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: 1079

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

When did the police get degrees in mental health?The first question I'd ask the police,given the same senerio is how are you qualified to assess anyone's mental status.

I have dealt with many cops in my life time, most are just NUTS.

This is an example of the way that the General Public has been "brainwashed" into believing that the open carry of sidearms is "forbidden."  Most States recognized the "legality" of open carry but as in "ass" the police will give those people a "hard time" about it.  They can't stand the "Inalienable Rights" that are Specifically Stated in the Constitution, once again, these rights are GOD GIVEN RIGHTS, and no man is Above God!!!

M-AR-15-5.56x45!,

   You have a good point.  I am in agreement that it it our GOD GIVEN RIGHT to open carry if we choose.  Maybe we can just make it a good time to greet and meet the cops.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Michael Ramirez

Political Cartoons by Lisa BensonPolitical Cartoons by Steve Breen

ALERT ALERT

YUP: President Trump Signs Great And Beautiful Trump Border Wall During Tour In San Diego

Embedded video

President Donald Trump visited the San Diego border on Wednesday to show off a newly constructed portion of the wall after a fundraising trip in California.

“It’s an amazing project,” Trump said, pointing to the 30-foot high barrier constructed with steel and concrete, noting that it also went six feet underground.

“If you think you’re going to cut it with a blow torch, that doesn’t work, because you hit the concrete, and then if you think you’re going to go through the concrete, that doesn’t work because we have very powerful rebar inside,” Trump said.

The president traveled via motorcade after a fundraiser to Otay Mesa, a community outside San Diego on the United States -Mexico border to review the latest constructed physical barrier.

He pointed out the new wall structure to the press, which was 24 miles of primary and secondary wall at the border.

“We have it covered underground, we have it covered overground,” Trump said.

The president was joined by acting Department of Homeland security Kevin McAllen and several other border security officials.

He said that over 44,000 bollard panels had been set up for the wall, which was then filled with concrete and rebar.

Trump admitted that he envisioned a solid concrete wall when he campaigned for president, but he was told by border officials that they preferred a wall constructed by concrete-filled bollards so they could see through it.

“It’s hardened concrete, very powerful concrete,” Trump said, pointing to the structure.

He added that the steel wall was designed to retain heat, making it harder to climb, plus having an anti-climbing system at the top.

“You can fry an egg on that wall,” he said. The president also acknowledged to reporters that he wanted the wall to be painted black and have spikes but said it was cheaper to let it remain naturally rust-colored.

“We can paint it later,” he said.

The president discussed his growing understanding of border barriers, noting that the Southern border would not need much more than 500 miles of wall to secure the border. He cited the existence of natural mountain and river barriers that prevented criminals from crossing. He did not rule out building additional barriers in the future but said it would depend on whether it was needed.

One border patrol agent spoke about the importance of the border wall to all of the agents, thanking the president for pushing forward on construction.

Trump said he met with Border Patrol prior to constructing the wall, picking the most effective structures to protect the border.

One border security official scoffed at the idea that the wall was a “vanity” project for the president.

“There’s a false narrative out there that this wall is the president’s vanity wall,” he said. “I’m here to tell you right now that that is false.”

He thanked Trump for listening to border patrol agents during the planning and construction process.

“You listened to the agents and you gave them exactly what they asked for,” he said.

One official with Trump confirmed that the structure was funded with regular Congressional appropriations in the FY 2017 and FY 2018 and that that the new wall replaced an inferior structure.

Trump said that he still considered the situation on the border a national emergency, but as more wall went up he could withdraw military forces.

“I hope you’re impressed,” he told reporters as he took questions about the project.

One worker told Trump of a tradition of workers signing the wall if they worked on the wall.

“I’ll sign it,” Trump said, and went to the wall and signed the steel barrier with a marker before encouraging other officials present to do the same.

© 2019   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service