State suspends gun carry permit for James Yeager

[DaveS]

Revoke his permit for protected speech...  If his speech in the video was a criminal act charge him (and in the process he will loose his permit while the criminal charges get sorted out)....  If the speech is not a criminal act then it's protected, and to use that protected speech as the reason to revoke his permit is a CLEAR violation of the 1st Amendment.

Since when is making a verbal threat to KILL PEOPLE protected under the first admendment? Walk into any store USA and threaten to start killing people and your First Amendment rights go right out the window, as they give you full opportunity to exercise your Fifth Amendment rights!  Threatening to start killing people is a very serious matter in these days and times!

 

Dave S

[Dolomite_supafly]

I will say this OPSEC is the first part of preparing to meet you enemy. Yeager has forgotten this and laid out his plans for all the world to see. Now his tools to resist are going to be taken away. Just because someone doesn't want to jump on here or on national television and scream their plans doesn't mean they are cowards. What it does mean is they are not fools like Yeager. How effective can you be against an adversary if you tell the adversary what you are going to do? And anyone that does lay out their plans, on here or anywhere else, is a fool just like Yeager.

 

Yeager has secured his fate and ensured he will not have as many guns if anything kicks off. There are several alphabet agency's securing search warrants right now to seize his firearms, ammunition and his records. His fight is not going to stop with TDOS, the feds are going to use a sigmoidscope, shoved so far up his ass that it tickles his tonsils, to look for any more weapons before everything is said and done. We will read about it in a week or two about him having stockpiles of ammunition and weapons. As well as a few other things he isn't supposed to have. They are going to secure computers and financial records. Then he will be used as evidence in hearings that will no doubt have an impact on all of us legal gun owners.

 

Also, think about this. Yeager has probably kept records of every single student. He, and his alumni, could loosly be termed an "organization" by stating his alumni are "waitiing for orders". And with Yeager making threats like he has the feds are going to secure those lists during the search and begin looking into them. And Yeager gave them the ammunition, so to speak, to be able to do it. The secondary investigations may not go far but Yeager opened that door.

 

I can say without a doubt I have spent more time in his shoes while overseas than he ever has. I have worked for several companies and paid my dues during that time. And yes, I have taken fire and done so on more than one trip and multiple times each trip. I have lost several friends over there. I will not second guess what Yeager did during the ambush, it could have been his first. What I will second guess him on is his willingness to blame everyone else except himself in his reports after the fact. Did him taking the car out of gear cause those people to die? I don't know but it sure didn't help them live.

 

I have said it before and I will say it again, Yeager is a tool and has been for a very, very long time. He was fired from his LE job then got into contracting and was going to be fired from it as well had the “incident” not secured his fate with ERSM. He managed to find the only place he couldn't be fired from, his own company. But the feds are fixing to fire him from that one as well.

 

He has said in subsequent interviews he will kill anyone who tries to take his guns. I suspect he will get his chance.

 

Dolomite

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Let's see, right now, we are on the 7th page of advertizing for James Yeager. I thought someone talked about that, once?

 

Gun show's got to be more fun, today. The weather looks to be okay outside.

[Sam1]

I don't think this thread would qualify for any kind of productive advertising lol

[TMF]

[quote name="6.8 AR" post="882525" timestamp="1357999544"]Let's see, right now, we are on the 7th page of advertizing for James Yeager. I thought someone talked about that, once?   .[/quote] Ha, well at this point I don't believe it makes a difference, especially because he is all over the news. Besides, he admitted that his certs are expired, which I'm sure will cause an audit of some kind if he was still conducting business that required any certs to be current. Also, I'm betting that his legion of instructors are jumping ship as we speak. He just shot himself in the foot in regard to his business. I don't see him recovering. But this is all good theater when you consider the history of all the other bonehead things he's said in the past, so I'm entertained with the train wreck unfolding, but sad that this is going to be used against you and I in the fight to keep the 2A intact.

[Sam1]

He strikes again!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wD5kuOMIVts

 

Looks like someone has taken a whole bunch of those inches from his ego.

Edited January 12, 2013 by Sam1

[TMF]

This is good theater. Maybe this is why chicks are into reality shows. Oh yeah, what a little biach. Somebody shoulda told him, if you want to roll with the big dogs you can't piss like a pup.

[Dolomite_supafly]

I suspect Yeager is about to get some inches. Maybe not where he had hoped.

 

Dolomite

[DaveTN]

All things being equal, do you believe that this video would have gotten this kind of attention pre Sandy Hook? Would his permit still have been pulled?

Yes, all this gun control legislation was in the works prior to Sandy Hook, they were just waiting for the Obama reelection. He doesn’t have to worry about getting reelected now and can try anything he likes. I think there is a very good possibility the swift action on Yeager came from a phone call from higher ups out of state.
 

Suspending his permit isnt going to cover their ass if he did do something. People will say the state knew he was a gun owner and they didnt take them away.

The SCOTUS ruled he has a right to own guns, the state will determine where and when he can carry them. It would require civil action such as a mental competency hearing or a criminal conviction to take his guns, but to take his carry privileges is much easier.
 

Since when is making a verbal threat to KILL PEOPLE protected under the first admendment? Walk into any store USA and threaten to start killing people and your First Amendment rights go right out the window, as they give you full opportunity to exercise your Fifth Amendment rights! Threatening to start killing people is a very serious matter in these days and times!

Dave S

It has yet to be determined that what he said is covered as a 1st amendment right. That would be tested if he was arrested, or will be tested in his hearing on his permit. I expect you will see a whole different level of legal expertise and respect of the defense when this goes to the hearing as opposed to the last time we saw that.
 

Looks like someone has taken a whole bunch of those inches from his ego.

This is what I expected in the beginning. I should have known he was too stupid to do it. Obviously this is now in the hands of someone besides Yeager. The biggest problem they will have is keeping their clients mouth shut.

[TMF]

[quote name="DaveTN" post="882595" timestamp="1358006103"]It has yet to be determined that what he said is covered as a 1st amendment right. That would be tested if he was arrested, or will be tested in his hearing on his permit. I expect you will see a whole different level of legal expertise and respect of the defense when this goes to the hearing as opposed to the last time we saw that. [/quote] I'm betting that he gets it back. That will be yet another story that the media goes after to make our state look crazy for giving this man back his permit to carry a firearm, but then again they all think Tennessee is off the rails anyhow.

[mikegideon]

Let's break this down a little. James did a really stupid thing with that first video. It didn't take him long to realize the stupidity, so he pulled the video and lopped off the stuff that was over the line. Then, he came back the next day and doubled down, adding even another layer of stupid. Note that the Libtard crusaders never showed the edited version of his first video. Not enough juice.

 

Meanwhile, his antics inspired comments from some of the sane members of our community. Travis and the Military Arms guy come to mind. This was a good thing, and helped with concensus building. A lot was said about lines in the sand. So, while James gave the gun grabbing machine lots of ammo, he also inspired some dialog from the good guys.

 

Finally, James borrows a brain from his attorney, and comes out with a message that's in line with the roughly formed concensus. "It's not time." To me, that doesn't mean "Take my guns and pass the granola".

Edited January 12, 2013 by mikegideon

[ProjectDexter]

This is all just a media frenzy, you know he's still carrying those glocks with or without a permit. What irks me is that I could grab thousands of videos from the Internet that would put what Yeager said to shame and yet nothing has been done to those people. You got libs talking about mass murdering gun owners because THEY'RE GUN OWNERS!

This is all happening because the guy has a large platform of followers through his company and someone sitting in a comfy chair on the top floor somewhere thinks that could be dangerous.

[JayC]

Dave,

 

Again you start in with no basis in what current case law says...  People make statements about wishing people dead, or wanting to kill people all the time and it's protected by the first amendment...  While walking into a store and yelling I'm going to kill everybody here is clearly a criminal threat and not protected speech...  but go out to a public park, hold a KKK/Black Panther rally and say "kill all the XXXXX", is protected speech. (Which is why neither of those groups are arrested when making such statements)

 

I made an attempt to CITE a court case where such speech was held to be protected, can you cite a case where somebody was convicted for a non-direct threat such as the one Yeager made?

 

So don't bother arguing with me about protected vs unprotected speech unless you can back it up with SCOTUS rulings please.

 

Since when is making a verbal threat to KILL PEOPLE protected under the first admendment? Walk into any store USA and threaten to start killing people and your First Amendment rights go right out the window, as they give you full opportunity to exercise your Fifth Amendment rights!  Threatening to start killing people is a very serious matter in these days and times!

 

Dave S

 

 

[TMF]

[quote name="mikegideon" post="882613" timestamp="1358006941"] Finally, James borrows a brain from his attorney, and comes out with a message that's in line with the roughly formed concensus. "It's not time." To me, that doesn't mean "Take my guns and pass the granola".[/quote] No, but it shows that his word is absolutely worthless and his tough guy act is, well, just an act. I would agree with just about everything in his latest vid, but this guy sells himself on being this tactical guru tough guy, and the reality is he is just a blowhard that is full of so much BS its comin out his ears. This is the reason I have always ridiculed his stupid videos he puts out as his legion of fanboys tout that no one would call him a coward to his face. Well before three days ago I wouldn't call him a coward, but now I know he is and I would absolutely call him in person if my opinion was solicited. Before I just thought he was a douchebag.

[mikegideon]

I'm betting that he gets it back. That will be yet another story that the media goes after to make our state look crazy for giving this man back his permit to carry a firearm, but then again they all think Tennessee is off the rails anyhow.

 

I'll bet he gets it back too. He didn't just crawl out from under a rock. The guys that pinched his permit know he's a blowhard. They also know he's an ex-cop, and has done his time for the good guys. I can hear off-the-record the conversation between his attorney and the judge now. "Look, we both know James is an idiot, but is also one of the good guys. He'll stay out of trouble from now on".

[Dolomite_supafly]

http://www.wsmv.com/story/20559778/tn-firearms-instructor-gains-attention-from-youtube-rant?autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=8167819

At 3:36 in the video has states he is going to shoot anyone who comes to take his guns. This is long after he was probably warned hundreds of times. He loves to be "radical" as he says but that only draws attention and in this case more than he will probably be able to handle.

We are finding ourselves be represented by idiots we did not choose and I, for o e, would like Yeager to quit representing me.

Dolomite

[mikegideon]

No, but it shows that his word is absolutely worthless and his tough guy act is, well, just an act. I would agree with just about everything in his latest vid, but this guy sells himself on being this tactical guru tough guy, and the reality is he is just a blowhard that is full of so much BS its comin out his ears. This is the reason I have always ridiculed his stupid videos he puts out as his legion of fanboys tout that no one would call him a coward to his face. Well before three days ago I wouldn't call him a coward, but now I know he is and I would absolutely call him in person if my opinion was solicited. Before I just thought he was a douchebag.

 

I agree. When it comes to him, the story is always bigger than the guy. His mouth turned him into a useful idiot for the Huffpo crowd. THEY are our true enemies.

 

I don't get too hung up on Yeager's douchebag level. I've been in the media my whole adult life. I've known lots of folks that make their living in front of cameras and microphones. Some of them have been big names. What comes out of their mouths is usually not the same as what you get when they're off mic. Yeager isn't a pro, but does use video to promote himself and build an audience.

[mikegideon]

http://www.wsmv.com/story/20559778/tn-firearms-instructor-gains-attention-from-youtube-rant?autoStart=true&topVideoCatNo=default&clipId=8167819

At 3:36 in the video has states he is going to shoot anyone who comes to take his guns. This is long after he was probably warned hundreds of times. He loves to be "radical" as he says but that only draws attention and in this case more than he will probably be able to handle.

We are finding ourselves be represented by idiots we did not choose and I, for o e, would like Yeager to quit representing me.

Dolomite

 

I think you may get your wish, G. I think he's been firmly placed into STFU mode :)

[Guest 6.8 AR]

"Yeager has secured his fate and ensured he will not have as many guns if anything kicks off. There are several alphabet agency's securing search warrants right now to seize his firearms, ammunition and his records. His fight is not going to stop with TDOS, the feds are going to use a sigmoidscope, shoved so far up his ass that it tickles his tonsils, to look for any more weapons before everything is said and done. We will read about it in a week or two about him having stockpiles of ammunition and weapons. As well as a few other things he isn't supposed to have. They are going to secure computers and financial records. Then he will be used as evidence in hearings that will no doubt have an impact on all of us legal gun owners."

 

Gordon, is this through some kind of inside knowledge, or just an educated guess? You know, you still have to break the

law to get that kind of treatment, or at least you used to have. Because of some kind of video statement, comparing this to

a person of a different race saying he wanted to kill crackahs is any different? If the feds do what you suggest, we have

gone down the road to Hell further if we allowed such. And if you buy into the idea of letting them get away with that, you

may have, also. There is something called "Justice", I think, in America. Cynicism and dislike for someone doesn't mean

it isn't worth fighting for.

 

There are things like probable cause, going in front of a judge to obtain warrants, and other restrictions that may or may not

be considered of any value any more. That's enough for concern from me. It wasn't like this before.

 

Keep this up and no one will be able to say anything much longer. Just sit in our cubbyholes and think about things, until

that can be pulled out of our heads: Minority Report. Chew on that!

 

I see where we humanoids are heading and it ain't pretty. Get a copy of the Constitution and read it again. Think about what

it says, and think about how far off things have gone before you jump ship on it. It is still worth defending, don't you think?

 

"Equal justice under the law" Now, where have I seen that?

 

I'm so glad I turned off the TV, a while back. I'm going to try and keep what's left of my sanity.

 

How many have read "Dark Rivers of the Heart", by Dean Koontz? Maybe that story would wake up some.

Edited January 12, 2013 by 6.8 AR

[DaveS]

Dave,

 

Again you start in with no basis in what current case law says...  People make statements about wishing people dead, or wanting to kill people all the time and it's protected by the first amendment...  While walking into a store and yelling I'm going to kill everybody here is clearly a criminal threat and not protected speech...  but go out to a public park, hold a KKK/Black Panther rally and say "kill all the XXXXX", is protected speech. (Which is why neither of those groups are arrested when making such statements)

 

I made an attempt to CITE a court case where such speech was held to be protected, can you cite a case where somebody was convicted for a non-direct threat such as the one Yeager made?

 

So don't bother arguing with me about protected vs unprotected speech unless you can back it up with SCOTUS rulings please.

Can you cite a case?

 

Dave S

[Punisher84]

Ok enough of this case citing BS. How about The Smith Act of 1940?

 

Title I. Subversive activities. The Smith Act set federal criminal penalties that included fines or imprisonment for as long as twenty years and denied all employment by the federal government for five years following a conviction for anyone who:

...with intent to cause the overthrow or destruction of any such government, prints, publishes, edits, issues, circulates, sells, distributes, or publicly displays any written or printed matter advocating, advising, or teaching the duty, necessity, desirability, or propriety of overthrowing or destroying any government in the United States by force or violence, or attempts to do so; or...organizes or helps or attempts to organize any society, group, or assembly of persons who teach, advocate, or encourage the overthrow or destruction of any such government by force or violence; or becomes or is a member of, or affiliates with, any such society, group, or assembly of persons, knowing the purposes thereof.

The Smith Act's prohibition of proselytizing on behalf of revolution repeated language found in previous statutes. It went beyond earlier legislation in outlawing action to "organize any society, group, or assembly" that works toward that end and then extended that prohibition to "membership" or "affiliation"—a term it did not define—with such a group.

 

He did specifically call for "all you patriots" to pack some sammiches and get ready to fight. He specifically stated intentions to start killing people based on his anger with the government. I think The Smith Act might be a fine place to start legal proceedings, at the very least as grounds for precedent.

[DaveTN]

We are finding ourselves be represented by idiots we did not choose and I, for o e, would like Yeager to quit representing me.

I don’t consider him as representing me and only the most fanatical gun haters will see it that way. There is an element out there that sees this as an opportunity to overthrow our government. I am not part of that group and will protect my country at all costs.

As I have said before these clowns picture themselves wandering around gun in hand living the good life with no government intervention. They are totally clueless as to what would happen with secession or an attack on the government. They get mad and they can’t think straight. I think that is what happened to Yeager.

We have a set of checks and balances in place. We have three levels of government. Right now one (the Executive Branch) is out of control. We have a President that is more than willing to walk all over the Constitution and side step the other two branches any chance he gets. Our founding Fathers planned for exactly what is going on now.

I expect the President to try to do something illegal. I think his Vice President is so stupid he won’t know the difference. I don’t expect the Legislative Branch to take a hard line and step in to stop him; although hopefully I will be wrong and they will. I do however expect the Judicial Branch to stop him cold. It will take time for them to do that; I am willing to give them a reasonable amount of time to do that.

[Dolomite_supafly]

You do not have to have proof a law has been broken to obtain a search warrant. A search warrant is used to search for evidence that a law has been broken.

Search warrants will be issued and various agencies. I will be very surprised if he was not charged or at leadt investigated under 18 USC with all the media coverage. Look at Ted Nugent's case to see what is, at a minimum of what is going to happen to Yeager. The key difference is Yeager made threats against "people" and is likely to be viewed as a threat against the public.

And as screwed up as it is it is the world we live in. And all this started long before O took office. The vast majority of our privacy rights and rights in general were lost long before 2008. The country demanded we protect ourselves from the terrorists and that is what has lead to where we are now.

There is no such thing as a justice system anymore. You can look at the sentencing and see that. What we have now is a legal system.

Dolomite

Edited January 12, 2013 by Dolomite_supafly

[mikegideon]

Ok enough of this case citing BS. How about The Smith Act of 1940?

 

Title I. Subversive activities. The Smith Act set federal criminal penalties that included fines or imprisonment for as long as twenty years and denied all employment by the federal government for five years following a conviction for anyone who:

The Smith Act's prohibition of proselytizing on behalf of revolution repeated language found in previous statutes. It went beyond earlier legislation in outlawing action to "organize any society, group, or assembly" that works toward that end and then extended that prohibition to "membership" or "affiliation"—a term it did not define—with such a group.

 

He did specifically call for "all you patriots" to pack some sammiches and get ready to fight. He specifically stated intentions to start killing people based on his anger with the government. I think The Smith Act might be a fine place to start legal proceedings, at the very least as grounds for precedent.

 

I'll say it again... welcome back :)

[DaveTN]

I think The Smith Act might be a fine place to start legal proceedings, at the very least as grounds for precedent.

Why would you want them to start there? Your avatar says “Come and take them”, is that letting them know you will voluntarily hand over your guns or should they start with you next because it means something quite different?