Protestor arrested in Spokane for Carrying rifle onto Federal property

[slimmer13]

I'm surprised at the attitudes being displayed here. Y'all are saying he was in the wrong but was he? Can anyone tell me specifically what law he broke?

My non college educated guess would be this part of USC 930, but I could be wrong

"Nothing in this section limits the power of a court of the United States to punish for contempt or to promulgate rules or orders regulating, restricting, or prohibiting the possession of weapons within any building housing such court or any of its proceedings, or upon any grounds appurtenant to such building."

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/930

 

[evltwn]

Locate the movie "Ghandi". Fast forward until the part where the masses are advancing peacefully against British troops. Take note of the protesters getting beaten by the soldiers until their (the soldiers) get tired of beating them. This guy at the courthouse was doing the same thing. Feel free to be the next to be beaten (ie, arrested, guns confiscated, yada yada yada). While in prison rejoice in the fact you stood up to the feds, and in your spare time, memorize the amendments to the Constitution. Cause you will have LOTS of spare time.

When (or perhaps if) your family comes to visit, ask them what life is like on the outside without you. They probably are enjoying the break.

 

[1Asterisk]

So, Bosworth is an idiot but you all are OK with the 5 hour detention, no Miranda, no attorney, no phone call, being treated and interrogated as a domestic terrorist just because you support 2A? No? Well then, where is the outrage that your government is operating as a tyranny?

Sooner than later, we will all have to decide. Do I become a 'criminal' or do I capitulate my constitutional right and give up my firearms? Will I resist?

At this point I think armed civil disobedience is the 'next step' because nothing else is working, and those of you soft on the "...shall not be infringed" part will continue to let them take and take and take, while being fearful of what others may think.

I do agree that armed civil disobedience with 'strength in numbers' is a better tactic, but I have no doubt Bosworth knows what he is doing, and what the outcome will be. I admire his courage to go it alone and I don't give a damn what the 'soft 2A' or fence sitters think.


"As the noose tightens, the sheep simply settle in and accept shackle after shackle". Kit Lange, PHS

 

[Brigadier]

So don't exercise your Rights 'cause you might lose them.
Is that the message we're trying to spread?
Tell you what. I'm gonna be a nice guy and help you out. Give me all your guns so you don't lose your 2A Rights.
Sound good?

Good grief.

 

[WasrNwarpaint]

Quote So don't exercise your Rights 'cause you might lose them.
Is that the message we're trying to spread?
Tell you what. I'm gonna be a nice guy and help you out. Give me all your guns so you don't lose your 2A Rights.
Sound good? unquote

yet another brilliant approach!



go ahead and exercise your rights & mine down the tubes, every time some clowns with long guns and gas masks exercise your damned rights ....they pass more laws against carrying here, there ......next every where

where did you see long gun rallys work in your favour recently? I see a guy in public with an ak47.... & my hand will be in my jacket on my 45 because you appear to be a problem...Im not thinking about his right at that moment..... and Ill be ready to take him out & I certainly hope the rest of the CC'ers are of same mind.....how is it you cant grasp this concept

doing the same FAILED TACTIC expecting a different outcome is definition of insanity so maybe some of you guys are gun nuts, with this ritual beating the dead horse "I will tote my long gun in your federal building face "...........because I can

there is an intelligent interpretation to your right to carry
I fear for MY right to bear arms with clowns stuffing long guns in mommy's face's in public places

 

[evltwn]

So...ya spent your day composing a firebrand post about armed resistance, then...darn it anyway ya totally lost track of time and forgot to go to the courthouse and get arrested. Maybe tomorrow, if Oprah is a rerun, after you put new tennis balls on the legs of your walker...sheesh...

 

[IheartSig]

This type of behavior does nothing to further the cause. This guy is not some "patriot hero", he is doing more harm than good. Every time one of these attention seeking "open carry activists" pull a publicity stunt like this it makes us all look silly. Don't pretend he is "exercising rights" either, he's playing a fools game and deserves what ever he gets.

 

[BroncoFan]

Let me just say I stay pretty politically active. I'm in touch my county, state and federal reps probably at least monthly, and I've made my pro 2a stance pretty well unequivocally known.
That being said I think this open carry business is beyond counter-productive. It reminds of a class I took in college 30 Years ago when they talked about that "the medium is the massage." It was meant to say the medium is the "message." Essentially it's like the superbowl commercials. The commercials are entertaining but what the heck were they selling? Folks get so wrapped up in what these characters are doing that the actual message of constitutional rights is being lost and is frankly the furthest thing from their mind. To some it's entertaining, to some it's downright frightening, but to most it's just the antics of some "gun nuts."

What we should be far more concerned about is the situation where an individual makes a good faith attempt to abide by the background check law and still goes to jail. Abramski's only sin was accepting a check before he made the purchase of a handgun. He went through a background check, transferred the handgun to his uncle who went through a background check, and Abramksi gets hooked up on a felony that is then affirmed by the Supreme Court. Simply because he accepted a check from the uncle beforehand, checked a box that said he was the actual buyer of the firearm, and then legally transferred said firearm to uncle through the background check system. Felony for checking a box. Paraphrasing Justice Scalia: "It should not be a crime for a lawful gun owner to purchase a firearm for another lawful gun owner."
For me, the Abramski case is far more chilling and a threat to our constitutional rights than some a**clown carrying a rifle onto federal property.

 

[The Heretic]

Am I okay with all of the laws restricting gun ownership?

No. I think there should maybe be less than a dozen in total, regarding ownership of firearms by violent felons, etc.

Do I think running around agitating for change by open carrying is pointless and counter-productive?

Yes.

If you don't see even a little sense in that assertion, then we really don't have much to talk about as we can just agree to disagree, not waste our time any further, and you can go get arrested, lose your guns now by carrying them openly in obviously prohibited places, spend time in jail, spend money on lawyers, and in the end, at best, get no beneficial results.

Do I think it there are much much much better ways to work the system against gun control?

Yes.

 

[decklin]

Every single one of you is missing the point. No crime commited. End of story. If he had committed a crime then why did they let him go with no charges?
Use your heads.

 

[BroncoFan]

With respect, use what's inside your head. It doesn't matter if he broke the law, or not. It's the message being sent, not the fact that he broke or did not break the law. When the actions override the message then those actions become counter productive.

 

[The Heretic]

Every single one of you is missing the point. No crime commited. End of story. If he had committed a crime then why did they let him go with no charges?
Use your heads.

Well then, he has nothing to worry about and it is a non-issue - right?

End of story.

 

[IheartSig]

Every single one of you is missing the point. No crime commited. End of story. If he had committed a crime then why did they let him go with no charges?
Use your heads.

It would seem that you are unable to see the big picture here, which is monumentally more important than the "rights" of a person going out of their way to put himself in a dangerous, unnecessary situation and damage the responsible gun owners everywhere.

 

[1Asterisk]

So...ya spent your day composing a firebrand post about armed resistance, then...darn it anyway ya totally lost track of time and forgot to go to the courthouse and get arrested. Maybe tomorrow, if Oprah is a rerun, after you put new tennis balls on the legs of your walker...sheesh...

When you don't have an intelligent counterpoint, use ridicule....sheesh...

 

[MikeE]

Even though he's not being nice, I laughed at, and agreed with this article:
http://chrishernandezauthor.com/2015/01/21/saved-from-tyrants-by-open-carry-douchebags/

 

[The Heretic]

"No crime was committed" - cops can and often will arrest for anything, including resisting arrest.

They can make stuff up (i.e., lie about what you did), find some arcane law that they can arrest you for...

http://www.cracked.com/article_19450_6-laws-youve-broken-without-even-realizing-it.html

Or, as I said, just arrest you for resisting arrest.

So going around poking sticks (or guns) at the powers that be, and don't be surprised if you get arrested.

Would I vote for the guy for sheriff?

Nope. I would hope that a sheriff would have more sense to pull such silly stunts.

 

[1Asterisk]

It would seem that you are unable to see the big picture here, which is monumentally more important than the "rights" of a person going out of their way to put himself in a dangerous, unnecessary situation and damage the responsible gun owners everywhere.

The 'big picture' I see is continuing to do the same old thing over and over again (insanity? someone said?), ie; rallies; calls, letters, and emails to politicians; signing petitions, wringing of hands and condemnations of individuals who choose to act on their own without group approval; all with the continued non-success we've had so far.

The 'big picture' I see is lawmakers will continue to ignore their oath to support and defend the Constitution, much less the 2A, and will continue to pass unconstitutional laws affecting all our freedoms; with the idea that if it is unconstitutional, so what? The courts will figure that out, ... eventually... maybe... assuming anyone has the financial wherewithall to fight it.

The big picture I see is judges continuing to ignore their oath and make unconstitutional rulings because they have either an anti-gun agenda, or think they are making the country safer, rather than ruling by a strict interpretation of the Constitution.

The 'big picture' I see is a continued erosion of our right to keep and bear arms uninfringed. Assisted in part by those who believe pandering to the anti's is a better, more civilized path.

And the 'biggest picture' I see is that one day, some citizens will truly have to fight for your rights. And if you think I enjoy that idea, you would be dead wrong.

Mr. Bosworth's right to act as he did is not trumped by any perceived damage to responsible gun owners. It is, was, and will always be his right. His God given right at that.

 

[Gunguy45]

So, Bosworth is an idiot but you all are OK with the 5 hour detention, no Miranda, no attorney, no phone call, being treated and interrogated as a domestic terrorist just because you support 2A?

That's an unsubstantiated claim, not a fact.

So far we have the word of a guy who O/C'd a rifle onto federal property. If that's the sum-total of your "evidence," color me unimpressed.

This long gun O/C stuff is STUPID. It scares the crap out of everyone, moves people otherwise neutral on gun rights over to the ANTI column and DOES NO GOOD FOR ANYONE who cares about our rights.

It's grandstanding and attention whoring. People who engage in grandstanding and attention whoring get no sympathy from me. Because they don't ACTUALLY care about the issues, they care about getting their names in some blog or a newspaper.

Meanwhile, those of us who work WITHIN the system have brought you Heller, MacDonald, Peralta, Etc, Etc. While the attention whores have accomplished exactly NOTHING except gettiing even MORE restrictions passed.

The proof is in the pudding.

 

[Member 18201]

Somewhere, a boxcar is waiting.

 

[BroncoFan]

The crime, is the background check. The results and action taken from an unconstitutional background check (deciding who is a law abiding buyer, seller etc..) is the crime. 'shall not be infringed' does not mean a right ever becomes a priviledge. Whenever one is supposed to ask permission or get a 'permit' (to buy a gun, carry concealed etc..) from ANYONE to aquire the means to exercise a right, it is then a priviledge. Grow a pair.

Did you even read my post? How might I grow a pair? I said Abramski got hosed by the system. A situation that went all the way through the process of legislation (making of law), the bureaucracy (ATF) and the judicial review. That should bother you a whole he** of a lot more than some attention seeking OC advocate getting "hassled." I quoted the dissenting opinion that basically said it's wrong for a it to be illegal for a lawful gun owner to purchase a gun for another lawful gun owner. And yes - There are limited circumstances when an individual's right to bear arms is forfeit. I'll grow a pair when you grow some comprehension skills.
If my test of manliness is in pointless showboating and carrying a rifle just to prove a point, then I guess I'll surrender my man card tonight.