$21000.00 won in suit over legal carry

[silverfox031]

Details here: Landmark decision? - Alamogordo Daily News

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[Thumper]

Excellent outcome!

It WAS about his 2A rights the minute the police asked him to STOP exercising them!

[JD]

I always have mixed feelings on these cases, granted this one was not insane in monetary damages and is to cover court costs, but that money is coming from the tax payers. I'm glad to see that his rights were upheld and restitution is being made.

For the original thread see here: http://www.defensivecarry.com/vbulle...n-carrier.html

[TucAzRider]

SWEET!!!!.... That is GREAT to hear,.. I'm sure the LEO's will think twice about it next time some call to report a at the movies,..


JD,.. I hear ya on that one,.. Law suits are crappy all the way around,.. But when something goes against the Constitution, I'll be hoping for a win every time..

[CJ810]

I thought it was interesting that they were concerned because the movie was about assassins. Does that mean they hassle the people who drive to and from a 2Fast2Furious movie?

[ccman]

Good.

[ccw9mm]

I always have mixed feelings on these cases, granted this one was not insane in monetary damages and is to cover court costs, but that money is coming from the tax payers.

And, thus, it's one of the strongest levers that can be pulled in order to get change to happen. At some point, a community that gets itself royally screwed over will make a fuss severe enough to force change, whether the problem was mismanagement, malfeasance, misapplication of the law, or other similar "official" abuse. Attempting to talk sense into such people while such malfeasance is occurring often goes nowhere. You want to make something sting, and make it public? Get it into the courts and get the awarded figure to be stiff enough that it hurts, that it forces change. It can be quite effective as an agent of change. It's how the system works.

[ASSA9]

Excellent outcome!

It WAS about his 2A rights the minute the police asked him to STOP exercising them!

I agree, But this is the reason I got my CCL years ago.
There is always the chance someone will call the cops
and turn your day to crap.
The cops have to investigate when someone screams
"Man with a gun" Its their job.
Its just not worth my time to OC. when I can CC.

[Ssmo]

Details here: Landmark decision? - Alamogordo Daily News

Hope he got his money back from the theater.

A lot more people are OCing and CCing. I think things are finally coming to a head. People have had it with being jerked around by overpowered police and government.

[ccw9mm]

There is always the chance someone will call the cops and turn your day to crap.
The cops have to investgate when someone screams
"Man with a gun" Its their job.

Their jobs don't include shutting off the brain and disregarding law, however. When THAT occurs, it's plain as day what needs to happen.

[automatic slim]

Art. II, Sec. 6 NM State Const. "No law shall abride the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms........."

[ASSA9]

Their jobs don't include shutting off the brain and disregarding law, however. When THAT occurs, it's plain as day what needs to happen.

OK,OK,
Tell me how that changes this guys day at the movies.
He still gets pull out of a movie he paid to see because
he did something that made the sheep nervous.
That the whole reason I got my CCL, to keep the sheep in the
dark and get on with my day.

[nutz4utwo]

It WAS about his 2A rights the minute the police asked him to STOP exercising them!

Not really. It was about his rights against unreasonable search and seizure (in both State and Federal constitutions). He was not doing anything illegal or dangerous and he was stopped by police and searched. Hence "unreasonable."

[Japle]

Sullivan (ADPS's attorney) said the police simply told St. John to put the gun in his car.

"They asked him to put the gun in the car as a matter of safety," he said. "No one questioned his right to bear arms. It was a matter of circumstance and public safety."

So no one questions his right to bear arms, but they insist that he not bear arms.

He's been in the theater for 3 hours, not bothering anyone and hadn't been asked to leave, but it was a matter of public safety.

Only a lawyer could follow that reasoning!!

[larefugee]

Like JD said, I have somewhat mixed feelings because I value the work that LEOs do to keep communities safe and I don't think they wake up in the morning hoping to violate someone's rights, yet that is what happened because of incorrect/inadequate training, or for whatever reason. I think that the outcome is what needed to happen, and hopefully they revise their policies so that this doesn't happen again.

Below is what I wrote in the comments section on that news site, in response to those expressing consternation that people would now feel emboldened to carry guns.

The fact is that Mr. St. John was minding his own business and doing nothing wrong, nor did management ask him to leave the theater, nor were there mobs of panicked people fleeing in terror.

If you support the illegal seizure, search, and hassling of law abiding citizens because they are doing something that displeases someone, then you are on the side of tyranny and you might find the gestapo at your own door someday.