Glock Talk

Glock Talk (http://glocktalk.com/forums/index.php)
-   Gun-Control Issues (http://glocktalk.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   James Yeager Revoked of Concealed Carry Permit. (http://glocktalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1465200)

ParabellumChambered 01-16-2013 18:00

James Yeager Revoked of Concealed Carry Permit.
 
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.co...tical-response

I feel like he had this coming after posting that video stating he will "start killing people." He posed a very real threat to the general public and set a horrible example for us responsible gun owners. :brickwall:

What do you guys think?

RPVG 01-16-2013 18:28

Agreed. Very irresponsible. It's one thing to feel that way... it's another to come out and say it in a public forum like an internet video. He should know better.

ParabellumChambered 01-16-2013 18:43

I wonder if he will ever me eligible for one again.

Annoyinglylongname 01-16-2013 19:20

I think that the fewer hotheaded tools we have out front as spokesmen, the better. I agree with their stands, I even concur with their feelings, but we need to present a more more reasoned and reasonable approach to this situation.
What we really need is some of the hot Hollywood types that are pro-gun to get out front and show responsible gun use as a shining example to the world.

WinterWizard 01-17-2013 02:08

I think what he said was stupid. On the other hand, they revoked his CCL before a trial and conviction of a crime. So in essence, they are operating outside the law and outside the judicial system. You cool with that?

It will cost him a lot of money and a couple years to get it back, if he can.

Law enforcement are using any excuse possible to take people's guns and gun rights away right now. Watch what you say, boys.

Say something mildly inciting, you are a terrorist. Bye, bye guns.
Say something depressing, you are suicidal. Bye, bye guns.
Say something agressive, you are violent. Bye, bye guns.
Speak against the government, you are inciting riots. Bye, bye guns.
Say something strange to the doctor, you are mentally unstable. Bye, bye guns.

Laws be damned at this point. It's revoke first, ask questions later.

RichardB 01-17-2013 14:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by WinterWizard (Post 19875127)
I think what he said was stupid. On the other hand, they revoked his CCL before a trial and conviction of a crime. So in essence, they are operating outside the law and outside the judicial system. .

No, they are operating within the perameters of his own state's laws. A criminal complaint or trial is not needed.

The Army screwed up when they did not nip Major Hassein in the bud when he first started running his mouth, look what then happened at Ft Hood. This state is not going to make the same mistake.

I believe his original remarks and not his lawyered up apology is the real Yeager.

WinterWizard 01-17-2013 20:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichardB (Post 19877152)
No, they are operating within the perameters of his own state's laws. A criminal complaint or trial is not needed.

In Tennessee a criminal compaint or trial is not needed to convict someone of a crime? Please explain. Also, please cite the specific Tennessee criminal code he broke and provide a link.

I will say again I think it was stupid and he shouldn't have said it, but his "threat" was conditional, not directed any specific person or group, no one was in imminent danger and no one was subsequently harmed as a result of this conditional, hypothetical "threat."

Jerry 01-17-2013 20:52

A CCW is a "privilege". It can be suspended or revoked pending a hearing. I believe they said he can request a hearing. You didn't think CCW was a right did you. :shame:

RussP 01-17-2013 22:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by WinterWizard (Post 19878710)
In Tennessee a criminal compaint or trial is not needed to convict someone of a crime? Please explain. Also, please cite the specific Tennessee criminal code he broke and provide a link.

I will say again I think it was stupid and he shouldn't have said it, but his "threat" was conditional, not directed any specific person or group, no one was in imminent danger and no one was subsequently harmed as a result of this conditional, hypothetical "threat."

He was not "convicted" of a crime.

Tennessee law says the DOS may suspend a handgun carry permit when presented with sufficient evidence that there is a "material likelihood of harm to the public."

It is a suspension, not a revocation. He had 10-days to surrender his permit. He may appeal the decision within 30-days either with a hearing with the DOS or in General Sessions Court.

And, if you think what you post on the internet will not be considered as evidence by DOS, you are very wrong. When a former GT member had his permit suspended, the State had a 3" stack of printouts of his posts on several forums going back several years. His posts were considered in the decision to suspend.

WinterWizard 01-17-2013 22:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerry (Post 19878765)
A CCW is a "privilege". It can be suspended or revoked pending a hearing. I believe they said he can request a hearing. You didn't think CCW was a right did you. :shame:

Never said it was. Was simply asking for the law he broke. Driving is also a privilege, but you have to break a law for them to take it away. If you went on YouTube and said, "I am going to go 120mph on the freeway this weekend, they wouldn't be able to take away your license, nor would they.

WinterWizard 01-17-2013 22:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by RussP (Post 19879146)
He was not "convicted" of a crime.

Tennessee law says the DOS may suspend a handgun carry permit when presented with sufficient evidence that there is a "material likelihood of harm to the public."

It is a suspension, not a revocation. He had 10-days to surrender his permit. He may appeal the decision within 30-days either with a hearing with the DOS or in General Sessions Court.

And, if you think what you post on the internet will not be considered as evidence by DOS, you are very wrong. When a former GT member had his permit suspended, the State had a 3" stack of printouts of his posts on several forums going back several years. His posts were considered in the decision to suspend.

This is all true. And only a fool would think a YouTube video is not evidence. I am simply saying what he did, in my non-professional opinion, does not constitute a crime. But whatever. I have no stake in defending James Yeager. I am not an alumni of his courses, nor do I know him in any way. I don't really care at this point. Whatever.

JabbaNoBother 01-18-2013 09:57

YouTube...supplying the "tool to broadcast" millions of idiots since 2005

jhc37013 01-18-2013 14:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by ParabellumChambered (Post 19873307)
http://livewire.talkingpointsmemo.co...tical-response

I feel like he had this coming after posting that video stating he will "start killing people." He posed a very real threat to the general public and set a horrible example for us responsible gun owners. :brickwall:

What do you guys think?


What about the people who are playing/promoting the NRA video game with the NRA president being the target? How about all the people who have said that NRA members should have to shoot their own children, I guess all is fair as long as your going after the "gun nuts".

http://www.examiner.com/article/anti...their-children

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepa...-head-n1489825

RussP 01-18-2013 14:13

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhc37013 (Post 19881371)
What about the people who are playing/promoting the NRA video game with the NRA president being the target? How about all the people who have said that NRA members should have to shoot their own children, I guess all is fair as long as your going after the "gun nuts".

http://www.examiner.com/article/anti...their-children

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepa...-head-n1489825

If any are citizens of Tennessee with handgun carry permits, file a complaint with DOS.

jhc37013 01-18-2013 14:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by RussP (Post 19881384)
If any are citizens of Tennessee with handgun carry permits, file a complaint with DOS.

Nah I'm more inclined to have less government tell me what I can't say and I feel the same way for people I disagree with, I love this country and it's free speech and it certainly should not change just because I disagree with what other citizens say.

I do take notice though when I see one person who has a view and is criminalized and these other people can say anything(kill NRA members and children) and do anything (make/play this game) and you hear of no authorities getting involved.

Jerry 01-18-2013 17:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by WinterWizard (Post 19879153)
Never said it was. Was simply asking for the law he broke. Driving is also a privilege, but you have to break a law for them to take it away. If you went on YouTube and said, "I am going to go 120mph on the freeway this weekend, they wouldn't be able to take away your license, nor would they.

You do not have to brake a law. All they need is a reasonable suspicion. In this case a video of a threat being made. Then you have to prover them wrong.

I can say I heard you threaten someone. You and I both know it's a lie but they will suspend your CCW until you prove it a lie. It's called error on the side of caution.

Jerry 01-18-2013 17:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhc37013 (Post 19881371)
What about the people who are playing/promoting the NRA video game with the NRA president being the target? How about all the people who have said that NRA members should have to shoot their own children, I guess all is fair as long as your going after the "gun nuts".

http://www.examiner.com/article/anti...their-children

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepa...-head-n1489825

It falls in the same category as the Black Panther leader offering a bounty to have someone killed, or Black Panthers with sticks intimidating people at polls. Or BATF&E supplying our enemies with automatic weapons... on and on and on... It's OK because they are on the "Libtard" side. :steamed:

WinterWizard 01-18-2013 19:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jerry (Post 19882320)
You do not have to brake a law. All they need is a reasonable suspicion. In this case a video of a threat being made. Then you have to prover them wrong.

Obviously that is the case here. I am saying I think that it's wrong. It's one of the ways they twist around the justice system. Instead of charging someone with a crime and having to bear the burden of truth (innocent until proven guilty), they are skipping all that and passing the burden of proof onto the person accused (guilty until proven innocent). And I don't care if this is in reference to a privilege and judicial process doesn't apply. This is America and that ain't right, and I ain't cool with it.

If he is such a threat, why didn't they take away his guns altogether? If he was really such a threat, do you really think taking away his "privilege" to carry concealed would really prevent a crime? This was a political statement, pure and simple. Talk crap about the government, pay the consequences. Dissenters will not be tolerated. They will mess with your life in any way possible.

RussP 01-18-2013 20:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by WinterWizard (Post 19882642)
Obviously that is the case here. I am saying I think that it's wrong. It's one of the ways they twist around the justice system. Instead of charging someone with a crime and having to bear the burden of truth (innocent until proven guilty), they are skipping all that and passing the burden of proof onto the person accused (guilty until proven innocent). And I don't care if this is in reference to a privilege and judicial process doesn't apply. This is America and that ain't right, and I ain't cool with it.

If he is such a threat, why didn't they take away his guns altogether? If he was really such a threat, do you really think taking away his "privilege" to carry concealed would really prevent a crime? This was a political statement, pure and simple. Talk crap about the government, pay the consequences. Dissenters will not be tolerated. They will mess with your life in any way possible.

Go to this website Material Likelihood of Risk of Harm to the Public for other times when Tennessee used this provision in the law.

Jerry 01-18-2013 21:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by WinterWizard (Post 19882642)
Obviously that is the case here. I am saying I think that it's wrong. It's one of the ways they twist around the justice system. Instead of charging someone with a crime and having to bear the burden of truth (innocent until proven guilty), they are skipping all that and passing the burden of proof onto the person accused (guilty until proven innocent). And I don't care if this is in reference to a privilege and judicial process doesn't apply. This is America and that ain't right, and I ain't cool with it.

If he is such a threat, why didn't they take away his guns altogether? If he was really such a threat, do you really think taking away his "privilege" to carry concealed would really prevent a crime? This was a political statement, pure and simple. Talk crap about the government, pay the consequences. Dissenters will not be tolerated. They will mess with your life in any way possible.

Your first paragraph is correct. As to the second. He's lucky they didn't. I often say things here... The Truth... then I wait for a knock or kick. Thankfully it hasn't come. :whistling:


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 22:21.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright 2013, Glock Talk, All Rights Reserved.