City Attorney Bernard A. Pishko said his office will prosecute Hampton resident Dan Moore for trespassing after he was ordered to leave Waterside for wearing a gun on his hip, and, according to police, refused to leave.This confirms what we broke here last night.
And they're threatening Mr. Moore with "up to a year in jail"? This is clearly official revenge and a conspiracy to deprive a citizen of his rights. What a strutting little piece of...work this punk Pishko is.
I would think if Waterside is a private entity, and it sounds more like one of those fascist "public/private partnerships," someone representing it would need to be the one to order someone to leave--not a police officer. Ditto for filing a complaint.
But here's the funky part:
Pishko said that although Waterside has received millions of dollars of taxpayer dollars in its 25 years, it is a private institution, owned by Waterside Associates, and thus can ban guns.Yet the Virginia-Pilot reported in March:
The city’s housing authority bought the marketplace from its private owner in early 1999. At the time, Norfolk leaders said they planned to eventually find a private owner and get out of the landlord business.Methinks this creature is neither fish nor fowl, but some confounded corporate hybrid and legal labyrinth--and perhaps the technicalities involved can be exploited to advantage. But it's premature to speculate on what should be the purview of a good pitbull attorney.
Nearly 10 years later, the city still owns Waterside, which has become less of a boon to municipal coffers.
Still, it's clear the city of Norfolk is intent on playing hardball, and as a side effect, I think they're apt to suffer some unintended consequences in re trying to squelch open carry. Since VCDL is the group with boots on the ground there, I'll take my lead from what they say. If a defense fund is set up, I'll naturally plug it here.
[Via Mack H]
So, if you are a peaceful person and yet are kidnapped and robbed (I'm assuming they stole his gun) anyway, what is the point of being peaceful when confronted by these parasites? Just asking.
ReplyDeleteWhile I understand your sentiment, there are several problems with not being peaceful.
ReplyDeleteIf you are not peaceful, the ungood things that could happen will depend on what not being peaceful results in. Being charged with several felonies, after being beaten and/or shot would be the beginning.
The police have the ability to call for backup, while you will probably be alone. The police will be assumed to be on the right side of things, you will be assumed to be on the wrong side. This will be the case whether it is the bystanders, the court, and/or the jury.
You will be vertually alone in your fight. I was surprised, and appauled to learn that David Olofson was left with a public defender. Where were his helpers? Where were the NRA, GOA, JFPO, or others, to help pay for a good defense?
You see, while I am not privy to all the details of all of the cases, the one common denominator that I see is, you will be acting and serving on your own.
When you get out of prison, you will have fewer freedoms, way fewer firearms, fewer options, fewer possessions, and you will still be on your own.
We can be brave when writing on the blogs. Come and get them! OK, but when they do, how many of us will actually have the final shootout, with twenty or more of them, in our living rooms with our children there? Note that you will be doing this by yourself.
Those that have tried to organize, have had the enemy send spies, and then, in some cases, everyone is scared back to their homes.
I wish someone would explain how not being peaceful in these situations will change anything for the good? Even if you win that particular battle, what then? Even fellow "patriots" won't stand with you.
I suggest you try ME. I mean exactly what I say. And don't bother giving Kent a going over. He means exactly what he says too. I ain't "brave on the blogs". There's men and women buried in Asia, Central America, and elsewhere, and I put them there. The Gestapo decides to burst into my house, they better be good, and they better get me first, because family or no family, it's time to dance. I ain't worried about anyone standing with me. Way I figure it, you're already dead, it's just a question of when. Dying because you refused to get shit on by JBTs doesn't sound like a bad way to go, since you gotta go anyway. And I'd rather go out like a man, if I had my druthers. And I'm sick to death of this runnin' crap.
ReplyDeleteSheepdogggy, you don't think I know that? The system is rigged and completely corrupt. Cops are the enforcers of the corrupt state and have the entire corrupt system behind them. Standing up to the system is suicide. Still if you can't win, you may as well raise the cost of the Liberty Eradication Operatives "just doing their (nazi) jobs". That is the essence of "unintended consequences". When you have nothing to lose......
ReplyDeletePlanning, timing, staying mobile etc. Or making it costly in whatever way you can.
ReplyDeleteMy considerable physical abilities have long since fled. My principles and manhood have not. So the only real question is how expensive can I make it for them.
ReplyDeleteHow much company can I take across the River Styxx via the vessel of violence. I will not have it visited on me without proper response. Proper response does not include cowering in abject fear in the hopes that they will only hurt me or mine "a little bit".
There was a time when the majority of citizens understood and adhered to that standard. The new centurions understood it also. Therefore they were very careful not to abuse even the lone man, because there were a Hell of a lot of them who could be expected to prepare to act just the same way in violent response. As we have seen the will of the lone man diminish we have seen the concomitant rise in abuse of him.
Being alone in a fight like that is a no win situation, but it is far worse to be alone in surrender. Make them earn it at a high price.
If it was still believed that Americans still had that will, this wouldn't even be an issue.
So when anyone warns of dire consequences for the lone man who will resist tyranny, he is correct about the consequence, but is aiding the enemies of liberty if his message is heeded too well by too many.
Addendum, what the Hell good is a sheepdog that runs from wolves?
ReplyDeleteOr helps the wolves.
ReplyDeleteSheepdoggy,
ReplyDeleteOne must be a Secret Freedom Fighter,nowdays...
CIII
Sheepdoggy said,"I wish someone would explain how not being peaceful in these situations will change anything for the good? Even if you win that particular battle, what then? "
ReplyDeleteBecause if it happens often enough the bully, as is usual among bullies, will become fearful of continuing to do it. Therefore the dynamic may be halted so your children or grandchildren will not need to do it, since those who resist have already settled the issue and reminded the abusers of their own mortality.
If one does not care about the nation he leaves his children or subsequent generations then Sheepdoggy has a point. Don't laugh, I have heard far too many pseudo-men say "I don't care, I will be dead by then, that will be their problem."
I have publicly and loudly proclaimed these pseudo-men as cowards, reprobates and undeserving of the slightest consideration by real men. I have done so in every instant and to their faces in front of others. A few threatened to "whip your ass", meaning mine.
But, guess what? None of them ever did, they didn't even try. I suppose they were waiting for their children to do it.
And no, this isn't a reference to my courage, because I knew, with certainty, all along a pseudo-man such as that was not going to take that risk. Therefore it took no courage on my part to treat them publicly with contempt.
Ergo, why would a government with all its assets not treat them the same way?
And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling in terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand? [...] The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt!"
ReplyDelete-The Gulag Archipelago, A. Solzhenitsyn. Chapter 1 "Arrest", fn. 5.
Thank you Jeff, for that. There is no more eloquent voice than his for validity of resistance. Some as compelling, but none surpassing.
ReplyDelete