Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Another crazy Temple arrest....

  1. #1
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318

    Another crazy Temple arrest....

    Jason Orsek, VP of Come and Take It, was arrested yesterday for Unlawful Carrying Weapons. The problem with this arrest? Jason was on private property, with permission of the property owner, which was verified by the arresting officer prior to the arrest.

    http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.u...E.46.htm#46.02

    As this is obviously not a violation of UCW, expect the charges to change a half a dozen times until they think they've found something they can get worked thru their kangaroo court. https://www.facebook.com/comeandtakeittexas
    Advocate freedom please

  2. #2
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,274
    File criminal charges against the arresting cop. False this, wrongful that, unlawful use of..., then sue the pants off of the cop and his cop buddies.

  3. #3
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    Jason Orsek, VP of Come and Take It, was arrested yesterday for Unlawful Carrying Weapons. The problem with this arrest? Jason was on private property, with permission of the property owner, which was verified by the arresting officer prior to the arrest.

    http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.u...E.46.htm#46.02

    As this is obviously not a violation of UCW, expect the charges to change a half a dozen times until they think they've found something they can get worked thru their kangaroo court. https://www.facebook.com/comeandtakeittexas
    The statute you provided doesn't say there's an exception for someone else's property. Unless your going to say that his buddies land was under his control? Didn't see anything about public land versus private land. It just says doesn't pay if your in YOUR land or land you control.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    The statute you provided doesn't say there's an exception for someone else's property. Unless your going to say that his buddies land was under his control? Didn't see anything about public land versus private land. It just says doesn't pay if your in YOUR land or land you control.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    True BUT ... from statue
    (2) inside of or directly en route to a motor vehicle or watercraft that is owned by the person or under the person's control.

    AND .. from FB page
    Jason Orsek, VP of CATI, was illegally arrested on February 19th. He was sitting in a parked vehicle in a church parking lot using their Wi-Fi signal

    the vehicleappears to be under his ownership or control ...

    Looks like he is likely not guilty to me...thought he FB page isn't gospel and it does not say "his car"

  5. #5
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    The statute you provided doesn't say there's an exception for someone else's property. Unless your going to say that his buddies land was under his control? Didn't see anything about public land versus private land. It just says doesn't pay if your in YOUR land or land you control.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    Is he covered by the fact that he had permission to be on the property? I can't answer that definitively. What I can answer definitively is that this arrest was unjust, unconstitutional and immoral.
    Advocate freedom please

  6. #6
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,274
    It does not matter if the car was his. He was in control of the car by his presence. As long as he was not unlawfully "possessing" the car he is good. It seems that this will come down to whose definition of "plain view" that will be upheld.

  7. #7
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Here is a good write up on this incident. http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2014/02...tivist-in.html

    It sounds like they have no case, what-so-ever, and they probably knew that when they made the arrest.
    Advocate freedom please

  8. #8
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Case dismissed, reason "Insufficient evidence to obtain a conviction of the offense herein."
    Advocate freedom please

  9. #9
    Regular Member Rusty Young Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Árida Zona
    Posts
    1,648
    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    Case dismissed, reason "Insufficient evidence to obtain a conviction of the offense herein."
    Wonder how much Mr. Orsek paid in legal fees.

    I suppose it should all be considered water under the bridge now? /sarcasm

    Hope to hear more.
    Last edited by Rusty Young Man; 12-08-2014 at 03:14 PM.
    I carry to defend my loved ones; Desensitizing and educating are secondary & tertiary reasons. Anything else is unintended.

    “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” - Frederic Bastiat

    "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle." - Edmund Burke

  10. #10
    Regular Member FreeInAZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Secret Bunker
    Posts
    2,573

    Another crazy Temple arrest....

    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty Young Man View Post
    Wonder how much Mr. Orsek paid in legal fees.

    I suppose it should all be considered water under the bridge now? /sarcasm

    Hope to hear more.
    It's called fiscal re-eduction by Opinion Enforcement Officers. They see someone doing something legal, yet they find annoying, their answer? Cook up some bogus charges, and teach the person a lesson of "law be damned! I am the law! You rub my sensibilities the wrong way, you'll pay!"

    Sad but true tactic OEO's have been using for decades now.
    Last edited by FreeInAZ; 12-08-2014 at 06:41 PM.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "You must be the change you wish to see in the world" by Mahatma Gandhi

    “Your beliefs become your thoughts. Your thoughts become your words. Your words become your actions. Your actions become your habits. Your habits become your values. Your values become your destiny.” by Mahatma Gandhi

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by FreeInAZ View Post
    It's called fiscal re-eduction by Opinion Enforcement Officers. They see someone doing something legal, yet they find annoying, their answer? Cook up some bogus charges, and teach the person a lesson of "law be damned! I am the law! You rub my sensibilities the wrong way, you'll pay!"

    Sad but true tactic OEO's have been using for decades now.
    They have tried it with me several times; but but but, I resist so they have the option of : a) going away or b) fight to the death

    They always just go away.

  12. #12
    Regular Member zekester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Uvalde, Texas
    Posts
    665

    Too Ironic

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    Here is a good write up on this incident. http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2014/02...tivist-in.html

    It sounds like they have no case, what-so-ever, and they probably knew that when they made the arrest.
    The same language that saved him....will be stricken from HB195

    Sec. 46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun, illegal knife, or club if the person is not:

    The below is stricken....

    (1) on the person's own premises, or premises under the
    person's control, or with permission of the premises owner
    Last edited by zekester; 12-11-2014 at 11:16 AM.
    GOD gave me rights!!!....The Constitutuion just confirms it!!

  13. #13
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Quote Originally Posted by zekester View Post
    The same language that saved him....will be stricken from HB195

    Sec. 46.02. UNLAWFUL CARRYING WEAPONS. (a) A person commits an offense if the person intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his or her person a handgun, illegal knife, or club if the person is not:

    The below is stricken....

    (1) on the person's own premises, or premises under the
    person's control, or with permission of the premises owner
    Either you don't understand the bill or you're being deceitful. He'd have been completely and unambiguously covered with hb195.
    Advocate freedom please

  14. #14
    Regular Member zekester's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Uvalde, Texas
    Posts
    665

    Onl;y becasue

    Quote Originally Posted by stealthyeliminator View Post
    Either you don't understand the bill or you're being deceitful. He'd have been completely and unambiguously covered with hb195.
    It is not written....so therefore not a crime
    GOD gave me rights!!!....The Constitutuion just confirms it!!

  15. #15
    Regular Member stealthyeliminator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    3,318
    Quote Originally Posted by zekester View Post
    It is not written....so therefore not a crime
    ...... Which is preferable...... What's the problem? Where's the point?


    ...... This bill strikes Texas' longstanding prohibition on handgun possession from the law. That's a great thing. It's much preferable to writing new law, or modifying the existing, to "allow" handgun possession. This bill accomplishes the goal in the best way, by striking bad law from existence.
    Advocate freedom please

Posting Permissions

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