MTN Jack ARRESTED for OC near Obama rally site!

[mjfletcher]

100 Yards, an entire football field away, is far from "at the rally," unless one intends to argue that if you lived within a block of the park and were sitting on your porch or having a backyard BBQ you were at the rally. There was a secured area where one was required to have a ticket to gain entrance in which the rally was occuring, he was outside of it. Tape put up for crowd control in public areas outside the event area means nothing. The PSP is twisting facts and grasping at straws to cover their ass.

Whats next? A hunter who lives 300 yards from where a political rally is happening being arrested because he carried his rifle out his door to head out to his hunting camp? Or pre-emptively arresting anyone that even owns a hunting rifle and lives in the same city as the event?

[mjfletcher]

It's not a question of 100 yards or 101 yards... a reasonable person will judge that, given the size of an event and the attendance, there's a common sense determination of whether someone is "at the event" or merely a by-passer going about his business and otherwise totally oblivious or unconcerned with said event.

100 yards = 300 feet = approximately one city block. A block away from something is not at it.

[Pa. Patriot]

...Yet, if such an area is truly deemed as a "gun free zone" in the eyes of the law, so that it holds up in court, then our man is lucky to be charged with mere disorderly conduct or other minor misdemeanor.

And it was not.

The Secret Service vetted and released him.

If he was in a "gun free/secure area" he would still be in FEDERAL prison.

As such there is absolutely NO question that he was not breaching any "secure" area.

[Pa. Patriot]

Tape put up for crowd control in public areas outside the event area means nothing. The PSP is twisting facts and grasping at straws to cover their ass.

Yes. Typically, taped areas at a park or similar location are to keep a crowd from blocking the sidewalk, etc. IE: to keep people IN the park.

It was not a "secure area"

[Pa. Patriot]

It's not a question of 100 yards or 101 yards... a reasonable person will judge that, given the size of an event and the attendance, there's a common sense determination of whether someone is "at the event" or merely a by-passer going about his business and otherwise totally oblivious or unconcerned with said event.

Huh? Please post some legal citations or examples of this.

If I OC to the tailgate party across the street from the superbowl game with 20K people, and a bunch of fans are across the street holding signs, etc, I am now at the super bowl?

And even if you were to opine "yes", what does this have to do with a security checkpoint (to get in the stadium) I do NOT pass through?
Answer: Nothing

I will agree that Jack was at an "event". But that event was not the event that was guarded by a secured perimeter.
Jack went to the "event" OUTSIDE the "Obama rally" to make a political statement, the same as all the other folks holding political signs in a public area not secured against entry by the public.

Why were those people not arrested? Especially the ones that were CC'ing?

[Mike]

Well, if this is just a bandying about of semantics about what is or isn't the "event area", I'm even more disgusted.

I don't care what the SS or PSP concept of the "event area" may or may not be, if anyone is within 100 yards of a podium for the main speaker or overtly crossing any taped off area to get within said 100 yards, that's "at the rally" in my mind.

And thus things are beginning to look not so great, if Jack was truly "within 100 yards of the podium"... if he wasn't, then so be it, and I'm relieved... but it's hard to believe that the PSP would make such an overt statement if they couldn't back it up, since it'll be easy enough to disprove, if the PSP is lying.

Judges don't have the time or patience to mince words over "event area"... within 100 yards of a podium is "at the rally"... sorry. And I hope for Jack's sake he wasn't within that proximity, nor crossed any taped areas.

You totally don't get it - let's say Jack was inside this so called "event area," and siiting in the friont row listening to Obama. Would any law be broken? No.

But Jack was not in any "event area," he was in an adjacent park across the street from this so-called event area.

And you better believe Judges "have the time [and] patience to mince words" - that's all they do!

[Ghost001]

After browsing 51 pages, this is what I have to say...

NUTS!!!

Alright, not really.

For those that don't know, in order to be charged with any crime, a crime has to have been commited. There was none.

For those nay sayers...Please, sight what crimes this person has committed.

I'll wait.

The simple fact is this...

This person was cleared/vetted (I like this word, that's why I use it) by the USSS. It has already been stated that Mtn Jack did not breah the secure area of this political rally. I can assure you, if he did, he would not be posting on PAFOA. He would be in a Federal prison cell counting the tiles in his "room."

Whether the USSS did the FI on scene, off scene, or at the PSP barracks, they cleared him. He was not a person of interest, he has no wants or warrants and he did not enter the secure areas of the rally. That has been stated! Whether he OC'd or not, he committed no crime.

My question is this, if it is about having a weapon...

Why was this person the only one detained/arrested and questioned? Where there not others there that were carrying? Whether CC or OC, they still ahd a weapon. Right? Why was the crowd, as a whole, not detained/arrested and searched and questioned? Why just one person out of the many? What, because a person was excersising their 1st amendment rights? I mean come on, he had a bible and a gun! That in and of itself is enough for me to say, "Oh yeah, I see where he's coming from."

My take on it is...The PSP has something they are trying to prove. What it is...I couldn't tell you. I can tell you that from experience, this incident was cleared as well as the person. The PSP must not like the fact that we AMERICANS excersise our rights to the letter of the law. They must really not like OC at political rallies.

Bottom line, he was cleared.

I'm standing by for the crimes committed...

[Ghost001]

Mr. Kayland,

I would love for you to post the Federal law on your distances to the podium. You obviously have no concept of how a "Secure" area is set up let alone on how a protective service/detail works.

There is no distance set, only lines. (Preverbial of course) If there was a distance...Well, no one would be within 5 miles of the podium.

[Ghost001]

100 Yards, an entire football field away, is far from "at the rally," unless one intends to argue that if you lived within a block of the park and were sitting on your porch or having a backyard BBQ you were at the rally. There was a secured area where one was required to have a ticket to gain entrance in which the rally was occuring, he was outside of it. Tape put up for crowd control in public areas outside the event area means nothing. The PSP is twisting facts and grasping at straws to cover their ass.

Whats next? A hunter who lives 300 yards from where a political rally is happening being arrested because he carried his rifle out his door to head out to his hunting camp? Or pre-emptively arresting anyone that even owns a hunting rifle and lives in the same city as the event?

True and false...

A "ticket" is needed to be in the rally proper where the candidate or protectee would be (Depending on of course what type of rally/political event it is), however, a "ticket" and clearance is only needed to be in a secured area. In other words, if you are a caterer and you need to make a truck delivery, you need to be vetted in order to enter the "secure area" but you need to have a pass to enter the actual sight to serve your food to the candidate or their people.

There is a difference.

Ticket is used loosely in this context.

[Pa. Patriot]

More thoughts....

Fact:
People were congregating in Macintosh and Quay parks with political signs (on sticks).

Fact:
Those signs-on-sticks are not permitted in the rally (beyond the security checkpoint) They only allow paper/cardboard signs with no "sticks". WHY is that? Because the sticks are "weapons".

Conclusion:
So since jack was arrested for apparently simply possessing a "weapon", those weapons (sticks) possessed by the other people in the adjacent parks should have been grounds for arrest too.

But none of them were arrested.