• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Federal Court Rules that 2nd Amendment Right is Now a Reason for Cops to Detain You

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,462
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
http://thefreethoughtproject.com/fe...ce-detain-individuals-open-carrying-firearms/
Grand Rapids, Mich. – In a stunning violation of 2nd Amendment rights, the U.S. District Court of Western Michigan ruled police have the legal authority to detain individuals that choose to exercise their constitutional right to open carry a firearm. Open Carry is also specifically allowed under Michigan law.

The ruling means that people in Michigan who choose to exercise this constitutional right are now subject to being stopped by law enforcement for engaging in a completely lawful activity.

Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/fe...s-open-carrying-firearms/#RB29RkyLCoZZCm1i.99
 

rightwinglibertarian

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2014
Messages
827
Location
Seattle WA
The Federal court can't be trusted to make lawful or Constitutional rulings. Thankfully at least a few know any ruling contrary to the Constitution is void
 

deepdiver

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
5,820
Location
Southeast, Missouri, USA
SCOTUS bound if Deffert is so inclined. Deffert could be the case that changes the LE paradigm.

After today I doubt that would make much difference. Clearly 6 Justices do not care what the plain letter of the law says but will vote their personal political opinion instead. Today we sadly had proof that the rule of law has essentially ceased to function for now in the US. Getting further 2A cases certified to SCOTUS in this current environment may be the worst thing that could happen.

But then my outlook at the moment is quite jaded...
 

SouthernBoy

Regular Member
Joined
May 12, 2007
Messages
5,837
Location
Western Prince William County, Virginia, USA
After today I doubt that would make much difference. Clearly 6 Justices do not care what the plain letter of the law says but will vote their personal political opinion instead. Today we sadly had proof that the rule of law has essentially ceased to function for now in the US. Getting further 2A cases certified to SCOTUS in this current environment may be the worst thing that could happen.

But then my outlook at the moment is quite jaded...

Amen to this. Those six jurists chose to ignore the Constitution in favor of political expediency, and perhaps their place in history. And this at the cost of what the Founders created. The door to despotism has been opened a bit further with their decision.
 

Ezek

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
411
Location
missouri
Amen to this. Those six jurists chose to ignore the Constitution in favor of political expediency, and perhaps their place in history. And this at the cost of what the Founders created. The door to despotism has been opened a bit further with their decision.

not only did they ignore the constitution, they also ignored state and local law.

doing a lawful act even within state law is not grounds for detainment or RAS or PC, decision needs to be appealed and the state supreme court needs to have it's judges disbarred, and their license/certificates to practice law removed, PERMANENTLY, for lack of intelligence, and common sense, since it is obviously interfering with their ability to judge within the confines of the law, and therefore unable to uphold/adhere to the requirements of office.

how do idiots like this get into these positions of power?
 

twoskinsonemanns

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
2,326
Location
WV
After today I doubt that would make much difference. Clearly 6 Justices do not care what the plain letter of the law says but will vote their personal political opinion instead. Today we sadly had proof that the rule of law has essentially ceased to function for now in the US. Getting further 2A cases certified to SCOTUS in this current environment may be the worst thing that could happen.

But then my outlook at the moment is quite jaded...

I think you may be right. I dread 2A cases going to the SCOTUS.
IMHO the SCOTUS abandoned the constitution in the 30's under FDR's coercion.
 

Ezek

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2015
Messages
411
Location
missouri
this is what happens when you have a lack of moral absolutes and project the "everything is flexible in interpretation" onto such things.
 

nonameisgood

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
1,008
Location
Big D
this is what happens when you have a lack of moral absolutes and project the "everything is flexible in interpretation" onto such things.

Your scheme only works when I agree with your baseline. Since there are no moral absolutes, everything is a negotiated baseline. I agree that killing people is bad, in most cases, so the details of whom and under what circumstances is the negotiation.
Most people agree self defense is good, but many people are deluded by limited experience into thinking that all disagreement can be amicably resolved without bloodshed. The settlers in Texas were killed until a group realized that there could never be a negotiation so long as one party was willing to fight to the death and would never compromise. Right or wrong, it was the lack of a settled baseline and inability to negotiate that resulted in the demise of the Comanche. This was not the case with eastern tribes because they were willing to negotiate. One can stand their ground and win or die trying, or one can work to an acceptable settlement. There are many people in the U.S. who think one should not defend oneself with lethal force under any circumstance. So what is our moral absolute?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
As the world shrinks there absolutely can be some moral absolutes. Most are rooted in property rights and how the rights originate within the individual.

Murder morally absolutely wrong. Theft and sexual rape also. Values and morals need to be distinctly separated.
 

Liberty-or-Death

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2014
Messages
411
Location
23235
this is what happens when you have a lack of moral absolutes and project the "everything is flexible in interpretation" onto such things.
Agreed. I think you've defined "lawlessness" there.
Since there are no moral absolutes, everything is a negotiated baseline.
There are absolutely no absolutes except that there are no absolutes .... hmm.
 
Last edited:

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Your scheme only works when I agree with your baseline. Since there are no moral absolutes, everything is a negotiated baseline. I agree that killing people is bad, in most cases, ....
No, killing people is absolutely bad, no matter the circumstance. What is "negotiated" is what consequences from the killing, from none to death.
 

nonameisgood

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
1,008
Location
Big D
No, killing people is absolutely bad, no matter the circumstance. What is "negotiated" is what consequences from the killing, from none to death.

And this is a prime example of the kind of disagreement reasonable people can have about what is bad.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

RikuNoganashi

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2012
Messages
30
Location
Cookeville TN
So, they have officially sanctioned doing in Michigan what they have been doing in TN ever since the laws regarding "permits" for our right to exercise the second amendment? It has been a crime to carry a gun here ever since it was written into law that we had to have a permit for it.
 
Top