Index  •  FAQ  •  Search  

It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 5:32 pm

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 85 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 Carrying on Indian reservations - the definitive answer 
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 4:24 pm 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 12, 2006 7:18 pm
Posts: 402
Location: Saint Paul
This is why my money and my body stays off the res. I'll pass through--lawfully--on state/county/us highways. My cooperation ends there. Period.

Many reservations have BIA federal cops, though. Their jurisdiction is the entire reservation including any casino on it. They are different than casino security (obviously).
Casino security, IMHO, is about the same grade as most hospitals: better than average, but not of a caliber to be taking my piece without things becoming quite ugly. A moot point since I patently refuse to waste my time or money in these places.

As to the Lower Sioux (Jackpot Junction): I did some 'consulting' down there years back. They had some pretty serious issues resulting in tribal members shooting it up between two factions (basically a war over casino money). After a few days I packed it in and advised my firm to stay well clear. I never heard afterwards, but my guess is that whatever they've got keeping the law around there may well be pretty industrial strength.

_________________
Mike


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 5:04 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:24 am
Posts: 6767
Location: Twin Cities
i am now getting very, very annoyed.

AS I HAVE STATED THREE TIMES ON THIS THREAD, RED LAKE AND NETT LAKE ARE THE EXCEPTIONS. They are not subject to Public Law 280, which took away criminal jurisdiction from tribal authorities.

Every other tribe in the state IS subject to PL280.

Dick, you keep talking about "the tribe" taking the gun, charging or arresting you.

Most tribes have no police force.

A few tribes (Mille Lacs, Lower Sioux and Fond du Lac) have their own police departments. These departments may enforce Minnesota Law on tribal land, under the same rules as any city police department.

THEY ALSO WAIVE SOVERIEGN IMMUNITY from claims against their actions.

See MN Stat 626.90.

So, reluctantly, I'm calling "BS" on your hypotheticals. Sure, anyone can break the law (The MPD has confiscated a few firearms), but they can't do so with impunity, or with legal authority.

_________________
* NRA, UT, MADFI certified Minnesota Permit to Carry instructor, and one of 66,513 law-abiding permit holders. Read my blog.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 5:19 pm 
Forum Moderator/<br>AV Geek
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:56 am
Posts: 2422
Location: Hopkins, MN
Andrew is seeing why I was annoyed with the long gun thread... :wink: (not that he didn't before... I don't know...)

_________________
Minnesota Permit to Carry Instructor; Utah Certified CFP Instructor


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 5:28 pm 
Forum Moderator
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:37 pm
Posts: 1571
Location: Detroit Lakes, MN
I am going to simply note that I have talked with tribal authorities up here in the Tundra where we have a casino. They are not a closed reservation, meaning that they do accept MN Jurisdiction in criminal cases etc.

I asked specifically if the tribal authorities saw a person carrying, what would they do. Their answer was, most likely we would confiscate the gun. I said that "you can't do this" and they said..."so sue us."

My point is that the law maybe is (clearly is??) on the side of MN Permit holders, but at least on this one day, this tribal person said in effect "so what".

Now, this may still mean that I would ultimately win in court; but, I for one am not interested in that test case or pissing contest with the tribal folks; so...do I carry at the casino or on tribal land?? I'll never tell.

Now, I do know one person that has many many meetings at the casino and always carries. I asked if he ever had a problem, and he said "there can't be a problem if no one knows you are carrying."

So, I completely agree with Andrew's interpretation/understanding of the legal issues; yet, I will be extremely cautious if/when I carry on tribal land.

It is not that I don't think it would be an issue, for all I know the fellow was just spouting off rhetoric. I am not interested in finding that out...even if I am 100% in the right.

Just because something is legal, does not mean that doing it will not cause a bad or unfortuneate reaction. Or, said differently, carrying on some reservations may be perilous, so be careful out there! Here it may be time to carry that HiPoint :)

_________________
Paul Horvick
http://shootingsafely.com
---
Contact us to schedule a class for you and your friends, and check our website for more information http://shootingsafely.com


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:32 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 2:54 am
Posts: 2444
Location: West Central MN
Yep, the law is the easy part of this.

You've got to know when the "law" doesn't always work as it should. We've got a good gun law but no good procedure for enforcing it on the res.

Red Lake is in fact "more sovereign" but all the res people feel ''sovereign'' everywhere on a res and nobody will listen to your complaints, and I'd be amazed if you got your gun back. "So what, finders keepers!''

If anybody wants to test this on a reservation, tell us before you go so we'll know what happened to you. Don't take your favorite gun.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 6:34 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2005 10:24 am
Posts: 6767
Location: Twin Cities
The legislature giveth; the legislature can taketh away. If the tribal police break the law and abuse the authority the lege has trusted in them, they may find themselves back in their "security" uniforms.

Paul is right: one must always be sensible and prudent.

But the Minneapolis police can do the same, and could say "...so sue us," with EXACTLY EQUAL STANDING.

So I will exercise the same caution at the casino as I would on Nicollet Avenue. I won't disarm, and I won't advocate disarming.

Everyone is welcome to make his own decisions, but shouldn't do so based on half-baked misunderstandings of the law.

_________________
* NRA, UT, MADFI certified Minnesota Permit to Carry instructor, and one of 66,513 law-abiding permit holders. Read my blog.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Guns at Treasure Island
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:04 pm 
Longtime Regular
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2005 1:46 pm
Posts: 845
Location: Saint Paul
I don't know the circumstances surrounding the situation, but about a month ago my wife and I were leaving Treasure Island casino. There was a large crowd outside the doors near the valet parking office. We stood inside and looked to see what the commotion was about.

There were 2 guards and a casino host looking down on the ground at a chrome plated (not nickle) .25 auto. The clip was out, laying alongside the pistol.

The situation caused a backup in the valet parking routine so we had quite a while to watch what was going on.

In a few minutes a Red Wing police officer arrived and he picked up the pistol and the magazine. He pulled the slide back and ejected the round that had been chambered. He then put the whole thing into a baggie, put it in his car, and then left.

The casino guards and the casino host appeared to be very happy that the offending objects had been removed, but they also appeared as if they had staved off some sort of massacre.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 9:28 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 2:54 am
Posts: 2444
Location: West Central MN
Andrew Rothman wrote:
The legislature giveth; the legislature can taketh away. If the tribal police break the law and abuse the authority the lege has trusted in them, they may find themselves back in their "security" uniforms.

Paul is right: one must always be sensible and prudent.

But the Minneapolis police can do the same, and could say "...so sue us," with EXACTLY EQUAL STANDING.

So I will exercise the same caution at the casino as I would on Nicollet Avenue. I won't disarm, and I won't advocate disarming.

Everyone is welcome to make his own decisions, but shouldn't do so based on half-baked misunderstandings of the law.


I'm not sure what you mean by "standing". Usually Standing is a legal concept that could define a prospective Plaintiff, like the gun owner, rather than a prospective Defendant, such as the Tribal Community or the Minneapolis Police. But I guess we're 'half- baked' here.

Anyway, you can effectively sue the Minneapolis police in Minnesota District court. You cannot effectively sue the Indian Tribe in Minnesota District Court. Nothing equal about it, if you're the gun owner.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:34 pm 
Site Admin

Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 10:02 pm
Posts: 818
Location: downtown Mpls
Dick Unger wrote:
Judges can be personally liable for acting without jurisdiction

Can you provide evidence of that? I was under the impression that they had full personal immunity for any rulings they make (absent crimes like accepting bribes).


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:36 pm 
Site Admin

Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 10:02 pm
Posts: 818
Location: downtown Mpls
Dick Unger wrote:
First the police can take your gun, temporarily for their protection, and then as evidence while they investigate. Minnesota cannot forfeit your gun or "confiscate" it. The Tribe will say, "We're not Minnesota".

In that case, they have no authority over me; only the federal and state governments do (cities are creatures of the state).


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 10:44 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 2:54 am
Posts: 2444
Location: West Central MN
SethB wrote:
Dick Unger wrote:
Judges can be personally liable for acting without jurisdiction

Can you provide evidence of that? I was under the impression that they had full personal immunity for any rulings they make (absent crimes like accepting bribes).


They have immunity for wrong decisions if they have jurisdiction. No jurisdiction, no immunity. Pretty basic. Idon't have cites handy


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 11:23 pm 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 2:54 am
Posts: 2444
Location: West Central MN
SethB wrote:
Dick Unger wrote:
First the police can take your gun, temporarily for their protection, and then as evidence while they investigate. Minnesota cannot forfeit your gun or "confiscate" it. The Tribe will say, "We're not Minnesota".

In that case, they have no authority over me; only the federal and state governments do (cities are creatures of the state).


Look, first they'll take your gun. They've got more horses than you, and you're on their reservation. What are you going to do at that point? Shoot your way out? Of course not.

Later, when you want your gun back, you'll be ignored. If you sue they'll say we can't be sued in a Minnesota court. So you maybe sue in Tribal Court. (Ask permission to sue them first.) If you get that far they will claim the law does not apply to an Indian tribe, only to Minnesota. Or they are still holding as evidence while they investigate. I bet the Tribal court agrees with the tribal government.
Can you say "So what?" If so you can get a job working for them.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 7:02 am 
Longtime Regular

Joined: Sun Aug 28, 2005 2:54 am
Posts: 2444
Location: West Central MN
Anybody who is fascinated with dull stuff should read Gavle v Little Six Inc. 555 Nw2d 284 Minn 1996 and you can also simply hit the website for the tribal community you want to sue. Hit the legal page and then read about jurisdiction and sovereign immunity.

If you sue to get your gun back, its a tort action against the tribe.

Public Law 280 does not deprive the tribe of jurisdiction or remove the sovereign immunity of the tribe itself.

Every res is differant but in a way there're all the same too.


Last edited by Dick Unger on Mon Dec 11, 2006 5:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 9:05 am 
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:42 pm
Posts: 270
Location: Waconia,Mn.
My question is , why would anyone who is a permit holder and cares about freedom, willingly go to a "sovereign nation" and risk this type of thing [ie confiscation of your gun]?
Slot machines? You have got to be kidding!

_________________
David ,Molon Labe!
"An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it." --Col. Jeff Cooper


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 9:28 am 
Forum Moderator/<br>AV Geek
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 11:56 am
Posts: 2422
Location: Hopkins, MN
Andrew Rothman wrote:
But the Minneapolis police can do the same, and could say "...so sue us," with EXACTLY EQUAL STANDING.

Dick, Andrew is saying that while the tribal police (or contracted police force) can say "so sue us" after taking your gun, the Minneapolis police can do exactly the same thing. Equal standing would mean- Neither can do that legally (but it won't stop them from trying).

This is probably repeating myself, but no one seems to acknowledge my comments... I take that as being right, since no one fights me. :)

Gun forfeiture for permit holders is covered under 624.714. 624.714 being a criminal law. PL280 says indian reservations abide by MN criminal law. Again, if indians (or contracted police) take your firearm, they are breaking MN criminal law (likely 2 counts).

Read the title of "public law 280": (emphasis mine)
Quote:
18 U.S.C. § 1162. State Jurisdiction over offenses committed by or against Indians in the Indian country

_________________
Minnesota Permit to Carry Instructor; Utah Certified CFP Instructor


Offline
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Forum locked This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 85 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

This is a static archive the Twin Cities Carry forum, maintained as a public service by the current forum of record, The Minnesota Carry Forum.

All times are UTC - 6 hours


 Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron


 
Index  |  FAQ  |  Search

phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group