Cop Refused Treatment For Carrying Gun In Hospital
BY Herschel Smith
9 years, 7 months ago
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.”
This is an interesting case. They have a policy but don’t post, in which case their policy is irrelevant. Yet they called the police on the police, and so the police drew weapons on the police like they were criminals.
How does it feel, sir, to have guns brandished in your direction for no good reason? Unsafe? Now, your argument that goes like this: “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?’ “, is a little head scratching. I want to believe that you care about concealed carriers, but it’s hard given what most of your colleagues think about us.
I’ll tell you what. I want you to lobby for the repeal of laws that give LEOs special dispensation for carrying in court, parades, schools and everywhere else, and lobby for the codification of that right for everyone. Then I’ll believe that your having invoked our good name in order to argue for your officer was in good faith. Otherwise, you’re just a liar. And maybe you said more than you wanted to. Yes, concealed carriers do have to be “prepared,” which is why we care about this issue as much as you do for your officers.
|
|
On April 15, 2015 at 12:18 pm, Archer said:
I don’t know about Mansfield or Ohio, but in my area “urgent care” is a different type of facility than “hospital”. Urgent care is kind of a halfway between a normal “make an appointment for next week” doctor’s clinic and the ER at the hospital. Like the name says, they handle medical issues that should be taken care of right now, but aren’t life-threatening.
That said, in my not-so-humble opinion, no emergency facility should be barred from lawful carry. They are emergency facilities; by definition, they’re used for situations that are critical and unplanned. Requiring their customers (or patients, if you prefer) to plan ahead and not carry, or to take the time to go home, disarm, then come back, defeats the very purpose. Can you (or the attorneys) imagine the civil and legal liability the facility would take on if a legal CCW-er came in with a life-threatening condition (heart attack, say) and was refused treatment on the basis that he/she was carrying a firearm (again, legally), and the CCW-er died as a result?
On April 19, 2015 at 12:41 pm, Ned Weatherby said:
Right – if they take someone off the gurney, unconscious and intubated, and find a gun on the hip, what then? Deny treatment?
I recently had a surgery. The hospital was posted with “no weapons” signs, but it was almost like they were careful NOT to use the signs the state requires to make the campus “gun free.” I wouldn’t be surprised if this was due to male and female doctors & nurses who carry daily.
On April 15, 2015 at 6:53 pm, Ned Weatherby said:
Good points, Archer, as usual – but I’m always amused when armed “only ones” are hassled by other armed “only ones.” Gives them a little to think about next time they point a gun a someone doing nothing wrong, except for that terrible matter of possessing a holstered weapon.
On April 16, 2015 at 11:34 am, Archer said:
I agree, reading this tale of woe was far more schadenfreude-liciously amusing than it should be. Anytime an “Only One” gets a little taste of what they give out cannot be a bad thing.
Still, based on the nature of their activities, I think that posting emergency facilities against legally-carried anything should be a criminal offense. May as well post it as a “Bible-free zone” or “tattoo-free zone” and see how patients react.
On April 19, 2015 at 12:36 pm, Ned Weatherby said:
Kudos, Archer. Good exercise on how far out there legal proscriptions on acts that don’t harm anyone can go. What’s unfortunate is I could see it going that way in the near future.
Agree about the posting of emergency facilities, and your examples took the B.S. to a logical end. But, for sake of argument, if same facilities could legally post and then deny treatment – as a Bible-free or tattoo-free zones – it would be “Only Ones” called to enforce the proscription, and eject them from the property. Wonder how that would work out? Meanwhile, the forbidden patient (if not already dead) and the LEO who removed him are comparing tattoos.
In the near future, we can likely also expect age restrictions in emergency facilities.
You may be onto something here – another method to belittle the crazed, “Mad Mother” hoplophobes on their rancid CCW and open carry proscription craziness.
On April 29, 2015 at 1:25 pm, JT said:
The first problem with this discussion is that people think they have a RIGHT to medical care. Sorry, but you do not. If you are going to the hospital for medical evaluation and treatment then you will play by the facilities rules. Its that simple. You have every right as a American citizen to seek your healthcare elsewhere. If you are in a true emergency situation (life and death) then we will cut everything off you, inventory it, tag it, bag it and put your personal effects in the safe, if the facility has a “no firearms” policy or no personal effects safe, then your firearm will be turned over to law enforcement and you can deal with them to get it back, end of story. Don’t get me wrong, you have every right to keep and bear arms, and that is none of the healthcare personals business, that is, until you seek our assistance while carrying a firearm. We may serve the public, but we are not public servants. Guess where crazy people and drug addicts seek treatment? Get a clue. If you’d like to pay the massive liability insurance cost so that you can carry your firearm while being treated, then I’m sure the clinic/ER/Hospital would be willing to make an arrangement. How deep is your wallet?