Angel Shamaya Jailed in Michigan on Gun Charge

[Dan from MI]

Thanks, Al.

Where in Oakland County was he arrested?

 

[Barbara]

Explaining the way Michigan law works and thinking its not necessarily a good idea to annoy Bouchard with letters without having any idea what the charges are doesn't have a thing to do with agreeing with registration or with Mr. Shamaya's character at all.

I know for a fact that at least 3 people on this thread actively do things on a regular basis for gun rights in Michigan and none of them are encouraging anyone to write letters for someone who hadn't even been arraigned yet. If it gets to a point where a letter is helpful and the situation warrants it, I'll write a letter, not an email. In the meantime, I can't see the point in it.

As El Tejon said, your time would be more constructively spent putting together a defense fund for him. The lawyers I listed will help him. I can give him more names, if necessary, but I believe Jim is the best choice and is well aquainted with Sheriff Bouchard and knows Michigan firearms law inside and out. Regardless, there are going to be costs associated with this and money talks a lot louder than words on the internet.

As an FYI, he was not arrested in Detroit. Detroit is in Wayne County. He was arrested in Oakland County, which is an entirely different political animal.

Too bad..there's already precedent in WaCo for carrying an unregistered firearm. Maybe he could cut the same deal the Chief of Police did there when he got busted trying to take one on a flight in his carryon.

 

[AZRickD]

...at his home ... in Michigan

Oy. Synapses firing.

Angel told me once when my family paid him a visit in Flagstaff after his youngin' was born, that his wife was from Michigan and she wanted to return there. Angel was less than pleased to leave the high desert comfort of northern Arizona for the jungles of anything near Detroit, even a few counties away.

Rick

 

[Dan from MI]

I second Jim Simmons as a recommendation. If I had a gun related case, that would be my first call.

 

[Travis McGee]

Well, I'm glad to read that Angel is out, and the SAF is helping with his defense.

Trisha, I really appreciate your post.

 

[F4GIB]

If you are going to be a big shot pro-Second Amendment advocate and seek out controversy and fame, then you better be darn CAREFUL how you act around guns. Pushing the legal envelop isn't something you can do. Unless, of course, it's a carefully planned test case (which this wasn't).

 

[Barbara]

Since the vast majority of "big shot" 2A advocates don't get paid a dime, I don't see how we can really expect them to be more or less human than the rest of the population.

 

[Sgt.Slappy]

Jeff,

What are you smoking? It sure ain't plain tobacco!

We can talk about inalienable rights all we want. But unless those who control coercive force recognize that they mean what we think they mean, those rights mean nothing. That's why we fight in the legislature and in the court rooms. That's why we become politically involved.

(em. mine)

Those very words prove you do not understand what an inalienable right is.

To say that these rights stem from those who possess coercive force...

...that Inalienable Rights mean nothing unless legislation makes it so...

I...am...speechless...

I weep for your ignorance.

The Founders words have fallen on deaf ears.

If this is the conventional line of thought here at The High Road, the experiment is dead. The Founders have FAILED.

Please, please, someone tell me I'm wrong...

 

[shooten]

Thanks for the heads up about this Travis McGee. Let us know how we can help. No matter what the technicalities of his arrest, he will need financial help for attorney's fees. If there is a fund started, please post.

Scott

 

[Jeff White]

Sgt. Slappy,
Let me ask you this my friend, the 2d Amendment says that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Do we agree on that? If we take that as an inalienable right, then there are no laws infringing on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Yet a quick check of the lawbooks in every jurisdiction in the United States will reveal thousands of laws that infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

People are arrested and inprisoned every day for violating these laws. So obviously your idea of what an inalienable right is and my idea of what an inalienable right is; is at complete odds with the government's idea of what an inalienable right is. The government (who controls the means of coersive force) says that you can't own an M16A4 rifle because it was manufactured after May 19th 1986. Even though the M16A4 is the standard Infantry weapon of both the Army and the USMC, which would seem to make it especially protected under the second amendment. However they will not hesitate to arrest you and lock you away in prison if you dare to possess one and let them find out about it.

So while you're rotting away in federal prison, I guess you can take comfort in the fact that you exercised your inalienable right to keep and bear arms by owning an M16A4 rifle.

Yet if you ask most people they would tell you that the government hasn't infringed on your inalienable right to keep and bear arms by telling you which arms you may keep and bear.

You are going to be waiting a very long time for lightning bolts to descend from the heavens and smite those who passed the laws infringing on your inalienable rights my friend.

The better solution is to become involved in the process and get judges appointed who will make court decisions that will make the right to keep and bear arms as the founders intended it to be.

Maybe in the next life, the government will respect inalienable rights, but I don't want to wait that long.

The hard reality of things is that your rights mean exactly what those who control the people with badges, guns and a prison system want them to mean. There are many constitutions in police states worldwide that guarantee the same inalienable rights as ours does, but they don't even bother to pay lip service to the rule of law in those places.

Here we have a court system that gives us redress and the ability to change what the legislature infringes on. That is the difference between having a inalienable rights that mean more then the paper and ink it takes to print them.

The experiment hasn't failed. It's working just as the founders intended it to. If it had failed, we wouldn't be fighting these issues in the legislature and in the courts.

Jeff

 

[JerryM]

Don't know if he wanted to make a statement or challenge the law or what.

However, he broke the law, and should suffer the consequences. If a court rules the law unconstitutional then he won, but if not then he has to pay the piper.

Whether we like it or not, the law is either constitutional or not at any particular time depending upon how the SCOTUS rules.

As has been said, that is a major reason to get people like Thomas and Scalia on the Court.

So it is a case of commit the crime, do the time.

Jerry

 

[AZRickD]

However, he broke the law, and should suffer the consequences.

Not if good people were on his jury. They would vote to acquit, and I, for one, would be quite pleased. But, since this is not a felony, he'll likely be in front of a rubber-stamping judge who has lost all concept of Rights.

Angel is a big fully informed/empowered jury advocate, btw.

Rick

 

[Zedicus]

JerryM: However, he broke the law, and should suffer the consequences.

To Borrow a line from R.Lee Ermly

YOU MAKE ME WANT TO VOMIT!


Edited to add: a poster on kba.com made a reply to a simalar post, allow me to quote it.

Uncle Bob: ALL of the Framers were FELONS in the King's eyes! Almost ALL of the politicians, L.E., etc. are in VIOLATION of OUR CONSTITUTIONAL LAW! Whether by directly usurping against our Rights, or by not doing anything to stop the usurpation's. Why isn't anybody screaming to have them locked up? They are, after all, unconvicted FELONS!

 

[Sgt.Slappy]

The better solution is to become involved in the process and get judges appointed who will make court decisions that will make the right to keep and bear arms as the founders intended it to be.

And you say I am the one waiting for "bolts to descend from the heavens and smite those who passed the laws infringing on your inalienable rights".

Not my rights Jeff, our rights.

You really believe that our rights hinge upon whether or not we can just get the right judges appointed?

That the words of the Founders are nothing more than patriotic and charming noise from a bygone era?

You acknowledge that the government is in direct violation of some of these rights, yet you advocate working within a broken system, playing by its broken rules, in order to "fix" the very problems it has created.

I suppose I am alone here in saying this is foolish optimism at best.

The hard reality of things is that your rights mean exactly what those who control the people with badges, guns and a prison system want them to mean. There are many constitutions in police states worldwide that guarantee the same inalienable rights as ours does, but they don't even bother to pay lip service to the rule of law in those places.

I want you to imagine what our country would be like today, if Jefferson, Adams, Hamilton, Jay, Henry, or any of the many, many other brave souls who founded this nation; had said those words, or harbored those thoughts and sentiments.

It wouldn't exist.

Those men, and so many others like them, risked their fortunes, their homes, their lives... to openly defy an oppressive and massively powerful government. They too might have rotted in prisons, with their only comfort being the fact that they dared believe in their rights, and dared to exercise them to defend the rights of others who were either unable or unwilling to defend them. If this is not a noble and righteous cause, then I fail to see what is.

Perhaps soon (very soon) it may be time to do this all over again... to begin anew. Does that disturb you?

Would you be willing to fight, and maybe die, for something you believe in (like the Founders)? Something that is larger than yourself? For what the United States of America is?
Would you have been willing to fight with those men, so long ago, if you knew how this nation would turn out? That people who call themselves patriots, when faced with injustice again, contemplate the easiest path, rather that the righteous one?

Jeff, I do not mean to belittle you. I do not mean to anger you unnecessarily, I will tell you this:
The things you have said tonight saddened me deeply. The words and actions of the Founders have had a staggering impact on the course of our country, and to dismiss these things, in deference to a broken system, is unimaginable. Those are holy books, holy words... they have given you everything you have today. Do not turn your back so readily.

(sigh...)

I realize I'm not going to change your mind Jeff. I only hope to God there are more people like me out there. Who aren't afraid to exercise their inalienable rights...

 

[Preacherman]

Sgt. Slappy, you are welcome to stand on your "inalienable rights", from your absolutist perspective, as long as you please. They will - repeat, WILL - get you into jail if you persist in defying the laws and jurisprudence of the Republic. No ifs, buts or maybes about it.

I agree that in a perfect world, the absolutist interpretation would prevail (and that we'd also have a much, much smaller Federal government as a result!). However, we are not living in a perfect world - we're living in the world we've got. Reality sometimes bites, and it will bite you if you disregard the laws and jurisprudence that currently govern you.

This may be distasteful, even unpalateable - but it's reality. It's not about to change. Live with it.

 

[dzimmerm]

Sgt. Slappy and Jeff White

I think it would be wise to start another thread to explore your interpretations of the 2nd ammendment as applied to living your life as an unjailed, (note I did not say free) citizen in the current USA.

I thought to make some statements on this discussion but realized it detracts from the original thread and would be a form of hijacking that might not be high road.

dzimmerm

 

[mpw]

Any word on legal defense fund?

 

[Steam dragon]

I have been wondering where I read comments with the same attitude as expressed by Mr White in post #60, JerryM in post #61, and Preacherman in post #65.

I remembered.

Newspaper editorials from the late 30s and early 40s that my grandparents kept.
From folks like Joe Kennedy.
People that thought the Germans were 'following their law.' They were, after all.
So were the Russians in the late 40s and 50s. Just following the law.

And we see how well that attitude worked for the Jewish people in Germany, and the dissidents in Russia.

four nineteen

EDIT to add: Those e-mails? If they do no other good, they gave Angel some mental support when he needed it. He knew he woulden't be 'dissapeared.' He knows that some of us remember what he has done for us in the past. And that we care. About him, and about the cause.

 

[Thain]

He had four illegal handguns on him, and was intimidating someone enough that a charge of "menacing" stuck. Until we get more details, I'm withholding judgement... but if this was some sort of "test case stunt" then Mr Shamaya just sent the cause of gun ownership back a decade in Michigan.

Michigan's gun laws were not perfect, but they were fairly liberal (lower case 'l'), with shall issue ccw, un registered longarms, relativly painless handgun registration, and a "stand your ground law" about to pass. Plus, some of the best hunting in the world.

If he got himself arrested in some punk protest over Michigan's handgun "safety inspection," then he's an idiot. It will past all current Constitutional tests, will never even rise to the level of SCotUS attention, and will be used to set back RKBA in Michigan and elsewhere.

If Mr. Shamaya moved to Michigan, failed to register his handguns properly, then he made a very dumb mistake (If anyone should know the importance of checking local laws, it's a prominante gun rights advocate), and he ought to just pay his fines, files his paperwork, and get on with life. He should also keep it on the "down low" (as we say in Detroit) just so the Brady Bunch doesn't use it agianst him/us.

If he was actually involved with contraband weapons, in a manner other than a paperwork crime, then he should be dealt with accordingly. However since the charges reported were misdemeanor possession, I assume its just a paperwork problem.

I am a Libertarian stalwart, however the laws on the books are the laws on the books. One must live with them before one can get them changed... I'll be running for office in 202x... How about you?

 

[Molon Labe]

Sgt. Slappy, you are welcome to stand on your "inalienable rights", from your absolutist perspective, as long as you please. They will - repeat, WILL - get you into jail if you persist in defying the laws and jurisprudence of the Republic.

Your argument appears to go like this:

"Yes, these gun control laws are wrong. And unconstitutional. But you had better abide by them, or else!"

Is that your argument? If so, your argument only works if you assume everyone lives in fear. I live without fear, Preacherman. And I refuse to compromise my principles on account of a written "law." My inalienable rights trump any and all written laws.

IMO, a person who holds the argument you appear to espouse is completely void of courage. One wonders if they deserve these rights to begin with.

Live with it.

Never! Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death! - PH

I realize I'm not going to change your mind Jeff. I only hope to God there are more people like me out there. Who aren't afraid to exercise their inalienable rights...

You're not alone, Sgt.Slappy. Men of real courage still exist.

 

[Big Gay Al]

He had four illegal handguns on him, and was intimidating someone enough that a charge of "menacing" stuck. Until we get more details, I'm withholding judgement... but if this was some sort of "test case stunt" then Mr Shamaya just sent the cause of gun ownership back a decade in Michigan.

Actually, he is ACCUSED of having four unregistered firearms, in his home, not ON him. And, he's been ACCUSED of intimidating someone. Other than his arrest, nothing else has been proven one way or the other.

Not a test case, a case of someone else's idea of revenge, or something along those lines.

 

[Thain]

Actually, he is ACCUSED of having four unregistered firearms, in his home, not ON him. And, he's been ACCUSED of intimidating someone. Other than his arrest, nothing else has been proven one way or the other.

Not a test case, a case of someone else's idea of revenge, or something along those lines.

Forgive me for my lapse, and not refering to Mr. Shamaya as "accused," "suspected," or as "alleged." But frankly, if this man wasn't somethign of a celebrity, most of us on this board wouldn't bother with such niceties, and like most Americans I tend to assume that if an arrest is made, and the D.A. files charges, then there probably is sufficent cause.

Mr. Shamaya is known to us in the gun culture, however he is a virtual "Nobody" outside of it. He isn't being crucified as some sort of martyr to the cause. He allegedly had four firearms that the police have a reason to suspect might be unregistered, and have accussed him of it.

Now, if he had them properly registered, he could have shown his card to the police, and there would have been no arrest, no charges, and no story.

Say what you will about the Founding Fathers, but handgun registration is legal, and has passed all current Constitutional tests. Michigan's safety inspection policy is less a burden then other State's Constitutional registration laws... you aren't goign to change this by startign a one man revolution.

 

[Steam dragon]

Here's the latest:

Gary Marbut/MSSA/TOS/BIT
11:18 am (3 minutes ago)
Dear Friends of Angel,

So many of you have asked for updates about Angel's situation, and I
am sooo swamped dealing with this situation, that the only way I
could hope to keep you informed is to add you all to a general email
list - my "Friends of Angel" list. That's why you are getting this email.

The information I broadcast here will be somewhat generic, because I
must consider it to be in the public domain.

Angel moved to Michigan to be close to his son, a very high priority
in his life.

Because of a malicious complaint (my opinion) that Angel was
dangerous and had unregistered guns, a SWAT team raided his domicile
yesterday. I was tagged to be something of a nexus in the recovery
effort partly because I was on the phone with Angel when the SWAT
team showed up at his door, partly because I'm also a friend of
Angel's, and partly because of the curse or blessing of my
get-it-handled-now personality.

As soon as I knew that Angel was in jail, I called Alan Gottlieb of
SAF to get a referral for a local attorney. I found one from the SAF
list who had his cell number on his office answering machine, and who
answered his cell phone promptly, a bit after 5 PM CST. This
attorney got after Angel's situation immediately, and I phoned Nicki
of KeepAndBearArms.com next to hatch a plan to get the word out and
start the reference letters coming. These letters will be delivered
to Angel's attorney electronically, Monday morning.

Today, an associate of the attorney I contacted yesterday appeared to
represent Angel at the arraignment, and got him sprung from jail on a
bond (the bond was not steep). I was out of the loop in the middle
part of the day today because it was the scheduled Annual Meeting for
MSSA in our State Capitol, Helena, Montana (yes, thank you, I am
still president).

I talked to Angel on the phone within 20 minutes of his release (and
several times since). Of course, he's angry, frustrated, bummed, and
distraught - who wouldn't be under these circumstances? But, he's coping.

Angel has an immediate need of protection from the consequences of
any more malicious police reports. We're working with some Michigan
folks to provide Angel with company to document his whereabouts and
activity until this is resolved. If you know anyone in Michigan
(Detroit/Pontiac area) who might help with this, let me know.

We are also sketching out a fundraising plan for legal expenses that
should come together within about 48 hours. Stay tuned for more about this.

In the mean time, Angel is facing four misdemeanor charges, three of
which are for guns that were not yet registered properly under
Michigan law, but which Angel was in the process of trying to get
registered. Bad timing and a malicious complaint - what can I say.

But, I believe, your many and kind letters will help establish with
the court that Angel is an upstanding guy.

Thanks loads for your concerns, your help, and your many offers to
help more. I'm sure Angel would want me to go heavy on thanks to you too.

I am scheduled to teach the second day of a two-day precision riflery
class tomorrow, and will be out of the loop all afternoon. Other
than that period, I will keep you updated as new and significant
information becomes available.

Best wishes.

Gary Marbut, president
Montana Shooting Sports Association
http://www.mtssa.org
author, Gun Laws of Montana
http://www.mtpublish.com

Yep, trying to follow those reasonable resrictions will get you every time.

 

[Harve Curry]

I met Angel when he was first starting the Arizona web site. I came away believing he's passionate and dedicated to defending for OUR Bill of Rights, even at personal cost to himself.

Which leads me to ask:
What part of the below text does anyone on THR not understand ?

 

[beerslurpy]

Did I say it smelled of malice? Police dont just kick down your door to look for contraband unless someone has it in for you.