• 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.

Sheriff arrested for defending citizen's 2A rights...

skidmark

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
I don't see that the Sheriff was arrested for defending anybody's 2A rights. Per the arrest warrant affidavit he took a public record and said document has not been seen since. The affidavif speculates that the document was then destroyed.

That the Sheriff believed that Parrish should not have been arrested, or that the law is a bad one that he prefer not be enforced in his jurisdiction, are subordinate to the fact that he took a public document and possibly (probably) then destroyed it. That is not any of the methods recognized as legal/lawful for stopping/preventing the arrest of persons suspected of violating the law the Sheriff believes violates the rights of citizens. You know, like seeking an injunction, or starting up a campaign to have the law repealed.

Even if one supports the Sheriff's position that the law in question should not be enforced because it does violate rights guaranteed under 2A or violates other laws, there should be no support for him removing (and possibly destroying) a public record. Not even if he removed (and possibly destroyed) the public records relating to every single person ever arrested on a charge of violating the law about needing/carrying a license in order to carry a handgun.

stay safe.
 
stealthyeliminator

stealthyeliminator

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
3,100
Location
Texas
skidmark said:
I don't see that the Sheriff was arrested for defending anybody's 2A rights. Per the arrest warrant affidavit he took a public record and said document has not been seen since. The affidavif speculates that the document was then destroyed.

That the Sheriff believed that Parrish should not have been arrested, or that the law is a bad one that he prefer not be enforced in his jurisdiction, are subordinate to the fact that he took a public document and possibly (probably) then destroyed it. That is not any of the methods recognized as legal/lawful for stopping/preventing the arrest of persons suspected of violating the law the Sheriff believes violates the rights of citizens. You know, like seeking an injunction, or starting up a campaign to have the law repealed.

Even if one supports the Sheriff's position that the law in question should not be enforced because it does violate rights guaranteed under 2A or violates other laws, there should be no support for him removing (and possibly destroying) a public record. Not even if he removed (and possibly destroyed) the public records relating to every single person ever arrested on a charge of violating the law about needing/carrying a license in order to carry a handgun.

stay safe.
Click to expand...
Wrong. His actions can be in defense of someone's 2A rights and illegal at the same time. He was not utilizing the law to protect someone's rights, which is one way to do it, and perhaps the only way that can be advocated on this forum, but he was protecting someone's rights.
 
Last edited:
skidmark

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
stealthyeliminator said:
Wrong. His actions can be in defense of someone's 2A rights and illegal at the same time. He was not utilizing the law to protect someone's rights, which is one way to do it, and perhaps the only way that can be advocated on this forum, but he was protecting someone's rights.
Click to expand...

If the law clearly states that you must have a permission slip in your possession, and you do not, then you are liable for arrest when discovered by a police officer. The discussion of any need for a permission slip as infringing upon (different from defending) someoine's 2A rights has been effectively mooted except as a philosophical discussion regarding the "reasonable restrictions" issue. As the person arrested did have, albeit "reasonably" restricted, a right to keep and to bear arms I fail to see how the behavior of the Sheriff can be categorized as "defending" 2A rights.

This brings us to an impass. You see any restriction as a complete deprivation of 2A rights while I see the "reasonable restriction" issue as unacceptable infringement but not absolute deprivation of those 2A rights. It is highly unlikely either of us will change the mind of the other. As the forum rules prohibit the espousal and encoragement of illegal/unlawful behavior, I gain and hold the moral high ground, and reinforce my possession by encouraging addressing the issue at hand via legal/lawful methods.

stay safe.
 
eye95

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Taking (and possibly destroying) the paperwork did not defend the carrier's rights. Releasing him and refusing to arrest him would be such a defense--as would stopping anyone else from arresting him.
 
davidmcbeth

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Logan 5

Logan 5

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2012
Messages
696
Location
Utah
Perhaps so David. But treason is.
And to the socialist dictator in office, the sheriff is committing treason by honoring and respecting the US Constitution.
 
davidmcbeth

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Logan 5 said:
Perhaps so David. But treason is.
And to the socialist dictator in office, the sheriff is committing treason by honoring and respecting the US Constitution.
Click to expand...

Was he charged with treason? Its just I have searched and cannot find out what he was charged with.

It would be quite a laugh if he was charged with treason - he was just using the authority given to him by the state.
 
Logan 5

Logan 5

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2012
Messages
696
Location
Utah
davidmcbeth said:
Was he charged with treason? Its just I have searched and cannot find out what he was charged with.

It would be quite a laugh if he was charged with treason - he was just using the authority given to him by the state.
Click to expand...

But...he was still charged. So if the can make up those charges, they can make up treason charges, and logically speaking, treason charges have more ground. It's not right in either case, however.
 
skidmark

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Logan 5 said:
But...he was still charged. So if the can make up those charges, ....
Click to expand...

Pleasae explain how the charges brought were "made up", as opposed to reflecting actual behavior that allegedly violated the law.

"Made up" suggests that someone just grabbed the charges out of thin air without anything in the way of behavior to back them up. Such as charges of treason might be grabbed out of thin air.

stay safe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top