ABC Reporter arrested after having CCW onto school premise

Status
Not open for further replies.
did they take down the vid?

I can't find it.
In many cases the sidewalk is indeed school property.
I have thought about moving to Utah so I don't have to be disarmed to go to school.
 
Simple, it is against the law, even if you have a concealed carry permit, to carry a firearm onto school property. Is there anyone in this universe that doesn`t know this?
Click to expand...

Not in California.


I just hope the station isn't a bunch of GFWs and backs their guy up.

If it was my station, every negative detail of the lives of the cops involved would be made public. Any problems that the School Board Police had would also be aired as well as continuing with the "problem school" angle as well.

These people would find themselves on TV almost everyday for months.
 
One interesting facet of the video was that it only showed a short bit of time that related to the police and the reporter. When the video started, the parties were already face to face on the sidewalk. What we don't know is what happened before the video clip started. Had the reporter walked into the school property initially, hence the summoning of the police (there were three, I recall) who were escorting them off school property when the reporter made a stand on the sidewalk? My point here is that we don't see the approach of the police or what it was that resulted in the police being present with the reporter.

One thing I find very interesting is the fickle nature of many of the folks on the forum. We are usually very quick to talk about ignorant and liberal reporters for whom we have so little respect, but just as quickly, some of y'all are martyring this gun just because he was arrested while concealed carrying a gun. There isn't even any indication that he was carrying the gun to champion the concealed carry cause, but some of you think that this is what it is about, seemingly ignoring the fact that it was stated that he carries a gun because he had been threatened. Come on. Does this reporter have a single other pro gun story under his belt where he is taking the pro gun stance?

I notice that y'all are quick to poke fun at the comment of "school board police" which was an idiotic misnomer made by another reporter, but instead of noting the reporter's shortcoming, fun is poked at the police because of the misnomer.
 
. Had the reporter walked into the school property initially, hence the summoning of the police (there were three, I recall) who were escorting them off school property when the reporter made a stand on the sidewalk?
Click to expand...

Even if that were the case, once back on the sidewalk there was no longer a problem. If the cops can't take some reporter yelling at them without just walking away they need some training or a new job.

If a cop asked him to leave school property and he then complied by withdrawing to a sidewalk it still should have ended right there.

There is another TV reporter with that station that is saying she had the EXACT same thing done to her by the school police there, so this is not the first time it's happened.
A quote from her:

Been there, done that (minus the arrest). Different school, different police officer, same command to get off a public sidewalk, move here, stay there.
Crash course in freedom of the press: as the “voice of the public”, news crews are permitted to be anywhere the public is permitted.

When was the last time someone told you to leave a sidewalk in front of a school?
Click to expand...

And maybe even a pattern in the area:

Still photographs, as snapshots of moments, may also help. A freelance journalist named Carlos Miller is currently using his photos in his own legal fight. Earlier this year, in the course of shooting pictures for a story along Biscayne Boulevard, he managed to shoot a few frames while police officers arrested him. They had told him to go away. He didn't. His photos show his arrest on a public sidewalk.
Click to expand...
 
Fruits of the poison tree... When it is proved in court that the officers did not have any legal right to ask the reporter to leave the sidewalk, any evidence uncovered incident to the arrest will be inadmissable in court. Then the civil suit can be filed by the reporter.Looks like the rats don't like to have the light shined on them.
 
Even if that were the case, once back on the sidewalk there was no longer a problem.
Click to expand...

I agree, but it would also mean that the reporter did in fact break the law by carrying onto school grounds. I don't think that evidence would or should be admissable if he was unjustly arrested for the sidewalk trespass, however.

gunsmith said,
did they take down the vid?

I can't find it.
Click to expand...

The link in post #8 is still active as of right now.
 
Channel 2 Denver had a part of the video on it (7:35AM - Tom Greene) and didn't mention that he was licensed.

I just sent this off to them:

According to the news story on Jeffrey Weinsier of WPLG-TV at:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071024/...orter_arrested

"Weinsier has a concealed weapons permit, but state law prohibits anyone from being armed at schools, police Detective Ed Torrens said."

He had, according to this piece, obtained a License to Carry a concealed defensive firearm because of prior death threats.

Your story and clip this morning made no mention that apparently Mr. Weinsier was licensed to carry a firearm.

In leaving out this fact your story left the rather negative impression that Mr. Weinsner was unauthorized to carry a firearm and that the reporter was bent on some kind of violence.

Are you guilty of selective reporting, or have more facts emerged since his arrest?

If it is a case of the latter, I believe you should have reported any other facts.

I am sorry, but henceforth I shall have to take a rather jaundiced view of any firearms-related reporting by your news staff in future.

It makes me wonder how many other of your stories might be biased to reflect the attitudes of your news staff on any matters of importance.
Click to expand...
 
Hey guys, let's not jump off the deep end here. Let's wait until we can see all of the tape and all the evidence is in. I'm just as much a 2nd amendment advocate as anyone but I have also been a LEO and have a son who is currently one and have seen both sides. So let's keep a cool head and let the chips fall where they may. If the officer was in the wrong then he should suffer the consequences and the same goes for the reporter. MO!!

Buel
 
Weinsier has been charged with resisting an officer without violence, trespassing and carrying a concealed weapon on school grounds. He bonded out of jail Tuesday.
Click to expand...
I cannot possibly keep up with the proliferation of "gotcha" laws. Those here who have posted in the past that the road to disarmament will be a tangle of laws so convoluted that the mere act of living will constitute a felony appear to have it right.

"Resisting an officer without violence"? What the heck is that, and how is it defined? On the surface, it sounds and smells a lot like "suspicion of lawful activity" to me.

diggers said:
Does it bother all of you that the standard MO now is to throw a handful of charges at some one and just hope a couple stick? Its kinda like the police don't really feel they need a clear reason to arrest some one, they will just shotgun them with charges and maybe the jury will agree with a couple of them.
Click to expand...
Yes, it bothers me a lot, and I have commented on it previously (not in this thread). There are a number of laws the police make zero effort to enforce by themselves, but they are very happy to add them to the laundry list when they write up someone to whom they have taken a dislike. All of which strikes me as "arbitrary and capricious." If it's the law, the police should be citing it every time they encounter it, not just those instances when it suits their convenience to add a few extraneous charges so the rap sheet looks more impressive in the morning newspaper.
 
My sidewalk (OK, I don't have one out in the boonies, but I used to live in town and did) is "my property". The city may hold an easement that allows the public or others access and use but it is "my property". I suspect the sidewalk in front of a school very much "school property".
Click to expand...
Maybe where you used to live, but at least in my state that would be a rare exception. Working as a building inspector I review a LOT of building and site plans. The municipal street right-of-way almost always extends for approximately twice the width of the actual paved road or street, and the sidewalks are almost always located in the public right-of-way. Once in a great while a building on a corner has the corner of the building cut off to create a sort of entrance plaza. In such cases, the owners put a small plaque in the sidewalk at the corner of the actual property line that reads "THIS SPACE NOT DEDICATED," which is a legal way of informing the world that although the owner allows people to walk across his property at that point, he is not ceding it to the public and the sidewalk between the plaque and the building remains private property. But in such cases the public sidewalk still extends another 6 to 10 feet outside of the property line, and the only indication that part of the sidewalk isn't public property is the plaque.
 
It is sad to see those police officers breaking their oaths. I thought they swore to uphold the Bill of Rights and The Constitution. Got to love the hypocrisy on their part.

We should lobby to have LEOs disarmed so that when they decide to take the law into their own hands we are safer as a society.
 
1) The federal code:
"(2)(A) It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to
possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects
interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual
knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone (1000' of school).

"(B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to the possession of a
firearm--

"(i) on private property not part of school grounds;

"(ii) if the individual possessing the firearm is licensed to
do so by the State in which the school zone is located or a
political subdivision of the State, and the law of the State or
political subdivision requires that, before an individual obtains
such a license, the law enforcement authorities of the State or
political subdivision verify that the individual is qualified under
law to receive the license;

2)Florida Law: 790.06
No license issued pursuant to this section shall authorize any person to carry a concealed weapon or firearm into any place of nuisance as defined in s. 823.05; any police, sheriff, ...any elementary or secondary school facility; any career center; any college or university facility unless the licensee is a registered student,
**************


Seems the state law does not allow even licensed carry in a "school facility", somewhat similiar to here in NY (which is "school grounds"). Now - federal law says he CAN carry in the school zone, so the "1000' zone" rule is gone, but state law still says not in "school facility". Sooo...what is the definition of "facility"? Buildings? Grounds? Inside the fence? Sidewalk in front of?


The federal law SHOULD trump the state law entirely (that whole supremacy clause), but I would not be the test dummy here in NY. Maybe this guy can test the constitutionality there in FLA!?!
 
Last edited:
If the city, state or county "owned" my sidewalk....they wouldn't need an easement to allow others the "right of way" to use it. The whole idea of an easement (at least the "right of way" type easement) is to restrict my property deed such that...while I do own the land, others have a right to use it. In fact, where I am now, I own out to the moddle of the road in front of my house....but easements say the government controls the use of the first 60 feet. Clearly it is somewhat limited ownership....not unlike the designated wetlands elsewhere on my property....but it clearly falls under what I "own". I never said I controled my sidewalk or that I could do whatever I wanted there, just that it is "my property" just like the sidewalk in front of a school is "school property".

As an aside, the reason the Post Office annalogy carries no water is because with a post office the rule is "not inside the building"...in most states the rule is "not on the property".
 
That sidewalk is public property. The reporter had a right to be there. The LEO could have had some legal reason to exclude the reporter.It appears that the officer had no reason and in fact singled the reporter out to be excluded. It will be found that the officer was without legal standing to exclude the reporter from the sidewalk. Therefore the officers orders were improper and will not sustain the burden of probable cause. Anything discovered on the reporter's body (legal or not) will not be admisable in court as evidence.The reporter needs to lawyer up NOW and do a story on the experience when it's over.Cops cannot simply make up their version of the constitution or laws. Well I guess they can until someone calls them on it.The fact that he had a gun will be immaterial to his arrest.
 
My property extends to the inside edge of the sidewalk. I do not own or control what happens on the sidewalk or any portion of the ground between the sidewalk and the street. The city requires me to maintain the sidewalk free and clear of snow and ice, and to keep the grass between the sidewalk and street cut to a reasonable height. Failure to do either will allow the city to send a public works crew to perform the service, and then charge me (at very high cost) for the work. This is a form of taxation on the property owned adjacent to the city property (street and sidewalk).

Different areas have different ways of deeding property and allowing access to the public. My previous home, in a different city, had an access easement across the back of the property for utility lines (power and phone); the utility crews had a legal right to come onto my property at any time to perform necessary work on those lines.

What has NOT been mentioned in the postings regarding this incident in front of the school, is whether there are any local ordinances regarding LOITERING on public property; if there are loitering laws in effect, the police could order him to move on and depart the vicinity of the school.
 
Ok granted I only skimmed throught he fist page of replies, but did it ever occur to anyone that leaving his gun behind so he could keep his job, was not worth it? Where I work, if the corporate retards find out I pack a gun in my truck, I'm fired on the spot. NO JOB is worth it, if your wife becomes a widow over it. Yeah one must support their family, but you can find another job, can't find another you. I've never talked to this guy so I have no idea why he did what he did. I carry a gun at work, because I am out all over town all night long. It's worth the risk of the job to protect my life. Here in Oregon one need not worry, if you have a CHL and get arrested for carrying onto school grounds, you have a rock solid case. Oregon Administrative Rules cites you cannot carry a gun on any school grounds anywhere int he state, regardless of CHL or not. However Oregon Law makes it VERY clear that these rules are null and void(thats exact wording too). Most of the schools who know this are fighting it. The rest are content that the rules override the law. Every CHL holder in this state who has been arrested for packing on school grounds, has had the state by the balls. Gun Free Zone = TARGET RICH ENVIRONMENT!
 
No wonder the police were a little touchy.

"there were several TV news cameras at the scene reporting on a story about a Central High School teacher who attempted “suicide by cop” the previous day."

There are a few other pieces of useful info re: the law in this piece. John

http://carlosmiller.wordpress.com/2007/10/24/another-journalist-arrested-in-miami/

"Weisnier’s real issues stem from that damn gun. Even if he had never stepped on the grass, the sidewalk still falls within the School Safety Zone (although one can argue there really isn’t much of a safety zone at Miami Central High School).

Florida law is very clear about where you are not allowed to carry your concealed weapon even if you have a license. Schools, federal buildings, hospitals, bars are off-limits if you are packing a gun, unless you are a law enforcement officer.

But if it is proven that police conducted an illegal search and seizure on Weisnier prior to finding the gun (Fourth Amendment violation), then perhaps prosecutors will have a tougher time making the felony gun charges against him stick."

"According to Florida Statute 810.0975, which defines trespassing in “school safety zones”, a person is committing an unlawful act if he loiters in the school safety zone, but “does not have legitimate business in the school safety zone"

"The school safety zone is defined as 500 feet within a school grounds"

- Carlos Miller
_____________

"My name is Carlos Miller and I am a writer, reporter and photojournalist who was arrested by Miami police after taking photos of them against their wishes, a clear violation of my First Amendment rights. I have pleaded not guilty to the nine misdemeanor charges they conjured against me to justify their arrest. Contrary to what they state, I was not standing in the middle of the street snapping photos when they arrested me, something that is very clear from the above photo. "
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
  • Locked
No trespass = No charge
2 3
Replies
52
Views
3K
Robert Hairless
R
Z
  • Locked
News reporter arrested for refusing to leave public sidewalk (with unedited video )
Replies
3
Views
622
geekWithA.45
G
B
  • Locked
6 Guns Found in IL School, Locked Down and 3 Arrests Made.
Replies
18
Views
1K
yongxingfreesty
Y
C
  • Locked
Steven's Point, WI student not charged for gun on school property
Replies
18
Views
1K
ChrisMG
C
V
  • Locked
Madness after girl, 4, draws gun pic at school
2 3 4 5
Replies
123
Views
7K
Sam1911
S
Back
Top