• 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.

Arrested for open carry. Waiting for a ruling from the Court of Criminal Appeals

BluesStringer

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2007
Messages
30
Location
Madison, AL
And what evidence, pray tell, might you be in possession of that shows what Jason Tulley "is more interested in," or tends to demonstrate in any way that he even knows a single thing about the dispute that you're so obsessively focused on?
The fact that he won't post the information here, but will simply allow this site to be abused for his personal purposes.
Are you suggesting that Jason Tulley has posted links here to BamaCarry? All I've seen here that have confirmed they're associated with BC were by posters with user names that aren't Jason's, and they speak of him in the third person, so I don't think that they are him. And from what I remember of him (Jason) first posting at ALOC, he told his story as though he was asking the readership where to turn for help. In other words, at that time anyway, he wasn't a "gun guy" that hung out at gun forums, he just found himself in a situation he couldn't handle alone. So he reached out to an Alabama-specific website and got quite a bit of good, even great, advice. After his conviction, the last I heard was that there would be no more news until the appeal rolled around, and as you can see by my post-count here, which is even thinner there (by a long-shot), I went back to my old haunts and waited until the case surfaced again. So yesterday, I'm having a conversation with a friend on another forum and he recommends I come to the OC.org/Alabama sub-forum for some info on the new law, I did, and the first thing I see is a fresh thread about the Tulley case. I click on it and find myself in a toilet-bowl-vortex of antipathy that I *think* has nothing to do with Jason Tulley, but with some unrelated feud between you and people who deign to visit BamaCarry without your blessings. But guess what? Now I see I was wrong about that, as you are now claiming that Jason Tulley, "...won't post the information here, but will simply allow this site to be abused for his personal purposes." The worst part is that you said that in response to my inquiry as to what evidence you might have to even suggest that he knows about all the petty schoolgirl BS you're engaging in here, and instead of answering that question, you double-down with accusations of him abusing this site when neither you or I even know if he's ever viewed a single page of this site.

You are completely daft.

I was a part of the original BamaCarry and watched the theft of the name. So what I say is true, whether you choose to believe it or not. If you don't like the reaction of a member of OCDO, then I suggest that y'all don't come over here and abuse this site. If you are truly interested in Tulley's case and want to discuss it here, then post the relevant information here.
I saw where you got another thread locked because of bad-mouthing another gun-rights website. Actually, no, it was the same website you're bad-mouthing here. Is that what you're going for here? Because someone whom you don't know decided to post the documents relating to his case on a gun-rights website you don't like, a case that you knew nothing of before this thread was started, you want to lock down discussion of his case here? While at the same time making baseless and false accusations concerning the victim of the oath-breakers who have trampled his liberties that you claimed in Post #2 that he "earned" because he was "trespassing" when you didn't have a freakin' clue what you were talking about?

To the Mods and/or Administrator(s) - Please don't let this thread or topic crash and burn because of these petty cross-site arguments. Jason Tulley's case is an important one for Alabama. If decided in our favor, it could become the precedent needed to get rid of an ambiguous statute that gives LE way more discretion in arresting for OC than any legislature ever contemplated them having. This is an appeals court case, not a peeing contest about which website is "acceptable" to a non-mod/Admin to link to. Please put a stop to those (or the one, as the case may be) responsible for the thread-jack. Thanks.

Blues
 
Last edited:

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,539
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Geez. I complimented your lack of rudeness, and you respond with rudeness. Pity.

Of course it is not the same website. The name BamaCarry was in use by a developing grassroots organization. I belonged to it. The site suddenly disappeared. No explanation. For weeks folks were wondering what happened. The site reappeared under a new name. All the original material had been preserved and reloaded. However the name was gone.

It seems that ONE person owned that name. He didn't like what the organization was doing, so he took the name that he "owned" and left, forming his own message board. That is not how grassroots works. That is how places like ALOC work. However, that is not the point.

The point remains that, if Tulley, or any of his supporters, wants to discuss his predicament here, he or they ought to post the information about the incident here, or the legitimate conclusion is that the purpose of mentioning Tulley's incident here is to generate traffic there.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,539
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
And you are entitled to believe and say that. And the owner of the BamaCarry name is entitled to do what he wants with the name, even if it meant killing the group that was using it. And Tulley and his supporters are entitled to try to use this site to generate traffic at their site.

None of it is the right thing to do, though.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

BamaCarry

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2013
Messages
11
Location
Alabama
Eye95
I am growing tired of the lies and bashing of a group that you clearly know nothing about. Are you trying to get another thread locked down?
Forum Rules
(12) NO BASHING OF OTHER GUN RIGHTS ORGANIZATIONS: Regardless of how convinced you are that another gun rights organization is not doing their job, this is not the place to air those concerns unless they are specifically related to an anti-open carry position taken by that organization. All other rants against other gun rights groups will be deleted or the thread locked.


BamaCarry is incorporated and has filed for NP status. We have a board of directors and an advisory board that consists of all of the local groups. I have no idea what you are talking about when you say we stole the name. If that was the case, surely the web address wouldn’t have been available and we wouldn’t have been able to register with the state.
You clearly are upset over the actions of a different group and still hold a grudge. The irony here, is that BamaCarry was started by several people whom had just been banned from the other group
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?97512-ex-ALOCers

We do not have a grand plan to try and get people to click on the web page. It was very time consuming to upload all the documents in order. We tried to upload them here but several failed because of their size. This case has been fought for over 2 ½ years so there are several documents and it is easier to understand when they are in some sort of order.

I won’t respond to anything else unless it is a direct question regarding this case.

If you don’t want to get the info, then don’t click on the link but please stop hijacking this post.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,539
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
If you have no idea, then you are lying.

I belonged to BamaCarry. The website disappeared. It was gone for weeks. It reappeared intact under another name. The name had been taken by the person who claimed to "own" the domain. Another site was created using that domain name.

The above are all facts of which I have personal knowledge.

Because of the way the original BamaCarry was treated by the "owner" of the domain name, I will have zero to do with the current incarnation of a group with the BamaCarry name.

Just post the raw data from the encounter and the court proceedings, and this part of the discussion is over. Keep trying to get folks to visit your site as the only way to access that information, and I will continue to report what I know that happened, as much as you try to deny it, and I will continue to decry the fact that you won't post the information here and are simply using OCDO to create traffic at your site.

Your choice.

Not moving on.
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,690
Location
Whatcom County
There are some places to make a statement and get into a constitutional/legal debate with someone to prove a point. In a bank with gun on your hip while arguing with someone who can lawfully tell you to beat it, is probably not the best place.
The mundane has the right to tell the state agent to beat it if it is an unlawful encounter.....:p
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,324
Location
White Oak Plantation
Typically it is the cop who gets to decide the appropriate venue for constitutional/legal debates. The citizen typically must resort to the courts to assist in informing that cop that his choice on the appropriateness of venue was beyond his authority. So, the question now is when can a citizen engage in constitutional/legal debates? We know what some cops think, what about other cops.
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
Typically it is the cop who gets to decide the appropriate venue for constitutional/legal debates. The citizen typically must resort to the courts to assist in informing that cop that his choice on the appropriateness of venue was beyond his authority. So, the question now is when can a citizen engage in constitutional/legal debates? We know what some cops think, what about other cops.
You should'nt debate a law in a place that may encite a bad response. I can't and won't attempt to give you a list of "good or bad" places. I'll try to give an example.

A bank, with people who may not be comfortable (even if it is legal) with a weapon in the open, and then a person telling you to leave, is not the place to debate. I say this because debate usually leads to anger, which leads to disrespect (on BOTH PARTS), which may lead to yelling, which usually leads to bad things.

Man yelling in a bank with a gun? Bad. Even if he's yelling , or talking sternly, about the Federalist Papers.

A man yelling on his front lawn with a gun, about anything, ALOT BETTER.

I use the bank for a few reasons, they can be a hostile place for OCers, and if the situation gets out of hand it can be misconstrued AGAINST the OCers. You can insert a few other sensitive places, mainly stores or places of business where money or service is exchanged. So I'm giving you free advice.

BUT, you have the right to debate and speak whatever you want wherever you want. I'm just trying to help you out. Enjoy, and be safe while debating.
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
As far as WHEN. I'd recommend debating when NOT being detained for any disturbance. So if you want a debate partner, go to the local station and ask to see an officer. Then politely engage him in a debate. Then it will just be two dudes debating law.

If you "debate" during a detainment it can lead to things like Disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, etc.

For example, I hear guys debate things all the time.. "Nah It wasn't my fault I didn't mean to break her nose when I punched her in the face!! She slapped me first!!"....

Finally, the good old Constitutiton and many State constitution sets up the Court as a place for you to "debate" laws. So blame those pesky founding fathers.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,324
Location
White Oak Plantation
Can't argue to reality of your points. Unless another cop chimes in the answer can only be that the cop decides when a constitutional/legal debate is appropriate, the citizen, not so much.

A citizen must never debate a cop on the sidewalk/side of the road. The citizen will always lose the debate. Being unreasonable begets unreasonableness no matter how right the citizen is.

Stick to the law and speak very little when detained by a cop. Record the encounter. Whatever law the cop is using at the time of the encounter is the law. It is a rare cop who can be, or is willing to be, educated on the sidewalk/side of the road, judges are better educators.
 

49er

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2008
Messages
154
Location
Central Alabama
The entire video from Jason's entrance to his departure covers only 41 seconds.

Jason's replies to the security guard/officer's demands were short and to the point:

- I didn't know that was against the law, Sir.

- Alabama is an open carry state.

- That's unconstitutional.

Some may wish to call that a debate. I don't.

Keep in mind, the security guard/off duty officer was acting in his own individual capacity unless he witnessed a violation of the law being committed in his presence. A violation of the law was necessary to change his status from security guard to a police officer according to Alabama case law.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,539
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
If the 41 seconds is everything, I don't see a debate either. However, I don't know if the 41 seconds is the whole story.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

Daylen

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
2,224
Location
America
This whole thing is moot since the passage of Beason's bs law. I'd almost rather a guilty verdict; a not guilty would be definitive proof that the bs law hurt.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,539
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
This whole thing is moot since the passage of Beason's bs law. I'd almost rather a guilty verdict; a not guilty would be definitive proof that the bs law hurt.
I am a bit confused. Can I ask you to expound on this? Thanks in advance.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

Daylen

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
2,224
Location
America
I am a bit confused. Can I ask you to expound on this? Thanks in advance.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
-52 did not apply up to last year (C.D.J vs state, Braxton* vs state). If the appeal says not guilty it would reaffirm that prior precedent. We would still be able to say there is now law generally prohibiting carry (including oc). Now however, the law has been amended and is no longer replaced by a more recent law (-70s as precedent said). I'm not sure about you, but I don't like -52 as amended, it reinforces what the anti-OC crowd has said for a while: you need permission or show me a permit. I don't care about OC just to show off, I like OC (or liked anyway) as it was a way to carry without asking for permission.




* spelling?
 
Top