• 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.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • 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.

Lawsuit: detained for openly carrying pistol

Michigander

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
4,818
Location
Mulligan's Valley
Some of these cases make me wish the punishment fit the crime. Calculating a fair punishment in this case is as simple as asking yourself what would the police have done if he had drawn on them instead of the other way around, and the obvious answer is also a fair and proper one. So why the double standard?

The ironic thing is that half assed thugs with badges commit felonies in claiming to insure that good people are not felons. 600 grand is not enough. A price cannot be put on endangering someones life, and that goes double when it's a sworn public servant.
 
Last edited:

FreeInAZ

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
2,508
Location
Secret Bunker
Some of these cases make me wish the punishment fit the crime. Calculating a fair punishment in this case is as simple as asking yourself what would the police have done if he had drawn on them instead of the other way around, and the obvious answer is also a fair and proper one. So why the double standard?

The ironic thing is that half assed thugs with badges commit felonies in claiming to insure that good people are not felons. 600 grand is not enough. A price cannot be put on endangering someones life, and that goes double when it's a sworn public servant.

Quoted for truth! I hear you brother. +1:thumbup:
 

BrianB

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2011
Messages
223
Location
Florida
I only hope the plaintiff takes it to the end and gets an actual finding of fault and judgement against the criminals. Too often these things are settled out of court and the bad guys get away with not admitting any wrongdoing in exchange for hush money.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
I only hope the plaintiff takes it to the end and gets an actual finding of fault and judgement against the criminals. Too often these things are settled out of court and the bad guys get away with not admitting any wrongdoing in exchange for hush money.

While literally true that such a settlement avoids admission of wrongdoing, pretty much anybody paying attention knows there was wrongdoing. An admission doesn't accomplish much. The admitters know what they did.

The tasty part is that while the recipient of the settlement is often prohibited from revealing the details by the terms of the settlement, some parts are accessible by way of FOIA/Sunshine/Open Records request.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Until the law recognizes that citizens should not have to hand over their arms, without resistance, that they possess for their protection against the gov't, will the gov't come to the conclusion that harassing LACs is not in their best interest.

We should be pushing for laws to allow for citizens to be able to resist unlawful detentions and such harassment..

If such laws are passed, these incidents will go down to zero ...
 

DeSchaine

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2013
Messages
537
Location
Kalamazoo, MI
McBeth, I agree in principle, but in practicality, advocating resisting puts people in more danger. Not only the person being detained, but bystanders as well. Lets face it, most cops cant shoot worth a damn. I refer to the incident where the NYPD shot bystanders and never actually hit the suspect, and where they wounded nine civilians while trying to gun down one suspect. What really needs to be done is legislation concerning the implementation of stiffer penalties for sworn law enforcement officers who violate State statutes as well as constitutional law.

Here's the NYC things:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/15/new-york-nypd-shooting/2815851/

Unreal... and yet we law abiding citizens are the threat. Go figure.
 

Michigander

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2007
Messages
4,818
Location
Mulligan's Valley
There is no law against self defense against felon cops in most jurisdictions, and the scotus mentioned that it could be done legally, though yes shooting it out with a cop who at that moment deserves to die is a fairly certainly suicidal move, and no, that wouldn't change with stronger laws encouraging the practice, but yes, if it happened frequently the abuse levels might change, but more likely all that would happen is that the media would slander people who defended themselves and things would get worse. Many of us here in years past have routinely had the legal right to defend ourselves against cops with deadly force, that doesn't make it smart, unless there is someone nuts enough to start severely beating or shooting people, and I can't recall any instance of that in regards to OCing, other than I seem to recall one example in Philadelphia.
 
Last edited:

ghostrider

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2007
Messages
1,416
Location
Grand Rapids, Michigan, USA
Until the law recognizes that citizens should not have to hand over their arms, without resistance, that they possess for their protection against the gov't, will the gov't come to the conclusion that harassing LACs is not in their best interest.

We should be pushing for laws to allow for citizens to be able to resist unlawful detentions and such harassment..

If such laws are passed, these incidents will go down to zero ...

It's already legal to resist unlawful arrest. The problem is knowing/proving it was unlawful. Detained is an arrest.
 

smn

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
145
Location
, ,
So what are the odds of a settlement vs legal precedent? I'd rather see a court opinion favorable to the plaintiff but that will take time. Municipalities are quick to make settlements.
 

bigt8261

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
181
Location
Grand Rapids
A newly created user called "CityAttorney" has started posting in the comments and has attacked me. HA!

CityAttorney:
How does Mr. Lambert, who lives and works in the City of Kentwood, know what kind of handgun Mr. Deffert, who lives in the City of Grand Rapids, was carrying at the time?
Tom Lambert:
If this is the level of investigatory prowess Mr. Deffert will be up against, he should be able to sleep a little better.

I do not work in the city of Kentwood, sorry. If you do a little more reading you will see that I personally know Mr. Deffert.

Just as my city of residence does not preclude me from being affected by the preempted ordinances of Grand Rapids, my place of residence also does not preclude me from knowing and interacting with residents of Grand Rapids.

Is it really wise for you to be posting here, let alone attacking individuals? Is that what taxpayers are paying for? Of course, assuming you really are who you say you are.

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rap...r.html/post/2013-12-23/1387812391-48-381.html
 

bigt8261

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
181
Location
Grand Rapids
I've already reported the user and taken a screen shot. IP info will be kept by Mlive.

If this user really is from the city and should the city ever try to come after me, Johann's case will look like peanuts.
 

Haman J.T.

New member
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
1,245
Location
, ,
While literally true that such a settlement avoids admission of wrongdoing, pretty much anybody paying attention knows there was wrongdoing. An admission doesn't accomplish much. The admitters know what they did.

The tasty part is that while the recipient of the settlement is often prohibited from revealing the details by the terms of the settlement, some parts are accessible by way of FOIA/Sunshine/Open Records request.
This can only happen if the Plaintiff agrees to a prohibition of public revealation on his part! I Didn't! This IS Deja Vu for Steve and Me! Just change names and it's just another (technicaly according to law) "Armed Robbery" by "Ignorant/of law" LEO! If He has the money/lawyer fees to take it all the way, it may go before a jury and the "Cost" of the Violation may be realized! CARRY ON!
 
Top