Law Student Schools Policeman On His Gun Rights

[video=youtube;RyJFD6BhQFY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyJFD6BhQFY[/video]

I guess it has come down to this. If you LEGALLY walk around with a gun, the cops will stop you because a few people who watch the glowing orb in the corner of the room calls the police because of they are freaked out. That is their problem, not yours.

If you live in state that allows you to walk around with a gun, that cannot be the only reason why a cop can stop you: UNITED STATES v. DeBERRY

Here is a transcript of the whole video: J McDonald – Detained For Open Carry Portland Maine 26 MAY 2012

You would think the cop in the video would know this, but apparently he doesn't. Good thing his supervisor did.

 

I feel bad for the cop. He and the rest of the departments are being told to take this action by there bosses who know this is 100% illegal to stop the citizen.

The whole goal here is conditioning to make it so that people do not exercise their right to bear arms.

I know Liberals are going to call this guy a jerk, but unless we exercise our rights, we will lose them.

 

Next they will be going for our cameras. Liberals want us to forfeit our guns, and this is next.

[video=youtube;ApIJc8gs3lw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApIJc8gs3lw[/video]

 

More paranoia I see...

 

So you support open carry?

How about concealed carry?

 

Why is this more paranoia?

Why was she being arrested?

 

Do you even know what "paranoia" means? I just gave you an video example of it actually happening. Please don't use words that you don't know.

 

Yes he is a RWering. He is typical of the problem in this country. He will deny the homosexuals the right to marry, while screaming do not take my constitutional amendments away to carry a gun.

That is extremely hypocritical I will agree.

However, the police arrested the women because she refused to stop video taping on a public street. She has the right too. If she didn't, the paparazzi would be out of business. Are you perfectly fine with this?

 

There is Constituional protection for genital preference; there IS, however, a Seceond Amendment.

 

Thank you for finally admitting the 14th amendment. Now run along.

 

You know, legal or not, I don't think its unreasonable for a police officer to be able to at least stop and ask a person openly brandishing a firearm whats up. If the person says exercising their constitutional right, then tally ho.

 

Of course not, though its well known cops are often ignorant of the law and its a good thing his superior was aware.

 

SCOTUS would disagree. Please see the UNITED STATES v. DeBERRY link in my opening comments

 

I was asking about the video HB Surfer posted. Are you ok with the cop arresting the lady for refusing to stop video taping. By bring up the supervisor in the video your answer is throwing me off.

 

What happened to this lady? My guess is any charges were dropped since no law is being broken. Again it goes back to most cops being power hungry jerks who are ignorant of the law. But HB would like us to believe Obama and those "evil liberals" personally made this happen. That is my point.

And No I do not agree.

 

You still cannot grasp what the 14th Amendment ACTUALLY says.

Please cite the law that does not EQUALLY and EXACTLY APPLY to gays, as it does to everyone else.

(BTW- before you further embarrass yourself, gays, straights and everyone else have to follow the EXACT SAME MARRIAGE RULES. Nothing different for ANYONE.= no problem under the 14th Amendment.)

You'd best get back up on the porch , little doggie...you're about to get whipped, again....

- - - Updated - - -

Wearing a firearm, is not "brandishing" a firearm.

 

Well, you do not have a right to concealed carry. Where allowed, it certainly is then legal. But municipalities are allowed to legislate against such. Which just means you must then open carry.

The video then demonstrates how that can work out. Allowing concealed carry has its very pragmatic arguments.

 

The 14th amendment.

 

As noted above by others, have you really thought that through ?

"None of your damned business" would be a legal and proper answer. So what was the basis of your argument ?

 

Maybe read my post? I said 'Legal or not...'. Its just my opinion.

You take a firearm out into public (a place you don't normally see firearms except in the arms of criminals) a lot of people might not see the difference.

I prefaced my comment with the words 'I think', indicating it was my opinion. The basis of which being that I don't think it is unreasonable for a police officer to ask why someone is just wandering around with a gun hanging out. I understand the law doesn't support my opinion, and that is fine.

 

Sadly that's true. The number of police who are arresting people who are merely recording their actions/voices is astounding, law suits flying everywhere. Pretty basic stuff there, not rocket science, but it seems that a lot of coppers don't understand the law sufficiently in some places. And we're not just talking Mayberry here, this is also happening in big city departments where you would think the in-service training is top notch.

 

He should now file a lawsuit against the city for violation of his civil rights.

 

If your reading that as a blanket coverage for gay marriage which isn't specifically mentioned, wouldn't Obama's specifically targeting those making over $250,000 a year for higher taxes violate the amendment because money is property and that is specifically mentioned? You can't have it both ways, so is it the letter of the law or the spirit of the law?

 

Ummmm.... I hate to break this to you dolts.

I am Pro-Gay Marriage. I am Pro-Gay adoption.... I just don't think the government should be involved.

The real lock step minds are Liberals.