Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 86

Thread: Another law abiding citizen arrested for breach and interference...

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    53

    Another law abiding citizen arrested for breach and interference...


  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Meriden, CT
    Posts
    74
    Very interesting.....can't wait to see where this goes in court.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    53
    The unbelievable comments I am reading. On wfsb page
    http://www.wfsb.com/story/19222668/m...-movie-theater

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Naugatuck CT
    Posts
    90
    Did the cinema really prohibit firearms?
    Most of the time the there is no sign or it is so small an not on all the doors.

    I hope everything goes Hwang's way and the police get in trouble.
    That is total BS you cannot search everyone at will like that.
    I'm actually surprised only one person had a gun on them.

    The phone call should have been.
    "There is a man with a gun"
    Can you describe it, was he threatening anyone.
    Not threatening anyone, it is tucked inside his waistband.
    That is legal in this state and all but 1 other states. You should feel safer that there is law biding citizens around you that can protect you.
    Really where can I get the permit to do that?
    very easy talk to your local police department and have a nice day.
    Last edited by customcreationllc; 08-08-2012 at 07:12 AM.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    53
    No mention of any posted signs, not have I personally ever seen one in ct theaters

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Naugatuck CT
    Posts
    90
    Like they would have caught any criminals that way anyways.
    Criminals would have just ditched the gun.

    Was Hwang they guy they even called in about?
    Last edited by customcreationllc; 08-08-2012 at 07:36 AM.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by luckyykid View Post
    Very interesting.....can't wait to see where this goes in court.
    Seriously? Didn't we go over this in pretty heavy detail?

    Why would you want to see someone who, as far as we can tell, broke no laws go to court?
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    53
    Rich I think he is actually on the guys side and wants to see how he fairs with the actual law on his side

  9. #9
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by rt1983 View Post
    Rich I think he is actually on the guys side and wants to see how he fairs with the actual law on his side
    That might be, but lets not respond with glee that a man who (from the media reports) broke no laws, now has to get dragged through the court system because the New Haven PD apparently doesn't have a clue about the laws of the state. I don't see a single thing in the media reports so far that shows an appropriate response to this incident at all.

    I hear too much 'just let the courts work it out'. Tell that to people like Mr. Doutel who had corrupt police and prosecution drag him through the courts for one and a half years while denying his rights over nothing but a voicemail that they had to admit they were not even willing to prosecute on.

    http://ctcarry.com/NorwalkvDoutel/NorwalkvDoutel
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    53
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich B View Post
    That might be, but lets not respond with glee that a man who (from the media reports) broke no laws, now has to get dragged through the court system because the New Haven PD apparently doesn't have a clue about the laws of the state. I don't see a single thing in the media reports so far that shows an appropriate response to this incident at all.

    I hear too much 'just let the courts work it out'. Tell that to people like Mr. Doutel who had corrupt police and prosecution drag him through the courts for one and a half years while denying his rights over nothing but a voicemail that they had to admit they were not even willing to prosecute on.

    http://ctcarry.com/NorwalkvDoutel/NorwalkvDoutel
    Agreed

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Connecticut
    Posts
    108
    In addition to the points already raised, I noted with interest that 1) he is a lawyer so it might be presumed that he was and is aware of his rights and how to protect them and 2) he kept talking on his cell while the police rousted the other patrons. I wonder if his cell phone was recording what was happening, or if the person on the other end was recording (does anyone know how to do that - might be a good thing to know). I'm also surprised there weren't a dozen interviews of the other patrons.

    WFSB raised the point of not carrying where the property owner prohibited it. I saw nothing on the BowTie web site on the subject. Too bad CT didn't specify how the property owner had to convey the prohibition.

    The NBC report stated that he had the gun in a holster in the small of his back, not "tucked in his waistband" (unless it was in an IWB holster giving that appearance).

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    53
    lol here's a good one, he is a WELL known immigration attorney.
    Even better his office is in new haven
    Last edited by rt1983; 08-08-2012 at 10:13 AM.

  13. #13
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Officer David B Hartman, media liaison for New Haven police, told the New Haven Independent that it was a "bad choice" for Hwang to bring the gun to the theater but that it was not illegal and he was charged for being uncooperative.
    Hmmm...
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  14. #14
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    That makes me wonder, what is the Connecticut Code paragraph for "noncooperation with a police officer"?

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    53
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich B View Post
    Hmmm...
    If a police officer ever accuses me or questions me about anything, I will surely talk right away or I may be arrested for not cooperating. Right!!
    And this guy is an attorney, so I am sure he doesn't know any of his rights

  16. #16
    Regular Member KennyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Mountain Top
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    That makes me wonder, what is the Connecticut Code paragraph for "noncooperation with a police officer"?

    Maybe he figured, him just sitting there minding his own business that there was no requirement to comply to an unlawful order?? Well, maybe unlawful in "his" eyes anyways.......

  17. #17
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by KennyB View Post
    Well, maybe unlawful in "his" eyes anyways.......
    It should be unlawful in anyone's eyes. I don't know what these cops were thinking...
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  18. #18
    Regular Member KennyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Mountain Top
    Posts
    87
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich B View Post
    I don't know what these cops were thinking...

    Rich, it seems the standard response for a MWAG by police is to "saturate" the area with police. I believe you know that from experience. In this case, I heard over 20 LEO's responded to this call. Meanwhile, the areas being patroled by these same officers have no police protection. All this for a legally carrying citizen. A quick search on YouTube shows this to be the case almost everywhere when a MWAG call is recieved.

  19. #19
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by KennyB View Post
    Rich, it seems the standard response for a MWAG by police is to "saturate" the area with police.
    Which is a stupid response and very likely to violate civil rights...

    I believe you know that from experience.
    Not really.

    In this case, I heard over 20 LEO's responded to this call. Meanwhile, the areas being patroled by these same officers have no police protection. All this for a legally carrying citizen. A quick search on YouTube shows this to be the case almost everywhere when a MWAG call is recieved.
    Most OC incidents I have seen involve 1 or 2 officers.
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  20. #20
    Regular Member KennyB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Mountain Top
    Posts
    87
    Rich I seem to remember a MUCH larger response then 1 or 2 LEO's to your incidents at Starbucks and the pool hall. Correct me if i'm wrong?

  21. #21
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by KennyB View Post
    Rich I seem to remember a MUCH larger response then 1 or 2 LEO's to your incidents at Starbucks and the pool hall. Correct me if i'm wrong?
    In Old Saybrook, you are wrong, in Wallingford you are mostly wrong.


    Old Saybrook had 1-2 officers, Wallingford had less than 6.
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  22. #22
    Regular Member DocWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Mountain Home, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    1,968
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    That makes me wonder, what is the Connecticut Code paragraph for "noncooperation with a police officer"?
    Contempt of cop....i.e. Not bending down and kissing his boots on command.

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Meriden, CT
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by Rich B View Post
    Seriously? Didn't we go over this in pretty heavy detail?

    Why would you want to see someone who, as far as we can tell, broke no laws go to court?

    Yeah we discussed it here, but I want to see the court's "discussion." That in no way means I'm happy about seeing an innocent man go to court, but what happened happened and nothing is going to change that, and now i'm very interested to see the Connecticut courts interpretation is of this scenario. Without sounding too much like a nerd, I find law and legal argument very fascinating.


    Seriously? Didn't we go over this in pretty heavy detail?
    Don't forget that even Supreme Court justices disagree on laws and their application.

  24. #24
    Regular Member Rich B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    North Branford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    2,910
    Quote Originally Posted by luckyykid View Post
    Yeah we discussed it here, but I want to see the court's "discussion." That in no way means I'm happy about seeing an innocent man go to court, but what happened happened and nothing is going to change that, and now i'm very interested to see the Connecticut courts interpretation is of this scenario. Without sounding too much like a nerd, I find law and legal argument very fascinating.
    Don't forget that even Supreme Court justices disagree on laws and their application.
    The breach of peace charge will not go before a court if the incident is as stated.
    Connecticut Carry is dedicated to advancing and protecting the fundamental civil rights of the men and women of Connecticut to keep and bear arms for self defense of themselves and the state as guaranteed by the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Connecticut.

    Join us and discuss the issues: http://ctcarry.com/Forum

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,605
    To Whom it may Concern:

    ..., and that is The Problem in Connecticut.

    NO Preemption, and NO Protection from Statutes of General Application Concerning Breach-of-Peace Offenses that Officers Use to Discourage Law-abiding Citizens.

    aadvark

Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •