Columbus Cops Want Credit for Not Killing 2 Black Boys Who Had a BB Gun

Officer Peter Casuccio lectured the kids for endangering their lives by doing something that was perfectly legal.


Columbus Division of Police

The Columbus Division of Police (CDP) thinks this bodycam video of Officer Peter Casuccio lecturing two black boys about the dangers of carrying a BB gun is a fine example of protecting and serving, and a lot of people seem to agree. "This is getting kids killed all over the country," Casuccio tells the boys, an 11-year-old and a 13-year-old, whose faces are obscured by big green circles. "I could have killed you."

It is true that the boys, whom Casuccio detained last Saturday, might have ended up dead, as 12-year-old Tamir Rice did in Cleveland four years ago and as 13-year-old Tyre King did in Columbus two years later, because they were playing with something that a nervous cop mistook for a real gun. But that sad fact says more about the hastiness of police officers than the recklessness of these two boys, who do not appear to have done anything illegal or especially foolhardy.

Casuccio was responding to a 911 call from a woman who said she saw "two little kids," one of whom "brandished a gun." When he located the boys, he forced them to kneel on the ground while he picked up the BB gun. In the edited bodycam video, which the CDP released to "show the good police work that our officers do every day," the boys are back on their feet, leaning against a traffic railing.

"They call in and they say there's two young male blacks," he tells them. "They look really young, and they just flashed a gun….You had to show somebody, because how the hell did they know you had it?"

"I didn't show nobody," the younger boy replies. "I was just holding it."

"OK, you can't do that in today's world," Casuccio says. "That thing looks real, bro." He emphasizes the danger they put themselves in by being seen with a BB gun: "You should be sorry, and you should be scared….Do you think I want to shoot an 11-year-old? Do you think I want to shoot a 13-year-old?…I pride myself on being a pretty bad hombre, because I got to be. Don't make me."

Depending on your perspective, this incident is either a heartwarming story about a compassionate cop setting wayward youths on the right path or an alarming story about how easily black kids can be killed for doing something that does not violate the law or anyone's rights.

"I'm not from the area, but felt moved to comment when I read this story," said one visitor to the CDP's Facebook page. "Officer Casuccio handled this situation perfectly! I have the greatest respect for this man. Hopefully, these two youngsters have learned a very valuable lesson that may someday save their lives."

Others saw the episode differently. "Why is your department trying to pat themselves on the back for NOT shooting some Black kids who had a BB Gun?" wrote another Facebook visitor. "Open Carry is LEGAL in Ohio. White people, INCLUDING WHITE CHILDREN, walk around openly brandishing REAL GUNS all the time. Do you threaten them with murder?"

As that critic noted, Ohio residents are generally allowed to openly carry actual firearms in public without a permit. The state has no minimum age for possession of firearms and no laws regulating who may own or carry BB guns. "Why is Officer Peter Casuccio a hero for lecturing those kids for doing nothing illegal?" another Facebook critic wondered. "What gave him that authority?"

NEXT: The Good, the Bad, and the Loophole of New York City's New Police Search Law

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

    1. Well, he is and he isn’t.

      1. At least he is self aware enough to know that the blue crew are reckless killers, and warned the kids to know thine enemy.

        1. Why don’t you put on a uniform and badge and see what it like to go to work every day not knowing if you are going to still be alive at the end of your shift because high level people like Nancy Pelosi and Maxine Waters along with the media talking heads say it OK to shoot cops. A NC state trooper was shot and killed the other day during a routine traffic stop. His killer was a Black man. Obama can be blamed for fostering a hatred of the police due to his handling of the police officer detaining a Harvard Professor trying to gain entry to his home after locking himself out. Instead of congratulating the officer for his handling of the situation, Obama made it sound like the officer was at fault. Dislike and hatred of our police officers has spread from there. The media is at fault also for the way they immediately blame the police whenever a police shooting involves a Black person. They ignore that most crime involves Black people.

          1. “Why don’t you put on a uniform and badge and see what it like to go to work every day not knowing if you are going to still be alive at the end of your shift”

            Complete and total bull shit. Law enforcement doesn’t even make the top 10 for most dangerous jobs in the US.

            1. No, but it’s a lot more dangerous than shuffling paper in an office. They also get into a TON of scuffles, on a regular basis. While they may be less likely to die than underwater welders or WTF ever, I bet they’re a lot more likely to get into fights, get punched, kicked, spat on, etc.

              I can’t count the number of times I’ve seen cops struggling to put down some drugged out loonie where I live.

              Keep in mind, I have a natural dislike for the police… But a very good chunk of them are decent guys, with nothing but good intentions. When you’re literally jumping from shit situation to shit situation all day, 5 days a week, I imagine it gets a little rough.

              The police do enough ACTUAL bad shit to bitch about… That Obama and the Dems MAKE SHIT UP when it’s not even reality… Fuck that. That black Harvard professor who did the study on use of force found cops are MORE LIKELY to shoot white people than blacks in the same situations!

              1. But a very good chunk of them are decent guys, with nothing but good intentions.

                Do these cops enforce drug laws? Arrest prostitutes? Then their intentions don’t mean much when they’re causing nearly as much violence as they’re supposed to be preventing.

                1. Right. In today’s US it is not possible to be decent and well intentioned and be a cop. A cop who behaved decently and without unprovoked aggression would soon be fired for refusing to do his job.

                  1. As I said, I don’t like cops as a knee jerk thing. But for most of them the majority of the work they do is at least semi legitimate, and they’re not horrible people out to shoot random brown people for kicks.

                    It’s not their job to make the fucking laws. Many of them also let people slide on shit like a single joint where it’s illegal, etc. Where I grew up the county sheriff was a pretty righteous, and shady in a way, dude. He personally let me and my friends off the hook when he could have arrested us for doing dumb shit, more than once. His deputies were pissed they didn’t get to arrest us too. One of his deputies went super overboard with the tough guy thing on me once when I got busted for underage drinking… Another was super awesome. They’re not all good, or all bad.

                    Many of them disagree with lots of the laws they enforce… But again, they don’t write the laws. You’re basically bagging on their personal character because their employer makes bad policies… Just as it isn’t the customer service rep at Comcast’s fault they have bad policies, so too it isn’t the cops. If your argument is that ONLY people who agree with 110% of the awful laws we have should be cops… Well that’s a horrible fucking idea. At least as is we have some decent ones.

                    I don’t get how this is hard to comprehend.

                    1. It’s not their job to make the fucking laws.

                      But they volunteered for the job of enforcing the laws, and they are personally responsible for making that choice. You must be aware that “I was just following orders” has been rejected as an excuse for immoral behavior by our civilization. You are trivializing the horrific effects of enforcing oppressive laws. Giving someone bad service at Comcast doesn’t result in anyone being tasered, pepper sprayed, beaten, impoverished, made unemployable, locked in a cage, raped, or killed. Yes, being willing to use force against others to enforce oppressive laws reflects negatively on ones character. Being willing to use force to enforce laws that one AGREES are bad is even more deplorable.

                      I don’t get how this is hard to comprehend.

                    2. Not their jobs to make the laws?

                      Someone should tell that to the police unions that write laws for their pet legislators to pass.

                    3. Well, agree to disagree. I’m GLAD that some people decide to work in government, be it cops or other departments, who find some of the laws out of line. As I said, a police force that 110% agreed with every shit law would be even worse.

                      As hard as it may be for you to comprehend, not everybody is an anarcho-capitalist. The majority of the criminal laws we have are reasonable, at least in terms of them being no-nos. The degree of punishment even on legit crimes is sometimes out of line. There are many that aren’t from a libertarian perspective. And some that aren’t from almost ANY perspective really. However a lot of people that are good folks overall still believe in some of the bad laws too.

                      I don’t think being wrong about a thing here or there makes one LITERALLY HITLER. I think many purist libertarians are fucking retards about a few issues, but that doesn’t mean I think you’re horrible people. The truth is cops enforcing the “status quo” of over managing peoples personal lives doesn’t make them the worst people on the planet. That designation is reserved for the people that make the laws IMO.

                    4. This entire screed reeks of desperation.

          2. Agree. While I believe that, in theory, you should be able to open carry with no consequences, 50 years of leftist policies encouraging cop-killing and “letting them destroy” have made this right pretty impractical. If a cop sees you walking the street with a gun that looks remotely real and you don’t immediately put it down when commanded to or, worse yet, accidentally point it at them, you could end up dead. I don’t blame the police – they have as much right as anyone else to go home safely to their families at the end of each day.

            1. they have as much right as anyone else to go home safely to their families at the end of each day.

              No, they don’t. Not at the expense of putting citizens in danger. The get paid to put themselves at unusual risk so the rest of us don’t have to. That’s the job. If the rest of us were at liberty to just open fire on criminals we wouldn’t need them.

              The police should have the same right of armed self-defense as any other citizen. No more, no less. The extra risk they face is their choice, for which they are compensated.

            2. Why would the cop command you to put it down?

    2. Why did he fail to mention some gangbanger could have seen the gun and shot the kid if he happened to be wearing the wrong color shirt?

      1. Because this is no longer the 1980’s

        1. You DO realize that’s still a thing right? Or are you that retarded?

          There are more gang members in the US now than probably at any time before in our history. 95% of them are black or Hispanic, and they still have their own distinctive colors, parts of town “they own,” and all the same shit as ever.

          1. And if you wander into those parts of town wearing the wrong colors your ass is getting shot whether you look like you’re carrying or not.

            So it would be pretty irrelevant.

            1. Not relevant to pointing out to tardo above that, YES, gangs still have colors and all that other nonsense.

  1. Yeah I saw this on the local news a couple days ago. Even my old man agreed this was ludicrous. In my day we would carry around a BB gun and no one thought twice about our intent and whether or not we would face lethal force from law enforcement.

    The world has changed but it’s not because of new threats from this side of the badge.

    1. Well, frankly, it’s all the crazy leftists.

      When I was a kid, in my moms hometown in the mountains in California, people still rocked gun racks in their pickup trucks. Nobody thought a thing of it. Nowadays, people don’t do that there, but probably wouldn’t freak seeing somebody carrying a hunting rifle or whatever.

      They did the same thing in my home town barely 40 minutes outside of San Francisco when my dad was a kid… Not by the time I was growing up… I bet if you were seen with any kind of a gun there now, you’d have a SWAT team on you. It’s the anti-gun people who freak over ever seeing anybody with a firearm. This same thing probably wouldn’t have happened in a small town in Ohio, but in a city like it was… Bad idea for practical reasons, even if it would be fine in a saner world.

  2. Off-topic: Just finished filling out my early-voting ballot. Voted L’s when I could, R’s when I couldn’t, except for some local offices where the D was better (seriously, our sheriff is a prick).

    Does anyone know why the coroner is an elected office?

    Hopefully Past Me will stick to the past and won’t vote this year.

    1. Coroner has a longer history and, traditionally, a larger role beyond finding out ‘how did this person die’.

      Elections are a hold-over from that time.

      1. Technically, if you go back that far, “how did this person die?” was completely outside the scope of the coroner’s office. It still is in many states.

        There are states that use a combination of coroner and medical examiner. In those states, “how did this person die?” belongs to the medical examiner.

        Coroner’s duties

        The second question is: What is a feed store coroner going to do when faced with a dead body?

        Dr Kiesel answers, “He’s gonna go out and say, ‘Well, he’s dead.’ That’s the coroner’s official duty.”

        The coroner is also responsible for:

        Identifying the body
        Notifying the next of kin
        Collecting and returning any personal belongings on the body to the family of the deceased
        Signing the death certificate

    2. Whether a corpse’s blood is red or blue is highly contentious.

    3. In the old days it was a big $$$ position (as in, guaranteed). May still be. Much like sheriff. Probably don’t need qualifications,.

    4. In my town we elect a fence viewer and a measurer of wood and bark.

    5. “Does anyone know why the coroner is an elected office?”

      Because, a coroner is not a medical examiner.

      Only one state that still uses a coroner system, Louisiana, requires coroners to be forensic pathologists.

      In fact, the coroner system is older than the concept of a medical autopsy.

      Dr. Kiesel spoke about the origins of the coroner:

      “The history goes back to the old days where the position was originally called the “crowner.” The crowner and a couple of knights would go out, and it was basically to make sure that when somebody died, the king got his cut of the booty.”

  3. “Do you think I want to shoot an 11-year-old? Do you think I want to shoot a 13-year-old?…I pride myself on being a pretty bad hombre, because I got to be. Don’t make me.”

    I just have to wonder if this cop’s wife has ever heard words similar to these. Yes, he’s the real victim here.

    1. Maybe not the best way to phrase things, but explaining to them that walking around the city with a realistic-looking gun is dangerous was certainly appropriate. Making them get down on there knees on the sidewalk, probably not.

  4. I think the cop did the right thing. The kids were not doing anything illegal but in the city carrying around a realistic looking gun like that is very dangerous. That is just reality.

    When my son was younger he had a plastic airsoft gun. Found out he and his friend were out walking around on Halloween he was carrying it around and had blacked out the orange tip with a sharpie. That was the end of that toy. Couple years later we took an NRA class and he learned proper gun safety and shooting.

    I think parents should teach their kids basic firearms and safety when they are old enough for the same reason you need to teach them how to swim.

    1. Couple years later we took an NRA class and he learned proper gun safety and shooting.

      I think parents should teach their kids basic firearms and safety when they are old enough for the same reason you need to teach them how to swim.

      The problem here isn’t necessarily a lack of training. It’s an arbitrary escalation by people only tangentially involved. If we substitute a carving knife for a gun does the story change substantially? No, not really. It’s hoplophobia. They wouldn’t see someone walking around wet and think to call a lifeguard, but if they see someone walking in the presence of a gun, they call the police, whether anyone is in any danger or not.

      You do know sharpie comes off with rubbing alcohol, right? That if you can’t just tell your kid, “This sort of behavior could get you shot.” then a firearms safety class isn’t really going to deter them from anything, right?

      1. I also found out he discovered that it was fun to shoot the little plastic balls into the ceiling tiles so it was time for that toy to go.

        I think the firearms class or teaching them yourself is a good idea in any case. You are less likely to do something stupid if you understand the real thing.

        I agree that people calling cops and the killings that have happened when kids have had BB guns or toys is ridiculous and wrong. How to act around police is another lesson you need to teach. Sad but that is the reality today.

        1. Yeah. Sure. Andy Lopez and Timur Rice did not know how to act around a cop hyped up over seeing them in public with a toy gun. But you know, that shit did not happen when I was kid, and I really don’t think I should accept the new anti-gun normal, that kids should know the drill that apparently street hoods who don’t wanna get shot know how to follow.

          1. It did not happen when I was a kid either, so far as I knew.

            Teach them how to swim.

            The rest is commentary.

    2. It was an unlawful detention. Period.

      1. The fashion police say those red pants are a felony.

        1. At least they weren’t wearing plaid shorts like white boys do these days. I’d thought those things had been outlawed in the sixties.

    3. Explaining the situation to the kids may have been the right thing. Treating them like criminals and practically threatening to shoot them when they were doing nothing illegal was not.
      Letting people know what the deal is, even if it’s a bad deal, is fine. But you don’t have to be a dick about it.

      1. Excellent summation.

      2. OTOH the kids learned an important lesson. Cops are dicks.

        1. They probably already knew that.

  5. This brings up a point that 2nd amendment theologians don’t often acknowledge.

    When some citizen in public gets shot by police, it is often justified by whether or not the person had a weapon, like a gun.

    Police can use deadly force when they subjectively feel that there is some threat to their person.

    So, walking around with a gun in public seems to increase the chances of police blowing you away.

    “He had a gun” is enough for police to kill you. Police seem to shoot first and ask questions later, so they will probably unload their clip before they even ask someone to drop the gun.

    If you are a minority, walking around with a gun is a suicide mission, depending on the chances of the police seeing you with the gun.

    1. On the one hand, I support open carry.
      On the other hand, I don’t want America to become Beirut.

      I’m not sure how I feel about this. The confusion over a realistic looking BB gun being open carried by a nervous Nellie and ensuing officer stop vs the right to be left to yo damn self until you break a law…

      Playing devil’s advocate, what if it was a real gun?

      Further… What if the police acted the same way toward girls who increased their chances of being raped like these kids increased their chances of being shot? Would they get a talking to for getting drunk and walking alone?

      1. If it was a real gun the kids still wouldn’t have been doing anything illegal.

        But we should know that that doesn’t matter. Cops routinely enforce laws that they make up on the spot, sometimes kill people for breaking them, and nothing else happens.

      2. Actually my understanding is the violent crime rate in Beirut is very low.

        I have not been there but I have been to Israel. One of the things Americans first notice is the people open carrying guns of all kinds. Some of those are off duty soldiers, security people of various kinds, tour guides, and others. The crime rate is far lower than the US. Not really comparable though as gun laws are much stricter than here.

        I would rather have more open carry and less concealed carry.

        1. https://tinyurl.com/yb6bxn9v

          A day at the beach in Tel Aviv

        2. I would say that if you counted decades of expropriation and plunder of Palestinian homes and property, arbitrary detention, and unjustified police shootings of protesters, the crime rate in Israel is probably a lot higher than you think.

    2. And if they don’t have a gun, they just claim something they did have looked like a gun. And if they didn’t have anything, they claim they were reaching for their waistband.

      1. So, never wear pants. That waistband could be perceived as a deadly threat.

        1. “She was lifting the hem of her dress, I thought she was going for a gun”

          1. Maybe better:
            “Ze was lifting the hem of zir dress, I though ze was going for a gun”

    3. Police can use deadly force when they subjectively feel that there is some threat to their person.

      And that’s a problem. The rules for the use of deadly force should be the same for police as they are for everyone else. Cops should have the same right to defend themselves as any citizen, but no more. The mere fact that someone has a firearm in an open carry state does not justify attacking them for anyone but a cop. That must change.

  6. “brandished a gun.”

    You say “brandished” but the article linked in that sentence doesn’t use the term “brandished”. Not to be pedantic but there’s a distinct difference between two kids carrying a weapon and two kids brandishing or even pointing a weapon.

    If somebody called the police saying they pointed the gun and they had pointed the gun, I could see how a scolding would be in order. But if someone called the police saying they pointed the gun and the boys hadn’t been pointing it, somebody deserves a scolding for filing a false report. You can’t just be calling the cops like that, SWATtings happen all the time. Do you think police want to shoot an 11-year-old? Do you think police want to shoot a 13-yr.-old?

    Seriously, this is something that a dispatcher should sort out. Not pointing a weapon with no shots fired? No need to go in guns blazing.

    1. I believe that brandishing a weapon in public with no good cause is often illegal. Carrying one openly is not.

  7. This police officer should be fired. That BB gun was a threat to officer safety. He put himself in danger by not killing the kids on sight. Officer safety is the most important thing. How can they keep the public safe if they don’t kill every member of the public who might be perceived as a threat?

  8. Do they blur three feet around the subject so the public isn’t able to judge the “furtive movement” that gets them killed?

  9. The only way to know from any distance if it’s a real gun is when it goes BANG instead of bang.

    By then someone could be dead. Should cops assume all guns are harmless.

    Kids don’t know better so the cops told them.

    Their parents should have but didn’t. That’s probably why most kids get killed.

    1. If the concerned citizen had shot the kids on the spot instead of calling the cops to come shoot them, would you be okay with that? I’ll bet not, because there’s no reason to suspect the mere fact that someone has a gun makes them a lethal threat. Should cops assume all guns are harmless? Yes, yes they should – unless and until there’s some valid reason to assume they’re not. Does this mean more cops might get shot by being overly-cautious about jumping to conclusions? Yes, yes it does, but that’s part of the job. Better that 10 guilty men go free than one innocent man goes to jail has a corollary in better that 10 cops get shot than one innocent civilian get shot. Notice how rarely you hear of cops shooting each other on the grounds that “he had a gun and he was getting into the patrol car right next to me!” despite the thousands of times this happens every single day, I think they know that just because somebody has a gun doesn’t mean they’re a lethal threat. They just need to learn to extend the courtesy of the benefit of the doubt to the citizens they supposedly serve rather than just to their blue brothers.

      1. Cops are trained to believe every non cop with a gun is a deadly threat. They are shown just about every recorded instance of a cop being shot. Propaganda that would make Goebbels proud.

      2. As I said above, cops should have the same right of armed self-defense as anyone else. They should not have the right of pre-emptive use of deadly force because they feel they might be in danger.

      3. Unless you want to be dead, with my sincere condolences, when a cop tells you to disarm, do it. That is the price of civilization.

        Kids, and stupid fucks, don’t have the ability and maturity to act out of self preservation.

        The parents failed. The cops didn’t.

        1. You are a pervert. When the cops shoot someone when they are not under a real deadly threat, they need to go to prison, like everyone else. That is the price of civilization.

        2. If an armed goon from the state says jump, and you don’t say “How high and how long would you like me to stay in the air sir?” then your life is forfeit.

          That isn’t civilization. That’s authoritarian dystopia.

          1. Police are given the authority and responsibility by our civilized democratic government to disarm anyone they interact with.

            If you don’t like it, change the law (good luck), leave (don’t let the door hit you in the ass), or pick up a weapon in opposition (my condolences in advance).

            1. Please quote the law that gives police the authority to disarm anyone they interact with.

              1. It is left to the officers discretion, that’s the way it is.

                Do you want to create a specific law?

                How will that help your cause.

                Do you think any civilization will make a law requiring police no to disarm people they feel threatened by?

                If there has to be a law to shut you the fuck up, there will be, and you will be disarmed.

                1. You said that “Police are given the authority and responsibility by our civilized democratic government.” The way our elected representatives give such authority is by passing laws. If no such law exists, then that authority was not given to the police by democratic process.

                  1. I never said there was a law.

                    Apparently our elected officials don’t think there needs to be. All democratic life isn’t measured by written laws, yet.

                    But common sense isn’t very common anymore so I agree that there should be a law.

                    Then when you are disarmed when interacting with police you can be happy that it’s a written law.

                    1. As long as that law specifies that police officers are to be punished if the person they disarm turns out to have been doing nothing illegal, I’d be OK with that.

                    2. Police should disarm everyone they interact with.

                      You want the ability to draw your weapon while being questioned by police.

                      That’s never going to be made law.

                      Sucks to be you.

                    3. Heil Hitler. Sucks that there are people like you.

  10. White people, INCLUDING WHITE CHILDREN, walk around openly brandishing REAL GUNS all the time.

    He doesn’t know what “brandishing” means. People in Ohio, including kids, do walk around carrying firearms all the time, especially during hunting seasons. Farmers, loggers, and other people who work outdoors in rural areas routinely wear handguns. But carrying is NOT “brandishing”.

    1. Brandishing where I come from is using a gun to threaten life or limb without justification, and involves pointing a gun at a person in a threatening manner.. Brandishing is not simply carrying or transporting.

    2. Also, CONTEXT.

      These kids were walking around a CITY, apparently with the thing in hand. Probably waving it around and being dumb like boys that age will do.

      That’s totally different than a guy covered in mud, wearing camo, carrying a rifle strapped over his shoulder out in the sticks. Methinks in a small town, even kids running around with it wouldn’t have drawn much attention. That comment is just race baiting nonsense.

      1. waving it around and being dumb like boys that age will do.

        Yes, what we used to call “playing”.

        1. Exactly.

          But CONTEXT. Me playing with my BB gun in my backyard, or down by the creek where there weren’t people everywhere… Totally different thing than wandering down city streets, in a city that has large gang problems!

          Common sense yo. Even back when people didn’t reflexively freak out about guns, there was still common sense, and some times/places where you just didn’t do certain things.

  11. 2013 I was stunned when Andy Lopez (13 y.o,) carrying an air soft rifle past a field where kids played shoot’em up games was shot down by a responding officer (one felt he had to shoot, the other did not).

    I remember as a kid with other kids in the 1950s playing Audy Murphy, Davy Crockett at the Alamo, cops’n’roobers, cowboys’n’indians, Francis Marion the Swamp Fox, John Mosby the Gray Ghost, with no fear that over zealous cops would gun us down. I had a Mattel Thunder Burp, tommy gun replica.

    2014 Tamir Rice that was even more indefensible bullshit in my book. But the responses to the June 1970 shooting of Ken Ballew taught me that is what gun control nuts want to be the new normal, now extended to kids with toy guns.

  12. Columbus Ohio! seeeeesh! THAT explains a lot! Google Officer Harless of Canton Ohio sometime.

    My son was going on vacation to Canada, and was going to stop in Ohio to visit the “Christmas Story” house. I suggested very strongly that he rent a car rather than drive one of his own. When police run a Tennessee tag they get back the drivers license number of the registered owner and whether they have a handgun carry permit.

  13. Columbus Ohio! seeeeesh! THAT explains a lot! Google Officer Harless of Canton Ohio sometime.

    My son was going on vacation to Canada, and was going to stop in Ohio to visit the “Christmas Story” house. I suggested very strongly that he rent a car rather than drive one of his own. When police run a Tennessee tag they get back the drivers license number of the registered owner and whether they have a handgun carry permit.

  14. Honestly people, CONTEXT.

    I live in Washington state. We’re open carry. If I got myself as cleaned up as possible, threw a rifle over my shoulder, and went and ran errands in Seattle where I live… I’d have a SWAT team on me in no time.

    If I were an hour outside the city, NOTHING would happen most likely. I might catch a few compliments if it was a nice piece!

    That these were little ass kids, with a realistic looking gun, AKA shouldn’t be running around with a real gun unsupervised anyway, IN A CITY.

    I’d like for America to be like it was back in the good old days when people didn’t freak out… But the anti-gun culture dominates in cities. So like it or not, this is a horrible idea, and the cop was right to tell them it’s a shit idea.

    But the context matters, and anybody who doesn’t get that is a fool. I will certainly make sure my kids don’t do any stupid shit like this when I have some someday.

    1. The cop was wrong to be an asshole about it.

      1. Ish. I mean he could have changed a few words here and there for sure… But for him to generally lay into them for being fucking retarded? I don’t have a problem with that. They needed to get schooled.

        1. “A few words” is generally the difference between being an asshole or not.

  15. To purchase a firearm in Ohio, a person must be at least 18 years of age, with some restrictions still remaining. To be able to qualify to purchase a handgun in Ohio, you must be above 21 years of age. It is also illegal to sell or furnish a firearm to anyone younger than 18, and a handgun to anyone younger than 21.[3] In Ohio there are also a few other laws that are important to be mindful of. It is illegal to consciously fire a firearm while inside or on a motor vehicle. Antique or REPLICA rifles, shotguns, and HANDGUNS are supposed to be treated with the same urgency and under the same law a modern firearm would be.

    Ohio is a traditional open-carry state. The open-carry of firearms by those who LEGALLY possess the firearm is a legal activity in Ohio.

    There are actual rules for gun ownership and open carry in Ohio. What these boys were doing, if the caller assumed it was an actual firearm and not a BB gun, is against the law and should have been addressed. This officer made a life and death decision by NOT shooting first , and choosing to engage. He could have died for that choice. For all the individuals saying this officer was wrong, you can’t have it both ways; either you want the police to take pause and evaluate a potentially deadly situation, in a nanosecond, and decide there isn’t a threat OR you don’t. Which is it? These boys didn’t make the wisest decision and hopefully they learned something from the officer. Other than he’s a dick!

  16. This officer made a life and death decision by NOT shooting first , and choosing to engage. He could have died for that choice.

    In the words of Super Chicken, he knew the job was dangerous when he took it. If he doesn’t like that deal, he needs to find another career. It is not reasonable to assume someone is a deadly threat just because they appear to be carrying a firearm. Anyone who WASN’T a cop who opened fire on the boy would have gone to prison. The rules should be the same for cops.

    either you want the police to take pause and evaluate a potentially deadly situation, in a nanosecond, and decide there isn’t a threat OR you don’t.

    I want the police to take longer than a nanosecond to evaluate a situation. I expect them to put themselves at risk when they aren’t sure rather than shoot first and ask questions later. That’s their job. They do not have the right to push the risks of their chosen career off onto citizens by shooting on a hunch.

  17. Correction to the assumption that open carry would save these kids even if it was a real gun; it wouldn’t because the gun they were carrying resembled a handgun. Minimum age in Ohio is not set for handguns but they defer to the federal limit which is 18 for handguns and no restrictions on long guns. It is rational for both a knowledgeable observer to call the police on 2 kids with a handgun and it is also reasonable for police to approach with caution and assume a handgun is real. Lucky in this situation no one was hurt. The debate about the age limit is a separate issue, but under current law the stop was justified, though the officer clearly needs to learn some tact when talking to a tween and a teenager.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.