North Strabane Township Police Oppression

[deangelo1290@comcast.net]

Glad to hear you finally got to shoot and the check went smoothly!!!

-Rick
(over the hill from you off of McDowell)

Thanks for the support.
We must fight to protect our rights.
or they will slowly fade into oblivion.

[turb0buick57]

UPDATE ON MY SECOND AMENDMENT CIVIL RIGHTS LAWSUIT.

I know it has been a while, but as it stands now, my amended complaint was challenged by defendant with a motion to dismiss. The court denied the motion today and so the case proceeds.
Additionally, I began target shooting on my property just yesterday. The police were called as expected and responded, with guns drawn but pointed at the ground. After determining that I was target shooting, North Strabane Township officer Wagstaff looked over the area and completed his investigation in a very professional manner. No citations were issued and no arrests were made.The other officer who disarmed me (involuntarily but with cooperation) returned my handgun and after a few minutes of discussion left. The last thing I told the officers was that I would respectfully wait for them to leave before I reloaded and resumed shooting. I continued shooting for a couple more hours with no further interference or contact from police.
Officer Wagstaff even commented that "we support your second amendment rights.
So anyway, if anyone wants to get together to shoot on my property send me an email. I can give you the details. My property is in North Strabane Township bordering Canonsburg.
I just loaded up six thirty round magazines for my AR15. Time to get my gun off.
In the mean time, Good luck and happy shooting.

Thank you for updating this as I have been following this post from the beginning. Also live in north strabane.

Did the cops that showed try to convince you to stop, or go about their business once they checked the situation out?

[deangelo1290@comcast.net]

Thank you for updating this as I have been following this post from the beginning. Also live in north strabane.

Did the cops that showed try to convince you to stop, or go about their business once they checked the situation out?

No they didn't even suggest that I stop. Officer Wagstaff even stated that "we support the second amendment".

They were there for a brief period of time, about fifteen minutes. As they were leaving, I told them that I would wait until they were gone before reloading and starting to shoot again. The only thing that I really didn't care for was that they walked back to my property with sidearms drawn, but pointed at the ground. I spent another two hours or more there shooting after the officers left.

I think that it was easy for them to see that I had constructed a suitable plywood trap and was shooting into a soft dirt 80' high hillside. There is no apparent danger to anyone.

Also since my property is zoned industrial, noise ordinances don't apply.

I think that overall they acted in a professional manner, and made no threats to prosecute me or any other such threats.

Based on my federal lawsuit against the retired chief, I think they were already informed about me and the circumstance before responding to the call.

[gnbrotz]

Officer Wagstaff even stated that "we support the second amendment".

The Second Amendment isn't about target shooting (or hunting).

[TheGhost27]

The Second Amendment isn't about target shooting (or hunting).

I HATE when people say it's about hunting...

[GunLawyer001]

I HATE when people say it's about hunting...

It's equally true that nobody needs car keys to walk to work. It's a non sequitur. Which I believe could be translated as "arguments that idiots make".

It's part of a straw man argument, to argue that nobody needs "militia" weapons to go hunting. Perhaps true; but you do need them to maintain a militia.

Do you really need something that's designed to kill armed enemies, just to defend yourself against home intruders who have weapons? Well.....yes. That's kind of the point.

It's hard to believe that anyone with an IQ in the triple digits would say things like "you can't hug your children with nuclear arms" (nor can you repel an invading nation with a box of Pampers).

It's why the Left's favorite debate technique is to silence all opposition, through shaming, and ridicule, and control of the peer-reviewed journals. It's why they "debate" global warming by unilaterally declaring that the time for debate is over (without it ever having been in play, from what I can tell.)

They don't have good arguments in support of what they believe, and that's because they didn't arrive at their beliefs on their own. They are TOLD what to believe, by the NYT directly, and by the MSM that uses the NYT as their template.

Ask your "progressive" friends, on which issue do they most strongly disagree with the NYT? They will probably look at you the way my dog looks, when I talk into one end of a hose and my voice comes out the other end. The same way that Nancy Pelosi looks when you ask her to explain how Obamacare is legal under the US Constitution (" are you SERIOUS??")

[TheGhost27]

It's equally true that nobody needs car keys to walk to work. It's a non sequitur. Which I believe could be translated as "arguments that idiots make".

It's part of a straw man argument, to argue that nobody needs "militia" weapons to go hunting. Perhaps true; but you do need them to maintain a militia.

Do you really need something that's designed to kill armed enemies, just to defend yourself against home intruders who have weapons? Well.....yes. That's kind of the point.

It's hard to believe that anyone with an IQ in the triple digits would say things like "you can't hug your children with nuclear arms" (nor can you repel an invading nation with a box of Pampers).

It's why the Left's favorite debate technique is to silence all opposition, through shaming, and ridicule, and control of the peer-reviewed journals. It's why they "debate" global warming by unilaterally declaring that the time for debate is over (without it ever having been in play, from what I can tell.)

They don't have good arguments in support of what they believe, and that's because they didn't arrive at their beliefs on their own. They are TOLD what to believe, by the NYT directly, and by the MSM that uses the NYT as their template.

Ask your "progressive" friends, on which issue do they most strongly disagree with the NYT? They will probably look at you the way my dog looks, when I talk into one end of a hose and my voice comes out the other end. The same way that Nancy Pelosi looks when you ask her to explain how Obamacare is legal under the US Constitution (" are you SERIOUS??")

Yes, they always try to change or eliminate valid information or bully others into submission so that they can continue attempting to push their agenda. You also make a good point that they don't arrive at their beliefs using their own mind.

Here's an exmaple:

About 2 months ago I was at work having a conversation with someone (a girl) that I talk to on a regular basis (I would say we are friends, we talk a lot). At that point I was still excited since I just received the paperwork back for my first suppressor, so I started talking about my range trip from over the weekend. Everything was fine until I showed her a picture I took of my Sig PM400 with the suppressor attached to it.

Her response: "That's creepy"... I was shocked and confused for a few seconds since I didn't expect to hear a response like that. I asked, why does that look creepy? No response/answer. I asked again using slightly different wording. How is this picture creepy, what is so creepy about it? Again, no response/answer. At this point I started to get annoyed and wasn't going to stop pressing until I got an answer.

So I said, don't get all anti-gun on me now. I struck a chord with this comment since she immediately responded "I'm not anti-gun, we have guns in our house"! (maybe a few bolt action hunting rifles and maybe a shotgun). I asked again, then WHY or WHAT makes this picture SO creepy?!

Her response: "I always see them on the news every time someone gets killed". Again I was dumfounded hearing her response since I know this is BS. I said don't listen to the mainstream media telling you lies because Obummer and his anti-gun sheep have an agenda they're trying to push on our country. (I think she voted for him) <--- horror

She looked pretty annoyed from my comments and I was disgusted with her essentially being one of the sheep. I decided that's all I coukd take and ended "the talk". However, before I turned and walked away I said in a sarcastic/smart tone "I'm sorry for creeping you out.

I guess now I know where she stands and I must say that I am disappointed becasue I thought she was smarter than that; smarter than having others tell you what you're beliefs are or how you should think or view things.

After all of this, I don't really talk to her anymore. I may say hi, but that's about it after all of this.

[mollymayhem82]

There's a lot to be said for springing for a silencer, paying the $200 NFA tax, and going about your lawful business without being hassled. The Chief seems like a poor candidate for the CLEO signature, but there are other eligible CLEO's in every county, and options that don't require a CLEO signature at all.

I wanted to clear this part up: is it true that ANY chief LEOs could sign off on NFA stuff? I was told that the sheriff, your chief of police, or county DA were eligible as CLEOs. Is that true? My husband was considering a silencer; our last sheriff only ever approved one NFA application in over 20 years as sheriff. Our new sheriff is a democrat, so the likelihood that he would is slim. Would he be able to take it to our local PD chief or county DA?

[TheGhost27]

I wanted to clear this part up: is it true that ANY chief LEOs could sign off on NFA stuff? I was told that the sheriff, your chief of police, or county DA were eligible as CLEOs. Is that true? My husband was considering a silencer; our last sheriff only ever approved one NFA application in over 20 years as sheriff. Our new sheriff is a democrat, so the likelihood that he would is slim. Would he be able to take it to our local PD chief or county DA?

Yes, any of the three you have listed could sign-off on nfa items. If none of them will sign you could always go the trust or llc route.

[deangelo1290@comcast.net]

I HATE when people say it's about hunting...

As I go through the process of fighting for this right, my research has led me to conclude that the second amendment currently provides us with greatly expanded rights that we did not enjoy prior to 2008.
In the Heller Case, the court found that the second amendment is an individual right not related to service in the militia and a right related to service in a militia. SCOTUS also found that the second amendment not only provides us the right to Keep and Bear Arms, but also to use those firearms for "traditionally lawful purposes".
This was undeniably a landmark case which has opened the door for all to file lawsuits under the civil rights act. the case load for second amendment cases has dramatically increased.
For me the second amendment is not only my right to keep and bear arms, but the right to carry arms for personal defense, and to shoot targets and train for that point in the future when I may be in need of my firearms to protect myself, family or friends.