Masked Man Open Carries an AK47 into a Police Station

[Mister Bisley]

Pretty ridiculous indeed. They should have at least gotten a wooden shampoo

Great posts guys

 

[Gene Rojas]

Head shot for the a$$hole carrying an AK, wearing a mask.

 

[JedB]

They should also lose their 1A rights. Eating a bowl of stupid before pulling an unnecessary stunt has obvious consequences.

Thoroughly disagree with your statement about losing their rights to free speech.

They have chosen to exercise both free speech, and right to bear arms. Personally, I think there are better means & ways to exercise both in a manner that shows maturity, discipline and conveys a better message about both gun ownership, and how adults interact with police.

They, unfortunately set a very bad example for both rights. However, they haven't been convicted of anything (other than bad judgement in the court of public opinion) and as such, don't need their rights taken away without legal due process.

Idiots and bad choices abound, but that doesn't mean it's illegal.

Just to re-iterate; "Just because you can, doesn't mean you should."

 

[Kruel J]

Just when you think humans couldn't possibly get any dumber.

 

[11Charlie]

Not even sure what to say. There have been some stupid azz people in the last few weeks and months surfacing from out of no where. wish they would just go back in there mom's basement and stay there.

 

[nwslopoke]

Thoroughly disagree with your statement about losing their rights to free speech.

How I should have made my point is, the 2A is no less important than the 1A. When we say, they should lose one if them I feel they are of equal value.

 

[Vendor Hidden]

These types don't care about what impact their actions have on others, short term or long term, they want attention, that's really all it is. The same could be said for those that abuse the 1st amendment, any liberty, taken to the extreme can cease to be liberty and become a burden to others, possibly costing others their liberty in the process.

Just curious what you mean by the above (in bold).

 

[Mister Bisley]

How I should have made my point is, the 2A is no less important than the 1A. When we say, they should lose one if them I feel they are of equal value.

Use the First Amendment to protect the Second Amendment, so we won't have to use the Second Amendment, to protect the First.

 

[Vendor Hidden]

They should also lose their 1A rights.

whaaaaaat?

 

[jbett98]

Those two are lucky that Darwin was on vacation that day.

 

[MrMillspecer]

This is very upsetting.

 

[titsonritz]

Cop was polite, "I will put a round in you, sir".

 

[titsonritz]

These are the type of idiots that stick their fingers in machinery because they just couldn't help themselves.

 

[etrain16]

Just curious what you mean by the above (in bold).

Fairly simply, most of us know that having the right to free speech, freedom of religion and freedom of assembly (all guaranteed under the first), should be exercised with consideration given to your fellow Americans. Take for example the recent protests/demonstrations around the country. I have no problem with protests and gathering to make your case, but I do draw the line when your "freedom of speech" turns into blocking traffic, burning things, causing damage to property, theft and assault. Just because you have the right to free speech/assembly, doesn't mean you have the right to do so at all costs, and at the cost of others, any more than I have a right to pull a gun on everyone I disagree with. We also know that 1st amendment rights can end once you're on private property or on an employer's or business owner's premises. There are limits, and I think many folks understand those limits where they are not explicitly stated.

That would be the kind of thing I'm referring to.

 

[I594 Sucks]

Be advised that I already did a little poking around - yes the video was posted on his YT channel, but I found it on Bearing Arms, it's also posted on several news sites who are confirming the story. It was noted the video was originally posted on Reddit, I'm guessing the guy on YT saw it and just shared it on his channel. As for the actual incident, here are some comments from the police and Michigan Open Carry, Inc.:

"I find this behavior totally unacceptable and irresponsible," Police Chief Ronald Haddad said in a statement Monday afternoon. "This is not a 2nd Amendment issue for me. We had members of the public in our lobby that fled in fear for their safety as these men entered our building."

"Let us be clear, Michigan Open Carry Inc. in no way supports the actions of these individuals," Lambert said. "It is our belief that their actions were reckless and primarily designed to draw attention and a response."

And a quote from one of the two arrested:

Baker. 24, of Leonard couldn't be reached for comment Monday, but Vreeland told the Free Press that both men are legal gun owners and Michigan law allows them to carry their weapons openly. Vreeland, 40, of Jackson said he left his own rifle in his car before walking into the police station.

"We audit police to see how well they honor the Constitution and people's rights," said Vreeland, who was free after posting $1,500 bond late Sunday night. "We showcase police abuse and abuse of police power in the totalitarian police state that we live in."

Vreeland said he and Baker went to the police station to complain about Dearborn officers stopping them earlier in the day.

"No laws were broken," he said. "If we had to defend ourselves in a gun battle, I'd rather be armed."

Considering we've seen folks, on the 2A side, bait the police - YT is filled with their videos, I am leaning toward these guys being 2A folks, but extreme ones. Could they be a Dem plant? Sure, they could, but who would be willing to risk getting shot to make a point against the other side? Sounds like these are just two morons that enjoy messing with the cops and putting themselves in stupid situations to try and make a point - all the while making things more difficult for the rest of us.

Link for the quotes: Gun advocates arrested carrying rifle into Dearborn police station

Other links to the story:

Armed men in tactical vests arrested at Dearborn PD

Heavily armed men enter Dearborn Police station to file complaint

Obviously "plants". No self-respecting Conservative would "protest" in such a way as this. This was an extreme protest, much like the Women's March on Washington and others.

Similarly, free speech does not entitle you to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater, or "Bomb!" on board an airliner. Either of these actions would get you a quick trip to your nearest law enforcement office.

 

[Datenshi]

Fairly simply, most of us know that having the right to free speech, freedom of religion and freedom of assembly (all guaranteed under the first), should be exercised with consideration given to your fellow Americans. Take for example the recent protests/demonstrations around the country. I have no problem with protests and gathering to make your case, but I do draw the line when your "freedom of speech" turns into blocking traffic, burning things, causing damage to property, theft and assault. Just because you have the right to free speech/assembly, doesn't mean you have the right to do so at all costs, and at the cost of others, any more than I have a right to pull a gun on everyone I disagree with. We also know that 1st amendment rights can end once you're on private property or on an employer's or business owner's premises. There are limits, and I think many folks understand those limits where they are not explicitly stated.

That would be the kind of thing I'm referring to.

I don't know, I think you still have your 1A rights when you are on your employer's property...but they have every right to terminate your at-will employment too.

Just because we have the freedom to choose what we say, doesn't mean we don't have to face the potential consequences that follow.

 

[etrain16]

I don't know, I think you still have your 1A rights when you are on your employer's property...but they have every right to terminate your at-will employment too.

Just because we have the freedom to choose what we say, doesn't mean we don't have to face the potential consequences that follow.

You have your rights no matter where you are, but private businesses and private property owners are not necessarily obligated to oblige you in your expressions:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The clearly stated purpose of the first amendment is to prevent the government from restricting your speech, religion, etc. It does not protect you from your employer, a private property owner, etc. The main point being that the constitution is only protecting you from the government. If your employer doesn't appreciate your expression of your rights under the constitution, they are, generally, within their rights to take action, including dismissal.

It's best that everyone know their rights under the constitution, what they protect and what they don't protect, and consider that before taking certain actions. It is still surprising to me that so many Americans think the first amendment protects their free speech under all conditions, in all places and in all types of speech. We do have a broad freedom, but it is not without some bounds.

 

[etrain16]

Obviously "plants". No self-respecting Conservative would "protest" in such a way as this. This was an extreme protest, much like the Women's March on Washington and others.

Similarly, free speech does not entitle you to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater, or "Bomb!" on board an airliner. Either of these actions would get you a quick trip to your nearest law enforcement office.

Obviously plants by who? By Soros? The DNC? My first question, if that was the case is this - who would be so stupid as to take on an assignment like this, where there is a very high likelihood that you're going to be shot and killed by the police? For what, a political statement?

I agree they are idiots and certainly not representative of the 2nd amendment community, but I think these are lone wolf actors, a couple of doofuses that are just stupid enough to pull a stunt like this, likely not thinking through the full extent of their actions.

Either way, I reiterate how important it is for the 2A community to denounce people that do stuff like this, so as to distance ourselves from the occasional nutbag.

 

[Mister Bisley]

It was pretty apparent that after the screen went black, the two offenders still thought they were in the right

 

[Phred]

I would hope that someone within the firearms community who has a good understanding of how to use Youtoob, present a short video that would distance the good gun guys from this nutcase. And as a whole, condemn such action as it is not representative of the firearms community.