National Protest and 'disband the cops' discussion (and now ICE)

[amlove21]

So, while I agree with the general premise of the statements in the video, it's not really accurate to say Pretti wasn't carrying legally and would've lost his permit.

Not having your permit on you while carrying in Minnesota is a petty misdemeanor and carries a max. $25 fine. The reality is, unless you're being a complete jackass, if an officer checks and confirms a valid permit, you'd simply be let off with a warning. The $25 fine isn't worth the paperwork.

I agree with the rest of the comments, which are much more valid.

Not having your ID is a requirement. We can discuss ‘how illegal’ something is- let me frame it this way and tell me where I’m wrong.

Alex Pretti, who was actively engaged in the signal chats that can only be described as an insurgent network, purposefully made choices to hide his identity and carried a weapon illegally to the protest.

Any misinformation there?

 

[amlove21]

A lack of that got us where we are today. None of this happens if the previous admin did its job.

… because feckless “conservatives” were worried about what happens next time when liberals take power.

Which, by the way is exactly what all the edgelords are using to argue we shouldn’t update the laws now.

 

[ThunderHorse]

I kinda want to put this in the DHS thread, but @Ooh-Rah move it where it needs to go. Yesterday, a local bar chain that generally has great wings and some great specials the only downside is that there isn't one physically close to me to go, was raided by HSI and IRS-CI.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2015970753410433265

DHS is going after businesses who are committing fraud. But this fellow who just go a job at the restaurant had a lot to say, I feel for the dude because he may be out of work, but this is what you voted for. Rule of law. Going after businesses that commit fraud. There was a smaller restaurant chain in AZ that was rolled up for human trafficking. Like...

___________

Not related to my above but

Not having your ID is a requirement. We can discuss ‘how illegal’ something is- let me frame it this way and tell me where I’m wrong.

Alex Pretti, who was actively engaged in the signal chats that can only be described as an insurgent network, purposefully made choices to hide his identity and carried a weapon illegally to the protest.

Any misinformation there?

The moment he began interfering with the operation is the moment he was no longer legally carrying, the moment he resisted is the moment he had committed a crime.

 

[Blizzard]

Not having your ID is a requirement. We can discuss ‘how illegal’ something is- let me frame it this way and tell me where I’m wrong.

Alex Pretti, who was actively engaged in the signal chats that can only be described as an insurgent network, purposefully made choices to hide his identity and carried a weapon illegally to the protest.

Any misinformation there?

It's a minor point. I suppose, by the letter of the law, is it "illegal" to not have your valid permit on you while carrying? Meh. It's kind of like not having your auto insurance card on you, even though you have valid policy.

There is no law in MN against carrying at a protest.

I'd say you're barking up the wrong tree with the "carrying illegally" argument. It's a Red Herring when there are more valid aspects to focus on, like the general obstruction.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2015475113102123475

 

[ThunderHorse]

I suppose, by the letter of the law, is it "illegal" to not have your valid permit on you while carrying? Technically, yes, kind of like not having your auto insurance card on you, even though you have valid policy.

There is no law in MN against carrying at protest.

I'd say you're barking up the wrong tree with the "carrying illegally" argument. It's a Red Herring.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2015475113102123475

It wasn't a protest though. That's the point. Also, a misdemeanor is a crime last time I checked.

 

[Blizzard]

It wasn't a protest though. That's the point. Also, a misdemeanor is a crime last time I checked.

Doesn't matter. There is no restriction on his carry.

It's not a misdemeanor, it's a petty misdemeanor. Equivalent to a parking ticket, but with an even lower fine .

More importantly, the ticket must be dismissed once permit status is verified.

 

[Box]

so its not a "crime"

its just a misdemeanor...
...which ISNT a crime ??

make it make sense

 

[Blizzard]

so its not a "crime"

its just a misdemeanor...
...which ISNT a crime ??

make it make sense

Also, not a misdemeanor...a petty misdemeanor; not a crime.

The MN statute is listed in one of my posts a couple earlier.

 

[amlove21]

It's a minor point. I suppose, by the letter of the law, is it "illegal" to not have your valid permit on you while carrying? Meh. It's kind of like not having your auto insurance card on you, even though you have valid policy.

There is no law in MN against carrying at a protest.

I'd say you're barking up the wrong tree with the "carrying illegally" argument. It's a Red Herring when there are more valid aspects to focus on, like the general obstruction.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2015475113102123475

I don't ascribe to or defend/agree with anyone, so Kristi can say whatever she'd like. She was wrong here.

I am ok with "meh", the same way I am ok with someone lightly tapping me to make me let go of a submission as opposed to passing out. Just because there are gradations of law doesn't make lesser gradations legal.

He wasn't carrying legally. He obstructed, impeded, and otherwise interrupted federal LEO during the course of business. He was there because he was an active support member (medical/observer) of a traitorous signal chat. He could have simply filmed from his initial position- 50m away from the scrum with two females- and none of this would have happened, but even then, he didn't satisfy the base requirements to be armed.

 

[Box]

Again - I need somebody to make it make sense:
So we aren't talking about a "real" misdemeanor - it's just "petty" misdemeanor?
This sounds a like like the same logic that turns upside down flaming police cars, shattered store fronts, and thousands of dollars worht of "looting" into a "peaceful protest"

I'd feel a lot different if I could be convinced that there was this guy...
...and he was out doing his thing
...minding his own business
...and he realized, oh damn, I forgot my identification
...and my concealed carry permit
...but since I'm just out minding my own business and not committing any pretty misdemeanors that aren't actually "misdemeanors"
...or misdemeanor crimes that aren't actually "crimes"
...because I'm totally not going into a highly charged possibly violent situation as an active participant
...I'm just going as a "petty" participant
...but at least I remembered my gun

Alas - I dont feel different - instead, I feel like under these circumstances, "staying home saves lives"

Its tragic
...and awful
...but "lawful"
...I guess
...who knows

 

[amlove21]

Again - I need somebody to make it make sense:
So we aren't talking about a "real" misdemeanor - it's just "petty" misdemeanor?
This sounds a like like the same logic that turns upside down flaming police cars, shattered store fronts, and thousands of dollars worht of "looting" into a "peaceful protest"

I'd feel a lot different if I could be convinced that there was this guy...
...and he was out doing his thing
...minding his own business
...and he realized, oh damn, I forgot my identification
...and my concealed carry permit
...but since I'm just out minding my own business and not committing any pretty misdemeanors that aren't actually "misdemeanors"
...or misdemeanor crimes that aren't actually "crimes"
...because I'm totally not going into a highly charged possibly violent situation as an active participant
...I'm just going as a "petty" participant
...but at least I remembered my gun

Alas - I dont feel different - instead, I feel like under these circumstances, "staying home saves lives"

Its tragic
...and awful
...but "lawful"
...I guess
...who knows

Lemme help you out. It's called "special pleading".

Special pleading is an informal logical fallacy that occurs when someone applies a general rule, principle, or standard to others (or to most cases) but arbitrarily claims an unjustified exception for themselves, their group, a favored person, or a specific situation—without providing a relevant or adequate reason why the exception should apply.

 

[Blizzard]

I don't ascribe to or defend/agree with anyone, so Kristi can say whatever she'd like. She was wrong here.

I am ok with "meh", the same way I am ok with someone lightly tapping me to make me let go of a submission as opposed to passing out. Just because there are gradations of law doesn't make lesser gradations legal.

He wasn't carrying legally. He obstructed, impeded, and otherwise interrupted federal LEO during the course of business. He was there because he was an active support member (medical/observer) of a traitorous signal chat. He could have simply filmed from his initial position- 50m away from the scrum with two females- and none of this would have happened, but even then, he didn't satisfy the base requirements to be armed.

Concur with the bolded.

The rest is irrelevant and/or inaccurate. Again, and I can't make this any clearer than I have already -- I provided the actual statute, as posted by the MN Gun Caucus -- it's not illegal to carry at a protest, demonstration, or anything similar in MN nor is it necessarily a crime to not have your valid permit on your person...you can't have your gun confiscated or lose your permit as a result.

 

[amlove21]

Concur with the bolded.

The rest is irrelevant and/or inaccurate. Again, and I can't make this any clearer than I have already -- I provided the actual statute, as posted by the MN Gun Caucus -- it's not illegal to carry at a protest, demonstration, or anything similar in MN nor is it a crime to have your valid permit on your person...you can have your gun confiscated or lose your permit as a result.

You've evolved to an argument that you and I aren't having. I never said it was illegal to carry at the protest.

I said he was carrying illegally. My point stands.

ETA- can we find some common ground if we frame it as, "He was carrying illegally; and he attended a protest while carrying illegally?" Still factually accurate and maybe more palatable?

 

[Blizzard]

Lemme help you out. It's called "special pleading".

Special pleading is an informal logical fallacy that occurs when someone applies a general rule, principle, or standard to others (or to most cases) but arbitrarily claims an unjustified exception for themselves, their group, a favored person, or a specific situation—without providing a relevant or adequate reason why the exception should apply.

"Petty misdemeanor" is a degree of severity of a legal violation, not a plea.

In this case, not having your permit on your person when asked to produce it to a MN police officer, is not even an offense if you can show you had a valid permit at the time; it's dismissed.

If you decide not to show evidence of your valid permit, the fine is $25, but you can't lose your permit or your gun over it.

But, now I'm just repeating. This shouldn't be so difficult to comprehend.

 

[Blizzard]

You've evolved to an argument that you and I aren't having. I never said it was illegal to carry at the protest.

I said he was carrying illegally. My point stands.

ETA- can we find some common ground if we frame it as, "He was carrying illegally; and he attended a protest while carrying illegally?" Still factually accurate and maybe more palatable?

He was a valid permit holder who reportedly didn't have his permit on him.

I'd simply frame as this:
Who cares? What does that have to do with price of rice in China? It has absolutely nothing to do with why he was shot.

 

[amlove21]

"Petty misdemeanor" is a degree of severity of a legal violation, not a plea.

In this case, not having your permit on your person when asked to produce it to a MN police officer, is not even an offense if you can show you had a valid permit at the time; it's dismissed.

If you decide not to show evidence of your valid permit, the fine is $25, but you can't lose your permit or your gun over it.

But, now I'm just repeating. This shouldn't be so difficult to comprehend.

You're right, and if you were more consistent in your approach, we could follow. Any miscommunication is attributed to the sender, not the receiver. Unless you're saying I am too stupid, which I accept generally.

The plea you're making is "It's not THAT illegal, comparatively." You don't want me to call it illegal, which it is, but you want to soften that language in this case because while you agree it's illegal, it's really not THAT illegal in the grand scheme of things. That's the plea.

"It's illegal, sure, but not that illegal and in this case the illegality shouldn't matter that much because it's just a fine." Special pleading.

 

[amlove21]

He was a valid permit holder who reportedly didn't have his permit on him.

I'd simply frame as this:
Who cares? What does that have to do with price of rice in China? It has absolutely nothing to do with why he was shot.

You got there. So why are YOU arguing the point, if it doesn't matter? You brought it up as a salient point in a larger video.

 

[Blizzard]

You got there. So why are YOU arguing the point, if it doesn't matter? You brought it up as a salient point in a larger video.

*sigh*

Your very first point in your post of the video was that he was carrying illegally. Which he was not.

It would only be "illegal", graduations of severity or not, if:
1. He was asked to show his permit by a police officer (I won't even get into the semanticsof MN officer vs. federal agent). I doubt he was asked to do so during this interaction, unless they were asking him to show his permit between blows.

2. He fails to produce a valid permit to carry

3. After failing to display a valid permit, the officer issues a citation

4. He then fails to go to prosecutor or court with evidence that he had a valid permit, which would result in dismissal of a citation; ie no violation.

But, if all 4 things above, happen, then yes, he would be guilty of a petty misdemeanor (thus, the reason for the earlier "meh").

Does that make you happy?

 

[ThunderHorse]

Doesn't matter. There is no restriction on his carry.

It's not a misdemeanor, it's a petty misdemeanor. Equivalent to a parking ticket, but with an even lower fine .

More importantly, the ticket must be dismissed once permit status is verified.

Sure, but not the point. And I think you're arguing over semantics. Resisting arrest in Minnesota is a Felony. Resisting arrest while carrying a firearm leads to enhanced penalties.

He wasn't just walking down the street here, that's the point. Maybe we're arguing over semantics. But you're not getting charged with a petty misdemeanor because you're carrying without a permit walking down the street. Showing up to a traffic stop and interfering with it leads to different charges. Those charges would be elevated because he was carrying.

But to put a pin in this, we're not talking about someone walking down the street.

 

[Florida173]

His legal status to carry was immediately void once he was in the commission of a felony crime (obstruction and violent resist). Now instead of just the normal "real" crimes apparently, they would all be considered for upgrade to something like possession of a firearm during commission of a felony. This is a federal charge that can be attached under 18 USC 924(c) .