Posted on 10/07/2015 12:01:06 PM PDT by don-o
Brownsville, TX – U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen found former Cossacks Motorcycle Club Sergeant at Arms KC Massey of the III% Militia guilty yesterday, September 30, of being a felon in possession of a firearm.
It is a highly politicized and closely watched development in border disputes between the Obama Administration and certain states in deep conflict with current federal enforcement methods regarding illegal immigration.
For several months, he and other volunteer militiamen patrolled a brushy area of the Rio Grande in the Southmost neighborhood of this city located outside the border fence near the airport. It is a stretch of river ox-bows heavily trafficked by drug, money laundering and human trafficking smugglers.
Operating out of a headquarters at a tiny 21-acre riverside farm owned by Rusty Monsees, Massey and his band of at most a half dozen armed men tagged “Rusty’s Rangers” were on patrol at the Sabal Palms Sanctuary, a historic plantation operated by the Audobon Society as a bird preserve, when Border Patrol Agents at first gave their permission to escort them in their efforts to stop a mass crossing of illegal immigrants.
When John Foerster, a much younger man with long, flowing shoulder-length hair whose street name is “Jesus,” stepped out of the brush bearing an AK-47 clone rifle, he startled an agent who shot five rounds in his direction. Sheriff’s Officers were summoned, and when they said they could find no violation of the law because the men were on private property at the invitation of the caretaker, FBI and ATF agents conducted an investigation and learned that Massey had served time for burglary 28 years previously. Foerster has a record of burglary conviction much more recent. He elected to enter a plea of guilty.
Though Massey is not guilty of any offense against Texas law, the government decided to prosecute him as a felon under a statute of the U.S. Code that could net a 10-year prison sentence.
The argument of the Assistant U.S. Attorney is that the weapons he furnished to his men had been transported from outside state boundaries in international and interstate commerce, and thus a key element of the crime for which he was indicted involves the element of importing firearms to a state.
Massey and his attorney Louis Sirola decided to test that area of the law, and elected to stand a bench trial before Judge Hanen, a Baylor Law valedictorian and hard line conservative appointed by President George W. Bush.
He is the only judge out of all who are hearing suits brought by 28 states to enter an order staying the Obama Administration’s Executive Order that will allow emigration by aliens without legal status as political refugees and distressed children. Those cases are pending a government appeal of a ruling in the United States Fifth Circuit of Appeals at New Orleans that upheld Hanen’s order.
Observers who attended the trial said that Judge Hanen appeared somewhat apologetic when Massey confronted him about “You guys ___ing me up.” He explained that under the doctrine of stare decisis, which dictates that previous decisions in cases of the same circumstance hold precedent, he must follow the letter of the law in his finding of guilt, but that an appeals court would be authorized to take up his argument that the law as applied represents a misinterpretation by federal agents and prosecutors.
“Although he is not a soldier in the sense of the word that is typically used today, the law remains as stated above. “
Better recheck your source!
It is 17 to 45, NOT 27-64. Massey was over the age of 45.
“All my buddies have the common decency to come at folks
head on.”
BS. Many times I’ve caught them talking about me behind my back, and some have flat out told me they refuse to courtesy ping. So I see no reason to observe the usual courtesies either, since they haven’t been extended to me or other posters that don’t agree with the conspiracy theories.
“Calling a FReeper a gangster supporter is right up there (actually down there) with calling one a Russian troll.”
Well, they probably shouldn’t be defending criminal gangsters if they take such offense at the characterization. I call em as I sees em.
“Calling a FReeper a gangster supporter is right up there (actually down there) with calling one a Russian troll.”
What about calling a FReeper a Nazi sympathizer?
What about referring to a FReeper saying he supports loading people into box cars?
But I guess being called a domestic terrorist is ok?
See below for post to JR so it must be ok. Responsible party pinged.
His bent has been and will always be toward Socialism and Communism ala “right wing” brand of “conserving order” via brute government force. That is probably how he rationalizes claiming the title “conservative.”
People with mindsets like Boogieman are potent domestic enemies.
When terms like "subhumans" start getting thrown down, it is fair game to note who has historically used that term.
Yep, the rules apply only to those you disagree with.
I’m not going to tell you where you can stick your outrage, but I think you can use your imagination...
Projecting is a pitiful thing. There is no outrage. I feel mostly sad and somewhat bored with that stupid “gangster supporter” spew. Such used to not be tolerated around here.
But, enough of that. You may have the last word.
” I feel mostly sad and somewhat bored with that stupid “gangster supporter” spew. Such used to not be tolerated around here.”
1. Do you think the Bandidos are a gang or not a gang?
“I feel mostly sad and somewhat bored with that stupid “gangster supporter” spew.”
Well, if people weren’t defending criminal gangs, I wouldn’t have any need to say it. As long as they are, well, they should probably get used to some people taking notice and mentioning it.
What troubles me more are the blatantly false allegations with no tether to reality that are thrown about on these threads, all under your watchful eye, without a hint of disapproval from you. So long as the posters throwing the bombs are your buddies, you never say a word. That’s what I find sad.
I think that Webster's had the definition that applies.
---------------------------------------------------
adjective sub·hu·man \ˌsəb-ˈhyü-mən, -ˈyü-\
: not having or showing the level of kindness, intelligence, etc., that is expected of normal human beings
Full Definition of SUBHUMAN
: less than human: as
a : failing to attain the level (as of morality or intelligence) associated with normal human beings
I never used that term to refer to FReepers.
“the bombs”
Some have been real nasty. The type of language that shouldn’t appear on FR, regardless of who is throwing it.
But it all passes ‘unnoticed’ by Don, the unofficial mod for these threads.
That is incorrect. You can manufacture your own as long as it is not for resale.
From the ATF FAQ:
May I lawfully make a firearm for my own personal use, provided it is not being made for resale?
Firearms may be lawfully made by persons who do not hold a manufacturer’s license under the GCA provided they are not for sale or distribution and the maker is not prohibited from receiving or possessing firearms. However, a person is prohibited from assembling a non-sporting semiautomatic rifle or shotgun from 10 or more imported parts, as set forth in regulations in 27 C.F.R. 478.39.
In addition, the making of an NFA firearm requires a tax payment and advance approval by ATF. An application to make a machinegun will not be approved unless documentation is submitted showing that the firearm is being made for the official use of a Federal, State, or local government agency (18 U.S.C. § 922(o),(r); 26 U.S.C. § 5822; 27 C.F.R. §§ 478.39, 479.62, and 479.105).
http://www.criminaldefenselawyer.com/resources/can-i-sell-or-give-my-homemade-gun-another-person.htm
The Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA) permits an unlicensed individual to make a firearm for personal use, but not for sale or distribution. However, the law does not explicitly preclude an unlicensed person from later selling, giving away, or otherwise transferring a homemade firearm to another person as long as it was originally intended for personal use. A gun explicitly made for personal use can be sold or transferred in the same way that a factory-made firearm of that same class can be sold or transferred.
The Gun Maker’s Original Intent
The key in determining whether a homemade gun can be legally sold or transferred rests with knowing the intent of the maker when the gun was first created. Relevant factors in determining the transferor’s intent may include: the length of time between the creation of the firearm and its transfer; the specific reason for the sale or transfer; and whether the maker of the firearm frequently sells or transfers homemade firearms. For example, a time lapse between creation and sale of many years, a reason for sale that has no sinister overtones, and a transfer that is one-in-a-lifetime for the transferor, would indicate an original intent to keep the gun. By contrast, quickly transferring a gun right after its creation, to someone who could not legally possess a firearm, by someone who regularly transfers such guns, would indicate a lack of intent to keep the gun.
“...It is a highly politicized and closely watched development in border disputes between the Obama Administration and certain states in deep conflict with current federal enforcement methods regarding illegal immigration.
For several months, he and other volunteer militiamen patrolled a brushy area of the Rio Grande in the Southmost neighborhood of this city located outside the border fence near the airport. It is a stretch of river ox-bows heavily trafficked by drug, money laundering and human trafficking smugglers.
Operating out of a headquarters at a tiny 21-acre riverside farm owned by Rusty Monsees, Massey and his band of at most a half dozen armed men tagged “Rusty’s Rangers” were on patrol at the Sabal Palms Sanctuary, a historic plantation operated by the Audobon Society as a bird preserve, when Border Patrol Agents at first gave their permission to escort them in their efforts to stop a mass crossing of illegal immigrants....”
**************************************************************************
IATG
I guess the Defenders of Statists who Shoot Down American Citizens have arrived here to badmouth someone who is participating in doing something (i.e., Defend the American Border) that the Obama regime statists refuse to do.
This is the sort of thing that leads people to not taking your side seriously. For the most part, you brook no discussion and consider no point of view except that it was an unprovoked police ambush on a bunch of lovable old grampies. Was there polcie misconduct? Possibly, but considering the histories of the groups (and individuals) that were at Twin Peaks, it just doesn't hold water to insist that the firefight was totally the fault of the police.
“...it just doesn’t hold water to insist that the firefight was totally the fault of the police.”
*********************************************************************************
Well, many of us have been waiting for the “responsible” authorities to begin releasing the mountain of videos, ballistic reports and other information that will REVEAL THE TRUTH. They have not done that...have they? And they have obtained gag orders preventing the release of any information (after they put out their ever-changing versions). I wonder why that is the case?
And, by the way, I don’t care whether you or any other DEFENDER of the Statists takes “my side” seriously. And you apparently have no clue what “my side” is, do you. The desire of “my side” is for the truth to come out. And the Obama regime operatives and their puppets in Waco are doing everything they possibly can to prevent that. And folks not on “my side” (would that be YOUR side?) blindly accept the STATE’s propaganda.
You release that processing the amount of evidence involved, between all the various involved entities take quite a large amount of time? And will you be satisfied in any event? The autopsies didn't satisfy you people, the release of the vast majority of those arrested (and aren't they no longer being monitored, for the most part?) didn't satisfy you, the surveillance video that is available has done nothing to cool your jets either...Because you already *know* what happened. If you turn out to be correct, great. If the evidence proves otherwise, it will be a conspiracy, right?
"And, by the way, I don’t care whether you or any other DEFENDER of the Statists takes “my side” seriously. And you apparently have no clue what “my side” is, do you. The desire of “my side” is for the truth to come out. And the Obama regime operatives and their puppets in Waco are doing everything they possibly can to prevent that. And folks not on “my side” (would that be YOUR side?) blindly accept the STATE’s propaganda."
Again, I'm a statist because I don't immediately assume that what occurred was a police ambush on innocent people? Maybe, but an examination of the circumstances and the parties involved would logically suggest otherwise (and that doesn't rule out police misconduct). And Bull****, you don't desire the truth. You actually want the firefight to have been an ambush because you want (or need) an excuse to continue to be outraged. Regardless of what eventually turns out to have happened, you'll never accept that is wasn't what you deemed it to be, the day it happened.
“You release that processing the amount of evidence involved, between all the various involved entities take quite a large amount of time?...
...If you turn out to be correct, great. If the evidence proves otherwise, it will be a conspiracy, right?...
...And Bull****, you don’t desire the truth....”
**********************************************************************************
Yes, it likely takes “quite a large amount of time” to release evidence (videos, ballistics reports, etc.) you say as the days turn into weeks and the weeks turn into months. And, as these months roll on and on, let’s slap a gag order on releasing ANY of it to the public.
So when, exactly, do YOU think your “righteous” Waco authorities should release videos and ballistics reports and lift the gag orders? Do you think we peasants should NOT have that material available for review because we would misinterpret it as we lack the thinking & analytical abilities of the government overlords?
There’s a smell of corruption coming from Waco and some of us can detect it and others either can’t or won’t. And there are some who think the smell coming from Waco is sweet. I put you in the last category based upon your posting. By the way, give us a link to a single video that THE WACO AUTHORITIES have released!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.