Rutland Man Illegally Detained for OC

This is a discussion on Rutland Man Illegally Detained for OC within the General Firearm Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Green Mountain Daily:: Cuffed, stuffed, and detained for...exercising his rights? Joshua Severance was engaging in a legal activity. His firearm was legally owned and legally ...

Results 1 to 14 of 14
Like Tree21Likes
  • 1 Post By myrkr
  • 2 Post By NONAME762
  • 4 Post By ZeBool
  • 4 Post By OldVet
  • 2 Post By dben002
  • 1 Post By Spooler41
  • 2 Post By Glock2201
  • 2 Post By Dan060
  • 1 Post By NECCdude
  • 2 Post By Hopyard

Thread: Rutland Man Illegally Detained for OC

  1. #1
    Ex Member Array myrkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    xoxoxox
    Posts
    97

    Rutland Man Illegally Detained for OC

    Green Mountain Daily:: Cuffed, stuffed, and detained for...exercising his rights?

    Joshua Severance was engaging in a legal activity. His firearm was legally owned and legally carried.

    Now if the police wanted to check his ID to make sure he wasn't separated from his rights, that's one thing.

    But to come right out of the gate and put the man in handcuffs and stuff him in the back of the police car while doing so is not.

    The police have a duty to uphold the law. And upholding the law means respecting the rights of people behaving legally and traveling on lawful business.
    My thoughts: I can't say I'm surprised, the Rutland police department has a history of ignoring the law of the land and making arrests for little or no reason. They say there will be a protest march if the police chief doesn't apologize to Severance, which I support 100%
    Brent95 likes this.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #2
    VIP Member Array Richard58's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Charlotte area of North Carolina
    Posts
    2,059
    Bad
    The police are not there to protect you from crime, they are there to arrest the guy after the crime has been committed, assuming they find him. It is your responsibility to protect yourself and your family.

  4. #3
    VIP Member Array NONAME762's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    About 235M out of The Palouse WA
    Posts
    7,478
    It's cases just like this why even tho open carry is legal where I live too many cops hassle folks and I want no part of their fun stomping on my rights.

    The OP ought to get that guy Ripley of the Ripley Report on the case. I think most cops in America know who Ripley is.
    Manderinobyebye and Brent95 like this.
    Firing a suppressed is on my Bucket List.

    I'm just a spoke in the wheel but not a big deal.

    America...a Constitutional Republic. NOT a democracy as the liberals would have us believe.

  5. #4
    Member Array ZeBool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Western PA
    Posts
    204
    They need sued. Plain and simple. I refuse to be bullied, and I refuse to be cowed into not exercising my rights. Too many people have died for me to be a coward.
    NRA Certified Instructor: Basic Pistol, Personal Protection in the Home, Personal Protection Outside the Home. Utah BCI Certified Concealed Firearm Permit Instructor. RSO. Travelin' Man.

  6. #5
    VIP Member Array Badey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Pittsburgh
    Posts
    3,047
    Lawyer up.
    Though defensive violence will always be a sad necessity in the eyes of men of principle, it would be still more unfortunate if wrongdoers should dominate just men -St. Augustine

  7. #6
    VIP Member
    Array OldVet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    S. Florida, north of the Miami mess, south of the Mouse trap
    Posts
    16,142
    File a violation of civil rights claim in federal court. No probable cause, no reasonable suspicion.
    Brent95, dben002, ctr and 1 others like this.
    Retired USAF E-8. Lighten up and enjoy life because:
    Paranoia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... "For What It's Worth" Buffalo Springfield

  8. #7
    Distinguished Member Array dben002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Kernersville NC
    Posts
    1,388
    Quote Originally Posted by OldVet View Post
    File a violation of civil rights claim in federal court. No probable cause, no reasonable suspicion.
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^Yes, yes, yes, and collect the $$$$$$$$$$$....purchase a few new guns and go right back to the scene of the crime and gloat......
    There are two types of people who carry concealed weapons...Responsible ones and Irresponsible ones...which are you...

  9. #8
    Ex Member Array myrkr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    xoxoxox
    Posts
    97
    STATE v. ROSENTHAL.

    Many years ago this case was brought against none other than the same city of Rutland. Rutland apparently thinks they're above the state constitution, and that holds true today. I hope Severance contacts the NRA or GOA, I'm sure they'll foot the bill for a good lawyer.

  10. #9
    Member Array Spooler41's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    Port Angeles,WA.
    Posts
    44
    I really don't worry about open carry, I would much rather know some one is armed than deal with a CCW crazy. As the saying goes
    "Fore warned is fore armed"

    .............................Jack
    Manderinobyebye likes this.

  11. #10
    Distinguished Member Array Glock2201's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    NH
    Posts
    1,580
    You would think the Rutland PD would be spending their time catching the drug dealers instead of bothering a law abiding citizen
    NECCdude and myrkr like this.

  12. #11
    Ex Member Array IndianaSig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    733
    Firearm incident sparks debate over rights *:*Times Argus Online

    A little less sensationalized account of the incident.

    Some of you need a primer on what is legal and what is proper. In this case, what the Rutland PD did was both. If you're going to OC, it comes with the duty to do so responsibly. This kid didn't and it cost him 15 minutes of his time. If he, or you, would like to avoid such in the future, dress appropriately, don't look like a worthless thug, and maybe the police won't have a reason to stop you. What the PD did in this case is 100% legal and, frankly, was justified. If I were a resident in the area, I would be glad that the PD did their job.

  13. #12
    Distinguished Member Array Dan060's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    SC
    Posts
    1,310
    I guess some of us aren't as smart as some thinks they are,smh.

    I hope they file a lawsuit against them.Enough is enough
    Manderinobyebye and Brent95 like this.

  14. #13
    Senior Member Array NECCdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    522
    Quote Originally Posted by IndianaSig View Post
    Some of you need a primer on what is legal and what is proper. In this case, what the Rutland PD did was both. If you're going to OC, it comes with the duty to do so responsibly. This kid didn't and it cost him 15 minutes of his time. If he, or you, would like to avoid such in the future, dress appropriately, don't look like a worthless thug, and maybe the police won't have a reason to stop you. What the PD did in this case is 100% legal and, frankly, was justified. If I were a resident in the area, I would be glad that the PD did their job.
    The man wasn't doing anything illegal so your statement that what the police did is legal strikes me as odd. It doesn't matter what he looks like (akin to profiling) or if it's common sense. It's interesting that some people think this is legal while you can't ask someone if they're legally in this country when that person was stopped for actually doing something illegal. Gotta rid rid of the double-standards people.
    Snub44 likes this.

  15. #14
    VIP Member
    Array Hopyard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Disappeared
    Posts
    11,630
    Quote Originally Posted by IndianaSig View Post
    Firearm incident sparks debate over rights *:*Times Argus Online

    A little less sensationalized account of the incident.

    Some of you need a primer on what is legal and what is proper. In this case, what the Rutland PD did was both. If you're going to OC, it comes with the duty to do so responsibly. This kid didn't and it cost him 15 minutes of his time. If he, or you, would like to avoid such in the future, dress appropriately, don't look like a worthless thug, and maybe the police won't have a reason to stop you. What the PD did in this case is 100% legal and, frankly, was justified. If I were a resident in the area, I would be glad that the PD did their job.
    I'm no proponent of OC, but I can't quite swallow the "justification" the police came up with in that article you linked.

    They knew darn well he wasn't one of the people in the other incidents. Are you offended because he wasn't wearing a shirt?

    Well, personally I hate to see men walking around without shirts--- I'm equal opportunity. Everyone needs to cover up regardless of gender. I don't want to see it. But that is no reason to call him a thug or to detain him.

    Their actions sound more like NY's unconstitutional stop and frisk variant of Terry than a lawful use of Terry stops.
    Snub44 and myrkr like this.
    If the Union is once severed, the line of separation will grow wider and wider, and the controversies which are now debated and settled in the halls of legislation will then be tried in fields of battle and determined by the sword.
    Andrew Jackson

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

man illegally detained

Click on a term to search for related topics.