Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 75

Thread: Man with handgun, ammunition arrested at BWI

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    LINTHICUM, Md. (AP) — A Virginia man was arrested this month while carrying a concealed handgun and 30 rounds of ammunition at Baltimore-Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport, the federal Transportation Security Administration has disclosed.

    Police did not announce the Aug. 1 arrest at the time, but the TSA posted an account on its Web site to highlight the success of its technique for screening passengers by closely observing their behavior.

    According to the TSA, the man was "exhibiting suspicious behaviors" consistent with the actions of a terrorist before an attack. But Cpl. Jonathan Green, a spokesman for the Maryland Transportation Authority police, said there were no indications that the suspect was involved in terrorism or was "feeling out" security at the airport.

    Court records identify the man as Thomas J. Sackie, 45, of Falls Church. He was charged with having a handgun on his person without a permit and taken to Anne Arundel County District Court. He was released without bail.

    Cpl. Green said the agency did not issue a press release at the time because it did not think the incident was a major arrest. He described the man as someone who "made a bad decision and got caught."

    The man told officers he intended to get a permit for the gun but hadn't gotten around to it, Cpl. Green said.

    The TSA said an officer observed a man acting suspiciously as he stood at a ticket counter. The officer, who had been trained through the agency's Screening Passengers by Observation Techniques, or SPOT, program, notified police, who determined that the man was carrying a 9 mm Glock and ammunition without a permit.

    One listed address for Thomas J. Sackie was the same as that of Oakley Network Systems in Falls Church. According to public records, Tom Sackie is senior vice president of that firm.

    Oakley is a data security and investigative company that specializes in protecting clients against "internal threats," according to its Web site. Mr. Sackie did not return messages left at Oakley's office.


    http://www.washingtontimes.com/artic...043/1004/metro

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Gloucester Point, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    899

    Post imported post

    Man, you better watch out for the TSA's "SPOT" program...pretty amazing that just by observing the man, the officer could determine "that the man was carrying a 9 mm Glock and ammunition without a permit." As a graduate of the "SPOT" program, do you get x-ray glasses:what:





  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    205

    Post imported post

    It's amazing that .. in Maryland of all places..TSA didn't immediately run press releases to all the major networks proclaiming the thwarted terror attack!

    Hopefully the guy doesn't get the book thrown at him, although anyone with GOOD SENSE knows that Maryland isn't Virginia. "Average joe's" aren't getting permit in Maryland.

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    OK... I did wonder about this.

    He is old enough that he should know he cannot make it past the metal detectors packing a gun.

    He could have unloaded it and placed it into checked baggage or just walked out altogether.

    They never mention why he was there with the gun and what he intended to do with it before the flight.



    http://www.bwiairport.com/customer_a...s_and_dont__s/

    Firearms and ammunition may not be carried by a passenger on an aircraft. However, unloaded firearms may be transported in checked luggage if declared to the agent at check-in and packed in a suitable container. Handguns must be in a locked container. Boxed small arms ammunition for personal use may be transported in checked luggage.



  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Woodbridge, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    131

    Post imported post

    Nevermind the was a Virgninian carrying in Maryland - DOH!

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    Ya.... Not sure what he was thinking.

    But I have to wonder about him. Seems like he is not very bright in what he did.

    From VA and flying out of MD. So I will assume he left home to go to the airport.

    So WHY did he take his gun?

    Being an older guy, he should have known better and checked to see what he needed to do to take it with him.

    But maybe he lives in a cave and did not hear about the ban on transporting firearmson anaircraftso long ago.

  7. #7
    Campaign Veteran Dutch Uncle's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Virginia, USA
    Posts
    1,715

    Post imported post

    I agree this guy has very poor judgment to say the least. I wouldn't trust him to provide "security" against any kind of threats, internet or otherwise. He's not a very good example of the folks who carry, so I'm glad to hear he "didn't get around to getting a permit". What kind of a soft-headed lubber doesn't realize you can't just carry a gun in MD, especially while getting ready to get on a plane? How many state and federal laws does thaqt violate?! A simple INTERNET check would have told him he could have dismantled or locked the pistol in his luggage, stored the ammo separately, then declared it as check on luggage at the desk. Federal Peaceable Journey laws would protect him on Maryland's roads, and TSA rules allow checking firearms in baggage if declared. Maybe he's not familiar with how to use the internet to find these things out.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    Dutch Uncle wrote:
    I agree this guy has very poor judgment to say the least. I wouldn't trust him to provide "security" against any kind of threats, internet or otherwise. He's not a very good example of the folks who carry, so I'm glad to hear he "didn't get around to getting a permit". What kind of a soft-headed lubber doesn't realize you can't just carry a gun in MD, especially while getting ready to get on a plane? How many state and federal laws does thaqt violate?! A simple INTERNET check would have told him he could have dismantled or locked the pistol in his luggage, stored the ammo separately, then declared it as check on luggage at the desk. Federal Peaceable Journey laws would protect him on Maryland's roads, and TSA rules allow checking firearms in baggage if declared. Maybe he's not familiar with how to use the internet to find these things out.
    EXACTLY!!!

    So what we have here is a fine, upstanding member of the community exercising his rights to keep and bear arms.

    He is so responsible that he chose not to get a CC permit and failed to research how to transport a handgun while traveling by air. It has been all over the news that you cannot do it and for as long as I can recall... you cannot take a gun on the plane.




    So I do not think I can trust any decisions he may make when it comes to use of force! People.. watch out!!! This guy is out there.


  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Gloucester Point, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    899

    Post imported post

    Who said he was trying to board an aircraft? Who said he was traveling by air? Who said he was really even a traveler?

    Based on what I read in this article, yes he screwed up, he didn't have a license but nowhere did I read that he attempted to board an aircraft with his gun.



  10. #10
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Dutch Uncle wrote:
    I agree this guy has very poor judgment to say the least. I wouldn't trust him to provide "security" against any kind of threats, internet or otherwise. He's not a very good example of the folks who carry, so I'm glad to hear he "didn't get around to getting a permit". What kind of a soft-headed lubber doesn't realize you can't just carry a gun in MD, especially while getting ready to get on a plane? How many state and federal laws does thaqt violate?! A simple INTERNET check would have told him he could have dismantled or locked the pistol in his luggage, stored the ammo separately, then declared it as check on luggage at the desk..... Maybe he's not familiar with how to use the internet to find these things out.

    This guy is a senior veepat an IT security company. The company provides products and services to BIG customers, including Fortune 100 companies. So, he is quite aware of how to use the Internet. He is also obviously connected politically since he got special treatment by the TSA--his arrest was not announced at the time it happened and possibly the only way it was made public was due to an eagle-eyed reporter scanning TSA internally aimed reports. This guy isno neophyte. But he does qualify for goof with a gun status, that's for sure.

    OK, he's an executive goof with a gun...

    I wonder ifthe goof's firmwill loseanyof the business it has with the Department of Defense?


  11. #11
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    [censored for failure to be an imperialist murderer]
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    377

    Post imported post

    Any chance he can use the Second Amendment as an affirmative defense? I have a dream, where he gets a hotshot lawyer and the law is overturned as unconstitutional because the the right of the people, to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

    The article did not mention brandishing, threatening behavior, illegal discharge of firearm, wounding or murder. Just a citizen with a pistol. Anyone hurt? SO why was he arrested?

    Do we needpermits to carry our laptops around? Go to an airport. Tell me that none of the people hooked up to the Wi-Fi network is doing something illegal, like downloading child porn, using credit card numbers purchased from Russian hackers to buy DVDs to convert into cash later to be funneled to Hezbollah, or directing a botnet to take down Wal-Mart?

    If pistol carriers need permits, then so do laptop carriers! Who knows what evil things those crazy and fanatical laptop users are up to in public!

    (This was written on a laptop, but inside my home. You'll need a search warrant to examine it.)

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Gloucester Point, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    899

    Post imported post

    All these posts go back to my original questions posed earlier this afternoon (which nobody has really attempted to answer):

    Who said he was trying to board an aircraft? Who said he was traveling by air? Who said he was really even a traveler?





  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    As I understand it.... They never "observed" a gun... just his behavior as being suspicious.Besides carrying a concealed firearm without a permit... he was not breaking any laws.

    Contact was made based on their training to spot people acting like a terrorist. It was only then that he was found to be armed.

    Everything appears to be legal and proper. Not sure what defense he can raise.

    Both laptops and guns can be used to commit illegal acts. The only difference is that unless you decide to smash someones head in with the computer... laptopsdo not kill people.

    You have the right to beep and bear arms... The Constitution does not permit youKeep and Conceal them.

    As always.... the bad guy will still conceal carry since he does not really care. The law only stops the honest people who will refrain until they receive a permit. The bad guy must be caught in the act of concealing so that he can be punished accordingly.



  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    [censored for failure to be an imperialist murderer]
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Redmond, Washington, USA
    Posts
    618

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    Both laptops and guns can be used to commit illegal acts. The only difference is that unless you decide to smash someones head in with the computer... laptopsdo not kill people.
    :shock::what:


    I'm confused by this statement. Are you implying that only the laptop requires a decision to kill people, where guns do it all by themselves? Posessing the owner into going on a killing spree?

    Seems to me, unless you decide to take out the firearm from it's holster and shoot someone, guns do not kill people.

    Is that statement wrong??

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    ixtow wrote:
    I'd say there's about 0% chance of using the constitutuon in any defense, if the part you intend to use is the 2nd Ammendment. That silly old thing? Judges have rolled their eyes at Constutional Defense for over a century. And whenever their feet are held to the fire, they find some way to "interpret" it to mean the exact opposite of what is written in very plain and easy to understand language.

    Bottom Line: he was arrested for doing something that was illegal according to a law that was illegal itself.

    Thus, his action was not illegal and he was arrested for no reason.

    But since reality and the letter of the law are not things that any branch of our government abides by anymore; he's screwed.
    I can party agree with you.

    He is screwed!

    But he was not arrested for no reason. He was arrested for carrying a concealed weapon without a valid permit.

    The reason for the initial contact is a little suspect to me. I am not sure I really agree with it. They spotted when they determined as being "suspicious behaviors" at the ticket counter.

    Granted, the police cannot just search everyone unless they could articulate the person may be armed. So I am going to alsohave a little bit of trouble here too and would love to know if he gave up his gun or if they found it. Was he constantly adjusting his gunand this was spotted? We do not know.



    Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court which held that the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures was not violated when a police officer stopped a suspect on the street and searched him without probable cause to arrest.

    The Court held that police may briefly detain a person if they have a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime. Because of the important interest in protecting the safety of police officers, police may perform a quick surface search of the person's outer clothing for weapons if they have reasonable suspicion that the person stopped is armed. This reasonable suspicion must be based on "specific and articulable facts" and not merely upon an officer's hunch. This permitted police action has subsequently been referred to in short as a "stop and frisk", or simply a "Terry stop". The Terry standard was later extended to temporary detentions of persons in vehicles, known as traffic stops.


  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    gregma wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:
    Both laptops and guns can be used to commit illegal acts. The only difference is that unless you decide to smash someones head in with the computer... laptopsdo not kill people.
    :shock::what:


    I'm confused by this statement. Are you implying that only the laptop requires a decision to kill people, where guns do it all by themselves? Posessing the owner into going on a killing spree?

    Seems to me, unless you decide to take out the firearm from it's holster and shoot someone, guns do not kill people.

    Is that statement wrong??

    Ahh!! Allow me to clarify my brain processing....

    Computers are not designed to kill people.. while guns are.

    But in the end.. computers and guns do not kill people.... people do!

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Redmond, Washington, USA
    Posts
    618

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    You have the right to beep and bear arms... The Constitution does not permit youKeep and Conceal them.
    Nor does it forbid you from Keep and Conceal. It only stipulates that you can not infringe on being allowed to keep arms, and it says that you can not infringe on being allowed to bear arms. Saying you can not bear them in one fashion or another would make that a defacto infringement.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    gregma wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:
    You have the right to beep and bear arms... The Constitution does not permit youKeep and Conceal them.
    Nor does it forbid you from Keep and Conceal. It only stipulates that you can not infringe on being allowed to keep arms, and it says that you can not infringe on being allowed to bear arms. Saying you can not bear them in one fashion or another would make that a defacto infringement.
    But since it is not explicitly in there... it does not forbid a state from preventing it.

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Redmond, Washington, USA
    Posts
    618

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    gregma wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:
    Both laptops and guns can be used to commit illegal acts. The only difference is that unless you decide to smash someones head in with the computer... laptopsdo not kill people.
    :shock::what:


    I'm confused by this statement. Are you implying that only the laptop requires a decision to kill people, where guns do it all by themselves? Posessing the owner into going on a killing spree?

    Seems to me, unless you decide to take out the firearm from it's holster and shoot someone, guns do not kill people.

    Is that statement wrong??

    Ahh!! Allow me to clarify my brain processing....

    Computers are not designed to kill people.. while guns are.

    But in the end.. computers and guns do not kill people.... people do!
    You've obviously never had to work on a computer 15 hours a day as a programmer or tester!!

  22. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    43

    Post imported post

    The guy probably went to the airport to drop someone off or to meet someone arriving.

    He probably used the justification that the 2nd Amendment allows him to carry a firearm. He also rationalized everything with the old "concealed is concealed" argument.

    He did not do anything wrong. But, unfortunately, according to the Peoples Republik of Maryland, he commited a crime.

    I hope he gets off but since we are talking about Maryland, I believe he is screwed!

  23. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Chambersburg,Pa, ,
    Posts
    92

    Post imported post

    this guy will probably get the book thrown at him, to make an example out of " those gun toten virginian's"......but if he was an 18 yr old baltimore "native" he'd end up with a sweet plea deal and do probation......if that......

  24. #24
    Founder's Club Member ixtow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Suwannee County, FL
    Posts
    5,069

    Post imported post

    [censored for failure to be an imperialist murderer]
    "The fourth man's dark, accusing song had scratched our comfort hard and long..."
    http://edhelper.com/poetry/The_Hangm...rice_Ogden.htm

    https://gunthreadadapters.com

    "Be not intimidated ... nor suffer yourselves to be wheedled out of your Liberties by any pretense of Politeness, Delicacy, or Decency. These, as they are often used, are but three different names for Hypocrisy, Chicanery, and Cowardice." - John Adams

    Tyranny with Manners is still Tyranny.

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Redmond, Washington, USA
    Posts
    618

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    gregma wrote:
    LEO 229 wrote:
    You have the right to beep and bear arms... The Constitution does not permit youKeep and Conceal them.
    Nor does it forbid you from Keep and Conceal. It only stipulates that you can not infringe on being allowed to keep arms, and it says that you can not infringe on being allowed to bear arms. Saying you can not bear them in one fashion or another would make that a defacto infringement.
    But since it is not explicitly in there... it does not forbid a state from preventing it.
    Sure it does. "Shall Not Be Infringed". Why do people have so much difficulty with that word "Infringed"?

    If you restrict, forbid, prevent, disallow, require a license, make a law against. You are infringing. :P


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
  •