| Author | Post |
|---|
Mike
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 03:49 am |
|
OpenCarry.org
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 22, 2007
----------------------------------------------
And then there were 5 . . . another Dickson Dozen victim heads to court
And now a fifth person has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against the Borough of Dickson City and members of the Dickson City Police Department over the “Dickson Dozen” incident. The plaintiff, Edward Kraft, Jr., of Clifford PA, seeks compensatory and punitive damages as a result of civil rights violations suffered during the police response to a call about a group of people peaceably eating dinner, some of whom were openly carrying holstered handguns.
Kraft's action, filed in United States Federal District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, follows a similar lawsuit filed by four other patrons on June 11 that were also involved in the incident. Kraft and the other four plaintiffs, one of whom was only armed with a video camera, were doing nothing illegal or suspicious under Pennsylvania law and the police had no reason or authority to detain and search them, or confiscate their guns.
Police report: http://paopencarry.org/policereport.pdf
Media reports on the Dickson Dozen police roundup: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum46/10896.html
Mr. Kraft’s complaint: http://paopencarry.org/kraft_complaint.pdf
Mr. Kraft’s Lawsuit Contact: Johanna L. Gelb, Esquire, Scranton, PA at (570) 343-6383
Earlier complaint filed by Rich Banks et al.: http://paopencarry.org/complaint.pdf
Contact for lawsuit by Rich Banks et al.: Brian Collins, Esquire, Allentown, PA at (610) 436-4896
--
##########################
Contact anytime on gun stories:
Mike Stollenwerk/John Pierce
http://www.OpenCarry.org
A growing national Internet community with more than 7,400 registered members
News media reports citing OpenCarry.org's perspective: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum63
##########################
Attachment: Press Release re Kraft Lawsuit Against Dickson City.pdf (Downloaded 62 times) Last edited on Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 03:51 am by Mike
|
Statkowski
Supporting Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 02:45 am |
|
Second filing finally made the Scranton Times-Tribune - four one-sentence paragraphs buried in the paper.
http://www.thetimes-tribune.com/site/index.cfm?newsid=19797629&BRD=2185&PAG=461&dept_id=590572&rfi=8
Suit filed in May open-carry incident
DICKSON CITY — Another person who had openly carried a handgun at Old Country Buffet in May has filed a lawsuit against Dickson City and its police officers.
Edward J. Kraft Jr., of Clifford Township, filed a suit Friday seeking an unspecified amount of money.
He is the fifth from a group of people who had been, according to the plaintiffs, unlawfully questioned by Dickson City police about openly carrying weapons in public.
The suit alleges Mr. Kraft was taking care of his 3-month-old daughter when officers pulled him and others aside, demanded identification and then ordered him and others to stand against a wall, in the rain, while his family looked on.
Last edited on Wed Jun 25th, 2008 02:46 am by Statkowski
|
mvpel
Supporting Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 25th, 2008 03:31 am |
|
I say whip it!
Whip it good!
Let's hope those arrogant, abusive, self-righteous cops get everything they deserve, good and hard. The extent to which they escape punishment is the extent to which we live in a Police State.
Last edited on Fri Jun 27th, 2008 02:02 pm by mvpel
|
AZkopper
Supporting Member
|
Posted: Mon Jul 7th, 2008 06:27 am |
|
After reading this, I have the following thoughts/comments:
1. Who I'm really upset with is the Assistant District Attorney (ADA) who was contacted on scene and ordered/authorized the arrest and confiscation of the guns(the officers really seemed clueless) and then advised that no charges would be filed the following Monday. This seems to be the true abuse of power.
2. Another thing, since when do people have a "Right" not be be offended?
3. If Open Carry is legal in PA (based on the police report) and according to all witnesses, the 5 were just eating and talking peacably, with holstered weapons that were not being brandished or even discussed, why were THEY inconvienced, when the 'offended' parties should have been the ones pulled outside and 'inconvienced' with the truth of the law.
4. I don't know if the gun registration is a PA thing or a Dickson City thing (I'm not from there), but a law passed by the town council or state legislature is usually considered valid until challenged and overturned in court. If gun registration is the law there, and only the registrered owner can carry the gun, the proper thing to do is to challenge it in court, not ignore it. That is the only part of the whole thing that can be justified at all.
|
Seif5034
Supporting Member
|
Posted: Mon Jul 7th, 2008 07:57 pm |
|
AZkopper wrote:
2. Another thing, since when do people have a "Right" not be be offended?
ever since people found out that if something as EVIL as a holstered, dormant firearm was annoying them that they can call it disturbance of peace
|
T Dubya
Activist Member
|
Posted: Mon Jul 7th, 2008 09:30 pm |
|
| Can someone tell me how they ran the serial numbers? How they determined who the firearms were registered to? When did gun registration become law of the land? Did I miss something?
|
Phonetic Diabetic
Supporting Member
|
Posted: Mon Jul 7th, 2008 10:39 pm |
|
After reading this for the 1st time, I'm just bewildered at how little some LEOs actually know about gun laws. Of all people out there, they should be the most knowledgeable. The whole, "He told me this, so I had to ask the ADA if it was right....." thing just bugs the living hell out of me.
Last edited on Mon Jul 7th, 2008 10:40 pm by Phonetic Diabetic
|
Statkowski
Supporting Member
|
Posted: Mon Jul 7th, 2008 11:49 pm |
|
Can someone tell me how they ran the serial numbers? How they determined who the firearms were registered to? When did gun registration become law of the land? Did I miss something?
They called in the serial numbers to the PSP.
The PSP told them who the firearms were sold to.
There is no gun registration in Pennsylvania, which is one of the reasons for the lawsuits.
No, you did not miss anything. It was the Dickson City Police and the Lackawanna County DA's office that missed something, big time.
|
Northern-Lights
Supporting Member
|
Posted: Tue Jul 8th, 2008 01:42 am |
|
Phonetic Diabetic wrote: After reading this for the 1st time, I'm just bewildered at how little some LEOs actually know about gun laws. Of all people out there, they should be the most knowledgeable. The whole, "He told me this, so I had to ask the ADA if it was right....." thing just bugs the living hell out of me.
Don't be so fast to judge them. First....there are hundreds....no, thousands of laws. They can't possibly know them all.
They did the right thing by calling the ADA and asking for an update. Notice, even the ADA had to brush up on the law...and he lives in that stuff all the time.
Bottom line is this....yes, it may be our right to carry....but expect to meet up with LEO's who don't know this...and haven't come across anyone exercising that right. Be calm.....be polite.....don't say or do anything stupid which will add fuel to the fire to change the law. If anyone makes a stupid statement or action....let it be the LEO's or the general public.
Then, if wrong's are committed......take appropriate action. Just don't be surprised when the ignorant masses are surprised and offended that you are carrying. After all....they've been lied to by the liberal masses for decades.
|
AbNo
Supporting Member
|
Posted: Tue Jul 8th, 2008 02:15 am |
|
Northern-Lights wrote:
Don't be so fast to judge them..... ....They did the right thing by calling the ADA and asking for an update. Notice, even the ADA had to brush up on the law...and he lives in that stuff all the time.
Exactly. The LEO patrol on scene did the right thing, they were just given the wrong information.
And I'm sure the ADA is going to try and throw these guys under the bus to save his own arse. 
|
crotalus01
Supporting Member
|
Posted: Tue Jul 8th, 2008 02:25 am |
|
| WOW. The police report alone will win the lawsuit for the paintifs. In this case, however, I really don't blame the cops as they were simply following the instructions of the DA - as stated previously there is no way for the cops to know all the laws on the books. By the police report (which may be misleading - I would like to hear from one of the open carriers how it jibes with their side) it really sounds like the cops were not jerks about the whole situation. But the DA? Thats a whole nother story
|
gnbrotz
Activist Member
|
Posted: Tue Jul 8th, 2008 08:37 pm |
|
The following things happened at the discretion of the officers involved without ADA consultation:- Officer Mariano admitted OC was legal w/no license and that the involved parties were w/in their rights.
- They still demanded "papers" from those involved (unlawful)
- Rich was arrested for refusing to comply with ID demand (unlawful)
- Judy was threatened with arrest if she did not stop video taping (unlawful)
- People were detained (not allowed to leave) for lawful activity (unlawful)
- People had their property confiscated to run the serial numbers through a non-ownership database. (unlawful)
- People were searched, including pockets, without PC or incident to arrest. (unlawful)
I'd say the officers involved were just as responsible, if not more so,
than the ADA.
|
libertyrules
Supporting Member
|
Posted: Wed Jul 9th, 2008 04:09 am |
|
gnbrotz wrote: I'd say the officers involved were just as responsible, if not more so,
than the ADA.
Plenty of culpability to go around here. Whew! Trying to be LEO's without a clue about due process, or civil rights must get downright - well, trying. It will likely prove to be an expensive lesson for the two cops. I expect the good town of Dickson will be contributing to the kids' college fund.
Any mention of whether or not the video will become available on YouTube?
|
AbNo
Supporting Member
|
Posted: Wed Jul 9th, 2008 05:20 am |
|
gnbrotz wrote:
The following things happened at the discretion of the officers involved without ADA consultation:- Officer Mariano admitted OC was legal w/no license and that the involved parties were w/in their rights.
- They still demanded "papers" from those involved (unlawful)
- Rich was arrested for refusing to comply with ID demand (unlawful)
- Judy was threatened with arrest if she did not stop video taping (unlawful)
- People were detained (not allowed to leave) for lawful activity (unlawful)
- People had their property confiscated to run the serial numbers through a non-ownership database. (unlawful)
- People were searched, including pockets, without PC or incident to arrest. (unlawful)
I'd say the officers involved were just as responsible, if not more so,
than the ADA.
I stand corrected.
|
gnbrotz
Activist Member
|
Posted: Wed Jul 9th, 2008 10:12 am |
|
libertyrules wrote:Any mention of whether or not the video will become available on YouTube?
I'd be very surprised to the the full, unedited footage publicly relased before the suit is complete. After that, I'm pretty sure it will be available.
|
Deanimator
Supporting Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 21st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 874 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jul 9th, 2008 01:20 pm |
|
AbNo wrote: And I'm sure the ADA is going to try and throw these guys under the bus to save his own arse.
Which is a perfectly acceptable outcome because it drives a great big wedge between the people pushing for enforcement of invalid laws and those who actually have to do the enforcing. You can pass all the bad laws you want. If you can't get anybody to enforce them, they're utterly irrelevant.
Case in point: Cleveland has an assault weapons ban. The mayor of Cleveland announced that despite state preemption, it would be enforced. Almost immediately, the Cleveland FOP announced that whoever enforced it, it WOULDN'T be Cleveland cops, who were advised in the strongest possible terms NOT to enforce the now null and void law, lest they open themselves to lawsuit.
Deterrence works, both against those breaking valid law and against those who would enforce INvalid law, or make up laws of their own.
|
JoeSparky
Centurion Member
|
Posted: Thu Jul 10th, 2008 03:44 am |
|
Deanimator wrote: AbNo wrote: And I'm sure the ADA is going to try and throw these guys under the bus to save his own arse.
Which is a perfectly acceptable outcome because it drives a great big wedge between the people pushing for enforcement of invalid laws and those who actually have to do the enforcing. You can pass all the bad laws you want. If you can't get anybody to enforce them, they're utterly irrelevant.
Case in point: Cleveland has an assault weapons ban. The mayor of Cleveland announced that despite state preemption, it would be enforced. Almost immediately, the Cleveland FOP announced that whoever enforced it, it WOULDN'T be Cleveland cops, who were advised in the strongest possible terms NOT to enforce the now null and void law, lest they open themselves to lawsuit.
Deterrence works, both against those breaking valid law and against those who would enforce INvalid law, or make up laws of their own.
Unfortunately, at some point someone else may direct the officers to "enforce the assault weapons ban or they won't be LEO's in Cleveland any more."
Which brings us back to the point that bad laws MUST be repealled not just ignored!
JoeSparky
|
Deanimator
Supporting Member
| Joined: | Fri Sep 21st, 2007 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 874 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 10th, 2008 01:09 pm |
|
JoeSparky wrote: Deanimator wrote: AbNo wrote: And I'm sure the ADA is going to try and throw these guys under the bus to save his own arse.
Which is a perfectly acceptable outcome because it drives a great big wedge between the people pushing for enforcement of invalid laws and those who actually have to do the enforcing. You can pass all the bad laws you want. If you can't get anybody to enforce them, they're utterly irrelevant.
Case in point: Cleveland has an assault weapons ban. The mayor of Cleveland announced that despite state preemption, it would be enforced. Almost immediately, the Cleveland FOP announced that whoever enforced it, it WOULDN'T be Cleveland cops, who were advised in the strongest possible terms NOT to enforce the now null and void law, lest they open themselves to lawsuit.
Deterrence works, both against those breaking valid law and against those who would enforce INvalid law, or make up laws of their own.
Unfortunately, at some point someone else may direct the officers to "enforce the assault weapons ban or they won't be LEO's in Cleveland any more."
Which brings us back to the point that bad laws MUST be repealled not just ignored!
JoeSparky
I've got two words for you, "WRONGFUL TERMINATION". I'd rather lose my job and gain a big judgement than end up PAYING a big judgement because I pierced my own qualified immunity by knowingly committing a false arrest. Frank Jackson hasn't got a snowball's chance in Fallujah of winning his challenge to state preemption and the FOP to its very rare credit, knows it.
|
modelo57
Supporting Member
| Joined: | Sun Aug 19th, 2007 |
| Location: | Connecticut USA |
| Posts: | 79 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jul 10th, 2008 02:55 pm |
|
| Am I doing something wrong? I tried to open the police report file and got an error message stating the file is damaged and not repairable.
|
Mike
Super Moderator
|
Posted: Thu Jul 10th, 2008 02:57 pm |
|
modelo57 wrote: Am I doing something wrong? I tried to open the police report file and got an error message stating the file is damaged and not repairable.
it just opened fine for me.
|
Current time is 02:42 pm | Page: 1 2 3   |
|
