THREE MEN ‘ILLEGALLY’ ARRESTED FOR OPENLY CARRYING ‘BLACK POWDER’ PISTOLS IN TEXAS – HERE’S WHY THEY ARE WILLING TO ‘FIGHT THIS ALL THE WAY TO THE SUPREME COURT. Jackie Gleason is dead, but Sheriff Buford T. Justice evidently lives on.
This post was last modified on January 26, 2021
View Comments (28)
Trying to find out the whole story. Oldest son lives in Austin and is a staunch 2nd amendment supporter.
Well, had the protesters been armed liberals ( I know- but for the sake of argument) and the police made arrests there is no question gun fire would have ensued.
This situation says a lot about lawful gun owners ( real Americans) in that police can walk into a large crowd of armed pro-gun protesters, exercise authority and participants remain calm and act lawfully.
Check Youtube and watch some of the occupooper protests or almost any left wing protest and you'll find violence and disgruntled liberals destroying something-
Buts it's okay for ''black power'' piss-ants carrying batons at philly polls
Sounds like a case of some Austin Politician pulling a South Park Cartman; "You will respect my authority"
OK, ran down that statute page a bit more. Here's yer problem, fellas:
Sec. 46.035. UNLAWFUL CARRYING OF HANDGUN BY LICENSE HOLDER. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder carries a handgun on or about the license holder's person under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and intentionally fails to conceal the handgun.
Ain't no open carry allowed for handguns. Story says others were carrying rifles. This law says nothing about handguns.
Maybe these cops did something stupid, especially arresting a quad, and I won't say they should have been arrested, but it certainly sounds to me like they were breaking the law.
So in other words, an antique black powder pistol is legally defined by Texas as NOT a firearm, but two paragraphs later is defined as a handgun. Sigh. Our laws are written by imbeciles for imbeciles and designed to make sure we can always be arrested for something.
"designed to make sure we can always be arrested for something."
There you have it.
I believe that you're right. I think these guys were testing that part of the law and hoping to exploit it a bit. Hate to see cops put on the spot like this and the parts of the video I saw, they were respectful. I would go as far as to suggest the protesters were trying to get a rise out of these Troopers and failed (again, I did not watch the entire incident). Start telling a cop how or what to do while he's working is a bad idea. Toss in the nazi Germany comment and you're asking for it. I learned when I was 18 (the hard way ) not to whack that hornet's nest!
Also, that they are willing to go all the way to the SCOTUS with this tells me they were purposely looking to get arrested.
Hey this is suddenly sounds familiar. Didn't a bunch of guys in Texas pull this same kind of stunt earlier this year? I remember video of cops walking around writing down license plate numbers, carrying open I think, it was a park and what looked like a main city street alongside. I think they were deliberately breaking some law though, because one of them made the point that it was an act of civil disobedience and they expected to be in jail.
They supposedly did it here in SA a while back. I don't recall it making the news. They're scheduled to do it here again next month. Our up and coming liberal democrat mayor will probably order SAPD to arrest everyone!
I was stationed in San Antonio (Universal City) from 1982 through 1986 and don't remember you having a conservative mayor ever!
Good ole' Henry Cisneros was mayor when I was there.
Back inthe good governm e nt league days theywere more conservative. And we have had a couple others. Just more libtards.
If this guy can keep his dick in his pants, he'll go far in the people's party. Saint Cisneros couldn't keep it sheathed and crashed early, though I might suggest the Clinton's had a little to do with that fiasco. Julian Castro is a eel-slick and slimy bag of worms that will do plenty of damage to this country when given the chance. He's light years sneakier and smarter than than the yokels in our city gubmint and will move on from here as soon as the next door opens for him.
He's such a dork and . A momma's boy.he'll have trouble getting in trouble. Samewith his brother.
That's an act. This guy a is a wolf in sheep's clothing and they are grooming him for higher office. It will be interesting to watch where they want to send him next. I just hope they get him out of here soon!!!!
Momma has groomed both of them since birth. I wouldn't trust either of them an inch or as far as I could throw them, whichever is the lesser distance.
In a case like this, I prefer to use "As far as I can throw the Alamo".
Weird. I wonder if they were up to something else? I mean it says there were a lot of othe people walking around with guns.
Something weird about that statute too, or at least how the Blaze is reporting it. I went right to the site and it does say:
"Firearm" means any device designed, made, or adapted to expel a projectile through a barrel by using the energy generated by an explosion or burning substance or any device readily convertible to that use. Firearm does not include a firearm that may have, as an integral part, a folding knife blade or other characteristics of weapons made illegal by this chapter and that is:
(A) an antique or curio firearm manufactured before 1899; or
(B) a replica of an antique or curio firearm manufactured before 1899, but only if the replica does not use rim fire or center fire ammunition.
===
Those A/B are "and" clauses, and have to run with the main part of the paragraph. What these guys were carrying were legally firearms, despite what the Blaze says (or what they are saying), since the "integral blade" etc. clause must apply too. It sounds like that only if a weapon is otherwise illegal ("integral blade") AND 19th cent. style is not a firearm.
I don't know PD, it seems to me that the entire statute is just dripping with libtardese wording. Makes me wonder about who is running Texas.
Remember the Democrats ran Texas for decades. We have a stupid arrangement where laws passed become . Part of the Constitution. I suspect this one Was specifically designed to allow someone's private collection. Also Austin is a Democratic stronghold, and I am ashamed to say San Antonio is heading thesame direction, so this report is not too surprising.
There's many statutes across the country that exempt black powder, and other firearms older than a certain age, from firearms laws.
Sure stopped the officers in their tracks.
What is going on with the police in this country? All over the place, in incident after incident, they are acting like jack-booted Nazis.
And by the way, Texas residents, what is the "DPS"? Department of Public Safety or something to do with the Parks? 'Cause parks officers at every level in my experience seem to have a tendency to over-react.
DPS guys are our State Troopers. Every one of them I ever encountered had their act together and they have a pretty good reputation overall. I'm wondering if these protesters ran into a gun free zone since it was in the State Capitol area. Pretty sure open carry of antiques doesn't qualify as OK in a gun free zone.
Story says there were people carrying rifles who weren't arrested. So doesn't sound like a gun-free zone.
In my experience, state cops are the cream of the crop - feds and small-town cops being the worst - so this incident makes me wonder. It's possible the state troopers were under orders from above and had to arrest someone. If so, they're probably as pissed about the whole thing as we are.
They are likeky among the group tasked with protecting the governor.
Nope, they ran into ignorant officers. When the officers read the law, they immediately changed their story, arrested them for causing alarm.
More evidence that in practice the Bill of Rights and Constitution have already been nullified.