UPDATE: Kid in Birmingham Mi Open carrying a rifle is going to be tried - Page 5

UPDATE: Kid in Birmingham Mi Open carrying a rifle is going to be tried

This is a discussion on UPDATE: Kid in Birmingham Mi Open carrying a rifle is going to be tried within the Open Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; What I find unsettling is the prosecutor's interpretation on brandishing, the need for a "legitimate reason" to carry, the inference of carrying at night as ...

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 61 to 67 of 67
Like Tree38Likes

Thread: UPDATE: Kid in Birmingham Mi Open carrying a rifle is going to be tried

  1. #61
    VIP Member
    Array PEF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    4,102
    What I find unsettling is the prosecutor's interpretation on brandishing, the need for a "legitimate reason" to carry, the inference of carrying at night as being some sort of evidence of malfeasance, and the prosecutor's assertion of a lack of a specific definition of brandishing as being proof of legislative intent that "brandishing" is any carrying outside of the four exemptions. If that were the case then the term "brandishing" need not be in the criminal code. Instead, OC itself would be a crime.

    Also, it seems odd that so many here are ready to draw all inferences in favor of the police when we don't know the facts. I don't know how many times I've read "the kid was a tool" or "the kid was foolish," etc. Maybe, maybe not. Maybe the cops overreacted. Who knows.

    At most, it appears there may be an obstruction charge, *if* the gentleman was *required* to show ID to the police. I don't know if that is the case or not. I suppose that will be settled at trial.

    I'm not saying what the guy did was Ok. I don't know. Just seems like there are a lot of people here that aren't abiding by the presumption of innocence. Instead they are running with what they read in the the papers. I sure as heck would not want those people sitting on my jury if I were ever charged with a crime.


  2. #62
    P95
    P95 is offline
    Ex Member Array P95's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    304
    We live in a paranoid world today with all school shooting...disgruntled workers going on killing sprees. What did the boy think would happen. He could of got away with it 15 years ago....not now. In the governments eyes..the safety and welfare of the people trump the 2nd amend.....and it never states "why" the kid was carrying the rifle.

  3. #63
    VIP Member Array Harryball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Lansing Mi
    Posts
    7,751
    Quote Originally Posted by slave View Post
    Well, fair enough on the looking 12 part, but he doesn't look 12. At all. That part is subjective, and the LEOs could make a case for it.
    He looks 15 at most. If he would have shown ID, I have a feeling we wouldnt be talking about him...
    Don"t let stupid be your skill set....

    Never be ashamed of a scar. It simply means, that you were stronger than whatever tried to hurt you......

  4. #64
    Member Array Penhall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by tacman605 View Post
    And how do you propose they do that if they do not ask for his ID? If he would have confirmed his age he would have been on his way plain and simple.
    tacman,
    I think you missed the point of my post, or maybe I didn't make it clear. I support the actions of the police. As I previously said, the cops were within the scope of their authority to detain/arrest him until they could ascertain that he was of legal age to carry the weapon. Yes, this would have been easier had he complied with their request for ID, but since he chose to exercise his legal right not to, they should have and did take him in to custody to confirm his identity/age. Once this was done, down at the police station, I'm guessing, then he should have been released and charges should have been dropped. The decision to pursue charges is not the decision of the police, it's the decision of the local prosecutor. That's the person who I feel is in the wrong here. However, I agree with you that had he complied with the officers' legitimate request, we likely wouldn't be having this discussion.

  5. #65
    Member Array Penhall's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    125
    Quote Originally Posted by Cokeman View Post
    I like your avatar.
    Thanks!. I like yours too. It's making me hungry. :)

  6. #66
    VIP Member
    Array tacman605's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Arkansas/On the X in Afghanistan
    Posts
    3,053
    Roger understood.

    Guys I simply used 12 as a number I typed in, that age group for sure 12-15 but not specifically that age.
    "A first rate man with a third rate gun is far better than the other way around". The gun is a tool, you are the craftsman that makes it work. There are those who say "if I had to do it, I could" yet they never go out and train to do it. Don't let stupid be your mindset. Harryball 2013

  7. #67
    Distinguished Member Array claude clay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    ct
    Posts
    1,975
    Quote Originally Posted by todhog View Post
    This country would have never been founded if some of you bed wetters were around 200 years ago.
    i rather agree with this

    today is so different in all ways that one is hard put to compare an event in the life of founding father's day to one today

    for instance--in the long ago men (and children strong enough; women too if they were so inclined) carried rifles with them as an extension of their selves.
    when they weren't busy revolutionizing, they were russling up food for the family. back than, for those who made it past the childhood diseases nor succumed to infections...
    starvation was a real event. so was carring a firearm.

    another for instance is the past few decades we have been debating the meaning of 'is' rather than doing something about our freedoms that are being diluted.

    with all regard due the constitution--the kid carrying a rifle, round chambered in a city today is an idiot.
    he is not who i want as a poster boy for the 2nd amendment.

    my reason for thinking him a danger to self and others yet support his right to do so is--

    it can so easily be taken from him and used in ways that would be tragic.
    he is just not capable of defending the rifle.

    and 200 years ago there would have been half the people on the street armed to stop a person who began shooting crazy; forgetting that he has one shot anyways...
    today but for a scattering of CCW'ers the closest gun may be in a crusier, windows up, A/C on and 5 blocks away while the kids are firing 11 rounds. than tossing the
    rifle, stealing some purses and running away while survivers take cell-phone pictures.
    Arthritis sucks big-big
    -------------------
    Why do those elected to positions of power than work so hard
    to deny those same opportunities to the same people who empowered them

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Sponsored 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

birmingham michigan boy carrying gun
,
birmingham michigan june 11th right to bear arms
,

birmingham michigan open carry

,

birmingham open carry

,
boy with gun in birmingham
,
is it legal to open carry a rifle in michigan
,
michigan man who was freed from carring a riffle
,
open carry age michigan
,

open carry birmingham mi

,

open carry in birmingham mi

,
open carry vs brandishing rifle michigan
,
why cant kids open carry?
Click on a term to search for related topics.