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

federal-court-rules-practicing-2nd-amendment-right-is-a-reason-for-detainmentGrand 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.

Officers detained Johann Deffert in early 2013. He was walking down the sidewalk with a holstered FNP-45 pistol, after receiving a 9-1-1 call from a woman who spotted Deffert with the open carried, but holstered, handgun on his person.

The dispatcher initially informed the caller that Michigan is an open carry state. However, the woman subsequently explained that she found Deffert’s presence alarming, due in part to his wearing of camouflage, although she admitted that he wasn’t threatening anyone. Somehow the dispatcher made the decision that someone engaging in a completely legal activity, as earlier in the call noted by the dispatcher, should now be inspected by police, due to caller saying they found wearing camo disturbing.

The absurdity in logic; that someone wearing camo takes the situation from being a completely legal situation not to be interfered with, and raises it to a level of needing police assistance, shows the extreme arbitrary nature of the entire situation.

The incident was captured on responding officer Moe Williams’ dash cam, and lasted 14 minutes. Williams had indicated he believed that perhaps Deffert was suffering from some type of mental illness, as he seemed to be “talking to nobody” when the officer arrived on scene. Upon further investigation, Deffert was revealed to have been happily singing the song “Hakuna Matata” from the Disney movie “The Lion King” while strolling down the sidewalk.

The video shows the officer command Deffert to lay face down on the ground upon arrival on the scene. Deffert was treated as if he were a criminal that needed to prove he was not doing anything wrong, as the officer detained him while running a mental and criminalbackground check. Deffert was polite and respectful throughout the encounter, but strongly asserted his rights regarding open carry laws in the state of Michigan.

Remember, all of this transpired despite Deffert’s total compliance with Michigan law, in respect to open carry of a firearm. Eventually, Deffert was released, as he had violated no laws, done nothing wrong, and there was no legitimate reason to hold him. Shortly after the incident, in what seemed like a vindication for Deffert at the time, Grand Rapids Police Sgt. Steve LaBreque recommended to Moe’s commanding officer, that Moe “would benefit from some additional training in handling ‘open carry’ issues.”

Several months later Deffert filed a federal lawsuit alleging his constitutional rights were violated and that he was assaulted and falsely imprisoned. The legality of open carry in the Michigan was never in question, only if law enforcement had the authority to detain an individual simply because they were open carrying a firearm, according to court records.

In the most convoluted of logic, U.S. District Judge Janet Neff claimed that officers do have such authority. Neff wrote that the officers were “justified in following up on the 9-1-1 call and using swift action to determine whether [Deffert’s] behavior gave rise to a need to protect or preserve life … in the neighborhood.”

When a call to 9-1-1 is made in regard to a completely legal activity, the police should not even be dispatched. If in fact the police needed to “determine whether [Deffert’s] behavior gave rise to a need to protect or preserve life … in the neighborhood,” they need not impeded a citizen from going about their legitimate and legal business,” as Neff asserts, but rather could passively watch from a distance to determine if there is any reasonable suspicion of criminal activity afoot, and if so act accordingly.

The most glaring problem with Neff’s logic, is that there is no reason for police to ever assess someone’s behavior who is simply engaging in constitutionally protected and lawful activity, regardless if another citizens takes issue with the activity. If the activity fails to rise to the level of criminality, then police have no business getting investigating or getting involved. The police, as public servants, aren’t paid to investigate non-crimes.

The idea that someone needs to prove their innocence for engaging in a constitutionally protected activity is contrary to everything America teaches its children to believe about liberty and freedom.

The case will most likely be appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. The National Rifle Association and others have offered to assist in the appeal.

It will be interesting to see what open carry advocates across the nation, and specifically those in Texas, a hotbed of open carry activism, think about this ruling; and how they would respond if this were to become the standard of law in their state.

Sound off in the comments!

Be sure to share this critical information with all your liberty loving friends!

Read the decision below.

Johann Deffert court documents


Jay Syrmopoulos is an investigative journalist, free thinker, researcher, and ardentopponent of authoritarianism. He is currently a graduate student at University of Denver pursuing a masters in Global Affairs. Jay’s work has previously been published on BenSwann.com and WeAreChange.org. You can follow him on Twitter@sirmetropolis, on Facebook at Sir Metropolis and now on tsu.

Courtesy of The Free Thought Project.

Don't forget to follow the D.C. Clothesline on Facebook and Twitter. PLEASE help spread the word by sharing our articles on your favorite social networks.

http://www.dcclothesline.com/2015/06/21/warning-federal-court-rules...

Views: 1073

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

TIME TO STAND UP NOW

AMERICA IS ON A HORRID TIPPING POINT AND WE MUST SAVE HER .  TIME FOR A HUGE CONSERVATIVE OCCUPY MOVEMENT SPREAD OUR WORD

I agree 100% officer need to get a ******* handle on how they deal with situations and quit taking the law into thier own hands. They are gonna hate it when we take law into our own hands.

It is obvious that GESTAPO LAW ENFORCEMENT TACTICS are alive and well in Grand Rapids, Michigan.  You may have the Second Amendment right to "open carry", however if you dare to exercise that right, you become subject to overly close scrutiny by law enforcement.  The right to "open carry" in Michigan is being discouraged and surpressed by a GESTAPO MENTALITY

if he was a diaperhead they would have ignored him!!!!!

I don't open carry because I don't want criminals and communists to know I am prepared for them.

Bob, you make a good point.  Many years ago helmet laws were in almost every state in the union, requiring everyone to wear a helmet while riding a motorcycle.  I had a brother-in-law that was really involved with getting them repealed.  After the law was repealed he continued to ride with a helmet.  I ask him "Fred, why did you fight so hard to get this law repealed and then keep wearing a helmet."  He replied "We should have the choice ourselves to wear a helmet or not, if we start letting the government tell us we have to do something, where will it end."  He was right back in the seventies and he would be right today.

.eal tired of government over stepping their bounds. Sounds like a liberal judge doesn't like this law. Get over it Janet Neff. We do need to stand up and fight back. This is sooo ridiculous. Par for the course, they're always forcing their will on us (Liberals). This needs to be fought to the bitter end. Thankfully we have the NRA>

there is only one way to put a stop to this tyranny!!!!!

http://www.conservativedailynews.com/2015/07/declaration-of-indepen...

More bribery. When's it going to start?

  Time To Stand Up Was Yesterday, Or The Un- Countable Days, Months, Years Before It!!! I Will Never Stand Idly By And Let Our Rights Be Taken From Us. VOTE, WRITE LETTERS TO OUR CONGRESSMAN-WOMEN OF OUR DISGUST AT THIS ATTACK ON OUR CONSTITUTIONALLY GUARANTEED RIGHTS!!! Be Ready To Back Our Words Up With Action. Any Attempt To Challenge The Existing Wordage, Or Change To Our Constitution, Must Be Met With Swift Action On OUR Parts. For To Begin To Change Something Many Of Us Have Died And Fought For, Or Just Fought For, Says That The Constitution Means NOTHING To Those That Have No Idea What It's Ideals Mean To The Rest Of Us!!!

That's why I stated before, Don't Open The Constitution with these people in Power. If we do, go buy your self some Razor Blades, so you can cut your own wrist!    

I believe they DO KNOW....but they disagree and want it their way.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Jerry Holbert

Political Cartoons by Michael RamirezPolitical Cartoons by AF Branco

ALERT ALERT

1 Billion Dollar Net Worth!!! Oberlin College Claims Poverty To Avoid Paying Punitive Damages To Gibson’s Bakery

Although IRS reports show the university is worth around $1 billion, Oberlin College still claimed poverty to avoid paying punitive damages to Gibson’s Bakery.

As Breitbart News reported this week, the far-left Oberlin College lost a defamation case filed by Gibson’s Bakery after a local jury found the university liable for falsely accusing the family bakery of racism.

The jury ordered Oberlin on Friday to pay Gibson’s $11.2 million in compensatory damages for defamation and intentional interference with a business.

Legal Insurrection reported on Thursday that “the jury awarded a total of $33 million in punitive damages, which will probably be reduced by the court to $22 million because of the state law cap at twice compensatory.”

Legal Insurrection has been following the case for two years — since the beginning — and reports that the school’s only defense against a sizable punitive award is to pretend it is poor, despite holding assets that amount to a billion — with a “b” — dollars and despite paying some of its staffers more than a half-million dollars a year:

Oberlin College was so hellbent on getting the message out that their cash liquidity was in such dire straits — as the eight-person jury was figuring out if they wish to add $22.4 million to the school’s legal verdict bill — that they brought out the school’s president, Carmen Twillie Ambar to the stand to tell that part the story.

“We’ve created deficits … and over the next ten years, if this continues, that is unsustainable and we will not exist,” Ambar told the jury. She even indicated the school’s grants — about $60 million a year from the school, and lots of students get those scholarships as only 10% of them pay the full $70,000 a year — were important to preserve as “the accessibility of education” was a key component of the school’s purpose.

However…

The college has more than $1 billion in funds and net assets according to the latest IRS 990 form, an endowment fund that had grown from $440 million to $887 million in the last 20 years, and because of its non-profit status, pays no taxes on any property it owns.

It also had 18 members of their administration making more than $100,00 a year. The president and chief financial officer of the school were both making more than $500,000 a year.

Grifters gonna grift…

The day after Donald Trump won the presidency, this nutball school apparently decided to take out its impotent woke-rage on this poor bakery, which has been part of the Oberlin community for more than a century.

It all started when three Oberlin students (who would later plead guilty in a plea deal) attempted to steal bottles of wine.

The proprietors caught the students and, while attempting to hold them until police arrived, were allegedly roughed up by the shoplifters. But because the students are black and the proprietors white — and with no respect for due process or facts — Oberlin staffers and students decided some vigilantism was in order and did everything in their considerable power to destroy this local bakery forever, to smite it off the map.

Classes were canceled so hundreds of students could protest in front of the small store while enjoying free food and drink, courtesy of the school. School staffers handed out fliers that basically described the family-owned bakery as the local branch of the KKK.

As a result, the bakery had to lay off almost all of its employees and barely avoided bankruptcy.

In the end, the three shoplifters said race had nothing to do with what happened.

For those of you interested in incurring $200,000 in debt before you even enter the workforce, it looks as though you can major in Mob Justice at Oberlin.

SPECIAL VIDEOS

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service