This is absolutely disgusting

[Bob Hubbard]

Theft - To take without permission. N.Webster.

The issue there is, government redefines things in their favor.

 

[Archangel M]

Webster doesn't equate to legal statute Bob. A crime has to show "mens rea" or a "guilty mind" involved in the taking. Rarely is larceny defined as a "strict liability" crime...as in I haven't seen it yet.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

I stick with English dictionaries. Legal ones aren't English. Government changes meanings to justify their actions. Legal definition doesn't equal the common one.

 

[Archangel M]

If you live under a set of laws its best that you understand them. Thinking that a websters understanding is sufficient could land you in trouble. Being that this is a martial arts/self-defense forum I would say such understanding is manditory.

Heres a nice explination of INTENT in regards to criminal liability.

http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/US_Criminal_Law


PS-"Common Law" as deep and ancient roots. This stuff is not something new that the gvt has "cooked up". It's a vital component to defending yourself against a case bought against you BY the gvt.

 

[Jenny_in_Chico]

Bob, I think Archangel has out-argued you. Better throw in the towel now and live to argue another day.

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Jenny,
I had a long reply written, but tossed all but this part as I don't want to argue today.

Legal language has checks, justifications, and complexity to it. That's why the highest document in the nation is a mere 20 pages, yet it takes 50 just to outline who can get a tattoo.

 

[Jenny_in_Chico]

Jenny,
I had a long reply written, but tossed all but this part as I don't want to argue today.

Is that because you got my pic in the mail?

 

[Bob Hubbard]

Haven't been to the post office yet this week dear.

 

[Archangel M]

Don't confuse legislative "law" (i.e. bill writing) with penal law and criminal procedure law either. Criminal Law was as "complex" back in the founding fathers day as it is now. Governmental "law"...as in thousand page health care bills are a separate matter that doesn't really apply here.

Legal definitions of what consitutes theft, burglary, rape, etc. (and "self defense") are very specific and have remained pretty much unchanged for YEARS. They have roots in "common law" and that reaches WAY back in the human formation of "law".

 

[Jenny_in_Chico]

Don't confuse legislative "law" (i.e. bill writing) with penal law and criminal procedure law either. Criminal Law was as "complex" back in the founding fathers day as it is now. Governmental "law"...as in thousand page health care bills are a separate matter that doesn't really apply here.

Legal definitions of what consitutes theft, burglary, rape, etc. (and "self defense") are very specific and have remained pretty much unchanged for YEARS and has roots in common law that reach WAY back in the human formation of "law".

That's kicking a man when he's down, Michael.

 

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

First -- I don't have a problem with the cop investigating when he saw someone carrying a gun. Nor do I have a problem with him doing the initial investigation at gunpoint. Until the cop knows what's going on with that gun, he needs to maintain the upper hand.

That said -- some of his actions beyond that point are less than ideal. I'll take the article at its word that there's no way to verify the CCW. Given that, the officer should be familiar with what the CCW permit looks like. If the card was valid on its face, and he's confirmed that the card belongs to the guy in question, and made sure that guy with the gun isn't a convicted felon or other prohibited person, and running a wanted check -- he probably should have been done. Instead, he seized the property. The article is scant on why or what happened then... but the lawyer was released.

I don't like the attitude, either. And it's the cop's job to know what's legal and what's not -- without making up crazy laws on his own.

Several years ago, I stopped a car for speeding. Driver tells me that he's got a gun in the car, and that he's got a CCW permit. But... he left his wallet at his buddy's house. I did take custody of the gun, while running his information. (This is when I discovered that if you don't query EXACTLY what's in the file, the CCW system in VA doesn't confirm the permit.) I let him call his buddy to bring his wallet, while I maintained custody of the gun. Eventually, the buddy arrived, I confirmed the information, and returned his property to him. I didn't pull him out of the car at gunpoint because of the way he advised me, and because he was completely compliant.

I think the officer's actions are justifiable, if not ideal, here. And I think they do fall under the scope of his official duties, and he should have immunity. But I think he also needs some discipline/retraining based on his attitude, taking the article as accurate. And that Massachusetts needs to come up with some method for verifying the permit other than a phone call to the permit office! (What if I had to verify it from Virginia?)

We've run into a similar issue with groups like OpenCarry here in Virginia. They stage events where they go into a restaurant or mall or some other public area, openly carrying various guns. Their (unstated) goal is to provoke enough of a reaction that the cops are called, and then they hope that the cops will do something stupid. And it works more often than it should, because the truth is that there are a lot of cops who don't bother to know some of the laws properly, and who have an attitude of "nobody should have guns but us." In Virginia, openly carrying a gun is generally legal. You'll probably attract some police attention, and if I'm the cop, I'm going to make sure that you aren't wanted, and that you don't fall into a prohibited category... but you aren't breaking the law. (I could stretch for disorderly if I really, really had to -- but it'd be stretching things, and probably require more conduct than simply carrying the gun. And, in some cases, you'd be trespassing...)

Are you refering to those Manassas City Cops who got real aggressive with a few of those legal gun owners and then were overheard on their radios calling them all kind of insulting names and saying they wished one of them would have treid something so the cops could shot them?

The reason these groups do this is because there is so many in Va. L.E. that do not know the laws pertaining to firearms and damn well should in the great FREE Commonwealth of Virginia.

Maybe it's time you guys were made to attend a dedicated coarse on gun laws and the citizens right to carry and defend themselves?

( I know You know the laws, I am meaning Va. LE in general.)

I bet you would rather sit through that than another cultural sensativity class?

 

[Carol]

Are you refering to those Manassas City Cops who got real aggressive with a few of those legal gun owners and then were overheard on their radios calling them all kind of insulting names and saying they wished one of them would have treid something so the cops could shot them?

Cop humor can be rather dark, when they're talking amongst themselves. Just sayin'.

 

[jks9199]

Are you refering to those Manassas City Cops who got real aggressive with a few of those legal gun owners and then were overheard on their radios calling them all kind of insulting names and saying they wished one of them would have treid something so the cops could shot them?

The reason these groups do this is because there is so many in Va. L.E. that do not know the laws pertaining to firearms and damn well should in the great FREE Commonwealth of Virginia.

Maybe it's time you guys were made to attend a dedicated coarse on gun laws and the citizens right to carry and defend themselves?

( I know You know the laws, I am meaning Va. LE in general.)

I bet you would rather sit through that than another cultural sensativity class?

The Manassas City incident was only one of several -- and they still go on. The responding officers in Manassas screwed up in more ways than one.

But the reality is that no cop really knows all the laws; we learn the ones we use and deal with regularly, and look up the others as we need to. The regional response to OpenCarry and the screw up in Manassas was reminders being sent out by most agencies about what is legal.

It also doesn't help that quite a few of the Virginia weapons laws have some really screwy wording; see, for example, 18.2-287.4, titled "Carrying loaded firearms in public prohibited; penalty." The catch is that it only prohibits carrying CERTAIN loaded firearms, basically high capacity ones in particular areas.

 

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

The Manassas City incident was only one of several -- and they still go on. The responding officers in Manassas screwed up in more ways than one.

But the reality is that no cop really knows all the laws; we learn the ones we use and deal with regularly, and look up the others as we need to. The regional response to OpenCarry and the screw up in Manassas was reminders being sent out by most agencies about what is legal.

It also doesn't help that quite a few of the Virginia weapons laws have some really screwy wording; see, for example, 18.2-287.4, titled "Carrying loaded firearms in public prohibited; penalty." The catch is that it only prohibits carrying CERTAIN loaded firearms, basically high capacity ones in particular areas.

Well back in the younger days, my little haedbanger buddies would talk the Anarchy BS and talk about how " We will fight the Cops Man." I always said " Your an idiot, soon after any Anarchy a new order allways comes along and the first order is to establish law enforcement, you need them unless you want to battle everyone you meet. You want to change the World? First thing you do is kill all the Lawyers. =)

(These guys were to dumb to know about Henry the 8th)

Good luck, stay safe JKS.