The Law Firm of Darrin K. Johns, PC

09/21/2022

10/29/2018

This week, the European Court of Human Rights issued a ruling that threatens to destroy free speech throughout Europe and possibly the world, as some of our Supreme Court Justices look towards foreign courts in rendering their opinions for US cases. The case, E.S. v. Austria, involved an incident where E.S. was giving a lecture and commented that the Prophet Muhammad had married a six year old and consummated the marriage when the girl was 9 years old. [ 704 more words ]

This week, the European Court of Human Rights issued a ruling that threatens to destroy free speech throughout Europe and possibly the world, as some of our Supreme Court Justices look towards foreign courts in rendering their opinions for US cases. The case, E.S. v.

10/29/2018

This last week we have seen some despicable acts committed by men who claim to be conservative. First was the mailing of potential explosives to liberal politicians, activists, and media outlets. The second was the horrific shooting and killings of Jews in Pittsburg. I whole-heartedly denounce and condemn both of these terrible actions. These are not the actions of a true conservative, but rather they are the actions of sick and evil men. [ 484 more words ]

This last week we have seen some despicable acts committed by men who claim to be conservative. First was the mailing of potential explosives to liberal politicians, activists, and media outlets. The second was the horrific shooting and killings of Jews in Pittsburg.

02/25/2018

Do you ever wonder why, if the Constitution created a Federal government with very limited powers, why the Federal government today seems so powerful? A lot has to deal with a very poorly reasoned Supreme Court case dealing with a simple farmer who grew wheat, not for sale, but rather used to feed his chickens and his own family. Wickard v. [ 946 more words ]

Do you ever wonder why, if the Constitution created a Federal government with very limited powers, why the Federal government today seems so powerful? A lot has to deal with a very poorly reasoned Supreme Court case dealing with a simple farmer who grew wheat, not for sale, but rather used to feed h...

01/21/2018

With the Government shutdown now occurring, many are asking why the President, Members of Congress, and Federal Judges still getting paid? The answer lies in the Constitution. The President. Article 2, Section 1, Clause 7 provides, "The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a Compensation, which shall neither be increased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States, or any of them." [ 876 more words ]

With the Government shutdown now occurring, many are asking why the President, Members of Congress, and Federal Judges still getting paid? The answer lies in the Constitution. The President. Article 2, Section 1, Clause 7 provides, "The President shall, at stated Times, receive for his Services, a C...

01/02/2018

Did you know that the word "privacy" never once appears in the Constitution? So where does our expectation of privacy come from? The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution declares, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable�...

01/26/2016

Many have been deceived by Mr. Trump’s false allegations that Ted Cruz is not eligible to be President because he is not a “natural born Citizen.” Mr. Trump has even suggested that Mr. Cruz is an originalist except when it does not suit him, as in the case of being a natural-born citizen. Don’t be deceived by these falsehoods.
Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 if the United States Constitution clearly states, “No Person except a natural born Citizen, …, shall be eligible to the Office of President.” But, as it does with so many other things, the Constitution does not define what a “natural born Citizen” is. It left it up to the Congress to pass laws and to define a natural born citizen.
The Constitution states that the Congress shall have power “To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Ex*****on the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Cons ...

08/01/2015

Arming Recruiters
July 31, 2015

We are all deeply saddened by the recent shootings and killing of military recruiters in Chattanooga. In the wake of the killings, it has been asked why are recruiters (and military personnel in general) not allowed to carry fi****ms in the United States?

In answer to this question, we have been given a very weak response from our military leaders; a response that is not only weak, but flat out wrong. They have responded saying that the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C. 1385) prohibits them from arming military personnel in the United States.

A "Posse Comitatus" is "a body of persons that a peace officer of a county is empowered to call upon for assistance in preserving the peace, making arrests, and serving writs."

The Posse Comitatus Act is short and simple. It states, "Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."

The most glaring error in the thinking of military leaders that this Act prohibits them from arming military personnel, or allowing them to carry their personal fi****ms in the United States is that the Act does not apply to all military personnel. It only applies to the Army and Air Force. The recruiting station in Chattanooga was manned with Sailors and Marines who are not covered by the Act! The act was last updated in 1994 and Congress could have included the Navy and Marine Corps at that time (or at any time in our Nation's history) if Congress wanted the Act to apply to all military personnel.

A second flaw in the reasoning that the Posse Comitatus Act prohibits the arming of military personnel in the United States, is that the Act only prohibits the use of Soldiers and Airmen "to execute the laws." Nothing in the Act prohibits military personnel from possessing fi****ms on duty and in uniform for the purposes of self-defense or to defend the lives of others. The Act prohibits using Soldiers and Airmen to effectuate arrests, conduct traffic control, conduct searches and seizures of civilians, or otherwise execute of enforce the laws, but it certainly does not prohibit military personnel from possessing fi****ms while in uniform and on duty for the purpose of self-defense and to defend others.

It was wrong to disarm our military personnel in the first place. With our current fight against terrorism where there are no battle lines, with terrorist cells now present in the United States, and after attacks like the ones in Chattanooga and Fort Hood, it is past time that we correct this wrong and allow our military personnel throughout the country to carry fi****ms while on duty and in uniform.

http://www.darrinjohnslaw.com/arming-of-recruiters/

02/10/2015

Captain Darrin K. Johns

02/10/2015

Lt Col Darrin K. Johns

02/10/2015

10% off All services for military members and their families

Call The Law Firm of Darrin K. Johns, PC now at 801-477-6572 to learn more about Lawyer in American Fork, UT.

09/27/2014

Free piece of legal advice for the day. In Utah, you have the right to say no when the police ask if they can search your vehicle. Police officers are not allowed to detain you longer longer than is necessary to take care of the issue that caused them to pull you over in the first place unless something during the stop gives them reasonable suspicion that something else is going on. The mere denial of a request to search a vehicle cannot be used as the basis for raising reasonable suspicion.