Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 57

Thread: KY: Man arrested in Louisville Arby's after refusing to cover gun, police say

  1. #1
    Regular Member Morbidph8's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Apache Junction, AZ
    Posts
    98

    Angry KY: Man arrested in Louisville Arby's after refusing to cover gun, police say

    Man arrested in Louisville Arby's after refusing to cover gun, police say

    http://www.wdrb.com/story/19319955/m...o-hide-firearm

  2. #2
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Police say at least one Army National Guard member was on hand and assisted the officer in placing Helms in custody.

  3. #3
    Regular Member rushcreek2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Colorado Springs. CO
    Posts
    924
    When the COP said "You may need to cover that up." ( or words to that effect) That was the CLUE because you are on private property, in a public setting and the LEO gave him some good advice.

    This is exactly the sort of behavior that convinces the folks that CONCEALED IS OK - but OC is BAD.

    Respect, respect, respect. I know - we want our RTKBA respected too. OK-so do I - but when you create concern in the minds of people for their safety - this is what will happen.

    And Yes - he looks strikingly similar to the dude that shot of the Sikh Temple in Wisconsin, or some other skin-head white supremist type.

    This keeps up , and the state laws WILL CHANGE.

  4. #4
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by rushcreek2 View Post
    When the COP said "You may need to cover that up." ( or words to that effect) That was the CLUE because you are on private property, in a public setting and the LEO gave him some good advice.
    Clue? Are you saying it is good advice to CC anytime you are on "private property, in a public setting"?

    Also I believe from the article it was not advice but a command.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  5. #5
    Regular Member MKEgal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    in front of my computer, WI
    Posts
    4,426

    Angry

    Police say a man caused alarm among Arby's customers Saturday afternoon when he showed up at the restaurant with a gun and refused to cover it up, despite an officer's demands.
    So the opinion enforcer escalated to violating the citizen's civil rights?
    Not smart.

    Unconcealed firearms are not allowed inside the restaurant, according to an employee of the Arby's.
    Whadayawanna bet that was not the owner, nor a manager, but some hourly drone who was also expressing an opinion?
    If there wasn't a sign, then the customer wasn't notified of this alleged restriction.

    While the officer was confronting Helms
    And thereby causing both alarm & a disturbance...

    the suspect's aunt and mother ... stood between Helms and the officer, and began arguing with the officer
    Not the smartest move they could have made. Wonder why they weren't also arrested for DC?

    And why in the bloody blue blazes would a Guard member assist an officer in violating someone's civil rights? Sounds like s/he needs to read up on refusing illegal orders.

    BTW:
    refused to put the gun away
    So was he ordered to put his shirt over it, or to leave it in the car?
    (And if it was the shirt option, how would that make other customers feel any better, since they already knew it was there?)

  6. #6
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by MKEgal View Post
    Whadayawanna bet that was not the owner, nor a manager, but some hourly drone who was also expressing an opinion?
    If there wasn't a sign, then the customer wasn't notified of this alleged restriction.
    I bet it went something like after the fact when the cop was taking the statement of a nearby employee "Now sir/miss you don't specifically allow people to openly carry guns in here, do you?"
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  7. #7
    Regular Member Jack House's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    I80, USA
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by twoskinsonemanns View Post
    Clue? Are you saying it is good advice to CC anytime you are on "private property, in a public setting"?

    Also I believe from the article it was not advice but a command.
    Pretty sure he meant that the individual was on private property and if the owner of that property chooses to disallow OC, then it is good advice to respect the owner's wishes.

    I don't know what happened, there is far too little information to take a side in the matter. From what little is available, it seems like the officer started crap, trying to enforce his own opinion and the individual wouldn't have any of it.

  8. #8
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ashland, KY
    Posts
    1,847
    This amazes me, and I have defended this man numerous times in the comment section of the article. If the man was asked to leave by Arby's management, and he refused, then he could have been charged with Criminal Trespass (KRS 511.060). This man was approached by an officer that was already in the store, not one that was called by Arbys or a customer. They charged this man with Menacing (KRS 508.050) and Official Misconduct (KRS 525.055 & KRS 525.060), which is a gross violation of KY law, and this man's constitutional rights. You can read these statutes at http://lrc.ky.gov/krs/titles.htm , and you will realize these charges are false and will not stick. In KY we have court precedent that says no one can question our right to openly carry a firearm (Holland V. Commonwealth), and this officer completely disregarded that ruling. These charges will be dropped at the initial appearance I guaruntee because he did not do anything that constitutes these crimes. It says the family is the ones that acted irrationally, not the man that was being illegally detained and questioned. Openly carrying a firearm does not constitute RAS for a detainment in KY, and since the officer witnessed his firearm and approached without management asking him to do so he violated this man's rights and the law. This is bogus!

    I would certainly like to witness the store's video surveillance and know what actually happened, but based on the report this was an officer that did not like someone disobeying his UNLAWFUL orders.
    Last edited by KYGlockster; 08-20-2012 at 07:08 PM.
    "I never in my life seen a Kentuckian without a gun..."-Andrew Jackson

    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined."-Patrick Henry; speaking of protecting the rights of an armed citizenry.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Does it ever occur to anyone to wonder why "guns is so special" when it comes to property rights and cops?

    Does anyone think the cops would come with sirens blaring should the property owner have a "No untucked shirts" policy and someone refused to tuck their tee-shirt?
    Maybe the restaurant had a "no slurping noises" policy, think the slurpee should be handcuffed and thrown in the back of a police car for awhile?
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 08-20-2012 at 07:33 PM.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    Kentucky Revised Statutes: 508.050 MENACING
    (1) A person is guilty of menacing when he intentionally places another person in reasonable apprehension of imminent physical injury.
    (2) Menacing is a Class B misdemeanor.

    525.055 Disorderly conduct in the first degree.
    (1) A person is guilty of disorderly conduct in the first degree when he or she:
    (a) In a public place and with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm, or wantonly creating a risk thereof:
    1. Engages in fighting or in violent, tumultuous, or threatening behavior;
    2. Makes unreasonable noise; or
    3. Creates a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act that serves no legitimate purpose; and
    (b) Acts in a way described in paragraph (a) of this subsection within three hundred (300) feet of a:
    1. Cemetery during a funeral or burial;
    2. Funeral home during the viewing of a deceased person;
    3. Funeral procession;
    4. Funeral or memorial service; or
    5. Building in which a funeral or memorial service is being conducted; and
    (c) Acts in a way described in paragraph (a) of this subsection at any point in time between one (1) hour prior to the commencement of an event specified in paragraph (b) of this subsection and one (1) hour following its conclusion; and
    (d) Knows that he or she is within three hundred (300) feet of an occasion described in paragraph (b) of this subsection.

    525.060 Disorderly conduct in the second degree.
    (1) A person is guilty of disorderly conduct in the second degree when in a public place and with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance, or alarm, or wantonly creating a risk thereof, he:
    (a) Engages in fighting or in violent, tumultuous, or threatening behavior;
    (b) Makes unreasonable noise;
    (c) Refuses to obey an official order to disperse issued to maintain public safety in dangerous proximity to a fire, hazard, or other emergency; or
    (d) Creates a hazardous or physically offensive condition by any act that serves no legitimate purpose.
    (2) Disorderly conduct in the second degree is a Class B misdemeanor.
    Effective: March 27, 2006


    Strictly from the news report, I'm not seeing evidence of either beyond a reasonable doubt.
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 08-20-2012 at 07:32 PM.

  11. #11
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ashland, KY
    Posts
    1,847
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    Does it ever occur to anyone to wonder why "guns is so special" when it comes to property rights and cops?

    Does anyone think the cops would come with sirens blaring should the property owner have a "No untucked shirts" policy and someone refused to tuck their tee-shirt?
    Maybe the restaurant had a "no slurping noises" policy, think the slurpee should be handcuffed and thrown in the back of a police car for awhile?
    Fairly sad isn't it? The real problem with this story (based on the article) is that the officer was already in the resreraunt and witnessed his gun and confronted him. He had no authority to ask him to conceal his firearm, and after the gentleman told him he did not have a CDWL, he would have been entrapping the man if he made him conceal. The officer had no RAS to approach him in the first place unless management asked them to do so, and if they did and he refused to leave the charge would have been criminal trespass in the 1st degree.
    "I never in my life seen a Kentuckian without a gun..."-Andrew Jackson

    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined."-Patrick Henry; speaking of protecting the rights of an armed citizenry.

  12. #12
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Quote Originally Posted by Jack House View Post
    Pretty sure he meant that the individual was on private property and if the owner of that property chooses to disallow OC, then it is good advice to respect the owner's wishes.

    I don't know what happened, there is far too little information to take a side in the matter. From what little is available, it seems like the officer started crap, trying to enforce his own opinion and the individual wouldn't have any of it.
    If that's true I of course agree. He didn't mention that part so I was asking for clarification.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  13. #13
    Campaign Veteran MSG Laigaie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Philipsburg, Montana
    Posts
    3,137
    What position has this Guardsman put himself in? He "assumed" the LEO was correct in his action. I have been given "unlawful orders" by others in the past. Usually a little advise on bad decision will help. Not in this case. What if an injury had occurred?
    "Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people's liberty teeth (and) keystone... the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable... more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference .When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour." -- George Washington

  14. #14
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,272
    KYGlockster: He had no authority to ask him to conceal his firearm, and after the gentleman told him he did not have a CDWL, he would have been entrapping the man if he made him conceal.
    This information places this in a completely different light if true. A cop attempting to force a citizen to violate the law, for whatever reason, is really really bad. Is there case law in KY or feds that could make this a chargeable criminal violation on the part of the cop?
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  15. #15
    Regular Member paramedic70002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Franklin, VA, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,448
    Does KY have a Code that requires citizens to obey any lawful order of the police? Logic dictates that if the subject did not have a permit, then he could NOT obey an unlawful order. I think it's a case of "contempt of cop" and our OCer just hit the OC lottery. Time to lawyer up!
    "Each worker carried his sword strapped to his side." Nehemiah 4:18

    Guns Save Lives. Paramedics Save Lives. But...
    Paramedics With Guns Scare People!

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Bondurant, IA
    Posts
    1
    Any update on this case? Nothing on google...

  17. #17
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838

    the article .... from 1st post

    LOUISVILLE, Ky. (WDRB) -- Police say a man caused alarm among Arby's customers Saturday afternoon when he showed up at the restaurant with a gun and refused to cover it up, despite an officer's demands.

    It happened at the Arby's on Crittenden Drive, near Central Avenue, just before 1:30 Saturday afternoon.

    Police say 21-year-old Bennett Helms walked into the Arby's with an "exposed" handgun on his hip.

    An officer who was inside saw the gun and told Helms, "You may need to cover that up."

    Helms allegedly responded, "I don't need to."

    Police say the officer asked Helms if he was a police officer, and he said no. Unconcealed firearms are not allowed inside the restaurant, according to an employee of the Arby's.

    While the officer was confronting Helms -- who refused to put the gun away -- police say the suspect's aunt and mother walked into the restaurant and stood between Helms and the officer, and began arguing with the officer. The disturbance caused "alarm" among customers inside the restaurant, according to police.

    Police say at least one Army National Guard member was on hand and assisted the officer in placing Helms in custody.

    Helms was arrested and charged with menacing and disorderly conduct.

  18. #18
    Activist Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Ashland, KY
    Posts
    1,847
    I conducted a state-wide case search of the Kentucky Court of Justice case log with his name and I found nothing! I would guess that charges were dropped immediately and nothing ever came of it. If charges were not dropped it would show past, present, and future cases that involve the man that was wrongfully arrested.
    "I never in my life seen a Kentuckian without a gun..."-Andrew Jackson

    "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect every one who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined."-Patrick Henry; speaking of protecting the rights of an armed citizenry.

  19. #19
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    I wonder if this isn't yet another case of, "You can beat the rap but you can't beat the ride"?

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    If family members showed up and vociferously argued with the officer, creating a scene, that might lead to charges that stand up in court.

    Don't make a scene. Even if you choose not to comply, you can do so without making a scene.

    BTW, did anyone tumble to the Arby's employee saying that unconcealed firearms were not allowed? What is Arby's (or the local franchise's) policy? Was the employee correct, or just regurgitating ignorantly something she heard from someone else?

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by eye95 View Post
    vociferously
    vo·cif·er·ous (v-sfr-s)
    adj.
    Making, given to, or marked by noisy and vehement outcry.



    In my state, yelling, cursing, or acting "vociferously" is not grounds for an arrest. As long as no threats are made one is fine.

    I've had lots of cops threaten me with "disorderly conduct" .. never got arrested. Mainly dealing with civil issues with merchants.

  22. #22
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    I wouldn't worry too much about the National Guard angle. Unless he pretended to be acting in a National Guard capacity, I think it will be hard to implicate posse comitatus.

    I can easily see a citizen helping out who just happened also to be a Guardsman.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Fairborn, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    13,063
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    vo·cif·er·ous (v-sfr-s)
    adj.
    Making, given to, or marked by noisy and vehement outcry.



    In my state, yelling, cursing, or acting "vociferously" is not grounds for an arrest. As long as no threats are made one is fine.

    I've had lots of cops threaten me with "disorderly conduct" .. never got arrested. Mainly dealing with civil issues with merchants.
    Thanks for the dictionary definition. No thanks for the snideness of presenting it. I am perfectly willing to have a rational discussion until that kind of obnoxious behavior that has become so prevalent around here. One more attempt at rationality:

    OC in and of itself is not DC. However, the attendant behavior in conjunction with OC can be seen as threatening or inducing fear in reasonable people. Getting into a loud (vociferous) argument with a police officer (even one who is wrong) could result in a DC charge that sticks. So, again, my perfectly rational advice: Disagree with the officer, but don't make a scene.

  24. #24
    Regular Member twoskinsonemanns's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    WV
    Posts
    2,489
    Pretty simple. The cop does not like to see someone encroaching on his monopoly on OC. The LAC refused to bow to the cops's made-up-laws so the cop bullied the LAC to prove his point.
    The idea that "causing a scene" = causing alarm has no basis.
    "I support the ban on assault weapons" - Donald Trump

    We are fast approaching the stage of the ultimate inversion: the stage where the government is free to do anything it pleases, while the citizens may act only by permission - Ayn Rand

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Hilton Head, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    524

    KY: Man arrested in Louisville Arby's after refusing to cover gun, police say

    Quote Originally Posted by rushcreek2 View Post
    When the COP said "You may need to cover that up." ( or words to that effect) That was the CLUE because you are on private property, in a public setting and the LEO gave him some good advice.

    This is exactly the sort of behavior that convinces the folks that CONCEALED IS OK - but OC is BAD.

    Respect, respect, respect. I know - we want our RTKBA respected too. OK-so do I - but when you create concern in the minds of people for their safety - this is what will happen.

    And Yes - he looks strikingly similar to the dude that shot of the Sikh Temple in Wisconsin, or some other skin-head white supremist type.

    This keeps up , and the state laws WILL CHANGE.
    Arby's policies do not carry the weight of law. The officer had no legal authority to demand that the customer conceal his firearm, regardless of Arby's policy. I hope this young man sues the PD and Arby's for violating his rights.

Page 1 of 3 123 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
  •