GreekChat.com Forums  

Go Back   GreekChat.com Forums > General Chat Topics > News & Politics
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

» GC Stats
Members: 332,004
Threads: 115,727
Posts: 2,208,058
Welcome to our newest member, Sofia3672
» Online Users: 4,376
1 members and 4,375 guests
Sofia3672
 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #14  
Old 01-19-2011, 02:12 PM
MysticCat MysticCat is offline
GreekChat Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: A dark and very expensive forest
Posts: 12,737
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostwriter View Post
If this was not a criminal action, why was he detained for 10 days until bail could be posted? I understand posting small amounts of bail for lots of different type misdeameanors, but 10 days? I simply think the state of NJ and the authorities there we trying to be jerks and they succeeded.
The case heard by the Third Circuit (and which the Supreme Court said it would not hear) was not a criminal case, it was a civil case.

Yes, he was held for 10 days until he could post bail, but the state prosecutor later dismissed the charges. When that happened, the criminal case was over. No more criminal case.

After the criminal case was over, this guy sued the Ports Authority. He did not sue for malicious prosecution, wrongful arrest or something like that. He sued for violation of his rights under the Firearm Owners’ Protection Act. The courts said he couldn't sue for violation of his rights under FOPA because when he took his gun to the hotel, he removed himself from FOPA's protection. Whether that holding was correct, not his arrest and detention, was what the case in the Supreme Court was about.

Some of the comments in this thread are combining and confusing the earlier criminal proceeding and the civil case actually before the Court, as though the Third Circuit's holding in this case means that anyone traveling with a gun who finds himself rerouted has to be aware of the gun laws in all states or risk criminal prosecution. That's not what this case stands for at all; it stands for the proposition that you can't bring a civil action under FOPA if you didn't comply with the requirements of FOPA. The Third Circuit's suggestion that one go find a law enforcement officer at the airport and explain the situation is not a suggestion on how to avoid criminal prosecution (although following the suggestion may have that effect) -- it's a suggestion on how to stay within the protection of FOPA when one is rerouted like this. (And the whole point of FOPA, at least as it applies in this instance, is that as long you know what you're supposed to do under FOPA and do it, you don't have to worry about knowing the laws in every state where you might find yourself.)
__________________
AMONG MEN HARMONY
1898
Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Jihad Jane" arrested for trying to kill cartoonist who mocked Islam DaemonSeid News & Politics 9 03-12-2010 12:15 PM
"40 Year Old Virgin" Actor Arrested DSTCHAOS Entertainment 5 08-14-2008 01:51 AM
Utah PiKA: "My experience with hazing" hoosier Risk Management - Hazing & etc. 11 02-06-2006 09:19 PM
Federal Programs Face Cuts:Utah rejects "NO Child..."not funded by Fed Govt AKA2D '91 Alpha Kappa Alpha 16 02-11-2004 03:52 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:14 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.