« More on the fight over the Federal DC legislation | Main | Blogging a bit slow »
Open carrier taken into custody outside Obama rally
Story here. The fellow was carrying openly (utterly legal in Pennsylvania), but does so outside an Obama rally. He doesn't try to enter the park where it was being held (which requires passing thru metal detectors), Someone sees the gun, and he winds up arrested, charged with disorderly conduct (essentially disturbing the peace) -- which I can't see. The county attorney describes it as a conflict between the first amendment right to peaceably assemble and the second amendment right to arms. Again, I don't see it. He could have exercised his second amendment rights, and they exercise their first amendment rights, without any conflict at all.
20 Comments | Leave a comment
I can't believe what I'm reading.
"Berosh said Noble did not have the right to alarm anyone around him attending the Barack Obama rally in Irvine Park."
A right to "alarm anyone"? Standing around calmly with a holstered firearm is now considered "alarming"? This is ridiculous. When the hell are we going to take back our laws? They have been co-opted by GFW liberal soccer moms who want the police to always make sure everyone is "safe" and never has to see anything that might be scary or offensive. What if the guy was standing there with a sign that said "F*** Obama"? The Supreme Court case of Cohen v. California says he would have been perfectly within his First Amendment rights, but that sure could have caused a disturbance.
"While Noble’s intentions might not have been sinister, Berosh said, “The people who don’t know him don’t know that.”"
Neither did they have any objective reason to suspect he WAS up to something. I mean, really, if he was planning some violent attack, would have have his gun openly visible in a holster?
It's ridiculous the way "disturbing the peace" and such charges have been redefined over the years. Nowadays, if an onlooker gets agitated because they don't like the way you look or what you're saying, YOU get arrested for "creating a disturbance" when it really is the intolerant, ignorant bystander who is the one creating the "disturbance."
Oh, and here's a great one - the Sheriff says "I don’t think this was the time or the place to show your rights." Yeah. Standing around in a public park is no time or place to "show your rights." What were you thinking?
"In the charges filed against Noble, state police trooper Shawn Schexnaildre wrote that if witness John Atkinson hadn’t been alarmed by Noble, Atkinson wouldn’t have notified nearby officers."
"Officer! I'm ALARMED because that man over there looks MEAN. I don't like the way he's standing! Arrest him!"
Anyone heard the Radiohead song that says "Come here, police - arrest this man, he's not like me"?
Sick.
Well put, Bill.
I guess you could arrest someone for driving their car near an environmentalist protest.
Or eating a roast beef sandwich while walking on the street near a Vegan demonstration.
Just boggles the frickin' mind that a "gun" is somekind of a magical talisman of power that circumvents normal common sense/normal law enforcement/normal principles of what a "public" place means.
yes, it's "karma police," and, it doesn't quite go like that... but of course i see your point.
For many years in Ohio, where it was "legal" to OC, you would get arrested for disturbing the peace if you carried openly. The police did not wait for a complaint. If they saw you with a gun on your hip you got arrested. The judicial system supported this.
I like the sheriff's comments about time and place to show your rights. Reminded me of the line in Dr. Strangelove when the fight breaks out in the war room..."Gentlemen. You can’t fight in here. This is the War Room!”
I think the appropriate question to the sheriff is just when and where IS the place to show your rights.
Some people get alarmed when a young black man walks past them on a lonely sidewalk. Therefore all young black men who walk down the street should be thrown in jail for disorderly conduct, right? I'll bet Obama would support that.
This is precisely the reason why open carry should be done much more often - not necessarily for self defense (concealed carry preferred for that), but strictly to desensitize the public to the sight of someone legally carrying a firearm!
A mix of people carrying concealed and open will go a long way to both reducing crime and desensitizing the public.
What pisses me off, is where are the recall petitions re: District Attorney and Sheriff?
Perhaps the laws have changed since I left Pennsylvania (2004). At that time holders of Concealed Carry Permits were instructed NOT to carry openly; doing so could revoke their permit.
The laws have changed (if that was, indeed, the law in 2004). From SnowflakesInHell, the information is that the Penn Courts have specifically ruled that open carrying CANNOT be used to generate a disorderly conduct or disturbing the peace charge. If charges were indeed filed, it's likely they will be dismissed.
Alan A
"desensitizing the public"
This open carry concept will not work in many areas of the country with large populations unless the badge and uniform are attached with it.
"Instead, Berosh said, it’s a battle between two constitutional rights: The right to bear arms and the right to assemble peaceably and without fear.
"
I don't seem to recall the "without fear" part of the 1st Amendment.
It won't work as long as every time some hoplophobe gets upset, the person carrying legally gets arrested. That simply reinforces the belief that guns are bad, since every time someone other than a police officer is seen with one, he or she is arrested. It will only work when the police (which will only happen when they're motivated by some false arrest judgments) start telling the whiners to stop wasting their time.
VCDL holds open carry dinner parties for exactly this reason.
Arrest a VCDL member, and a bunch of them will make a point of showing up the next weekend.
Enough lawsuits and even the dimmest police chief gets the message.
I don't speak for VCDL (I am but a lowly member), but I believe that VCDL's official policy is neutral re: open carry. VCDL often has outings at restaurants that serve alcohol, and duly reminds its members that they must open carry IF they plan to carry.
The "members" of opencarry.org regularly organize open carry dinners. The largest and most active contingent of opencarry.org members seem to be Virginians (and VCDL members).
The idiocy of arbitrarily amending a Constitutional right...."to peaceably assemble without fear?" Come on, do they really think that will fly?
I suspect they think that the "without fear" part was always there, just hidden in a penumbra.
How the fuck does one Amendment override, supercede or negate any other amendments, unless it was specifically designed to do so (ie: prohibition and its repeal thereof)???? I love his line that said, "His (Obama's) rights don't trump mine!"
It seems that when it comes to candidates and law abiding, gun bearing citizens, that the police are fond of the old saying, "You'll beat the rap, but you're still taking the ride."
The tactic is plain and obvious: arrest the citizen, give him a ride downtown, and charge him with something plausible enough to avoid countercharges, but which won't hold water and will ultimately be dismissed.
Straightarrow: such "instructions" have no force of law. Each county sheriff has his own "here's your carry permit, don't be an idiot" letter, the details of which vary.
It's legal in MA too but, from everything I've seen or anyone I've talked to, no one carries openly for exactly that reason: expectation of arrest for disturbing the peace or some such.