ch 6 news yesterday (8/28/13) at 5

thedevilrobyjohn · Aug 28, 2013

did anyone see the piece on the guy down near hopewell protesting on the over pass with open carried ar and semi pistol? he was loading and unloading the guns and racking slides on camera. he was detained by police and weapons seized. He was talking about open carrying and his rights as well as they showed vcdl stickers. Is no one talking about this for a reason, perhaps some damage control. did no one see it? his name was Brandon something. They mentioned him being a member of some organization but didnt specifically say vcdl, they showed the sticker to make assumptions or connections, they named an organization but it wasnt vcdl...i had just got home and it popped on, i didnt get perfect info from it....they showed vcdl stickers

peter nap · Aug 28, 2013

thedevilrobyjohn said:
did anyone see the piece on the guy down near hopewell protesting on the over pass with open carried ar and semi pistol? he was loading and unloading the guns and racking slides on camera. he was detained by police and weapons seized. He was talking about open carrying and his rights as well as they showed vcdl stickers. Is no one talking about this for a reason, perhaps some damage control. did no one see it? his name was Brandon something. They mentioned him being a member of some organization but didnt specifically say vcdl, they showed the sticker to make assumptions or connections, they named an organization but it wasnt vcdl...i had just got home and it popped on, i didnt get perfect info from it....

I didn't see it!
I wonder if David McBeth came to Va for some reason:banana:

Here it is:
http://wtvr.com/2013/08/27/constitutionalist-carries-assault-rifle-protests-obama/

cirrusly · Aug 28, 2013

Even the Commonwealth Attorney agrees he was well within his rights. Another victim of LEOs overstepping the law.

ProShooter · Aug 28, 2013

Legal or not, if you are standing on a highway overpass with a rifle and pistol, you may find that you will draw some unwanted attention.

cirrusly · Aug 28, 2013

ProShooter said:
Legal or not, if you are standing on a highway overpass with a rifle and pistol, you may find that you will draw some unwanted attention.

Agreed- you are putting yourself at a greater propensity for illegal detainment, however this does not mitigate or justify the fact he was indeed illegally detained.

peter nap · Aug 28, 2013

ProShooter said:
Legal or not, if you are standing on a highway overpass with a rifle and pistol, you may find that you will draw some unwanted attention.

It brings up some very interesting questions Jim.

We are on the whole, a pretty conservative group. Perhaps too conservative but then again.

Groups like "Richmond Guns" are old ladies that want to become a permit state. Here at least we're closer to the center line.

Had VCDL organized a long gun carry protest, they would have alerted the police and I doubt there would have been any problems.

That said....should we have to alert them that one or more people will be exercising RIGHTS anywhere? Should we be more concerned with playing to the camera than actually exercising our God given rights?

There is an extremely fine line between a nut spouting the gospel on a street corner and a missionary spreading the word.

The same for us.....A fine line between a nut with a gun and legally armed Citizens demonstrating.

I'm on the fence with this.

papa bear · Aug 28, 2013

ProShooter said:
Legal or not, if you are standing on a highway overpass with a rifle and pistol, you may find that you will draw some unwanted attention.

No problem with him drawing attention to himself. i think that was the point

what i do have a problem with is LE drawing their guns on him and illegally seaching him and detaining him.
if they seen him and he was doing nothing illegal, they should have left him alone

peter nap · Aug 28, 2013

In the news interview...the guy came across pretty well. I'd have to call this one a win.

OC for ME · Aug 28, 2013

However, the chief says, and legal experts agree, that there’s a fine line between individual rights and public safety. University of Richmond law professor Jack Preis references Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. opinion in Schenck v. United States, often paraphrased as “shouting fire in a crowded theater.”

http://wtvr.com/2013/08/27/constitutionalist-carries-assault-rifle-protests-obama/

So, OC is now analogous to yelling fire in a crowded theater. Those cops and the chief have some splainin to do.

ProShooter · Aug 28, 2013

peter nap said:
I'm on the fence with this.

I'm on the fence as well.

Sometimes, we have to find a balance between Virginia law, and the laws of common sense. A convicted felon is not supposed to be in possession of a gun. If he finds himself in a life threatening situation that he did not cause, and he can access a firearm to defend his life, I think that the law of common sense says that he did nothing wrong. In this case, I think the law of common sense says that walking around a highway overpass with a rifle is a bit over the edge.

Now, what people (and some people here) need to understand, is that we are looking at things after the fact. You can complain all you want about the police drawing down on him. When a flurry of people call 911 and say "There's a man on the overpass with a rifle", no cop is going to drive up, look and drive away muttering to himself "perfectly legal activity". When you get calls from the public, you respond. The officers have no idea what the rifleman did prior to their arrival. They cannot go on just what they observe at the moment of arrival. To do so would be suicide.

skidmark · Aug 28, 2013

In no particular order -

Yes, if a disturbance had resulted, charges could have been filed. But it would depend on who actually initiated the disturbance, as opposed to what they were disturbed about.

It looked like he was in somebody's back yard when he demonstrated the manipulation of the AR-style, although what I could see from the video was that no magazine was actually inserted. Good way to avoid the easy brandisahing charge.

Time/place/manner can control public speech (which includes public demonstration). However, nothing was said about any of the criteria that must exist before imposing time/place/manner restrictions.

The attempt to incite by pointing out that he was "near" a military instalation and "near" a prison are just that - sensationalization for no purpose except to drive (uninformed/uneducatd) viewer sentiment. Talk about inserting editorial content into what is presented as a straight news story.

The guy identified himself as a member of the Tea Party and that he was engaging in a Tea Party activity. So why the focus on the VCDL sticker? Are they trying to suggest VCDL was involved/supported/condoned the event or the individual's behavior? Or are they again insereting editorial content? (I thought about the possibility that VCDL has become so strongly tied to 2A in Virginia that the reporter/TV6 might have thought this was a VCDL activity - except that they mentioned several times that the guy was associated with the Tea Party and that is was a Tea Party activity not only locally but nationally.)

As for the cops responding and the manner in which they responnded - it's pretty much a wash IF the reporter's statement was correct that they received several "frantic" calls. Of course, the investigation that took place based on those calls could well show that certain callers made false reports - and I've got some oceanfront property in Nebraska to bet against that happening regardless of how frantic and how less-than-truthful some of the callers might have been.

Detaining and disarming the guy may or may not have been a step over the line. It all depends on what they did, how long they did it for, and how they report it out. Only a complete FOIA search will determine if rights were violated.

stay safe.

davidmcbeth · Aug 28, 2013

Any FOIA request likely would result in no records at this point in time - investigation files are exempt.

And I only act like this in front of democratic legislative members' homes who vote anti . Yuk Yuk Yuk.

There maybe a law about highway overpasses though; I'm sure the guy will find out.

Thundar · Aug 28, 2013

ProShooter said:
I'm on the fence as well.

Sometimes, we have to find a balance between Virginia law, and the laws of common sense. .......I think the law of common sense says that walking around a highway overpass with a rifle is a bit over the edge....

I read somewhere that the problem with common sense is that it isn't very common.

I could not find the section of the common sense law that identifies protesting on the overpass as being over the edge.

The long gun open carrier is correct. A right unexercised is a right lost.

Live Free or Die,
Thundar

rmansu2 · Aug 28, 2013

ch 6 news yesterday at 5

If he was actually loading, unloading & racking his slide, wouldn't that be brandishing his firearm?

reddn · Aug 28, 2013

Re: ch 6 news yesterday at 5

rmansu2 said:
If he was actually loading, unloading & racking his slide, wouldn't that be brandishing his firearm?

§ 18.2-282. Pointing, holding, or brandishing firearm, air or gas operated weapon or object similar in appearance; penalty.A. It shall be unlawful for any person to point, hold or brandish any firearm or any air or gas operated weapon or any object similar in appearance, whether capable of being fired or not, in such manner as to reasonably induce fear in the mind of another or hold a firearm or any air or gas operated weapon in a public place in such a manner as to reasonably induce fear in the mind of another of being shot or injured. However, this section shall not apply to any person engaged in excusable or justifiable self-defense. Persons violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor or, if the violation occurs upon any public, private or religious elementary, middle or high school, including buildings and grounds or upon public property within 1,000 feet of such school property, he shall be guilty of a Class 6 felony.B. Any police officer in the performance of his duty, in making an arrest under the provisions of this section, shall not be civilly liable in damages for injuries or death resulting to the person being arrested if he had reason to believe that the person being arrested was pointing, holding, or brandishing such firearm or air or gas operated weapon, or object that was similar in appearance, with intent to induce fear in the mind of another.C. For purposes of this section, the word "firearm" means any weapon that will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel single or multiple projectiles by the action of an explosion of a combustible material. The word "ammunition," as used herein, shall mean a cartridge, pellet, ball, missile or projectile adapted for use in a firearm.

http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+18.2-282

Here is the biggest test '... hold a firearm or any air or gas operated weapon in a public place in such a manner as to reasonably induce fear in the mind of another of being shot or injured.'

This test is to be conducted using the expectations of a 'reasonable man'. Good luck finding that constantly.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2

jegoodin · Aug 28, 2013

rmansu2 said:
If he was actually loading, unloading & racking his slide, wouldn't that be brandishing his firearm?

It didn't look like he was in public (on the overpass)when he was demonstrating how the AR functioned on camera.
It looked like he was doing it at the request of the reporter after the fact in his home.

PALO · Aug 28, 2013

OC for ME said:
So, OC is now analogous to yelling fire in a crowded theater. Those cops and the chief have some splainin to do.

God not this stupid Schenck crap again. First of all, Schenck was SUPERSEDED by Brandenburg.

It is not even the law of the land anymore. Second of all, it's not "shouting fire in a crowded theatre", it's FALSELY shouting fire in a crowded theatre.

And thirdly, Schenck was used to justify the prosecution of a person for PROTESTING THE WAR. It is an odious case, but people constantly reference it as if it is the law (it isn't), and if it's wise

Blk97F150 · Aug 29, 2013

From a VCDL.org email alert:

***********************************************************
1. VCDL member illegally detained/harassed by Hopewell PD on Monday
***********************************************************

On Monday a VCDL member was participating in an event where cardboard signs were being
held on an overpass for cars below to see (and honk if they agreed with the message).
The member, Brandon Howard, had an unloaded AR-15 slung across his back and a pistol
holstered at his side.

After a while EIGHT Hopewell police officers showed up guns drawn and POINTED at Brandon!
Keep in mind Brandon was simply standing on the overpass holding a sign in both hands.
Both guns were secured, so the police had no justification to seriously endanger
Brandon's life by pointing loaded guns at him. (Officer safety does NOT trump citizen
safety in such a situation where there is no viable threat. I guarantee that the
Hopewell officers do not like someone pointing a gun at THEM.)

The Hopewell PD, with what must have been their ENTIRE on duty force at that time, then
proceeded to do a felony stop, having Brandon walk slowly backwards with his hands in the
air. He was then cuffed, his rifle thrown into the trunk of a police car, and then taken
to the PD. The police claimed at the time that this was just a "detention."
That detention lasted TWO HOURS, after which Brandon was released, his damaged rifle
returned, and he was driven back to his vehicle.

Keep in mind this happened in VIRGINIA, in our backyard, not New Jersey.

I have put Brandon in contact with an attorney, as he needs to look for a remedy that
will get Hopewell's attention so this doesn't happen to anyone else.

-

Jimmy Barrett on WRVA (Richmond AM 1140) this morning went off on a self-righteous tirade
on this event without knowing the facts. He implied things that weren't true. Having
met Jimmy before, all this took me by surprise.

Professionals in the media should avoid doing such things, as it affects their
credibility.

Jimmy said that one should not mix the Second Amendment and First Amendment rights.
Really? They get mixed all the time and it's no big deal.

He also said that the police were justified in detaining Brandon because drivers might
see him with the rifle, not knowing if he was going to shoot at them! The implication is
that the rifle was in his hands and visible from the traffic below.

OK, let's look at the facts on this, Jimmy:

1. The rifle and handgun were secured, not in Brandon's hands - no one was being
threatened.

2. The rifle and handgun would be totally invisible from the expressway below - from
both directions. Brandon's front was covered by a sign and the rifle was strapped to his
back, making it totally invisible from drivers approaching Brandon from the front.
Drivers approaching from his back wouldn't see any of him at all because the bridge would
be blocking their view. The only way his gun could be seen was by someone driving on the
overpass itself. Again it was secured (and unloaded).

-

It is a right to be able to carry a firearm openly - be it a handgun, shotgun, or rifle
and THAT is the bottom line. The Hopewell PD failed miserably in their treatment of
Brandon and hopefully amends will be made.

nuc65 · Aug 29, 2013

Blk97F150 said:
From a VCDL.org email alert:

***********************************************************
1. VCDL member illegally detained/harassed by Hopewell PD on Monday
***********************************************************

On Monday a VCDL member was participating in an event where cardboard signs were being
held on an overpass for cars below to see (and honk if they agreed with the message).
The member, Brandon Howard, had an unloaded AR-15 slung across his back and a pistol
holstered at his side.

After a while EIGHT Hopewell police officers showed up guns drawn and POINTED at Brandon!
Keep in mind Brandon was simply standing on the overpass holding a sign in both hands.
Both guns were secured, so the police had no justification to seriously endanger
Brandon's life by pointing loaded guns at him. (Officer safety does NOT trump citizen
safety in such a situation where there is no viable threat. I guarantee that the
Hopewell officers do not like someone pointing a gun at THEM.)

The Hopewell PD, with what must have been their ENTIRE on duty force at that time, then
proceeded to do a felony stop, having Brandon walk slowly backwards with his hands in the
air. He was then cuffed, his rifle thrown into the trunk of a police car, and then taken
to the PD. The police claimed at the time that this was just a "detention."
That detention lasted TWO HOURS, after which Brandon was released, his damaged rifle
returned, and he was driven back to his vehicle.

Keep in mind this happened in VIRGINIA, in our backyard, not New Jersey.

I have put Brandon in contact with an attorney, as he needs to look for a remedy that
will get Hopewell's attention so this doesn't happen to anyone else.

-

Jimmy Barrett on WRVA (Richmond AM 1140) this morning went off on a self-righteous tirade
on this event without knowing the facts. He implied things that weren't true. Having
met Jimmy before, all this took me by surprise.

Professionals in the media should avoid doing such things, as it affects their
credibility.

Jimmy said that one should not mix the Second Amendment and First Amendment rights.
Really? They get mixed all the time and it's no big deal.

He also said that the police were justified in detaining Brandon because drivers might
see him with the rifle, not knowing if he was going to shoot at them! The implication is
that the rifle was in his hands and visible from the traffic below.

OK, let's look at the facts on this, Jimmy:

1. The rifle and handgun were secured, not in Brandon's hands - no one was being
threatened.

2. The rifle and handgun would be totally invisible from the expressway below - from
both directions. Brandon's front was covered by a sign and the rifle was strapped to his
back, making it totally invisible from drivers approaching Brandon from the front.
Drivers approaching from his back wouldn't see any of him at all because the bridge would
be blocking their view. The only way his gun could be seen was by someone driving on the
overpass itself. Again it was secured (and unloaded).

-

It is a right to be able to carry a firearm openly - be it a handgun, shotgun, or rifle
and THAT is the bottom line. The Hopewell PD failed miserably in their treatment of
Brandon and hopefully amends will be made.

I am waiting to see where and when a legal defense fund is set up. I plan on contributing. I also think he will have good standing to make the city of Hopewell pay for their Trynical actions, and I hope he does so.

SouthernBoy · Aug 29, 2013

Removed by poster.

ch 6 news yesterday (8/28/13) at 5

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Regular Member

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Banned

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Newbie

Regular Member

Regular Member

Activist Member

Regular Member