[Mayhem like Me]

FYI
This guy is a first class Nimrod.
My guys have run into him on more than one occasion he has been asked to leave businesses and uses the word "sheeple"

He's a grumpy hermit.

[Bren]

Originally Posted by Mayhem like Me

FYI
This guy is a first class Nimrod.
My guys have run into him on more than one occasion he has been asked to leave businesses and uses the word "sheeple"

He's a grumpy hermit.

I hope his BS lawsuit costs him a bundle and gets him nothing. People like this are the worst enemies shooters and gun owners have - they can do more harm than any lefty anti-gunner. What makes a bigger impression, a hippie saying people with guns are nuts, or a real live example of a nut with a gun?

[FlCracker70]

I read the report and I think he has a case. It has nothing to do with OC or any gun laws in particular. The story is that he was in a public park and was asked to leave. Georgia Code - Crimes and Offenses - Title 16, Section 16-7-21 states


(a) A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she intentionally damages any property of another without consent of that other person and the damage thereto is $500.00 or less or knowingly and maliciously interferes with the possession or use of the property of another person without consent of that person.

(b) A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she knowingly and without authority:

(1) Enters upon the land or premises of another person or into any part of any vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person for an unlawful purpose;

(2) Enters upon the land or premises of another person or into any part of any vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person after receiving, prior to such entry, notice from the owner, rightful occupant, or, upon proper identification, an authorized representative of the owner or rightful occupant that such entry is forbidden; or

(3) Remains upon the land or premises of another person or within the vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft of another person after receiving notice from the owner, rightful occupant, or, upon proper identification, an authorized representative of the owner or rightful occupant to depart.

(c) For the purposes of subsection (b) of this Code section, permission to enter or invitation to enter given by a minor who is or is not present on or in the property of the minor´s parent or guardian is not sufficient to allow lawful entry of another person upon the land, premises, vehicle, railroad car, aircraft, or watercraft owned or rightfully occupied by such minor´s parent or guardian if such parent or guardian has previously given notice that such entry is forbidden or notice to depart.

(d) A person who commits the offense of criminal trespass shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.

(e) A person commits the offense of criminal trespass when he or she intentionally defaces, mutilates, or defiles any grave marker, monument, or memorial to one or more deceased persons who served in the military service of this state, the United States of America or any of the states thereof, or the Confederate States of America or any of the states thereof, or a monument, plaque, marker, or memorial which is dedicated to, honors, or recounts the military service of any past or present military personnel of this state, the United States of America or any of the states thereof, or the Confederate States of America or any of the states thereof if such grave marker, monument, memorial, plaque, or marker is privately owned or located on land which is privately owned.

The complaint stated that he was being asked to leave for being "evasive" in his answers to the security guard. He is under no obligation to even talk to the security guard nor does he even need to talk to the police.

This guy is likely an *sshole but frankly its people like this who highlight what the limits of the law are. I think that in this case he was being harassed for being in *ss. This is not illegal in any state and I would like to see cases like this result in losses to the city. These losses would result in a change in behavior by the police.

[Warp]

Originally Posted by TBO

Why would one person need justification to approach another person?

Why does the answer to this question matter?

[RussP]

Originally Posted by Drain You

I was only able to squint through the first report. In it I was not able to find anything that justified the security guard or police approaching him.

Because Drain You brought it up...

I would also ask Drain You...well, I'll do that in another post, so it will not get lost.

[Hour13]

Sounds to me like this guy went to the park hoping to end his day with an arrest.

"Making a statement" or "making money"?
Either way, guy's a ******. Thanks pal, love when it's the gun owners giving us bad press.

[RussP]

Originally Posted by Hour13

Sounds to me like this guy went to the park hoping to end his day with an arrest.

How did you reach that conclusion, that he went hoping to be arrested?

[Warp]

Originally Posted by Hour13

Sounds to me like this guy went to the park hoping to end his day with an arrest.

"Making a statement" or "making money"?
Either way, guy's a ******. Thanks pal, love when it's the gun owners giving us bad press.

I don't know why he went to the park, but I agree with the bad press.

Even if the arrest was not justified (and I'm not really seeing how it was...), I still do not personally support his actions. That just isn't the way to go about it, at all, IMO.


BTW: I live in Gwinnett County. (where this incident took place)

[RussP]

Originally Posted by Drain You

I was only able to squint through the first report. In it I was not able to find anything that justified the security guard or police approaching him.

Drain You, when you say "justified," well, first, lets break it down into the security guard's actions and then the police officers' actions.

When you say you do not find anything that justified the security guard approaching Proescher, do you mean he had no legal reason to approach him, or he no reason to approach him.

As to the police officers, they responded to a call from the security guard. Is that not a justification to approach?

[Sam Spade]

Originally Posted by Warp

BTW: I live in Gwinnett County. (where this incident took place)

I gather that he's fairly active in the OC world, and works/worked at a gun shop. Have you had any dealings with him that might shed light on this episode?

[Bren]

Originally Posted by FlCracker70

I read the report and I think he has a case. It has nothing to do with OC or any gun laws in particular. The story is that he was in a public park and was asked to leave. Georgia Code - Crimes and Offenses - Title 16, Section 16-7-21 states

The complaint stated that he was being asked to leave for being "evasive" in his answers to the security guard. He is under no obligation to even talk to the security guard nor does he even need to talk to the police.

This guy is likely an *sshole but frankly its people like this who highlight what the limits of the law are. I think that in this case he was being harassed for being in *ss. This is not illegal in any state and I would like to see cases like this result in losses to the city. These losses would result in a change in behavior by the police.

Looks like he was arrested for not leaving when he was told, by what appears to be an identified representative. Not having an obligation to answer questions seems to be irrelevant, even if that's was the whole story.

[Bren]

Originally Posted by Drain You

I was only able to squint through the first report. In it I was not able to find anything that justified the security guard or police approaching him.

A girl scout can "approach you" and ask you questions in public, just like anybody else. In this case, bizarre behavior and carrying a gun in a park, where there may also be an ordinance against carrying guns, seems ot be the issue that got their attention. However, no legal authority is required to ask him questions.

Is your argument that a man near a playground with a gun can't even be questioned until he commits a crime, like shooting somebody?

I can tell you, as somebody who has litigated the issue in court, you are dead wrong.

[chammer]

Originally Posted by Bren

Looks like he was arrested for not leaving when he was told, by what appears to be an identified representative. Not having an obligation to answer questions seems to be irrelevant, even if that's was the whole story.

Right, but that appears to pertain to private property only. The park in question is city owned. I'm not sure how it works in GA, or how you could be forced to leave public property. It's kind of impossible...isn't it?

I'm not seeing any actual laws being broken, just the guy being a pain in the butt and the authorities just throwing something general out there sort of like "disturbing the peace" or some such.

Either way, right or wrong, the guy should have just left and came back later. Starting a war with police on the street is never going to end well.

[Mayhem like Me]

Originally Posted by chammer

Right, but that appears to pertain to private property only. The park in question is city owned. I'm not sure how it works in GA, or how you could be forced to leave public property. It's kind of impossible...isn't it?

I'm not seeing any actual laws being broken, just the guy being a pain in the butt and the authorities just throwing something general out there sort of like "disturbing the peace" or some such.

Either way, right or wrong, the guy should have just left and came back later. Starting a war with police on the street is never going to end well.

you can be asked to leave public property especially parks for any number of reasons .
there are about 6 to 8 parks closer to his house than the 1 he was kicked out of .there is a reason he went to the park that has a full time security person .that reason was to cause a commotion and be noticed because he carries a gun mmm big man .

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

[Sam Spade]

Originally Posted by chammer

I'm not sure how it works in GA, or how you could be forced to leave public property. It's kind of impossible...isn't it?

Not at all impossible, as the Occupy crowd has discovered.

[Warp]

Originally Posted by Sam Spade

I gather that he's fairly active in the OC world, and works/worked at a gun shop. Have you had any dealings with him that might shed light on this episode?

Based on the name alone I have no recollection of him, unfortunately.

[Warp]

Originally Posted by Mayhem like Me

you can be asked to leave public property especially parks for any number of reasons .
there are about 6 to 8 parks closer to his house than the 1 he was kicked out of .there is a reason he went to the park that has a full time security person .that reason was to cause a commotion and be noticed because he carries a gun mmm big man .

What are you basing this on?

[Bren]

Originally Posted by chammer

Right, but that appears to pertain to private property only. The park in question is city owned. I'm not sure how it works in GA, or how you could be forced to leave public property. It's kind of impossible...isn't it?

I'm not seeing any actual laws being broken, just the guy being a pain in the butt and the authorities just throwing something general out there sort of like "disturbing the peace" or some such.

Either way, right or wrong, the guy should have just left and came back later. Starting a war with police on the street is never going to end well.

Being publicly owned doesn't mean you get to do as you please there - it is controlled by the government, just like the publicly owned county jail or police department. A representative of the government can tell you to leave, unless there is some law preventing it (constitution, statute, etc.). Think of all those "occupy _" protestors being arrested in public parks. A government official of some kind (including police) tells them to leave and then the police arrest those who don't. Same thing.

[Bren]

Originally Posted by Warp

What are you basing this on?

If you take his post and the description of what the "activist" nut did, it couldn't be more clear what he's basing it on.

[RussP]

Originally Posted by Mayhem like Me

you can be asked to leave public property especially parks for any number of reasons .
there are about 6 to 8 parks closer to his house than the 1 he was kicked out of .there is a reason he went to the park that has a full time security person .that reason was to cause a commotion and be noticed because he carries a gun mmm big man .

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine

Without revealing the actual address or street, where does he live?

[Search]

Originally Posted by OlliesRevenge

I'm a career firefighter for a Big "West Coast 7" City up here in the NorthWest, and I work in the south "culturally diverse" side of that city... so I get to see you guys and gals in blue on alot of the same runs (I've pulled many taser darts out of your "customers"). I have seen the kind of people you have to deal with... Basically I "get it", just judging from the photo, I'm not inviting Christopher Proescher to my back yard BBQ either.

What I don't get is why these OC confrontations always wind up in a @!$$!#& contest to get the OCer to show ID.

I don't personally OC, but I have several friends who do (one of whom has actually had one of these "Papers Please" encounters). With minor variations, it's always the same story -

• · Nervous Nellie citizen calls 911 to report OC'er

• · Cop shows up, knows OC is perfectly legal but wants to see ID - "To ensure the scene is safe" (like that will prove anything).

• · OC'er just happens to be a Ron Paul libertarian who knows his rights (go figure!). He says something like : "Given the fact that I'm not driving, and am not required to carry my Drivers License when I'm a pedestrian, what kind of ID would you like to see officer?"

• · Situation either escalates into an arrest for some creative infraction ('cause the initial reason for contact - OC, is legal) OR either OC'er or cop capitulates.

The basic point is that the OC'er isn't breaking the law, so I'll just ask; "Why the need to ID?...What will it prove?" I don't want to get into a big discussion about social psychology and the need to establish Alpha dominance, so I'll circumvent that issue and simply ask - Wouldn't it be pretty easy to articulate the rationale for complete inaction in this case?

You arrive on scene to investigate an OC complaint and witness an adult male carrying an expensive firearm in a quality holster openly on his belt... he's clearly not a "banger", or a 220 nutjob. He's just "That Guy", the passionate gun enthusiast making his statement (one I know drives a minivan... sheesh). If we input the details of this scenario into the critical thinking - Street Smart section of our grey matter, the output would clearly be..... 'This Person Is Not a Threat'... and as an added bonus they weren't even breaking the law in the 1st place! They could win the prize of NOT even being contacted by Law Enforcement today!

Feel free to stop by the station and use the restroom, just don't raid the fridge!

My .02

I've seen kids try to kill us. I've had my life threatened by an old woman with a gun. I've seen a guy that could be a preacher try to run over another cop. I remember the West Memphis, AK incident when a father and son in a church van killed those cops.

I don't care if you look like little red riding hood. You're getting treated the same as I would with anyone. The only exceptions are known trouble makers because my sense of security is heightened.

That mindset is how you get killed in todays world. That's just how things are.

When I'm called to a scene or detain you and you fail to provide ID or provide mis-matching information, a big red flag goes up.

When I ask you for a your drivers license and you tell me you didn't drive I'm one step closer to arresting you.

Just because it says drivers licenses doesn't mean it isn't considered an official form of identification. There are others I can ask for, but that is the hands down most common. I'm not looking for issue a ticket for running a stop sign or checking your DL status. I'm looking for who you are and it is going to tell me.

It's that simple. You fail to prove who you are when I ask and your arrested until you either get over yourself and tell me or I prove it. That's the law and there are reasons that are too obvious to type out.

You have no idea how many people I've arrested on warrants after IDing them at random. If you have nothing to hide, just let us do our jobs and then move on. It's when people argue that 9 times out of 10 something they don't want you to know comes to light.

If the guy you decided to give a break happens to be a serial killer from another state and then goes off and kills someone your close to.. now what. You had a chance and passed it up.

I'm saying "you" in a general sense, not calling you out Ollie. Thanks for serving on the other side

[Sam Spade]

Originally Posted by RussP

Without revealing the actual address or street, where does he live?

There's a link to his neighborhood on page one. It's with the mugshot; post #2.

[RussP]

Originally Posted by Bren

If you take his post and the description of what the "activist" nut did, it couldn't be more clear what he's basing it on.

Does Mr. Proescher have a history of previously doing what he did?

[RussP]

Originally Posted by RussP

Without revealing the actual address or street, where does he live?

Originally Posted by Sam Spade

There's a link to his neighborhood on page one. It's with the mugshot; post #2.

Well, DUH!!! Thank you...

[Mayhem like Me]

Originally Posted by RussP

Without revealing the actual address or street, where does he live?

it's on the arrest report.

Outdoor Hub mobile, the outdoor information engine