Man removed by PD for carrying at St. Joe County polls

[Ted]

Blatant ignorance will suffice. It doesn't matter their justifications, motivations, or purposes in acting illegal, just that they acted illegally.

Actus reus isn't of only relevance. Mens rea also plays a part of any criminal act.

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

All those in favor of civil suits against appropriate parties for the violation of the civil rights - say "Aye"?

-J-

 

[jeremy]

AYE!!!!!

 

[Bunnykid68]

EYE

 

[KG1]

A

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

I

 

[PeaShooter]

 

[Indy_Guy_77]

I do not and cannot speak for ANY of the involved parties...

But I just wonder if the Civil route is something that's been suggested - especially considering the decision not to pursue things via Federal court...

-J-

 

[SirRealism]

I personally think they should serve some Jail Time, and be stuck with the term of Felon....

...and, thus, be unable to obtain an LTCH. Sweet irony.

 

[jedi]

...and, thus, be unable to obtain an LTCH. Sweet irony.

Ah but the JBTs need no special paper like you and mean so no irony there. I do hope for a win but a money win is a bittersweet victory. The JBTs won't learn from it.

 

[CathyInBlue]

Actus reus isn't of only relevance. Mens rea also plays a part of any criminal act.

Prosecution under IC 35-47-11.1 is civil, not criminal in nature. If we're talking about a federal action, which has already been discounted, as the feds are gutless wonders where defending 2nd Amendment rights are concerned, then you have half a point. They don't have to have had mens rea to break the law, they just have to have had mens rea to commit an act which turned out to be against the law. I think that has been amply demonstrated.

 

[SirRealism]

Ah but the JBTs need no special paper like you and mean so no irony there. I do hope for a win but a money win is a bittersweet victory. The JBTs won't learn from it.

As felons, would they have to turn in their boots?

 

[theweakerbrother]

I personally think they should serve some Jail Time, and be stuck with the term of Felon....

I'd call that a good start.

 

[jedi]

As felons, would they have to turn in their boots?

Nope... laws don't apply to them remeber!

 

[eldirector]

feds are gutless wonders where defending 2nd Amendment rights are concerned

Rather than the 2A angle, why not the Voter Obstruction angle noted up-thread (IC 3-14-3-4). He was illegally pulled from the chute. That is a D Felony.

The civil suit is to "make him whole". No one is punished, since it isn't their money. The criminal charges would punish the offenders.

Maybe once the civil suit has been won, there would be enough evidence (and pressure) for the DA to pursue criminal charges.

 

[jedi]

Maybe once the civil suit has been won, there would be enough evidence (and pressure) for the DA to pursue criminal charges.

yyyyeeeeeaaaaaahhhhhh right and one day you will be able to OC in chicago!

 

[griffin]

Rather than the 2A angle, why not the Voter Obstruction angle noted up-thread (IC 3-14-3-4). He was illegally pulled from the chute. That is a D Felony.

+1

 

[MikeDVB]

It seems to me, from the likely fact that there will be no prosecutions, that voting isn't as important a right for somebody who carries a gun as somebody who does not... Or perhaps the whole country has degenerated to the point that voting isn't considered a right anymore.

 

[CathyInBlue]

Trodding upon voting rights is only the proximate federal felony here. The ultimate crime in this case is trodding on the civil rights of a gun owner. For most feds, that is not only not considered a crime, it's considered their job description. The fewer of us who vote, the better for the feds. If they had denied the vote to a black, illegal alien, communist revolutionary, who got their voter registration card through ACORN, the feds would be all over St. Joe's County.

 

[theweakerbrother]

Why just civil, J-?