Illegal Immigration Counter Protesters Detained

OrbusMax ^ | 5/4/06 | SteveB

[Sir Gawain]

Because even the 2nd Amendment has limits - you cannot bear tactical nuclear weapons as a "firearm" for instance.

You're moving the goalpost. We're not talking about nukes at the demonstration, and getting into an argument about the original intended meaning of the word "arms" is a different subject altogether not really related to this thread.

[clawrence3]

That was just one "for instance" - neither the First nor the Second Amendments permit someone to incite a riot - brandishing a weapon like these idiots did could have led to a riot.

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

No training. But it has been consistent though. I knew the law before and won a bet once on this topic.

[clawrence3]

I do not know whether a) there were Brown Berets of Aztlan at this particular protest, or b) whether they would be armed if there were. Next question?

[Supernatural]

I told people the other day on a thread about the protest of illegals outside of Bush's ranch in Texas that citizens protesting would be harassed and maybe arrested.

I was mocked and laughed at. I was told "What country are you from? That doesn't happen here in the U.S".

Guess what?

[Tammy8]

Thank you for answering my questions.

I strongly disagree with you that citizens of another country should be allowed to compete with legal citizens for jobs. I think any workers brought in from other countries should only be allowed to work at jobs that there are not enough Americans to fill.

I also strongly disagree that citizens of another country should be allowed access to health care, I do not buy the argument that if they are indigent they should. I think illegals should only receive care if it is a real emergency, and as soon as their condition is stable they should be transferred to a hospital in their own country. I would not deny care to someone that had a real emergency in any circumstance, but many illegals go to the emergency room for minor issues. This is one of the reasons our health care costs are out of sight in this country.

[TheErnFormerlyKnownAsBig]

Someone reported that one of these people had a firearm. I agree that it was reasonable for the Police to investigate the situation. However, since there appears to have been no evidence that the weapons were brandished or that any threats were made, the police had no authority to detain them.

I beg to differ. The legal authority for a detention is Terry v Ohio and states that an officer only have a reasonable suspicion that a crime has been, is about to be, or is being committed.

That threshold is easily met.

My pointing out the law was so people would realize the vagueness of this law. It also leaves wiggle room for an officer to do an investigation.

Most importantly, outside of this case, is that an overzealous prosecutor, with a political or ideological motive, could use this vagueness in the law to prosecute someone for headlines.

[Rick Deckard]

"...brandishing a weapon like these idiots did could have led to a riot."

Brandishing a weapon? From what I gather, someone saw part of a holster. I've seen people wearing cell phone holsters that could be mistaken for a handgun holster if only part of it was exposed.

[Sir Gawain]

brandishing a weapon like these idiots did could have led to a riot.

In a situation like the mass pro illegals march, simply counter-protesting could have incited a riot. Cartoons of Mohammed have incited riots. Should we throw the cartoonists in jail? To be consistent, you would have to say yes.

[SauronOfMordor]

Once again, STUPID COPS who cannot comprehend the Constitution they swore an oath to uphold blow it big time. All police officers should be required to take a course in Constitutional Law and read, (and tested on), "The Federalist Papers" before they're put on the streets.

It's not that they cannot comprehend the Constitution, it's that they don't care. The first priority of the cops was to avoid any conflict, and the method that gets them into the least trouble is to cart away the white guys

Even if it is later found that their rights were violated, it's too late, the demonstration is over, and none of the cops will be personally affected

[Horatio Gates]

We actually had department wide training on open carry contacts several years ago. It was something along the lines of mock scenes. The convicted felon scenario and guy in the bar were the only actionable incidents. The idea was to see who went to far with the contact and cuffed up John Q Public who had his sport jacket stuck over the holster at church or Home Depot. We're due for that gain imho.

I recall a guy at St Joes who had a 44 strapped to his hip while I was there with a DUI blood draw. After a few ladies screamed at me to do something I still got a complaint for asking him nicely to please pull his shirt over it or I'd never get out of here. Always thinking about myself.

[SauronOfMordor]

I have read no where that the protesters were armed themselves.

When you've got that many people, you don't need to be armed. You can just stomp victims to death.

[SauronOfMordor]

Because even the 2nd Amendment has limits - you cannot bear tactical nuclear weapons as a "firearm" for instance.

But the 2nd Amendment, as of the time it was ratified, did in fact cover cannons. A cannon loaded with grapeshot will do more damage than a full-auto AK-47 with a 30-round mag.

In fact, per congress's power to "grant letters of marque and reprisal" (authorizing privately-owned warships to capture and confiscate the ships of unfriendly nations), the Constitution explicitly contemplates that privately-owned warships are covered.

And I'll tell you, even a Revolutionary-war-era warship, loaded up with cannonballs and grapeshot, will do a considerable amount of damage to anything in range

[SW6906]

you can bet they'll come after you if they can find you."

If there is nothing to tell them where it came from, there's no way they can get to you to test your fingerprints against any found on the envelope. ;o)

[armchairadmiral]

You do not have to actually walk up to a police officer and say "I'm carrying a gun" you are just required to have your valid permit on your person and produce it when asked.

Here is the complete text pertaining to the section you referenced:
(1)(b): Every licensee shall have his or her concealed pistol license in his or her immediate possession at all times that he or she is required by this section to have a concealed pistol license and shall display the same upon demand to any police officer or to any other person when and if required by law to do so.

In other words: you don't have to volunteer it, but you must have it on your person when carrying, and must produce it when asked for it.

And there is no indication whatever that there was any "brandishing of weapons".

[StevenB]

One hour until the Bryan Suits show on 570 KVI, http://www.570kvi.com/

Could be an interesting show.

[JDoutrider]

This is the first time I've heard of this nonsense... I'd be hiring me some top shelf lawyers if this had happenned to me...

[StevenB]

Bryan Suits show on 570 KVI, http://www.570kvi.com/ right now.

[SW6906]

Ping for live show right now!!!!!

[StevenB]

Ping