• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Kansas City police disarm (OCing) antifa & others @ Washington Square rally

BB62

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Aug 17, 2006
Messages
4,015
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
http://www.kansascity.com/news/local/article172286812.html

"Kansas City police ordered armed antifa groups and others to remove ammunition from their weapons and from their possession at a rally Saturday morning in Washington Square Park.

The armed individuals peacefully complied. Several with the antifa groups said the action violated their rights under state law allowing them to openly carry weapons. They said they planned to fight the order but decided not to take any action at the park.

“We don’t see any merit to fight it now,” said one person who removed ammunition from a rifle under order of the police.

His face was covered, as were the faces of many at the rally just north of Crown Center, and he declined to identify himself other than to say he was a partisan from the Kansas City Revolutionary Collective, which describes itself as an “autonomous Marxist-Leninist-Maoist collective.”

He and several others whose faces were covered said they were concerned about becoming the target of harassment if their identities became public.
“We disarmed ourselves in front of the police,” said another man who identified himself as a member of Serve the People in Kansas City. He said police ordered him to empty a rifle and a 9mm handgun he carried. ..."
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
The right to keep an bear arms shall not be infringed".. Guess Im missing something.

My .02
CCJ
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,912
Location
North Carolina
As much as I disagree with Antifa... I think the police just might have exceeded their authority under state law.
Well the courts have given police officers the power to disarm for officer safety. Until those rulings are overturned they are within their limits of power. Violent encounters with ANTIFA provides plenty of RAS for them to take the actions they did supported by the courts. The FBI gave police the green light with the revelation that they were deemed terrorists, and should be treated no different than ISIS.

Simple don't want to be treated as a terrorist organization, don't participate in terrorism.
 
Last edited:

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,826
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
If you are referring to either Terry v. Ohio or Pennsylvania v Mimms you may wish to note that the authority to disarm for officer safety only exists while the individual is being detained. It does not extend to a carte blance "You fellers go have a good day, but ya gotta keep ya guns unloaded" situation.

As to what the FBI has deemed a terrorist organization, I'm aware of where the Department of Homeland Security formally classified their activities as “domestic terrorist violence, but haven't run across this most recent addition to the list of terrorist groups compled by the FBI. Could you provide a link?
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,912
Location
North Carolina
If you are referring to either Terry v. Ohio or Pennsylvania v Mimms you may wish to note that the authority to disarm for officer safety only exists while the individual is being detained. It does not extend to a carte blance "You fellers go have a good day, but ya gotta keep ya guns unloaded" situation.

As to what the FBI has deemed a terrorist organization, I'm aware of where the Department of Homeland Security formally classified their activities as “domestic terrorist violence, but haven't run across this most recent addition to the list of terrorist groups compled by the FBI. Could you provide a link?
When an officer makes contact with a person it is sketchy whether they are detained. IMO if a officer is stopping an individual, and giving them instructions, yes they are detained. The most important factor of the courts is officer safety.

Department of Homeland Security, FBI Consider Antifa’s Activities as ‘Domestic Terrorist Violence

http://fox40.com/2017/09/01/department-of-homeland-security-fbi-consider-antifas-activities-as-domestic-terrorist-violence/
 
Last edited:

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,912
Location
North Carolina
... and does officer safety extend to after the temporary detention is over? Can Officer Friendly tell me not to walk around unarmed for the rest of the day?
If they post a continued threat, and the history says they do, then yes I believe officer safety is impaired by their very presence, let alone armed.

And ANTIFA is always with BLM which HAS encouraged for the murders of police officers. So not just yes, but hell yes.
 
Last edited:

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,826
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
If they post a continued threat, and the history says they do, then yes I believe officer safety is impaired by their very presence, let alone armed.

And ANTIFA is always with BLM which HAS encouraged for the murders of police officers. So not just yes, but hell yes.
Maybe my question was not quite clear...
Are you stating that law enforcement has the authority to demand that a group of citizens be disarmed even when they are not being detained by nor have any 'special relationship' with the police?

Where does the authority of the police to exercise "officer safety" end after an encounter? Five steps away? Five minutes after contact? The rest of the day or week?

Do they have the authority to demand that persons disarm for the rest of the day, week, month, year or even permanently walk around disarmed?
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,912
Location
North Carolina
Maybe my question was not quite clear...
Are you stating that law enforcement has the authority to demand that a group of citizens be disarmed even when they are not being detained by nor have any 'special relationship' with the police?

Where does the authority of the police to exercise "officer safety" end after an encounter? Five steps away? Five minutes after contact? The rest of the day or week?

Do they have the authority to demand that persons disarm for the rest of the day, week, month, year or even permanently walk around disarmed?
As a group that participates in terrorism, they are no longer protestors but enemy combatants. They pose a threat to police by their very presence because of the penchant for violence. Distance? how far does a bullet travel?

Disarm ISIS permanently, YES. ANTFA is a domestic group that has proven they will commit violence when they can. When they gather they should all be treated as enemies of the state. They put themselves in this position of their own free will.
 
Last edited:

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,826
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
Unfortunately, WW neither your personal feelings nor mine, on the matter carry that much weight. You may freely misdefine then as 'enemy combatants' but the government has not.

When another O̶b̶a̶m̶a̶ socialist takes office and the SPLC gets the FBI to deem the NRA, GOA or any other organization as a "terrorist group" will you be so agreeable about disarming the people and quick to ignore the rule of law of the United States and of the States themselves?
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,912
Location
North Carolina
Unfortunately, WW neither your personal feelings nor mine, on the matter carry that much weight. You may freely misdefine then as 'enemy combatants' but the government has not.

When another O̶b̶a̶m̶a̶ socialist takes office and the SPLC gets the FBI to deem the NRA, GOA or any other organization as a "terrorist group" will you be so agreeable about disarming the people and quick to ignore the rule of law of the United States and of the States themselves?
We will have to see how the courts play out, so far the police have shown great restraint. But considering the threats of violence against the police, and other people I am not going to complain. There have many instances where deadly force would have been justified. They have got off easy so far. The police have my complete support against these thugs, and I am guessing I am not the only one tired of this terrorism.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,131
Location
White Oak Plantation
The cops are referring to a city ordinance (listed in the linked article, https://library.municode.com/mo/kansas_city/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=COORKAMIVOII_CH50OFMIPR_ARTVIIIWE_S50-261UNUSWEEN) that utilizes RSMo 21.750.3 (OC can be banned w/o a permit). If any of the protesters would have displayed a valid permit (even a out of state permit) they could have told the cops to pack sand.

Here is a appeal brief to the MO Supreme Court and I will be following this case. https://www.courts.mo.gov/file.jsp?id=116437

It appears that the cops displayed considerable restraint given the penalty provided in the city ordinance.
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
The problem is that the courts deem officer safety more important than the Constitution. Therein lies the problem.

In my humble opinion a citizen is more likely to be hurt or even killed by a cop than a domestic terrorist.

Again in my humble opinion, government agents want no one but those in their fraternity to have guns.. They may say oh yes, I support the 2nd amendment, but their hypocrisy has no bounds.

My .02
CCJ
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
Unfortunately, WW neither your personal feelings nor mine, on the matter carry that much weight. You may freely misdefine then as 'enemy combatants' but the government has not.

When another O̶b̶a̶m̶a̶ socialist takes office and the SPLC gets the FBI to deem the NRA, GOA or any other organization as a "terrorist group" will you be so agreeable about disarming the people and quick to ignore the rule of law of the United States and of the States themselves?
Plus a million!

Soon any law abiding citizen owning a gun will be deemed a "domestic terrorist".. Beware of your contract with the government and we all know the contract of which I speak...

"Disarm the people that is the best and most effective way to enslave them" James Madison

' The greatest danger to American freedom is when government does not honor the constitution" Thomas Jefferson

" A free man need not wear his freedom as a yoke and chain" Kahlil Gibran-- from the prophet.

The only domestic terrorist we need fear are those that wish to disarm us.. CCJ

My .02
CCJ
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
Well the courts have given police officers the power to disarm for officer safety. Until those rulings are overturned they are within their limits of power. Violent encounters with ANTIFA provides plenty of RAS for them to take the actions they did supported by the courts. The FBI gave police the green light with the revelation that they were deemed terrorists, and should be treated no different than ISIS.

Simple don't want to be treated as a terrorist organization, don't participate in terrorism.
The government participates in terrorism and tyranny each and everyday therefore what is your point?

Pitting groups against one another is a ploy by the G so as to control and disarm.. Please wake up from your LE days and THINK..

There exist no RAS when one is simply exercising a natural and constitutional right.. Fear is not a legal reason to violate rights. Again stop thinking like a LEO and start thinking like a free man.. " A free man need not wear his freedom as a yoke and chain' (Gibran). Freedom is not about doing whatever we please, its about not belonging to anyone else. WW, who Sir do you belong too?

My .02
CCJ
 
Top