Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 109

Thread: ALERT: MI Sheriff's training on how to arrest OCers.

  1. #1
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445

    Post imported post

    THIS HAS TURNED OUT TO BE INCORRECT, See comments below.:



    An Amazon best seller "MY PARENTS OPEN CARRY" http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/

    *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research. These are my opinions, if you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

  2. #2
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Venator wrote:
    I just found out that two attorneys will be presenting a talk on how to successfully arrest and prosecute lawful OCers. As it's only for Sheriffs I can not attend, but do have someone that will be video taping the talk. I hope to have it available on-line soon.

    I encourage every one to email their sheriff and express their outrage at such a waste of tax payers money and officers time trying to harass and arrest lawful people exercising their firearm rights under both the 2A and the state constitution.
    ...
    That's a pretty serious charge, V.

    Wouldn't that be...illegal?

    I hope your info is correct....and not just alarmist misinterpretation.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Burton, Michigan
    Posts
    3,361

    Post imported post

    Perhaps a call or email to Sheriff Bouchard might clear this up.

  4. #4
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    Venator wrote:
    I just found out that two attorneys will be presenting a talk on how to successfully arrest and prosecute lawful OCers. As it's only for Sheriffs I can not attend, but do have someone that will be video taping the talk. I hope to have it available on-line soon.

    I encourage every one to email their sheriff and express their outrage at such a waste of tax payers money and officers time trying to harass and arrest lawful people exercising their firearm rights under both the 2A and the state constitution.
    ...
    That's a pretty serious charge, V.

    Wouldn't that be...illegal?

    I hope your info is correct....and not just alarmist misinterpretation.

    I have it on good authority that a talk by two lawyers will be presented on methods to successfully prosecute OCers.

    Since the talk has yet to be given (Monday or Tuesday) I don't know what information will be discussed. I will know after reviewing any tapes of the training. This is a heads up that something may be coming and we need to be proactive. If the information turns out to be false then I will retract and apologise.

    As for being illegal, if the prosecutors thought it was legal then it wouldn't be illegal would it. As ignorance of the the law IS an excuse for LEOs.

    An Amazon best seller "MY PARENTS OPEN CARRY" http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/

    *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research. These are my opinions, if you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Taurus850CIA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    , Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,071

    Post imported post

    Lawyers are sneaky bastards. Tricking someone into saying the wrong thing isn't illegal. Could it be that the subject matter will be strategies to this end?
    "Fault always lies in the same place, my fine babies: with him weak enough to lay blame." - Cort

    Gun control is like trying to reduce Drunk Driving by making it tougher for sober people to own cars.

    Sentio aliquos togatos contra me conspirare.

    The answer to "1984" is "
    1776"

    With freedom comes much responsibility. It is for this reason so many are loathe to exercise it.

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

    Post imported post

    Venator wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    Venator wrote:
    I just found out that two attorneys will be presenting a talk on how to successfully arrest and prosecute lawful OCers. As it's only for Sheriffs I can not attend, but do have someone that will be video taping the talk. I hope to have it available on-line soon.

    I encourage every one to email their sheriff and express their outrage at such a waste of tax payers money and officers time trying to harass and arrest lawful people exercising their firearm rights under both the 2A and the state constitution.
    ...
    That's a pretty serious charge, V.

    Wouldn't that be...illegal?

    I hope your info is correct....and not just alarmist misinterpretation.

    I have it on good authority that a talk by two lawyers will be presented on methods to successfully prosecute OCers.

    Since the talk has yet to be given (Monday or Tuesday) I don't know what information will be discussed. I will know after reviewing any tapes of the training. This is a heads up that something may be coming and we need to be proactive. If the information turns out to be false then I will retract and apologise.

    As for being illegal, if the prosecutors thought it was legal then it wouldn't be illegal would it. As ignorance of the the law IS an excuse for LEOs.
    For any sheriff's office to make plans to arrest people, starting with (your words) "a talk on how to successfully arrest and prosecute lawful OCers" would be an illegal act, would it not?

    The key term in your charge is the word "lawful Ocers."

    No LE departement should be making preparations to arrest members of any group who they know to be behaving lawfully. If believe federal charges would be in order if they did, regardless of their ignorance at certain levels.

    You seemed to be making an allegation of illegality--without any real support for charge. That's a dangerous, and ineffective, type of activism. I'd recommend against it.

    It's great that MOC is proactive. You guys in MI are doing some good stuff. But thiskind of talk doesn'tcome off well...

  7. #7
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    It's great that MOC is proactive. You guys in MI are doing some good stuff. But thiskind of talk doesn'tcome off well...
    Thank you for your opinion.
    An Amazon best seller "MY PARENTS OPEN CARRY" http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/

    *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research. These are my opinions, if you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Ann Arbor Area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    86

    Post imported post

    Venator wrote:

    I have it on good authority that a talk by two lawyers will be presented on methods to successfully prosecute OCers.
    After the talks are done, their names need to be displayed in neon.

  9. #9
    Regular Member Utah_Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Kearns, Utah, USA
    Posts
    717

    Post imported post

    Please keep us informed on this Issue.
    Zach
    8014487574
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity"

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Taurus850CIA wrote:
    Lawyers are sneaky bastards. Tricking someone into saying the wrong thing isn't illegal. Could it be that the subject matter will be strategies to this end?
    This would be my first guess. Police are pretty good at figuring out for themselves all the loopholes in the case law to squeeze through. These attorneys may have a few wrinkles for them to add.

    Its also possible the initial report is a little skewed. It could be that the attorneys are training the police how to not screw up with a lawful OCer, as in false arrest or detention, and get sued.

    In any event, OCers need to be especially on their toes with respect to their own legality. For example, no questionable knives as back up. Ifyou carry a knife as back up, make sure it isone that is unquestionably legal. Carry coffee or something in you gun hand when its feasible fornullifying accusations of reaching for a gun (menacing/inducing panic). You want to be in rock-solid territory legally speaking, and then some.

    If the report is true, probably the least you can expect is detentions on the flimsiest excuses. Anywhere there is a hole in the case law that can be "interpreted" to allow a detention for some reason.

    It goes without saying that if the police in a certain area are "gunning" for OCers, then the OCers need to be really on their toes with respect to exercising their 4th Amdendment and 5th Amendment rights.

    After lots of thought, looking at a number of angles, I always advocate politely, verbally, refusing consent while complying with all orders.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  11. #11
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    Its also possible the initial report is a little skewed. It could be that the attorneys are training the police how to not screw up with a lawful OCer, as in false arrest or detention, and get sued.
    Right. But if the talk is actually about "training the police how not to screw up with a lawful OCer...and get sued," then it would be the exact opposite of what V charged in the OP. More than just "skewed"....

    Such a mis-statement, if it is one,is likelyborne out of ideological extremism and we're better off without that kind of stuff.

    Actually, the charge is, on its face, unbelievable. It's possible that all the sherrifs and all the lawyers and all the deputies and all the courts will be scheming and lying to falsely arrest and falsely prosecute "lawful OCers." We have to keep open to that remotely possible outcome. But it's probably too early to start publicly accusing them all of illegal activity.

    There's a cost for making wild and spurious allegations. The cost is reduced credibility.




  12. #12
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    SNIP There's a cost for making wild and spurious allegations. The cost is reduced credibility.
    The same can be said of unnecessary needling and baiting, Hanky.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  13. #13
    Regular Member dougwg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    MOC Charter Member Westland, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    2,445

    Post imported post

    I guess we should all just sit back and see how this goes then.

  14. #14
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Venator wrote:
    [suggested letter]
    I'm reminded of something from Terry v Ohio, something that might fit into a letter. No matter what the real nature of the lawyer training, it can't hurt to remind the attorneys and cops.

    For as this Court has always recognized,

    "No right is held more sacred, or is more carefully guarded, by the common law than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others, unless by clear and unquestionable authority of law." Terry vs Ohio, quoting Union Pacific Rail Co. vs Botsford.

    This undermines "creative" ways to prosecute lawful OCers--clear and unquestionable authority of law. If they are looking for loopholes or twists, those mechanisms are hardly "clear and unquestionable."

    Also, notice that handy little phrase, "For as this court has always recognized." (emphasis added)

    Anybody getting creative, looking for ways to arrest lawfulOCers, is bucking the US Supreme Court, throughout its history no less. And, if they are really just trying to update the police training to keep them out of trouble, this won't hurt. Might even cut down on illegal detentions for other people a little bit, too.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  15. #15
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    dougwg wrote:
    I guess we should all just sit back and see how this goes then.
    Yes. Doing nothing is best. Wait until after someone gets arrested. Don't want to undermine our credibility, do we? Oh, no. Not with police who accuse us of seeking to entrap them just to make money. Heavens no. And not with certain segments of the public whoget the vapors and rants overOC anyway. Oh, no. Must maintain credibility.

    Bwahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

    Goof with a keyboard.

    PS: This isn't directed at Dougwg.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  16. #16
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    Venator wrote:
    [suggested letter]
    I'm reminded of something from Terry v Ohio, something that might fit into a letter.

    How about the ole CitizenT-shirt gambit (CTG)? :P



    Citizen wrote:
    Just wear a T-shirt that says: "False arrests will be vigorously sued."

    Or you could be more subtle about it: "My attorney wants another Lear jet."

    Or, perhaps even better: "My attorney'swife is driving him nuts with her demand fora vacation home in The Hamptons."

    "My attorney is a legal activist. His slogan is 'LITIGATE NOW!'"

    "My attorney especially likes targets who mistakenly think they are protected by qualified immunity."




  17. #17
    Regular Member Evil Creamsicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Police State, USA
    Posts
    1,270

    Post imported post

    HankT wrote:
    Citizen wrote:
    Its also possible the initial report is a little skewed. It could be that the attorneys are training the police how to not screw up with a lawful OCer, as in false arrest or detention, and get sued.
    Right. But if the talk is actually about "training the police how not to screw up with a lawful OCer...and get sued," then it would be the exact opposite of what V charged in the OP. More than just "skewed"....

    Such a mis-statement, if it is one,is likelyborne out of ideological extremism and we're better off without that kind of stuff.

    Actually, the charge is, on its face, unbelievable. It's possible that all the sherrifs and all the lawyers and all the deputies and all the courts will be scheming and lying to falsely arrest and falsely prosecute "lawful OCers." We have to keep open to that remotely possible outcome. But it's probably too early to start publicly accusing them all of illegal activity.

    There's a cost for making wild and spurious allegations. The cost is reduced credibility.


    Do you always have to interject and try to discredit someone? Venator is relaying information he received from a source he trusts, and admits that he does not have the details, and will not until it happens.

    A tornado siren before a severe thunderstorm may not necessarily yield an actual tornado, but wouldn't you rather have been warned and prepared and be relieved when it didn't happen than be outside jogging or something and be jumped by a tornado you were unaware of?

    You say what Venator says is a serious charge... and it is, if it is true. However, I think that directly calling him an extremist is also a serious charge. And after all, reduced credibility is the cost for making wild and spurious allegations... so, since it seems likely that there will be a video of the event, why not wait for it to happen before unquestioningly disregarding its possibility.

    Besides... its not exactly like Michigan police have never gone out of their way to hassle OCers before...

  18. #18
    State Researcher HankT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Invisible Mode
    Posts
    6,217

    Post imported post

    Evil Creamsicle wrote:
    HankT wrote:
    Citizen wrote:
    Its also possible the initial report is a little skewed. It could be that the attorneys are training the police how to not screw up with a lawful OCer, as in false arrest or detention, and get sued.
    Right. But if the talk is actually about "training the police how not to screw up with a lawful OCer...and get sued," then it would be the exact opposite of what V charged in the OP. More than just "skewed"....

    Such a mis-statement, if it is one,is likelyborne out of ideological extremism and we're better off without that kind of stuff.

    Actually, the charge is, on its face, unbelievable. It's possible that all the sherrifs and all the lawyers and all the deputies and all the courts will be scheming and lying to falsely arrest and falsely prosecute "lawful OCers." We have to keep open to that remotely possible outcome. But it's probably too early to start publicly accusing them all of illegal activity.

    There's a cost for making wild and spurious allegations. The cost is reduced credibility.


    Do you always have to interject and try to discredit someone? Venator is relaying information he received from a source he trusts, and admits that he does not have the details, and will not until it happens.

    A tornado siren before a severe thunderstorm may not necessarily yield an actual tornado, but wouldn't you rather have been warned and prepared and be relieved when it didn't happen than be outside jogging or something and be jumped by a tornado you were unaware of?

    You say what Venator says is a serious charge... and it is, if it is true. However, I think that directly calling him an extremist is also a serious charge. And after all, reduced credibility is the cost for making wild and spurious allegations... so, since it seems likely that there will be a video of the event, why not wait for it to happen before unquestioningly disregarding its possibility.

    How do you define "unquestioningly disregarding its possibility?"

    Especially in light of my statement that "It's possible that all the sherrifs and all the lawyers and all the deputies and all the courts will be scheming and lying to falsely arrest and falsely prosecute "lawful OCers." We have to keep open to that remotely possible outcome?"

  19. #19
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Evil Creamsicle wrote:
    SNIP Do you always have to interject and try to discredit someone?
    Uh, oh. You fell for it, EC.

    HankT is our resident troll. He is fishing for reactions. He wants you to get annoyed, upset, angry, etc. His existence here is one long history of needling and baiting people.

    By the way, don't answer his questions. He doesn't really want to know. He's just using them to get a rise out of you, to lure you intosatisfying his need to see other people upset. He feeds on it.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  20. #20
    Regular Member Utah_Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Kearns, Utah, USA
    Posts
    717

    Post imported post

    Lets see where this goes and give the OP time to research this. It does not hurt to wait and see what happens.
    Zach
    8014487574
    "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity"

  21. #21
    Regular Member eastmeyers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Hazel Park, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,383

    Post imported post

    WOW I thought this was the Michigan Forum...

    Don't freak out aliens, just pokin fun.
    "Bam, I like saying bam when I cite something, in fact I think I shall do this from here on out, as long as I remember.
    Bam!" - eastmeyers

    "Then said he to them, But now he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his sack: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one."
    Luke 22:36
    God Bless

  22. #22
    Regular Member Evil Creamsicle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Police State, USA
    Posts
    1,270

    Post imported post

    Citizen wrote:
    Evil Creamsicle wrote:
    SNIP Do you always have to interject and try to discredit someone?
    Uh, oh. You fell for it, EC.

    HankT is our resident troll. He is fishing for reactions. He wants you to get annoyed, upset, angry, etc. His existence here is one long history of needling and baiting people.

    By the way, don't answer his questions. He doesn't really want to know. He's just using them to get a rise out of you, to lure you intosatisfying his need to see other people upset. He feeds on it.
    I had no intention of answering the question
    I just haven't seen him do one constructive thing since I've been here.

    *shrug*

    oh well.

  23. #23
    Activist Member hamaneggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    warren, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    1,251

    Post imported post

    Evil Creamsicle wrote:
    Citizen wrote:
    Evil Creamsicle wrote:
    SNIP Do you always have to interject and try to discredit someone?
    Uh, oh. You fell for it, EC.

    HankT is our resident troll. He is fishing for reactions. He wants you to get annoyed, upset, angry, etc. His existence here is one long history of needling and baiting people.

    By the way, don't answer his questions. He doesn't really want to know. He's just using them to get a rise out of you, to lure you intosatisfying his need to see other people upset. He feeds on it.
    I had no intention of answering the question
    I just haven't seen him do one constructive thing since I've been here.

    *shrug*

    oh well.
    HankT's location-invisible mode?
    Today JESUS would tell me to sell my coat and buy two Springfield XD Compact 45acp's!

    NRA LIFER,GOA,MOC Inc.,CLSD,MCRGO,UAW! MOLON LABE!!

  24. #24
    Regular Member autosurgeon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Lawrence, Michigan, United States
    Posts
    3,845

    Post imported post

    Ya HankT has a long and colorful history here...
    Anything I post may be my opinion and not the law... you are responsible to do your own verification.

    Blackstone (1753-1765) maintains that "the law holds that it is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    625

    Post imported post

    There were traitors in the revolution! I suppose there are traitors now!

Page 1 of 5 123 ... 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
  •