Quantcast

Elderly Vet's Guns Confiscated After He Voices Concern About Potential School Shooting

Discussion in 'General Gun Discussions' started by hps1, Oct 19, 2019.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. buck460XVR

    buck460XVR Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    7,931
    Good faith is an abstract and comprehensive term that encompasses a sincere belief or motive without any malice or the desire to defraud others.

    In this incident, it probably was determined by the Tisbury Police, since they were the one the waitress reported to. Again, IMHO, the waitress did the reporting in "Good Faith" and the local PD took her report and decided there was a legitimate threat. Even tho her facts were incorrect, she nor the PD knew that till they followed thru. It was not she that dropped the ball, it was the local PD, who didn't properly follow up and confirm those facts. Would your local PD act upon a red flag because of the hat you were wearing at McDonalds? You tell me. Personally, I doubt very much iffin' it would ever get before any judge.

    BTW....there are also, at least in my state, severe penalties for folks that make false reports of intended school violence, i.e., bad faith. Now how your state and local PD handles NRA hats, I have no clue.
     
    theotherwaldo and Jeff22 like this.
  2. Deanimator

    Deanimator Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Messages:
    12,484
    Location:
    Rocky River, Ohio
    Perhaps you forgot that NRA members such as myself have been labeled "terrorists" by the City of San Francisco.

    I'm sure that cleaner (and Holocaust fan) in that Lakewood, Ohio McDonald's SINCERELY agrees with that characterization. Do you think that "terrorists" should be allowed to possess firearms? What if the judge (and the police) "sincerely" believe that:
    1. NRA members are "terrorists".
    2. Terrorists shouldn't be allowed to own firearms.

    Remember, a considerable number of advocates of racially invidious gun controls believe that people on the "no fly" list should be banned from purchasing firearms. How do you get on that list? How do you get off of it? NOBODY KNOWS.

    "Red flag" laws are the equivalent of taping the spoon down on a white phosphorus grenade with dollar store cellophane tape, pulling the pin and tossing it into a cage full of chimps high on meth.
     
  3. SharpDog

    SharpDog Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2006
    Messages:
    2,226
    Location:
    Tennessee
    It's not just the PD. Was there no prosecutor or judge involved ?

    1. The PD never thought to find any corroborating evidence. Not just one officer I presume but at least two in the PD.

    2. No prosecutor ? Did the DA's office never think to find corroborating evidence ?

    3. The judge never thought to ask for corroborating evidence ?

    Either the process is seriously flawed or likely at least four government representatives failed in their duty to uphold the rights of an elderly citizen.
     
  4. Deanimator

    Deanimator Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Messages:
    12,484
    Location:
    Rocky River, Ohio
    Option three is that they saw an opportunity to take one or more guns "off of the street" and took it.

    Malice is ALWAYS an option, and in the case of racially invidious gun controls, USUALLY a go-to.
     
  5. buck460XVR

    buck460XVR Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    7,931
    Funny, how the local PD reacted so aggressively since Nichols claims he had a working relationship with them for 6 decades. One wonders what else is going on there. Could it be the criticism against the resource officer has been ongoing and there was already some form of animosity there?

    As for the involvement of a DA and a Judge, I couldn't find anywhere if there was indeed a search warrant. from what I read Nichols voluntarily gave up his license when asked. Could have been the same with his guns. If someone else knows more I'd like to know.
     
    SharpDog likes this.
  6. hps1

    hps1 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    1,877
    Location:
    Texas
    Stephen Nichols reinstated as crossing guard
    After tsunami of online support, former Tisbury cop says he’ll return to the kids ‘I love.’

    By
    Rich Saltzberg
    -
    October 14, 2019
    59

    6 of 6

    LP_Stephen_Nichols_03.jpg
    Crossing guard Stephen Nichols waits for kids to arrive from the Tisbury School.
    LP_Stephen_Nichols_06.jpg
    Stephen Nichols gives a thumbs up to supporters, many of whom honked and said words of encouragement as they drove by.
    LP_Stephen_Nichols_07.jpg
    Crossing guard Stephen Nichols is known for handing out wintergreen lifesavers to kids crossing his sidewalk.
    LP_Stephen_Nichols_08.jpg
    Crossing guard Stephen Nichols hands out wintergreen candy to his “regulars.”
    LP_Stephen_Nichols_11.jpg
    Stephen Nichols went back to work as a Tisbury School crossing guard today.
    LP_Stephen_Nichols_15.jpg
    Stephen Nichols gives a thumbs up to supporters, many of whom honked and said words of encouragement as they drove by.


    A Tisbury School crossing guard who had been relieved of duty and had his personal firearms confiscated for alleged threats to the Tisbury School was reinstated to his position on Columbus Day morning. Stephen Nichols was pulled from his post Sept. 20 after a waitress at Linda Jean’s Restaurant allegedly overheard Nichols make threats to the school two days earlier. Nichols has staunchly denied he threatened the school, and said he was pointing out what he deemed a hole in school security.

    Nichols’ ouster and the seizure of his firearms generated social media activity never before seen on Martha’s Vineyard Times webpages, including links on gun activist and law enforcement pages, and tens of thousands of Facebook hits. On the same day Nichols was reinstated, an online petition circulated demanding Nichols be allowed to return to his crossing guard duties.

    Stephen Nichols, 84, of Tisbury, who said his career with the Tisbury Police spanned six decades and he served in the U.S. Army during the Korean War as a Morse code specialist, told The Times he had criticized Tisbury School Resource Officer Scott Ogden in a conversation with a friend. He said the conversation was taken out of context. That conversation allegedly occurred Sept. 18, and was reported on Sept. 20, the same day Nichols was relieved, according to police.

    On Oct. 15, Nichols returned to his twice-daily post at the crosswalk on the corner of Spring and Pine Streets by the office of the Martha’s Vineyard superintendent of schools. Numerous motorists waved, beeped, or gave Nichols the thumbs-up as they passed. As students began to trickle down the sidewalk, Nichols offered them Life Savers candies whether they crossed or continued walking on the sidewalk. A handful of staffers from the superintendent’s office came outside and watched Nichols perform his duties. Nichols told The Times he was glad to be back helping the students.

    In a statement released Monday, Police Chief Mark Saloio, who was actively involved in the investigation of Nichols, said he was never fired, but his job was under review.
    “The town, collectively, has expressed an outpouring of concern about Mr. Nichols, and his employment as a school crossing guard. We as well share those concerns. We wish to make you aware that today, Mr. Nichols was informed that he may return to his crossing guard duties tomorrow morning,” Saloio wrote in an email to The Times. “This return to work was always pending upon a final review that was in process. Throughout this period, Mr. Nichols has retained his position as a crossing guard for the town. However, these reviews are thorough and complete, and neither immediate nor instantaneous.”

    Nichols had expressed concerns at Linda Jean’s that Ogden was leaving his post at the Tisbury School to go to XtraMart. The chief defended Ogden in his written statement.

    “Please know that Officer Ogden performs his duties as the assigned school resource officer, for our elementary school, at a consistently high level. He continues to be dedicated and works hard, in partnership with all of the school staff, to keep our children safe every day,” Saloio wrote. “This department appreciates any and all concerns brought to our attention through the proper channels so that we may help and assist everyone in the best way possible.”

    Dan Larkosh of the Edgartown firm Larkosh and Jackson represents Nichols. He said he is pleased Nichols was reinstated. Nevertheless, he intends to file an appeal of the decision by Tisbury Police Chief Mark Saloio to seize guns owned by Nichols, as well as his license to carry. Larkosh said his firm has received repeated offers to contribute to Nichols’ legal costs, including from some national organizations.

    Saloio initially declined to comment when approached at the Tisbury Police Station. He later told The Times, “There’s nothing that I can legally discuss about the matter. Period.” The police department has also refused to release the police report from the investigation, citing the “personnel” exemption of the public records law.

    Saloio’s comment about Nichols’ status doesn’t clearly match the crossing guard’s previously stated understanding of his status, nor how Tisbury town administrator Jay Grande responded when The Times asked if a crossing guard had been terminated. “In response to your inquiry, I want to acknowledge that a crossing guard was removed from active status pending a review of personnel-related concerns,” Grande wrote. “I will not have any further comment on this matter.”

    At a selectmen’s meeting Tuesday, Saloio was backed and commended by the board, with the caveat there was room to refine some practices. Board chair Melinda Loberg specifically praised the chief’s handling of the situation. “We are very much in support of the work you’ve done recently, and the hard decisions you’ve had to make following police protocol to exercise your responsibilities as a police force,” she said. “The atmosphere has changed. We all need to get used to some new perspectives, some new requirements of the state, and I think the selectmen here are in full support of the work you do.”

    “It’s important for everyone to remember those requirements protect everyone,” Saloio said.

    Selectmen Jim Rogers and Jeff Kristal also offered support, both extending that support to Ogden, the school resource officer, brought up in the controversy.

    “Out of every situation comes a learning opportunity. I think it’s important for us and the school committee to educate the public on just what a school resource officer is,” Rogers said. “There’s a lot of confusion on what a school resource officer does, and it’s not to act as an armed guard, unlike what popular opinion is.”

    Later, Kristal suggested the board needs to improve internal and external communication. Selectmen knew nothing about the incident involving Nichols ahead on Friday’s initial story in The Times.


    What led to crossing guard’s removal?
    Nichols said he was unimpressed with Ogden’s alleged trips to XtraMart when children came to school in the morning. While dining at Linda Jean’s Sept. 18, Nichols said, he told a friend about this, and suggested somebody could “shoot up the school” in that officer’s absence, which he described as “leaving his post.”

    Nichols said the waitress made a complaint to Tisbury Police about what she overheard, and on the strength of that, Saloio and another officer relieved Nichols of his crossing guard duties while he was in the midst of performing them, and subsequently drove to his home and took away his firearms license and guns.

    “He came up and told me what I said was a felony, but he wasn’t going to charge me,” Nichols said of Saloio.

    The confiscated guns were later turned over to Nichols’ son-in-law, Nichols told The Times.

    Asked if he was given a letter or any paperwork for the seizure of his license, Nichols said, “No, he just told me to hand it over, so I took it out of my wallet and handed it to him.”

    Nichols said he has been licensed for firearms since 1958.

    A petition on the website change.org arose over Columbus Day Weekend seeking to reverse Nichols’ ouster. To do so, “Pamela Salt,” a Vineyard petitioner, according to the site, called on Tisbury selectmen Jeff Kristal, Jim Rogers, and chair Melinda Loberg, along with Tisbury School Principal John Custer, Martha’s Vineyard Superintendent of Schools Matt D’Andrea, town administrator Grande, and Chief Saloio.

    “Please reinstate Mr. Nichols as a Tisbury School crossing guard so he can get back to his joy of helping the children get to and from school safely and with a smile,” the petition reads. “As a well-loved, retired, senior citizen, Mr. Nichols finds great happiness in this job, and we’re sure the children miss seeing him as much as he misses helping them! The entire situation appears to be a great misunderstanding, and with the restoration of his job and his LTC, Mr. Nichols (and our community) can put this terrible event behind him, and focus on moving past the trauma and embarrassment of these events. We stand with Mr. Nichols!”

    As of 11 am on Columbus Day, the petition had garnered about 800 signatures out of a goal of 1,000.

    At the same time the petition met that mark Columbus Day morning, Nichols met with Grande and Saloio at the Tisbury Police Station.

    “All they were interested in was, Did I want my job back, and I said ‘yes,’” Nichols said.

    Nichols described Grande and Saloio as being in “a very good mood,” but that they did not offer any detail as to why Nichols’ crossing guard job was being reinstated.

    While Nichols said he doesn’t own a computer or cell phone and is therefore not directly privy to the online support he’s received, he said his daughters have kept him apprised of it.

    Of the support he said, “I appreciate that, and I’m really, really happy that I have it.”

    In a lengthy interview with The Times, Nichols explained his concern about Tisbury School.

    “When I was in the U.S. Army, and it wasn’t just me, it’s anybody who’s in the U.S. service, if you are on guard duty for eight hours, you didn’t leave that position,” Nichols said. “And I’m just so accustomed to that, that when I see someone who’s supposed to be protecting kids … leave the school unguarded — if you’re on guard duty, you stay there.”

    Tisbury School Principal John Custer told The Times he was familiar with Nichols as a crossing guard, but when asked if he knew of Nichols’ situation, Custer responded by saying crossing guards are “hired, trained, and scheduled entirely by the police department.”

    Asked if anyone had complained about Ogden going on coffee breaks, Custer said, “None whatsoever.”

    Ogden did not return a message seeking comment.

    Linda Jean’s owner Marc Hanover said he’s known Nichols for decades, and vouched for his integrity. He described the situation as “absolutely outrageous.” He said he believes one of his servers “overreacted.” Hanover said he spoke with the restaurant patron who had conversed with Nichols at the time of the alleged threats.

    “He assured me there was never a threat made,” Hanover said.

    That patron, Edgartown resident Andy Marcus, described the situation as “absurd.” Marcus confirmed Nichols did not threaten the school, but pointed out that Nichols thought Ogden was having coffee at XtraMart and leaving the students potentially exposed. Marcus said he has known Nichols for years, and often talks with him at the counter of Linda Jean’s. He said nobody at that restaurant but one server holds the opinion Nichols possibly posed a threat to the Tisbury School. Marcus said in addition to being a longtime special police officer, Nichols was a court officer and a constable. “He loves kids,” Marcus said. “It’s almost like of all the people …”

    Nichols said he’s never been accused of threatening a school, and never had a firearms violation. “I’ve got no record of any violations,” he said.

    Nichols said he never carries guns outside the house, and would like to have his license and his guns back, but the fate of the guns may be sealed. “My grandson is manager of a gun shop in Worcester, and he’s going to be allowed to come down and take the weapons and sell them for me,” he said.

    Nichols said he has 11 grandchildren and 11 great-grandchildren. “I would never, ever, ever, harm a child,” he said.

    Nichols lost his wife two years ago, and values his crossing guard work as a connection to the outside world. “I just need something to do to get out of the house, and I love the kids,” he previously said.

    “We would expect reasonable minds to prevail, and [Nichols] to be reinstated in his job,” Larkosh said on Oct. 11. That expectation came true. Nichols said he’ll be “back with the kids I love.”

    George Brennan contributed to this report.
    https://www.mvtimes.com/2019/10/14/stephen-nichols-reinstated-crossing-guard/

    Regards,
    hps
     
  7. Shanghai McCoy

    Shanghai McCoy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2004
    Messages:
    4,477
    Location:
    The,sort of, Free state
    So he got the job back but still loses his guns... o_O
     
  8. buck460XVR

    buck460XVR Member

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2007
    Messages:
    7,931
    From my understanding his son-in-law was able to retrieve them.

     
    Shanghai McCoy and boom boom like this.
  9. fireside44

    fireside44 member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,145
    It was sarcasm. The left, and authorities, will use any possible justification for gun seizure so I was just playing on that mentality. It's easier to be sympathetic towards an old guy who has been law abiding but confiscation without due process is no bueno in any situation whether they are an innocent old crossing guard or a creepy incel kid who posts non-specific threats online.
     
  10. boom boom
    • Contributing Member

    boom boom Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,777
    Location:
    GA
    Sorry, it does not work that way legally. What you are demonstrating is an incomplete understanding of the case of U.S. v. Leon, 467 U.S. 897 (1984) which is the good faith exception to the warrant requirement under the 4th. In that case, the police instigated an investigation based on an informer of uncertain reliability and had corroborating evidence developed through the investigation including past criminal histories of the individuals and additional information from the investigation indicating operations out of a number of locations. A magistrate judge issued the warrant which was later found deficient in probable cause by the Court of Appeals regarding one defendant and the location searched because the information regarding that site was predicated on "stale" information provided by the informant. A number of states, however, actually reject the "good faith" exception, for example Georgia and South Carolina where illegally acquired evidence can be suppressed regardless of the police "intent".

    People with a legal duty to report such conditions have to have some degree of immunity (often qualified immunity or even absolute immunity for judges and prosecutors) and some protections, otherwise a lot of people would simply not take the risk of losing their jobs, being sued, etc. A waitress nor Joe Blow citizen is not someone with a legal duty to report and given the recent NFIB v. Sebelius case, I doubt any such requirement would be constitutional.

    Generally speaking, our country protects the right to do nothing or say nothing (absent a subpoena) in cases including medical treatment of accident victims, buying a product, rescuing someone from drowning even if you are an Olympus class swimmer, etc. The thing is that if you act as an ordinary citizen, then you can be held liable for actions absent any protective laws for such reports. Filing a false police report is a crime in almost every jurisdiction for example and libel/slander of private individuals is legally actionable in every state. It gets complicated with employer-employee relations and/or "whistleblower" statutes but even there unfounded accusations can result in job loss and or lawsuits depending on the case facts.

    The whole culture of see something say something designed around anti-terrorism has been appropriated to mandate all sorts of reporting requirements when some sort of legal duty as a basis for employment exists and to CYA, organizations have created vast bureaucracies that attempt to sort the wheat from the chaff as for example Title IX investigations at schools. As the legal record indicates by the basis on lawsuits etc., often those bureaucracies ignore the niceties of due process and in turn are sued and one of the problems involved is lack of sanctions against individuals making accusations in bad faith.
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2019
    40-82, Deanimator, hps1 and 1 other person like this.
  11. Steve S.

    Steve S. Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2014
    Messages:
    1,151
    Location:
    Missouri
    You have to watch what you say, you have to watch what you don’t say, you have to say the right things when they need to be said. You have to blend into the slimy muck and you will be fine. You have to become an actor, you have to pretend, “they” like that - it pacifies them - know your audience and become a chameleon.
     
    Sovblocgunfan, Casefull and boom boom like this.
  12. hps1

    hps1 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    1,877
    Location:
    Texas
    :thumbup::thumbup:
    Regards,
    hps
     
  13. Shanghai McCoy

    Shanghai McCoy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2004
    Messages:
    4,477
    Location:
    The,sort of, Free state
    OK, at least that makes some sense..?
     
  14. CapnMac

    CapnMac Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2009
    Messages:
    6,910
    Location:
    DFW (formerly Brazos County), Texas
    Ah yes, and there's the rub of it.
    Not one of these travesties has an "oops we were wrong" provision in any of them. There's not even a mechanism created for redress and/or restitution.
    Which speaks volumes on the intent.
    It also means each and every victim will have to fight the uphill causal battle to prove their innocence, and to get permission to seek redress, and to then have to have property restored as well (along with the expungement of all records of the event, lest they slander the victim en absentia).
     
  15. hps1

    hps1 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 31, 2002
    Messages:
    1,877
    Location:
    Texas
    35112055543_0e34c7f7ea_o.jpg

    Regards,
    hps
     
    Shanghai McCoy likes this.
  16. Speedo66

    Speedo66 Member

    Joined:
    May 31, 2008
    Messages:
    6,467
    Location:
    Flatlandistan
    One of the tenets of our form of law is that you have the right to face your accuser. Why is this revoked if it involves a gun?
     
    SilentStalker likes this.
  17. BSA1

    BSA1 member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2011
    Messages:
    7,492
    Location:
    West of the Big Muddy, East of the Rockies and Nor
    The lesson all of us should take away from the incident is to be careful what topics you discuss when in public and what you say when in public. As commented words like “shoot the school up” are enough of a Red Flag for me to be concerned if I didn’t know the people in the discussion.

    Senior citizens are known to be very opinionated and not shy about saying what they think. However has there been any school or mass shootings committed by 80+ year old senior citizens?
     
  18. George Dickel

    George Dickel Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Messages:
    892
    Location:
    Florida
    I have to wonder how much Mr. Nichols' comments on the wayward school security officer has anything to do with the heavy handed treatment of him by the PD and the Chief of Police. Too many PD's don't like having their dirty laundry aired in public. Maybe the reason other people who observed the officer leaving the school didn't say anything was they knew better than to bring it to someone's attention.
     
    G.E. Lee likes this.
  19. RA40

    RA40 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2005
    Messages:
    790
    Location:
    California
    People are very sensitive towards topics involving schools and kids. The latitude that is being spread about informing LEO's over any stray hair is becoming to much. That "better safe than sorry" and so turning in a person based on hearsay is becoming accepted by the masses as ok.
     
  20. CapnMac

    CapnMac Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2009
    Messages:
    6,910
    Location:
    DFW (formerly Brazos County), Texas
    Sadly, that means we have to cede our 1st amendment rights to preserve our Second (and 4th,5th,6th, & 7th). At some point that will have to be seen as "infringement."

    Ceding liberty for freedom is no bargain.

    And appears to be quite intentional.
     
  21. Scooter22

    Scooter22 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2012
    Messages:
    2,057
    Location:
    Central NY, not the rotten apple
    This is pretty nutz. We say were on a slippery slope. I think we actually are standing two feet in the crap already. First it was "If you see something say something". Ok that was 9/11. So at that point my biggest concern was if I had a repairman, utility worker of cable guy go in the basement and see shooting related stuff. Then get a BS report of bad stuff. One cable guy saw a plastic bin of a couple K of .223 brass that I didn't cover up on a shelf. Right where a splitter was he had to replace. " WOW, you must be a re loader shooter guys. I bet you could shoot alot of people with all those." THIS was the cable guy in my basement.! Now we got the Red Flag laws. No need for any facts. ANYONE can call law inforcement with a claim. Then you are guilty until proven Innocent and that may only be partially. But your property(guns) are gone. Now I worry about carrying long guns in cases out to my truck to go shooting. I have newish neighbors who really don't know how much I shoot. I call in at 9AM and see whats up for calls. If none I can do what I want until they call me so I can shoot at any time. What if a neighbor calls and says I'm carrying out gun cases a couple times a week on week days? Only takes one thing these days.
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2019
  22. TikkaShooter

    TikkaShooter Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2016
    Messages:
    513
    Location:
    NE Georgia

    San Francisco is a city where they fence people in so the fruits and nuts don't pick them.

    Even worse, I'm a life time member of the NRA since the 1960s, I own a lot of firearms, and I'm a Christian.
     
  23. boom boom
    • Contributing Member

    boom boom Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,777
    Location:
    GA
    Well, the red flag laws bear a striking similarity to Title IX investigations in schools and schools have been losing due process lawsuits right and left and paying out substantial monies to accused students. They have also generated a lot of caselaw so that now any Title IX or higher up administrators are beginning to be held personally liable as they can no longer claim shoddy procedures are the norm.

    You want government abuses to end, you do not allow government departments to "fix" the problem. Instead, empower trial attorneys and they can bring even the most recalcitrant government to heel over time.
     
    SharpDog likes this.
  24. Shanghai McCoy

    Shanghai McCoy Member

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2004
    Messages:
    4,477
    Location:
    The,sort of, Free state
    [QUOTE="boom boom, post: 11266779, member: 53428" You want government abuses to end, you do not allow government departments to "fix" the problem. Instead, empower trial attorneys and they can bring even the most recalcitrant government to heel over time.[/QUOTE]
    The poor guy is in his 80's, how much fracking "TIME" do you think he's got to be waiting for the lawyers..?
     
    SharpDog likes this.
  25. boom boom
    • Contributing Member

    boom boom Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    Messages:
    4,777
    Location:
    GA
    The poor guy is in his 80's, how much fracking "TIME" do you think he's got to be waiting for the lawyers..?[/QUOTE]

    How else other than political action, which can be problematic in a blue state, are you going to "fix" the problem other than resorting to the legal process. One of the issues is that the guy may be satisfied with simply getting his crossing guard job back and you cannot force plaintiffs to sue if they do not want to. You want a fix to red flag laws, governments are not going to fix them unless they either suffer political setbacks because of them or it cost them in the wallet.

    BTW, Otis MacDonald, plaintiff in the Chicago case striking down their gun regulations was 74 when he filed his suit and 76 when the Supreme Court overturned the regulation in 2010. He died at 80 in 2014, https://www.chicagotribune.com/news...tis-mcdonald-obituary-met-20140406-story.html
     
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2019
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice