AA Pilot Busted for Impersonating Cop

[FN FAL]

http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode18/usc_sec_18_00000036----000-.html

also, press release below

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/can/press/html/2005_12_14_BigBlockfinal2pleas.htm

the subjects in the above press release were prosecuted federally for drive-by shooting

yes, the law exists

by the way, did I murder the gay because he was gay or because he cut me off in traffic?

lets start with the motorist first, I thought I made it clear...if you shot him because he cut you off, it's state charge of murder. If you shot him because he was gay, it's a federal hate crime...if they can prove you did in fact shoot him because he was gay.

You got to read these laws all the way through...Yea, it says drive by shooting, but read the notes. It's all about the interstate commerce and import export. Heck, if you had five guys on your crew and shot witnesses or people to conceal your tracks and it was gambling, they'd still have you on RICO charges for the murders. And the controlled substances act wouldn't exist as federal authority if it wasn't for the interstate commerce claim by the feds. Anything that I added in writing is in black and brackets. I only colored the actual text from the code or italicized it for emphasis.

§ 36. Drive-by shooting


Release date: 2005-08-03(a) Definition.— In this section, “major drug offense” means—
(1) a continuing criminal enterprise punishable under section 408 (c) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 848 (c)); [go read that one]

(2) a conspiracy to distribute controlled substances punishable under section 406 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 846) section [1] 1013 of the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 963); or [interstate commerce/import-export]

(3) an offense involving major quantities of drugs and punishable under section 401(b)(1)(A) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 841(b)(1)(A)) or section 1010(b)(1) of the Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C. 960(b)(1)). [interstate commerce/import-export]





(b) Offense and Penalties.—

(1) A person who, in furtherance or to escape detection of a major drug offense and with the intent to intimidate, harass, injure, or maim, fires a weapon into a group of two or more persons and who, in the course of such conduct, causes grave risk to any human life shall be punished by a term of no more than 25 years, by fine under this title, or both.





(2) A person who, in furtherance or to escape detection of a major drug offense and with the intent to intimidate, harass, injure, or maim, fires a weapon into a group of 2 or more persons and who, in the course of such conduct, kills any person shall, if the killing—

(A) is a first degree murder (as defined in section 1111 (a)), be punished by death or imprisonment for any term of years or for life, fined under this title, or both; or
(B) is a murder other than a first degree murder (as defined in section 1111 (a)), be fined under this title, imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both.



​

§ 848. Continuing criminal enterprise

(c) “Continuing criminal enterprise” defined For purposes of subsection (a) of this section, a person is engaged in a continuing criminal enterprise if—
(1) he violates any provision of this subchapter or subchapter II [subchapter two is import/export] of this chapter the punishment for which is a felony, and
(2) such violation is a part of a continuing series of violations of this subchapter or subchapter II of this chapter—



​

(A) which are undertaken by such person in concert with five or more other persons with respect to whom such person occupies a position of organizer, a supervisory position, or any other position of management, and
(B) from which such person obtains substantial income or resources. [interstate commerce]




​

Subchapter two...

TITLE 21 > CHAPTER 13 > SUBCHAPTER II SUBCHAPTER II—IMPORT AND EXPORT

 

[FN FAL]

If Joe Dirtbag drug dealer does a driveby on some competing gang-bangers, and kills three of them, the feds are happy to hear the good news. However, this is definitely (potentially based on the facts) a violation of federal law but not really "against the federal government"

It doesn't say what you say in that in the code...

It says "continuing criminal enterprise" which has a definition.

It says "conspiracy" which has a definition.

It says "major quantities" which has a definition.

You don't think that the government has the authority to regulate controlled substances?

It says controlled substances act...they are controlled substances, not prohibited substances.

You don't think that the federal government has the authority to regulate machine guns? Machine guns are not prohibited by the federal government, they are regulated.

 

[FN FAL]

http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/can/press/html/2005_12_14_BigBlockfinal2pleas.htm

the subjects in the above press release were prosecuted federally for drive-by shooting

In pleading guilty, Stepney and Ellis acknowledged Big Block’s role in a total of five drug-related shootings. Stepney, who admitted being the leader of the “Big Block” criminal street gang in the Bayview/Hunters Point area of San Francisco, pleaded guilty for his role in a drive-by shooting in an attempt to kill a rival gang member on March 23, 2001. Stepney also pleaded guilty to conspiracy to use and carry firearms in connection with a drug conspiracy, and conspiracy to possess over 5 kilograms of cocaine in order to manufacture cocaine base (crack cocaine) and to distribute more than 50 grams of crack cocaine. Kim Ellis pleaded guilty to conspiracy to possess over 5 kilograms of cocaine in order to manufacture crack cocaine, and to distribute more than 50 grams of crack cocaine

Dude, these guys were federally screwed without the shootings...conspiracy, large quantities, continuing criminal enterprise over a long period of time.

Remove the drugs, remove the continuing criminal enterprise, remove the conspiracy and the shooting people from a car becomes a plain murder...and the second one made it a plain serial killing.

Once again, commercial commerce clause and import export...all within the authority of the federal government to REguLATe.

(entire Flightinfo audience vomits and prays this legal discussion is over soon)

I could see your reason for saying this. You're running out of things to stretch.

 

[FN FAL]

I think this all starts to sound a little like LEO's verse FFDO's verse the feds. Everyone needs to stick their cocks back in their pants and start supporting each other. Soudns like a typical law enforcement pissing match.

Consider this...the Department of Homeland Security guy that was busted for trying to get the underage girl in the sack? He was busted by county police and sits in county jail awaiting extradition to another county jail in the same state...yea, that one blew my mind, intrastate extradition?

State troopers possessing illegal machine guns? Busted by the feds.

Hawaii just lost 5 police officers this week in federal sting.



Last year, a Milwaukee cop was plucked off the streets by the feds for robbing drug dealers.

 

[Patrick Bateman]

Well I have probably flown with 15 FFDO's. Only one actually carried. The company I am with use to support people who wanted to go and actually gave them paid time off. That changed. So we actually have a lot on property. He was the only one who said he trained frequently. The others said the only time they shot was at the 6 month training and that was because that was the only time they got ammo paid for. Three of the guys said they did it just to get thru security without taking their shoes off. The rest said it is too much of a pain because they go out of the country too often. Out of 15 I have seen one qualified FFDO. And I was unhappy with him because he had one of the stickers. I actually asked him about FFDO before he told me he was one. Is that safe?

ss

I think that person's justification for having that sticker on their flight bag would be for the simple purpose in making known that changes in the program are still very much political and public swaying is one route to take. Having a sticker on a bag doesn't necessarily make that person an FFDO. Most people that have the ALPA or APSA sticker don't seem to even be FFDOs but only people that seem to support the general idea/concept of arming pilots.
I might not be 100% correct, but hey, just a guess.

Super secret mall ninja squirrel here

 

[FN FAL]

Okay, i actually know this guy. He and I were in the same guard unit (im retired) and still live in the same city. ..He was pulled over for a traffic violation and did try the ole "brother law enforcement" bit to dodge it. stupid, but not criminal. he did not claim he was a federl airmarshall but a part of the airmarshall program. trying to explain the FFDO program to someone who never heard of it. Then a couple of weeks later the feds show up to "just ask a few questions, to clear up this misunderstanding" Just a friendly chat, no need for a lawyer or anything. Next thing he knows hes indicted and the whole thing has literally become a federal case. Now he has a DA who wants a juicy career enhancing case (maybe get on FOX news!) and the feds with an axe to grind on FFDO's in general. So far American has told him that unless he is convicted they have no problem. The Air Guard though has grounded him and revoked security clearances until this is resolved. So if you are in the FFDO program, beware. You cannot dick around with this and skate by. Lots of confusion about your legal status as "law enforcement"

Boxes, with keeping in mind the actual press release that was generated by the US Attorney General's office and with what you know about the situation, in your opinion, do you believe that Austin would have avoided one of the two federal charges by invoking his right to remain silent when they approached him?

 

[PBRstreetgang]

Then tell me how it is good. I told you my opinion and all you did is post "it is garbage". That is not constructive, it is crap.

No what you posted is crap, your ignorance is shining like a super nova. Your "opinion" is just 100% wrong, it's your right to be as wrong as you want, just as it is my right to tell you so. An opinion is the sky is a beautiful blue, or that is a gorgeous sunset. You try to post your opinion as fact, when in fact it is anything but fact.
SoSorry
PBR

 

[Secret Squirrel]

No what you posted is crap, your ignorance is shining like a super nova. Your "opinion" is just 100% wrong, it's your right to be as wrong as you want, just as it is my right to tell you so. An opinion is the sky is a beautiful blue, or that is a gorgeous sunset. You try to post your opinion as fact, when in fact it is anything but fact.
SoSorry
PBR

OOOOOOHHHHH!!! name calling. Big man. You must be right. I am so sorry. All you have given me is more mouth flapping. I say I am right and I can give a rats A$$ what you and your sunsets believe. You have given me no reason to change my mind. Maybe you could call me more names until I change my mind. Or call me stupid, that might do it. Were you on the debate team in high school?

By the way, Get a life. This isn't court. Its a web board. I will state my facts (opinions) any way I please until the moderator kicks me off.
So sorry I don't care what you think.

SS