June 8, 2009 issue
‘Lessening violence in our backyards’
Mennonites, others arrested in public witness at Philadelphia gun shop acquitted
By Celeste Kennel-Shank Mennonite Weekly ReviewFour Anabaptists were among 10 defendants acquitted May 26 on charges related to their arrest at a demonstration in front of a gun store in Philadelphia.
Two other defendants had charges against them dropped mid-trial in a Philadelphia municipal court. The charges stemmed from incidents during “Heeding God’s Call: A Gathering on Peace,” a Jan. 13-17 event led by Mennonites Church of the Brethren and Quakers that included a local focus on gun violence.
Five people went to Colosimo’s Gun Center Jan. 14 and asked the owner to sign a 10-point code of conduct to reduce illegal trafficking of guns. He refused to do so; the demonstrators did not leave, and were arrested inside the gun shop.
Two days later, three more went to ask again: J. Fred Kauffman and Drick Boyd, members of West Philadelphia Mennonite Fellowship, and Kemah Washington, an Episcopalian. All three were arrested in front of the door. They were charged with disorderly conduct, criminal conspiracy and blocking a public highway — referring to the sidewalk. Four more people then did the same.
“This is something Christians can do who want to lessen violence, immediately, in our backyards,” Kauffman said of supporting the code of conduct.
The code they advocated was created by Mayors Against Illegal Guns and signed by more than 300 mayors. It was drawn up in conversation with Wal-Mart, which has signed it.
“Its purpose is to give the gun retailer more tools to prevent the sale of guns to people who are going to resell them in the illegal market,” Kauffman said. “It’s a way of working directly with the point of the problem.”
The code includes provisions such as employee background checks, inventory checking and waiting for background check results before selling firearms.
In 2003, the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence named Colosimo’s among the 10 U.S. gun dealers with the most guns traced to crime.
“In this campaign, ‘Heeding God’s Call,’ what we are concerned about is the flow of weapons to the illegal market,” Kauffman said. “We are not concerned about hunters.”
Comments
-
Thanks to Susan for her witness. As one of the defendants I can say that her gift to us was one of the points where the Spirit (that was moving through this whole event) became tangible. We continue to pray for the victims of gun violence and for creative ways to reduce and prevent the proliferation of handguns in our society.
-
I am disappointed Ms. Shank paints Mr. Colosimo as an irresponsible Philly citizen and business owner. Mr. Colosimo, 78, is a law abiding citizen and the owner of Colosimo's Gun Center. Those religious zealots noted in Ms. Shank's article violated Mr. Colosimo's civil rights by invading and disrupting his business, demanding that he sign a 10 point Conduct Code relating to gun sales. On the advice of Mr. Colosimo's attorney, there was one item on that code that was unacceptable, therefore, he politely refused to sign it.
Why do not these same people also picket the Philly crack houses, bars and liquor stores which are the bases for much of the violence on the streets and in the homes? Perhaps Ms. Shank could address these elements in a future article.
[Sentence removed because of factual concern.] Was this a WWJD action? Mr. Colosimo stated "Nobody wanted to have these people locked up, they were asked three times to move." They did not. According to news sources, all individuals arrested pled not guilty to the charges including conspiracy, obstruction and disorderly conduct, and were acquitted by a liberal woman judge who claimed the state failed to meet its burden of proof. I ask where is the moral integrity of these religious law breakers in pleading not guilty? Apparently, breaking the law is acceptable if one can claim a higher moral purpose. It appears to me that Rev. Kauffman takes delight in the publicity he receives of getting arrested for "religious Jesus purposes".
I would ask a question of Rev. Kauffman, upon his arrest at the gun shop and before leaving, did he personally hand one or more gospel tracts to Mr. Colosimo, his employees and store customers to read? In addition, did he invite all of them to attend future Sunday morning church services at West Philadelphia Mennonite Fellowship? If not, why not? This would have be a great witness opportunity.
Rev. Kauffman is quoted in the news article after spending 12 hours in jail and a comment by a jail guard " he was following in the footsteps of many religious prophets, including Jesus. I say "Like Jesus? Really?". Who annointed Rev. Kauffman to become a lawbreaker for the higher moral good?" Perhaps the man who murdered abortion doctor George Tiller recently could also employ the same logic that it was for the higher moral good. Who is to judge actions which are for the higher moral good? Perhaps Ms. Shank could add this to her list to address in a future article.
If Rev. Kauffman is following in the footsteps of Jesus, how do his actions and those like minded individuals relate to the following Bible verses?
But let none of you suffer as a murderer, or [as] a thief, or [as] an evildoer, or as a busybody in other men's matters. I Peter 4:15
Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets. Matthew 7:12
How would Rev. Kauffman and supporting members of a Mennonite Church respond if Mr. Colosimo, along with his attorney and 12 of his employees or customers, were to invade and disrupt their Sunday morning worship services as these religious zealots did to his lawful business? And if they refuse to leave, would church leaders call police? I believe from Mr. Colosimo's response, he is too much of a gentlemen for that and his understanding of the Bible would prevent that action. I see Jesus in his response but not in the actions of Rev. Kauffman and his like minded zealots.
-
I find it interesting that the above comment brings the murder of Dr. George Tiller into the discussion for comparative purposes. How is homicide even in the realm of the discussion when the peace witness discussed above was nonviolent in nature, and the charges amounted to nothing more than trespassing and perhaps minor disruption of business?
Now, if we are going to talk about the "moral integrity of these religious law breakers in pleading not guilty," which the above comment seeks to disparage, perhaps we can discuss the events in South Bend during the months of April and May, as a result of the University of Notre Dame's invitation to President Barack Obama for the commencement address. For more than a month, protesters lined up on the sidewalks at Notre Dame's gates to protest the visit with grotesque signs. By the above author's logic, they should have been arrested--and plead guilty--for "blocking a highway." They had a pretty solid hold on the sidewalks, and most certainly inconvenienced me on my way to class. They were most certainly disrupting the students' preparations for final exams with a plane that was in the air daily during this time with a grotesque banner in tow.
Arrests were only made when the protesters crossed onto the privately owned campus--with the intent of harassing students in the dining hall and elsewhere through their grotesque displays. Some protesters were arrested several times for repeated violations of similar nature. Surely they plead guilty, because they were, in fact, trespassing on private property? With the exception of one person, they are dragging out their trials to the fullest extent of the law, pleading "not guilty."
I would argue that there is no relevant charge that can or should be brought up for protesting in a public place. Such charges as those made against the Philadelphia protesters for "blocking a public highway" are trumped up, and the judge seems to have seen this. I am not aware that such charges were leveled against the Notre Dame protesters, nor should there have been such charges. While on public ground, they were exercising their First Amendment rights. Perhaps the trumped up nature of the charges is why the judge summarily dismissed the case against the Philadelphia protesters, including the more justifiable charges of trespassing on private property.
While ultimately every protester must accept the consequences for civil disobedience, I would not expect him or her to plead guilty for the charge, since the very idea of a protest is to generate attention to the injustice of the situation, despite its legal status. The longer the process takes, the more press it generates.
-
What did Jesus do? How many religious laws did he violate? Are civil laws more sacred than religious laws?
-
I am uncertain as to why the opening sentence in paragrapn three of my original comments was removed for factual concerns. In paragraph 4 of Ms. Shank's article it states J. Fred Kauffman, Drick Boyd and Kemah Washington were arrested in front of the door. Now I have seen pictures of the gun store and there is a narrow entry way from the sidewalk to the front door. Therefore these three men, to be arrested, had to be standing on the sidewalk blocking the entry way to the front door of the gun store. I conclude if they were on the sidewalk, not blocking the entry way to the door, there would be no violation, therefore no arrests.
Regarding protesters who had entered the gun store, quoting from a news article on one of several protesting events, "You couldn't talk them out of getting locked up," said Lt. Joseph O'Brien, of the Civil Affairs Unit. From another arresting officer, "Usually you could talk them out of it." "It's trespassing." said Capt. William Fisher. "I gave them three warnings to protest on the sidewalk." These protesters were in the gun store violating the gun store owner's civil rights and disobeyed police orders to leave. I rest my case.
BTW, Mr. Smeltzer, Jesus was not obligated to honor the many man made religious rules, but he did honor civil law as drawing money from the mouth of a fish to pay a tax to the Roman government. I refer you to Matthew 23 where Jesus condemned the many man made religious rules which did not originate with God.
-
The factual issue in Dale's comments is as follows:
The defendants testified that they had not blocked people from entering the store, according to the law office of Lawrence Krasner, one of the attorneys who represented the defendants.
Municipal Court Judge Karen Yvette Simmons ruled that the defendants were not guilty of blocking a public highway, in this case the sidewalk.
-
Apparently the police who were on the scene saw it very differently, therefore the arrests. In this case, I would strongly lean in believing the police rather than the protestors. At any rate, there is nothing in the Bible that would indicate Jesus ever confronting and disobeying civil authorities. Sorry.
Comment on the article ‘Lessening violence in our backyards’
The purpose of comments is to engage in dialogue. We expect commenters to treat authors and each other as each would want to be treated. Respectful criticism is welcomed; offensive comments or parts of comments will be removed by the site administrator. Name and comment will be posted; email address is for follow-up only and will not be made public.
Download
Download a free PDF showing the populations of
Mennonite groups and other Anabaptists.
