Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: marktwain

“Rather, the person would need to commit some sort of questionable act to be charged with disorderly conduct.”

The trouble is that by itself “disorderly conduct” is a very ambiguous charge.

“Disorderly conduct is a criminal charge in most jurisdictions in the United States. Typically, disorderly conduct makes it a crime to be drunk in public, to “disturb the peace”, or to loiter in certain areas. Many types of unruly conduct may fit the definition of disorderly conduct, as such statutes are often used as “catch-all” crimes. Police may use a disorderly conduct charge to keep the peace when people are behaving in a disruptive manner to themselves or others, but otherwise present no serious public danger.”

So a police officer could say that someone with a gun was under arrest for “disorderly conduct”, contriving any reason the officer wanted, when in fact he was arresting him for having a gun in public.

Such arrests in past were called “loitering with intent to gawk (stupidly gaze).”


2 posted on 01/30/2012 6:46:58 PM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: yefragetuwrabrumuy

The “Libs” will keep picking away, complaining, harassing, lying, cheating and doing what ever they can to get guns out of law abiding citizens hands. They want guns “gone”, PERIOD!

The preservation of our very nation depends on private gun ownership. Without guns, it would be MUCH, MUCH easier for the “gov” (Libs) to control the people.

A second revolution is in the making, I am almost certain of that. Be prepared!


3 posted on 01/31/2012 5:28:36 AM PST by DaveA37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson