North Texans ride to Waco rally to protest mass jailing of bikers

Dallas Morning News ^ | June 7, 2015

[Smokin' Joe]

One of the reasons I got my CWP was that ND required securing the firearm in a locking compartment in the vehicle after dark. I drove either a van or a motorcycle (no hard bags) at the time, so without one, I couldn't go out to a friend's to shoot and stay for dinner.

Mere possession of a weapon does not imply nefarious intent, regardless of what happens around you.

Granted, the police might want to sort that out, but especially if the weapon was not fired and the person had a permit, I would think that wouldn't take very long.

Despite the allegations that presence at the event meant a person was party to any altercation that took place, this was to be the sort of meeting which involved motorcyclists from a variety of backgrounds, and thus, people who had no dog in the fight.

Charge 'em all and let God sort them out is hardly an outstanding example of American jurisprudence.

[X-spurt]

Best cognitive reply yet! Thanks!

“Mere possession of a weapon does not imply nefarious intent, regardless of what happens around you.” My point was that those additional arrested and held, were they or were they not armed and if so did they hold a Conceal Carry License? I have not heard any answer. But I suspect that if they were in the Twin Peaks, with a motorcycle “club” were armed and did not have the CCL, that might just answer some of the questions on why they are being held on very high bail. Can you agree to that assumption?

“Charge ‘em all and let God sort them out is hardly an outstanding example of American jurisprudence.” One would think there might have been more people at the scene than the number arrested? Why were they not among the Charge em all group?

When nine people are killed at a situation, it is a very serious thing and extraordinary measures are rightfully called for. The LEO say they have lots of evidence that these gangs had made credible threats toward the cops prior to this shootout. It sounds like to me the gangs somehow thought they could intimidate the cops like they do everyday citizens and should get away with murder.

I have lots of good honest hardworking friends that ride, I think they foolishly dressup in pretend gang garb, but none of them are part of the Bandidos or any other “club” and all routinely go out of their way to help others, but they also know that if and when they are riding and happen to run across some of these gang members they are likely to be attacked or intimidated for no good reason. With that in mind, where is the reasoned rationale why good people think its appropriate to defend such outlaw gangs? Are we seeing some variation of the Stockholm Syndrome here?

The Constitutional argument is also hollow. As organized habitual criminals and by their own actions, forfeit their Constitutional protections.