Mark Ostrem, Olmsted County Attorney was at the meeting last night (discussing the recent spate of shootings in our neighborhoods), and he said something quite disturbing.
In response to a question about self-defense using firearms, he was very direct. He told the 250 or so people in attendance that this was unwise because he -as County Attorney- would make the decision whether you had made the right decision in using a weapon in defending yourself. And -I'm paraphrasing- he said "we have enough work as it is". Better, he said, just to call the police.
He thus implied that Olmsted County could very likely prosecute you for defending yourself. And apparently it'll be up to Mark Ostrem to decide if you were right to do so. I suppose if it's a slow month, they'll go ahead and charge you. Or not. The point is, the rule is so vague, it's best not to do anything in self defense. Get shot, get knifed, get robbed, get raped, get beat up. Then call the cops.
Just don't fight back. Or else you'll go to jail too.
Maybe I misunderstood, but I doubt it.
As a result, Olmsted County feels that should my family get assaulted while walking on the bike path, I should run away and hope my wife and kid can keep up with me, or be a good witness so I can tell the cops what happened later, or try to convince the attacker to stop through verbal negotiation. But I shouldn't fight to stop the attack. Better to be a victim, or Rochester will put you in prison.
Yet the US Supreme Court recently struck down a handgun ban in Washington, D.C., and (re)stated that the 2nd Amendment actually does guarantee the individual right to keep guns at home for self-defense.
Olmsted County says this: You have the right to bear arms ...as long as you don't actually use them.
Something is seriously wrong here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Hey you have a blog. Cool. The last time I checked you weren't active. Expect a lot of comments from me including updates from Fred, Barney, Wilma, Betty, Bullwinkle and Rocky, and Gurinsnaya and Peggy Noonan.
It was my impression that the only time that Mr. Ostrem showed any emotion was when this question was raised, and gave an angry response. It appeared to me that he was more than willing to "prosecute to the fullest extent of the law" anyone who defended themselves, but has no problem turning these worthless thugs back on the street. Cases in point: in Monday night"s PB, a man was sentenced to 17-months in prison for felony criminal vehicular operation resulting in injuries. In Saturday night's PB, a Minneapolis judge delayed sentencing of a felon by one day so he could vote. I was told by someone in good authority that if a caucasion and someone from a minority race were charged with the same crime, the caucasion would go to prison. The minority offender would "get another chance" and be back on the streets. What's wrong with this picture? And, why are our elected officials playing the race card? Justice is not blind.
It's trooper!
Post a Comment