forgottenliberty.com

I live in a fairly conservative, gun toting area of Virginia, but I was shocked to learn of an incident that happened just a short drive from me in Roanoke.  A man named Aaron A. Stevenson filed a lawsuit last week in U.S. District Court alleging that his constitutional rights were violated during a May 6 traffic stop in Roanoke.  According to the Roanoke Times,

The lawsuit gives this account of Stevenson’s encounter with police:

Stevenson was driving along Williamson Road to pick up his daughter from church when Roanoke police Officer Jamie A. Kwiecinski stopped him. Stevenson was given a summons because his registration had expired.

Kwiecinski learned that Stevenson had a concealed carry permit and asked if he had a gun. Stevenson declined to answer.

Kwiecinski called for backup, and Officer Dwight W. Ayers arrived on the scene. Stevenson said the officers ignored his repeated invocation of his right to remain silent, and to have an attorney present during questioning.

The officers pulled Stevenson from his vehicle, the lawsuit said, took the .45-caliber handgun he wore in a belt holster, and put him in handcuffs in the back of a police car. Stevenson said he was threatened with loss of his permit, confiscation of his gun and indefinite detention while police investigated whether he was involved in anything criminal.

Officers never read Stevenson his Miranda rights, the lawsuit said, and Ayers told Stevenson the questioning would stop if he would admit to some criminal action.

As the incident continued, some of Stevenson’s co-workers drove past and his employer stopped to see what was happening. The officers asked the employer if Stevenson had mental problems.

Stevenson said the tight handcuffs injured his wrists.

Eventually, Sgt. Sandy Duffey, a police supervisor, said to release Stevenson.

In the lawsuit, Stevenson asked for unspecified monetary damages, injunctions to prevent future incidents and a declaration that his civil rights had been violated.

Online court records indicated that the expired registration charge against Stevenson was dismissed in June.

We only have one side of the story so far, but if Mr. Stevenson’s story is even remotely accurate, it is very disheartening.  I’m guessing when Officer Kwiecinski pulled up Stevenson’s information on his computer he saw that Stevenson had a concealed carry permit.  It seems that the officer used this information to contend that Stevenson was somehow breaking the law or was a criminal even though a clean criminal history is required to obtain a concealed carry permit.

What seems perplexing about this is that Stevenson was only stopped for a minor non-moving traffic violation (that was eventually dismissed).  His firearm was not visible, he was not threatening anyone with it, and he was not breaking any laws.  What reason did the officer have to ask if Stevenson had a firearm with him and why did it matter?  What reason did the officer have to pull Stevenson from his car and put him in handcuffs?  Was it ethical for the police to tell Stevenson that if he just admitted to a crime, they would stop questioning him?  Was it right to threaten confiscation of Stevenson’s property (his firearm) even though he was not breaking any law?  All Officer Kwiecinski had to do was give Stevenson a ticket for an expired registration and let him go on his way.  Why did he feel the need to push and search for a crime that was non-existent?  Why did he treat a law abiding citizen so poorly?

Does possessing a concealed carry permit somehow imply that the holder of the permit is a criminal?  If someone chooses to legally exercise their right to carry a firearm and goes through the process of obtaining a permit, do they lose their right to the presumption of innocence?  Is this infringing on our right to keep and bare arms?  Is this an effective way for police to serve and protect their communities?  I have lots of questions and I’m scared of what the answers may be.

My wife and I just returned from a fantastic Caribbean Cruise!  If you have ever been on a cruise, you probably noticed that the cruise lines employ people from every corner of the world.  On our cruise, we met employees from the Philippines, Australia, South Africa, Romania, Indonesia, Moldova, Portugal, and the U.K. to name just a few.  There was one employee in particular that I would like to talk about, because it applies to this blog and the direction our country is heading.

This particular employee’s name is Vasily and he is from Russia.  He worked in the cigar lounge and was very friendly.  One evening, while I was enjoying a cigar, he shared some of his political views.  He grew up in the USSR and has seen Communism and Socialism first hand.  I was excited to hear what he had to say.  I could sum up what he said in two phrases.  The first is, “Socialism looks good on paper but it doesn’t work”, and the second is, “Freedom is great but is also frightening.”

He said that the idea behind Socialism and Communism is great.  From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs, seems reasonable and compassionate.  Everyone gives and contributes to the best of their ability, and they only use what they need.  Everyone should be happy and provided for.  The population pools their resources and the government ensures that everyone has what they need.  Of course, we all know this did not happen in the USSR.

He said the reason Socialism doesn’t work is because people stop trying to excel.  The people are not allowed to keep what they earn, so they eventually stop working hard.  He gave me an example,  “If you work hard and build 3 houses for your family, when the government finds out, they will take 2 of your houses and give them to someone else they think needs those houses more.”  With this example, he hit the nail on the head.  If you ever try to succeed or better your situation, the government takes whatever you have that could be considered excessive and not needed to live.  Everything is owned by the state or “the people” so anything can be taken from a citizen if the government thinks someone else needs it more.  Citizens do not have rights to their own property, because private property doesn’t exist.

Historically,

I found this cartoon on YouTube called Make Mine Freedom.  It was made in 1948, but it definitely applies to today’s political environment.  Someone comes along, like Obama, and promises to be everything to everyone and solve all their problems, aka socialism. He promises them the world, but in the end, everyone loses their freedom.  I wish they still made cartoons like this!

“Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty.” Thomas Jefferson.