1911Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 42 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,262 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,216 Posts
"But once, we were here." - Chingachgook Last of the Mohicans
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
200 Posts
The media doesn't like it when they are being watched by armed citizens with a with a serious love of liberty.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,888 Posts
So, in one article the person who organized the black demonstration said that blacks carrying rifles would be shot by police and in article 2 Oath Keepers are going to arm 50 black protestors with rifles because the law enforcement official told the Oath Keepers they couldn't carry rifles in St. Louis in contradiction of state law and 2A. I do not see a good outcome - but I've been wrong before.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,262 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
The media doesn't like it when they are being watched by armed citizens with a with a serious love of liberty.
Neither does the Chief of Police, Belmar ...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,845 Posts
From the article...



Anyone have a link to this video?
Here you go: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BP_HgKWrTYU

Of course, Chief Belmar is 100% WRONG! Missouri law specifically makes it illegal for any law enforcement to disarm the public during a declared state of emergency.

Firearms and ammunition, state of emergency, no restrictions permitted.

44.101. The state, any political subdivision, or any person shall not prohibit or restrict the lawful possession, transfer, sale, transportation, storage, display, or use of firearms or ammunition during an emergency.
He says in the video that no state of emergency has been declared, so the statute does not apply, but he is also 100% WRONG in that respect, since the St. Louis County Executive DID declare a state of emergency.

http://www.stlouisco.com/Portals/8/Executive Order Criminal Unrest.pdf

Just another jackbooted LEO who thinks laws don't apply to him. He even says in the video that he doesn't know the law, and he'll just let his lawyer sort it out. :mad:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
874 Posts
I think Oathkeepers have many good points and platforms they support. Pointing out the illegal police comments made about personal weaponry during an emergency is a good one for example. I'm not sure what they are hoping to accomplish here by arming strangers. I suppose they can try to make the police who are working the streets and their commanders look stupid and impotent if they grab for the guns and can't get them, or if the police don't follow through on a threatened grab. For the folks who live there, I'm not sure that creating situations that foster even more animosity or distrust for the police service really helps. What is the upside for the actual folks living there, apart from the vicarious Eff da Police the American public seems to like to twist out every so often?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,600 Posts
"You have attorneys and we have attorneys" comment is true. The city has attorneys and prosecutors but the difference is when they go to trial and loose a case the taxpayer ends up footing the bill. Gov't attorneys have zero liability, they get paid by the budget year and poor performance isn't likely to cost them clients (income) or their jobs. They make stuff up as they go that appeals to who ever they work for. Gov't attorneys cost taxpayers billions of dollars every year and I'm not talking about their pay.

Looks like the city might be in for a legal lesson at the expense of the tax payer here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,769 Posts
Who are we to decide who can and cannot lawfully carry?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,653 Posts
I grew up in North St. Louis county in the 60s and I can attest to the fact that there are plenty of jack booted cops there. I met a bunch of them during the final years of the Vietnam "war". I had just returned from said "war" and decided to grow my hair and a beard. Back then that alone was enough to get you pulled over and "interrogated" and have your vehicle torn apart and searched. Some of those guys have no business wearing a uniform and a badge. I see that not much has changed.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,650 Posts
So, what are we seeing or witnessing here?

The "protesters" have been claiming the cops in Ferguson are over stepping their authority and violating their Constitutional Rights. Most of us have come to the conclusion that these protesters are just criminals looking for an excuse to grab some free stuff.

Now we see these same "cops" overstepping" their bounds and getting ready to violate the Constitution Rights of OathKeepers and defenders of the Constitution, life and property.

Don't like what the protesters do, don't like what they say, don't like much if anything about them, BUT, it is starting to look like they may be right and the cops in Ferguson are indeed thugs and Violators Of The Constitution.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
58 Posts
Hypothetical situation, let's say I give you a firearm and you use that firearm in the commission of crime. During that crime you hurt or kill an innocent. Am I liable in any way, civil or criminal?
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,650 Posts
Hypothetical situation, let's say I give you a firearm and you use that firearm in the commission of crime. During that crime you hurt or kill an innocent. Am I liable in any way, civil or criminal?
Criminal, maybe. If a reasonable person would have reason to believe that the person you gave the firearm to was a "Prohibited Person" or mentally unstable or .....

Civil, You bet. Suing a company or an individual for the actions of another is the American Way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,219 Posts
I stood guard at a recruiting center recently with a couple of Oath Keepers. Those guys bring their own guns and expected others to as well.

I have a hard time believing they are going to arm strangers. I think it's more likely they would defend whomever they felt had their rights threatened.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,845 Posts
So, what are we seeing or witnessing here?

The "protesters" have been claiming the cops in Ferguson are over stepping their authority and violating their Constitutional Rights. Most of us have come to the conclusion that these protesters are just criminals looking for an excuse to grab some free stuff.

Now we see these same "cops" overstepping" their bounds and getting ready to violate the Constitution Rights of OathKeepers and defenders of the Constitution, life and property.

Don't like what the protesters do, don't like what they say, don't like much if anything about them, BUT, it is starting to look like they may be right and the cops in Ferguson are indeed thugs and Violators Of The Constitution.
Errrr....no. Apples and oranges. (Unless you think criminals shooting at cops, attacking them physically and trying to steal their gun, or looting and burning businesses is the same as standing quietly on the street with a gun, and not bothering anyone.)
 
1 - 20 of 42 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top