I can’t think of a better example, coming out of Ohio, as to why we need to get notification laws repealed, than this:
All I have to say is I’m glad they are sticking cameras in patrol cars these days, so the people can see what their employees are doing. I don’t think what we’re witnessing is professional behavior, and that’s being charitable. Given multiple threats of violence, and threats of retaliation, this officer needs to lose his badge. He does not deserve the trust the public has placed in him, and every day he continues to patrol the streets is an outrage.
That said, I do wonder this guy was doing in a seedy section of town with an apparent prostitute, and what would appear to be her pimp, in the back seat. But either way, that’s not really my concern, and it’s likely not illegal to do so.
I ran into a duty to inform law in Texas, when I was stopped, under questionably legal circumstances… apparently for parking suspiciously in a small town. The officer approached, and began to ask a series of questions, which I answered, and before I could get out that I had a gun on me, he asked if I had any weapons, and then I truthfully answered. We went through all the motions, and everything checked out. He only warned me that I was supposed to inform, and was otherwise pleasant and professional. But the fact is, I didn’t really have a chance to inform, at least without going against instinct in that kind of confrontation. I can completely understand why someone would believe following instructions answering questions is the more prudent path. Ohio desperately needs to change its law, and if not to eliminate duty to inform entirely, at least make it only a ticketable offense.
Final lesson in all of this is that when a cop puts you into a situation where it’s becoming apparent there’s suspicion of a crime, exercise your fifth amendment rights. You are under no obligation to talk to the police, and don’t really do yourself any favors by doing so. Let them arrest you, call your attorney, and speak to the police under the advice of counsel. If the police beat or threaten you for not cooperating, fine. You now have the basis for a civil rights lawsuit, and whatever they got out of you is inadmissible. Once it’s apparent you’re not in a typical traffic stop, that’s when you’re in lawyer country. It sucks, but remember that we have a legal system, not a justice system.
UPDATE: Canton police chief has apparently relieved the officer in question pending an investigation. They deserve credit for acting on this.
So, hang on. Did that cop not realize the dash cam was recording everything he was saying?
Did he think he could erase the evidence?
Was he just on drugs, as his mannerisms and broken, stream-of-consciousness speech would suggest?
VERY professional cop.
Sounds like he went to the PPD school of public speaking. Violent threats, cursing, and promises of retaliation.
What should he, the cop, be charged with? The list is long…
Jesus … just, WOW. I understand that police work can be tense, but that was way beyond the pale of unprofessional conduct!
Unbelievable.
It is obvious that the fact that they are more or less constantly being recorded has not penetrated the corporate culture of most police departments.
Officer Foulmouth, I want you to wrap your head around something: At the rate technology is going, I promise you that, if you stay in LE for at least 5-10 more years, before you go off shift for the last time, you will be wearing a sealed camera that is running for your entire shift and transmitting to multiple off-site recorders. Count on it. You’d better get used to it and start practicing proper comportment now.
Haven’t been able to catch the video yet.
But I thought my relatives from Ohio told me that the duty to inform had been removed in that state.
I have a duty to inform in Michigan, which makes traffic stops interesting. Since they don’t happen often, I don’t have much practice. But usually I had time to produce carry permit and drivers license, and have both visible when the officer walks up to the vehicle.
Even if an officer is reported, it doesn’t take much for recordings to “have an error” or to have been “accidentally erased” by the thin blue line.
Just as there are a-hole cops out there, there are a-hole departments and chiefs as well. Unfortunately, us law abiding people dont get to choose our officer either.
If it is legal in your state, I think you should consider carrying a tape recorder (many are built into cell phones) and surreptitiously recording any LEO encounters. The town I’m in now for work has a habit of “losing” police dash cam footage and even having “corrupted” recordings of radio calls and such. Absurd, but it is the world we live in. In a town that is bucking preemption with a corrupt police department that’s pretty high threat.
There are even apps that will immediately upload your recordings to a cloud based service which preserves them if the cops find and destroy/erase your recording device.
Just another state-supported thug with a badge (TWB).
How long are the citizens of the United States going to tolerate this abuse from our civil ‘servants’?
And looking at the habitus and presentation of the TWB, I wouldn’t be surprised to find out he’s using illicit anabolic steroids.
Unreal. They wonder why a lot of people hate cops.
After getting a chance to listen to that….
I hope this officer gets fired and looses his pension; No reason that Ohioans have to pay for that scum for the rest of his life.
Don’t make assumptions about the victim and the alleged prostitute and pimp.
When I was a young guy I drove a cab and knew many people like that who hung around my cabstand and the nearby bars.
If I had reason to be in that neighborhood (and I believe he gave a legitimate one), I would have stopped and talked to someone I knew and I would have given them a ride if asked.
I have had prostitutes in my cab (they talk about it), but never had a pimp tag along. He sounds legit.
People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. How many people here have been in a sitaution were someone could have pulled a gun and shot them, or are in that position on a daily basis. Probably none of you. Or how about the fact that the guy was in the car with a hooker and anyother unknown male who he doesn’t know.
I can tell you from experience that people in situations like that at that time of the morning seldom have the purest intentions. With the being said I do being the officer over reacted, but alot of people love to jump on the cop without even giving a second thought to his point of view. I’m a cop and I’m very pro 2A, but you have to take certain factors into account. The time of night, the fact the cops were outnumbered 3 to 2, The high crime area. The lies the other male told the police ie giving a false name. The profession of the female.
These circumstances alone warrant an investigation. The driver didn’t deserve to be yelled at for that length of time but, I believe the if you look at it from the cops point of view he truly thought he could have been shot. I can speak from experience when I say that in itself get ones blood up. If the stone throwers here think its’ any easy job you fill out an application and hit the streets and get a first hand experience at what its like. I just know you will behave like perfect people after you truly believe you just might have been shot.
Jeff,
No one said it was an easy job so stop whining!
There is a huge difference between “getting your blood up” and issuing death threats.
According to that department’s facebook page the officer has been relieved of a duty and there’s an investigation going on.
As an attorney, I have another question, and one that may doesn’t appear to be answered by the video: Why was the car stopped and searched in the first place?
A car stop requires PC. A search of the vehicle requires PC. An arrest requires PC. An arrest does not authorize a search of the car as a general rule, per Arizona v. Gant. Unless there is more to this story, the fact that the car is out late at night, and a passenger is out of the car, is not a crime, nor evidence that a crime “has been, is, or is about to be” committed per Terry v. Ohio.
Where is the PC for this entire episode?
Jeff, while I agree with you that we shouldn’t always be quick to jump down the officer’s throat but in this video they overreacted- in any stretch. At first i dont blame them taking the action they did; when they first found out about the gun. Everyone is one is on edge so its understandable that things may get a bit rough- but the issue what happened afterwards. As someone in the emergency services as well one of the key things in our line of work is that we can’t let our emotions determine our actions- we have to take a distant approach. These officers did not. Talking about how they should have executed the driver and that they wouldn’t lose sleep over it?- thats unacceptable to say in any situation, let alone completely unprofessional. As a police officer you can’t threaten an individual because you are angry at them. Once the driver was cuffed and in the car the situation is under control- it does not require those actions by the officers.
I dont think the officers should be fired but disciplinary action needs to be taken. I don’t care how angry they were, their behavior was completely unacceptable.
GMC70,
“My client was stopped in his motor vehicle at the time. He was in a no parking zone. This was not the result of a high speed chase or anything like that.”
http://ohioccwforums.org/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=53994
“He does not deserve the trust the public has placed in him, and every day he continues to patrol the streets is an outrage.”
Not only that, but an officer like that is a danger to the public. He needs to not only lose his job, but be charged and arrested for terroristic threatening at a minimum.
How about “don’t talk to the police period.” Even under advice of council, it is not in your best interest to talk to the police. Period. Nothing you say to them can help you, only hurt you….
Jeff:
I don’t think any of us would be watching the video if the cop were just pissed at the guy and taking it out of him verbally. Unprofessional? Sure. But I don’t have any problem with sending him for some retraining and getting him back out on the street in that situation. I can accept it’s a tough job, and it’s not always easy to keep your cool.
But threatening to beat people, and beat and murder the driver, were way way out of line. A felony arrest, when the guy was clearly trying to comply with the law, was way out of line. If you lose your cool to that degree with the power of a gun and a badge behind you, you’re not the kind of person I want entrusted with that power.
aeronathan:
Sounds like a remarkably poor choice if you’re standing over a dead body with a gun that’s just been fired, and you did it in self-defense. Probably in your best interest to tell the police about the circumstances. The reason you do it under advice of counsel is that they will help you frame your statement in a way that aids your defense rather than complicating it.
I lived in TX under the “duty to inform” and my experience was benign. I carried my carry and driver’s licenses in my wallet so that I could display both with the same flick of the wrist, which helped remind me to “inform”.
Pretty obvious this LEO has big problems and might not be trustworthy enough to carry a loaded firearm in public. Not all LEO’s are the same, and you have to treat crazies like crazies, in uniform or not…to minimize your downside.
LEO’s are people, just like us, and there are bad ones and good ones. No sudden enlightenment occurs when a body pins a badge on, or when they are elected to an office or appointed to some commission. They need to remember that even more than we do, and some are failing miserably at it.
aeronathan,
Might i also add that current Ohio law forces you to not do that and surrender information to the police?
(Which then generally results in an officer fiddling with your gun and holster, which they may not be familiar with, and shooting you or themselves)
I have to disagree. It is in your best interest to avail yourself of all of your constitutional rights, including the right to speak to an attorney. You have a right against self-incrimination, and even though it provides context, admitting that ‘you did it in self-defense’ starts with … ‘you did it’.
It can only go downhill from there.
Packetman:
In that context, I mean talking to them with your attorney’s advice. And talking to, in this case, can mean a written statement. My point was, if you shoot someone in self-defense, you’re going to have to talk to the police if you don’t want to go to trial or go to jail. But you should do it with an attorney.
I think one of the relatively shocking things about this video is that the cop left the driver in the vehicle the whole time, while he’s casually walking all around the car.
The cop was pissed that the driver could have shot him. I hate to tell him, but if the driver was intent on doing that, the officer certainly gave him plenty of opportunity to do so!
Guest @ 11:57:
The link provides the reason for the initial encounter, and OK, as far as it goes. It does not explain in the least the rest.
Parking in a no parking zone is grounds for a ticket. Period.
It does not provide any reason for the removal of the persons from the car (absent some reason to do so for officer safety, which the officers can do, though in most cases, it’s safer to keep them in the car). It certainly does not explain not making initial and keeping consistent contact with the driver – indeed, if a no parking zone violation is the basis for the stop, that’s the first thing the officers should have done. Nor does it justify any search of the vehicle; a search requires PC, and I see no hint of any in the video.
This is a roust, pure and simple. And an illegal one, completely separate and apart from the officer’s irrational overreaction to learning the driver – who he’d refused to talk to – was an armed CC holder.
In short, the officer’s overreaction to the CC holder’s delay in informing – a delay caused entirely by the officer, I might add – is only part of and perhaps the least of his worries. There’s no PC for the encounter at all, beyond writing a parking ticket and sending the driver on his way. Anything over that requires PC, or at least reasonable suspicion; I don’t see that here.
Swift and serious disciplinary action is needed here.
This is why every cop should have a solid-state non-erasable (by him, at least) recorder on him, and on, every second while on duty.
(And this should be mandated by law, with significant fines against the Department’s budget for any failures not immediately remedied, to Align The Incentives Against Convenient Failures… and given today’s technology, it might be best to simply have the cameras streaming to a third-party repository.
After all, anything recorded in the line of duty is properly Public Knowledge anyway, I’d say.)
It’d cost very little, given modern technology, and be very useful:
It’d collect lots of good evidence against the actually-guilty.
It’d be great evidence against corrupt cops.
It’d be a great way to show that good cops were innocent of false accusations.
Everyone wins, except the people who don’t deserve to.
“People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones. How many people here have been in a sitaution were someone could have pulled a gun and shot them, or are in that position on a daily basis. Probably none of you.”
I disagree. Every day, when I step outside my house, there’s a possibility of someone pulling a gun and shooting me. However, since my job doesn’t involve depriving people of their freedom, property or lives through the implied threat of lethal force, I’m a lot less likely to do things to people that will make them want to shoot me.
In cases such as this one, the so-called “administrative leave” should consist of the officer in question having to walk foot patrol, carrying a radio and nothing more lethal than a can of pepper spray.
In cases such as this one, the so-called “administrative leave†should consist of the officer in question having to walk foot patrol, carrying a radio and nothing more lethal than a can of pepper spray.
And wearing a sign that says “Yes, I’m the asshole in the video.”
Except even that’s giving this bozo too much authority.
LMAO, this cop tells the man that he does not deserve a gun and then tells him he wouldn’t loose sleep had he executed him! Any officer that takes up for this imbecile should loose their badge as well as this is unacceptable. While officers do in fact have the 11th most dangerous job in the U.S. behind garbage men and commercial fishermen, there is no reason to act this way. If officers think their jobs are so dangerous that they would use their power to treat citizens like this then they have no place in law enforcement. I read someone ask where the PC was and the answer to that is there was no PC. The officer would use the fact that he recognized a known hooker, but a hooker speaking to an individual does not PC make nor is it a violation of any law I know of. This guy should be fired and never allowed to serve as a LEO in the U.S. again. Perhaps allowing him to take anger management classes and perhaps a mandatory constitution/civil liberties class would be better than putting him in jail, for I would dare say he has violated others rights and possibly caused harm to others he might encounter while incarcerated.
The ‘administrative leave’ should be terminal, and end when he walks out of the worst prison in Ohio after 5-7 years of making license plates for the state. Under no circumstances should he be offered any sort of ‘rehabilitation’ or ‘retraining’ on the job, and he should NEVER be in a position of public authority again: He has demonstrated he cares not a whit for the public, the laws he was sworn to enforce, or even the safety of his partner…
In short he’s a bad, dirty, crooked, and mostly STUPID cop.
@sebastian
Lets say you did just shoot someone in self defense. Whether you talk to police or not, you’re probably going to jail for a little while at least. What you tell the police can certainly provide the DA enough evidence to take it to a grand jury and get an indictment. They might not have any other evidence about what happened, other that what you tell them (dead men tell no tales as they say). If you clam up, there’s a significant chance, you may never get indicted and go to trial.
If you talk to police, even under the advice of council, if the DA decides to prosecute you, anything you tell the police can only be used to hurt you. When it comes time for trial, the DA/police can selectively provide statements that are even remotely incriminating to the jury in a way that paints you in the worst possible light, all the while the rules of evidence will bar them from repeating anything exculpatory that you told them under the hearsay rules.
The only way to counteract it is to personally take the stand and testify and if you’re going to do that, you may as well just clam up to begin with so the police/DA don’t have personal statements to present to a grand jury.
If they think you shot someone maliciously, let ’em prove it to the satisfaction of the grand jury, but sure as hell don’t help them out. The reason the vast majority of indictments end in a plea bargain is when arrested, people run their mouth, even with council present, enough to either provide an outright confession or come close enough that the DA has enough rope to hang them.
@ Bryan S
I recognize that in some instances you’re required to provide certain information, such as ID, vehicle insurance and whether you’re carrying or not. My point is, other than those few limited instances, you’re not required to talk to the police or provide them any information and it’s not in your best interest to voluntarily waive the 5th Amendment rights that allow you to keep your mouth shut….
FYI for anyone interested, there’s a series of videos on youtube where a criminal defense attorney AND a police detective are lecturing a law school class as to why its not in your best interest to talk to the police. They both provide a much better explanation as to why than I ever could. Well worth the time to watch it….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wXkI4t7nuc
My advice (and I give it for a living) if you ever have to use your weapon in self-defense is:
1) call 911, and say, “OMG, I feared for my life, and had to shoot an attacker – send help” or words to that effect. It’s in large part true – the ‘victim’ is the first person to call 911.
2) when officers arrive, cooperate – up to the point of giving a statement. DO NOT give a statement, other than “I feared for my (or my wife’s, etc., as the case may be) safety, and had to use my weapon in defense” or words to that effect. Don’t deny the obvious (“Why, yes officer, those are my .45 holes in that miscreant who tried to attack my family”), but don’t say anything more.
3) then shut the hell up and get an attorney. Immediately. My words will be, if that time ever comes (God forbid!): “Officer, I’m a little rattled now, and I need to collect my thoughts. I will not give a statement at this time.” Then hire an attorney. If you’re prosecuted or sued (a serious possibility), nothing you say will be used to help you, and will only be used to hurt you. Your refusal to speak cannot be used against you, however, as you have a constitutional right to refuse to speak.
4) get names and addresses of any witnesses. Don’t assume the cops will; they should, but that does not mean they will.
More general advice: NEVER speak to law enforcement if you are the “person of interest” in any investigation (if you’re a witness to a hold-up or the like, of course, feel free to sing like a canary and lock the perp up), and NEVER, EVER consent to any search of your person or property. Ever.
As has been pointed out, we don’t have a “justice” system, we have a legal system.
Policemen who wig-out like this should spend a year in a 3rd world shiite hole as a quasi-UN international police civilian law reconstruction team – armed only with a rusty .38 special and up to their arm pits in crowds where every tenth male is carrying an AK or 12 ga (the rest carrying bolos).
Another proof that cops should be tested for steroid use. If it’s important enough to test baseball players, then it’s important enough to test cops.
I regret the requirement by every website, and nearly every blog, in the world to register and become a member beffore one can post a comment. Such as Ohioans for Concealed Carry. Pleae pass on the suggestion to the Police Chief and/or the defendant’s lawyer that the offier be forced to give a blood test. It is definitely in the government’s and public’s interest (a la the most often cited reason for abrogating citizen rights ) that his officer be checked for steroid and other drug abuse. As we all should remembre, tests can disclose use & abuse long after the fact, so the rsults can still be pertinant.
So maybe they can use a forfeiture law to seize the assets of the town, like LEOs do to everyone else.
Now wouldn’t that be karma!
I also think in Texas you must show your CHL, and thus inform the LEO, only if he ask for your identification.
If no ID is asked for, no duty to inform.
I’ve been stopped a few times by Texas LEOs and when they ask for my ID, I give them the CHL license to. Never ever had them say anything to rebuke me.
“How many people here have been in a sitaution were someone could have pulled a gun and shot them, or are in that position on a daily basis?”
I’ve been there. If I had carried on like this for a moment, I would have been thrown in the brig immediately.
@Paul:
“I also think in Texas you must show your CHL, and thus inform the LEO, only if he ask for your identification.
If no ID is asked for, no duty to inform”
This is correct. We don’t have the kind of duty to inform that they have in Ohio, which requires immediate notification to the officer that you’re carrying.
I don’t have a lot of dealings with peace officers, so in the 9 years I’ve had a CHL I’ve only had to show my CHL three times. The first two were State Troopers who pulled me over. In those cases I informed them that I had a CHL and was carrying *before* showing my license and CHL because I had to pull out my wallet to get to them. In both cases I said something to the effect, “I have a CHL and I’m carrying. I wanted to tell you this before I start reaching around for insurance and my license.” In those cases they just asked where the gun was and there wasn’t any fuss.
The last one was Tuesday when I was in a minor accident. When they asked for DL I handed both the DL and CHL to the officer and all she did was ask if I had it on me at the moment. No hassle, there, either.
In all of these cases the officers, who are in a position to have someone pull a gun on them on a “daily basis” (to quote an earlier apologist for the officer), treated me politely and without any hassles. There is simply no excuse for what this officer did, and no excuse for his partner for allowing it.
Jeff, you’re part of the problem.
Here’s a cop who is threatening to MURDER people.
And you come back with, “Well, he was out late at night in a bad neighborhood. He might have been about to break the law. You have to see it from the cop’s point of view.”
There’s one obvious criminal in this video, and it’s the one wearing a badge.
One bad apple like officer jerkwad here, can be dealt with within the context of a lawful police department. But a department full of cops like you – who can watch a video like this, and find fault with the victim – you and your whole department just become another criminal organization in the community, and a much more dangerous one at that.
Wish the Ohioans had used spell check and grammar check. It doesn’t improve our argument on what’s become a national story that the annotation on the video follows the opposition’s stereotype of us as barely literate.
On the other hand, much bigger kudos to them for pushing the video and helping the man in question with public support and legal defense funding.
That scenario is terrifying. Contrast that officer interaction with the video Uncle posted at the end of June: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZFzH5Oe-YL4&feature=player_embedded#at=53 .
Unacceptable.
At one point the officer comments, “I’ll tell you what I should done. As soon as I saw your gun, I shoulda taken two steps back, pulled my glock 40, and just put ten bullets in your ass and let you drop. And he (the other officer) would have been a nice witness as I executed you.”
Now imagine that you walk up, while opening carrying (just like the officer), and said the same thing to another police officer. You would end up in jail. Anyone want to place a wager about the officer being arrested and charged?
Once again, unacceptable.
Fuck the police. They do not serve or protect jack shit. They are nothing more than the muscle behind our extortionist politicians.
I hope half of those lazy bastards get laid off before this “great recession” is over.
Boy, I see alot of hate for the police on this post. Think alot of people here failed reading comprehension, I did say the cop was out of line. Not to mention that there are so many posts on this site that seems to be anti-law enforcement in general.
Listen, You people elect these politicians that pass these crazy law that officers are stuck enforcing. I strongly support peoples right to carry concealed firearms for their protection regardless of the numerous anti police posts.
Just try to remember the majority of cops support peoples rights to carry. To ALATH, Please engage your brain before you speak. I always have listen to both sides of the story know matter the case. I guess you just don’t like the police, maybe you got a speeding ticket lately and aren’t thinking clearing.
OK, Jeff, let’s try some reading comprehension here.
Here’s a breakdown of the content of your first post.
Sentences where the main point is that non-cops have no right to criticize cops: 5
Sentences where you speculate that the victim(s) in this situation were doing something to deserve what the officer did: 2
Sentences where you assert that there is something about the circumstances that justifies the officer’s behavior: 6
Sentences where you suggest that the officer did something wrong: 2
And even where you do suggest the officer did something wrong, it’s extremely weak.
One: the officer “over-reacted” – implying what? The victim did something wrong, that merited an aggressive response… just not quite as aggressive as what this officer did? What did he do that warranted any kind of reaction at all?
Two: the victim “didn’t deserve to be yelled at for that length of time.” How long exactly did he deserve to be yelled at? What exactly did he do to deserve being yelled at at all? And what kind of actions does a citizen do that justify an officer threatening to murder him?
And in both cases where you start out suggesting that the officer might have been out of line, you immediately negate it with a “but.”
And no, I haven’t had any tickets for years, and I don’t have any problem with law enforcement. The vast majority of cops are perfectly decent people, trying to do a difficult job. I have the greatest respect for lawful police officers. You don’t really seem to be in that group, though. You’re on the side of anyone wearing a uniform, whether they’re upholding the law or breaking it. Which essentially makes you just as lawless as any criminal.
Sounds like he went to the PPD school of public speaking. Violent threats, cursing, and promises of retaliation.
Yep Dusty, we’re all exactly like that. All 6,000 of us.
Then all 6000 of you PPD guys have to stop protecting the bad ones, and be on the side of the angels and get rid of the bad ones.
Compare this guy with the Oceanside police officer who acted properly, to a fellow exercising California open carry rights.
“I should have executed you…” – wow. Not – “you could have been shot as I defended myself..” Not – “How am I supposed to know you aren’t a bad guy?” “Executed.” A judge? Bah. Appeals Court? Whata buncha hacks! And if you happen to catch one of the over-shots out of the 10 he chose to pump into the driver? “Well, you shouldna been in that ‘hood unless youse a criminal.” Being poor really really sucks – you are surrounded by poor desperate people and the cops are inclined to “execute” people piss them off (let alone those they subjectively feel threatened by). [ They can argue about ‘subjective’ versus ‘objective’ – while the shot person bleeds out on the pavement.]
Cops don’t know what it feels like to be on the receiving end of police abuse. They certainly know how to dish it out! As America becomes more fearful, the more aggressive cops have become, and the more sanctimonious.
This Canton cop sincerely believes himself to have been victimized by the individuals in the car, especially the driver. I think he’d be happier selling shoes for a living Unfortunately, there are lots and lots of people pursuing careers for which they are ill-suited.
I have NEVER been arrested. I have NEVER done anything that should result in an arrest, but the incidents in which I have had involvement with LEO’s have shown me that this is, unfortunately, the typical attitude and intelligence of most police officers. My brother was a police officer and that statement applies to him also. I wish I could believe differently but experience denies me that luxury.
I believe that much of this attitude can be traced to the fact that they are in fear of everyone. That could be solved if LEO’s were trained properly in the use of firearms and then take the initiative to become familiar with their weapons.
The gun club that I belong to has a contract with several local departments. The other members refer to them as “semi-annual” warriors. They show up twice a year to basically have a good laugh at each others lack of firearms knowledge and then proceed to trash the range, which must be shut down to all other members for an entire day.
I’m not a board member, but if I was they would be finding somewhere else to practice their incompetence.