PA State Police Say Open Carry is Legal but Charge Man Near Obama Event with &quot;Future Cr

Pa. Patriot · Sep 6, 2008

imported post

CowboyKen wrote:

Mr. Banks,

Don't you think it will take a court test to establish that the federal laws that provide for the Secret Service to protect the candidates don't allow the authorities to interfere with your "right" to open carry?

No, then I invite you to open carry on Tuesday, in the "vicinity" of Mr. McCain's appearance. Please let us know if you will be there. Someone may want to arrange for press coverage.

Ken

Now you twist what I said. Do you work for the PSP?

I said there was no law. I did not say you would be allowed in past a security check.

Of course it has been explained to you,ad nauseum, that that doesnt apply to Jack's case or if anyone else in a public area OUTSIDE a secured event.

You continue to argue points that are not in play.

What authority did the PSP have to arrest Mt Noble? Clearly none. If you disagree please post up the cite tothe law. Thanks.

CowboyKen · Sep 6, 2008

imported post

Pa. Patriot wrote:

Now you twist what I said. Do you work for the PSP?

I said there was no law. I did not say you would be allowed in past a security check.

Of course it has been explained to you,ad nauseum, that that doesnt apply to Jack's case or if anyone else in a public area OUTSIDE a secured event.

You continue to argue points that are not in play.

What authority did the PSP have to arrest Mt Noble? Clearly none. If you disagree please post up the cite tothe law. Thanks.

OK, So what say we have our own little rally, right outside of the check point for McCains appearance on Tueasday, at say 3:00p.m. We'll bring signs that say we support McCain - Palin and that we Cling to our Guns and our Bibles, and we'll all open carry.

Will you help organize this? Are you with me?

Ken

Mike · Sep 6, 2008

imported post

CowboyKen wrote:

I definitely am for open carry. But I don't think the law will allow it in the vicinity of the Presidential candidates and I think the courts will find it is not a right supported in the constitution to do so in that situation.

Ken - the issue of a "right" only come up if their is a law against the conduct - only then, must an individul assert the "right" as a defense for his conduct to defeat the application of the law to his facts.

Let's say there was no right to carry. This would be irrelevant if there was no law against carry at Presidential candidate's events.

CowboyKen · Sep 6, 2008

imported post

Mike wrote:

CowboyKen wrote:

I definitely am for open carry. But I don't think the law will allow it in the vicinity of the Presidential candidates and I think the courts will find it is not a right supported in the constitution to do so in that situation.

Click to expand...

Ken - the issue of a "right" only come up if their is a law against the conduct - only then, must an individul assert the "right" as a defense for his conduct to defeat the application of the law to his facts.

Let's say there was no right to carry. This would be irrelevant if there was no law against carry at Presidential candidate's events.

So, Mike, does that mean that I can count on you to be there at our rally on Tuesday, after all there is "no law against carry at Presidential candidate's events"? And it is our right to open carry!

I hope I will see you there.

Ken

p.s.; It seems to me that if the authorities assert that they can stop you from doing a "thing," and you belive it is not unlawful for you to go ahead and do that "thing" and you choose to press the issue, you will end up having your "right" to do it adjudicated. Law or no law.

Mike · Sep 6, 2008

imported post

CowboyKen wrote:

p.s.; It seems to me that if the authorities assert that they can stop you from doing a "thing," and you belive it is not unlawful for you to go ahead and do that "thing" and you choose to press the issue, you will end up having your "right" to do it adjudicated. Law or no law.

Well, no - if charges are actually pressed, then the government must first prove the existence of the statute alleged to be violated and prove that the Defendant committed the offense. The Defendant need not allege any right to have been violated.

But regardless, at some point, after having the government "stop you from doing a 'thing,' and you belive it is not unlawful," the aggrieved person can assert that the police conduct in charging them with bogus crimes and/arresting them was itself unlawful as a violation of e.g., Fourth Amendment. Such suits are usually for damages - open carriers are winning damages when police unlawfully detain or arrest them and will continue to do so. So I guess Ken you are partly right in that a "right" will at some point be lititgated, but it is not the right to do the "thing," but rather the right to be free of unlawful police harassment and restraint.

Here is a recent article on law suits against the Pittsburgh area police for unlawfully writing disorderly conduct tickets against folks for merey cussing out police officers, etc. http://www.pennlive.com/newsflash/pa/index.ssf?/base/news-66/1220415647196860.xml&storylist=penn

One party won a $3,000 settlement against the police for this unlawful application of the disorderly conduct statute. The ACLU of PA is involved and no doubt may take an interest in John Nobles case soon

CowboyKen · Sep 6, 2008

imported post

The ACLU of PA is involved and no doubt may take an interest in John Nobles case soon

I'd love to see that!

Just to be clear, it looks like we agree on almost everything except for the ability of authorities to use the Secret Service's mandate to protect certain individuals as they see fit.

IMO they can, and will, stop you from doing whatever they want to stop you from doing (open carry?) within what they think are reasonable parameters around that mandate. They will not care whether or not you think that what you are doing is legal and I think they may well prevail when you sue them.

So, are we going to have a rally outside of the McCain event?

Ken

p.s.; Please let all of us know when Mr. Noble gets his, illegally seized, gun back. Thanks.

Mike · Sep 6, 2008

imported post

CowboyKen wrote:

Just to be clear, it looks like we agree on almost everything except for the ability of authorities to use the Secret Service's mandate to protect certain individuals as they see fit.

IMO they can, and will, stop you from doing whatever they want to stop you from doing (open carry?) within what they think are reasonable parameters around that mandate.

What "mandate" are you talking about? Cite to authority.

irish · Sep 6, 2008

imported post

Why was his firearm confiscated after he was released and deemed not to be a threat?!?!?!

CowboyKen · Sep 6, 2008

imported post

What "mandate" are you talking about? Cite to authority.

Come on, Mike, I know you know the sections, and they have been cited and quoted, that mandate the Secret Service protect Presidential candidates (among others) under certain circumstances.

Please don't act like a buffoon that you are not.

Ken

p.s.; So, are we going to have a rally outside of the McCain event?

CowboyKen · Sep 6, 2008

imported post

irish wrote:

Why was his firearm confiscated after he was released and deemed not to be a threat?!?!?!

Because the State Police wanted to?

Ken

p.s.; It seems to me we have been over all of this ad nauseum.

Thundar · Sep 6, 2008

imported post

CowboyKen wrote:

Thundar wrote:

Is this really happening in Pennsylvania? This is amazing! The PSP really have crossed the Rubicon.

Do not be fooled by the false charges brought by the PSP. The civil rights violations perpetrated by the PA State Police and the S.S. are real. The right to openly carry and make political expressions isnot in question. They don't like it and are trying to pervert the law in order to suppressyour rights.

Hypothesis:

I think that the PA State Police have been hoodwinked by the S.S. or are their willing accomplices.

1. There will be many more political rallies in PA due to the nature of the electorate in PA.

2. Guns around these rallies are in the eyes of the S.S. a Bozo no no, but they are powerless to prevent lawful carry.

3. They will use the useful stooges (PA State Troopers) to try and violate citizen rights, (Immediate suppression of undesirable behavior, i.e.; lawful open carry) and discourage lawful exercise of firearms rights in the future (Chilling Effect).

Doug, your Alice in Wonderland post was spot on!

Click to expand...

You are absolutely right!

We must all rally round Mr. Noble and open carry to all future appearances of the candidates in PA.

According to this John McCain will be in Lancaster on Tuesday at 3:30 p.m.: Palin will be there too!

http://blogs.mcall.com/penn_ave/

Can we expect to be treated differently at this event? How many of you can I count on to be there and to open carry?

Can we have a show of support!

Ken

Cowboy Ken,

COUNT ME IN!!!!

I live in Virginia (Chesapeake on the N.C. border) I cant make it there on a work day, but count me in when Barr, Obama, McCain or any of the VP candidates come to Hampton Roads (SE Virginia)

I've done it once and I'll do it again. Why? Because I'm an American

Mike · Sep 6, 2008

imported post

CowboyKen wrote:

I know you know the sections, and they have been cited and quoted, that mandate the Secret Service protect Presidential candidates (among others) under certain circumstances.

Nope - I have never seen such code cited, please tell us.

CowboyKen · Sep 6, 2008

imported post

Mike wrote:

CowboyKen wrote:

I know you know the sections, and they have been cited and quoted, that mandate the Secret Service protect Presidential candidates (among others) under certain circumstances.

Click to expand...

Nope - I have never seen such code cited, please tell us.

Frankly, Mike, I think you are full of it. But, if you are not try google and U.S. Secret Service& USC. Let us all know if anything interesting comes up. OK Bud.

Ken

Gray Peterson · Sep 6, 2008

imported post

The fact is that it was STATE law enforcement officials who are doing this, not federal. I seem to remember that the Secret Service very clear that Mtn Jack did NOT very any federal law, and was outside of the protection zone for Obama's rally 30 minutes later anyway.

If he violated a federal law, he would be in a federal detention facility right this moment, not just ticketed for two state misdemeanors.

This is a rather common occurrence in Northern Virginia, where an open carrier happens to come across a dignitary or someone who's under the Secret Service's guard, and usually what happens is this:

Secret Service to Gun Carrier: "Sir, may I speak to you for a moment *flashes Secret Service Credentials*

Gun Carrier: "Ok?"

Secret Service: "Just to let you know sir, we're guarding a foreign dignitary/candidate/whatever, and due to federal law, we are required to maintain a security zone around said person. I know that you're lawfully carrying here in Virginia, but I would ask that you stay a certain distance from the dignitary so that way we can maintain his security"

Gun Carrier: "Ok, that's no problem, how long will you guys be?

Secret Service: "About 20 minutes for them to wrap up their shopping trip, if you come back after that point if you still see us just hold tight there, and when we leave you can go about your business within that zone".

Gun Carrier: "All right, have a good day sir".

See, nothing too serious.

XD-GEM · Sep 6, 2008

imported post

Is it possible to get an injunction against the PSP to prevent them from arresting anyone at thisproposed "Clinging to the Bible and Our Guns" political rally? Although I'm down in New Orleans, I'd love to now the answer to this.

CowboyKen · Sep 6, 2008

imported post

Lonnie Wilson wrote:

The fact is that it was STATE law enforcement officials who are doing this, not federal. I seem to remember that the Secret Service very clear that Mtn Jack did NOT very any federal law, and was outside of the protection zone for Obama's rally 30 minutes later anyway.

If he violated a federal law, he would be in a federal detention facility right this moment, not just ticketed for two state misdemeanors.

This is a rather common occurrence in Northern Virginia, where an open carrier happens to come across a dignitary or someone who's under the Secret Service's guard, and usually what happens is this:

Secret Service to Gun Carrier: "Sir, may I speak to you for a moment *flashes Secret Service Credentials*

Gun Carrier: "Ok?"

Secret Service: "Just to let you know sir, we're guarding a foreign dignitary/candidate/whatever, and due to federal law, we are required to maintain a security zone around said person. I know that you're lawfully carrying here in Virginia, but I would ask that you stay a certain distance from the dignitary so that way we can maintain his security"

Gun Carrier: "Ok, that's no problem, how long will you guys be?

Secret Service: "About 20 minutes for them to wrap up their shopping trip, if you come back after that point if you still see us just hold tight there, and when we leave you can go about your business within that zone".

Gun Carrier: "All right, have a good day sir".

See, nothing too serious.

So, Lonnie, what do you think would happen, in the situation you describe, if the subject responded by saying "I am not breaking any law and I'll do as I like."?

Ken

Mike · Sep 6, 2008

imported post

CowboyKen wrote:

Mike wrote:

CowboyKen wrote:

I know you know the sections, and they have been cited and quoted, that mandate the Secret Service protect Presidential candidates (among others) under certain circumstances.

Click to expand...

Nope - I have never seen such code cited, please tell us.

Click to expand...

Frankly, Mike, I think you are full of it. But, if you are not try google and U.S. Secret Service& USC. Let us all know if anything interesting comes up. OK Bud.

Ken

Penalty Flag on the Post. Willful failure to cite to authority. OCDO R. 7. Personal attack. OCDO R. 5.

Kevin Jensen · Sep 7, 2008

imported post

CowboyKen wrote:

OK, So what say we have our own little rally, right outside of the check point for McCains appearance on Tueasday, at say 3:00p.m. We'll bring signs that say we support McCain - Palin and that we Cling to our Guns and our Bibles, and we'll all open carry.

Will you help organize this? Are you with me?

Ken

And you guys can wear these shirts!

CowboyKen · Sep 7, 2008

imported post

SGT Jensen wrote:

And you guys can wear these shirts!

WOW!!!!

Where can I get some of those? Please send me a PM if you don't want to post it. Thanks.

Ken

Doug Huffman · Sep 7, 2008

imported post

Mike wrote:

Nope - I have never seen such code cited, please tell us.

Hmmm, this sounds very like a point made while LEO 229 and I were going at it. The logical contrapositive of an appeal to authority is ad hominem personal attack, that the asserter is not privileged to special or secret knowledge.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_authority

It is traditional OCDO SOP to cite a publicly available source for otherwise special personal knowledge, Ken.

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$$

PA State Police Say Open Carry is Legal but Charge Man Near Obama Event with &amp;quot;Future Cr

State Researcher

Regular Member

Site Co-Founder

Regular Member

Site Co-Founder

Regular Member

Site Co-Founder

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Site Co-Founder

Regular Member

Founder's Club Member - Moderator

Campaign Veteran

Regular Member

Site Co-Founder

State Researcher

Regular Member

Banned

PA State Police Say Open Carry is Legal but Charge Man Near Obama Event with "Future Cr