Posted on 11/06/2010 6:39:10 AM PDT by marktwain
"Licensed gun-holder loses guns & permits after he and cops lock horns -- twice," Stephanie Farr of the Philadelphia Daily News reports.
What in the world is going on here?
On two afternoons in a row last week, [John] Solomon, 24, was arrested after hanging out at a North Philadelphia bus stop, and each time, the cops confiscated from him a legally owned gun and a separate license to carry a gun, the licensed security guard said yesterday.
Solomon maintains he was waiting for a bus and let some pass him by "because it was about 3 p.m. and he didn't feel like riding a bus full of kids leaving school."
The cops say "Solomon was being insolent and used poor judgment."
"If he's that defiant, should this guy have a gun?" said Sgt. Ray Evers, a police spokesman. "The most uncommon human trait is common sense. He's not using good, adult judgment."
Let's follow Ray's logic: People he deems to have poor judgment should not have guns. Common sense is uncommon. Therefore, most people should not have guns.
Besides, the bus stop is at a "known drug corner." That Solomon was not observed making transactions and that he had no drugs in his possession seem not to be factors here.
So why didn't Solomon just, you know, obey the cops?
"I was mad. I told them you can't lock me up for waiting for a bus," he said. "I'm allowed to miss a bus or two...A bunch of other people was loitering, but they [police] didn't say nothing to them..."
And the position of Philadelphia's finest?
"If the cops tell you to move four times and you don't move, what do you expect?"
What I expect is the police have probable cause
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
I’ve always been a staunch supporter of LEO.
But I can’t shake the instinctual feeling that something’s in the air. And I don’t like it.
A permit to carry a firearm is really a privilege, not a right. This is what happens when society gives gov’t the power to issue permits to us to excercise our rights.
We need a picture of Much the Miller’s son being cuffed by one of Sir Guy of Gisbourne’s chainmailed guards for poaching the King’s deer, and backtalking (from the movie Robin Hood).
Do you have a permit to express that sentiment, peasant?
As the pen is mightier than the sword, I would like to see your permit to use the internet.
Something in the air? Possibly police-statism trickling down from the WH to the precinct level?
My once staunch support is eroding daily.
Yes, that.
But, even outside of the Oath Keepers, I always felt that LEO would fight the state to protect the people.
I’m getting the feeling that more and more of the foot patrol are on-board with Statist authority “for our own good” because they know or have been told that the $hit is about to hit the fan and will result in social breakdown.
But, as I said, it’s just a gut feeling.
I hope so. This group of JBT's is getting too big for its britches.
The second amendment of the constitution is a right - the "permit" process is a violation of the second amendment. The purpose of the second amendment is to protect people from tyranny. The permitting process circumvents this purpose by putting the group (government) that is most likely to exercise tyranny in charge of who gets to carry a sidearm.
it’s Philadelphia. what else could you expect?
You are absolutely correct. Thank goodness for AK, AZ, Vt.
I agree. We don't need no stinking permits. It's a right to "keep and bear". Not a "right to keep" and "privilege to bear."
We should not surrender our rights to the state just so they can spoon feed them back to us (if we behave).
I agree, Ghost ... there is indeed something in the air. And lately the police are part of the problem, not part of the solution.
Part of it, I believe, is the seeming attitude among police that there three kinds of people — police (the good guys), civilians and scumbags. The police are at war with the scumbags, with civilians caught in the crossfire. (Notice how the police no longer dress in white or light blue shirts and now all wear black? And please don’t get me started on those useless SWAT teams.)
Sadly, too many police today believe any civilian younger than 80 or older than 5 is probably just a “scumbag-in-waiting” who hasn’t been caught yet. The crime of “being angry in public” is unacceptable and must be punished with an arrest for “disorderly” conduct. (Freedom of spech? Oh, please!)
I keep thinking back to an episode of “Mayberry RFD” where Sheriff Andy responded (with other cops) to what would today be called a hostage standoff with an armed assailant. As Sheriff Andy walked up to the house, the angry homeowner took a shot at him but missed. Instead of calling down a fiery death on the guy, Andy just said, “Aw, he’s a better shot than that. If he was trying to shoot me, he’d a hit me.” And the incident was calmly defused.
I’m saddened to say that people probably SHOULD be afraid of police today. Unless you know the cop by his first name (i.e. know him pretty well) then you may be in for a rough ride for anything from speeding to having a gun in the car.
The part I’m still trying to sort out is the difference between “government storm troopers” and some cop wearing a helmet and body armor and carrying a submachine gun while he bashes down somebody’s door with a “no-knock” search warrant in hand. Whatever became of good old Officer O’Mally, the friendly beat cop who came down the sidewalk every afternoon around 4 o’clock?
“SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED”.
LLS
I guess it is worth it to maintain all those drug warrior's big gov’t salaries & pensions. I feel safer & freer, don't you?
If you were familiar with Philly police it would be by the minute.
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.