Freedom? What Constitution?

[witness23]

RESPONSIBLE ownership had nothing to do with freedom.....I see nothing wrong with police at least saying "hey Buddy whats up?" IF the situation calls for it....such an innocent question.....

Especially if there was a question on how old the kid may have been, how do the cops know if he is of legal age to carry? There isn't a whole lot of information in the story, but it sounds as if they(police) questioned the kid and he may have been a bit "cantankerous" and got himself in trouble. Sounds like a whole 'lotta nothin' goin' on around here. Except for a bunch of over zealous gun owners lookin' for a reason to show of all dem der perty guns they got.

 

[layoutshooter]

Especially if there was a question on how old the kid may have been, how do the cops know if he is of legal age to carry? There isn't a whole lot of information in the story, but it sounds as if they(police) questioned the kid and he may have been a bit "cantankerous" and got himself in trouble. Sounds like a whole 'lotta nothin' goin' on around here. Except for a bunch of over zealous gun owners lookin' for a reason to show of all dem der perty guns they got.

Show me, in the U.S. Constitution, the age limit to the RIGHT to Keep and bear arms.

How is it possible to be 'over zealous' in defense of the U.S. Constitution? I can, and will, carry what I want, where I want, whenever I want. That IS my right. Prove me wrong. on that. Do I carry a long gun on the street? Not for years, but I may start now.

Shall not be infringed.

 

[Ragman]

. . . he may have been a bit "cantankerous" and got himself in trouble.

Does that have anything to do with beer?

 

[layoutshooter]

Michigan law states:




"If a person is openly carrying a firearm on foot, and in a legal manner, he/she need not give a police officer their name and address after being approached and questioned if the only reason for that questioning is because of the openly carried firearm. Officers should not editorialize against open carry by private citizens in any way shape or form, or in any way suggest that a person should conceal their firearm. Suggestions and editorializing against lawful open carry may be interpreted as “commands” by civilians who are lawfully open carrying and may subject officers to complaints filed against them, as well as possible legal action against themselves and the department."

As I said before, the ONLY crimes in this case were committed by the police.

 

[layoutshooter]

The Michigan Constitution on this subject states:



"Every person has a right to keep and bear arms for the defense of himself and the state."

 

[scottm4211]

How do you know what if any crimes were committed without knowing the facts? Aren't you the guy who says all news outlets are liars, and now you pick and choose what to believe?

 

[layoutshooter]

How do you know what if any crimes were committed without knowing the facts? Aren't you the guy who says all news outlets are liars, and now you pick and choose what to believe?

Just going on what facts were stated. He was arrested for disturbing the peace and brandishing. Assuming the facts are straight, which is why he was in court today, then the police committed several crimes, state and federal.

Something must be right, he is in court. Only time will tell.

 

[scottm4211]

I agree with your last sentence.

 

[layoutshooter]

Did you see the section of Michigan law on this subject and the part of the Michigan Constitution?

The law states that carrying a gun is NOT disturbing the peace.

This is NOT the first time this has happened. More than one police department has attempted in Michigan to charge those who carry open with things like 'brandishing' or 'disturbing the peace' before. They have always lost in court.

If you search back a year or so ago in this forum you will find reference to another very similar case that was thrown out.

Too many people just cannot stand the idea that carrying a gun is legal.

 

[scottm4211]

I don't care if anyone legally carries a gun. I never commented on that. I am referring to the fact that until one knows exactly what happens, it seems hypocritical to form an absolute opinion based on a media story. Especially when said opinion is formed by someone who has a track record of slamming the media. Whether that's right or wrong doesn't matter either. But again you're picking and choosing what you believe.

 

[layoutshooter]

I don't care if anyone legally carries a gun. I never commented on that. I am referring to the fact that until one knows exactly what happens, it seems hypocritical to form an absolute opinion based on a media story. Especially when said opinion is formed by someone who has a track record of slamming the media. Whether that's right or wrong doesn't matter either. But again you're picking and choosing what you believe.

It was the police that stated what he was being charged with. The Chief of the Birmingham police stated that the man in question was 'resisting' because he would not give his name or ID when questioned. The law clearly states that he was not required to do so based on the fact of carrying a gun in public.


More will come out. Other sources are speaking out, no one with like them, but they are.

an excerpt from an article that did not totally agree with what he did. Just stated the facts as they knew them. Link below, I hide nothing.

"Sean Michael Combs was arrested on April 13th for publicly carrying a loaded M1 Garand in Birmingham Michigan. Combs is an 18 year old high school student who receives good grades and participates in track and field. Michigan law does not prohibit the carrying of long guns in public places, so why was Sean Michael Combs arrested?

The open carry movement has been spreading across the US for a few years now. More and more people are hitting the streets, their local Starbucks, and other public places legally openly carrying their handguns and long guns. Combs wanted to do the same as I am sure he has seen countless do all over the country. The M1 Garand was a present for his 18th birthday and he loaded a single round in the chamber, slung it over his shoulder, and went out on the town with his friends. According to his friends he was careful and polite about carrying the rifle. Other youth approached the group to ask if the rifle was real and were more curious than threatened.

​

After more than an hour of socializing with his friends, Combs was approached by a police officer who asked him for his identification. Michigan does not require a person to give their identification to police unless they are being detained. Since Combs was not doing anything illegal and was not being detained, he did not give his ID to the officer. In a short amount of time, two other officers showed up and Combs was arrested. Combs is facing the charges of brandishing a weapon, resisting and obstructing police, and disturbing the peace. The Birmingham Chief of Police recognized Combs’ legal right to carry but stated, “this guy was creating a disturbance and he wouldn’t cooperate.”"

Sean Michael Combs: Open Carry, Michigan Law, and Consequences | T.A.G.

 

[skyraider]

I have a permit to carry and keep my little 32 pop gun in my pocket. I can see the right of this young man to carry a M1, clip fed, gas operated, individual shoulder weapon in at 9lbs approx,wgt, but but but, I wont do it,not in Chattanooga.The police here are wired now with all the shootings and such. I call carrying a military style weapon a (look at me Mommy moment and its really to much IMHO to have it in public). If this young man wants to carry one, then the Army is a good place and he will get lots of shooting time there.

I think a responsible thinking person would not want to draw that much attention to ones self in public, we got enough problems in public as is, imho.

 

[layoutshooter]

I have a permit to carry and keep my little 32 pop gun in my pocket. I can see the right of this young man to carry a M1, clip fed, gas operated, individual shoulder weapon in at 9lbs approx,wgt, but but but, I wont do it,not in Chattanooga.The police here are wired now with all the shootings and such. I call carrying a military style weapon a (look at me Mommy moment and its really to much IMHO to have it in public). If this young man wants to carry one, then the Army is a good place and he will get lots of shooting time there.

I think a responsible thinking person would not want to draw that much attention to ones self in public, we got enough problems in public as is, imho.

It was not the most wise thing to do. It was, however, legal. Getting arrested for legal activities is always bad. It was sort of a "mommy" thing. The rifle was a gift for his 18th birthday, he just wanted to show it off.

He may enlist after he graduates from high school. I hope he does.

I used to carry my shotgun down the street to my buddies house. No case. Just my pump 12GA. I would knock on Pete's door, he would come out with HIS 12GA pump. We would walk about a mile to where we could hunt. All the while carrying our guns. No one batted an eyelash. People were not scared of their shadows back then.

 

[OntarioVanMan]

my whole point was..It wasn't the smartest thing to do...especially inner city....

people carry all the time out here....Doesn't scare me at all....

 

[layoutshooter]

my whole point was..It wasn't the smartest thing to do...especially inner city....

people carry all the time out here....Doesn't scare me at all....

Birmingham? Inner city? It may not have been smart, but it is NOT illegal. To get arrested for legal actions is wrong.

They are claiming that his refusal to give ID when questioned was resisting and obsturcting the police. If you read that section of the law I posted it clearly states that the individual is NOT required to answer those questions and that the act of carrying a gun is NOT disturbing the peace.

Smart? Nope. Illegal? Nope. Should he have been arrested, assuming the facts as printed are true, nope. Should the police be sued? Yep. The Judge? Yep. THEY have broken laws.

 

[scottm4211]

Birmingham's nice. We bought my wife's wedding dress there. Bought, not rented.

 

[layoutshooter]

Birmingham's nice. We bought my wife's wedding dress there. Bought, not rented.

I remember hunting not all that far from there. Used to be REALLY nice then.

 

[xiggi]

I'm sorry, I know I have still got a lot to learn about this subject.

If I saw a teen with a rifle I would be be FREAKED out ....... teens/children shouldn't be walking anywhere carrying a firearm!!

Teens moods can be voilatile at best at the littlest jibe etc.

No Siree bob ...... Uh Uh no way

Its not the Wild West anymore LOL.


All in my opinion obviously

Those 18 year old teens should only be allowed on the battle field with guns.


Sent from my SPH-D710 using EO Forums

 

[layoutshooter]

Those 18 year old teens should only be allowed on the battle field with guns.


Sent from my SPH-D710 using EO Forums

Yeah, no matter what the U.S. or Michigan Constitution's say. Besides, compared to Detroit the battle is safer. Lot's MORE guns on the battlefields as well.

 

[AMonger]

an 18 yr old walking down a Detroit St.would infringe on MY right to be secure of person....where is my rights?
There is a duty of the officers to protect the public, whilst maintaining the rights....

False. To be secure in your person, as used in the Constitution, does NOT refer to absence of any danger to your person. It refers to the inviolability of your person by the government except as specified in that constitution i.e. a warrant obtained by oath of probable cause. That's why laws mandating individual seat belt use are unconstitutional.

Second, US courts have repeatedly ruled that the police have no such duty to protect.