imported post
Everyone who has been around the Washington board for any decent length of time is probably aware of the language of RCW 9.41.270 re: 'warranting' alarm.
We have also heard of many instances where someone wearing a badge (or patch as they sometimes are these days) attempting to bulldog (intimidate you into) compliance with their opinion by claiming that your actions are (or could be) illegal because your sidearm 'caused' alarm.
HERE is a perfect demonstration of the difference between 'causing' alarm, and 'warranting' alarm.
Note that while this girl is most decidedly 'alarmed' at the presence of the pickles (assuming it's not all an act), I doubt even the most jack-booted of thugs could twist this into a case of that alarm being 'warranted'.
The plain fact is this: Just because someone IS (or becomes) alarmed it does not automatically extend to that alarm being 'warranted'.
Everyone who has been around the Washington board for any decent length of time is probably aware of the language of RCW 9.41.270 re: 'warranting' alarm.
We have also heard of many instances where someone wearing a badge (or patch as they sometimes are these days) attempting to bulldog (intimidate you into) compliance with their opinion by claiming that your actions are (or could be) illegal because your sidearm 'caused' alarm.
HERE is a perfect demonstration of the difference between 'causing' alarm, and 'warranting' alarm.
Note that while this girl is most decidedly 'alarmed' at the presence of the pickles (assuming it's not all an act), I doubt even the most jack-booted of thugs could twist this into a case of that alarm being 'warranted'.
The plain fact is this: Just because someone IS (or becomes) alarmed it does not automatically extend to that alarm being 'warranted'.