FL Deputy Threatens to Shoot Concealed Carry Licensee and Arrests Him for Lawfully carried Handgun

Citrus County Florida Deputy Andy Cox Threatens to Shoot Concealed Carry Licensee for Lawfully Carried Handgun & Then Arrests Him for Accidental Exposure.

  • Currently 5/5 stars.

Views: 4653

Favorite of 1 person


You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center

Comment by Gerald Bryan on February 8, 2013 at 7:42pm

 The cops attitude is all too common in law enforcement.  Apparently the uphold the constitution

part of his oath was without reading the constitution and explaining what the English terms Keep

ad Bear mean.  To me the modern version should read OWN and CARRY.  That is what keep and

bear means.  Tell the to the Police Chiefs Association president and all of its members as well.

They don't need a pistol off duty or at home if we can't all have one.  They don't need personal

protection more than any person in the USA.  The second amendment does not say citizens in

good standing with the local law enforcement or who have paid all their dues.  Those founders

were very good at English.  If they had meant to say that, they would have said that.  If they had

wanted a few enclaves where no one cares to have guns then the second amendment would say

the right to carry firearms in a few enclaves where no one gives a damned.  It does not say that.

Comment by Ken Locke on February 8, 2013 at 5:00pm

Cox has a clear unstable temper to be a police officer.

His actions as a so called professional, Dont Pass.


Comment by Eugene P. Clark on February 7, 2013 at 10:00pm

Me thinks that Officer needs a few classes in "Anger Management".

It is obvious that he is angered because he "Made the mistake" of not taking the proper precautions that are outlined in Police proceedures 101. HE is the idiot, NOT the person he arrested.

As I listen to the commentary further, I think he should be released from the Police Dept. simply because he is totally out of control and close to a breakdown. Having a badge (and a gun) does not

give a cop carte blanche. It requires a cool head and skill. I saw neither in this Officer's demeaner during this episode. 

Comment by Eugene P. Clark on February 7, 2013 at 9:38pm

Cox should be summarily " FIRED " for his "STUPIDITY". Like Obama he is making up his own version of the Law. The gun owner will be exonerated as soon as the Judge sees the tape. (Unless he too is a "politically motivated gun confiscation nut"). Let's send this tape around the Country and get the "Keystone Cop" canned, and make him a school crossing guard.

Comment by Stephen McMahon on February 6, 2013 at 12:47pm

Once an individual presents a properly obtained and recent concealed carry license, the officers attempts to take the weapon ends, unless other thngs happen. Accidentalexposure is just tht, forgetful and accidental. Sue the Sheriffs Dept, big time.

Comment by Skip Foss on February 3, 2013 at 12:50pm

This punk ass little Barney Fife should be out of his job,one for his language in front of the mans wife and for his atitude. Give a punk like this a gun and a badge  they think they have all power ,his own camera shows this man had no intention of harm or diplaying the weapon. He is a typical coward with a gun and scared to death if someone elselawfully carry's one also

Comment by A_Nobody on February 1, 2013 at 5:49am

@Theodore Harley Knight: IF he can't handle the pressure, he shouldn't be in the position, period. He more in need of a psyhc evaluation. There IS NO EXCUSE for his behavior.

Comment by X-Beast on February 1, 2013 at 12:14am

Personally IMO there is no justifiable excuse for the cop to say "I'm gonna shoot you in the f***ing back!

If I were his chief I would fire the SOB!

Comment by my911 on January 31, 2013 at 9:30pm


I agree that a Police Officer is at risk, never knowing what's on the other side of the door.

But, with your man on his belly, hands cuffed behind him it seems that civil language is in order, eh?

Comment by Theodore Harley Knight on January 31, 2013 at 9:23pm
I agree with Francis D. Carlson. Not knowing the full story as to the Officer's reaction we have some conjecture regarding his response. I think that stopping someone and having to walk up to their car must be something that causes a lot of stress. Put yourself in the Officer's shoes.



Clinton Donor And Tax Cheat Tied To Russia

“Do as we say, not as we do.”

That seems to be the slogan for Hillary Clinton and her political allies, and it’s especially apt in light of new information about one of Clinton’s largest campaign donors.

While the left is still trying to attack President Trump and his family over unproven business dealings and largely debunked connections to Russia, a new report indicates that it was Hillary Clinton’s team who were doing those exact things.

“Fox News has learned that one of the top donors to the ‘Hillary Victory Fund’ (HVF) in 2016 was a Los Angeles-based attorney who is alleged to have misused company funds to create his own $22 million real estate portfolio,” that outlet reported on Thursday.

“He has also been considered by California to be one of the state’s biggest tax cheats, and allegedly has ties to the (Russian) Kremlin,” Fox continued.

The man’s name is Edgar Sargsyan. His deep pockets greatly benefited Clinton’s campaign, with contributions of at least $250,000 to the Hillary Victory Fund in 2016.

He was also in charge of an elite fundraising dinner to benefit Clinton, where donors paid $100,000 per couple just to attend the ritzy event. But in true Clinton fashion, the money apparently went missing.

Sargsyan is now “being sued by his former company for allegedly diverting those funds to start his own real estate company,” according to Fox.

Now, people are asking hard questions about Clinton’s buddy Sargsyan, including whether his contributions were part of a pay-to-play scheme and if he had shady connections to foreign governments.

“Nobody gave to the Hillary Victory Fund out of the goodness of their heart or some generalized desire to help 33 random state parties,” pointed out attorney Dan Backer from the Committee to Defend the President.

“They did so to buy access and curry influence — something the Clintons have been selling for nearly three decades in and out of government,” he continued.

Trying to buy political influence is sadly common, especially when it comes to the Clintons. What is raising more red flags than normal, however, is the evidence that Sargsyan is no run-of-the-mill campaign donor.

“The really scary question is, what did this particular donor with this strange web of connections hope to buy for his quarter-million dollars?” Backer asked Fox News.

That web of connections is strange indeed.

The Committee to Defend the President is now alleging that SBK, a major Sargsyan-linked company “is an investment firm that is affiliated with United Arab Emirates president, Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed al-Nahyan, and its international affiliate has business interests in Russia,” according to Fox.

“Among its dealings was a bid to finance $850 million for a major bridge project to connect Crimea with Russia,” the group claims.

“He worked for SBK, and SBK appears to have bid on some Crimean/Russian bridge project,” Backer said. “That’s usually an indicator of political favor and connections.”

It raises several chilling questions: Was Sargsyan paying a quarter million dollars to Clinton for political favors, and — more disturbingly — was that money actually from sources in Russia in order to smooth the way for its construction plans?

Nobody knows for sure. What is clear, however, is that there is a pattern of dirty money surrounding the Clintons, with the “Uranium One” and “Clinton Foundation” scandals just two of the most well-known examples.

“It reinforces how fast and loose the Clinton machine was when it came to ‘Hoovering up’ these megadonor checks, not just from questionable Hollywood and Wall Street elites but potentially from foreign influence peddlers using who knows what money,” Backer told Fox News.

“It reinforces the need to take a long hard look at not just the unlawful money laundering process, but the way in which they were solicited as well,” he continued. “The Clintons have never shown a great deal of concern for whomever it was cutting the checks — whether it’s foreign influence peddlers or Hollywood smut peddlers like Harvey Weinstein.”

If those claims are even partially true, then America dodged a bullet in November of 2016 — and it’s worth keeping the pile of foreign-connected Clinton scandals in mind the next time the left tries desperately to tie Donald Trump to Russia. Perhaps they should look in the mirror.


Washington Post Compares
Jeff Sessions To Slaveholder’

The Washington Post compared Attorney General Jeff Sessions to “slaveholders” after he quoted the Bible on Thursday while discussing his department’s policy of prosecuting all illegal immigrants who cross the border.

Sessions made the statement during a speech to law enforcement officers in Fort Wayne, Indiana.

WaPo ran a story entitled “Sessions cites Bible passage used to defend slavery in defense of separating immigrant families” by general assignment editor Keith McMillan and religion reporter Julie Zauzmer on Friday.

Rather than detailing the statistics Sessions cited in the speech that explain the immigration policy, the story quoted John Fea, a history professor at Messiah College in Pennsylvania.

“This is the same argument that Southern slaveholders and the advocates of a Southern way of life made,” Fea said.

Sessions spent much of the speech discussing the numbers behind current immigration policy, including separating families at the Southwest border.

“I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained the government for his purposes,” Sessions said.

“Orderly and lawful processes are good in themselves. Consistent and fair application of the law is in itself a good and moral thing, and that protects the weak and protects the lawful.”

“The previous administration wouldn’t prosecute aliens if they came with children,” Sessions said.

“It was de-facto open borders if you came with children. The results were unsurprising. More and more illegal aliens started showing up at the border with children.”

Sessions laid out the numbers in the speech.

“In 2013, fewer than 15,000 family units were apprehended crossing our border illegally between ports of entry in dangerous areas of the country,” he said.

“Five years later, it was more than 75,000, a five-fold increase in five years. It didn’t even have to be their child that was brought, it could be anyone. You can imagine that this created a lot of danger.”

The U.S. has the “opportunity” to fix its broken immigration system now, Sessions said.

“I believe that’s it’s moral, right, just and decent that we have a lawful system of immigration,” he said. “The American people have been asking for it.”

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service