found guilty tonight for 13a-11-52 - Page 3
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 38

Thread: found guilty tonight for 13a-11-52

  1. I could of course be completely wrong. The Judge, could just be an anti-firearms crusader hell bent on a very narrow interpretation of a very badly worded piece of antiquated legislation. This case illustrates why "fiat" crimes of posession should all be unconstitutional.

    Such crimes really stretch the definition of "guilty mind" (mens rea). In this case this gentleman was acting in accordance with what he believed to be the law. Admittedly the interpretation that open carry is legal is quite convoluted and is contained in the annals of case law and Attorney General opinions. Just laws should be clear to allow the governed to live as freely as possible. If the law has become so complex that it is impossible for a free man to know what is forbidden under the law he is no longer free but rather living under an arbitrary system of government and the most incidious tyranny imaginable.
    "Get this through your head! We're not fighting to have everybody think the way we do, we're fighting so that people can think whatever they want! Even if they don't agree with us!"--Stalker, GI JOE #39

  2.   
  3. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Oldgrunt View Post
    G: There you go again, ...(e)verything you write is critical of (CCW badges). I will have to say one thing for you, the most intelligent statement you have written is how you came up with the name "G50AE." I liked.
    Noted and thread tagged. Even though I don't see where I mentioned CCW badges yet on this thread.

  4. #23
    So the Judge convicted the man of something the ALSC has already ruled legal. Gee, thanks, Your Honor! Now the defendant has more court costs, time and soul to give to the system.
    "Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18
    Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
    Paramedics With Guns Scare People!

  5. Maybe he will actually compose more than one sentence and provide details.

  6. Quote Originally Posted by paramedic70002 View Post
    So the Judge convicted the man of something the ALSC has already ruled legal. Gee, thanks, Your Honor! Now the defendant has more court costs, time and soul to give to the system.
    Yes. But before you become indignant, I would invite you to take a look at Welcome To Alabama Open Carry!. The law SBE was convicted of violating in a plain reading appears to fobid carrying a pistol on land not your own. There is no mention of license to carry concealed within that section of the article. There is an "except as otherwise provided in this article". Antother section of Title 13A Chapter 11 Article 3 which requires that an indictment show that the accused carried the pistol concealed. Still later there is a section which covers "may issue" permits to carry concealed.

    Taken as a whole the law has been interpreted to permit unrestricted open carry while on foot. (vehicle carry is considered concealed) The problem is that on the face of it and by plain reading -52 states that carrying a pistol on property not your own or under your control is illegal. It can be argued that since concealed carry is licensed and legal that licensed and concealed carry are the only exceptions covered under the execption claus in -52. This of course ignores the concealed requirement in -55 but 55 only says that it is "sufficient" to charge that the weapon was concealed. It does not say "necessary and sufficient" therefore a plain reading of the law might still conclude that open carry remains forbidden under -52.

    Historically -52 has not been interpreted that way. AG opinion and case law supports OC. But you can see by my rather lengthy and convoluted explaination that the issue may not be as cut and dry as the OC folks would have you believe. This is part of the perils of relying on Case law and convoluted AG opinions. Precedent can be changed at the sound of a gavel. This is particularly true when judges of the past choose to interpret the law in a radically different fashion than how the law was plainly written by the legislature. The best answer to this is to either have a judge strike down the law and force the legislature to clarify their intentions or to have the legislature repeal the act themselves and pass a law which requires less "sophisticated" interpretation.

    Keep in mind that the legislature may ultamately decide to ban open carry entirely, decide to establish shall issue concealed permits or elect unrestricted (constitutional) carry. Then it would be up to the courts to decide again what restrictions pass constitutional muster.
    "Get this through your head! We're not fighting to have everybody think the way we do, we're fighting so that people can think whatever they want! Even if they don't agree with us!"--Stalker, GI JOE #39

  7. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Doc Mustang View Post
    Keep in mind that the legislature may ultamately decide to ban open carry entirely, decide to establish shall issue concealed permits or elect unrestricted (constitutional) carry. Then it would be up to the courts to decide again what restrictions pass constitutional muster.
    I think Alabama should pass Constitutional carry and clean up its gun laws, this case serves to prove my point quite well.

  8. Quote Originally Posted by G50AE View Post
    I think Alabama should pass Constitutional carry and clean up its gun laws, this case serves to prove my point quite well.
    At the risk of feeding the troll, I agree with you in sentiment if not in substance. The transition from a "may issue" state to unrestricted carry by those lawfully entitled to posess firearms is a very large change. Just as what could be percieved as (or are) infringements upon constitutional rights were not passed in one go the transition back is also going to be slow.

    The problem with most "constitutional carry" legislation is that it is based upon the premise that the regulation of the carry of firearms is something the legislature is entitled to regulate in the first place.

    True constitutional carry would involve abolishing the laws that make different forms of the carrying of arms illegal. This would include the posession of firearms by former felons. For if the legislature has the ability to restrict the ownership of firearms to one class of persons, the remaining question is from which other classes may they also restrict them.
    "Get this through your head! We're not fighting to have everybody think the way we do, we're fighting so that people can think whatever they want! Even if they don't agree with us!"--Stalker, GI JOE #39

  9. #28

    Thumbs up Constitutional Carry

    Then Jesus asked them, "When I sent you without a major credit card, fanny pack, or tactical boots from 5.11 tactical.com, did you lack anything?"

    "Nothing," they answered.

    And Jesus said, "But now if you have a major credit card, take it, and also a CCW Badge, and if you don't have a CCW Badge, sell your leather jacket and use your major credit card to purchace a CCW Badge from ccw badges.com."

    And then one of his followers from the state of Alabama asked, "My Lord, if Alabama passes constitutional carry, we won't need no stinkin badges."

  10. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Shortbuseinstein View Post
    Apparently you are not allowed off premisses not your own in Alabama with a firearm.
    How about some more information on what happened ?. Athread like this is almost useless with out some details to go along with it, and im sure other will agree.

  11. Quote Originally Posted by Ghost Rider View Post
    How about some more information on what happened ?. Athread like this is almost useless with out some details to go along with it, and im sure other will agree.
    You should try reading the entire thread. There are links to the story. The OP also has another thread on this board. Try searching his past threads for more information.
    "Get this through your head! We're not fighting to have everybody think the way we do, we're fighting so that people can think whatever they want! Even if they don't agree with us!"--Stalker, GI JOE #39

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast