Bellum_Intus
Regular Member
I've been outspoken in the past about YT videos.. against them in general.. the shocker is that I support this one..
--Rob
-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Man arrested for OC in Colorado Springs park.
- Thread starter Hamans-gallows
- Start date
I've been outspoken in the past about YT videos.. against them in general.. the shocker is that I support this one..
--Rob
Ohhhh.......riiiiiight..... So, what's your opinion of him raising his tone?
Bellum_Intus
Regular Member
He was getting frustrated that the LEO didn't know the law.. I think I'm gonna start carrying CRS 29-11.7-103 in my pocket from now on..
*I* was even getting frustrated that the LEO's were quoting non existent laws, esp as a SGT, he should have known the code was repealed in 2003 along with EVERY OTHER Firearm related municipal code (with the exception of Gov't buildings) ..
When the LEO basically said he didn't care about his 2A rights.. I almost blew up. and I'm at work.. "to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and The State of Colorado" .. I know the damn oath.. why don't they?
So yeah, this wanna be LEO.. is mad at the LEO's..
--Rob
Last edited:
LoneEchoWolf
Regular Member
lol well put!
I was getting really frustrated by that, but I couldn't help but notice the irony where the LEO told the "suspect" that "Ignorance of the law is no excuse". Really, sarge? Then what's YOUR excuse?
Hamans-gallows
Regular Member
I went and OCed in Acacia park this morning. Same park where the guy got arrested.
Last edited:
AcePlayerDeluxe
Regular Member
Aint that about a biatch. This is one of the times it needed to be taped. Glad that ^ was said on camera. They can't plead ignorance now can they...
I.AM.Treo
New member
In light of this issue has anyone considered an OC event at Acacia park?
Hamans-gallows
Regular Member
M-Taliesin
Regular Member
Facts, what the law says!
Howdy Folks!
Once again, this time in 4 part harmony, and into the breech:
Editorial comment: Ignorance of the law is no excuse. That there were high ranking police officers on the scene who do not know the law, they gleefully violated the law. This is one more indication that there should be criminal charges against the police officers involved, right along with civil charges against the city and the police department as well. They DO NOT KNOW THE LAW!!!!!!
Just to make my point, here is what the law says! This is the law. It is the law these officers broke, rather than upheld.
===============================================
CRS 29-11.7-103. Regulation - type of firearm - prohibited.
A local government may not enact an ordinance, regulation, or other law that prohibits the sale, purchase, or possession of a firearm that a person may lawfully sell, purchase, or possess under state or federal law. Any such ordinance, regulation, or other law enacted by a local government prior to March 18, 2003, is void and unenforceable.
----------------------------------
29-11.7-101. Legislative declaration.
(1) The general assembly hereby finds that:
...
(b) Section 13 of article II of the state constitution protects the fundamental right of a person to keep and bear arms and implements section 3 of article II of the state constitution;
...
(d) There exists a widespread inconsistency among jurisdictions within the state with regard to firearms regulations;
(e) This inconsistency among local government laws regulating lawful firearm possession and ownership has extraterritorial impact on state citizens and the general public by subjecting them to criminal and civil penalties in some jurisdictions for conduct wholly lawful in other jurisdictions;
(f) Inconsistency among local governments of laws regulating the possession and ownership of firearms results in persons being treated differently under the law solely on the basis of where they reside, and a person's residence in a particular county or city or city and county is not a rational classification when it is the basis for denial of equal treatment under the law;
...
(2) Based on the findings specified in subsection (1) of this section, the general assembly concludes that:
(a) The regulation of firearms is a matter of statewide concern;
(b) It is necessary to provide statewide laws concerning the possession and ownership of a firearm to ensure that law-abiding persons are not unfairly placed in the position of unknowingly committing crimes involving firearms.
29-11.7-104. Regulation - carrying - posting.
A local government may enact an ordinance, regulation, or other law that prohibits the open carrying of a firearm in a building or specific area within the local government's jurisdiction. If a local government enacts an ordinance, regulation, or other law that prohibits the open carrying of a firearm in a building or specific area, the local government shall post signs at the public entrances to the building or specific area informing persons that the open carrying of firearms is prohibited in the building or specific area.
===============================
When policemen break the law, there is no law ~ Billy Jack
I suggest we engage in a full broadside against this sort of tyrannical behavior on the part of officers sworn to defend and uphold the constitution, when in fact, they have no such intention to do so. They have violated their oath as police officers, do not know the law, and as they so often tell the citizen.... ignorance of the law is no excuse. We need to address this with a cohesive front, and press for change. That will be the topic of a subsequent post.
Blessings,
M-Taliesin
Howdy Folks!
Once again, this time in 4 part harmony, and into the breech:
Editorial comment: Ignorance of the law is no excuse. That there were high ranking police officers on the scene who do not know the law, they gleefully violated the law. This is one more indication that there should be criminal charges against the police officers involved, right along with civil charges against the city and the police department as well. They DO NOT KNOW THE LAW!!!!!!
Just to make my point, here is what the law says! This is the law. It is the law these officers broke, rather than upheld.
===============================================
CRS 29-11.7-103. Regulation - type of firearm - prohibited.
A local government may not enact an ordinance, regulation, or other law that prohibits the sale, purchase, or possession of a firearm that a person may lawfully sell, purchase, or possess under state or federal law. Any such ordinance, regulation, or other law enacted by a local government prior to March 18, 2003, is void and unenforceable.
----------------------------------
29-11.7-101. Legislative declaration.
(1) The general assembly hereby finds that:
...
(b) Section 13 of article II of the state constitution protects the fundamental right of a person to keep and bear arms and implements section 3 of article II of the state constitution;
...
(d) There exists a widespread inconsistency among jurisdictions within the state with regard to firearms regulations;
(e) This inconsistency among local government laws regulating lawful firearm possession and ownership has extraterritorial impact on state citizens and the general public by subjecting them to criminal and civil penalties in some jurisdictions for conduct wholly lawful in other jurisdictions;
(f) Inconsistency among local governments of laws regulating the possession and ownership of firearms results in persons being treated differently under the law solely on the basis of where they reside, and a person's residence in a particular county or city or city and county is not a rational classification when it is the basis for denial of equal treatment under the law;
...
(2) Based on the findings specified in subsection (1) of this section, the general assembly concludes that:
(a) The regulation of firearms is a matter of statewide concern;
(b) It is necessary to provide statewide laws concerning the possession and ownership of a firearm to ensure that law-abiding persons are not unfairly placed in the position of unknowingly committing crimes involving firearms.
29-11.7-104. Regulation - carrying - posting.
A local government may enact an ordinance, regulation, or other law that prohibits the open carrying of a firearm in a building or specific area within the local government's jurisdiction. If a local government enacts an ordinance, regulation, or other law that prohibits the open carrying of a firearm in a building or specific area, the local government shall post signs at the public entrances to the building or specific area informing persons that the open carrying of firearms is prohibited in the building or specific area.
===============================
When policemen break the law, there is no law ~ Billy Jack
I suggest we engage in a full broadside against this sort of tyrannical behavior on the part of officers sworn to defend and uphold the constitution, when in fact, they have no such intention to do so. They have violated their oath as police officers, do not know the law, and as they so often tell the citizen.... ignorance of the law is no excuse. We need to address this with a cohesive front, and press for change. That will be the topic of a subsequent post.
Blessings,
M-Taliesin
Saxxon
Regular Member
The problem with "an apology" is it doesn't remove the arrest report from Google, where it will reside till long after you expire of old age.
M-Taliesin
Regular Member
Howdy Pard!
And so much for the concept of "innocent until proven guilty!"
Regardless of the outcome of the case in court, or whether charges are dropped,
the arrest record remains as a taint on the character of an innocent man.
It is a slander that cannot be reconciled, challenged, removed or eradicated.
Justice cannot exist in such an environment where truth is victim to malicioius prosecution.
Blessings,
M-Taliesin
zach
Regular Member
I understand him raising his voice, one way to make sure that he was heard on the video. I'm sure that's why the cops kept their tone down.
One thing that really bugs me though, don't start dropping F-Bombs. IMHO, the profanity isn't called for, but seems to be common place these days.
Nothing worse than the LEO that's ignorant of the law and has a chip on his shoulder. Maybe since the individual is "gay", as he put it, he'll actually get the ACLU to support him.
zach
Regular Member
Bring your video camera?
Hamans-gallows
Regular Member
Well, I suppose I could have recorded with my phone, but I figured that in light of current events, they wouldn't dare approach me.
Gunslinger
Regular Member
He broke no law, hence, they have nothing to charge him with. He, on the other hand, has plenty to sue them for. I can't believe the DA hasn't nolle prosequi by now. It will be of great interest to see how this is handled by the CSPD.
rushcreek2
Regular Member
I viewed the You-Tube video a couple of times, read, and watched the TV news coverage - and slept on all of this over the night. Still searching for my "equilibrium" on this one. My emotions are all over the place concerning this incident.
The LEO's were on highened alert due to :
TWO DAYS AFTER THE AURORA THEATER SHOOTING.
A " GAY PRIDE " EVENT in Acacia Park.
ACLU MOST LIKELY INVOLVED IN THIS CASE BECAUSE OF THE GLAD FACTOR.
This is NOT SIMPLY ANOTHER OC/LEO ENCOUNTER.
Attention has been drawn to OC in a big splash.
This incident could result in the City posting NO/OC signs at Acacia Park.
This incident (had it involved one of our regular CO OCDO members) I WOULD LIKE TO BELIEVE would have been resolved politely, legally, and professionally by all concerned. On the other hand it wouldn't have made the news.
I have always had very good experiences with COS LEO's , including 2 of the officers present on the video. I am concerned that the antagonism being expressed towards these officers is not in the best interest of others who regularly OC in the Springs. I thought the officers initially involved were very restrained, and acted responsibly.
The last arriving officer was not privy to the prior contact back & forth. and probably reacted instinctively to a dispatch that described an " agitated MWAG at the Gay Pride event". He probably should have cooled down his adrenalin surge a bit before presuming to take control of the situation away from the three other officers already at engaged at the scene.
The CSPD administration is the problem - not the officers. They unfortunately demonstrated that the Chief is asleep at the helm - and has been for several years according to the "cheat sheet".
Why are COS officers not required to be knowledgeable of State law ? A "CHEAT SHEET" - for Pete's sake ???????????
We didn't see the beginning of this encounter. From what was stated on the video the OC'er was told to LEAVE THE PARK because he was OC'ing. I attended the Tea Party event in Acacia Park back in 2008/09 and I chose NOT TO OC because of the potentiality for tensions related to antagonists present who engaged in some disruptive side-show activity. I just thought it was prudent to conceal under the circumstances - but that's just me.
I might well OC at a given public gathering. I wouldn't have even been at this one. Not having been present I don't have anyway of judging why this encounter went so badly. I suggest we calm down a bit in attacking the officers involved, and direct our attention to the problem - that being the head of the CSPD - the Chief of Police. A train is only as steady on the tracks as the engine hauling it.
A good time for my signature to appear below perhaps.
The LEO's were on highened alert due to :
TWO DAYS AFTER THE AURORA THEATER SHOOTING.
A " GAY PRIDE " EVENT in Acacia Park.
ACLU MOST LIKELY INVOLVED IN THIS CASE BECAUSE OF THE GLAD FACTOR.
This is NOT SIMPLY ANOTHER OC/LEO ENCOUNTER.
Attention has been drawn to OC in a big splash.
This incident could result in the City posting NO/OC signs at Acacia Park.
This incident (had it involved one of our regular CO OCDO members) I WOULD LIKE TO BELIEVE would have been resolved politely, legally, and professionally by all concerned. On the other hand it wouldn't have made the news.
I have always had very good experiences with COS LEO's , including 2 of the officers present on the video. I am concerned that the antagonism being expressed towards these officers is not in the best interest of others who regularly OC in the Springs. I thought the officers initially involved were very restrained, and acted responsibly.
The last arriving officer was not privy to the prior contact back & forth. and probably reacted instinctively to a dispatch that described an " agitated MWAG at the Gay Pride event". He probably should have cooled down his adrenalin surge a bit before presuming to take control of the situation away from the three other officers already at engaged at the scene.
The CSPD administration is the problem - not the officers. They unfortunately demonstrated that the Chief is asleep at the helm - and has been for several years according to the "cheat sheet".
Why are COS officers not required to be knowledgeable of State law ? A "CHEAT SHEET" - for Pete's sake ???????????
We didn't see the beginning of this encounter. From what was stated on the video the OC'er was told to LEAVE THE PARK because he was OC'ing. I attended the Tea Party event in Acacia Park back in 2008/09 and I chose NOT TO OC because of the potentiality for tensions related to antagonists present who engaged in some disruptive side-show activity. I just thought it was prudent to conceal under the circumstances - but that's just me.
I might well OC at a given public gathering. I wouldn't have even been at this one. Not having been present I don't have anyway of judging why this encounter went so badly. I suggest we calm down a bit in attacking the officers involved, and direct our attention to the problem - that being the head of the CSPD - the Chief of Police. A train is only as steady on the tracks as the engine hauling it.
A good time for my signature to appear below perhaps.
Last edited:
jthe88mike
New member
HI
Im the guy in the video , they asked me to leave and my partner and I said sure. sorry i am removing any and all post of what happened
thanks for all your support
JR & Kiefer
Im the guy in the video , they asked me to leave and my partner and I said sure. sorry i am removing any and all post of what happened
thanks for all your support
JR & Kiefer
Last edited:
OC for ME
Regular Member
Good points.....except the chief was not there, those cops were and it will be their conduct that will be scrutinized, not the chiefs. The chief will have to deal with any mess those cops may be responsible for creating.