USA: It's now illegal to buy firearms while known to be "disgruntled"!???

http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100309/NEWS/3090315
http://www.theangrypatriot.com/?p=364

The home of an Oregon man, reportedly disgruntled over being placed on administrative leave from his job at the Department of Transportation, was descended on by Oregon State Police, Jackson and Douglas county sheriff departments, and the Medford and Roseburg police departments despite his breaking NO law. The action involved the dawn evacuation of neighbors homes. Hostage negotiators and SWAT were called in, though no laws were broken, to convinced the man to "voluntarily surrender to SWAT" and subject himself to a mental-health examination because he purchased several firearms within days of his alleged state of upset over losing his job. 

HOLD UP Y'ALL! Let me see if I understand. It is illegal to purchase a gun if someone has told police that you are really, really, really upset about something? WHAAAAAAAAAAATTTT??? Are you kidding me? Is this the twilight zone? Somebody wake me up! How do you get so many people in close proximity willing to violate basic human rights like this???? I've got a message for those yellow-bellied (probably a few with a God-complex) "law enforcement" officers: READ THE CONSTITUTION WHICH YOU ARE SWORN TO UPHOLD AND DEFEND!!!

I shudder to think what would have happened if he'd (legally) refused. The firearm purchases were legal, and included the required Oregon State Police background checks. Authorities were reportedly "extremely concerned" that he may be planning retaliation against his employer, and subsequently "took a proactive approach" (See it here: KDRV video)  rather than the usual reactive....you know when a CRIME has actually been committed!? NO CRIMINAL CHARGES HAVE BEEN FILED -- of course because no crime was committed! -- yet, the 3 recently purchased firearms, along with 2 he owned prior to losing his job, were confiscated. It is unclear if the man is still being held illegally. Heads must roll!


Amendment IV to the US CONSTITUTION reads:
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses,
papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and
seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue,
but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation,
and particularly describing the place to be searched,
and the persons or things to be seized."

The irony: According to the SUPREME COURT of these United States, this man could have LEGALLY KILLED ALL OFFICERS trying to arrest him illegally with the very weapons they confiscated.

http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/defunlaw.htm

“Citizens may resist unlawful arrest to the point of taking an arresting officer's life if necessary.” Plummer v. State, 136 Ind. 306. This premise was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States in the case: John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529. The Court stated: “Where the officer is killed in the course of the disorder which naturally accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law looks with very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had the right to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right. What may be murder in the first case might be nothing more than manslaughter in the other, or the facts might show that no offense had been committed.”

“An illegal arrest is an assault and battery. The person so attempted to be restrained of his liberty has the same right to use force in defending himself as he would in repelling any other assault and battery.” (State v. Robinson, 145 ME. 77, 72 ATL. 260).


“Story affirmed the right of self-defense by persons held illegally. In his own writings, he had admitted that ‘a situation could arise in which the checks-and-balances principle ceased to work and the various branches of government concurred in a gross usurpation.’ There would be no usual remedy by changing the law or passing an amendment to the Constitution, should the oppressed party be a minority. Story concluded, ‘If there be any remedy at all ... it is a remedy never provided for by human institutions.’ That was the ‘ultimate right of all human beings in extreme cases to resist oppression, and to apply force against ruinous injustice.’” (From Mutiny on the Amistad by Howard Jones, Oxford University Press, 1987, an account of the reading of the decision in the case by Justice Joseph Story of the Supreme Court.

Please contact the alleged involved agencies tomorrow to find out on what authority they claim to have detained this man. The local news stations only report the Medford Police, so at least call or email them to ask what's going on?

Reported Involved Agengies:
Douglas County Sheriff, http://www.dcso.com/contact_numbers_N.htm
Jackson County Sheriff, http://www.co.jackson.or.us/Page.asp?NavID=197 (scroll way down for phone #)
Oregon State Police, http://www.oregon.gov/OSP/contact_us.shtml
Medford Police, http://www.ci.medford.or.us/SectionIndex.asp?SectionID=7 (bottom-left)
Roseburg Police, http://www.cityofroseburg.com/police/index.php