I NEED HELP! A STATE TROOPER STOLE MY WALLET AND ARRESTED ME!

[Sharpie]

Why wouldn't I? The second amendment says nothing about felons.

That's because back then, felons were generally imprisoned for an appropriate amount of time or executed, depending on their offense. Besides, the Constitution and its amendments are a framework, not the entire criminal code. You do understand that, do you not?

 

[MrsGungho]

the one link does work for me.

it be dead for me too

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

it be dead for me too

Same here .

 

[Sharpie]

it be dead for me too

http://mycase.in.gov/default.aspx

Here ya go.

 

[Westside]

http://mycase.in.gov/default.aspx

Here ya go.

Thanks

 

[indytechnerd]

If any of his charges are felonies that prohibit him from owning firearms, I hope the police use the contents of his profile here to develop probable cause for being a felon in possession of firearms, then obtain a warrant and search his house.

Fact: Emile Humbert has an extensive criminal record. One can logically assume that he is, by all accounts, a criminal.

BUZZ! FAIL!

Then you don't leave the house much.

Why do you approve of this criminal owning firearms?

Nevermind the whole 2nd Amendment thing that's been brought up to you. You're saying to check his records here for felonious possession of a firearm. That, then, would lead to the possibility that some of the good people on here either bought or sold to him under the pretense that he's a standup citizen. Would you have them arrested and charged as well?

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

http://mycase.in.gov/default.aspx

Here ya go.

Just as I thought , a quick search of me turns up nothing .

I guess I'm not special enough to make their lists .

 

[Sharpie]

Nevermind the whole 2nd Amendment thing that's been brought up to you. You're saying to check his records here for felonious possession of a firearm. That, then, would lead to the possibility that some of the good people on here either bought or sold to him under the pretense that he's a standup citizen. Would you have them arrested and charged as well?

For what? There must be probable cause that the citizen who engaged in the transaction had knowledge of the other person's prohibited status. (ie: felon) If someone here knew that he is a criminal, and sold him a firearm anyway, then YES, I would like to see them arrested and charged.

The only "fail" is in your understanding of the law and legal procedure.

 

[jdmack79]

I amended my posts on the arrests records. Before posting them initially I only skimmed them. This time I read them a little more thoroughly. Some numbers got bigger, some numbers got smaller, and a new charge was added.

 

[CountryBoy19]

(Kind of like getting herculiner on your hootus)

Haha, I remember that one... and now finallly I'm a part of one of these epic threads that will end up all over the internet... stupid guy should have taken our advice and just shut up and deleted his post... even if it was on google's cache it wouldn't be here and it wouldn't have blown up into one of the most epic threads on the internet...

BTW, this thread is growing at an explosive rate. Everytime I clicked to the next page the number of pages grew higher and it seemed as though I may never make it to the end to post something...

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Just as I thought , a quick search of me turns up nothing .

I guess I'm not special enough to make their lists .

Great! Lawrence county isn't in the database...you'll never learn of my sorted past.

 

[jdmack79]

Great! Lawrence county isn't in the database...you'll never learn of my sorted past.

It is on the database I use. Muahahaha!

 

[Shadow]

Great! Lawrence county isn't in the database...you'll never learn of my sorted past.

Morgan ,isnt on the list either

 

[perry]

I'm sure lots of folks have done silly things when they were younger. He's 31 now, so those charges from 2000 would have put him at a fairly wild age. Doesn't mean he hasn't changed and isn't an otherwise good fella these days. People on the internet can be big meanies sometimes

 

[cagilber]

Is this a free service? I would really like to know where I can do this as we are looking for a babysitter for our two kids at the moment. Can never be too safe.

www.doxpop.com

Sign up for the free service and get 20 searches per month.

 

[1775usmarine]

Anybody check out his facebook page?

 

[tyrajam]

I'm sure lots of folks have done silly things when they were younger. He's 31 now, so those charges from 2000 would have put him at a fairly wild age. Doesn't mean he hasn't changed and isn't an otherwise good fella these days. People on the internet can be big meanies sometimes

Yeah, people make mistakes. I don't hold it against them. My very first post on this thread was wondering why he would admit to breaking the law, driving with a suspended license, and then complain about getting arrested. THAT is the meat here, the rest is just gravy.

 

[KLB]

That's because back then, felons were generally imprisoned for an appropriate amount of time or executed, depending on their offense. Besides, the Constitution and its amendments are a framework, not the entire criminal code. You do understand that, do you not?

A felon that is not in jail today has server an appropriate sentence as well, as defined by today's judicial system. Since he served his time, he should be free to defend himself just as any other free citizen is. If he cannot be trusted with a weapon then he should not be free in the first place. In that case the law should be changed so that he is locked away not free on the streets.

 

[Sharpie]

A felon that is not in jail today has server an appropriate sentence as well, as defined by today's judicial system. Since he served his time, he should be free to defend himself just as any other free citizen is. If he cannot be trusted with a weapon then he should not be free in the first place. In that case the law should be changed so that he is locked away not free on the streets.

That is certainly a good argument for change in the status quo. However, we live in the world that is, not the world that we would like. The law says that certain felons are barred from possessing firearms. If Emile Humbert has been convicted of a felony that bars him from possessing a firearm, and he possesses said arms, he should be arrested and charged.

BTW, the Constitution doesn't say anything about felons because it was established legal precedence from common law that a convicted felon loses certain rights. This is not something new. Felon disenfranchisement has roots all the way back to Greek and Roman times, and in English common law, which our system is loosely based on.

Suggesting that felons should be able to possess arms because "the founding fathers didn't mention it" is ludicrous, and shows a complete lack of understanding about law and legal procedure.

 

[HotD]

A felon that is not in jail today has server an appropriate sentence as well, as defined by today's judicial system. Since he served his time, he should be free to defend himself just as any other free citizen is. If he cannot be trusted with a weapon then he should not be free in the first place. In that case the law should be changed so that he is locked away not free on the streets.

A person can serve his appropriate time, and still not be trusted to possess a firearm as well. How would you suggest keeping that person from being released from incarceration, and at the same time, not violating his due process rights?