Police arrest anti-war protester, 80, at mall -- Crimes, Iraq W...

[hydratwo]

Not sure if this post is about done but here is how to find your local Smith Mall to test out your tee shirt and find if it is "politically correct".
http://www.simon.com/findamall/

[hydratwo]

Interesting that in this day and age, an 80 year old is arrested for not removing an anti war tee shirt in a New York mall (Crossings is one of the Simon properties in NE PA) while wearing a gun at a northeast PA restruant is OK with some of these far right types.
05/14/2008
Gun owners protest police action with video
BY CHARLES SCHILLINGER
STAFF WRITER
DICKSON CITY — A Friday evening police incident spilled over into a Borough Council meeting Tuesday, with gun-rights advocates alleging harassment by two police officers.
The regular monthly meeting erupted into a full-blown debate on the Second Amendment, with more than 20 Pennsylvania Firearm Owners Association members — many of whom were openly armed — arguing their right to carry a weapon in public.
Police have yet to release a report of the incident in which a group of customers at Old Country Buffet were questioned about openly carrying handguns in public. At least one of those customers, Rich Banks, of Luzerne County, was detained for refusing to cooperate with police in regard to his concealed .38-caliber handgun, Police Chief William Stadnitski said. Mr. Banks’ weapon remains confiscated, but the chief said he can pick it up at any time.
Pennsylvanians are required to carry a permit for a concealed weapon; however, there are exemptions, such as in the case of Mr. Banks, who Dickson City police later found out had a federal gun-dealer license.
“We don’t feel there was any misconduct. We did what we had to for the safety of the customers,” Chief Stadnitski said of his part-time officers, Karen Gallagher and Anthony Mariano, who responded to the restaurant after 911 received complaints. The chief said no charges will be filed.
But some, like Andrew Koch, disagreed. Mr. Koch drove more than five hours from Pittsburgh to speak out for Mr. Banks and the other gun owners who were “embarrassed, oppressed, harassed and violated” by the police.
“These officers need to be disciplined, and criminal charges need to be brought against them,” Mr. Koch said.
Firearm association members turned out from all over the state at Tuesday’s meeting after postings on Internet sites, such as www.opencarry.org . The co-founder of that site, Lancaster resident Mike Stollenwerk, drove from Washington, D.C., to protest the police conduct.
“Normally when hiccups like this happen, they don’t go as far as gun seizure.... Usually it gets cleared up much quicker,” he said.
Bill Grumbine, of Kutztown, carrying a Springfield XD-45 handgun, said he brought his 15-year-old daughter, Emily, for a “real-life civics lesson.”
“The last thing we want to do is use our guns, just like the last thing you want to do is use the air bag in your car,” he said.“But we believe in being prepared, and we believe in exercising our rights.”
Several council members and Mayor Anthony Zaleski defended the police officers.
“Our officers did not know what to expect. They could be walking into situations similar to shootings at school campuses and other public events,” said council President Barbara Mecca.
Contacted by The Times-Tribune, Lackawanna County District Attorney Andy Jarbola declined to comment on this specific case, but said people have a right to openly carry a weapon without having to show identification or a permit.
“Police can ask, but if they don’t want to give it, they don’t have to,” he said.“It’s going to be surprising to the public, but that’s the current state of law.”
Contact the writer: [e-mail]
©The Times-Tribune 2008

[Rockhead]

hydratwo wrote:

Interesting that in this day and age, an 80 year old is arrested for not removing an anti war tee shirt in a New York mall (Crossings is one of the Simon properties in NE PA) while wearing a gun at a northeast PA restruant is OK with some of these far right types.

And as usual, you far left types would prefer the only people that be armed are law enforcement and criminals.
The case you stated above should result in a law suit against the offending officers. The spokesman stated "Our officers did not know what to expect. They could be walking into situations similar to shootings at school campuses and other public events" it should have only taken an inteligent law enforcement officer a second or two to figure out that the people sitting there eating dinner with sidearms visible, were doing nothing more than eating dinner. Had their (Legally Armed Citizens) intention been a "Columbine" type event, the cops would be arriving after the event took place. Instead of persecuting legally armed law abiding citizens for carrying firearms, the police should be thanking them for stepping up to the plate and not cowering in fear (like the cowards who called 911) as the typical liberal does.

As for the 80 year old protestor, the ol' biotch shoulda known better...

[Now Ive Seen It All]

hydratwo wrote:

This third article also gives the dates of the court date. Seems like a logical response should be some support for those activists that live near there and also to shop elsewhere unless you like anal security guards.
Update on Smith Haven Mall action: Letter from woman arrested
Jump to Comments
Click here for info on how to send financial support to the two demonstrators facing charges.
The Wilderside editors were proud to be at the Smith Haven Mall “4,000 Soldiers/One million Iraqis” peace demonstration. We were on the “sidewalk team” and did not go into the mall. Though, we support our colleagues who are facing legal problems for wearing a t-shirt at the shopping center which proclaimed simple truths about war and peace on it. The two people arrested were Don Zirkel and Susan McKeon-Steinmann.
We will keep our wilderside readers posted on ways to help. We were excited to receive the message below as a comment from Susan McKeon-Steinmann:
Dear Wilderside and Friends,
I was the other person arrested and I have a few comments on this wonderful action. Sometimes we get caught in the here and now by physical and temporal boundaries without realizing the interconnectedness of what we do.
Because of this action of over 250 people outside the mall, and dozens inside protesting there is now an international debate about free speech in “private spaces” not only in this country, but also in England. I googled protesters arrested at Smith Haven Mall and found ten pages of blogs on which there are thousands of comments discussing what we did.
The t shirt which says 4000 troops dead,1 million Iraqis, and Enough on the other side has been seen by practically everyone who watches the news on Long Island.
Nancy Dwyer,a Pax Christi member and one of our wonderful peace movement activists was on Channel 12.
People are questioning the New York State law which is different from California or New Jersey which has determined malls to be public places.
The war and protest against it is being discussed by thousands of people who were not doing so before.
For over half an hour, twenty or so of us, young and old read the names of the dead publically and got some support from shoppers, but we stood our ground and withstood several arrest warnings. We moved outside our comfort zone in the name of peace and justice. Saving lives was presented as a higher issue than commerce.
This was a classic civil disobedience action. Like the lunchcounter struggle in the sixties it moved far beyond what any of us expected because it took on a life of its own.
Don and I go to court on May 22nd. My hearing for criminal trespass is at 8:30 and Don’s for criminal trespass and resisting arrest is at 2 pm. I hope the peace movement will spend the day trying the war itself and come to the court to support us. We will meet outside in the parking lot before hand as we did for John Phillips hearing.
We are a package deal. Come to support us both since what has been proven is that an issue whose time has come is stronger than fear or money.
To all the wonderful people who bravely stood outside and in, and to the readers of names of the dead, thank you for giving me the strength to be arrested. Without you, I could not have done it.
Much love,
Susan McKeon-Steinmann

The point is IT IS PRIVATE PROPERTY. Go back to Haight-Ashbury you hippy hags

[hydratwo]

Now Ive Seen It All wrote:

<quoted text>
The point is IT IS PRIVATE PROPERTY. Go back to Haight-Ashbury you hippy hags

Screw you. You a mall cop or something? Former vet and not that far away. You types are the sell outs that have screwed away freedom. Get some ****s for once.

[hydratwo]

Rockhead wrote:

<quoted text>
And as usual, you far left types would prefer the only people that be armed are law enforcement and criminals.
The case you stated above should result in a law suit against the offending officers. The spokesman stated "Our officers did not know what to expect. They could be walking into situations similar to shootings at school campuses and other public events" it should have only taken an inteligent law enforcement officer a second or two to figure out that the people sitting there eating dinner with sidearms visible, were doing nothing more than eating dinner. Had their (Legally Armed Citizens) intention been a "Columbine" type event, the cops would be arriving after the event took place. Instead of persecuting legally armed law abiding citizens for carrying firearms, the police should be thanking them for stepping up to the plate and not cowering in fear (like the cowards who called 911) as the typical liberal does.
As for the 80 year old protestor, the ol' biotch shoulda known better...

Thanks for demonstrating once more that you far right types are walking commercials why gun control laws are necessary.

[Rockhead]

hydratwo wrote:

<quoted text>
Thanks for demonstrating once more that you far right types are walking commercials why gun control laws are necessary.

And how is that? Please explain how my statement demonstrates the need for more gun control laws. Don't post ignorant Party Line propaganda. Give me a real reason how my statement brought you to that conclusion. I'de be willing to bet your gonna come up empty.

Had someone intended a "Columbine" type attack on that restaurant, those armed citizens would have been there to prevent or minimalize the carnage. The cops, when they finally showed up, would just be there for clean up. Do you honestly believe that if stricter gun control laws were enacted, that the people most likely to use guns in a crime would willingly give up their guns? Do you honestly believe that Mr Policeman is going to be there at the exact time someone intent on shooting someone else goes on a rampage? The answer to both is NO. A well armed citizenery is the BEST crime deterrant.

Guns are here, in insane numbers, to think that they are going to just disappear is fantasy, as are most left wing nut job ideas. When faced with circumstances that connot be controlled, such as the proliferation of guns, the smartest plan would be to figure out how to deal with those that would use them for criminal purposes.

Pull your head out.

[Simon Sux]

Simon Properties obviously is a communist organization run by former leaders of the USSR.

[Moe Litvak]

charges dropped entirely.
just a way to break the chops of the protesters.
freedom of speech as long as you dont say too much.

[hydratwo]

Rockhead wrote:

<quoted text>
And how is that? Please explain how my statement demonstrates the need for more gun control laws. Don't post ignorant Party Line propaganda. Give me a real reason how my statement brought you to that conclusion. I'de be willing to bet your gonna come up empty.
Had someone intended a "Columbine" type attack on that restaurant, those armed citizens would have been there to prevent or minimalize the carnage. The cops, when they finally showed up, would just be there for clean up. Do you honestly believe that if stricter gun control laws were enacted, that the people most likely to use guns in a crime would willingly give up their guns? Do you honestly believe that Mr Policeman is going to be there at the exact time someone intent on shooting someone else goes on a rampage? The answer to both is NO. A well armed citizenery is the BEST crime deterrant.
Guns are here, in insane numbers, to think that they are going to just disappear is fantasy, as are most left wing nut job ideas. When faced with circumstances that connot be controlled, such as the proliferation of guns, the smartest plan would be to figure out how to deal with those that would use them for criminal purposes.
Pull your head out.

Face it. Most people polled in the local paper thought it was ridiculous for those idiots to wear handguns into the restraunt. This was not just a liberal comment but one of numerous gun owners and supporters. This type only shows common sense does not prevail and laws are necessary. Only an idiot would believe that this type of person could even handle a terrorist situation if it did happen. You guys are not cops, and you do not seem to want to obey the cops if it don't suit your purposes.
I don't think the 80 year old with the tee shirt posed the same sort of threat.

[Rockhead]

hydratwo wrote:

<quoted text>
Face it. Most people polled in the local paper thought it was ridiculous for those idiots to wear handguns into the restraunt. This was not just a liberal comment but one of numerous gun owners and supporters. This type only shows common sense does not prevail and laws are necessary. Only an idiot would believe that this type of person could even handle a terrorist situation if it did happen. You guys are not cops, and you do not seem to want to obey the cops if it don't suit your purposes.
I don't think the 80 year old with the tee shirt posed the same sort of threat.

Who cares what those polled think. Were those that were carrying guns breaking the law? No they weren't. If they had carry permits, they were well within their rights to carry. The snivelling little turds that got scared at the sight of a gun were the problem that day. As for the abiltiy of those people to handle a "Terrorist Situation" How do you know what they were or were not capable of? Any response they could have provided would have been way better than the response from the police, who would have arrived after the fact.

[Julius]

Rockhead wrote:

<quoted text>
And how is that? Please explain how my statement demonstrates the need for more gun control laws. Don't post ignorant Party Line propaganda. Give me a real reason how my statement brought you to that conclusion. I'de be willing to bet your gonna come up empty.
Had someone intended a "Columbine" type attack on that restaurant, those armed citizens would have been there to prevent or minimalize the carnage. The cops, when they finally showed up, would just be there for clean up. Do you honestly believe that if stricter gun control laws were enacted, that the people most likely to use guns in a crime would willingly give up their guns? Do you honestly believe that Mr Policeman is going to be there at the exact time someone intent on shooting someone else goes on a rampage? The answer to both is NO. A well armed citizenery is the BEST crime deterrant.
Guns are here, in insane numbers, to think that they are going to just disappear is fantasy, as are most left wing nut job ideas. When faced with circumstances that connot be controlled, such as the proliferation of guns, the smartest plan would be to figure out how to deal with those that would use them for criminal purposes.
Pull your head out.

Couldn't agree with you more Rockkopf.
Why does your IP read San Francisco now and at other times read Texas?

[Rockhead]

Julius wrote:

<quoted text>
Couldn't agree with you more Rockkopf.
Why does your IP read San Francisco now and at other times read Texas?

I dunno, it reads SF when I post from work and Texas when I post from Home. I'm pretty sure I'm not driving 2000 miles to work every day. I must be bouncing out of a SF server.

[hydratwo]

Rockhead wrote:

<quoted text>
Who cares what those polled think. Were those that were carrying guns breaking the law? No they weren't. If they had carry permits, they were well within their rights to carry. The snivelling little turds that got scared at the sight of a gun were the problem that day. As for the abiltiy of those people to handle a "Terrorist Situation" How do you know what they were or were not capable of? Any response they could have provided would have been way better than the response from the police, who would have arrived after the fact.

They were not afraid, just not trusting those that were ignorant enough to do this.

[McSame]

Be the first one on your block to have your kid sent home in a box !

[Spend and Kill]

Does anyone know if there were any demonstrations or other activities outside the courtroom the day of the hearing? Any articles on this to update the story?

[hydratwo]

McSame wrote:

Be the first one on your block to have your kid sent home in a box !

Problem with the gun nuts is that that phrase is not the "anti war" lyrics of Country Joe, but a possibility while going up to the Old Country Buffet for the second helping.