Posted on 05/04/2006 8:53:59 AM PDT by StevenB
Illegal Immigration Counter Protesters Detained
The topic of discussion on the Bryan Suits radio show on 570 KVI earlier this evening was a call by a Seattle area citizen, Eric, who called to say that while thousands of illegal immigrants marched a couple of feet away, 5 United States citizens, he being one of the 5, who should be covered by all of the constitutional amendments, including the 1st and 2nd, were detained by the Seattle Police Department for over 2 hours because... well hard to say really. The reason for Caller Eric's call into the show was, surprise, surprise, the medias total lack of coverage of what should be a fairly big story. U.S. Citizens constitutional rights infringed in order to protect illegal aliens non existent right to hold a protest march.
Now I am a regular listener of the Bryan Suits show, as you should be, especially if you, like me, are in the male 35-64 year old demographic, and as Bryan can testify, I am also a regular emailer, but did not catch every single minute of the show since the 5pm to 8pm time slot is right in that end of the work day - drive home - eat dinner time window so I may have missed out on some of the conversation but here is a recap as best as I can recall. Full disclosure on my part requires that I state my Father is a 25 year retired Seattle Police Officer and I may or may not own a gun, try breaking into my house and you may or may not get an answer right then and there.
It all started with a 911 call from someone the police say was not part of the march claiming that there was a group of people with signs opposed to the marchers who were armed. The caller said he saw a gun holster sticking out from a partly open jacket. The police responded to the call and found the counter protesters and asked if any of them had weapons and sure enough, 3 of the 5 had guns and one had a switchblade or some sort of knife. Caller Eric said he was the one counter protester that did not have a weapon. At that point they were cuffed and taken to the West precinct where they spent the next 2 plus hours being detained until the march was over. The problem is they had not violated the law as the 3 with guns had valid concealed carry permits and as best as I can tell while switchblades appear to be illegal, there was no mention of the person carrying the knife being arrested or charged with a crime.
A Seattle Police officer, who called himself Steve, called into the show to give his version of the events. While for the most part, the stories matched, Office Steve's main point was they felt they were doing the appropriate thing in order to potentially avoid a violent situation and needed to take the people to the station in order to do a proper investigation. As Bryan Suits said, it was kind of a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation for the police but he, along with myself, kept asking under what authority were these people detained and why did it take over 2 hours to finish the investigation and let them leave? Bryan's conclusion, as was mine was it seems fairly obvious that the message from the police hierarchy was to hold these people until the march was over. One thing that bothered me about the conversation with Officer Steve was how Suits had to explain to him it is legal to openly carry a firearm. In the State of Washington you must have a concealed carry permit to have a concealed weapon but not to openly carry. Officer Steve made a comment that implied he thought since the holster was partly visible, that was in some way a violation of the law since the weapon was no longer concealed, which is not the case.
Later a female caller gave Bryan a ring and said she was one of the counter protesters who was packing heat. The first question from Bryan was in effect, what were you thinking bringing a gun into a situation like that even though you are totally within your rights to do so? Her response was she always has her gun with her, expect in bars and other "gun free zones" or as I like to call them, "potential sitting duck shooting galleries". She mentioned that the gun was in her purse and they told the officers when they first asked about the weapons that they had valid permits for them. She said once at the station they were told they would be released once the march was over which contradicted what Office Steve said about it just taking that long to finish the investigation and there was no intent to simply hold them until the march was over.
Now last I checked, United States Citizens have a 1st amendment right to free speech and even in Seattle we have a 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms and it sure seems to me like those and potentially others were violated. I do know one thing, if I were one of the Seattle 5, I would "lawyer up" and have filed a lawsuit against the City yesterday, because as I emailed Bryan, until the city gets hit with a lawsuit and pays a big judgment, expect this kind of thing to keep on happening. My one question of any city official is when did POTENTIALLY preventing a violent situation supersede our constitutional rights?
Thursday on the Bryan Suits show, where you can listen to live over the internet by going here, the hope is someone from the City will be on to discuss this topic in further detail. Also, its Led Zeppelin Thursday, so get your request in early.
If anyone has any additional information, clarification or corrections, please post them in the comments and I will update accordingly.
They need Sheriff Joe there with his 3200 member posse.
So, American citizens can violate the law, just not non-American citizens, in your opinion?
Careful with any "frivolous" use of a postage paid reply envelope. You can get yourself in trouble.
Abysmal lack of judgement in my opinion. Like using a blowtorch for lighting in a gasoline storage shed.
Yes, that for me would be grounds to revoke the carry license.
It obviously wasn't fast enough for you. You're the one who already accused them of breaking the law. If they'd broken the law, they would have a citation against them when they were released from custody. It sounds like no citations were given. You're quick to jump on and attack law-abiding Americans and equally quick to jump to the defense of the millions of criminal invaders marching in our streets in events organized by various marxist organizations. By such behavior, you've made plain which side you're on. That being so, what are you doing on this conservative forum?
I'd prefer to see aggressive counter-protestors, CCW armed, protecting themselves when assaulted by illegals.
Think about it. A handful of Americans stand holding signs denouncing the tens of thousands of criminal invaders marching past them. Given that there have been violent attacks before (see Westwood, CA - July 4, 1996 and 2000) they would have been using poor judgement not to be armed for their own protection. It was poor judgement for them to counter protest such a large angry mob in the first place. But, then again, it was poor judgement for our founding fathers to stand up to the British like they did. That doesn't make it any less RIGHT for them to stand up and exercise their rights. These people had just as much right to hold up unpopular signs as they did to carry unpopular firearms. 1st amendment and 2nd amendment rights enjoy equal protection - or they should.
apparently the police do
I definitely would take mine!
no doubt
So, 1st Amendment rights are more important or deserve better protection than 2nd Amendment rights? Funny, I don't see that distinction in the U.S. Constitution. Are you sure you're not a liberal?
How do you know which marchers were "legal" and which were "illegal"? Or do you just assume all were illegal?
Howdy. I'm new to these parts. By way of introduction, let me say that I was an immigration officer (Border Patrol and Special Agent) for over 30 years.
So I can say with a high degree of certainty (and also with a high degree of regret) that illegal aliens have every constitutional right that you and I do except to vote and hold some public offices and jobs. That includes the right to peaceably assemble to petition the government for redress of grievances. The Constitution confers rights on "people" in the U.S. not just citizens of the U.S.
This particular case stinks, though: As far as I know, the Constitution does not sanction preventive detentions. I agree with the idea of pursuing a suit for false arrest.
APilgrim
Either the marchers were criminal invaders or they were those who are aiding and abetting the criminal invaders. The marches, organized by various marxist groups, called for the crimes of the criminal invaders to be excused and for them to be rewarded with citizenship. Criminals and their accomplices - that's who we saw marching.
We had a march where I live and there were some non-Hispanics marching as well. I guess they should have been arrested. Freedom is a wonderful thing but only for some.
Yes - I'm sure - there's no 1st or 2nd Amendment right to incite a riot either. Big shock, isn't it?
Were they carrying guns?
Police can arrest someone to protect them from harm too.
Because if a million illegals across the country decided to turn into a full blown riot, our tough-guy LEOs wouldn't know what to do.
France, Nous sommes devenu vous!
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.