Gun owner rights

[harvey lee]

Recently, the National Association for Gun Rights was the first to break the incredible story of the suspension of a man's Second Amendment rights in Shreveport, Louisiana.

At the time, no other gun rights organization bothered to expose this violation of Second Amendment freedoms. But when we tracked down the victim, Robert Baillio, for an interview, we couldn't believe what we heard, and we immediately sent out a nationwide alert.

The story went viral overnight.

If this tale of government abuse moves you, send it to a friend or family member to get the word out.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Welcome to Shreveport: Your rights are now suspended

According to Cedric Glover, Mayor of Shreveport, Louisiana, his cops "have a power that the President of these United States does not have."

Mayor Glover claimed his police officers had the power to take away certain rights.

And would you like to guess which rights he had in mind?

Just ask Shreveport resident Robert Baillio, who was pulled over for having two pro-gun bumper stickers on the back of his truck -- and had his gun confiscated.

While the officer who pulled him over says Baillio failed to use his turn signal, the only questions he had for Baillio concerned guns: Whether he had a gun, where the gun was and if he was a member of a pro-gun organization.

No requests for a driver's licence, proof of insurance or vehicle registration -- and no discussion of a turn signal.

Accordingly, Baillio told the officer the truth, which led the police officer to search his car without permission and confiscate his gun.

However, not only does Louisiana law allow residents to drive with loaded weapons in their vehicles, but Mr. Baillio possessed a concealed carry license!

What does such behavior demonstrate, other than transparent political profiling -- going so far as to use the infamous Department of Homeland Security report on "Americans of a rightwing persuasion" as a how-to guidebook, no less?

Mr. Baillio made no secret of his political affiliations -- he proudly displayed an American flag and other pro-freedom stickers and decals on his back windshield.

In fact, when Baillio asked the officer if everyone he pulls over gets the same treatment, the officer said "No" and pointed to the back of his truck.

Baillio phoned Mayor Glover to complain about this "suspension of rights" only to find that his city's "commander in chief" was elated to hear about the story.

According to Glover, Baillio was "served well, protected well, and even got a consideration that maybe [he] should not have gotten."

Thankfully, Mr. Baillio recorded a good bit of that phone call. I've reproduced a chunk of the call below:

Baillio: (in the context of being asked about the presence of a gun) Well, I answered that question honestly, and he disarmed me.

Glover: Which would be an appropriate and proper action, sir. The fact that you gave the correct answer -- it simply means that you did what it is you were supposed to have done, and that is to give that weapon to the police officer so he could appropriately place it in a place where it would not be a threat to you, to him or to anyone in the general public.

[. . .]

Glover: My direction to you is that, had you chosen not to properly identify the fact that you had a weapon and directed that officer to where that weapon was located; had you been taken from the vehicle, and the officer, in the interest of his safety, chose to secure you in a safe position, and then looked, found, and determined that you did, in fact, have a weapon...then, sir, you would have faced additional, [inaudible], and more severe criminal sanctions.

Baillio: So what you're saying is: I give up all my rights to keep and bear arms if I'm stopped by the police: Is that correct?

Glover: Sir, you have no right, when you have been pulled over by a police officer for a potential criminal offense [which would be what?! - DB] to stand there with your weapon at your side in your hand [baillio's weapon was nowhere near his side or his hand, and Glover knew that. - DB] because of your second amendment rights, sir. That does not mean at that point your second amendment right has been taken away; it means at that particular point in time, it has been suspended.

Will Grigg from ProLibertate, an excellent freedom blog, has this to say:

According to Glover, a police officer may properly disarm any civilian at any time, and the civilian's duty is to surrender his gun -- willingly, readily, cheerfully, without cavil or question.

From Glover's perspective, it is only when firearms are in the hands of people other than the state's uniformed enforcers/oppressors that they constitute a threat, not only to the public and those in charge of exercising official violence but also to the private gun owner himself.

"I felt sick," Baillio told NAGR. "My uncles didn't die for this country so I could surrender my rights like a wimp. I felt terrible. I was just thinking of all that my family has done for freedom in this nation -- including dying -- and here they are disarming me at a traffic stop."

I know this kind of harassment occurs frequently all across the country. In fact, the Department of Homeland Security has on many occasions warned law enforcement officials to "look out for" folks like Mr. Baillio who have bumper stickers that promote ideas such as "liberty."

There is danger in the Congress, as well. Right now there is active legislation that seeks to label gun owners like you and me as "terrorists."

If you are interested in fighting that piece of legislation, please sign your petition to your Congressman and Senators demanding that you not be labeled a "terrorist."

I'll leave you with one last consideration. As a licensed firearms instructor in charge of a hundred different students every month, I'm often asked if indiiduals should voluntarily inform police officers of the presence of a firearm during a routine traffic stop.

While different states have different laws, my answer for the state I live in, Colorado, is an emphatic "No."

Colorado law doesn't require you to volunteer that kind of information, and this case in Louisiana proves why, if at all possible, you should never invite trouble by doing so.

[Will]

Wow! This seems to be a growing "mindset" towards law abiding citizens who are pro gun. Just sad.

[96trigger]

Interesting read Harvey. Half of me hopes its not true, the other half hopes its is. I have often gotten emails like this, only to do a 5 minute search and find them false. I don't know who starts them or what their motives are but, they do nothing to help support gun rights, for that reason I hope it is true and that it is not propaganda to spread paranoia, on the other hand if this truly is happening, it shows the power one elected official can have. We are seeing it almost daily now in the political scene. It can be gun rights, education, health care or whatever. The political climate in the country is not good right now.

[fr0sty]

Trigger, I did a quick search also and didn't find anything stating it was false.

I have just two comments about the situation. First, the driver should not have been profiled as he was with the officer fishing for right wing militia types (Tim McVey).

Second though, when an officer lawfully pulls you over, it seems reasonable (and I believe they are legally permitted to) that if he asks if you have any weapons, that you answer and hand them over during the stop.

[96trigger]

Thanks frosty. Hard to believe this happens in America. We are still only hearing one side of the story at this time. However, if he is telling the truth, its a little chilling.

[K_Josh87]

I have never had an officer ask me about weapons in my vehicle during a traffic stop, and I normally have one or two long guns in the pickup, sometimes more if seasons are open... But I am always carrying a critter getter of some sort. My brother in law was pulled over for speeding a month or so ago, and had his shotgun cased in the rear seat of the vehicle, and the officer asked about and, and took the gun back to his car while he finished up his business and was politely returned after he completed his work. I don't see an issue with this, however, if he was detained or the firearms where confiscated, I do not see why this would need to happen. If the man was honest and upfront about the guns, weather or not he had a permit to carry etc... he should understand an officer taking the reasonable efforts to protect himself. My guess is there are portions of this blown out of portion just as about anything else that seams to hit the media... With that being said, I do stand up for the right to have a firearm and the rights to use them. But I don't see an issue with an officer doing what is in his best interest to safely do his job.

JK

[schmoe147]

I could totally see this happening. I had a similar case happen to me.

[Froggy4371]

I will tell you this as an officer, I, WILL NOT take a weapon out of a vehicle unless I feel it is a threat to me but at no time will I conficate it unless apropiate. I do encourage people to let me know they have a permit to carry and that they do let me know they have a gun on them or with them. It actually kind of sets your mind at ease a little bit. Every person who legaly (not felons) should not have to fear somthing like this.

I will say it though. Please if pulled over let the officer know if you have firearms in the vehicle. I would hate to have someone with a permit to carry, open a glovebox and the officer see a firearm and have that officer draw his weapon on someone.

Froggy

[papabear]

from what Ive read about this "incident" the weapon was secured during the stop and returned to him when the officer was through. Another scare tactic by a group who stands for the $ not the 2nd Amendment. IN fat I think I saw somenting like this on a show about Alaska where they have to inform the officer of any weapons and surrender them if asked to and then have them returned at the end of the stop.

It sounds like this was blown out of proportion by a gun group to stir things up since Obama hasnt taken our guns away they need to find someone to be the bad guy so we'll send money to fight a one sided fight.

[fr0sty]

Haven't you heard? The first four years of his administration was just a ruse to lull us into complacency. If he gets re-elected, he's really going to take away our guns.

It sounds like this was blown out of proportion by a gun group to stir things up since Obama hasnt taken our guns away they need to find someone to be the bad guy so we'll send money to fight a one sided fight.