Posted on 07/20/2007 5:11:30 AM PDT by Mad Dawg
I think that's an important comment. I think I mentioned it in a previous post. It's rough on a cop when the local law says one thing and the state law says another.
The Sheriff should take the point (and the grief) on this. The deputies' culpability, however, is increased because of their needlessly rough handling of the victim.
Thanks for the link to the VP article. It is interesting that Pishko says one thing to the papers but, if van Cleave is to be believed (and I think he is) quite another to a private citizen. I hope there is a suit.
Also, please note the inflammatory use of "enraged". Is all righteous anger "rage"? Is resolve "rage"? Isn't characterizing a 2nd Amendment group as "enraged" just playing into a characterization of people who carry as likely to fly off the handle?
Chet contacted me that evening and related the above story. The next morning I was on the phone to Norfolk City Attorney, Bernard Pishko.Now Mr. Pishko to the newspaper:
Mr. Pishko proceeded to tell me that the public streets for the event were considered private property and thus guns could be banned. I told him that the "Festevents" organization that was running the festival was nothing but an arm of the City and could NOT ban guns. I also said that if the private property part were true, why had Chet not been arrested for trespass, but was instead charged under a City ordinance?
Mr. Pishko said I wasn't a lawyer and didn't know what I was talking about. He suggested that he could drop the charges against Chet, but said that perhaps this issue should be settled in court. Mr. Pishko said he was comfortable that the City would win.
City Attorney Bernard Pishko said the city is not attempting to challenge the state law by imposing restrictions on handguns.I don't think Mr. Pishko is being ethical here.
Pishko described the gun ban in the Harborfest ordinance as an oversight, a "housekeeping" issue. "This is one that we missed," he said. An ordinance governing Afr'Am Fest in May contained the same restrictions on weapons. Both ordinances were in effect only for the few days the events ran.
Pishko said his office has since advised police that "the only gun laws in effect for Norfolk are those in effect for Virginia."
I know that they cannot generally be held liable if they fail to protect someone.
But I disagree with your comments about "sole function ..." Plenty of us try to defuse situations and to step in before things get funky. And if we don't mess up doing so we are commended by those up the food chain.
Some of us feel a responsibility to protect as best we can and to keep things peaceful. Just this Friday at our "Let's show Cindy Shehag just how much we love her" counter demonstration when I got into a conversation with a pro-surrender wacko, I noticed that a uniformed officer got closer to us in case things got interesting. I was able to keep the wacko from getting too extreme and he finally walked away leaving his alleged arguments in pieces on the ground. But I appreciated the cop's moving over. It was a potentially volatile situation. I think that's good policing.
You are correct in that many times police presence can defuse a hostile situation. That supposes that the cops present are level headed, experienced and rational. All too often we experience the bad eggs with the Wyatt Earp Syndrome and a derire to push an agenda.
I understand you. I think some people just don’t want to understand your argument.
Of course you meant derriere, right? Lotta derrieres in uniform out there.
An "ass-whippin" implies that they "worked him over"..Which they didn't.
You also implied that this "ass-whippin"...happened right in front of his family. And that didn't happen either....according to the article.
Isn't characterizing a 2nd Amendment group as "enraged" just playing into a characterization of people who carry as likely to fly off the handle?
Yep, we're all a bunch of nutcases - newspapers aren't known for having an unbiased attitude toward the 2nd Amendment.
Pishko described the gun ban in the Harborfest ordinance as an oversight
An "oversight"?????
Sounds more like the city was trying to see what they could get away with. This incident showed them what they could not get away with.
Mad Dawg,
Please inform me by PM. I live in Virginia Beach.
Woah! I'll try.
Do please think about joining VCDL. I got the original post as an email from them, and they're pretty good. You can prolly Google it
It is entirely possible the Deputy waited until his hands were occupied before she approached to better gauge his reaction when approached.
So far I just read his response as A. Failure to grovel B. Failure to be alert.
If he had spotted them before they spotted him he would have been ready with his response.
You simply cannot walk around in Condition White when you engage in this type of activism. There are at least two sets of people interested in you-bad guys and everyone else.
Best regards,
Situational awareness is paramount, even (especially!) with an unloaded weapon.
However, I suspect he envisioned (police) confrontation. While his actions appear to have been appropriate for making a legal point without violence, they are weak in other areas.
The legal defense is that he is transporting the firearm (unloaded), and not 'carrying' it, in order to be compliant with the law.
It is a subtle difference, to be sure, and in the event he was 'transporting' the firearm somewhere he might need it, he had best be at full alert because he would not only have to produce the firearm, but load it as well prior to it being of any use.
Which, as you point out, might make him a target for thieves who are interested in the weapon.
“unless you have at least a level 2 holster”
While I myself have a concealed carry permit here (Arizona), I do not use a holster because I sit in a wheelchair all the time. Just ‘cause I am curious, what exactly is a “level 2” holster?
Short answer: a holster that it's hard to get a gun out of from which -heh heh- unless you know how it works. When I was a depiddy I had a level 3 holster. There are level 4 holsters.
Problem is your definition of a “close proximity” situation is not the same as someone elses. Do you carry at the mall?
Ah, so you know when the good Lord is going to call you from this earthly realm then, huh? Must be nice to know that info. Myself, I don’t know, especially after the self destructive life I lived in my teen years. The fact that I am still around means that no one can know when they are going to be called. It is people like you that feed the antis. You are either for our rights (all of them without limit) or you aren’t, there is no “I am for it in this situation but not that one” or “We really don’t need x firearm(s)”.
No. I actually carry very rarely, as I do not go very many places that I deem are dangerous, and I can’t carry on a daily basis, because of where I work. When I travel on business, I would like to, but my travels takes me overseas, and it’s not possible.
No not at all. I am for our rights as gun owners all the way, but I am also for an individual’s right to make a decision concerning the application of said rights. There certainly is a...’for it in this situation but not that one’. I never said we don’t need x firearms, I said it should, and is up to the individual as to when/where he wants to carry.
Where do you get the idea the gun was unloaded? Open carry, (loaded) is legal in Virginia.
From the article:
In the following seconds Chet had hands all over him. One officer was tugging at Chet's pistol, having much difficulty removing it. Chet was worried about an accidental discharge with his family being literally feet away.
Best regards,
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.