2nd Amendment Patriots Meeting in South Bend

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

We will be resuming our Second Amendment Patriots North meetings starting at 6:30 PM on Tuesday September 30th.

The meetings will be held at:

Kodak Range and Training Facility
4611 South Burnett Drive
South Bend, IN 46614
574 299-8000

The Sheriff of St Joseph County Indiana has been invited to speak at our Sept 30th meeting. So far, we have not received a confirmation he can be there.

Hope to see you all at the meeting on the 30th.

 

[Southbendfamily]

I think you should invite Teachman. Just sayin'

 

[9mmfan]

I'll try to make this one.
Heck, if Teachman shows up he'll probably won't feel safe with all the people carrying in the room.

 

[Thor]

Maybe you should invite that peacenik Joe Bock who's running for Congress...He's Mr. Globalist/UN lover.

Let him tell everyone what his stance on the 2nd is...

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

We will be resuming our Second Amendment Patriots North meetings starting at 6:30 PM on Tuesday September 30th.

The meetings will be held at:

Kodak Range and Training Facility
4611 South Burnett Drive
South Bend, IN 46614
574 299-8000

The Sheriff of St Joseph County Indiana has been invited to speak at our Sept 30th meeting. So far, we have not received a confirmation he can be there.

Hope to see you all at the meeting on the 30th.

Still no confirmation from the Sheriff.

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

We will be resuming our Second Amendment Patriots North meetings starting at 6:30 PM on Tuesday September 30th (TOMORROW NIGHT).

The meetings will be held at:

Kodak Range and Training Facility
4611 South Burnett Drive
South Bend, IN 46614
574 299-8000

Hope to see you all at the meeting on the 30th.


No news on our sheriff. I'm guessing he won't be there.

 

[TaunTaun]

One of these days I will have to schedule classes that doesn't take place on Tuesday evenings...

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

Don't forget the Second Amendment Patriots North meeting at 6:30 PM on Tuesday October 28th (next Tuesday night).

The meeting will be at:

Kodak Range and Training Facility
4611 South Burnett Drive
South Bend, IN 46614
574 299-8000

 

[N8RV]

So, what happens in these meetings?

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

COOL! Sheriff Brad Rogers.

The next Second Amendment Patriots North meeting will be held on January 27th at Kodiak Range & Training in South Bend. The meeting starts at 6:30 PM and includes a carry-in dinner. The location of the meeting is at:

Kodak Range & Training
4611 Burnett Drive
South Bend, IN 46614

Sheriff Brad Rogers of Elkhart County has confirmed that he will be attending the meeting. We look forward to what Sheriff Rogers has to say.

Attached to this notice are two pdf files summarizing the status of firearms related bills currently in the Indiana Legislative Session. Both of these documents were revised yesterday so previous copies that I have sent out are obsolete. You may print out these documents and bring them to the meeting -- as we will be discussing the current legislative agenda. Please don't hesitate letting your Indianapolis representatives and senators know how you feel about these issues (or other issues). We are now paying the price of too many citizens not paying attention to what is going on in Washington, etc. (People not wanting to "get involved in politics"). Bad "politics" will destroy the country. Let's not let the people in Indianapolis do something "stupid". These bills need to be reviewed carefully and supported or opposed where appropriate.

Hope to see you next Tuesday.

Stay safe and warm.

Denny and Len.

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

Just received this in my email. Author asked for comment. I'm unsure why they felt a need. Could be the police confrontation with the legal protester on South Bend last week or it could have stemmed from Sheriff Rogers attending the meeting last Tuesday.

ROUGH DRAFT Second Amendment Patriots NorthIntentional Police Confrontation Policy

It is the policy of Second Amendment Patriots North (2APN) to not participate in, support, promote or encourage confrontations with law enforcement officers (LEOs) as a means of publicly calling attention to our Second Amendment privileges. In addition, 2APN does not recommend that individuals who identify with Second Amendment causes participate in any public demonstration by any group using visible firearms as a means of confronting LEOs.

Because of the dangers involved with these types of confrontations, 2APN believes that they hurt the Second Amendment Cause rather than calling positive attention to this valuable Constitutional Right of self protection.While there is no legal prohibition to the carrying of a long gun in public in Indiana, an individual who does so will probably be reported to the police. Often such calls will not mention that the act is some sort of a public demonstration calling attention to the Second Amendment. Usually the calls to the police will just be reported as “a man with a gun”. The police, of course, not knowing why someone is walking around with a gun; will respond quickly and in force.

This is exactly how we, as citizens would want them to respond.A “man with a gun” call could mean a wide variety of things. It could mean someone drunk,or high on drugs, walking around with a loaded gun. It could mean some distraught individual involved in a domestic dispute who is angry at the world or who wants to commitsuicide “by cop”. It could also mean that someone hates police officers and intends to shoot the first ones who arrive. It could also mean a whole host of other situations too numerous to mention.

In summary, the police simply don't know WHY an individual is walking around with a gun and they must assume for safety's sake a worse case possibility.Once the police arrive, they must be absolutely certain the individual is “safe” before they can determine why they have a gun. Sometimes this means that the individual will be disarmed (sometimes at gunpoint) until the police can determine what is happening. At this point, the situation can become very dangerous. For example if the individual fails to follow the LEOs commands or they point a weapon at someone they could end up getting shot. Again, we citizens demand that the police make the scene safe.

If it is eventually determined that the individual is cooperative, respectful and not mentally disturbed, then it can be established that that they do have a right to appear in public with along gun. In the meantime, everyone experiences a lot of stress and a great of amount of time is wasted. Often several officers are “tied-up” on this nuisance call while other citizens who actually need police protection are waiting.In summary, the act of parading in public with a long gun (while permitted legally in Indiana) is a stupid and dangerous stunt that does not enhance the Second Amendment cause and 2APN categorically rejects suchh amateur publicity stunts. Grow up and learn how to communicate at an adult level.

 

[TaunTaun]

Okay, I've read this. I imagine someone sent this to you for reviewing to see if things needed fixed up.

Here are my comments on this:

The first two paragraphs: It's fine to not look for confrontation. It is another to back down from it. If someone wants to be political active, demonstrate for a cause. That is their right. If they want to do so while armed, that is again their right. I may not agree with their politics, their viewpoint, or what kind of holster they wear, but that is again their right. And I will defend their ability to do so. I do not look for confrontation, but if met, don't expect me to kowtow to someone because of somebody developing a sudden case of hopolophobia.

The third and fourth paragraphs: I summarily REJECT this statement. A gun is a gun, and no crime has been committed unless they actually have committed a crime. A viewpoint like this is pointedly ENCOURAGING Man-with-a-gun calls and condoning any and all police response to them. If someone points a gun at someone, others at the scene including police officer should take appropriate action up to and including the use of deadly force. But starting with the first assumption that the person is not "safe" is idiotic at best.

fifth paragraph: Once again, I summarily REJECT this statement. The same close-minded argument can be made for OC'ing a handgun. If you attack the rights of one group of gun owners, you attack the rights of all gun owners.

The person that sent you this almost HAS to be a troll. This is the kind of bull**** I would expect from someone like SBPD's Teachman or Maxey.

Print this policy and place it right next to a certain person's UN Flag floormat.

 

[TaunTaun]

I don't get to attend a lot of these meetings because of work, school schedule, and family commitments, but crap like this ticks me off.

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

I see your point. I've been drifting away for some time now.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Just received this in my email. Author asked for comment. I'm unsure why they felt a need. Could be the police confrontation with the legal protester on South Bend last week or it could have stemmed from Sheriff Rogers attending the meeting last Tuesday.

Hi. I don't normally wander in here, but I saw the thread and it caught my attention, so... I'll offer a few thoughts. Feel free to use them or not, your choice, in your response to the person who sent this to you and/or as policy choices for 2APN, if in fact you choose to have a policy at all on this issue. (My changes are in strikeout text and in bold, to eliminate or add, respectively.)

ROUGH DRAFT Second Amendment Patriots North

Intentional Police Confrontation Policy

It is the policy of Second Amendment Patriots North (2APN) to not, as an organization, participate in, support, promote or encourage confrontations with law enforcement officers (LEOs) as a means of publicly calling attention to our Second Amendment [STRIKE]privileges[/STRIKE]rights. In addition, 2APN does not recommend that individuals who identify with Second Amendment causes participate in any public demonstration by any group using visible firearms as a means of confronting LEOs.

(That is, if you are carrying while out, and also while out, participate in an event, that's your choice, but carrying for the purpose of confrontation is hazardous and could malign the name and purpose of the organization, hence, everyone in the protest may be a member of 2APN, but they may also all be members of 2nd Baptist Church. That does not mean 2nd Baptist Church is participating in the protest, nor is 2APN.)

Because of the dangers involved with these types of confrontations, 2APN believes that they hurt the Second Amendment Cause rather than calling positive attention to this valuable Constitutional Right of self protection. Carrying a firearm is a personal choice and responsibility, not a means of protest or political confrontation. (remove the remainder of the document from the policy statement, but leave it as explanatory text) As a separate issue, while there is no legal prohibition to the carrying of a long gun in public in Indiana, an individual who does so will probably be reported to the police. Often such calls will not mention that the act is some sort of a public demonstration calling attention to the Second Amendment. Usually the calls to the police will just be reported as “a man with a gun”. The police, of course, not knowing why someone is walking around with a gun; will respond quickly and in force.

This is exactly how we, as citizens would want them to respond.A “man with a gun” call could mean a wide variety of things. It could mean someone drunk,or high on drugs, walking around with a loaded gun. It could mean some distraught individual involved in a domestic dispute who is angry at the world or who wants to commit "suicide by cop”. It could also mean that someone hates police officers and intends to shoot the first ones who arrive. It could also mean a whole host of other situations too numerous to mention.

In summary, the police simply don't know WHY an individual is walking around with a gun and they must assume for safety's sake a worse case possibility.Once the police arrive, they must be absolutely certain the individual is [STRIKE]“safe” before they can determine why they have a gun[/STRIKE]legal, at which point an IN Supreme Court decision mandates the end of their confrontation with the citizen, absent other reasons to necessitate they remain, such as new-onset emotional distress causing a danger to self or others . Sometimes this means that the individual will be disarmed (sometimes at gunpoint) until the police can determine what is happening. At this point, the situation can become very dangerous. For example if the individual fails to follow the LEOs commands or they point a weapon at someone they could end up getting shot. Again, we citizens demand that the police make the scene safe.

If it is eventually determined that the individual is cooperative, [STRIKE]respectful[/STRIKE] and not mentally disturbed, then it can be established that [STRIKE]they do have a right to appear in public with along gun[/STRIKE] there is no further need for police involvement. In the meantime, everyone experiences a lot of stress and a great of amount of time is wasted. Often several officers are “tied-up” on this nuisance call while other citizens who actually need police protection are waiting. [STRIKE]In summary, the act of parading in public with a long gun (while permitted legally in Indiana) is a stupid and dangerous stunt that does not enhance the Second Amendment cause and 2APN categorically rejects such amateur publicity stunts. Grow up and learn how to communicate at an adult level.[/STRIKE]In summary, while it is lawful to carry a long gun in Indiana without any sort of license or permit, and to carry a handgun with a license, doing so in the course of your life is a wholly different thing than doing it for the explicit purpose of confronting someone who is not a deadly-force threat with ability, opportunity, and intent to do harm. As an organization, 2APN will not participate in open-carry demonstrations. Members may do so at their own choice and their own responsibility, but may not identify themselves as members nor wear any item doing so in the course of the demonstration.

(BoR version, Cleaned up)

ROUGH DRAFT Second Amendment Patriots North

Intentional Police Confrontation Policy

It is the policy of Second Amendment Patriots North (2APN) to not, as an organization, participate in, support, promote or encourage confrontations with law enforcement officers (LEOs) as a means of publicly calling attention to our Second Amendment rights. In addition, 2APN does not recommend that individuals who identify with Second Amendment causes participate in any public demonstration by any group using visible firearms as a means of confronting LEOs.

Because of the dangers involved with these types of confrontations, 2APN believes that they hurt the Second Amendment Cause, rather than calling positive attention to this valuable Constitutional Right of self protection. Carrying a firearm is a personal choice and responsibility, not a means of protest or political confrontation.


End policy, begin explanatory text
If you are carrying while out, and also, while out, participate in an event, that's your choice, but carrying for the purpose of confrontation is hazardous and could malign the name and purpose of the organization, hence, everyone in the protest may be a member of 2APN, but they may also all be members of 2nd Baptist Church. That does not mean 2nd Baptist Church is participating in the protest, nor is 2APN.

Be honest with yourself: would you carry the same way going to buy flowers or to go visit a sick friend or to take your dog to the vet for a checkup? Or are you putting on that gun in that holster for the purpose of making sure it's seen, because of this event you expect to attend? (Is it an EDC or a "barbecue gun"?)

As a separate issue, while there is no legal prohibition to the carrying of a long gun in public in Indiana, an individual who does so will probably be reported to the police. Often such calls will not mention that the act is some sort of a public demonstration calling attention to the Second Amendment. Usually the calls to the police will just be reported as “a man with a gun”. The police, of course, not knowing why someone is walking around with a gun; will respond quickly and in force.

This is exactly how we, as citizens would want them to respond.A “man with a gun” call could mean a wide variety of things. It could mean someone drunk,or high on drugs, walking around with a loaded gun. It could mean some distraught individual involved in a domestic dispute who is angry at the world or who wants to commit "suicide by cop”. It could also mean that someone hates police officers and intends to shoot the first ones who arrive. It could also mean a whole host of other situations too numerous to mention.

The police simply don't know WHY an individual is walking around with a gun and they must assume for safety's sake a worst-case scenario. Once the police arrive, they must be absolutely certain the individual is legal, at which point an IN Supreme Court decision mandates the end of their confrontation with the citizen, absent other reasons to necessitate they remain, such as new-onset emotional distress causing a danger to self or others. Sometimes this means that the individual will be disarmed (possibly at gunpoint) until the police can determine what is happening. At this point, the situation can become very dangerous. For example, if the individual fails to follow the LEOs commands or they point a weapon at someone, they could end up getting shot. Again, we citizens demand that the police make the scene safe.

If it is eventually determined that the individual is cooperative, and not mentally disturbed, then it can be established that there is no further need for police involvement. (Being respectful has no bearing on whether one has the right or not, but can hasten the end of police involvement and is to peoples' advantage.) In the meantime, everyone experiences a lot of stress and a great of amount of time is wasted. Often several officers are “tied-up” on this nuisance call while other citizens who actually need police protection are waiting. In summary, while it is lawful to carry a long gun in Indiana without any sort of license or permit, and to carry a handgun with a license, doing so in the course of your life is a wholly different thing than doing it for the explicit purpose of confronting someone who is not a deadly-force threat with ability, opportunity, and intent to do harm. As an organization, 2APN will not participate in open-carry demonstrations. Members may do so at their own choice and their own responsibility, but may not identify themselves as members nor wear any item doing so in the course of the demonstration.

For those who may not know the term "barbecue gun"... https://www.indianagunowners.com/forums/handguns/97898-what-constitutes-bbq-gun.html

Hope this helps!

Blessings,
Bill

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

The next Second Amendment Patriots North meeting will be held on February 24th at Kodiak Range & Training in South Bend. The meeting starts at 6:30 PM and includes a carry-in dinner. The location of the meeting is at:

Kodak Range & Training
4611 Burnett Drive
South Bend, IN 46614

The Sheriff of St Joseph County has been invited to speak at the meeting. As of today, however, we have not received a confirmation he will attend.

 

[TaunTaun]

So what was the story behind that email?

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

Which email?

 

[TaunTaun]

The one about the dude that was OC'ing at Ironwood and Lincoln that got that over the top SBPD response.

 

[LockStocksAndBarrel]

They're still working on it. I got an update this morning and they added some of BoR comments into it.

ETA: they'll be discussing it at the next meeting.