User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/28/2015 8:09:47 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They were trying to prohibit. He talked himself into the criminality. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The power to prohibit is not the power to criminalize. They were trying to prohibit. He talked himself into the criminality. LE does not have the authority to promulgate rules or orders under 18 USC s.930(f). The court has that authority. In order to be promulgated, a court rule or order must be published. A person cannot be punished for violating a court order unless he had notice of the order before the violation occurred. The LE in the video never made reference to any court order. They referred only to 18 USC s.930, which does not criminalize the carrying of firearms on the grounds of courthouses. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2015 8:11:51 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This plus you don't have to Miranda someone as soon as you out the cuffs on. Open carry guy is an idiot. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Conspicuously troll a federal building with rifles hoping to get arrested, and you get arrested? Depending on the period of detention, they may have no civil recourse. This plus you don't have to Miranda someone as soon as you out the cuffs on. Open carry guy is an idiot. You don't have to Mirandize at all unless 1. the interviewee is in custody 2. you intend to interrogate him 3. you want his responses to your inquiry to be admissible against him in court. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2015 8:13:26 PM EDT
[#3]
Should have stated, that he did not wish to create joinder, with them.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2015 8:15:32 PM EDT
[#4]
So the government effectively kidnapped him.
They had no grounds to arrest him. They forcibly took him into custody and availed him of none of his civil rights. What the fuck makes them think they can do that? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2015 8:16:51 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Reading some of the comments in here it looks like I have stumbled into the DU. 
What the hell is wrong with you people. I guess, "Shall not be infringed", are just words to some of you.  It baffles the mind. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2015 8:16:51 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. Expanded: Just because it's your constitutional right, doesn't mean you should exercise your constitutionally protected right, we might have to illegally detain and threaten you. Because we can an will. Txl |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2015 8:17:36 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So the government effectively kidnapped him. They had no grounds to arrest him. They forcibly took him into custody and availed him of none of his civil rights. What the fuck makes them think they can do that? FBHO wipes his ass with the constitution daily, why wouldnt they think they can get away with it? Look at the people here defending them... |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2015 8:52:04 PM EDT
[#8]
Just curious What makes you think that was what he was actually detained for? The US Marshal was the one who detained him not the uniformed division guy, just because the uniformed guy threw something out there doesnt mean that was what the marshal went with?
Quote HistoryQuoted:
LE does not have the authority to promulgate rules or orders under 18 USC s.930(f). The court has that authority. In order to be promulgated, a court rule or order must be published. A person cannot be punished for violating a court order unless he had notice of the order before the violation occurred. The LE in the video never made reference to any court order. They referred only to 18 USC s.930, which does not criminalize the carrying of firearms on the grounds of courthouses. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The power to prohibit is not the power to criminalize. They were trying to prohibit. He talked himself into the criminality. LE does not have the authority to promulgate rules or orders under 18 USC s.930(f). The court has that authority. In order to be promulgated, a court rule or order must be published. A person cannot be punished for violating a court order unless he had notice of the order before the violation occurred. The LE in the video never made reference to any court order. They referred only to 18 USC s.930, which does not criminalize the carrying of firearms on the grounds of courthouses. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2015 9:10:18 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Appurtenant could mean a lot of things and is not ascertainable without looking at the land records, or the (usually not publicly accessible) leases. It could include non-adjoining parcels, like an parking lot or annex to a court that GSA has leased. It could include easements for access. It could include lots of things not readily ascertainable by the public. Which is why the terminology in that statutory provision is problematic. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
18 U.S. Code § 930 (f) Nothing in this section limits the power of a court of the United States to punish for contempt or to promulgate rules or orders regulating, restricting, or prohibiting the possession of weapons within any building housing such court or any of its proceedings, or upon any grounds appurtenant to such building. Appurtenant is not synonymous with adjacent. Appurtenant could mean a lot of things and is not ascertainable without looking at the land records, or the (usually not publicly accessible) leases. It could include non-adjoining parcels, like an parking lot or annex to a court that GSA has leased. It could include easements for access. It could include lots of things not readily ascertainable by the public. Which is why the terminology in that statutory provision is problematic. That is a great point. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2015 10:18:11 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So, Black Panthers with billy clubs standing in front of polling places ... they're just exercising their 2nd amendment rights? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
No wonder gun owners are f*cked. Even our own will eat one another. <sarcasm> That guy has no reason to be open carrying! That idiot! Who does he think he is exercising his "right"!?</sarcasm> Don't bring a gun to a federal courthouse and tell officials that you are there in support/opposition to some specific case. I forgot about the Federal exemptions to rights. Sorry. So, Black Panthers with billy clubs standing in front of polling places ... they're just exercising their 2nd amendment rights? The DoJ seems to think so. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2015 10:27:25 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You don't have to Mirandize at all unless 1. the interviewee is in custody 2. you intend to interrogate him 3. you want his responses to your inquiry to be admissible against him in court. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Conspicuously troll a federal building with rifles hoping to get arrested, and you get arrested? Depending on the period of detention, they may have no civil recourse. This plus you don't have to Miranda someone as soon as you out the cuffs on. Open carry guy is an idiot. You don't have to Mirandize at all unless 1. the interviewee is in custody 2. you intend to interrogate him 3. you want his responses to your inquiry to be admissible against him in court. Cops + Custody + Questioning. I've arrested plenty of guys that were guilty enough to not need an interview. They got mirandized during booking or at the initial appearance by the magistrate. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/28/2015 10:47:11 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Question. So lets say he carries a rifle, slung, around the outside of the property. Nothing happens. LE looks at him, maybe waves and then ignores him. What has been accomplished? They "learned their lesson" not to mess with him? The people who drove past and most likely didn't even notice he had a firearm are taught what...? The masses are safer because he was ignored? Lets stipulate to it being legal. Whats the point? Attention? Exercising his rights? Okay. Could have done that at the piggly wiggly...it looks and smells of attention-whoring.... Just askin'... Yup. Dont we have more important shit to worry about? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 10:41:43 AM EDT
[#13]
As you can see, I've been around ARFcom for a long time.
I've never seen such a bunch of panty-waist, kiss-the-man's-ass, diarrhea-inducing, collectivist/statist-supporting, pants wetters in one thread since 2001. I thought I'd never be embarrasssed by being a member of ARFcom; well I guess that's changed. Don't even bother to reply to my post - you might have to wipe the fecal material from your fingers for digging around in .GOV's nether regions. Send your donations to Mom's Demand Action |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 11:01:05 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: As you can see, I've been around ARFcom for a long time. I've never seen such a bunch of panty-waist, kiss-the-man's-ass, diarrhea-inducing, collectivist/statist-supporting, pants wetters in one thread since 2001. I thought I'd never be embarrasssed by being a member of ARFcom; well I guess that's changed. Don't even bother to reply to my post - you might have to wipe the fecal material from your fingers for digging around in .GOV's nether regions. Send your donations to Mom's Demand Action |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 12:27:50 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So the government effectively kidnapped him. They had no grounds to arrest him. They forcibly took him into custody and availed him of none of his civil rights. What the fuck makes them think they can do that? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 12:34:33 PM EDT
[#16]
My question is how does an organization incepted to be a bueaucratic umbrella to coordinate the efforts of established agencies get it's own army?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 12:53:31 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Shall not be infringed is what it should be. But, we have folks who look for attention and act surprised when they get it. ETA: watched. He was in the right, but he could have walked away and made his case at a later time. He chose the hard way. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Reading some of the comments in here it looks like I have stumbled into the DU.
What the hell is wrong with you people. I guess, "Shall not be infringed", are just words to some of you. Shall not be infringed is what it should be. But, we have folks who look for attention and act surprised when they get it. ETA: watched. He was in the right, but he could have walked away and made his case at a later time. He chose the hard way. I'm sure the founding fathers would have just walked away and left it alone
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 3:18:51 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
My question is how does an organization incepted to be a bueaucratic umbrella to coordinate the efforts of established agencies get it's own army? As usual N_B you cut right to the heart of it. How, indeed - Napolitano + Obola = NSDAP |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 7:00:56 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
One wonders how congress would work if mere citizens were allowed to watch them vote while open carrying in the gallery...... Me thinks the voting would get REAL interesting....
Perhaps all congressional reps should ask themselves the question just before voting? "Would my vote change if my constituency was sitting in the gallery armed?" 
So, laws will be decided by whomever brings the most guns to bear? |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/1/2015 7:16:50 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Reading some of the comments in here it looks like I have stumbled into the DU.
What the hell is wrong with you people. I guess, "Shall not be infringed", are just words to some of you. No, but I recognize that limitations (within reason) can be placed on rights. My rights end where your nose begins, and all that. FYI, The Constitution provides for laws to be enacted AND for amending the document (remember prohibition?). Do we believe in age minimums for voting (or should 12-year-olds be allowed)? Minimum drinking age? Minimum age for driving? Pushing in ways that SCARE the general public builds support for the other side to use those Constitutional tools to hurt us. You can't believe in one part of the Constitution without believing in ALL of it. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
