Welcome to TheOhioOutdoors
Wanting to join the rest of our members? Login or sign up today!
Login / Join

Manfield urgent care refuses to treat cop

Ohiosam

*Supporting Member*
11,708
191
Mahoning Co.
WTF??

MANSFIELD – Officer safety is a chief concern in the streets, but now some are questioning it at care facilities, too.

Two months ago, Plymouth officer Wayne Liggett Sr. said he was denied treatment at Walk In Urgent Care, 1341 S. Trimble Road, because he was carrying his duty weapon. Even after it was verified he was a police officer and legally within right to carry his firearm, he was asked to leave, he said.

Eyesight problems brought him to the clinic Feb. 8.

The officer, who has been in law enforcement for 33 years, said he was seeing floaters and flashes of light in his vision and knew something wasn't right. He called ahead to the urgent care to ensure they had equipment to view the eye.

In a private room, an employee asked him to remove his jacket to take his vitals. As a courtesy, Liggett said he told the person he was carrying his duty weapon under his shirt, in case they would see it. He also had written down on the sign-in form he was employed as a Plymouth police officer, he said.

The employee took his vitals, said the doctor would be in soon and left.

The next knock at the door Liggett didn't expect.

Several Mansfield Police Department officers told him to come out slowly with his hands up. More than one of them were pointing their firearm at him, he said.

Liggett said he was placed in handcuffs while police verified his identity as an auxiliary officer, which took only minutes. He was carrying his badge and ID in his wallet.

Mansfield police did not file an official report on the incident. The only documentation on the matter is an event report showing dispatch logs.

But after releasing him and returning his .45 Smith and Wesson, Liggett was told the staff still refused to treat him, and he was escorted from the building. There was no sign at the facility denying concealed carry, Liggett said.

He called his eye doctor and had an appointment the next day, where he found out he had a tear in his right retina. He was in surgery by the end of the week.

On Monday, he undergoes a second surgery on the same eye for cataracts.

"They were very unprofessional with how they treated me," Liggett said. "Something could have been seriously wrong."

Urgent care owner Muzhar Hussain declined to comment.

The incident was cause for concern for Plymouth Police Chief Charles Doan. He questioned how other law enforcement officers will be treated in an emergency and whether the urgent care mishap was an isolated incident.

"Officers carry to be prepared, and citizens do too," Doan said. "If you have a concealed carry and get hurt, are they going to say, 'Get him out of here?' "

According to the Ohio Revised Code, officers are exempt from any concealed carry prohibitions. The federal Law Enforcement Officers' Safety Act supports the same.

Paul Johnson, director of security at OhioHealth MedCentral Mansfield Hospital, said that facility have rules and signs prohibiting people from carrying in the hospital.

If a patient comes in and happens to be carrying their firearm, staff members will ask him or her to take the gun to a vehicle, if possible. If it's an emergency situation, staff will store the firearm in a locked safe until the patient is recovered and outside of the hospital walls, he said.

But those rules don't apply to law enforcement.

"Most law enforcement are required to carry whether on or off duty," Johnson said. "They're never really off."
 

Jackalope

Dignitary Member
Staff member
38,841
260
As for the urgent care facility refusing to allow CCW, I obviously don't agree with them but that's their right under law.

As for the other guy. He's auxiliary police, not in uniform, and not on duty. He shouldn't be afforded any more rights than any other citizen with a CCW. Just because he has an auxiliary badge doesn't mean he gets to infringe on a business right to prohibit CCW when he's not acting in a official capacity. He is no more entitled than the next person.
 

MK111

"Happy Hunting Grounds in the Sky"
Supporting Member
6,551
66
SW Ohio
As for the urgent care facility refusing to allow CCW, I obviously don't agree with them but that's their right under law.

As for the other guy. He's auxiliary police, not in uniform, and not on duty. He shouldn't be afforded any more rights than any other citizen with a CCW. Just because he has an auxiliary badge doesn't mean he gets to infringe on a business right to prohibit CCW when he's not acting in a official capacity. He is no more entitled than the next person.

If I read this law correctly I disagree. It says there is no difference in part-time (auxilliary) officer to qualify.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enforcement_Officers_Safety_Act
 

"J"

Git Off My Lawn
Supporting Member
56,741
274
North Carolina
I'm in agreement with Frank on this one, if he's afforded a weapon on duty he's the same off duty.... We have auxiliary officers here in our town but they don't carry a gun just club, cuffs and a radio....
 

Jackalope

Dignitary Member
Staff member
38,841
260
If I read this law correctly I disagree. It says there is no difference in part-time (auxilliary) officer to qualify.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enforcement_Officers_Safety_Act

I wasn't talking about his need to qualify or apply for a CCW. I was talking about infringing on a businesses right to prohibit firearms. The guy wasn't in uniform or acting on official business and as such should have to obey the rights of others just like anyone else with the right to carry does. Just because he's a cop with an implied right to carry does not mean he has right to infringe on the rights of others. Now, if he was on official business or in uniform that's another story.


And it would appear the law agrees.

""Although LEOSA preempts state and local laws, there are two notable exceptions: "the laws of any State that (1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property" (such as a bars, private clubs, amusement parks, etc.), or "(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any State or local government property, installation, building, base, or park"
 

Jackalope

Dignitary Member
Staff member
38,841
260
I'm in agreement with Frank on this one, if he's afforded a weapon on duty he's the same off duty.... We have auxiliary officers here in our town but they don't carry a gun just club, cuffs and a radio....

I agree with that. I don't agree that when off duty they can supersede the rights of others however.
 

"J"

Git Off My Lawn
Supporting Member
56,741
274
North Carolina
I agree with that. I don't agree that when off duty he can supersede the rights of others however.

All I know is if a family member or friend is caught up in something where a part time officer was there and he didn't have a weapon too stop it I'd be one pissed off individual....
 

Jackalope

Dignitary Member
Staff member
38,841
260
All I know is if a family member or friend is caught up in something where a part time officer was there and he didn't have a weapon too stop it I'd be one pissed off individual....

Such is life. One could make the same argument for all of CCW laws however. But as it stands, just because you have a badge doesn't place you above the law or the rights of others. Per the law above that frank posted the guy should have been arrested for trespassing just like any other CCW holder should have been. He broke the law.
 

"J"

Git Off My Lawn
Supporting Member
56,741
274
North Carolina
But from reading Franks link it appears he does qualify too carry just as his full time counterparts are.... As well as military police....

So off duty part timers are afforded the same rights as full time officers.... So if they would of stopped a full time officer as well you'd agree with also?
 

MK111

"Happy Hunting Grounds in the Sky"
Supporting Member
6,551
66
SW Ohio
But from reading Franks link it appears he does qualify too carry just as his full time counterparts are.... As well as military police....

So off duty part timers are afforded the same rights as full time officers.... So if they would of stopped a full time officer as well you'd agree with also?

That's how I read it. My friend was a retired police officer and was protected under federal law to carry any where.
 

"J"

Git Off My Lawn
Supporting Member
56,741
274
North Carolina
That's how I read it. My friend was a retired police officer and was protected under federal law to carry any where.

Yeah that's how I read it too... I might be wrong about it but that's my take on it.... If they refuse him too carry they're in violation of federal law....
 

Jackalope

Dignitary Member
Staff member
38,841
260
That's how I read it. My friend was a retired police officer and was protected under federal law to carry any where.

No he's not. When he's not acting on official police business he still has to respect the right of a business to refuse CCW.

Read the section. "The law and it's amendments"

Although LEOSA preempts state and local laws, there are two notable exceptions: "the laws of any State that (1) permit private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property" (such as a bars, private clubs, amusement parks, etc.), or "(2) prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any State or local government property, installation, building, base, or park"
 

Jackalope

Dignitary Member
Staff member
38,841
260
But from reading Franks link it appears he does qualify too carry just as his full time counterparts are.... As well as military police....

So off duty part timers are afforded the same rights as full time officers.... So if they would of stopped a full time officer as well you'd agree with also?

He does have the right to carry without obtaining a permit. He does not have the right to disregard a businesses right to prohibit carrying. Unless he is on official business. Or the state has a provision that excludes off duty officers from the right of a business owner to prohibit carry.
 

"J"

Git Off My Lawn
Supporting Member
56,741
274
North Carolina
Doesn't the federal law state that though? From what I read on your answer too Frank specifies private citizen not off duty law enforcement..... Police officers are never off of law enforcement duty from my understanding....
 

Jackalope

Dignitary Member
Staff member
38,841
260
Doesn't the federal law state that though? From what I read on your answer too Frank specifies private citizen not off duty law enforcement..... Police officers are never off of law enforcement duty from my understanding....

Jesus guys.. Let me break it down. lol

1. The federal law permits a cop to carry a weapon in any state without the need to apply for a permit. The law allows this.

2. The federal law has an exception however. (Exception meaning the law does not apply) "the laws of any State that permits private persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their property" (such as a bars, private clubs, amusement parks, etc.)"

"Private persons or entities" means the Mansfield Urget Care that prohibited Concealed carry. The Urgent Care has a right to prohibit it, the federal law recognizes their right, as such the federal law expressly states it does not trample on that right.