SFF author Joel Rosenberg arrested after carryin gun into a police department

[turinturambar]

just do a google search, i found more or less the same info on every search. by the way that is shot, not killed, most info suggested 100-150 are actually killed.

the difference between guns and cars is clear. one is meant for harm and one isn't.

Harm or self defense or sport or getting some tasty food on the table. Count me in as somebody who's hunted, enjoyed it, and eaten some tasty critters. I haven't been hunting in 10+ years, but I do still have the 12 and I was very glad I had it when I lived on Troost in KC and had multiple attempted break-ins.

The thing is, victims of huting accidents are generally people who partook in the activity and knew the inherent risks before partaking in the activity. I played football when I was younger and once took a hit that shook my spine so bad that my body tingled for hours. If I had been paralyzed .... well that was a risk I took. Many men suffer debilitating injuries and even death playing football every year....but imo it should not be outlawed. There are many activities that have possible negative consequences, but I do not think we should be in the habit of taking away rights and/or outlawing the majority of activities people partake in just because there are negative risks.

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

So the deer hunter way out in the bush, or the duck hunter out in the lake should be harassed? Gee, so much for rights and freedoms.

In Canada, its illegal to harass a hunter. YOU will be charged.

As to the issue of concealed/open carry in non-hunting/sport shooting related activities, I cant comment. We dont have that in Canada.

Here in AZ we have a "stand your ground" law, which means you aren't obligated to try to get out of a situation where someone means you harm. There was a controversial case a while back where a hunter was out and shot a guy and his dog. He claimed they guy sicced the dog on him and then charged him with a knife after he killed the dog. Quite a few folks think he just shot the guy and his dog and made up the story so that he could get away with murder under the law.

Open carry is dumb. You might as well hang a sign around your neck to anyone wanting to start some shit saying "shoot me first".

Regardless how you feel about gun laws, the subject of the OP was well within them, and this is a clear case of the police arresting someone in retaliation for making them look bad. They get away with this ALL THE FUCKING TIME, and prosecutors need to start filing charges for wrongful arrest, abuse of power, and whatever else applies.

[Mad Monkey]

Here in AZ we have a "stand your ground" law, which means you aren't obligated to try to get out of a situation where someone means you harm.

I think if you end up being charged with murder, you should at least be required to prove that you were being faced with someone who means you harm in order for the "stand your ground" thing to be valid. It's pretty easy if it's a burglar in your house, but two guys and a dog in a forest? What's next? "That little old lady was going to hit me with her purse! I had to blow her away! And her wallet just fell out; I didn't want to just leave it there in case some unscrupulous person happened across it and stole her identity!"

[Myshkin]

Guns are not for harassing cops just to see if they agree with your interpretation of 'freedoms.' You say Sir or Ma'am and hope they don't go gestapo on you. That's what the fuck they are, after all.

This 'science fiction author' (hardly) was picking a fight. As such? Disorderly conduct.

(I'm not saying I agree with that, but a cop will be quick to invent it. And folks who don't know this are stupid.)

This. Don't expect me to feel any sympathy for this guy, even if he got arrested on trumped up charges. He went looking for a fight, and he found one.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

blasted_Saber,

Next time you have a bear in the yard walk up to it slowly and box its ears... that should trigger its flight reflex.

So, no firearms needed.

;)

[turinturambar]

I think if you end up being charged with murder, you should at least be required to prove that you were being faced with someone who means you harm in order for the "stand your ground" thing to be valid. It's pretty easy if it's a burglar in your house, but two guys and a dog in a forest? What's next? "That little old lady was going to hit me with her purse! I had to blow her away! And her wallet just fell out; I didn't want to just leave it there in case some unscrupulous person happened across it and stole her identity!"

Innocent til proven guilty. This means it's the prosecution's job to prove guilt, not the other way around.

[Myshkin]

Innocent til proven guilty. This means it's the prosecution's job to prove guilt, not the other way around.

Not if you are using an affirmative defense. If you admit to pulling the trigger, the burden of proof is now on you.

[Mad Monkey]

blasted_Saber,

Next time you have a bear in the yard walk up to it slowly and box its ears... that should trigger its flight reflex.

So, no firearms needed.

;)

What if it exercises its right to bear arms and tears open your throat when you walk up to it? I think you should use a gun in this situation.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

MM,

I must tell you there was absolutely no sarcasm intended in my prior post.

:)

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

Not if you are using an affirmative defense. If you admit to pulling the trigger, the burden of proof is now on you.

In this instance, there was a dog, there was a knife, and there was no evidence or witnesses that could be presented to gainsay the guy's story. The reason lots of folks think it was murder is that if a guy just shot your dog you would have to be pretty dumb to come at him with a knife.

That's pretty much it. The only guy I've ever seen open carry legitimately (IMO, and by that I mean "not in a douchebag way of 'I got my rights!") was a a guy in a pr0n/adult toy store in a very bad part of town, known to be infested with crack heads. Apparently, that ilk is very averse to a show of force, but if they think you're a target, they'll be quick to pounce on you for anything they can steal.

I open carry when I go backpacking, on account of bears and cougars and snakes not really being able to tell the difference. Concealed carry in town. Going to the ghetto with a gun on your hip is asking to get shot in the back for the several hundred dollars worth of gun you're flashing to everyone.

[Mad Monkey]

MM,

I must tell you there was absolutely no sarcasm intended in my prior post.

:)

And I must insist that I have not now nor ever laboriously misinterpreted someone else's joke for the purposes of setting up a clumsy pun about "the right to bear arms".

I open carry when I go backpacking, on account of bears and cougars and snakes not really being able to tell the difference.

Plus, it makes sure that the bears, cougars, and snakes have ample warning not to fuck with you.

[MercenaryChef]

I open carry when I go backpacking, on account of bears and cougars and snakes not really being able to tell the difference. Concealed carry in town. Going to the ghetto with a gun on your hip is asking to get shot in the back for the several hundred dollars worth of gun you're flashing to everyone.

now this i can understand and rationalize. the second bit is a little foggier to me. yes, you jumped through the hoops. yes, it is your constitutional right. but, truly how worried are you in 'town' for your personal safety that you need to go about armed? and do you also wear body armor and a helmet? as if i was truly worried for my personal safety i would go for defensive as well as offensive measures of protection.

and another very real question: how prepared are you to truly take a life? would you pull your gun if someone just tried to mug you or steal your car? is your wallet or car worth a human life? or only if said perpetrator was going to kill you? and how does one know the difference?

i am quite interested in the psyche that one possesses to feel that they are in the position to take a life.

perhaps i am weak. but, there is nothing i own or could own that i would feel i could take a life for. someone trying to harm myself or my loved ones i may be more inclined to do so. but, my faith in statistics puts me in a possibly naive position that the likelihood of being murdered or assaulted is not great. likely if i found a gun in my face my thought would not be 'man, i wished i was carrying one' it would be more 'statistically i should not be facing this. damn.'

[Tormund Ukrainesbane]

now this i can understand and rationalize. the second bit is a little foggier to me. yes, you jumped through the hoops. yes, it is your constitutional right. but, truly how worried are you in 'town' for your personal safety that you need to go about armed? and do you also wear body armor and a helmet? as if i was truly worried for my personal safety i would go for defensive as well as offensive measures of protection.

and another very real question: how prepared are you to truly take a life? would you pull your gun if someone just tried to mug you or steal your car? is your wallet or car worth a human life? or only if said perpetrator was going to kill you? and how does one know the difference?

i am quite interested in the psyche that one possesses to feel that they are in the position to take a life.

perhaps i am weak. but, there is nothing i own or could own that i would feel i could take a life for. someone trying to harm myself or my loved ones i may be more inclined to do so. but, my faith in statistics puts me in a possibly naive position that the likelihood of being murdered or assaulted is not great. likely if i found a gun in my face my thought would not be 'man, i wished i was carrying one' it would be more 'statistically i should not be facing this. damn.'

I worry less about my own safety than that of others. I carry a gun (when I do) more to be able to intervene on someone else's behalf than my own. (besides that, due to our gun laws, muggings are pretty rare here abouts). If someone were to threaten me with a weapon for my wallet, I would likely hand it over and see how things proceed from there. I know enough about fighting and weaponry to know that if the shit starts to go down, you really can't assume that your opponent wants anything less than your life.

[MercenaryChef]

I worry less about my own safety than that of others. I carry a gun (when I do) more to be able to intervene on someone else's behalf than my own. (besides that, due to our gun laws, muggings are pretty rare here abouts). If someone were to threaten me with a weapon for my wallet, I would likely hand it over and see how things proceed from there. I know enough about fighting and weaponry to know that if the shit starts to go down, you really can't assume that your opponent wants anything less than your life.

i suppose my concern is 'shit starts to go down.' how do you know when this is? for some people that means someone who is not white looks at them in the eye. for other people it means that someone has kicked in the bedroom door while they are sleeping. still others it means someone bumps them in the bar and causes them to spill their red bull and vodka. i am worried about people carrying weapons like guns because of this varied scope of 'shit going down.'

several years ago i could have killed someone. i could have taken a life. if i would have had a gun in my home within my reach i would have taken a life. it was 1am. i was at home with my former wife watching tv. i heard our door open and then close. it was odd to me. as we were the only ones who lived there. yes, i had drank a bit of whisky that night. i got up, confused and walked into my kitchen. kneeling down looking in my fridge was a 20-something lad. i flipped the fuck out. i grabbed my granite mortar from the pestle and started cursing and threatening him. (or so i am told) i had completely blacked out with a fear of my home, ex-wife and myself being in imagined danger. if i had a gun i may well have shot him. i would have gone to jail for a long time. a drunken party goer returning to the wrong apartment and looking for beer in the fridge is hardly cause for self-defense homicide.

my point is i am not that abnormal i am sure. i felt 'shit had gone down.' how many people right now are armed and have the same irrational idea of when 'shit has gone down?'

i will give you the benefit of the doubt and think of you as a clint eastwood level badass who knows the moment that one needs to pull a gun and when you need to just disarm your aggressor with a pithy one-liner.

i am not that guy. i would have been the guy crying in my kitchen as i realized i had just emptied a clip into a kid trying to find a beer.

[Old Nan]

a drunken party goer returning to the wrong apartment and looking for beer in the fridge is hardly cause for self-defense homicide.

Why not?

[MercenaryChef]

Why not?

Are you truly so daft? Killing someone who is rummaging in the wrong fridge is hardly a good thing.

We as a society are likely too unlucky for your home to be unarmed.

[Darzin]

Mercenary Chef I wish the post liking feature still existed because that post sure deserved it, +1.

[Old Nan]

Killing someone who is rummaging in the wrong fridge is hardly a good thing.

OK, I get that this is your gut feeling, but I was hoping for some kind of ethical justification. He invaded your home. Would any other mammal sit idly by? So much for gut feelings.

We as a society are likely too unlucky for your home to be unarmed.

Consider this disabusing my Christmas present to you.

[Darzin]

Well that depends on the mamal and considering its legal to kill any other mamal for sport thats not really a very good question.

And I for one do not want to live in a society were it is acceptable to simply shoot people for opening you're refigerator its detri. Do you Old Nam? If I caught you opening my refrigerator without my consent would you object ot me shooting you?

[Galactus]

For carry permits in Minnesota there are places where you do not have automatic permission to carry. State or local courthouse complexes are an area where you cannot carry unless you have express permission by the sheriff. Now this is where it gets a bit foggy.

Even for those who have express permission, it is expected (and insisted upon) that when entering a courthouse complex the permit holder will check in with the courthouse guards. The gun will be handed over, placed in a lockbox or other secure container, then retrieved when they leave, even though the permit holder has express permission. There has yet to be a test case in the courts so that's why there is this grey area. So the first issue is whether that Minneapolis police station can be considered a courthouse complex. I don't have enough info to have an informed opinion.

Say this cannot be considered a courthouse complex. Can the Minneapolis Police Department ban permit holders from carrying inside the building? For my private business, I can choose whether or not to allow a permit holder to carry in my building. If a person with a gun walks in, I can ask them to remove the gun from my building. If they don't comply I call the police and they would fall under trespass laws. Now a public building cannot trump the state laws and the state law gives Rosenberg the right to carry a weapon. Again this is an area with some unclear margins that have not been specifically tested in court.

Since all the charges were filed after the fact, it looks like vindictive behavior from the police. If he was breaking the law he should have been arrested at that time. Watching the video, the officer (IMHO) precipated the issue by grabbing the gun but Rosenberg complied with his request that the gun go out of the building. Calling it an assault is creative writing on Rosenberg's part, however.

Since there's a lot of unclear boundaries here, what are the odds of this Rosenberg fellow having arranged this in order to clear them out? Get a test case etc.?