U.S. District Court Rules: Leave Open-Carriers Alone - Fourth Amendment Applies

On September 8, 2009, United States District Court for New Mexico, Judge Bruce D. Black entered a summary judgment in a civil case against six police officers of Alamogordo NM.

In a nutshell: Mathew St. John paid and went into the movie theater to enjoy a movie and he happened to be wearing his holstered firearm in plain view, reacting to a call from the manager of the theater, the police physically removed him from the theater, disarmed him, searched him and removed from his person his identification.

The police allowed Mr. St. John to re-enter the theater as long as he left his firearm in his vehicle as he was not under arrest.

It’s legal to carry your firearm in plain-view without a permit in New Mexico as well as twenty five other state including Wyoming but what is important here is this case was won in U.S. District Ten which includes Wyoming.

Judge Black concluded that as a matter of law the police officers violated Mr. St. John’s Constitutional Fourth Amendment Rights because they physically seized and disarmed him.

Mr. St John’s attorney was happy with the ruling and is now proceeding to the jury trial requesting damages. He stated: “Great to see the Court carefully consider the issues presented by both sides and conclude that the U.S. Constitution prohibits the government from detaining and searching individuals solely for exercising their rights to possess a firearm as guaranteed by our state and federal constitutions.”

Judge Black denied the officers “qualified immunity” a defense that allows government officials acting in good faith to avoid any liability for violating law that isn’t clearly established.

From the courts decision: “relying on well-defined Supreme Court precedent, the Tenth Circuit and its sister courts have consistently held that officers may not seize or search an individual without a specific, legitimate reason. . . . The applicable law was equally clear in this case. Nothing in New Mexico law prohibited Mr. St. John from openly carrying a firearm in the Theater.  Accordingly, Mr. St. John’s motion for summary judgment is granted with regard to his Fourth Amendment and New Mexico constitutional claims. Defendants’ motion for summary judgment is denied with regard to the same and with regard to qualified immunity.”

This decision is great news for Wyoming and the rest of the country concerning open-carry and constitutional rights in the truest sense, we need to be advocates of holding on to not only the Second Amendment but the Fourth and Fifth as well and this case should solidify this concept.

Food for thought - When considering ”newer and better” legislation we need to test it against what we already have and ask will it give-away other protections such as the Fourth Amendment as evidenced in this case.

View the courts ruling click here   View District Court Map click here

Half truths that are used to ram anti-gun legislation down our throat and an example of a politician that speaks the same rhetoric.

 

 About .02 percent of the population of Wyoming committed suicide and of that number 77% used a firearm to do so, the Brady Campaign uses figures like this as their logical reason to impose the anti-gun agenda in the state of Wyoming, they take this number and wave it as their battle flag against firearms, keep reading to see what the numbers are….

“Wyoming is not even trying to recognize its own gun violence problem,” and “It’s a terrible shame.” said Doug Pennington of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, in a recent interview in the Sublette Examiner.(Pinedale WY)

Even more troubling, Rep. Dan Zwonitzer, R-Cheyenne is on the record for comments about legislation to ease concealed-carry regulations, he said he owns guns and enjoys shooting. However, he said Wyoming is among the top states in the country in terms of gun-related deaths by population and said the state doesn’t need legislation to encourage more people to carry guns.

Zwonitzer quoted the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which states in part that a “well-regulated militia” is necessary to the security of a free state. He said he wouldn’t have a problem with the bill if it specified that members of the Wyoming National Guard have a right to carry weapons.

Yes, he used the Brady logic and the “guns are for the militia” argument, for the record Zwonitzer broke away from his party and he voted against this bill at the final vote.

Whoops, looks like Rep. Dan Zwonitzer swallowed some Brady Kool-Aid.

While it may be true that suicide by firearm may be high in Wyoming, firearms are not the cause, what the “Brady Bozos” fail to point out is, Wyoming is a state with one of the highest gun ownership rates in the U.S. and one of the lowest murder rates, in 2007 Wyoming had 16 Murders.

The truth is, Wyoming is living proof that “An Armed Society is a Polite Society”.

To compare Wyoming with an area with similar population numbers and the toughest gun laws in the U.S., Washington D.C. has a very low Suicide rate, but wait, in 2007 they had 181 murders and 8,320 violent-crimes, that’s 175 more murders and 7069 more Violent-crimes than in Wyoming.

The truth about D.C.,  it’s a total embarrassment to the Brady Campaign, so much so they don’t even track the numbers on it, D.C. already has everything that the Brady crowd desires, and the crime rate is off the charts!

In 2007, Wyoming had a population of around 522,830, of that number there were 16 persons that were murdered, 7 of those were committed with a firearm and 82 persons took their own life using a firearm.

Interestingly, in the same year in Vermont, a state that already has the least restrictive gun laws and a permit isn’t required to conceal-carry, reported a total of 12 murders, 9 of which were with a firearm.

The Brady Campaign would have us disarm a large portion of the 99.98% for the benefit of the .02%, does this make any sense? only to the criminals.

The Brady Campaign cares no more about the high suicide rate in Wyoming than in the rest of rural America, they just use the numbers to push their agenda.

Obviously, the Brady Campaign and some of our politicians, need math lessons. WyGO’s only purpose here, is to expose the lies, half-truths, and the politicians that build upon them.

We believe, it’s idiotic for the Brady Campaign and our Elected Officials to impose their anti-gun agenda in our state, and our message is simple, Wyoming citizens enjoy hunting, shooting, buying and collecting firearms, but mostly we appreciate our right to bear arms and protect ourselves as stated in the Wyoming State Constitution, Article 1 Section 24 The right of the citizens to bear arms in the defense of themselves and the state shall not be denied.

‘Make my day’ law allows weapons charge to be tossed

“In the motion, Steele wrote that the state couldn’t meet its burden of proof. In May, Goodrich’s defense attorney, Nick Carter, argued that the charge should be thrown out, saying that under a new state statute his client didn’t break the law.”

Click here to read article in Gillete News Record

 

Have you heard  the media buzz about Obama saying he is backing away from the “assault weapon ban”
The truth is Obama said he has “not backed off at all” on a campaign pledge to try to restore the ban.
[CNN News]

This combined with his latest strategy to ratify a international arms treaty is alarming.
[The New American]

He said he will “push the Senate to ratify a  treaty signed by Bill Clinton in 1997″
[Summary] of the Inter-American Convention Against Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms

This treaty has to be accepted by the states and from our recent experience with our D.C. lawmakers to pass “un-read” legislation, we certainly don’t want  this style of action when it comes to our gun rights.

Obama anounced his plan to the Mexican President during his recent trip to Mexico.

“We know that it is a politically delicate topic because Americans truly cherish their constitutional rights,” Mexico President Calderon said.

This is no surprize that Obama is speaking to Mexico President Calderon about giving up our constitutional rights.

We must tell Senators Barrasso and Enzi that we will not accept this treaty or any gun-control stemming from this latest attack on the Second Amendment and ask them to use their influence to convince as many other states of as well.

Our state sovereignty is of great importance and we must claim the Tenth Amendment when it concerns any treaty with other Nations or imposing gun-control on U.S. citizens.
The tenth Amendment states that powers not granted to the Federal Government by the U.S. Constitution are reserved to the “States” or to the “People”

Senator John Barrasso Contact [By Phone]  [By email]

Senator Mike Enzi Contact [By Phone]  [By email]

Posted 11:40pm MT 3-19-09

From the Washington Post
Friday, March 20, 2009; Page A09

By Juliet Eilperin and Del Quentin Wilber

 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/19/AR2009031902801.html?hpid=moreheadlines 

A federal judge yesterday blocked a last-minute rule enacted by President George W. Bush allowing visitors to national parks to carry concealed weapons.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued a preliminary injunction in a lawsuit brought by gun-control advocates and environmental groups. The Justice Department had sought to block the injunction against the controversial rule.

The three groups that brought the suit — the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, the National Parks Conservation Association and the Coalition of National Park Service Retirees — argued that the Bush action violated several laws.

In her ruling, Kollar-Kotelly agreed that the government’s process had been “astoundingly flawed.”

She noted that the government justified its decision to forgo an environmental analysis on the grounds that the rule does not “authorize” environmental impacts. Calling this a “tautology,” she wrote that officials “abdicated their Congressionally-mandated obligation” to evaluate environmental impacts and “ignored (without sufficient explanation) substantial information in the administrative record concerning environmental impacts” of the rule.

Interior Department spokeswoman Kendra Barkoff said the department could not comment because of “ongoing litigation.”

The regulation, which took effect Jan. 9, allowed visitors to carry loaded, concealed guns into national parks and wildlife refuges if state laws there allowed it in public places. In most cases, a state permit would be required to carry a concealed weapon into a national park.

In the past, guns had been allowed in such areas only if they were unloaded, stored or dismantled; gun rights advocates said they saw no reason to be denied the right to carry concealed weapons in parks when they could in other public places.

Bryan Faehner, associate director for park uses at the National Parks Conservation Association, said his group is “extremely pleased” with both the court decision and the fact that Interior is now conducting an internal review of the rule’s environmental impact. “This decision by the courts reaffirms our concerns, and the concerns of park rangers across the country, that this new regulation . . . has serious impacts on the parks and increases the risk of opportunistic poaching of wildlife in the parks, and increases the risk to park visitors,” Faehner said.