autosurgeon
Regular Member
imported post
This is about Chris Fetters who was assaulted by the GH PD during the Coast Guard Festival.
This is about Chris Fetters who was assaulted by the GH PD during the Coast Guard Festival.
-
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.
-
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.
Grand Haven law suit settled
- Thread starter Venator
- Start date
kwikrnu
Banned
imported post
[align=left]
Michigan civil rights lawsuit
The Law Offices of Steven W. Dulan, PLC announces federal civil rights suit against City of Grand Haven and Ottawa County over open-carry ordinance.
The suit, brought under Title 42, Section 1983 of the U.S. Code, was filed on behalf of Christopher Fetters, an off-duty Air Force Security Officer who was attending the Coast Guard Festival in Grand Haven last year. Mr. Fetters was openly carrying a holstered pistol, which is legal under Michigan law, as in most states. He was arrested and detained and charged with a violation of a Grand Haven city ordinance prohibiting open carry of firearms. His gun was initially seized, although it was later returned.
Michigan law prohibits local units of government from making any law with respect to firearms, (MCL 123.1102.) The public policy goal of the statute is to provide a uniform system of gun laws statewide so that citizens do not have to guess regarding what local rules might exist as they move from one locality to the next.
The complaint alleges, among other issues, violations of Mr. Fetters' civil rights under the 2d, 4th, and 14th , Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, and Article I, Section 6 of the Michigan Constitution, which reads, "Every person has a right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state," when he was physically restrained, disarmed, and subjected to verbal harassment and ridicule by law enforcement personnel.
Criminal charges were later dropped by the Grand Haven City Attorney's Office, after being informed of the unenforceability of their ordinance. No allegations were ever made that Mr. Fetters ever threatened anyone, or in any other way disturbed the peace on the day of his arrest. He is demanding damages for violation of his civil rights as a citizen of the United States and of Michigan.
The case has been filed in the U.S. Court, Western District of Michigan in Grand Rapids and has been assigned Case Number 1:09-CV-00190.
[/align]
[align=left]1:09-cv-00190-RHB Fetters v. Reiss et al
Judge Robert Holmes Bell, presiding
Date filed: 03/05/2009
Date terminated: 01/04/2010
Date of last filing: 01/04/2010[/align]
[align=left]Case Summary[/align]
[align=left]Office: Southern Division (1)
Filed: 03/05/2009
Jury Demand: Plaintiff
Demand: $600000
Nature of Suit: 440
Cause: 28:1343 Violation of Civil Rights
Jurisdiction: Federal Question[/align]
[align=left]Disposition: Dismissed - Other
fetters v grandview complaint
fetters v grandview answer to complaint
fetters v grandview answer to complaint II
fetter v grandview order
[/align]
[align=left]
Michigan civil rights lawsuit
The Law Offices of Steven W. Dulan, PLC announces federal civil rights suit against City of Grand Haven and Ottawa County over open-carry ordinance.
The suit, brought under Title 42, Section 1983 of the U.S. Code, was filed on behalf of Christopher Fetters, an off-duty Air Force Security Officer who was attending the Coast Guard Festival in Grand Haven last year. Mr. Fetters was openly carrying a holstered pistol, which is legal under Michigan law, as in most states. He was arrested and detained and charged with a violation of a Grand Haven city ordinance prohibiting open carry of firearms. His gun was initially seized, although it was later returned.
Michigan law prohibits local units of government from making any law with respect to firearms, (MCL 123.1102.) The public policy goal of the statute is to provide a uniform system of gun laws statewide so that citizens do not have to guess regarding what local rules might exist as they move from one locality to the next.
The complaint alleges, among other issues, violations of Mr. Fetters' civil rights under the 2d, 4th, and 14th , Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, and Article I, Section 6 of the Michigan Constitution, which reads, "Every person has a right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state," when he was physically restrained, disarmed, and subjected to verbal harassment and ridicule by law enforcement personnel.
Criminal charges were later dropped by the Grand Haven City Attorney's Office, after being informed of the unenforceability of their ordinance. No allegations were ever made that Mr. Fetters ever threatened anyone, or in any other way disturbed the peace on the day of his arrest. He is demanding damages for violation of his civil rights as a citizen of the United States and of Michigan.
The case has been filed in the U.S. Court, Western District of Michigan in Grand Rapids and has been assigned Case Number 1:09-CV-00190.
[/align]
[align=left]1:09-cv-00190-RHB Fetters v. Reiss et al
Judge Robert Holmes Bell, presiding
Date filed: 03/05/2009
Date terminated: 01/04/2010
Date of last filing: 01/04/2010[/align]
[align=left]Case Summary[/align]
[align=left]Office: Southern Division (1)
Filed: 03/05/2009
Jury Demand: Plaintiff
Demand: $600000
Nature of Suit: 440
Cause: 28:1343 Violation of Civil Rights
Jurisdiction: Federal Question[/align]
[align=left]Disposition: Dismissed - Other
fetters v grandview complaint
fetters v grandview answer to complaint
fetters v grandview answer to complaint II
fetter v grandview order
[/align]
Venator
Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
imported post
Received a reply from Steven Dulan. Not too much info. Below is what he sent me.
"Here is what happened: We ended up with a small cash settlement and verification that the Grand Haven PD changed its official policy to comply with the law in the sense that officers have been informed that open carry is not unlawful and is not probable cause for a stop."
Received a reply from Steven Dulan. Not too much info. Below is what he sent me.
"Here is what happened: We ended up with a small cash settlement and verification that the Grand Haven PD changed its official policy to comply with the law in the sense that officers have been informed that open carry is not unlawful and is not probable cause for a stop."
kwikrnu
Banned
imported post
It least it ended up with some type of positive resolution.
It least it ended up with some type of positive resolution.
FatboyCykes
Regular Member
imported post
Venator wrote:
But better than a kick in the nutz I guess....
Venator wrote:
But better than a kick in the nutz I guess....
CoonDog
Regular Member
imported post
The other positive outcome is that this case, while not precedent-setting, will help to serve notice to local communities not to violate the rights of lawful firearm carriers.
The other positive outcome is that this case, while not precedent-setting, will help to serve notice to local communities not to violate the rights of lawful firearm carriers.
FatboyCykes
Regular Member
imported post
CoonDog wrote:
CoonDog wrote:
Will it though? For some small undisclosed amount? Money talks. And considering most of us don't have the financial wherewithal to pull off a case against a city I still see potential harassment in our future.
mikestilly
Regular Member
imported post
Nothing is positive from my point of view. This does nothing for the cause in my opinion.
Nothing is positive from my point of view. This does nothing for the cause in my opinion.
autosurgeon
Regular Member
imported post
mikestilly wrote:
mikestilly wrote:
Nothing seems to be positive from your point of view lately.... So I will tell you what my grandfather told me ... when everything seems lousy from your point of view... change the point you are viewing from.
Venator
Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter
imported post
Mike you seem to look for something big to happen all at once. Life rarely works that way. It took years for our gun rights to be eroded and I suspect it will take years to get them back.
Having said that as for this lawsuit. In my opinion it has helped. Why, because I often hear LEO talking about ALL the LAWSUITS those open carry guys file, when in reality there has been only one and it was by a non-MOC, Inc. member.
BTW before MOC, Inc. was founded but with many of the people that are now members, we contributed over $1,300 for Chris Fetters in less than 35 hours. We would have raised more but he had enough for the retainer.
There have been a couple of case where the people here have donated money for OCers that were charged with a crime. Also Dean has donated much of his time in defending people on bogus charges. Evey little bit helps in the fight for our gun rights.
People can dwell on the negative all day, but when looked at more closely the people on the Michigan forum and those that are members of MOC, Inc. have done a lot of good in promoting open carry in this state.
Mike you seem to look for something big to happen all at once. Life rarely works that way. It took years for our gun rights to be eroded and I suspect it will take years to get them back.
Having said that as for this lawsuit. In my opinion it has helped. Why, because I often hear LEO talking about ALL the LAWSUITS those open carry guys file, when in reality there has been only one and it was by a non-MOC, Inc. member.
BTW before MOC, Inc. was founded but with many of the people that are now members, we contributed over $1,300 for Chris Fetters in less than 35 hours. We would have raised more but he had enough for the retainer.
There have been a couple of case where the people here have donated money for OCers that were charged with a crime. Also Dean has donated much of his time in defending people on bogus charges. Evey little bit helps in the fight for our gun rights.
People can dwell on the negative all day, but when looked at more closely the people on the Michigan forum and those that are members of MOC, Inc. have done a lot of good in promoting open carry in this state.
northofnowhere
Campaign Veteran
imported post
I see any in court as a win, especially one that gets the department involved in education and training. I would rather see large cash settlements though. The embarassment of the individual, the headaches, the time, the lawyers all cost an individual in more then just money. Every little win in every battle gets us one more step closer and gets our word out.
I will say in regards to all the officers state wide talking about lawsuits on behalf of open carriers, I hear that even here as well. I frequently talk with officers while not open carrying about open carry and they typically mention the group downstate. I cannot carry at work or fire scenes, where my LEO intereaction typically takes place, but I damn sure can pull out my MOC card and proudly state I am a card carrying charter member of that group. I try to educate them that I am not a gun nut, I am an American threateened by a broken legal system who is a self defense nut. I don't blame the officers, I blame the courts, the prison system, and the politicians for not protecting the population from career criminals.
Word is spreading in the LEO community, and they do talk about things like this. Talk is good. Winning small court cases is good. Preventing and stopping crime is good. Making the places we call home better for our children is a good thing, no matter how small the win.
I see any in court as a win, especially one that gets the department involved in education and training. I would rather see large cash settlements though. The embarassment of the individual, the headaches, the time, the lawyers all cost an individual in more then just money. Every little win in every battle gets us one more step closer and gets our word out.
I will say in regards to all the officers state wide talking about lawsuits on behalf of open carriers, I hear that even here as well. I frequently talk with officers while not open carrying about open carry and they typically mention the group downstate. I cannot carry at work or fire scenes, where my LEO intereaction typically takes place, but I damn sure can pull out my MOC card and proudly state I am a card carrying charter member of that group. I try to educate them that I am not a gun nut, I am an American threateened by a broken legal system who is a self defense nut. I don't blame the officers, I blame the courts, the prison system, and the politicians for not protecting the population from career criminals.
Word is spreading in the LEO community, and they do talk about things like this. Talk is good. Winning small court cases is good. Preventing and stopping crime is good. Making the places we call home better for our children is a good thing, no matter how small the win.
22-250
Regular Member
imported post
+ 2
+ 2
Haman J.T.
New member
imported post
Venator wrote:
Venator wrote:
This is a plus for us! If the insurers do the same as they do with us regular folks,Grand Havens insurance rates will skyrocket! I'm sure that would be painfull when they have to pay the bill and explain to the people where the money went!
B
Bikenut
Guest
imported post
hamaneggs wrote:
hamaneggs wrote:
They won't explain where the money went... they will bully folks into a tax increase by saying they are running out of money and have to lay off police officers and fire fighters.
kwikrnu
Banned
imported post
Can someonea FOIA and find out how much the settle was?
Can someonea FOIA and find out how much the settle was?
wolverine1856
Regular Member
imported post
Bikenut wrote:
Bikenut wrote:
Yep this! Same story different day.