Idiot walks into police station carrying an AK47

[churchmouse]

It is most interesting to see the wide range of opinions on this one.

No knocks. Just observing.

 

[Hornett]

I cannot really think of an actual law that they broke.
(unless the police station had a jail, in which case they were in clear violation of carrying on jail property)
But, to me, the ski mask makes a huge difference.
IMHO, no one in their right mind would walk into a police station wearing a ski mask.
If you add to the ski mask carrying a pistol and a long gun, well then I think you do have grounds for a psychological evaluation at least.

 

[HoughMade]

I don't agree with what these two provocateurs did but I also don't agree with prosecuting them solely because I don't agree with what they did. If the case can be made that they legitimately broke the law then prosecute. Otherwise...oh well.

That's the thing about statutes and courts. While there is stretching when people are charged at times, if the charges don't fit the facts, most generally, the court will remedy that. I'm willing to see how this plays out. Michigan has a brandishing law that Indiana does not have. Also, were they carrying concealed without a license? That can be a felony in Michigan. The disturbing the peace is a stretch.

 

[bb37]

Here's how I see it. Note that I am not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV nor did I sleep at Holiday Inn Express last night.

Assaulting/resisting/obstructing a police officer

750.81d Assaulting, battering, resisting, obstructing, opposing person performing duty; felony; penalty; other violations; consecutive terms; definitions.

Sec. 81d.

(1) Except as provided in subsections (2), (3), and (4), an individual who assaults, batters, wounds, resists, obstructs, opposes, or endangers a person who the individual knows or has reason to know is performing his or her duties is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment for not more than 2 years or a fine of not more than $2,000.00, or both.

(7) As used in this section:

(a) "Obstruct" includes the use or threatened use of physical interference or force or a knowing failure to comply with a lawful command.

Brandishing in public

750.234e Brandishing firearm in public; applicability; violation as misdemeanor; penalty.

Sec. 234e.

(1) Except as provided in subsection (2), a person shall not willfully and knowingly brandish a firearm in public.

Assuming that the above are correct and valid quotes of Michigan law, the prosecutor may be thinking that a case can be made for obstructing a law enforcement officer since the accused failed to comply with the officer's direction to put down the gun(s). I think the video is pretty clear that the accused failed to comply. I also underlined the "opposes" and "endangers" provisions since there may also be a case to made on those points, too. Did the police officers feel that they were endangered? Was walking into a police station with exposed weapons an act of opposition to the police?

To most of us, open carrying in a location where it is otherwise legal is not brandishing. In Michigan, is walking around in public with an automatic rifle on your chest considered brandishing?

My guess is that the prosecutor will, initially, throw the book at these guys. Assuming that the accused have good lawyers, it wouldn't surprise me if the charges are negotiated down to just misdemeanor brandishing with a fine as punishment.

 

[HoughMade]

Also, I am unclear what an "assault" is in Michigan. Most people think of it like a battery, but in the civil context, it is putting someone in reasonable apprehension of an imminent battery. I haven't taken the time to see what the definition in Michigan is for the purposes of this statute.

 

[Birds Away]

Kind of just spitballing here. The definition of terrorism is the use of violence and threats to intimidate or coerce, especially for political purposes. Just curious how close these guys come to the definition. I realize this is a stretch.

 

[yeahbaby]

Regardless of how this turns out I have to believe it's going to be an expensive stunt. Lawyer fees, looks like they had to post bail. Possible lost time for work. All could of been avoided if they took their masks off, left the guns in the vehicle. Then go in and file the complaint.