S.B. 28 Prohibited activities of gang offenders (Sen. Greiner)

thoughtpolice wrote:

I think its being read in to a little too much. I think it allows alot of wiggle room on BOTH ends, to possibly get into or get out of trouble. I really dont see your scenario being prosecuted as a violation of this law.

Click to expand...

But that's the problem. If we can read into it and make it apply - any judge/da can do the same thing. Honestly, this one's not that big of a deal, but the system could give you a really hard time with this one if they wanted to. Sure, with a lawyer, you'd get out of it. But that's steps that shouldn't have to be taken.

The same as notifying a leo that you have a cfp and are or are not carrying to avoid a problem - even though our laws don't say that you need to. We already have to do so much extra to gaurantee that we have our rights. It's just one more hoop that they can choose to throw you through.

Yeah - I'm making more out of it than it is. But it's the darn principle! :cuss:

Click to expand...

that has as one of its primary activities the commission of one or more predicate gang crimes;'

Click to expand...

But two of the proposed anti-gang measures go too far.

Rep. Ronda Menlove, R-Garland, may introduce a bill that would make it illegal to belong to a criminal gang, or associate with a gang member. She should set that notion aside. Simply belonging to a group, or associating with an individual, should not constitute a crime.

And Senate Bill 16, sponsored by Sen. Jon Greiner, R-Ogden, would enable local governments to establish gang-free zones, and empower local police departments to enforce them.

Parks, malls, theaters, common areas of buildings -- any and all places where people routinely congregate -- could be placed off-limits for gangs and gang members.

The bill would require law enforcement officers to be trained to identify gangs and gang members, but it's not an exact science. While well-intentioned, the bill will surely result in racial and age-related profiling, and restrict the right to peaceably assemble.

Click to expand...

ProtectedbyHIS9mm wrote:

Alright, so for SB28 to affect anybody they need to actually commit a crime. Here, no crime needs to be committed.

Click to expand...

Ok, so I guess its more of an anti-"freedom to peacibly assemble" bill, not an anti-gunner bill....... food for thought?

Click to expand...

ProtectedbyHIS9mm wrote:

Yes, BUT with leos already having an issue with OCers then there is likely to be additional harrassment as they have to make sure that the gathering (of three or more people/ocers) isn't a gang. There's already MWAG calls on OCers. If this was a law and a citizen (the same kind of uninformed citizen making the mwag calls) sees a group of OCer's the police are going to react even more. Now it's a "gang"

Click to expand...

...Youre good people and you keep 9mm in line....

Click to expand...

ProtectedbyHIS9mm wrote:

Yes, BUT with leos already having an issue with OCers then there is likely to be additional harrassment as they have to make sure that the gathering (of three or more people/ocers) isn't a gang. There's already MWAG calls on OCers. If this was a law and a citizen (the same kind of uninformed citizen making the mwag calls) sees a group of OCer's the police are going to react even more. Now it's a "gang"

Click to expand...

See, I like you. Youre good people and you keep 9mm in line. But this is wrong. "with leos already having issues...." is wrong. SOME LEO's have issues. Some dont. Id venture to guess even if they do, MOST know the law or are getting knowledge of it as they progress in their careers. And its PROVEN by the fact that dozens of you have gone months or years without ANY negative contact with LEO. Period. And I guarantee they have been seen by LEO out there. This is the kind of stuff that leads lurkers on this board down an incorrect path. They read that and ALREADY are on the defensive. Its false. It is untrue. SOME have issues. And if they do, they have to follow the law. I despise the fact that every freeloading mother out there that pops out kid after kid that I pay for on welfare, get my money. But I still pay my taxes and follow the law.



EDIT, oooh I forgot. Its not a gang unless those criteria we discussed earlier on this thread are met, remember?

Click to expand...

thoughtpolice wrote:

ProtectedbyHIS9mm wrote:

Yes, BUT with leos already having an issue with OCers then there is likely to be additional harrassment as they have to make sure that the gathering (of three or more people/ocers) isn't a gang. There's already MWAG calls on OCers. If this was a law and a citizen (the same kind of uninformed citizen making the mwag calls) sees a group of OCer's the police are going to react even more. Now it's a "gang"

Click to expand...

See, I like you. Youre good people and you keep 9mm in line. But this is wrong. "with leos already having issues...." is wrong. SOME LEO's have issues. Some dont. Id venture to guess even if they do, MOST know the law or are getting knowledge of it as they progress in their careers. And its PROVEN by the fact that dozens of you have gone months or years without ANY negative contact with LEO. Period. And I guarantee they have been seen by LEO out there. This is the kind of stuff that leads lurkers on this board down an incorrect path. They read that and ALREADY are on the defensive. Its false. It is untrue. SOME have issues. And if they do, they have to follow the law. I despise the fact that every freeloading mother out there that pops out kid after kid that I pay for on welfare, get my money. But I still pay my taxes and follow the law.



EDIT, oooh I forgot. Its not a gang unless those criteria we discussed earlier on this thread are met, remember?

Click to expand...

....And you're wrong - I don't keep 9mm in line - it's the other way around.

Click to expand...

ProtectedbyHIS9mm wrote:

thoughtpolice wrote:

ProtectedbyHIS9mm wrote:

Yes, BUT with leos already having an issue with OCers then there is likely to be additional harrassment as they have to make sure that the gathering (of three or more people/ocers) isn't a gang. There's already MWAG calls on OCers. If this was a law and a citizen (the same kind of uninformed citizen making the mwag calls) sees a group of OCer's the police are going to react even more. Now it's a "gang"

Click to expand...

See, I like you. Youre good people and you keep 9mm in line. But this is wrong. "with leos already having issues...." is wrong. SOME LEO's have issues. Some dont. Id venture to guess even if they do, MOST know the law or are getting knowledge of it as they progress in their careers. And its PROVEN by the fact that dozens of you have gone months or years without ANY negative contact with LEO. Period. And I guarantee they have been seen by LEO out there. This is the kind of stuff that leads lurkers on this board down an incorrect path. They read that and ALREADY are on the defensive. Its false. It is untrue. SOME have issues. And if they do, they have to follow the law. I despise the fact that every freeloading mother out there that pops out kid after kid that I pay for on welfare, get my money. But I still pay my taxes and follow the law.



EDIT, oooh I forgot. Its not a gang unless those criteria we discussed earlier on this thread are met, remember?

Click to expand...

....And you're wrong - I don't keep 9mm in line - it's the other way around.

Click to expand...

Pssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.....

ANY MARRIED MEN IN HERE BELIEVE THAT?!?!:lol:

Click to expand...

ProtectedbyHIS9mm wrote:

I guess I'm just stuck on the principle of the matter. With legislation like the Patriot Act I would rather pick apart a bill being extra critical than let something slide by that could tromp on ANY citizens' rights.

And you're wrong - I don't keep 9mm in line - it's the other way around.

Click to expand...

Im stuck on the fact that it appears you think all LEO are out to get OCers. Pick the hell out of these bills, thats your job as an American Citizen. Just dont make sweeping generalizations. About anyone, noone should. Any asshat that says ALL OCers are whacky, in your face, mental illness cases would be wrong too. See what Im saying?

Click to expand...

JoeSparky wrote:

thoughtpolice wrote:

ProtectedbyHIS9mm wrote:

I guess I'm just stuck on the principle of the matter. With legislation like the Patriot Act I would rather pick apart a bill being extra critical than let something slide by that could tromp on ANY citizens' rights.

And you're wrong - I don't keep 9mm in line - it's the other way around.

Click to expand...

Im stuck on the fact that it appears you think all LEO are out to get OCers. Pick the hell out of these bills, thats your job as an American Citizen. Just dont make sweeping generalizations. About anyone, noone should. Any asshat that says ALL OCers are whacky, in your face, mental illness cases would be wrong too. See what Im saying?

Click to expand...

Thought Police,

Refer to the above ENLARGED and RED text....

Now tell me about sweeping generalized statements again....

Sheeesh!

Click to expand...

Now read the big bold and see what it says. IT APPEARS. My perception. Perhaps some middle school comprehension is in order for you. :shock: I didnt state it as fact. Sheeshhhhhhh!

Click to expand...

thoughtpolice wrote:

JoeSparky wrote:

thoughtpolice wrote:

ProtectedbyHIS9mm wrote:

I guess I'm just stuck on the principle of the matter. With legislation like the Patriot Act I would rather pick apart a bill being extra critical than let something slide by that could tromp on ANY citizens' rights.

And you're wrong - I don't keep 9mm in line - it's the other way around.

Click to expand...

Im stuck on the fact that it appears you think all LEO are out to get OCers. Pick the hell out of these bills, thats your job as an American Citizen. Just dont make sweeping generalizations. About anyone, noone should. Any asshat that says ALL OCers are whacky, in your face, mental illness cases would be wrong too. See what Im saying?

Click to expand...

Thought Police,

Refer to the above ENLARGED and RED text....

Now tell me about sweeping generalized statements again....

Sheeesh!

Click to expand...

Now read the big bold and see what it says. IT APPEARS. My perception. Perhaps some middle school comprehension is in order for you. :shock: I didnt state it as fact. Sheeshhhhhhh!

Click to expand...

Somebody smack that smirk of ThoughtPolices' face...:lol:

Click to expand...

JoeSparky wrote:

I tried once but It was pointed out to me that his face was on the other end!:what:

Click to expand...

Yep, other end.... of your wife. :?

Click to expand...

thoughtpolice wrote:

JoeSparky wrote:

I tried once but It was pointed out to me that his face was on the other end!:what:

Click to expand...

Yep, other end.... of your wife.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...