0

Gun-toting park patron files suit against police, security guard

SUGAR HILL -- A Forsyth County man has filed a federal lawsuit claiming a security guard and two Gwinnett police officers violated his rights when he was exercising in a Sugar Hill park with a licensed handgun on his hip.

Cumming resident Christopher Proescher filed a suit Friday in U.S. District Court in Atlanta that stems from an April 20 incident at Gary Pirkle Park. Proescher was walking around the park that day with a Smith & Wesson handgun in a belt holster, which he carries a license for, he said.

Before using the park while armed, Proescher said he consulted the parks director and was told that doing so is permissible.

Defendants named in the suit are private security guard Reid Hanna and Gwinnett County Police Department officers Adam Bell and Rodney Dantzler. The suit demands a trial, where jurors would decide damages. It claims Proescher's Constitutional rights protecting him from unreasonable searches and seizure were violated, along with his right to free speech and to bear arms.

Hannah, employed by a company called Plaza Security, is contracted by the city of Sugar Hill for park security, the suit states.

Proescher works at a firearms business and lives about six miles from the park, which he'd been frequenting a few times a week in an effort to shed pounds. He is armed at all times because, at age 53, he's too old to fight back against muggers, he said.

"If I have pants on, I probably have a firearm on, but I don't do it at any unauthorized locations," Proescher said. "I don't do it as a political statement -- it's allowed and people should get used to it."

Proescher said he was walking on a pedestrian pathway for 20 minutes when Hannah stopped him and said carrying a firearm in a park violated a Gwinnett County ordinance. Proescher said that was wrong. After a brief argument, Proescher said Hannah "threw him out" of the park on grounds that he was rude and carrying a firearm near a playground.

As Proescher walked to his car, Gwinnett officers arrived. Hannah had called them in reference to a suspicious person, according to a police report.

Officer Bell detained Proescher, seized the weapon and searched him, though he did not consent, the suit claims. The police report states the weapon was taken so officers could confirm it was not stolen.

Proescher had a valid Georgia weapons license issued in Forsyth County. But according to the report, he declined to answer officer's question about having a driver's license, or how he'd arrived at the park. A police corporal called a magistrate judge, who advised there was sufficient probable cause to arrest Proescher on charges of criminal trespass, a felony. Police found another weapon inside Proescher's impounded car and 100 rounds of ammunition, the report states.

Gwinnett police spokesman Cpl. Edwin Ritter said neither the department nor the individual officers would be able to comment on pending litigation. Hanna did not return calls to his office and cell phone.

The suit does not name Hanna's company or Gwinnett County as defendants.

Proescher said he was held at the Gwinnett County Jail for 13 hours before his release on $1,300 security bond. His firearm was confiscated and has yet to be returned, he said.

He said he's kept away from parks since the ordeal.

With a valid license, Georgia law allows guns to be carried everywhere but schools, churches, courthouses, government buildings, jails, nuclear power facilities, polling places and bars, unless bar owners permit them, said Proescher's attorney, John Monroe.

Comments

gwinnettresident1 1 year, 11 months ago

I would love to sit on that jury...Gwinnett loses millions..They know the Ga. Law and his lawyer is correct...We fought to have the law rewritten to eliminate the gray areas...Now leave the licensed carry holders alone...The man caused no harm just harassed like i was in Sams Club one day when they saw a tip of my pistol under my shirt...It was concealed but my shirt had come up just a bit....I went to jail...It was dropped because the judge new they were just f^&KIN (( with me..

2

jack 1 year, 11 months ago

The county is not being sued- only the security guy and the two officers.

0

roaads1 1 year, 11 months ago

Jack. This was done under color of law. The county may not be included right now but it can and should be.

1

gwinnettresident1 1 year, 11 months ago

Jack who do you thing pays the police....Its county tax funds....My God Boy

0

jack 1 year, 11 months ago

"The suit does not name Hanna's company or Gwinnett County as defendants." I was merely pointing out this statement from the article in the interest of accuracy. I don't know about you, but if I personally get sued, my employer is not obligated to pay any judgement levied against me.

0

NewsReader 1 year, 11 months ago

I was thinking the exact same thing. Such pompous arrogance on the part of the Security Firm and The Gwinnett County Police Department. He's licensed to carry a concealed weapon. He followed the rules, yet his rights were severely violated. "Paul Blart" and "Barney Fife"! LOL, What a pair of the finest law enforcement Sugar Hill has to offer. I hope that he receives an enormous sum of money to send a loud and clear message that we, the law abiding citizens of this country, will simply not put up with this kind of foolishness. This isn't the Soviet Union.

3

notblind 1 year, 11 months ago

Lots of people get thrown in jail for "suspicion of breaking the law" even if they are not breaking the law. If the officers are unsure they just lock you up.

Part 2- It's a concealed weapons permit. All kinds of unnecessary aggravation could be avoided if the person carries concealed. Ever heard the old saw "Proud nails get hammered".

1

gwinnettresident1 1 year, 11 months ago

Give me a break Barney put you one bullet back in your pocket...Yes he could have concealed it...but its not against the law to wear it open even without a permit...

0

notblind 1 year, 11 months ago

Hey Rambo, concealed carry = smart. Open carry = dumb. Just because something is legal doesn't mean the cops won't hassle you just like this guy.

0

mountainpass 1 year, 11 months ago

Why should someone openly carrying be hassled? Why is it dumb to openly carry, LE does it everyday?

0

roaads1 1 year, 11 months ago

It does however mean if they hassle you for it they are breaking the law and violating their oath of office. We have the right to open carry and if someone want to exercise that right we the people should be behind them. Not calling them names.

0

Karl 1 year, 11 months ago

Actually, you do need a permit to carry a weapon openly. Read the relatively new laws on it.

0

pjhydo 1 year, 11 months ago

Karl...you are going to get some one arrested. Open carry without a license was in the legislature this past session, but not voted on. DO NOT CARRY open or conceled without a license! (Unless you really like orange jumpsuits.)

0

mountainpass 1 year, 11 months ago

Karl since 1910, when the license was introduced(part of the racist roots of Georgia Gun Laws), the pistol had to be partially exposed. I think in the 80's the law was changed allowing it to be carried concealed also. You are correct though that a license is required to do either.

0

redmudd 1 year, 11 months ago

Hey notblind, you need to read the law before posting incorrect information. It is NOT a concealed weapons permit. IT IS A GEORGIA WEAPONS LICENSE. Thats why its called a GWL. The 4th Amendment still applies to Gwinnett's Finest. I hope Gwinnett County, the rent-a-cop and the Barney's pay millions! Go Hammer!

0

notblind 1 year, 11 months ago

Hey mudd, it's a Georgia Firearms License. Having it permits you to carry a concealed firearm. Carrying concealed is what smart, experienced people do. Open carry is for exhibitionists and people that enjoy putting themselves in aggravating situations.

0

mountainpass 1 year, 11 months ago

Hey notblind, it's a Georgia Weapons Carry License like redmudd said. That changed in 2010 with the GeorgiaCarry.Org supported bill SB308. People openly carry for many reasons, one it is a deterrent(I know of one case that happened in a Waffle House where the robbers decided to wait until the OCers left, but were arrested outside in their car wearing ski masks), two it's much more comfortable, three I want to, etc......

0

SavJames 1 year, 11 months ago

notblind, it is a Georgia Weapons Carry License (GWCL). The old license was a Georgia Firearms License (GFL). Both cover Open Carry and Concealed Carry. Georgia has never been a concealed carry only state. Open Carry is a choice with advantages and disadvantages, just as Concealed carry is. Concealed carry puts you in a bad light if someone notices your carry, they assume you're trying to "hide" the gun and as such, "must be up to something no good". Open Carry assures that you are not trying to hide anything.

0

roaads1 1 year, 11 months ago

It's sad that even in Gwinnett County this would happen. I am always on law enforcement's side but in this case they violated their oath of office. This also needs to be pursued. We have a constitution and state law. The last person that should be breaking those laws are the officers that swear an oath to uphold them. That judge should be held responsible too. I hope he wins millions. Some advocate groups should get behind him too. This should not be covered up. Good luck Mr Proescher. I hope you are a rich man at the end of this case.

1

misterconcerned 1 year, 11 months ago

As a gun carrier, I will never understand the idiots that carry in plain sight. If you carry a weapon in the open you will be the first to die when the fight starts. If these people were truly carrying for protection they would not post to the world "look I have a gun". In my opinion this guy got exactly what he wanted......attention. I expect more from someone who's profession is with firearms.

1

gwinnettresident1 1 year, 11 months ago

This has nothing to do with being the first to being hurt because "look i have a gun" Its his right just like its your right to go to Kroger and buy your food.

1

mountainpass 1 year, 11 months ago

So are LE's idiots for carrying in plain sight. Do criminals shoot the LE first?

0

Veryconcernedcitizen 1 year, 11 months ago

I'm sorry, but you folks need to read this story more closely. The police officers did not arrest this dude for carrying a gun. They arrested him for tresspassing. The security guard is acting on the behalf of the City of Sugar Hill. If the security guard asked this guy to leave the park and he did not then that is tresspassing. The police officers had to act in that case. The officers also called a judge and confirmed they could arrest this guy. It is apparent the police officers did everything correct in this incident. Unfortunately they were dragged into a mess by this gun carrying guy and the security guard. The law is clear on this one. If you ask someone to leave your property and they refuse then that person is guilty of criminal tresspass. It appears Proescher was looking for a confrontation and baited the security guard. My question why is Proescher (Forsyth County resident) using a Sugar Hill Park?

2

gwinnettresident1 1 year, 11 months ago

I am sorry the story says he was leaving the park....He has a right to say his peace to the rent a cop before he leaves....He was ARRESTED as he was leaving.

1

BufordGuy 1 year, 11 months ago

Uh, got a question. How can the PUBLIC be trespassing on PUBLIC property???

0

redmudd 1 year, 11 months ago

Very concerndcitizen, Take your own advance and read the article, "Proescher said Hannah "threw him out" of the park on grounds that he was rude and carrying a firearm near a playground.

As Proescher walked to his car, Gwinnett officers arrived. Hannah had called them in reference to a suspicious person, according to a police report. " The guy was leaving the park. The GPD and Barney overstepped their authority. They should be held accountable for being stupid to the laws of Georgia and the Constitution. Sounds like GPD and Barney are on a self centered power trip.

2

roaads1 1 year, 11 months ago

That was my point. Nicely put Redmudd. The only people that committed a crime here was the officers and maybe the security guard. He has the right to use the park anytime. There is no sign that says "for Gwinnett residents only". I get rude when someone tries to strip me of my constitutional rights too. This guy has a good case against the officers and Gwinnett. I hope he sets a record for winnings in a case. The constitution needs to be defended, especially by those who swear an oath to protect it. To say that this had nothing to do with him carrying his gun is at best disingenuous. If he wants to carry in the open it's no ones business as long as he isn't breaking the law. And he was not.

1

gwinnettresident1 1 year, 11 months ago

redmudd Sorry but very unconcerned citizen cant read!

0

mountainpass 1 year, 11 months ago

Veryconcernedcitizen wrote "If you ask someone to leave your property and they refuse then that person is guilty of criminal tresspass."

Well that's true if you OWN the property. The citizens(taxpayers) own the park.

1

Don 1 year, 11 months ago

First let's get this straight; Gary Pirkle Park is the city of Sugar Hill and not Gwinnett County. The lawsuit filed by Ga Carry was against Gwinnett County. I do not know what the rules are for carrying in Sugar Hill parks, they can supercede the county rules as long as they are more strick.

I hate to say this but as a person who carries I think Proescher was looking for a challenge and he got one. Two wrongs do not make a right. He should have been charged with a disturbance violation. If he felt so violated I think he should have called the police first to explain the rules to the security guard if Sugar Hill allows carrying. i learned long ago that if you treat police with repsect they typically will treat you the same, but give them a reason to arrest you they will do.

2

mountainpass 1 year, 11 months ago

Don the lawsuit is against the officers and security guard.

No county or city can make a law against carrying firearms only the General Assembly can.

How was he causing a disturbance?

0

kevin 1 year, 11 months ago

I hope they take the County to the cleaners. Parks are legal for a person to carry a concealed weapon with a license. Cops should also know this or they shouldn't be on the force. I wouldn't believe what these cop's excuses are. I was told that if someone in a mall sees it they could notify a security cop and they could ask you to take the gun to your car. Don't know if that is legal or not for a cop to force you to leave if you show your license.

1

Don 1 year, 11 months ago

Kevin; a private company has the right to not allow firearms on premise. Simon Malls for instance do not allow weapons at all with or without a license. Many fitness facilities like Lifetime also do not allow them.

0

gwinnettresident1 1 year, 11 months ago

The park isnt a private company....Georgia law fixed that gray area 2 years ago..

1

Mack711 1 year, 11 months ago

If Simon Malls does not allow them then how about telling the young 'thugs' there that. Have seen many of them carring weapons in the mall., they probably do not have permits. It is not the law abiding citizen that scares us it is the 'thugs' who have no respect for anyone,except themselves.

0

roaads1 1 year, 11 months ago

The law was enforced by Gwinnett. The law in is on Proescher's side here and that will come out. He was harassed for openly carrying a gun. That is a violation of his rights. He was then searched without consent or need. That was a violation of his rights. His arrest was in relation of these rights being violated. His case will stand up. Respect is earned. If he was compelled to give up his rights illegally I do not blame him for getting huffy (also his right). If he wanted a challenge maybe it's because there was something that he felt needed challenging (also his right). It certainly appears there was. He did have the right to open carry, to not show ID, and to not answer questions if he didn't want to. That's why we have these laws. So that if something like this happens there will be remedies through the judicial system and a cost for violating a US citizens rights. Which is also his right. We will miss the constitution when it's gone. The fact that people defend these actions against this man proves that it won't be around long.

3

pcjohn 1 year, 11 months ago

Well said roaads1. My earlier comments were removed (no reason given, of course) probably because I faulted the cops for not knowing the laws pertaining to a CCW permit. I hope your post remains up.

1

roaads1 1 year, 11 months ago

PCJOHN- I have seen them delete comments too. If they want people engaging over the long run they will stop doing that. It's the "regulars" that do and they will grow tired of it after a while and move on to a more friendly forum that allows everyone to say what's on their minds that aren't using foul language. I am always pro officer myself. The job they do is a tough one with many quick decisions to make. This is the first story I've ever read on GDP where the officer has blatantly messed up. This is a much bigger mistake than it appears. There were crimes committed that need to be addressed.

1

gwinnettresident1 1 year, 11 months ago

I submitted the link to Gun Owners of America....Let see if they help they usually do.

1

toby 1 year, 11 months ago

When obama is re elected, he will take our empty guns out of our dying hands.

2

roaads1 1 year, 11 months ago

Toby I believe you're right. He's been hinting at it and everyone that he surrounds himself with are known to be anti gun advocates. Not to mention the constitution is a thorn in his side that he's slowly getting rid of.

1

gwinnettresident1 1 year, 11 months ago

http://www.georgiacarry.com/county/gwinnett_parks/Gwinnett%20Ordinance%20Amendment.pdf

This is the offical position of Gwinnett County in 2007 after a lawsuit by Georgia Carry. Look it up....The man had all the rights to carry..

1

roaads1 1 year, 11 months ago

Gwinnettresident, Thanks for posting. To make a point there needs to be criminal charges brought against the officers and guard. Also the suit needs to include Gwinnett and the city. I hate it but this needs to be done. This sort of constitutional trashing needs to be stopped. If this case went all the way it would force the law enforcement agencies in Georgia to teach their officers & judges what can happen if they cross this line again.

1

pcjohn 1 year, 11 months ago

roaads1 - I agree completely. However you must realize that with a Chief like Waters ( a guy who never hurt one of his own goofballs) and DA Porter (another guy who doesn't believe cops must behave within the Law) nothing will be done. This is Gwinnett and the cops are exempt from all laws and regulations.

0

prole 1 year, 11 months ago

I think Chief Walters does a great job with the limited funds he has due to a commissioner that really does not like the PD. That is why GCPD is recognized as having an outstanding, well trained department.

0

pcjohn 1 year, 11 months ago

roaads1- I agree completely and wish it would happen. But I know that with a chief like Waters (who never would harm one of his guys no matter how bad they are) and a DA like Porter who seems to believe cops are above the law, there will be no action taken against these errant cops. This is Gwinnett and cops are not subject to any rules.

1

roaads1 1 year, 11 months ago

Porter has prosecuted Gwinnett officers in the past. And even brought his A game. I was however disappointed about the money vanishing out of the evidence room. That should have been prosecuted. This is a federal matter so they will not be a factor (at least we hope). This is a good case and clearly a violation of this mans rights. I am not one of those people that wear my gun openly, I conceal. My son however insists on wearing his out. I still expect his rights to do so will not be infringed upon. This case is quite simple. If he hadn't been open carrying he would have been left alone. His rights were violated. Everything started with that and everything after that came because he wore his gun openly as the law says he can. I hope he cleans their clock. Even if it costs us taxpayers some money. It make a much needed point and it's money they can't waste on buying worthless land from their friends.

0

prole 1 year, 11 months ago

The officers were doing their job. They were called to the scene because the person refused to leave the park. I believe it is standard procedure to run the weapon to see if it is legal. You would have a different view point if the responding officers had done nothing and the guy turned out to harm someone. Even a person with a carry permit can be dangerous. He would not have been arrested if he had acted properly. They officers cannot speak at this time but there is another side to this story I am sure. Go ahead and trash talk our fine Police Department. They will be there for you if you need them and you can count on that.

0

notamom 1 year, 11 months ago

And a person without a carry permit can be dangerous. That's why I carry a gun-legally- when using our local exercise trails. I'm healthy enough to walk the trails, but physical problems won't allow me to defend myself against criminals (or pit bulls, as I found out at Yellow River Park a few years ago). Love our Police, but if there's trouble they can't be there instantly.

1

prole 1 year, 11 months ago

you are correct, both my husband and I carry legally however we do not display them. I just feel sorry for these officers that were only doing their job to have to go through this. Putting their lives on the line for all of us and not being paid very well for doing so. Also no support from county government.

0

roaads1 1 year, 11 months ago

Prole-I'm not trash talking GPD. They're awesome. They do a great job. But when something like this happens a lesson needs to be learned. All of this stemmed from a guy legally wearing a gun. That is his/our right to do so without being harassed or asked a bunch of questions. This country is on edge because things like this keep happening. The bottom line is this happened because he open carried. The officers, judge, Gwinnett, city, and the guards company need to be made to pay for this violation so it stops happening. This isn't about liking the department. It's about protecting our rights against senseless harassment, search, and arrest. They were wrong. They need to be held responsible.

0

ImRetired 1 year, 11 months ago

Good grief, folks. There is a lot of blame to go around on all parts. Let's start with the armed citizen: only the irrational would not see that he was looking for a confrontation to exercise his rights. Those of us who are responsible firearms owners cringe when someone like Christopher goes strolling around a public area. Conceal your weapons folks and don't create a disturbance. The city of Sugar Hill has some blame for not notifying their security contractor of the weapons laws. The security guard should have known the laws and should not have let his panties get in a wad when he got his feelings hurt. The responding officers should have known the law as this new law was a part of training back when it was enacted. By the way, he was not "searched", as his shyster has written in the lawsuit. He was given a patdown and the weapon seized for officer safety. That is entirely legal. The judge gave the officers the authority for the trespass charge, which is legitimate. The weapons law was explained to the officers and no weapons charges were brought against the gentleman. His shyster obviously realizes his client has not much of a case as no tort complaint was filed against the city nor the county. The would have been given immunity from the outset. And, to close, let's all remember, any monies awarded will be our tax dollars as the officers will be defended by the county.

1

roaads1 1 year, 11 months ago

Of course you forgot to mention he was following the law wearing his gun exposed. I'm a gun owner/carrier. This man did nothing wrong as far as I can tell. He was harassed by the guard and then the police. He was arrested for not trespassing. Yet he was on public property. When referring to gun owners cringing because of what he did. Please just speak for yourself. Many of us see our rights being taken away pretty fast now. Standing up for his rights was the right thing to do and a brave thing to do. They waste our tax money all the time. I hope he gets plenty of it personally. Better spent proving a point than on trips overseas or another stadium. Perhaps the judge or the officers should actually read Georgia gun laws so they do not repeat this again.

1

tv_racin_fan 1 year, 11 months ago

The animosity towards someone who chooses to exercise his Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms in a different manner than you is astounding.

3

ImRetired 1 year, 11 months ago

Attempting to assign blame for this incident is hardly "animosity." I am only pointing out that the gentleman was acting immaturely with an exposed firearm and that the majority of firearms owners would have acted differently.

2

roaads1 1 year, 11 months ago

Why not point out the law this man broke instead of pointing out the law he stood up to defend ? They stopped him at his car. If wearing your gun exposed is lawful then he should be able to do that without fear of being prosecuted or harassed for it. I don't wear mine out but would stand up for his right to do it if he wanted to. This was a complete injustice. And I can see the animosity in your post too. Of course I have plenty in mine. The law is the law. Police and judges have to follow it too.

1

pcjohn 1 year, 11 months ago

Why don't you direct your criticism to the only place it really belongs - Hannah. He is the fool who overstepped his authority (whatever that amounts to), got offended by the umbrage of a law-abiding citizen acting within his rights and accosted by a power hungry cop wannabe. Proescher refused to kiss his ring and Hannah called the ignorant police to back him up. The 2 cops violated his 4th Amendment rights and arrested Proescher. And you find fault with Mr. Proescher. You exhibit the intelligence of the 2 Gwinnett cops or maybe the yet unnamed "judge" who authorized the arrest.

1

roaads1 1 year, 11 months ago

Pcjohn- Well put. And that is the bottom line. 4th amendment right may not always be here. Our rights have been eroded for a while now. I'm going to enjoy mine while I have them.

0

ImRetired 1 year, 11 months ago

The gentleman has a right to go the playground in the park and dance and sing while wearing nothing but a Speedo bathing suit. He would not be in violation of any laws but his actions would certainly cause reasonable people to be concerned and frightened. Would they call the police? Would the police respond? Would the officers check his ID and his background and try to determine a cause for his unusual behaviour? Yes to all. Have they violated his rights? No. The point to be made, again, is that a responsible gun owner, knowing that a lot of people are scared of firearms, would not be carrying openly in a park that has ballfields and playgrounds and VERY LITTLE crime.

0

pcjohn 1 year, 11 months ago

I would say that your hypothetical scenario is a little off-the-wall, wouldn't you? Mr Proescher was doing nothing to attract attention to himself by acting in a crazy manner like you suggest. Nor was he brandishing his weapon. He merely ran afoul of an egocentric cop wannabe who wanted to hang him out to dry in the sun. Of course the cops who arrived agreed with their unbadged counterpart and crushed Proescher's Constitutional rights and caused him serious hardship, loss of freedom and monetary penalties. And yet you still fault the victim and not the dunces who caused the trouble for Mr. Proescher. What are you retired from, some cop job???

1

ImRetired 1 year, 11 months ago

You still don't get it. One last time and then I'm through with your arrogance. I am a staunch believer in the Second Amendment. Yes, I am a retired law enforcement officer and a retired defense department contractor. I have lost more blood, sweat, and tears, literally, protecting your stupidity than I care to address here. My point is this: everyone involved made at least one mistake (see my first post.) But, NONE of this would have happened had the gentleman not been of those firearms owners who is bound and determined to do something so stupid so as to provide more incentive to the gun grabbers to use the goverment to curtail the Second Amendment. All he needed to do was exercise a little responsibility and discretion. But, that is more than you and some others can see or fathom.

0

prole 1 year, 11 months ago

Read the reports, If this guy had not been so evasive it probably would had ended differently

Police reports... http://glocktalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18924368&postcount=8

The case filed by the plaintiff. http://glocktalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18937777&postcount=277

0

pcjohn 1 year, 11 months ago

Proescher identified himself, displayed his GCW permit as requested, and gave the cops a valid, plausible reason for his presence in a public park. What else is required of an American citizen? Do we have to submit our family history to these uneducated thugs who are the cops in Gwinnett County?

I wish Mr Proescher success in his lawsuit. Any citizen who loves what's left of our Constitution should. Only the police want to do away with the Bill of Rights.

1

Don 1 year, 11 months ago

Did I not read some where that the dates on his driver's license and weapon permit differ for his date of birth? If that is true then I believe the police had some right to question this guy and arrest him.

0

Don 1 year, 11 months ago

Here is the link that contains the police report

http://glocktalk.com/forums/showpost.php?p=18924368&postcount=8

And yes the dates on the two ID's were wrong. I think this is enough cause to confiscate the weapon and take him in.

If he knew the date was wrong then he should have had it corrected, his fault.

0

pcjohn 1 year, 11 months ago

So in your mind the error made by a clerk at the County Courthouse is sufficient to cause the receiver of said error to be arrested? What planet are you from?

0

prole 1 year, 11 months ago

Some people to just want to place blame on the police officers without hearing both sides of the story. Usually it is people that have had a traffic ticket or some other encounter with a LE and have a grudge. I'm done with this.

0

pcjohn 1 year, 11 months ago

You know, if you think about it YOU have only heard one side of the story - that from the cops - and you're apparently content to believe them without considering Proescher's side. Seems like you're guilty of doing what you say others are guilty of. Maybe you've not gotten tickets or unpleasant encounters with the cops because you are one, or are friends with some.

0

Sign in to comment