Man ordered to surrender guns – just for blogging!
'My life's in danger now. I can't defend myself, I can't defend you'
Posted: September 29, 2011
9:44 pm Eastern

By Joe Kovacs
© 2011 WND

An Arizona man has filed a federal lawsuit against some of the state's top judges, claiming they're taking away his freedom of speech and right to own firearms, all because someone didn't like what he wrote on his blog.

"You can't suspend someone's constitutional rights [for blogging]," said Mike Palmer, who is bringing forth the legal action. "Everybody in America blogs or Twitters, so it's a First and Second Amendment issue."

The scenario started when Palmer, a 55-year-old Christian missionary from Phoenix, was online discussing "spiritual death" often referred to in the Bible.

But, according to the suit, a woman from Prescott, Ariz., Melody Thomas-Morgan, complained to authorities that Palmer was threatening her with "death," keeping that word in quotes in her legal filings.

Palmer explains, "It is true that the blog, 'That Woman Jezebel,' talks about spiritual life and spiritual death. ... Spiritual 'death' as in 'The wages of sin is death.' (Romans 6:23) ... It is not true that the blog ever mentions the 'death' of Miss Thomas-Morgan."


Judge Kenton Jones

Kenton Jones, superior court judge for Yavapai County, went along with the woman's harassment complaint and ordered Palmer to surrender his guns.

"The order says that I am not allowed to possess firearms or ammunition, and directs me to turn over any weapons to the Yavapai County Sheriff's Office," Palmer told WND.

Palmer indicated he does not own any weapons at this time, but when pressed on whether he had any guns previous to the order, he said, "No comment."

"I certainly want my gun rights," he added. "There is no law in Arizona which allows the courts to suspend any constitutional right, but in this instance, my Second Amendment right. And, of course, my life's in danger now. I can't defend myself, I can't defend you. I can't defend my fellow man."

Palmer's suit is seeking a restraining order that would grant him back his constitutional rights.

He wonders if the Christian nature of his blogging has anything to do with the action taken against him.

"Being a Christian seems to make me fair game," he said. "I bet if I were Muslim and writing about physical beheading on a blog, no judge would dare touch me with an injunction. Ironic."

Not only is Justice Jones named as a defendant in Palmer's suit, so are five other jurists on the state supreme court, including Chief Justice Rebecca White Berch.


The issue is reminiscent of another Arizona case, where a local judge ordered Michael Roth of Quartzsite, Ariz., to surrender his weapons because Town Councilman Joe Winslow was offended when Roth allegedly called the lawmaker a "turd."

In fact, Palmer has set up a blog called Michael's Law in honor of the Roth case to tell his own story.


Quartzsite Councilman Joe Winslow lists reasons he sought a restraining order against resident Michael Roth, claiming his entrance to town hall was blocked and that he was called a synonym for dog feces.

Winslow told Karen Slaughter, the elected justice of the peace for the region, what he wanted was that Roth and others with similar views "not be allowed to walk around armed. To me, I'm not a psychologist or psychiatrist, but I have been diagnosed with PTSD (post-traumatic stress disorder) ... that's what I'm concerned with, that he's gonna get so far into my personal space that I'm gonna react without thinking. I'm not making threats or anything like that. I'm not proud of that, but it's the way I am."

"I know that I'm 71 years old," Winslow said. "I don't want to be a statistic, I don't want to go to jail and I don't want to go in the hospital. But based on my history of 24 years in the service, I am more concerned about my reaction to his aggression than anything else, especially now that I believe that he is carrying a handgun. His actions have demonstrated in the past to me that he is not in full control of his emotions."

After WND's coverage of Roth's case, Judge Slaughter eventually reversed her decision on the weapons ban, but Roth says she refused to dismiss his attorney fees.


Read more: Man ordered to surrender guns – just for blogging! http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=349713#ixzz1ZScWSoMc

--------------------------------------------------------------
Understand the bottom half of this article is talking about a similar case, not the same case.

[This message has been edited by dennis_6 (edited 09-30-2011).]

man it is like the goverment is trying to push peaple too far !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I thought Arizona was a big "pro Second Amendment" state?

We don't have any "rights" anymore.
We have whatever priviledges the government deigns to grant us and it's subject to revokation at any moment for any reason.
You might think that's a bit extreme, but we've seen many examples in various states and rarely, if ever, is the citizen vindicated. It's one thing if he was convicted of threatening to kill someone, but it doesn't appear he was ever charged. It mentions a "harassment complaint" but no actual verdict of breaking any law. A restraining order, fine, but I don't see the justification for revoking his rights.

This is what happens when you don't stand up for the little erosions of your rights. It's too late now.

[This message has been edited by Formula88 (edited 09-30-2011).]

Every year I find something else that just goes one step closer to a gun ban. When that happens, a lot of people would be happy to give up their guns....

one bullet at a time.

quote Originally posted by Formula88: We don't have any "rights" anymore.

While from reading the story blurb above i don't agree with the taking of his weapons, if there is more to the story we don't have, and he DID threaten the other people, be it by yelling at them, sending them a letter, or even on line as in this case, then they should be removed.

We don't have a right to threaten others lives.

@User00013170

1. He did not threaten anyone's life. He was blogging about spiritual life and death.
2. My comment was about when the government gets so bold as to pass an outright ban on all guns. When/if that happens there will be a civil war.

quote Originally posted by Doug85GT: @User00013170 1. He did not threaten anyone's life. He was blogging about spiritual life and death. 2. My comment was about when the government gets so bold as to pass an outright ban on all guns. When/if that happens there will be a civil war.

I still bet there is more to this story then we are getting. This happens all the time to get people riled up.

When the government does finally do that i don't think there will be a civil war. it will happen so gradually and over such a long period of time we will go out with a whimper. We wont be around to see it however, it might be another couple of generations, as they slowly prep the upcoming generations.

quote Originally posted by Blacktree: I thought Arizona was a big "pro Second Amendment" state?

It is. However, many liberals run and operate the courts and county governments, where these silly orders come from.

Legislating from the bench, at any level is just silly.

I wonder if it was like the case here yesterday:

Police seize 12 guns and 2,000 rounds of ammunition from Southwest Portland apartment

quote Law enforcement authorities found an arsenal of weapons and ammunition when they searched the Southwest Portland apartment of a man who threatened his neighbors late Wednesday. In addition to 12 firearms and 2,000 rounds of ammunition, police also found gas masks, Kevlar Body Armor and a ballistic helmet, said Lt. Robert King, Portland Police Bureau spokesman. He said John Loxley Griffin, 50, was arrested for unlawful use of a weapon and menacing.

I don't think this guy was a Forum member.

quote Originally posted by User00013170: While from reading the story blurb above i don't agree with the taking of his weapons, if there is more to the story we don't have, and he DID threaten the other people, be it by yelling at them, sending them a letter, or even on line as in this case, then they should be removed. We don't have a right to threaten others lives.

If a crime was committed, and threatening someone is a crime, then he should be charged and tried. I'm not sure if being convicted of threatening someone automatically revokes your 2nd amendment rights. I know convicted felons aren't allowed to own firearms.

Regardless, there's due process. Or at least there used to be.

quote Originally posted by User00013170: I still bet there is more to this story then we are getting. This happens all the time to get people riled up. When the government does finally do that i don't think there will be a civil war. it will happen so gradually and over such a long period of time we will go out with a whimper. We wont be around to see it however, it might be another couple of generations, as they slowly prep the upcoming generations.

What do you mean when? I think it's already happening, and has been for many years.

I agree that people will go out without a whimper, especially since we have been trained over the past 50+ years to expect the Government to save us from everything, including the Government.

The people that do fight are labeled nut cases, the Montana Freeman for example took a stand, they were labeled as a fringe whackjob group.

I know that there are other groups that have done the same, or are planning similar, I just can't think of names right now.

Basically if any one, or group of people stand up against the Government they are slayed in the media, and made to be pariahs, then the military steps in and dismantles them based on laws that they made to stop the overturning of the government (which I think are unconstitutional.)

And I'm not talking about going around shooting anyone, or causing harm to anyone in any way.

Brad

quote Originally posted by Formula88: If a crime was committed, and threatening someone is a crime, then he should be charged and tried. I'm not sure if being convicted of threatening someone automatically revokes your 2nd amendment rights. I know convicted felons aren't allowed to own firearms. Regardless, there's due process. Or at least there used to be.

Here at least, being convicted of threatening would be grounds to lose your rights. You can even lose them for a short period without being convicted ( via a restraining order, where its mostly 'she said he said' )

quote Originally posted by spark1: I wonder if it was like the case here yesterday: Police seize 12 guns and 2,000 rounds of ammunition from Southwest Portland apartment I don't think this guy was a Forum member.

12 guns and 2000 rounds of ammo counts as an "arsenal" now?
I can burn through 500 rounds in a single range outing pretty easily, and that's with just 1 pistol. 2000 rounds is nothing, especially if you need multiple calibers for different weapons.

quote Originally posted by Formula88: 12 guns and 2000 rounds of ammo counts as an "arsenal" now? I can burn through 500 rounds in a single range outing pretty easily, and that's with just 1 pistol. 2000 rounds is nothing, especially if you need multiple calibers for different weapons.

Well I'm screwed then.

What needs to happen is people stop "tweeting", blogging, and letting every son of a b*tch in the world know when they take a crap. Go back to 15 years ago when there was not so much information shared on the "you lost your privacy and rights" zone known as the internet.

[This message has been edited by IMSA GT (edited 09-30-2011).]

quote Originally posted by Formula88: 12 guns and 2000 rounds of ammo counts as an "arsenal" now? I can burn through 500 rounds in a single range outing pretty easily, and that's with just 1 pistol. 2000 rounds is nothing, especially if you need multiple calibers for different weapons.

I was thinking the same. I have at least 12 guns and 2000 rounds per gun. O.o

------------------
I can ride my bike with no handlebars.

I haz no guns . Donations accepted will fight in the revolution!

quote Originally posted by nitroheadz28: I haz no guns . Donations accepted will fight in the revolution!

Mosin Nagant $109 dollars anywhere.

The local guy was coo coo for cocoa puffs so the circumstance may be different. But anytime someone feels threatened, that is taken very seriously by authorities. Most would rather err on the side of the one felt threatened until matters can be sorted out.