Posted on 05/14/2012 6:31:13 PM PDT by marktwain
The District grabbed the guns belonging to 1st Lt. Augustine Kim and won’t give them back. Two years ago, the South Carolina Army national guardsman had been injured on his second tour of duty in Afghanistan. Now he’s fighting to restore his constitutional rights.
Before deploying overseas, the soldier drove his collection - which included an AR-15, a Beretta 9mm and several .45 caliber pistols - to his parents’ house in New Jersey for safe storage. Upon his return to the states and recovery, Lt. Kim wanted to bring his weapons back to his home in Charleston. On the way, he stopped at Walter Reed Army Medical Center in Northwest Washington for a doctor’s appointment. That’s when his troubles started.
Lt. Kim became lost in the city and was pulled over. The cops asked Lt. Kim if they could search his vehicle. The lieutenant agreed because his guns were cased and stored in full compliance with federal firearm-transport laws. “I told them I had been under the impression that as long as the guns were locked in the back, with the ammunition separate, that I was allowed to transport them,” Lt. Kim told The Washington Times. “They said, ‘That may be true, however, since you stopped at Walter Reed, that makes you in violation of the registration laws.’ ” It is illegal to possess a firearm anywhere in the District other than the home. He was handcuffed and brought back to police headquarters, and his guns were confiscated as evidence.
The tank platoon leader was booked on four felony counts of carrying outside the home, which threatened a maximum penalty of a $20,000 fine and 20 years imprisonment. “I knew if I got one felony, my military career would be over,” Lt. Kim recalled.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Where are the guns now? Guess!
His mistake was allowing the police to search his vehicle...what reason did they have to do so? Probably none. As the article suggests, he thought there would be no harm in doing so.
Also, what about his right to travel?
Exactamundo - Never ever ever let cops where they are not constitutionally allowed.
Not in your house without a warrant.
Not in your car without a warrant.
They are NOT “your friends” “to protect and serve”
I do not agree with it, but once he made the stop , he was no longer traveling, he was conducting local business.
DC is the jurisdiction that can and will convict you of DUI with ANY measurable alcohol in your system, no lower legal limit. Any out of towner stopped for traffic offense is a fishing expedition for those gun grabbers. A great place to avoid at all costs.
Facist Nazi Govt Thugs....
Eric Holders GOONS.
“It is illegal to possess a firearm anywhere in the District other than the home”.
OK, how do you LEGALLY get it there?
Good question!
He will, in the end, win his case. His lawyers should also bring personal lawsuits against each of the officers who failed to recognize his status. They are simply too dangerous to be cops in DC where this is a common event.
That makes sense, but this situation is still BS.
He saw a doctor at Walter Reed ~ military business. The cops had no jurisdiction.
This reminds me of that case in New Jersey not too long ago.
The fed law only covers you while traveling through, not conducting local business. He was not on military orders, he was traveling on his own. Also, having the guns on Walter Reed’s property is a huge nono, he knew better.
Like I said, I do not agree with it, but the gun laws, especially in that part of the country, are intended to trap people.
I sure hope so!
I know I am an extremist, but I think it is time to make it a Federal capital crime for police officers and department heads to deny the constitution rights of citizens.
The second amendment that protects the right to posess weapons which includes guns shall not be infringed. If liberals chose to do that they are treasonous, and the death penality is due. That would take care of that.
With rights come responsibility. If you are going to exercise your 2nd A rights, you had better know the laws in the jurisdiction you wil be in.
For instance, you CAN NOT carry a firearm into a secure area in a transportation facility (not just airports).
Most gov’t facilities and property are off limits as well, military property is especially limited. Loaded firearms in hunting areas during closed hunting season is verboten in some states. In my state, “gatherings of people, sporting events, and rallies” are areas where you can not exercise your 2nd A right.
It is a PITA, but we do not need to give the anti gun crowd any rope to hang us. We need to follow ALL the rules to the letter until we get those rules rescinded. And it is no accident that many of the gun infractions are felonies, that way you lose your gun rights for life.
A fellow at one of the newspapers here once identified all the various police agencies in DC and defined all the spaces they had jurisdiction over.
Sometimes the jurisdictions conflicted ~ one such place was the Carillon near the Capitol. There were something more than a dozen types of cops had some sort of jurisdiction there and yet muggings were frequent!
Whatever goes on at Walter Reed is between the traveler on the property and provost marshall. You leave that place you are traveling interstate again.
We have this situation down here where you go to the town of Quantico VA to the gunstore THROUGH Quantico marine base ~ you actually have to stop at a couple of stop signs to make this trip.
I've done it several times and each time I had firearms in my vehicle. The Constitution protects my right to travel on that road which is actually part of the base ~ and hundreds of people each week do the same. The SPs could stop me or anybody and do whatever they wanted, but properly packed away and stored they really can't do anything about the firearms. And think about it, in this case we are not actually involved in INTERSTATE TRAVEL since these trips start and stop in Virginia.
The FBI and CIA agents who go there for training carry their own personal weapons on and off the base, and may actually go to restaurants in Quantico VA ~ whether they are on duty, off duty, or whathave you, the rules on the base are one thing, and the rules in Virginia are another, and the situation the soldier faced in DC never arises because the Virginia cops and the DOD cops know the rules.
I thought Walter Reed was closed and moved to the Naval Hospital grounds in Bethesda, Maryland.
Another good reason to not say nothin' except "no."
He was not arrested on federal property, he was arrested by DC cops within their jurisdiction. Walter Reed is way the heck off the interstate, and isn’t exactly a sprawling institution.
It is good you have not been stopped while carrying contraband on federal property, but if you continue, you just might get that chance.
I have driven all over several military bases with loaded weapons, guns, ammo, etc. I had reason to be in some areas, but not all. Had I been stopped and searched (consent to search is automatic on military property) I would have been arrested, even though I meant no harm.
This guy screwed up and needs to do what his lawyer tells him to do. If he wanted to do business in DC, he needed to pick up his weapons after he was done with his appointments. Traveling “through” does not include local stops, case law abounds on this.
Sounds like one of these days they may try stopping at a stop light. Course if you run the light and they see you, they'll pull you over, and that's stopping too, so....
Indeed, if local jurisdictions and/or states can trump a fundamental Right in the Constitution, in this case the 2nd Amendment, then we’re back to the days of Jim Crow.
By that logic, stopping for fuel, or even to answer the call of nature would place the man at risk.
The firearms were unloaded, in cases, locked in the trunk. Most jurisdictions consider that "secured" for transport purposes.
Would stopping for fuel, to urinate, to eat, have constituted "local business"? If so, then there is virtually no way to travel with Arms on the upper East Coast.
If the rules do not permit compliance, then what? How far do we retreat?
What happened to the RKBA and "...shall not be infringed."?
This goes beyond infringement to complete denial.
Yet oddly enough, no matter what they are doing or where they are, Congressmen are immune from arrest due to their traveling to and fro from Congress, per the Constitution. Just kind of ironic considering how DC is to everyone but pols. /rhetorical
They've transitioned to two locations. Bethesda (as you mentioned) and Fort Belvoir. The new location at Belvoir is quite impressive.
My son used to volunteer at the old hospital on Belvoir, (DeWitt) which has since been closed and moved to the new "Walter Reed Community Hospital."
Yup. And you could be arrested. Living in Virginia, it's a pain in the posterior living next to DC and Maryland.
Here's irony; of the three, guess which has the least gun related crime?
Most bases won't let you carry weapons, but they do allow you to bring an unloaded weapon and the ammo and drop them off at the armory until it's time to leave.
You really don’t understand the Quantico situation at all. Here are the rules as followed by the Quantico Shooting Club. http://www.quanticoshootingclub.com/rules-firearms-transport.php and there are some references in there you should look up.
There are OPEN FEDERAL INSTALLATIONS and CLOSED FEDERAL INSTALLATIONS ~ and some installations are partly open and partly closed.
There are rules for buildings and rules for "outdoors". NONE OF THEM ARE "LOCAL".
Note, even though Backlick Road, Springfield Bypass and US 1 enter and travel though Fort Belvoir, you will rarely encounter an MP, but the Fairfax cops can stop you. And then there's DC down the way. They are all mentally ill.
They'll look it up for you at that time ~ if your friends couldn't find out.
That ploy works for all sorts of demonstrators. Also, not all public side walks are actually "Public' ~ nor are streets. There are "easements" on private property, and in some cases on "Federal installations", so if you get arrested there in that sort of spot you can actually win damages. The reverse is true as well as the Planned Parenthood folks found out ~ they had an easement on a public street, but only for passage ~ so the demonstrators could demonstrate right up against their front door. The demonstrators won in court.
The wording that should be used in answering this unwarranted requestions should be:
“I DO NOT consent to a search of my vehicle, or person, am I free to go?”
In addition since the Lt. was under orders to report to a military facility, and gthat he was in transit to his duty station, the D.C. cops and legal system have wrongfully detained and charged this member of the armed forces who IS under orders to conduct business in that area...
I wonder if the Army’s legal folks are looking at this and providing counsel, much less a thorough thrashing of the D.C. idiots commissioned to enforce such un-Constitutional, and SCOTUS reviewed right to keep and bear arms in that district...
By the way the statement at the lead in to this post was given to me by a lawyer friend who is familiar with the methods used to coerce people into submitting to these un-warranted searches...
Never in your statement there should you utter the words “yes” or “no”, I know it is hard to contemplate, but that is exactly what they are fishing for...
Everything is being recorded, both audio and video in some cases...
Once you utter the word “yes”, they can stop the tape when you say “Yes, I do mind...”, or “No, I do not want you to search the vehicle...”
It can and has been used in courts around the country that when you say “yes”, that is permission alone, and when you say “no”, you are saying “No, I do not mind...”
It is a play on words, and in jurisdictions where the right to keep and bear arms, in this case, is severely restricted, you will see these tactics utilized by their commissioned law enforcement officiers...
It is an unfortunate case, and it is hard to fight...It all depends upon what you are prepared to do about it, and what you are willing to sacrifice for it...
You may beat the rap, but you will take the ride for your standing up for your rights...
No guess needed (VA). I understand the dynamic, I'm from North Dakota.
I’m not an Army guy, so I am only going on what I’ve learned from in the past...
I am glad you brought up the “Provost Marshall” issue...That is key to what I understand about the Army community...If you are under orders, and you have complied and are transporting under Federal Interstate requirements regarding firearms, and make the notification before you get to the post, to the Provost Marshall, I have heard it is no big deal...
I stand to be corrected by my Army friends...And anyone else who has gone through this issue...
Just seems to me the more that these law enforcement agencies (anywhere in this country) bust our chops about this issue, the more people educate themselves and do what is required if they have to attempt to transport firearms...
Or...
D.C. becomes another deteriorating social blight on the south end of an extinct northbound wooly mammoth...
Which I am absolutely ok with...
Not even the SCOTUS and the Heller Case, seems to lessen the grip these local government socialists have on our Constitutional right to keep and bear arms as WE see fit...
A truely sad situation, and one those that live in D.C. voted for...I have very little sympathy...
I disagree; the same logic could be applied to anyone stopping to buy fuel in a cross-country trip -- thus rendering the travel-law null and void.
>>Here’s irony; of the three, guess which has the least gun related crime?
>
>No guess needed (VA). I understand the dynamic, I’m from North Dakota.
Hm, I remember reading an article about a ND law (or proposal for one) restricting the right to keep and bear arms (I think it was with respect to concealed, and in certain places, like hospitals, IIRC). Do you know if it got passed (or is still in effect)?
My read on the fed law is that an active duty commissioned officer in effect has a license to carry pretty much as he pleases.
He probably would have gotten in trouble in NJ if they had found him.
Hmm, it’s this kind of blind obedience to the law, without any kind of rational thinking, that makes me a bit unsure of how dear leader’s potential dictatorship will be taken.
One thing that has me hopeful is the fact he doesn’t have any force to back up his claim if he grabbed power...but now it appears he won’t have any police force try to stop it either.
What? You expect reason from the gun grabbers?
But hey...Officer Friendly is our FRIEND!!! He’s there “to protect and serve”.
What a joke.
Bases are pretty anal about weapons. The local base store sells weapons but they have signs up that you have to register them if you live on base within days or leave immediately if you don’t. I’m guessing that right after you buy one you can’t do any more shopping or stay on base.
They have signs up at the gates about no concealed weapons. Does that mean that they have to be in the open then?
Only SFS folks and LEOs can carry on bases. They don't want anyone else in the mix if anything goes down - Security folks will follow war-time conventions in taking out anyone who isn't them, that shows a weapon.
Active Shooter instructions are a hoot - try to hide (but you aren't allowed to move out of your building because they call for a complete lockdown. If the shooter finds you, they tell you to throw things at him. I guess they feel that giving you a stapler against a shooter is a fair trade for insuring that only they and the bad guys have weapons.
What part of “shall not be infringed” is unclear?
A right only carries restraints against infringinging on equal or superior rights of other individuals. That’s life, liberty, property.
You ain't lying. Just imagine if the Ft Hood troops were allowed to carry. Hasan would have been martyred instead of the bogus show trial. Most bad guys by now have an idea about the active shooter response and would just pick a large building and slaughter everyone inside.
I think everyone ignores the carrying on base rules. They do random vehicle checks but I have never seen them patting down anyone and that is where most would have their weapons.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.