• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

young man in camo with slung airsoft rifle arrested

Sonora Rebel

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2008
Messages
3,956
Location
Gone
imported post

A bit... odd... but not illegal. The disorderly is disturbing 'cause there was no intent. He wasn't doing anything but hiking... fantasy hiking... but that's all. The rifle could have been real... there's no law against it. Prob'ly some Kommiefornia noobs took faint.
 

r6-rider

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2007
Messages
684
Location
az, ,
imported post

female hikers = california pussies (or at least wishing this was CA)

carrying an airsoft rifle = pussy. you wanna simulate carrying a ruck, pack 80+ pounds and carry a 12 pound AR

being charged with disorderly conduct = priceless. charges will probably be dropped and he'll be made fun of for a while but none the less i still give him props for trying.

either way if your trying to prepare for something you might as well make it as realistic as possible. pack a heavy ruck, dress ACUs, carry an unloaded (or loaded i guess) AR and start hiking.

airsoft and woodland camo? pretty gay but still give him an A for effort lol
 

JesseL

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
207
Location
Prescott, Arizona, USA
imported post

I suspect that the charge for disorderly conduct might have been less likely if the rifle had actually been real. There are no legal protections for the right to carry scary looking toys.
 

HankT

State Researcher
Joined
Feb 20, 2007
Messages
6,215
Location
Invisible Mode
imported post

JesseL wrote:
I suspect that the charge for disorderly conduct might have been less likely if the rifle had actually been real. There are no legal protections for the right to carry scary looking toys.

That's an interesting speculation. If you're right it would mean that a person with a rifle is acknowledged more rights than a person with an airsoft toy.

I think the situation is unfortunate. The kid had a right to dress any way he wanted to and carry almost anything he wanted to.

The public had a right to report the "GI Joe with a rifle."

The cops had the reasonable latitude to check out the situation and detain the kid.

Nobody did anything wrong.

Yet, they all screwed up.

Funny, how that happens sometimes...
39.gif
 

david.ross

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2008
Messages
1,241
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
imported post

:shock: You know, there needs to be an open carry meet with everyone open carrying a long gun or NFA weapon. Maybe go out for a group hike.
 

canadian

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2008
Messages
165
Location
, ,
imported post

Kildars wrote:
I've never understood why east valley PD uniforms are dark blue/black.


In 1988, two scientists from Cornell University published an academic paper entitled “The Dark Side of Self- and Social Perception: Black Uniforms and Aggression in Professional Sports” in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

I'll save you the long-winded analysis and skip right to the conclusions: The players wearing black uniforms were universally more agressive than those who did not.

Also, players and spectators alike found teams with black uniforms to be more manevolent and intimidating.

Read into that what you will.

Edit: You can read the entire paper herein .pdf format.
 

KBCraig

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
4,886
Location
Granite State of Mind
imported post

canadian wrote:
Kildars wrote:
I've never understood why east valley PD uniforms are dark blue/black.


In 1988, two scientists from Cornell University published an academic paper entitled “The Dark Side of Self- and Social Perception: Black Uniforms and Aggression in Professional Sports” in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.

I'll save you the long-winded analysis and skip right to the conclusions: The players wearing black uniforms were universally more agressive than those who did not.

Also, players and spectators alike found teams with black uniforms to be more manevolent and intimidating.

Read into that what you will.
I don't have to read into it: I know from anecdotal experience that it's true.

I live in a suburb of a medium-sized city. Until a few years ago, that city's police officers wore light blue shirts and medium blue trousers. Until this year, they drove white patrol cars with light blue police logos down the sides.

Now, they wear black uniforms, and all their new cars are black & white (predominantly black).

I admit that my political views have changed over the year, as well as my level of knowledge about police abuse. But still, every time I see one of their old white cruisers on the street, I smile a bit, thinking that it looks like someone to whom one could turn for help. And when I see one of their new black cruisers, my heart skips a beat.

The new police chief even said that he chose the new B&W scheme because it was more "intimidating".

Gee, thanks, chief.
 

david.ross

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2008
Messages
1,241
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
imported post

I'd like to mention.

If you've like to keep updated to his case, Mr. Dan Hoemke is keeping everyone who asks updated on the issue. His email address is listed below.

dan [at] hoemkeassociates [dot] com

They are, "certainly not pleading guilty." Please be aware he can't inform anyone of his defense strategy, so don't ask. He does have a lawyer for his defense, so they should be ready to have a go with the DA.
 

cato

Newbie
Joined
Oct 29, 2006
Messages
2,338
Location
California, USA
imported post

What is really sad is that even just an arrest,even withan acquittal,is likely to ruin his chances of becoming an Army Officer.
 

david.ross

Regular Member
Joined
May 24, 2008
Messages
1,241
Location
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
imported post

Cato,

You speak like you know it all, but you don't. You don't know what CO may say or do to him in regards to his past history. Also, he can have his records expunged, but there is always the media history behind him.

Don't make assumptions.
 

me812

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2008
Messages
216
Location
federally occupied Arizona
imported post

I'm reserving judgment on this, until after the case is tried. It seems hard to believe that someone was arrested just for walking around in the desert with an airsoft rifle. I'm guessing that the kid did something stupid, like try to scare some people with it.
 

JesseL

Regular Member
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
207
Location
Prescott, Arizona, USA
imported post

An email received from Officer Clark by one of the members over on thehighroad.us:
The title of your email tells me that you have no idea what the facts of this arrest are. Hiking/PT with an airsoft rifle had very little to do with his arrest. Here's what I've sent to a few other folks concerned about this arrest. This young man was in a dedicated preserve area where these types of air guns are not legal to possess, and clearly posted as such. You can expect to be cited or arrested if you are so equipped in the McDowell Preserve area in Scottsdale. This was not an open hunting area or state land. Its a city park used by kids, families and recreational hikers. The rifle this young man was carrying/handling was altered to look real, so any reasonable person would assume it to be a genuine assault rifle. He (admittedly) was standing on a hill overlooking an elementary school within an hour of hundreds of school children showing up for their day of school. He had the rifle in his hands at the "low ready" position when he was perched above the grade school. Hikers were, quite literally, were fleeing from this person exhibiting this behavior. If you see this, you would to foolish to assume it was an ROTC student in training. This was a reasonable reaction by these hikers to seeing this on recreational use, municipal hiking trail where these types of guns/toys are prohibited. (And clearly marked as such). Unfortunately, there are enough incidents with real guns in the news that our citizens are compelled to call the police when they see this behavior. If you are basing your opinion on the TV news coverage, then you saw his actions AFTER the incident, when he was knowingly going to meet the police. Obviously, he was just hiking and carrying his rifle slung over his shoulder when the news helicopter showed up to beam his image to the television station. So please don't assume you have all the facts, unless you were there or have the police report on the incident. If you've already made up your mind that we are the "bad police", then there's nothing more to say. If you are interested in the facts, then you will see that our actions were completely justified. You can also call me if you wish to discuss our actions any further.
http://www.thehighroad.us/showthread.php?t=411948


The discussion on thehighroad mentions that the nearest school is over a mile away and the way the Scottsdale law on guns in the nature preserve is being enforced appears to be in violation of Arizona's preemption law.
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2008
Messages
346
Location
, ,
imported post

sieg heil officer clark

"assault rifles" and their exploding bullet are deadly to kids and jumbo jets at 1 mile.
 

protector84

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2007
Messages
624
Location
Arizona, U.S.
imported post

Since I have a CCW permit, I can carry (OC or CC) in city and state parks even if they are posted "No Weapons." State preemption does allow parks to limit firearms to permit holders but they can't outright ban them. If Scottsdale PD doesn't like that, tough.
 
Top