Soldier's trial draws attention of gun rights advocates
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Soldier's trial draws attention of gun rights advocates

  1. #1

    Soldier's trial draws attention of gun rights advocates

    I didn't a see link to this story in the forums, and I thought this might interest some of you:
    .
    .
    Soldier's trial draws attention of gun rights advocates | Fox News

  2.   
  3. #2
    ezkl2230 Guest
    Getting sick of this mindset that says, you may have the legal right to carry your firearm in public, we we have to know your intentions first and will violate your Fourth Amendment rights to make that happen.

    PROBABLE CAUSE (NOT reasonable suspicion) + Sworn, detailed statement + Judge-issued search warrant = Legal search and seizure.

    Anything less is tyranny.

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,419
    Here's a more exhaustive analysis of the case, including the original video of the incident, but it's from April before the trial started. I found it while searching for streaming video coverage of the trial to no avail. Sure would like to see those Nazi cops get nailed for lying on the stand, because there was no legal justification for the way that went down.

    What has to be understood about this case (and many, many more that are similar to it) is that Sgt. Grisham was not detained for actions that he did, but for the illegal actions of the first fat cop. The cop was in the process of disarming Sgt. Grisham when the video starts, which according to Grisham, was immediately upon getting out of his patrol unit and making contact with him, before he had asked a single question, such as his name, was the rifle loaded, or even asking his permission politely to take possession of it for the duration of the stop. Only because of the fat porker's actions did Grisham's verbal resistance to him constitute "obstructing" the "investigation." This shows that no illegal action on your part is necessary for you to end up facing charges and a possible criminal record, just exactly like Sgt. Grisham is facing right now. And even if Grisham is acquitted, thousands of dollars will have been expended for his defense and nothing will happen to the JBTs who illegally put him through it.

    This is the kind of story that I really need to stay away from, at least on this particular forum. It was discussed back in May, and I had to handcuff myself to keep from getting banned in response to some of the idiocy expressed in that thread. "Expect to be harassed" when you carry an AR-15....legally!! And that wasn't even the worst of it. Regular posters whom I respect said similar things. Maybe it will happen here in this thread now that I have deigned to call the cops Nazis and JBTs. Oh well. If the truth hurts, then make the truth of the cops' actions compliant with our rights and don't support their JBT ways.

    Gotta git.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Santa Fe Area, New Mexico
    Posts
    3,487
    Without out valid PC, there is no legal right to detain for interview. Anything past that, ie...Office Safety is wrong and should be deemed illegal. Just as any evidence that's obtained without a warrant and ALL evidence afterward is non admissible in court. I'd find me a GOOD bastard lawyer and sue for false imprisonment and Fourth Amendment violation.
    "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." --author and philosopher Ayn Rand (1905-1982)

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    3,832
    Quote Originally Posted by JDM View Post
    I didn't a see link to this story in the forums, and I thought this might interest some of you:
    .
    .
    Soldier's trial draws attention of gun rights advocates | Fox News
    When this came out in April, The_Outlaw posted this: http://www.usacarry.com/forums/gener...peaks-out.html

    Thanks for updating us now that the trial is commencing.
    "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote."
    ~ Benjamin Franklin (maybe)

  7. #6
    Along with the various pro-gun activities, there needs to be a active effort to prevent the ongoing use of unconstitutional, and just plain wrong, use of the catch-all phrases such as resisting ****, failure to comply with ****, failure to not piss of the officer involved even though he can easily be shown to be wrong, etc. The existent rules in many jurisdictions really impinge on our rights.

    Lots of laws an ordinances have made these types of charges cover "the LEO is annoyed, unprepared to be out without mom, ignorant of the law, is not exercising common sense (not in the terms continually used by the national anti-gun groups/governmental agencies factoids) or all of the above". e.g., beats the ****** out of me.

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