Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Rutland Police need to be sued!

  1. #1
    Regular Member vermonter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    341

    Post imported post

    I read an earlier post by a member named CJ about open carry issues in Rutland. This state is getting out of hand with hard core gang bangers taking over. Look at this article. I am sure one of the posts in the Rutland Herald is by one of our members. I am all for an OC meet-up in Rutland. If the Rutland PD asks you for ID give it to them. After you are shown not to be a felon or person prohibited ask them "Am I being detained?", then walk away! If they detain you call a lawyer!

    http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pb...81/1002/NEWS01

    and here:

    http://blog.drivinglaws.org/2008/08/...hicle-assault/

    Here are the suspects who arefrom Connecticut:



  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Burlington, VT, , USA
    Posts
    8

    Post imported post

    I guess I'm missing something. I haven't been following the situation. I don't understand from the stories why Rutland Police need to be sued. Do Rutland Police not let you Open Carry?

  3. #3
    Regular Member vermonter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    341

    Post imported post

    Mike
    Super Moderator






    Joined:
    Sat May 13th, 2006

    Location:
    Fairfax County, Virginia USA

    Posts:
    3516

    Status:
    Offline
    Posted: Tue Jun

  4. #4
    Regular Member vermonter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    341

    Post imported post

    Sorry about the previous attempt to post. Read this post from CJ:

    http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum53/11480.html

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Stratford, Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    646

    Post imported post

    Your police could have done us a favor down here in CT by terminating them on the spot. We don't want those types back in the state (and I'm sorry they came up your way causing trouble too). There are a lot of scumbags around.

    GC

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    VT, AK, ,
    Posts
    76

    Post imported post

    Well, they are being sued but for a much different reason:

    http://rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.d...97/1002/NEWS01

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    VT, AK, ,
    Posts
    76

    Post imported post

    One thing I've come across that needs to be challenged, a Rutland ordinance forbids firearms in city parks:





    "§ 8004. Traffic. No person in a park shall:
    1. Motor vehicle laws apply. Fail to comply with all applicable provisions of the state motor vehicle statutes or city ordinances in regard to equipment and operation of vehicles.
    2. Speed of vehicles. Ride or drive a vehicle at a rate of speed exceeding 15 miles an hour, except upon such roads as the superintendent may designate, by posted signs, for speedier travel.
    3. Operation confined to designated areas. Drive any vehicle on any area except the paved park road or trails or parking areas designated by the superintendent.




    4. Parking.
    (a) Designated areas. Park a vehicle in other than an established or designated parking area, and such use shall be in accordance with the posted directions.





    § 8005. Recreational activities. No person in a park shall:
    1. Bathing and swimming.
    (a) Designated areas. Swim, bath, or wade in any waters or waterways in or adjacent to any park, except in such waters and at such places as are provided therefor, and in compliance with such regulations as are herein set forth or may be hereafter adopted.
    (b) Certain hours. Frequent any waters or places designated for the purpose of swimming or bathing, or congregate thereat, except between such hours of the day as shall be designated by the superintendent for such purposes for each individual area.
    2. Firearms. No person shall use, carry, or possess firearms of any descriptions, or air-rifles, spring-guns, bow-and-arrows, slings or any other forms of weapons potentially inimical to wild life and dangerous to human safety, or any instrument that can be loaded with and fire blank cartridges, or any kind of trapping device. Shooting into parks areas from beyond park boundaries is forbidden."

    Obviously, the state pre-emption law forbids cities from even having such ordinances: http://www.leg.state.vt.us/statutes/...;Section=02295

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    10

    Post imported post

    if any of those guys are found not guilty you could be sued for posting their picture online

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    180

    Post imported post

    mycoldhands wrote:
    if any of those guys are found not guilty you could be sued for posting their picture online
    Not true, arrest records are public information. Goggle slammer, it's a magazine that publishes the photos of all arrested persons every couple of weeks. It's available in several States and expanding. Some police departs put the photos on the net before conviction as well.

Posting Permissions

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