Posted on 01/10/2007 12:44:45 PM PST by looscnnn
A lawyer whose client is on trial for having "militia" weaponry says he'll ask questions and raise arguments about the 2nd Amendment, and then let the judge rule whether or not the Bill of Rights can be discussed in a federal courtroom these days.
A federal prosecutor in the Arkansas case against Hollis Wayne Fincher, 60, who's accused of having homemade and unregistered machine guns, has asked the judge to censor those arguments.
But lawyer Oscar Stilley told WND that he'll go ahead with the arguments.
"I'm going to ask questions, what else can I say?" he said. "There is a 2nd Amendment, and it means something, I hope."
"His (Fincher's) position is that he had a legal right to bear arms that are suitable and customary to contribute to the common defense. If it's a militia army, it's what customarily would be used by the military suitable for the defense of the country," Stilley said.
The objection to constitutional arguments came from Assistant U.S. Attorney Wendy Johnson, who filed a motion several days ago asking U.S. District Judge Jimm Larry Hendren to prevent Fincher and Stilley from raising any such issues.
"Yes, that is correct – the government does not want to allow the defense attorney to argue the law in Mr. Fincher's defense," Michael Gaddy wrote on Freedom Watch.
"If a defendant is not allowed to base his/her defense on the Constitution, the supreme law of the land, we are certainly doomed. If we allow these criminal acts perpetrated on law-abiding citizens to continue, we might as well turn in all our guns and scheduled a fitting for our chains," he wrote.
"Yes, Hollis Wayne Fincher goes on trial on January 8th – but so does our Constitution, our Liberty and our right to own firearms. If Mr. Fincher loses this battle, we all lose," he said.
{snip}
It's about responsibilities that accompany the rights outlined in the Constitution's Bill of Rights, he said.
The motion seeking to suppress any constitutional arguments will be handled by making his arguments, and letting the government make its objections, and then letting the court rule.
The motion from the federal prosecution indicated the government believes Fincher wants to argue the gun charges are unconstitutional, but it is asking that the court keep such decisions out of the jury's hands.
The government also demanded to know the items the defense intends to use as evidence, the results of any physical examinations of Fincher and all of the witnesses and their statements.
Fincher was arrested Nov. 8 and has been held in custody since then on a bond of $250,000 and other conditions that included posting the deed to his home with the court and electronic monitoring.
Police said two of the .308-caliber machine guns, homemade versions of a Browning model 1919, allegedly had Fincher's name inscribed on them and said "Amendment 2 invoked."
There have been laws since 1934 making it illegal for residents of the United States to own machine guns without special permission from the U.S. Treasury Department. Federal law allows the public to own machine guns made and registered before 1986 under certain conditions.
{snip}
Weren't you just saying he was arrested for forming a militia? Where in the Constitution does it give the FedGov power to operate a "machine gun registry"? Or require registration of ANY firearms fro that matter?
Poor little Roscoe... FR's dumbest little troll.
Retard? Well, Mr. Smart-guy...there were cannon when it was written...and one is prohibited from owning a cannon now.....
Your response?
No. When you can't address arguments, you invent them.
A law absent Constitutional authority is NO LAW and should be treated as such.
If you had half a clue you'd know this and agree. That you don't, makes you a liar. Two wars? Purple hearts? What? In your fruit loops maybe... Either that you you belong to the John Kerry fan club.
Your words. Again, you prove yourself to be little more than a worthless troll.
Beltway bureaucrats seem to see the issues in very different terms than regular citizens. Things look different on the other end of the the tax pipeline.
Exactly. His fraudulent position and counterfeit organization were his failed defense.
Points you fear to address.
But, that wouldn't suit your flame-bait posting style would it? Can't have people getting into logical, fact based arguments on a thread you have decided to piss all over.
The Second Amendment is about an individual Right to bear arms. Anything else is sophistry and lunacy.
Fake rank, no appointment by governor, counterfeit militia organization.
which they didn't
http://www.arkansasmilitia.com/documents/notice_governor.htm
there would be another set of charges.
Beg that question!
Again, you refuse to address his actual words and his fraudulent defense,
He didn't. It wasn't. End of story.
You are just trying to fabricate an argument where you know you have none. Ie; sophistry.
Stupid little troll Roscoe. All these years and you haven't learned a damn thing...
You don't quote, you just lie.
In order to form the companies of Infantry, Cavalry, and Artillery as ordained by Article Eleven of the Arkansas Constitution, we have claimed the following:For the Infantry: Any rifle, pistol, or shotgun, by any name known, whether automatic or semi-automatic, of past, present, or future design, regardless of size, caliber, barrel length, or magazine capacity...
We bring to your attention the possibility of conflict with some predatory agencies employed within the federal government who scoff at we, the people, and consider themselves immune to our states laws and boundaries. One such agency is The Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (BATF)....
We, having ordained and reserved by Constitutional Article, the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and have by the same Constitution defined the Militia Companies to be formed and armed, have no intention of surrendering that right...
Wayne Fincher, Lt. Commander
Um... yes? And? What's wrong with what he wrote? Worse, why don't you agree with the sentiment expressed?
Lessee, the fake Lt. Commander claimed the right to form an organized militia without the governor's approval and to attack federal law enforcement agencies. But you claimed that he merely "notified the governor that they would be there to be called up if needed."
You've been caught lying so often you've lost count.
Do you write press releases for the Brady Bunch or the DNC? They are the only other groups I can think of that would ever try and turn such plain meaning of words on their head like you do.
Um, yes. That was how he described the federal law enforcement agencies he intended to attack using his counterfeit militia and fake rank.
They also had warships back then and you can't own one of those either. What's your point?
Machine guns are man portable, when's the last time you saw someone carrying a cannon?
People do own cannons. For example, Civil War re-enactment groups.
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.