|
|
|
OpenCarry.org - Discussion Forum > Stories From The States > Pennsylvania > And then there were 5 . . . another Dickson Dozen victim heads to court
|
|
||
| OpenCarry.org - Discussion Forum > Stories From The States > Pennsylvania > And then there were 5 . . . another Dickson Dozen victim heads to court
|
|||
| Moderated by: jpierce | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
OpenCarry.org FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE And then there were 5 . . . another Dickson Dozen victim heads to court Attachment: Press Release re Kraft Lawsuit Against Dickson City.pdf (Downloaded 81 times) Last edited on Mon Jun 23rd, 2008 04:51 am by Mike |
|||||||||
|
Statkowski Regular Member 
|
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 03:46 am by Statkowski |
|||||||||
|
mvpel Regular Member
|
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 03:02 pm by mvpel |
|||||||||
|
AZkopper Regular Member 
|
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 Regular Member 
|
AZkopper wrote:
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 
|
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 Regular Member 
|
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 11:40 pm by Phonetic Diabetic |
|||||||||
|
Statkowski Regular Member
|
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 Regular Member 
|
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 Regular Member 
|
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 Regular Member
|
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
|
The following things happened at the discretion of the officers involved without ADA consultation:
than the ADA. |
|||||||||
|
libertyrules Regular Member 
|
gnbrotz wrote: I'd say the officers involved were just as responsible, if not more so, 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 Regular Member
|
gnbrotz wrote:The following things happened at the discretion of the officers involved without ADA consultation: I stand corrected. |
|||||||||
|
gnbrotz Activist Member
|
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 Regular Member
|
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 
|
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. 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 Regular Member
|
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. 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 Regular Member 
|
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
|
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. |
|||||||||
|
modelo57 Regular Member
|
Must be my connection, I'll try later. |
|||||||||
|
AbNo Regular Member
|
modelo57 wrote:Must be my connection, I'll try later. Try right-clicking on the link and saving the file, then opening it that way. Also, make sure your Acrobat is updated to fairly recently. |
|||||||||
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
Gun week article on the Law suits: http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum63/13376.html |
|||||||||
|
Statkowski Regular Member
|
Case Management Plan available here: http://paopencarry.org/dicksoncity/mgmtplan.pdf Both cases combined, justice slowly grinds on. |
|||||||||
|
hsmith Regular Member 
|
Northern-Lights wrote: 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. I respectfully DISAGREE. Citizens are expected to follow ALL laws and behave accordingly "i didn't know the law" won't get you out of jail. Police should be expected to function the same way. |
|||||||||
|
libertyrules Regular Member
|
+1 Leo's should be expected to know the basic gun carry laws in their state. If ignorance of gun rights is so prevalent, then some kind of legislative oversight of Leo training might be in order. Part of the problem is, as was pointed out above, that liberal weenies have been pushing their anti-gun agenda ever since Pres Reagan and Brady were ambushed and shot. We are fast becoming a Socialist country, and the liberal elite will always come down on the side of "gun regulation" & confiscation. What we are seeing here in America is a resurgence of sovereignty vs governmental bullying, which is a good thing. But we should take heart in the fact that gun owners are closing ranks and resisting the anti-gunners' game, by taking a level-headed proactive stance such as the ones in the restaurant took. Our liberty must never be taken for granted. We must and will continue to fight for our right to defend ourselves and our loved ones. When enough battles are waged and won, law enforcement will be forced to re-evaluate their position that they should be the only ones carrying guns. In this little town where I live in CO, I have taken a stance that I will carry, open or concealed, as I please. It comes at a price, but I have forced the Leos here to back off. Ordinary citizens need to be educated regarding gun rights. By openly carrying my gun on my hip wherever I go, they are slowly getting the message. They know about my little confrontation with the local police here, yet I'm still oc-ing in town, and the leo's aren't bothering me anymore. That does send a positive message. First you take a stance, and then deal with the consequences. Choose your battles carefully, then go for it. The "Dickson Dozen" did exactly that. They took their RKBA stance, chose their battle, and faced the consequences. Of curse they knew there would be a confrontation with law enforcement, if not that night, then another night. But they knew, and were prepared to deal with it. By the time this is over, one town will for sure will be well-versed in gun carry laws, from the rank-and-file, to the DA and mayor.  |
|||||||||
|
S.E.WI Regular Member
|
libertyrules wrote: +1 Could you tell us how you managed to get LE to back off? Here in WI we have a state constitutional right to bear arms for security and defense that is being denied. A disorderly conduct charge is the norm if someone calls the police about someone open carrying. (concealed carry for active and retired LE only) The court here has determined that our need for security and defense is at its apex only when in our home or business. Any ideas for us? From everything I have found, it's the state's actors that are violating the law. Thanks in advance. |
|||||||||
|
rodbender Founder's Club Member 
|
You are probably going to have to find a lawyer willing to take it all the way if need be. |
|||||||||
|
Statkowski Regular Member
|
Could you tell us how you managed to get LE to back off? You complain. If that doesn't work, you complain some more. You file a written complaint against the police officer with the police department. If possible, you try to file a criminal complaint against the police officer for official oppression, abuse of office, wrongful arrest, deprivation of civil rights, etc., etc. If necessary, sue the police officers and police department in state court. Fight any disorderly conduct charge made on you for lawful conduct. Attend municipal council meetings and make your objections known, on the record. Get others to complain. |
|||||||||
|
rodbender Founder's Club Member
|
Statkowski wrote: If necessary, sue the police officers and police department in state court. I think Federal Court would be better. It keeps it out of the hands of the locals. Knowhutimean? |
|||||||||
|
codename_47 Regular Member
|
I think Federal Court would be better. It keeps it out of the hands of the locals. Knowhutimean? +10 1983 cases belong in Federal. |
|||||||||
|
Mike Super Moderator
|
codename_47 wrote: I think Federal Court would be better. It keeps it out of the hands of the locals. Knowhutimean? Not if the issue is state law - federal courts cannot directly rule on state law against state government - no jurisdiction. See Chet's case in Virginia pages. |
|||||||||
|
Thundar Regular Member 
|
S.E.WI wrote:
Make it so painful that they want to turn and run away when they see you. It isn't a quick silver bullet, but it works. Use whatever sunshine or FOIA laws you have, take pictures of police misconduct go to town council meetings, write letters to the editor, run for town council, etc. Police hate paperwork. FOIA requests create huge paperwork nightmares for them. I really think many LEOs fear paperwork more than anything else. |
|||||||||
|
jahwarrior72 Regular Member 
|
libertyrules wrote:
actually, we didn't. according to most of the guys that have attended other OC dinners, this was the first time they got a negative reaction from the public and local LEOs at a get-together. and we weren't "picking a battle," we were picking what we wanted to eat: ham, or ribs. just a little reminder.  |
|||||||||
|
Sonora Rebel Regular Member 
|
Don't be so fast to judge them. First....there are hundreds....no, thousands of laws. They can't possibly know them all. As a former cop... Those laws you might be expected to commonly deal with on your post (at least) are second nature. OC is an obviously legal activity in PA that even the average citizen is aware of. Ignorance on the part of the cops is deplorable. This entire incident was deplorable on many levels. IMHO... incompetence and ignorant bias were rampant. The public is held accountable to obey all laws... ignorance of the 'law' is no excuse. LEO's should be held to at least the same standards... or find another line of work. |
|||||||||
|
libertyrules Regular Member
|
Could you tell us how you managed to get LE to back off? I won't get into specifics, but just being firm, without being confrontational, at the right moment(s) may have done the trick. That, plus the fact that I OC here as if it were the most natural thing to do. There are many in this town (thanks to the the anti-gunner's crusade) who are horrified at the thought of me carrying a gun, but I just continue to OC anyway. No place of business here has ever said a word about me OCing in their store, and that includes the local bank. And I earned respect from quite a few people who know me here. Behind the the answer to the question of "how?", lies the more important question of "Why?". I must say, it would be much simpler for me to just CC. But I have to look at it from a wider perspective, one in which our individual liberties are at stake here. The social progressives will literally take everything, unless we fight for our rights. Unless we are willing to fight for our first and second amendments, we had best prepare ourselves for a mind-set which includes being thankful for being allowed to exist in a political reality where the individual is always sacrificed for "the greater good". That rubs against the grain for me. History provides us with numerous examples of such insanity: Stalin's USSR, Communist China under Mao, Hitler's Nazi Germany, Pol Pot's Cambodia - and the list grows now to include countries where the Islamists have gained control of the government. Darfur and Somalia come to mind. Gun control and confiscation were among the very first policies carried out by the Islamic governments. Indeed, that has always been the case. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=YZ24YWOTVrs Last edited on Mon Oct 6th, 2008 02:26 am by libertyrules |
|||||||||
|
S.E.WI Regular Member
|
Sonora Rebel wrote: Don't be so fast to judge them. First....there are hundreds....no, thousands of laws. They can't possibly know them all. EXACTLY!! You also know the oath you had to take to become a police officer as should they. The 2A and Article VI of the constitution have been around for over 200 years. "Shall not be infringed" should be very clear to everyone. Article VI is important for LEO's also and has been passed over for too long. ARTICLE VI. All debts contracted and engagements entered into, before the adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the confederation. This constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, any thing in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding. The senators and representatives before−mentioned, and the members of the several state legislatures, and all executive and judicial officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by oath or affirmation, to support this constitution; but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States. As you can see, state legislators, state and federal judges, federal legislators and LE are acting contrary to the supreme law of the land. We the people had better wakeup and wakeup soon. As far as ignorance of the law, how can anyone know them all and then when you think you understand it some judge will make a ruling that changes it. We're all in the dark unless you can read minds. Every victim in locations that have had their rights through acts or legislation needs to sue under USC 42 1983.
|
|||||||||
|
S.E.WI Regular Member
|
Mike wrote: codename_47 wrote:I think Federal Court would be better. It keeps it out of the hands of the locals. Knowhutimean? "The Constitution was interpreted, in 1819, as giving the Supreme Court the power to invalidate any state actions that interfere with the Constitution and the laws and treaties passed pursuant to it. That power is not itself explicitly set out in the Constitution but was declared to exist by the Supreme Court in the decision of McCulloch v. Maryland" I found this in part of Article VI of the constitution. IANAL but it seems that state laws can be invalidated by the Supreme Court. When and how to apply this will require a good lawyer. Think of all the gun laws that interfere with the constitution, 2A. I hope it helps. |
|||||||||
|
Aran Banned
|
Think of all the federal laws that are against the Constitution. Oops, there goes your argument. |
|||||||||
|
AFCop Regular Member 
|
Aran wrote: Think of all the federal laws that are against the Constitution. Like what? |
|||||||||
|
S.E.WI Regular Member
|
Aran wrote: Think of all the federal laws that are against the Constitution. Tell us about all the federal laws that are against the constitution and stick to the Second Amendment for open carry like this forum is about. Our state representatives are passing laws contrary to the constitution which is a violation of the constitution. This makes the argument in Federal Court. AFCop, watch for the answer to this. Last time it was "take your crazy home" for me. |
|||||||||