The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 14, 2009, 10:28 AM   #26
buzz_knox
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 2, 1999
Location: Knoxville, in the Free State of Tennesse
Posts: 4,191
Without getting into the validity of this militia, it's an interesting quandry when the gov't simultaneously refuses to provide services in an area and refuses to allow the people to perform the service for themselves.
buzz_knox is offline  
Old April 14, 2009, 10:32 AM   #27
Brian Pfleuger
Staff
 
Join Date: June 25, 2008
Location: Central, Southern NY, USA
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Pettet, a midtown neighborhood activist who has a Desert Eagle pistol,...

Is owning a "Desert Eagle pistol" supposed to be a one-phrase commentary on the mans character or mental stability or something? How is that even relevant.
__________________
Still happily answering to the call-sign Peetza.
---
The problem, as you so eloquently put it, is choice.
-The Architect
-----
He is no fool who gives what he can not keep to gain what he can not lose.
-Jim Eliott, paraphrasing Philip Henry.
Brian Pfleuger is offline  
Old April 14, 2009, 10:34 AM   #28
ChicagoTex
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 18, 2008
Location: DFW Metroplex
Posts: 1,909
Quote:
it's an interesting quandry when the gov't simultaneously refuses to provide services in an area and refuses to allow the people to perform the service for themselves.
First off, Stockton is not "refusing" to provide police services - they had to make budget cuts, like most municipalities in this trying economy.

As for what people can do, people can facilitate the remaining law enforcement by being vigilant and reporting crimes to the police. Of course that would require more than a dozen or so extreme "militia" forming nutjobs to actually give a flying crap what happens in their community...

I understand these folks are frustrated, but this really isn't the way.

I also can't get over the audacity of attempting to bill the city for their "services"...
ChicagoTex is offline  
Old April 14, 2009, 10:38 AM   #29
ChicagoTex
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 18, 2008
Location: DFW Metroplex
Posts: 1,909
Quote:
Is owning a "Desert Eagle pistol" supposed to be a one-phrase commentary on the mans character or mental stability or something? How is that even relevant.
Desert Eagles are generally seen in media as garish, over-the-top, and "extreme". Countless films and videogames reinforce this.

It's a way for the media to invoke a subtle connotation. Basically, to the average reader it's a euphemism for "power-crazed nutjob".

To me, it just means the guy has really poor taste.
ChicagoTex is offline  
Old April 14, 2009, 10:43 AM   #30
hogdogs
Staff In Memoriam
 
Join Date: October 31, 2007
Location: Western Florida panhandle
Posts: 11,069
Ag assault, Mugging, purse snatching after a slap to the face are but a few in florida considered violent felonies, as are home invasion and car jacking...
Brent
hogdogs is offline  
Old April 14, 2009, 11:01 AM   #31
grymster2007
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: In the oak studded hills near Napa
Posts: 2,203
Quote:
Being white and calling yourself a militia does not make you less of a thug.
Nor does being black, brown, yellow or red and calling yourself a militia make you less of a thug. When you think about it, there are plenty of thuggish "militias" already on the streets of Stockton... they call themselves gangs.

Now I agree that these guys are approaching this the wrong way, but I understand their frustration.

BTW: I'll bet the city maintains lots of useless services while cutting law enforcement... the thing they need most.
__________________
grym
grymster2007 is offline  
Old April 14, 2009, 11:15 AM   #32
johnwilliamson062
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 16, 2008
Posts: 6,813
Quote:
What this is here is a group of people unsanctioned and incommisioned by any form of government fulfilling the role of law enforcement.
I do not believe they gave an explanation of exactly what they plan to do. I did not see claims of detention and chasing people. If they patrol their neighborhoods and report to the real police I can not see what they are doing being illegal or immoral. I also believe if they confront people it will be legal as long as they do not pursue and they do not initiate the threat of force.
Many of us have neighborhood watch programs that are simply not armed. Legally carrying a gun does not intrinsically change what you are otherwise doing to be illegal. Being an organized group of citizens does not limit your rights as citizens, at least as far as I know. If I want to go out in my car and patrol my neighborhood armed I can do it. If 3 others ple in my tiny civic and go with me it isn't illegal as long as we all have CCWs. I think most would agree this is how the law SHOULD read everywhere and I commend anyone OPENLY challenging ANY law. It is the ones trying to get around the law on the sly that bother me.

There are a lot of people on here making assumptions. I don't see anywhere in the article where the "militia" members

Where does it say the militia is limited to white people? How do you know there aren't already non-white members?

Quote:
We don't want armed citizens out there...
Big surprise there.

Quote:
I just don't know if that's in the best interest of these gentlemen, from a safety perspective
Nanny state?

Quote:
Desert Eagles are generally seen in media as garish, over-the-top, and "extreme".
Only in media? I tend to agree with the media on this one, I just appreciate your right to own one. I met a guy who has a F1 car for fun, I thought that was pretty over the top too. Spent quite a bit on it, but if it is his thing he should go for it. That isn't even constitutionally protected and a much bigger "waste" of money.
__________________
$0 of an NRA membership goes to legislative action or court battles. Not a dime. Only money contributed to the NRA-ILA or NRA-PVF. You could just donate to the Second Amendment Foundation
First Shotgun Thread First Rifle Thread First Pistol Thread

Last edited by johnwilliamson062; April 14, 2009 at 11:25 AM.
johnwilliamson062 is offline  
Old April 14, 2009, 11:18 AM   #33
warnerwh
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 11, 2009
Posts: 278
If these guys are going to break any laws of course they shouldn't be there. Then again they may be just trying to make a point and getting publicity because they think the city should make cuts some where else due to the crime level in their city. It is far more effective than just complaining to the deaf ears of city government who will do what they want even if you vote against it.

Why are they out of money? Stupidity? As long as people spending our money are not held accountable this constant waste will continue.
__________________
Portland, Or
warnerwh is offline  
Old April 14, 2009, 11:46 AM   #34
ChicagoTex
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 18, 2008
Location: DFW Metroplex
Posts: 1,909
Quote:
BTW: I'll bet the city maintains lots of useless services while cutting law enforcement... the thing they need most.
Quote:
Why are they out of money? Stupidity? As long as people spending our money are not held accountable this constant waste will continue.
I'm uncomfortable with the assumptive leap being taken that the city is blowing it's police budget on graft and waste. I have seen no evidence of this and feel this assumption is outside the scope of the discussion anyway.
ChicagoTex is offline  
Old April 14, 2009, 11:49 AM   #35
chris in va
Senior Member
 
Join Date: December 26, 2004
Location: Louisville KY
Posts: 12,530
Quote:
Absent that, the group in question is nothing more than an unauthorized paramilitary organization and probably illegal.
Illegal. You mean against laws put forth by the government?

The gentlemen in the picture, was that considered 'illegal'? Probably.

Quote:
I have seen no evidence of this and feel this assumption is outside the scope of the discussion anyway.
Again, do you live there? Have first-hand experience living in the city?

I don't live there either. But I do know what my friend in Lodi tells me, and it really makes me fear for his well being.
chris in va is offline  
Old April 14, 2009, 11:53 AM   #36
ChicagoTex
Junior member
 
Join Date: March 18, 2008
Location: DFW Metroplex
Posts: 1,909
Quote:
Again, do you live there? Have first-hand experience living in the city?
I have not, which is EXACTLY why I refuse to entertain allegations of corrupt and/or irresponsible governmental management.

If I lived there and knew from experience everyone who ran the city was a crook, I might feel differently. Until I've seen evidence otherwise, however, I will assume they're more or less on the up and up.
ChicagoTex is offline  
Old April 14, 2009, 12:01 PM   #37
Tennessee Gentleman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,611
Quote:
Originally Posted by chris in va
Illegal. You mean against laws put forth by the government?
Yes, many states have laws prohibiting armed paramilitary organizations. Not sure about CA.
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted."
Anonymous Soldier.
Tennessee Gentleman is offline  
Old April 14, 2009, 12:44 PM   #38
onthejon55
Junior member
 
Join Date: October 23, 2008
Location: Evansville, IN
Posts: 411
I thinks its a great idea. They should be allowed to do anything (with in the confines of the law) that they feel necessary to protect their neighborhood. I highly doubt that these men are going to go out of their way to try and prevent crime. More than likely they will patrol the streets with a cell phone in hand and report crime. Personally, I would love to have neighbors that cared enough about my neighborhood that they were willing to patrol the streets making sure me or my property wasnt being victimized.
onthejon55 is offline  
Old April 14, 2009, 01:11 PM   #39
grymster2007
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 22, 2007
Location: In the oak studded hills near Napa
Posts: 2,203
Quote:
I'm uncomfortable with the assumptive leap being taken that the city is blowing it's police budget on graft and waste. I have seen no evidence of this and feel this assumption is outside the scope of the discussion anyway.
The motivation for the militia's threat to begin operations is the city's threat to lay off law enforcement personnel when they're running one of the most dangerous cities in the country. How the city manages it's revenues is clearly germane to the discussion.

BTW, I looked at their budget and IMO, there is spending that's inappropriate, given the circumstances.
__________________
grym
grymster2007 is offline  
Old April 14, 2009, 03:22 PM   #40
JuanCarlos
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 22, 2006
Posts: 2,459
Quote:
I thinks its a great idea. They should be allowed to do anything (with in the confines of the law) that they feel necessary to protect their neighborhood. I highly doubt that these men are going to go out of their way to try and prevent crime. More than likely they will patrol the streets with a cell phone in hand and report crime. Personally, I would love to have neighbors that cared enough about my neighborhood that they were willing to patrol the streets making sure me or my property wasnt being victimized.
Yep, the line between "concerned citizen looking to reduce crime" and "vigilante" is often whether or not they do so within the confines of the law. Assuming these guys get permits and use their weapons only within the confines of California law (which I'm guessing would largely turn them into a roving neighborhood watch who are armed only as an absolute last resort for self-defense) then super.

The article in the OP doesn't give me much hope that this is or will be the case, though.

And talking about billing the city? Probably the most asinine thing I've read all week.
JuanCarlos is offline  
Old April 14, 2009, 03:32 PM   #41
orchidhunter
Junior member
 
Join Date: December 1, 2008
Posts: 320
Anti-Militia and Anti-Paramilitary Training Laws

Here is a listing of the statutory sources for each state law.

States with Both Anti-Militia and Anti-Paramilitary Training Laws (7)

-Florida. FLA. STAT. ANN. ch. 870.06, 790.29.
-Georgia. GA. CODE ANN. ss 38-2-277, 16-11-150 to -152.
-Idaho. IDAHO CODE ss 46-802, 18-8101 to -8105.
-Illinois. ILL. REV. STAT. ch. 1805, para. 94-95.
-New York. N.Y. MIL. LAW s 240.
-North Carolina. N.C. GEN. STAT. ss 127A-151, 14-288.20.
-Rhode Island. R.I. GEN. LAWS ss 30-12-7, 11-55-1 to -3.


States with Anti-Militia Laws Only (17)

-Alabama. ALA. CODE s 31-2-125.
-Arizona. ARIZ. REV. STAT. ANN. s 26-123.
-Iowa. IOWA CODE s 29A.31.
-Kansas. KAN. STAT. ANN. s 48-203.
-Kentucky. KY. REV. STAT. ANN. s 38.440.
-Maine. ME. REV. STAT. ANN. tit. 37-B, s 342.2.
-Maryland. MD. CODE ANN. art. 65, s 35.
-Massachusetts. MASS. GEN. L. ch. 33, s 129-132.
-Minnesota. MINN. STAT. s 624.61.
-Mississippi. MISS. CODE ANN. $ 33-1-31.
-Nevada. NEV. REV. STAT. s 203-080.
-New Hampshire. N.H. REV. STAT. ANN. s 111:15.
-North Dakota. N.D. CENT. CODE s 37-01-21.
-Texas. TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. s 431.010.
-Washington. WASH. REV. CODE s 38.40.120.
-West Virginia. W. VA. CODE s 15-1F-7.
-Wyoming. WYO. STAT. s 19-1-106.


States with Anti-Paramilitary Training Laws Only (17)

-Arkansas. ARK. CODE s 5-71-301 to -303.
-California. CAL. PENAL CODE s 11460.
-Colorado. COLO. REV. STAT. s 18-9-120.
-Connecticut. CONN. GEN. STAT. s 53-206b.
-Louisiana. LA. REV. STAT. ANN. s 117.1.
-Michigan. MICH. COMP. LAWS s 750.528a.
-Missouri. MO. REV. STAT. s 574.070.
-Montana. MONT. CODE ANN. s 45-8-109.
-Nebraska. NEB. REV. STAT. s 28-1480 to -1482.
-New Jersey. N.J. REV. STAT. s 2C:39-14.
-New Mexico. N.M. STAT. ANN. s 30-20A-1 to -4.
-Oklahoma. OKLA. STAT. ANN. tit. 21, s 1321.10.
-Oregon. OR. REV. STAT. s 166.660.
-Pennsylvania. 18 PA. CONS. STAT. s 5515.
-South Carolina. S.C. CODE ANN. s 16-8-10 to -30.
-Tennessee. TENN. CODE ANN. s 39-17-314.
-Virginia. VA. CODE ANN. s 18.2-433.1 to -433.3. orchidhunter
orchidhunter is offline  
Old April 14, 2009, 03:48 PM   #42
PoorSoulInJersey
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 25, 2009
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 220
Quote:
Is owning a "Desert Eagle pistol" supposed to be a one-phrase commentary on the mans character or mental stability or something? How is that even relevant.
I read it as "This guy thinks one handgun is enough to get into tactical situations? Really?", but I'll bet that's not what the writer intended.
PoorSoulInJersey is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.10436 seconds with 9 queries