Update on the Oath Keepers

One brief update to my story about the Oath Keepers: While it went up on the Reason site today, the article originally appeared in an issue of The American Conservative that came out last week. So the piece was published too early to include a significant new detail about Marine Sgt. Charles Alan Dyer, a man with Oath Keepers ties who, as I reported, was charged earlier this year with possession of a grenade launcher stolen from a military base: On Tuesday Dyer was found not guilty of the weapons charge.

Comments

[sage]

On Tuesday Dyer was found not guilty of the weapons charge.

Woo-hoo! Another victory for the second amendment!

[Almanian]

I’ll bet Dyer has a viscious dog, though. Send the SWATZIs back immediately to investigate further!

He sure appears to be guilty of….something.

[BakedPenguin]

Jesse – no link to Peter Bagge’s right to own a bazooka? I’m disappointed.

[PIRS]

Good. At this moment in history what is good for the Oath Keepers is good for what is left of our civil liberties. I wish the Oath Keepers luck in their mission.

[SIV]

OT:
Watching the ATL news on the local Tea Party. There is a 20something really hot chick with highly detailed tattoo of the Founding Fathers running up her right arm from wrist to shoulder.They look like copies of oil paintings rather than the currency portraits.

[PIRS]

I wonder if they are temporary tatoos. I have seen some very detailed temporary tatoos as of late.

[SIV]

Listening to her, it didn’t sound like it.

[Timon19]

Links to pics or it didn’t happen.

[cynical]

I wonder if cafepress has a Che style shirt with Jefferson or Washington or Paine or someone on it?

[Ken Shultz]

See?

Just ’cause a guy has a grenade launcher, doesn’t mean there’s anything to worry about.

or somethin’.

[Colonel_Angus]

So, he owns the grenade launcher legitimately? Did they give it back to him? I want one.

[aaron]

Woo-hoo! Another victory for the second amendment!

That’s the one that contains the right to steal grenade launchers off Army bases?

Anyone know why he was found not guilty? That article was a little lacking. I’m all for this guy being able to own a grenade launcher, but it seems to me that currently, it is illegal to be in possession of stolen military equipment.

[Lil Papi]

That’s an important observation, why he was found not guilty may not mean he didn’t intend to steal the weapon or buy it knowing that it was stolen. Further, it appears that several other weapons were/are missing as well, though its not clear that the other missing weapons are related to this case. It almost looks like they found it in his possession, determined it was missing from the military, but could not prove that he came to have it either by theft or purchase of a stolen item, possibly due to poor records on the government’s part. Just to speculate.
As to his philosophy, whatever. I usually stop listening when you start explaining away your sexual assault of a minor.

[dissertations]

Wonderful post, thanks for putting this together! “This is obviously one great post. Thanks for the valuable information and insights you have so provided here. Keep it up.
dissertation guide | dissertation

[cmace]

This is damn near a hoax. These guys are saying they won’t do anything wrong, all these Liberals are having fits.

[Ben P.]

I point out that Dyer’s still facing the sexual-assault-on-a-minor charge, too.

[Emily]

I don’t get it. How does a bunch of guys getting together and saying they will stay true to their wives threaten the republic in any way?

[Lost_In_Translation]

That’s “Promise Keepers” unless you swore to defend to defend your marraige from all enemies domestic and abroad?

[Emily]

Oh…..never mind

[Mo]

Jesse,
Have they commented on the Anwar al-Awlaki assassination order? Sees like it’s a good test case on their principles.

[Jesse Walker]

Mo: Not that I’ve seen.

Ben: Yes, he still hasn’t been tried for that. Obviously that’s a far more serious charge, though it’s less relevant to the context where Dyer appeared in the article (“if Dyer is guilty on the weapons charge, that might seem to support the position that the Oath Keeper worldview encourages insurrectionary force”).

[Nail]

So his exwife makes up some false statements to get custody in the middle of a divorce. Thats never happend before. Then the cops violate his Constitutional rights. Then the ATF arrest the guy for a fake grenade launcher, can you say airsoft kids toy. Yes it was and they still try the guy. Then you say he is guilty before he even gets a trial. You should all be ashamed of yourselves and go back to civics class. This guy is innocent.

[delphi]

Yeah I think its bunk

I found the three percent oathkeepers patches and will buy a passle and pass out

http://www.rangermade.us/store…..p-223.html