Army reservist being held for detaining illegals at gun point at AZ Border

[Rugged]

Originally Posted by Shaun

It was kidnapping the definition is below and they were held against their will therefore it is considered imprisonment.

Kidnapping - the unlawful act of capturing and carrying away a person against their will and holding them in false imprisonment

Actually, the LEGAL definition of kidnapping is as follows=

Common Law = the forceable abduction of a person from his country of residence and removal to a different country.

that one is hard to prove so we have the modern definition.

MPC = Secreting a person away

on second thought, there is ONE element for false imrisonment which is restriciton of movement by threat of force.

I still think it will get tossed. It LEGALLY deserves to.

[Shaun]

US Laws are statute based they are not based on english common law that is why common laws do not stand the test of the courts you must go with what the mordern criminal law is for a legal definition.

[Rugged]

sorry dude. I'm a law student currently taking "advanced legal writing for criminal law". The laws of 49 states (except for louisiana) are based off of english common law. Most statutes are exactly english common law. The only time we mess with english comon law rules of law is to broaden them.

There are two kids of crimes Malum en se and malum prohibitum.

Malum in se are crimes that are "evil in themselves" like murder, robbery, rape, assault, battery, burglary, larceny. mayhem, arson, false imprisonment. Those are governed FIRST by english common law, and second by the MPC (model penal code)

Crimes that are malum prohibitum are crimes that are "evil and prohibited" these are your speeding tickets, your public welfare and safety, and your health codes. These are governed ONLY by statutes.

For example=

Common law burglary = The tresspassory breaking and entering the dwelling house of another in the nighttime for purposes of committing a felony therein.

Can you see how hard it would be to convict someo0nt if they broke into your shed, in the day, to shoot heroin?

Model Penal Code burglary = Entering any building at any time for the purposes of committing any crime.

see now if I come to your house at noon to sell you coke I can get a felony charge of burglary added.

The bottom line is that it was neither kidnapping or false improsonment and I dont think the US government should use dollar one protecting illegals from ANYTHING. But that's just me.

Legally, I say this guy gets nothing but his gun taken.

[Shaun]

Rugged I am ex LEO and this would have been classified as a kidnap

[Rugged]

you can charge it, there's a 3% chance or so the DA would pick it up, and about a 5% chance a judge won't throw it out.... even so kidnapping would only last until the jury got it's instructions

Thank you for serving!


-on a side note, the teacher of this class in particular is a LT with LAPD Homicide division, he''s really fun to goad. We were going over the withdrawl from assault doctrine in regards to self defense that we were talking about here last week. We were talking about how follow up shots usually change a legit self-defense into an assault or attempted murder.

I raised my hand, interrupting a class of about 180 people, the teacher called on me,
and smiling, I ask "is that why we should double-tap every time?"

probably 50 people in class (A LOT of current / past MIL and Current / Past LE) understood what I was saying, including the instructor and just busted out laughing.

What makes it even more funny is that we broadcast the lectures live over the internet to our distance learning students and I had the teacher, 30 year veteran of LAPD, Attorney, Bar Exam Grader, 10%er (a person who scores in the top 10% on the BAR exam and has their answers published) crying with laughter.

[Shaun]

followup shots require stopping and making a choice double tap and just emptying the gun are valid they had a case in LA carjacker took 84 shots from three Hwy Patrol behind the car -- car jacker in car with handgun 3 officers faned out behind the car officer 1 fires and hits target each officer see's movement and fires result 60 hits to the BG -- the shooting was ruled valid because it was the officers perception that movement meant a threat even though the movement was caused by the bullet hitting the body.

Another valid case LAPD officer pull in behind a suspicious car in a mall parking lot 4 black males inside. Rookie officer walks up passenger side of the 4 door and the FTO walks up the drivers side. At contact the FTO hears a shotgun being racked. At the time of investigation turns out they had come upon 4 robbery suspects counting thier haul. All occupants were ruled dead the FTO and rookie were asked how many shots were fired " they said 5 or 6. IA found they had expended all but three rounds of the third magazine they carried. Training took over and they responded and only stopped when the threat was stopped. Also ruled a Valid shooting the same would be the case if the private citizen were confronted they have to evaluate using a common mans view.

[Rugged]

I every situation, the private citizen has more rights to shoot than the police officer EXCEPT self defense. The defenses I talk about like "stopping commission of a dangerous felony" don't work for police because they are supposed to be better trained to deal with it I guess.

Self defense tends to favor officers. EXACTLY as it should be.

still, I'm glad our foreign visitors were treated the way they were. And I would STILL be glad if they were 7 illegal:
canadians
irish
english
russian
german
israeli
kenyan
australian
lebanese

ANY group of scofflaw border jumpers DESERVES to be threatened.

If you haven't been to los angeles in awhile, or ever, you need to see this place to believe it. we're all full. no more people of any kind are needed or wanted.

Ive always been under the impression that America should be invitation only.
say we see a promising scientist, we invite him to become a citizen. Please do not apply on your own, don't call us, we'll call you.

[SPOCAHP ANAR]

Originally Posted by dhermesc

A few seconds later, six more men emerged.
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articl...4detain14.html

Why wasn't this in the original thread.

[SPOCAHP ANAR]

Originally Posted by MAX7.62

I think the guy's a hero,

Hero; for what? Getting the drop on some unarmed illegals? Let me know when he moves on to defend us from a those people who remove the tag off of mattresses!

[Habakkuk21]

I read the article a couple of times. IF it is accurate, then I think he over-reacted. He is reported as seeing one guy walk out of the bushes and toward a Suburban parked in the lot next to his car. It's unclear to me from the article what their relative locations were (he was walking his dog), but, okay, maybe the guy rushed at him, and in that case, I would regard him as being justified in pulling his weapon. I probably would have done the same. Then, six more men come out of the bushes. Okay, if I'm in his shoes, and if they are rushing at me, I would first pee in my pants (if time permitted, of couse. sometimes, it's difficult to get the stream running quickly), yell "STOP" and take the safety off.
But THEN he says they saw his gun, and walk toward (and evidently get into) the Suburban, and HE FOLLOWS THEM BECAUSE HE WAS STILL CONCERNED FOR HIS SAFETY AND TOOK THE KEYS AWAY FROM THEM. This is the part that I think crosses the line between reasonable action and unreasonable action. I'm concerned that 7 guys are going to beat me up or shoot me, so when they walk away from me, I follow them? To their VEHICLE? I just don't see it. If the Migratory 7 were, in fact, bad guys, then following them to their vehicle seems like a really good way to have a really bad experience.

[NorCalAshnjikov]

according to arizona law

http://www.azleg.state.az.us/Arizona...s.asp?Title=13
http://www.azleg.state.az.us/FormatD...13&DocType=ARS

13-1304. Kidnapping; classification; consecutive sentence

A. A person commits kidnapping by knowingly restraining another person with the intent to:

1. Hold the victim for ransom, as a shield or hostage; or

2. Hold the victim for involuntary servitude; or

3. Inflict death, physical injury or a sexual offense on the victim, or to otherwise aid in the commission of a felony; or

4. Place the victim or a third person in reasonable apprehension of imminent physical injury to the victim or such third person.

5. Interfere with the performance of a governmental or political function.

6. Seize or exercise control over any airplane, train, bus, ship or other vehicle.

B. Kidnapping is a class 2 felony unless the victim is released voluntarily by the defendant without physical injury in a safe place prior to arrest and prior to accomplishing any of the further enumerated offenses in subsection A of this section in which case it is a class 4 felony. If the victim is released pursuant to an agreement with the state and without any physical injury, it is a class 3 felony. If the victim is under fifteen years of age kidnapping is a class 2 felony punishable pursuant to section 13-604.01. The sentence for kidnapping of a victim under fifteen years of age shall run consecutively to any other sentence imposed on the defendant and to any undischarged term of imprisonment of the defendant.

look closely at numbers 4 and 5.
it is kidnapping LEGALLY

[NorCalAshnjikov]

Originally Posted by Gunnie Ed

...
you know, like a computer that's so full of viruses and spyware that the only way to fix it is to replace the hard drive.

bad analogy, you never have to replace a hard drive
because of viruses and spyware.
its like saying because the exterior of your car is so dirty and muddy
the only way to fix it is to replace the engine

[NorCalAshnjikov]

Originally Posted by MAX7.62

Uhhh? Hey Troy, it happens everyday - it's called airport security. OK, so the federal burger flipper at the gate doesn't whup out a piece and say he's going to blow you away, but you are darn sure detained for no reason at all - other than the reasons some bureaucrats have theorized on paper.

public property is not an airport, and the guy is not airport security

[gunssb]

Originally Posted by NorCalAshnjikov

bad analogy, you never have to replace a hard drive
because of viruses and spyware.
its like saying because the exterior of your car is so dirty and muddy
the only way to fix it is to replace the engine

Or like saying, there's so much crap going on in the country & all these illegals are coming in to add to the mess, we don't want to deal with it anymore -- lets do away with proper legal proceedings and waste the bastages.

[toolman]

so much crap going on in the country & all these illegals are coming in to add to the mess, we don't want to deal with it anymore -- lets do away with proper legal proceedings and waste the bastages.[/quote]

I missed the part where this guy wasted ANYONE! I normally try to break any situation down into separate components and I see this one like this.

1.The legal proceedings should've began immediately when these guys crossed our borders ILLEGALY.
2. A LEGAL U.S. citizen saw fit to stop an ILLEGAL activity-otherwise known as a "citizens arrest"
3. The aforementioned legal citizen is in the service of his country wherein he may be called to put his life in danger in defense of our liberties.
4. The ILLEGALS stand only to gain from their ILLEGAL crossing-not only in wages but most also apply for, and receive, medical benefits and welfare that many LEGAL U.S. citizens are unable to get.
5. The citizen responsible for halting the progression of a crime is in jail for doing what most of us wouldn't have the guts to do.
6.Instead of the usual "Here's a bottle of water, a sandwich, and a nice air-conditioned bus to ride on, we'll see you next week" speech, now the ILLEGALS are being portrayed as some kind of "victims" and will probably try to sue for "emotional distress" even though it was incurred during the commission of a crime!

This man didn't draw down on an innocent U.S. family in the middle of a shopping mall, they were trespassing and knew they were committing a crime when they crossed the border. This is just my .02 and I hope I'm never put in his position as I'm forbidden from carrying a gun while working. I would probably have to content myself with watching them drive off into the sunset knowing that you and I would be supporting them and their families through our tax dollars within a few months.

[gunssb]

easy there - I was referring to some views that people hold (and if you read this & other threads you will know the ones who hold such views). I am all for reporting, tracking, following and deporting them. Just feel that people without the proper authority should not be sticking guns at unarmed illegals not in the midst of a violent crime - it only discredits the work being done by the rest and gets in the way of law officials.

we have always had people immigrate from every country on the planet..this country has always had people coming here to find a better life..if the Mexicans looked like white people this wouldn't be an issue..they would be welcomed with open arms

[Rave]

I still think that this situation on the border smells fishey and there is something going on behind the scenes that we don't know about,otherwise we could stop it if we really wanted to.

[toolman]

Originally Posted by gunssb

easy there - I was referring to some views that people hold (and if you read this & other threads you will know the ones who hold such views). I am all for reporting, tracking, following and deporting them. Just feel that people without the proper authority should not be sticking guns at unarmed illegals not in the midst of a violent crime - it only discredits the work being done by the rest and gets in the way of law officials.

Sorry, not trying to be militant, it just upsets me to see a guy in the service of his country being railroaded for doing what he felt was right. My wife has fought the social security administration for almost three years for a legitimate disability claim. She has been told that the cases are being srutinized harder due to the larger number of claims being filed-many by illegal immigrants. Our border patrol is stretched to the breaking point and when these guys are deported, they come right back. I think the guy over-reacted but now it's the LEO's who're over-reacting, IMO.

[Rave]

There are a lot of frustrated folks in this country that just can't afford to support the whole dam world,especially those criminals coming
over that stinking border,I and my family are one of them,after taxes there just is'nt enough left. We worked hard and put up with a lot of crap to get to this point only to have it taken away to throw it away on them and all the other stinking shirkers already here,we are mad as HE**!
Now,when someone tries to correct the situation that is running amok,he is critcized for doing what own sorry a** elected officials won't do !
By God,I applaud him,even if he didn't act in the "correct" way,at least he was a man trying to protect his country and his family!
I respect him a lot more than that crooked bunch in D.C.! Also more than those sympathizers that condemn him!
BASTIDS! :gangster: