy their own insurance policy against abuse lawsuits - a bond. Lose a suit, insurance costs go up, they voluntarily get out of the biz or pay more in which case they have an incentive not to screw up again.

Big payouts no longer put the taxpayers on the hook.

And departments with a history of screwups (Canton OH, Oakland CA, Phoenix AZ) will cause higher insurance prices for all the cops of those departments, which is their just and proper penalty for not cleaning house on their own earlier. They sure as hell will then.

Thoughts?
Click to expand...
I like it ... a lot.

As a licensed architect, if I want liability protection I have to pay for it. Why should an LEO be any different?

How do we make this happen?
 
Sad to say, but Harless didn't right the book when it comes to getting caught with his hand in the cookie jar, knowing he was going to get burned and before he got burned, filed for disability. It's a tactic that's been used for years by many civil servants ,especially police and fire.

Soooo, since we're dreaming here... and since the FOP is ranked #2, second only to MADD, on the list of most powerful lobbying organizations in the State of Ohio...WE ARE DREAMING...

... if an LEO is proven to commit a crime, they are not eligible for new disability compensation of any kind from the time they committed the crime.

Also, they should be tried in court as a regular citizen and if found guilty, do there jail time as everyone else, be automatically fired from the force and only receive from their retirement what they paid in. They should not receive what the city paid to their retirement matching what the offender has paid.
Since the city has already 'earmarked' this retirement money for the offenders retirement, the city could then take that same money and apply it towards what the offended wins in the civil suit.
 
Welll...let me stick with my proposal a sec.

After the first...say, three months of implementation of this, the same law that triggered it says that the insurance rates of all the cops across the whole state get measured and averaged. And then all their salaries get boosted by that average amount.

Not unreasonable, since the local jurisdictions no longer need to cover that insurance cost.

So now what? Well lookie there - all the better cops just ended up with a raise. The best 50% anyhow. The worst got hosed and may decide to immediately quit. That's a feature, not a bug.

But this *should* reduce the flack the FOP would bring?
 
But how tight is the FOP?
Click to expand...

In these parts...think 'Mafia' tight.
Like I posted earlier, the 2nd largest lobbying org. in the State of Ohio.
They usually get what they want!

Just review the Harless case and the fact Harless wasn't arrested for threatening to shoot someone(a couple different times) while on duty. That should answer your question about "how tight the FOP is".

Unless you're an LEO, don't you try the same.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top