previous post next post  

And people wonder...

...why gun owners join gun rights organizations. And why gun owners are not necessarily trusting of agents of the government. Even those of us who have *been* agents of the government. Perhaps even more so.

"I don't care what the laws or the Supreme Court say. WE are NOT going to have people running around, wearing guns..." [the alleged words of a Gonzales, Louisiana LEO - ed.]

Mark Edward Marchiafava did not break the law in Gonzales, La. on January 28, 2006. But nonetheless, he was handcuffed, arrested, and his firearm, which he was legally carrying in the open on his side was confiscated and not returned.

So starts this entry by Nicki at The Liberty Zone, about an abuse of police authority in Gonzales, Louisiana.

One wonders, when will some Law Enforcement Officers recognize that *most* gun owners, especially ones who carry openly, or follow the rules to get permits, etc, are *on their side*?

Certainly, as someone who was briefly an LEO and is a retired soldier, I understand that all persons with weapons must be viewed with caution until intents and bona fides are established. I don't have a problem with that. There are ways to do it without being an a$$ at the same time - much less, as appears to be the case here, setting yourself up as above the law you are sworn to uphold.

Now, in looking around for some more data, I came upon this.

Mark, his wife, his daughter and other employees were at Mark's place of business 25 days ago when the parking lot was stormed by a dozen or more heavily armed, ninja-suited (complete with face masks) "law enforcement officers" who grabbed Mark and wrestled him to the ground, re-igniting an old jaw injury. These individuals presented no warrant and refused to tell Mark who they were as they hustled him off. They had "their man", but this wasn't enough. They stormed his place of business and pointed guns at a half-dozen or so women in the building, one of them in the bathroom at the time, and, still without identifying themselves or showing any sort of warrant, ordered them against the wall, faces to the wall, with guns pointed at all of them.

Mark was escorted away from the scene as he saw automatic weapons pointed at his wife and daughter. These people took Mark to the Coroner's office where the coroner asked Mark if he knew why he was there. Mark replied that he didn't, but that he had been asking. The Coroner said that Mark had threatened to kill 250 public officials, buy property in Mississippi, dig a hole and bury them in it. Mark denied making such comments, and to this date no proof of such comment has been offered, nor has any person taken the stand

That info (and more) comes from this website.

But, better - Mr. Marchiafava explains it himself, in this post at The Sierra Times.

Obviously, Mr. Marchiafava has F r iends in High Places. I suspect he's also a real pain in the a$$ to deal with when you are on his wrong side. And pugnaciously so.

Fine. Let's accept for a moment the premise that Mr. Marchiafava (whom I don't know personally) is an a$$.

And that his history with government and law enforcement probably generated the initial response by Gonzales Police.

I can accept that response, harsh as it seems to be, having been on the other side of the equation.

However, the apparent ignorance of state law and arrogant disregard for it when apprised - that is inexcusable.

Note to Gonzales cops - people who have bad intentions with their weapons usually don't carry openly while doing routine things, and are generally unable to produce concealed carry documents when found carrying concealed.

The Federal and State Constitutions are binding on you, too.

Y'all need to work a bit on your threat evaluation and target identification, and a little bit less about practicing for your 15 minutes of fame on Cops.

Just sayin'

H/t to Publicola for the head's up (and he takes a more direct view of actions that should be taken against the Officialdom involved) and David Hardy for the Sierra Times link.

3 Comments

Marchifera, his family, and The Cops are real lucky he didn't draw. From what I've seen so far it sounds like he would have been within reasonable bounds for self defense to draw(though, maybe dumb seeing how outnumbered and outgunned he was). This is startingly close to the no-knock shooting of a Brooklyn man who did draw during a no-knock a few years ago where the NYPD got slaughtered in court. They could've shot the man if he drew and that would've been absolutely a messed all to hell situation. Good on Marchifera for showing coolness and restraint under pressue, bad on The Cops for just absolutely screwing up. This could've been so messed up. All it takes is one idjit that shot and killed Grim's optometrist(he's got details here: http://grimbeorn.blogspot.com/2006_01_01_grimbeorn_archive.html#113859094551748750 ) Itchy trigger finger. Accidents, but not 'creeping fascism' as some might want to call it. Tragic accidents, and preventable ones too.
 
After reading that story, I am curious: What, aside from a hearsay threat was the reason for violating his Constitutionals? Isn't the 'burden of proof' on those MAKING the accusations, which would demand more than just a cursory investigation? Especially under the Patriot Act and so-called Homeland Security? Well written story and take on it, John.
 
If you have any questions, feel free to email me directly, tooge47@yahoo.com I have nothing to hide.......... Mark
 
© 2008 John Donovan
All rights reserved.