MTN Jack arrested

SP101 · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

Glad to hear John is out of the pokey. I am also prepared to support him in any way I can, to resolve this false arrest.

The saddest thing about this "made-up" charge is that Osama wasn't even there yet, for another 90 minutes, so the carrying near a politician bullshit, is complete bullshit.:banghead:

CowboyKen · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

My understanding (I cannot quote the law) is that the Secret Service is empowered to establish a zone of protection under federal law. This is then a weapons free zone for as long as the Secret Service maintains it as such. They can also control who may enter such a zone and empower local authorities, i.e. local law enforcement, to enforce/protect such a zone.

Within that area they appear to have almost Martial Law type authority on a temporary basis.

Can any of you varify my understanding, or authoritatively dispute it?

Ken

gnbrotz · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

CowboyKen wrote:

My understanding (I cannot quote the law) is that the Secret Service is empowered to establish a zone of protection under federal law. This is then a weapons free zone for as long as the Secret Service maintains it as such. They can also control who may enter such a zone and empower local authorities, i.e. local law enforcement, to enforce/protect such a zone.

Within that area they appear to have almost Martial Law type authority on a temporary basis.

Can any of you varify my understanding, or authoritatively dispute it?

Ken

Regardless of the validity of the above assertion, is there ANY evidence that Jack was within, or attempted to enter such a "zone"?

codename_47 · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

If there isn't a lawsuit over this, you are part of the problem.

CowboyKen · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

codename_47 wrote:

If there isn't a lawsuit over this, you are part of the problem.

Who is going to sue who for what? It would seem that under U.S. Title 18, 3065 the Secret Service, or any local LEO's that they designate, can detain anyone they deem is a potential threat to a "protectee."

This is a normal part of thier operations in preparation for a visit to any location by a "protectee."

Ken

Doug Huffman · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

Kneel civilian!

Either we are equal or we are not. Good people ought to be armed where they will, with wits and guns and the truth. NRA KMA$$

ShipAhoy · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

If MTN Jack does get cited for an offense, they will most likely try something from this code.

USC Title 18, Section 1752

Sec. 1752. Temporary residences and offices of the President and
others

(a) It shall be unlawful for any person or group of persons -

(1) willfully and knowingly to enter or remain in

(i) any building or grounds designated by the Secretary of

the Treasury as temporary residences of the President or other

person protected by the Secret Service or as temporary offices

of the President and his staff or of any other person protected

by the Secret Service, or

(ii) any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area

of a building or grounds where the President or other person

protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily

visiting,
in violation of the regulations governing ingress or egress
thereto:

(2) with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of
Government business or official functions, to engage in
disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to,
any building or grounds designated in paragraph (1) when, or so
that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly
conduct of Government business or official functions;

(3) willfully and knowingly to obstruct or impede ingress or
egress to or from any building, grounds, or area designated or
enumerated in paragraph (1); or

(4) willfully and knowingly to engage in any act of physical
violence against any person or property in any building, grounds,
or area designated or enumerated in paragraph (1).
(b) Violation of this section, and attempts or conspiracies to
commit such violations, shall be punishable by a fine under this
title or imprisonment not exceeding six months, or both.
(c) Violation of this section, and attempts or conspiracies to
commit such violations, shall be prosecuted by the United States
attorney in the Federal district court having jurisdiction of the
place where the offense occurred.
(d) The Secretary of the Treasury is authorized -

(1) to designate by regulations the buildings and grounds which
constitute the temporary residences of the President or other
person protected by the Secret Service and the temporary offices
of the President and his staff or of any other person protected
by the Secret Service, and

(2) to prescribe regulations governing ingress or egress to
such buildings and grounds and to posted, cordoned off, or
otherwise restricted areas where the President or other person
protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily
visiting.
(e) None of the laws of the United States or of the several
States and the District of Columbia shall be superseded by this
section.
(f) As used in this section, the term "other person protected by
the Secret Service" means any person whom the United States Secret
Service is authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title
when such person has not declined such protection.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Secret Service can designate any area a protection zone and it doesn't need to be roped off to be included in the area. They can then direct all PD's participating that protection zone is gun free. So these deputies may have been acting under direction of the Secret Service. And take it from someone who has legally OC'd in front of a President while in the military, the Secret Service does call all the shots on protection details.

This code supersedes any other state or federal law.

rjent1 · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

I'm glad to see my message finally got you. Jack mentioned your handle some time ago to me and I just could not recall.
I would ask you to consider the 4th Amendment as you ponder the legality of this situation, the first line of the amendment states. "The right of the people to be secure in their persons,houses,papers,and effects,against unreasonable search and seizures, shall not be violated....."

thanks again
a friend of MtnJack
and now a friend of Open Carry

Rjent1

lockman · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

If the area is not posted and controlled what teeth would the statute have?

Reading the text of the statute this applies whether one is armed or not. So how many others around MTN Jack were arrested for being "in the zone"?

joe15003 · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

Hello,

I was at the rally in Irvine park in Beaver PA. The Zip code for beaver is 15009. I checked google maps and the location where they are stating mtn jack as detained(arrested) was NOT in the area where secret service was doing searches. Please let me know if there is anything I can do. I can make phone calls, talk to people and I have let my family know what he did was not illegal

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=15009&ie=UTF8&ll=40.69433,-80.307114&spn=0.00268,0.002929&z=18

lockman · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

ShipAhoy wrote:

If MTN Jack does get cited for an offense, they will most likely try something from this code.

USC Title 18, Section 1752

Sec. 1752. Temporary residences and offices of the President and
others

(a) It shall be unlawful for any person or group of persons -

(1) willfully and knowingly to enter or remain in

(i) any building or grounds designated by the Secretary of

the Treasury as temporary residences of the President or other

person protected by the Secret Service or as temporary offices

of the President and his staff or of any other person protected

by the Secret Service, or

(ii) any posted, cordoned off, or otherwise restricted area

of a building or grounds where the President or other person

protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily

visiting,
in violation of the regulations governing ingress or egress
thereto:

(2) with intent to impede or disrupt the orderly conduct of
Government business or official functions, to engage in
disorderly or disruptive conduct in, or within such proximity to,
any building or grounds designated in paragraph (1) when, or so
that, such conduct, in fact, impedes or disrupts the orderly
conduct of Government business or official functions;

(3) willfully and knowingly to obstruct or impede ingress or
egress to or from any building, grounds, or area designated or
enumerated in paragraph (1); or

(4) willfully and knowingly to engage in any act of physical
violence against any person or property in any building, grounds,
or area designated or enumerated in paragraph (1).
(b) Violation of this section, and attempts or conspiracies to
commit such violations, shall be punishable by a fine under this
title or imprisonment not exceeding six months, or both.
(c) Violation of this section, and attempts or conspiracies to
commit such violations, shall be prosecuted by the United States
attorney in the Federal district court having jurisdiction of the
place where the offense occurred.
(d) The Secretary of the Treasury is authorized -

(1) to designate by regulations the buildings and grounds which
constitute the temporary residences of the President or other
person protected by the Secret Service and the temporary offices
of the President and his staff or of any other person protected
by the Secret Service, and

(2) to prescribe regulations governing ingress or egress to
such buildings and grounds and to posted, cordoned off, or
otherwise restricted areas where the President or other person
protected by the Secret Service is or will be temporarily
visiting.
(e) None of the laws of the United States or of the several
States and the District of Columbia shall be superseded by this
section.
(f) As used in this section, the term "other person protected by
the Secret Service" means any person whom the United States Secret
Service is authorized to protect under section 3056 of this title
when such person has not declined such protection.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Secret Service can designate any area a protection zone and it doesn't need to be roped off to be included in the area. They can then direct all PD's participating that protection zone is gun free. So these deputies may have been acting under direction of the Secret Service. And take it from someone who has legally OC'd in front of a President while in the military, the Secret Service does call all the shots on protection details.

This code supersedes any other state or federal law.

If MTN Jack has a LTCF then his carry of a firearm is "permitted by law" is this section applicable?

It appears to me this statute would only be operative if the state has no law to the contrary. In the absence of a specific law I would believe that a clear constitutional right being abridged would also render the statute unenforceable.

The likelihood of obtaining a conviction under this statute for anyone not otherwise engaged in some other criminal activity is a practical impossibility. All the actors involved are fully aware that by the time anyone can contest the arrest under this statute the venue of the zone will have moved -on , charges will be dropped. The arrested party certainly has a civil rights claim, and should be pursued if possible.

If you look at the way it is enforced it is more of a tool to keep undesirable political operatives under control. There may have been numerous persons within the "zone" carrying concealed. To Obama those carring concealed pose a much greater threat.

Doug Huffman · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

Might this be the SS version of a weapons enhanced Disorderly Conduct (as in Wisconsin) and extra legal?

codename_47 · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

Who is going to sue who for what? It would seem that under U.S. Title 18, 3065 the Secret Service, or any local LEO's that they designate, can detain anyone they deem is a potential threat to a "protectee."

Gee, I don't know how about 1983 civil rights violation... 4th amendment violation...He wasn't detained, he was arrested.

It had nothing to do with being in a SS restricted area, but for disorderly conduct, or at least that was the charge. Obama wasn't even THERE yet.

The SS did not detain/arrest him, the Sherrif did, and by the Sherrif's own words he was not disorderly or menacing or whatever:

David said Noble “wanted to show his rights.” He said Noble never removed the gun from the holster or threatened anyone.

CowboyKen · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

lockman wrote:

If MTN Jack has a LTCF then his carry of a firearm is "permitted by law" is this section applicable?

It appears to me this statute would only be operative if the state has no law to the contrary. In the absence of a specific law I would believe that a clear constitutional right being abridged would also render the statute unenforceable.

The likelihood of obtaining a conviction under this statute for anyone not otherwise engaged in some other criminal activity is a practical impossibility. All the actors involved are fully aware that by the time anyone can contest the arrest under this statute the venue of the zone will have moved -on , charges will be dropped. The arrested party certainly has a civil rights claim, and should be pursued if possible.

If you look at the way it is enforced it is more of a tool to keep undesirable political operatives under control. There may have been numerous persons within the "zone" carrying concealed. To Obama those carring concealed pose a much greater threat.

ShipAhoy. Thanks for citing that very relevent section.

You people have to be kidding. This is Federal law. It supercedes local/state law. They can certainly detain anyone they like and can charge and gget a conviction if they choose to. They can remand you for psychiatric evaluation and hold you for days with no charges and there is little or nothing anyone can do to et you out.

You can try to sue them all you want. You will get NADA.

Please stop being so silly.

Ken

lildobe · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

CowboyKen wrote:

You can try to sue them all you want. You will get NADA.

Please stop being so silly.

... So let's just all lay down our arms and submit to having our inalienable rights violated over and over again.

:cuss:

If you don't FIGHT it, you are ACCEPTING it. If you accept it, you are saying that what they did is "OK" and further erosion of our rights will occur.

Fight for what is right and don't back down!

Doug Huffman · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

CowboyKen wrote:

You people have to be kidding. This is Federal law. It supercedes[sic] local/state law.

Good boy, good civilian.

Thundar · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

lildobe wrote:

CowboyKen wrote:

You can try to sue them all you want. You will get NADA.

Please stop being so silly.

Click to expand...

... So let's just all lay down our arms and submit to having our inalienable rights violated over and over again.

:cuss:

If you don't FIGHT it, you are ACCEPTING it. If you accept it, you are saying that what they did is "OK" and further erosion of our rights will occur.

Fight for what is right and don't back down!

The next Political Rally in PA happens today, 30 August,at 3PM in Consul Energy Park in Washington, PA where John McCain is scheduled to speak. I am not advocating that anybody enter the park (This is minor league ball park), but will anybody carry in the vicinity of the ballpark, advocating for our god given and civil rights?

CowboyKen · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

If you choose to engage in civil disobedience I will support your right to do so to the limits of reason and then some. But don't complain if you succeed and are arrested or detained by law enforcement. And if you believe that you can do these kind of things and then sue and get money for your effort I hope you can find a really good, cheap lawyer to represent you.

Do you think the ACLU is going to ride in to the rescue?

Ken

RedKnightt · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

CowboyKen wrote:

You people have to be kidding. This is Federal law. It supercedes local/state law.

I'm really confused by your statement. You claim that this law supersedes state/local laws, yet the statute itself says:

(e) None of the laws of the United States or of the several
States and the District of Columbia shall be superseded by this
section.

I've seen this quoted on both this thread and the PAFOA one. It seems to say specifically that it does not supersede state laws, which in PA includes preemption on firearms laws.

--RedKnightt--

Zombie Squad has it right: “We hold fast to the belief that if you are prepared for a scenario where the walking corpses of your family and neighbors are trying to eat you alive, you will be prepared for almost anything.”

IndianaBoy79 · Aug 30, 2008

imported post

Also, just a small point here. Federal law never trumps state law...at least in theory. The federal government has certain areas of law that it exercises exclusive control over, and the state has the same. Equal and concurrent powers.

Terrible shame....I hope his charges get dropped soon.

MTN Jack arrested

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Regular Member

Banned

New member

New member

State Researcher

Regular Member

State Researcher

Banned

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Banned

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member