• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

UOC Blood Drive in Temecula?

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
imported post

I can see the argument whereby overcharging against the law qualifies.

However, from a strictly libertarian perspective your position is the correct one..

The rate is paid voluntarily, and nobody is being forced out of their $5.
 

ChuckBooty

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
38
Location
, ,
imported post

But none of it matters because Faith Armory is now one of the FEW shops on the area that FOLLOWS THE LAW on PPT's.
 

Decoligny

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
1,865
Location
Rosamond, California, USA
imported post

marshaul wrote:
I can see the argument whereby overcharging against the law qualifies.

However, from a strictly libertarian perspective your position is the correct one..

The rate is paid voluntarily, and nobody is being forced out of their $5.
It may indeed be a matter of semantics.

While not forced,every single customer who did a PPT while unaware of the statutory maximum charge of $35.00 was defrauded out of their money.

Each and every one of those people hadmoney taken illegally from them. When money is illegally taken from someone by force or by fraud, that is by definition theft.
 

Decoligny

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 29, 2007
Messages
1,865
Location
Rosamond, California, USA
imported post

coolusername2007 wrote:
Decoligny wrote:
Whether it's a million dollars or it's five dollars, stealing is stealing, and someone who steals is a thief.
What? Are you kidding? They didn't steal a single dime! Nobody forced them to do a PPT at their store. Those customers had every right to take their business elsewhere. They were neither arm twisted nor held at gun point.

So let me get this straight. You hate the fact that the State forces you do to a PPT through a dealer, right? You think the State is full of it and forces their unconstitutional laws on you, right? Well, then what makes you think the State knows jack about what it costs to run a business? Get off it. Faith is a good store filled with good people. Take your calguns eat your own attitude over there, and leave it the hell out of here. Oh, that's right they CLOSED that thread.Get a clue and stop hijacking this thread that's about a UOC blood drive!

So, by your thinking, if a store owner decided that they were going to charge 20% tax on all sales, versus the mandated rate set by the state, and the customer who may not be aware of the mandatedrate does business, then the illegal overcharging is fine and dandy as long as the customer doesn'tknow that they have been cheated out of their money.

Taking it one step further, a successful con man is one who can get the mark to willingly hand over the money. Since the person didn't have thier arm twisted and didn't have a gun pointed at them, then no crime has taken place.
 

coolusername2007

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
1,659
Location
Temecula, California, USA
imported post

Decoligny wrote:
So, by your thinking, if a store owner decided that they were going to charge 20% tax on all sales, versus the mandated rate set by the state, and the customer who may not be aware of the mandatedrate does business, then the illegal overcharging is fine and dandy as long as the customer doesn'tknow that they have been cheated out of their money.

Taking it one step further, a successful con man is one who can get the mark to willingly hand over the money. Since the person didn't have thier arm twisted and didn't have a gun pointed at them, then no crime has taken place.

I can tell you've never run or owned a business before. They wouldn't need to charge 20% sales tax, they would just raise their prices or add "handling" fees. Every day in virtually everytransaction the customer is unaware of the costs of the products or services they buy. Yet, they still gladly and gleefully hand over their money in exchange for whatever they're buying. Why? Because it's an acceptable transaction to them. That's not a con, its legitimate lawful business!

There is no con here...again you're mis-using words. In a con, the person who gives the money gets nothing (or very little) in return...its nothing more than sophisticated stealing. Nothing of the sort happened here.

The State has absolutely no business mandating the priceof any product or service. None whatsoever. Period. Further, I would argue the State has no business forcing you to purchase any product or service, whether insurance, smog checks, or PPTs. They are running little microcosm fascist empires and its disgusting. If they want to force you to buy something, like a driver's license, then make them set up government run, controlled, and employed operations like the DMV. And not force independent small business to bear the burden of the costs of their unconstitutional, power grabbing, control-freak laws.

Since we are now well beyond UOC, I won't comment on this any further. If you want to continue the debatesend a PM.
 

ChuckBooty

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
38
Location
, ,
imported post

So an LEO showed up at Faith Armory today and told Nate (the owner) that if he didn't WANT any UOC'ers that he could make them leave, since he was on private property. Strange, huh? Do LEO's routinely monitor this site? I imagine they do.
 

coolusername2007

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
1,659
Location
Temecula, California, USA
imported post

ChuckBooty wrote:
So an LEO showed up at Faith Armory today and told Nate (the owner) that if he didn't WANT any UOC'ers that he could make them leave, since he was on private property. Strange, huh? Do LEO's routinely monitor this site? I imagine they do.
Not surprised at all. You betcha they are watching this site, LEOs, prosecutors, DAs, and who knows who else. Besides Faith has many LEO customers, and since he agreed to display the educational brochure I createdand pc brochure I'm not surprised some are commenting. Did this LEO come in specifically for this purpose, or was he/she just another customer?
 

Gundude

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
1,691
Location
Sandy Eggo County
imported post

One more thing, if you think you are secure here....think again. With that terrorist threat assesment memo on caopencarry, you can bet that homeland security is involved and they know who we all are. I haven't heard any strange noises on my phone yet, but they can listen in if they want. what, me paranoid? :cool:On a one to ten scale, I am a two. I don't trust a politician any further than I can throw my recliner. All they care about is getting re-elected.
 
Joined
Dec 4, 2009
Messages
21
Location
, ,
imported post

I'm LEO and I think its good that some of us are reading these blogs. Many of you have very good info and I have learned a lot from these blogs. I am very fortunate to be in a position where I have several LEOs that work for me and they are all in tune with open carry situations.

Most of you are well informed and you have your facts straight, good job. Based on my readings here I am confident none of you will get the opportunity to file a civil rights lawsuit against me or the LEOs that work for me becuase we are now more aware of this situation. And in case your wondering, yes, I do support open carry.

Often times there is a very 'anti-LEO' tone here and I think that contributes to some of the open carry conflict on the street level. I won't even touch the CCW issues because that is far out of my pay grade. However, my personal opinion is that CCW is much better for everyone than UOC. I fully support the idea of law abiding citizens being armed. It is a very rare occasion that I am not armed and often times I have my primary and a backup. If more good people were armed there would be alot more dirtbags assuming room temparture.

I have been to Faith and I may be there on the 23rd. If so maybe we can chat a little. And in case your wondering, I will not go there on the clock.
 

pullnshoot25

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
1,139
Location
Escondido, California, USA
imported post

ready on the left...ready on the right wrote:
I'm LEO and I think its good that some of us are reading these blogs. Many of you have very good info and I have learned a lot from these blogs. I am very fortunate to be in a position where I have several LEOs that work for me and they are all in tune with open carry situations.

Most of you are well informed and you have your facts straight, good job. Based on my readings here I am confident none of you will get the opportunity to file a civil rights lawsuit against me or the LEOs that work for me becuase we are now more aware of this situation. And in case your wondering, yes, I do support open carry.

Often times there is a very 'anti-LEO' tone here and I think that contributes to some of the open carry conflict on the street level. I won't even touch the CCW issues because that is far out of my pay grade. However, my personal opinion is that CCW is much better for everyone than UOC. I fully support the idea of law abiding citizens being armed. It is a very rare occasion that I am not armed and often times I have my primary and a backup. If more good people were armed there would be alot more dirtbags assuming room temparture.

I have been to Faith and I may be there on the 23rd. If so maybe we can chat a little. And in case your wondering, I will not go there on the clock.

The "anti-LEO" tone is set by LEOs transgressing upon rights without reason and with impunity, a trait that seems to be the norm and not the exception. However, I am glad you as an LEO are 1) taking your oath seriously and 2) being proactive.

As far as filing lawsuits, that won't happen if cops start following the law and upholding their oaths. The OCing community as a whole has been pretty patient with teaching many police officers how to follow the oaths they took while trying to avoid arrest or a pneumothorax. Much credit given to your efforts, however.

I myself will try to be there on the 23rd as well. Nothing definitive but I think that talking to some of you guys would be cool.
 

inbox485

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
353
Location
Riverside County, California, USA
imported post

Decoligny wrote:
http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=245751&highlight=faith+armory

Apparently Faith Armory is charging more than the $35.00 fee for PPTs, the legal limit per the PC. 

They know that this overcharging is illegal, yet claim that they have to charge more or they will go broke.

I will choose another venue to give blood at simply because I refuse to support criminals.

Faith Armory is the best and darn near the only gun shop for about 30 miles in any direction. The workers are friendly and helpful and their prices are typically what you would see online. Should they be called on it if they charge unlawful fees? Sure, but they are still a great business.
 

inbox485

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
353
Location
Riverside County, California, USA
imported post

ready on the left...ready on the right wrote:
I'm LEO and I think its good that some of us are reading these blogs. Many of you have very good info and I have learned a lot from these blogs. I am very fortunate to be in a position where I have several LEOs that work for me and they are all in tune with open carry situations.

Most of you are well informed and you have your facts straight, good job. Based on my readings here I am confident none of you will get the opportunity to file a civil rights lawsuit against me or the LEOs that work for me becuase we are now more aware of this situation. And in case your wondering, yes, I do support open carry.

Often times there is a very 'anti-LEO' tone here and I think that contributes to some of the open carry conflict on the street level. I won't even touch the CCW issues because that is far out of my pay grade. However, my personal opinion is that CCW is much better for everyone than UOC. I fully support the idea of law abiding citizens being armed. It is a very rare occasion that I am not armed and often times I have my primary and a backup. If more good people were armed there would be alot more dirtbags assuming room temparture.

I have been to Faith and I may be there on the 23rd. If so maybe we can chat a little. And in case your wondering, I will not go there on the clock.

Your chiming in is much appreciated. While I'm 100% in support of LEO accountability, the anti-LEO tone urks me. Its the whole "subset x did this so the group X should be made to pay for it" mentality. The only reasonable outcome is group X saying "come and get it". No way to make friends for sure.

I think even most open carriers want OC and CC not just one or the other. If I had to choose one I would choose CC since it allows for more discretion, but there are times OC would be much preferred. That and CC only leads to things like felony charges for printing, and OC only leads to things like felony charges for shirt cover. Interestingly, a shall issue CCW in CA would cover OC as well. The only reason CCW doesn't get you OC in CA already is that your CCW can be yanked at the issuer's discretion.

+1 on dirtbags assuming room temperature.
 

inbox485

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2009
Messages
353
Location
Riverside County, California, USA
imported post

pullnshoot25 wrote:
The "anti-LEO" tone is set by LEOs transgressing upon rights without reason and with impunity, a trait that seems to be the norm and not the exception. However, I am glad you as an LEO are 1) taking your oath seriously and 2) being proactive.

As far as filing lawsuits, that won't happen if cops start following the law and upholding their oaths. The OCing community as a whole has been pretty patient with teaching many police officers how to follow the oaths they took while trying to avoid arrest or a pneumothorax. Much credit given to your efforts, however.

I myself will try to be there on the 23rd as well. Nothing definitive but I think that talking to some of you guys would be cool.

I'd agree with you for the most part. There are far to many examples of police violating the rights of OCers with impunity to be ignored, but there are a number of posts I've come across that go a lot further than being upset at the individuals doing the wrong. I've seen rabidly anti-LEO threads here that centered on articles that were deliberately one sided and missing critical points that exonerated the police actions.

I'm not LEO, but say I was and I was the type that wouldn't lift a finger to enforce an anti-gun law save it were my middle finger. I'd still feel like I was under fire in this forum.
 

pullnshoot25

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
1,139
Location
Escondido, California, USA
imported post

inbox485 wrote:
pullnshoot25 wrote:
The "anti-LEO" tone is set by LEOs transgressing upon rights without reason and with impunity, a trait that seems to be the norm and not the exception. However, I am glad you as an LEO are 1) taking your oath seriously and 2) being proactive.

As far as filing lawsuits, that won't happen if cops start following the law and upholding their oaths. The OCing community as a whole has been pretty patient with teaching many police officers how to follow the oaths they took while trying to avoid arrest or a pneumothorax. Much credit given to your efforts, however.

I myself will try to be there on the 23rd as well. Nothing definitive but I think that talking to some of you guys would be cool.

I'd agree with you for the most part. There are far to many examples of police violating the rights of OCers with impunity to be ignored, but there are a number of posts I've come across that go a lot further than being upset at the individuals doing the wrong. I've seen rabidly anti-LEO threads here that centered on articles that were deliberately one sided and missing critical points that exonerated the police actions.

I'm not LEO, but say I was and I was the type that wouldn't lift a finger to enforce an anti-gun law save it were my middle finger. I'd still feel like I was under fire in this forum.

An exception to the general rule does not make the general rule void.
 

Gundude

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
1,691
Location
Sandy Eggo County
imported post

ready on the left...ready on the right wrote:
I'm LEO and I think its good that some of us are reading these blogs. Many of you have very good info and I have learned a lot from these blogs. I am very fortunate to be in a position where I have several LEOs that work for me and they are all in tune with open carry situations.

Most of you are well informed and you have your facts straight, good job. Based on my readings here I am confident none of you will get the opportunity to file a civil rights lawsuit against me or the LEOs that work for me becuase we are now more aware of this situation. And in case your wondering, yes, I do support open carry.

Often times there is a very 'anti-LEO' tone here and I think that contributes to some of the open carry conflict on the street level. I won't even touch the CCW issues because that is far out of my pay grade. However, my personal opinion is that CCW is much better for everyone than UOC. I fully support the idea of law abiding citizens being armed. It is a very rare occasion that I am not armed and often times I have my primary and a backup. If more good people were armed there would be alot more dirtbags assuming room temparture.

I have been to Faith and I may be there on the 23rd. If so maybe we can chat a little. And in case your wondering, I will not go there on the clock.
I think most of the anti LEO sentiment is from hearing about or experiencing negative encounters with LEO's. For myself, If I'm walking down the street on my way to the 7-11 to get a pack of smokes, and suddenly find myself surrounded by 3 or 4 LEO's with guns drawn, disarmed,cuffed, searched and put in the back of a patrol car for doing nothing illegal, my attitude toward Leo's would change considerably. If the LEO's are watching this site, they should know that the overwhelming majority of UOC'ers arenot "out to get" any LEO's, and are not into "showing how big our guns are", as stated in some of the DA's memos on caopencarry. Not to worry, this is just one opinion.
 

coolusername2007

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2009
Messages
1,659
Location
Temecula, California, USA
imported post

ready on the left...ready on the right wrote:
I'm LEO and I think its good that some of us are reading these blogs. Many of you have very good info and I have learned a lot from these blogs. I am very fortunate to be in a position where I have several LEOs that work for me and they are all in tune with open carry situations.

Most of you are well informed and you have your facts straight, good job. Based on my readings here I am confident none of you will get the opportunity to file a civil rights lawsuit against me or the LEOs that work for me becuase we are now more aware of this situation. And in case your wondering, yes, I do support open carry.

Often times there is a very 'anti-LEO' tone here and I think that contributes to some of the open carry conflict on the street level. I won't even touch the CCW issues because that is far out of my pay grade. However, my personal opinion is that CCW is much better for everyone than UOC. I fully support the idea of law abiding citizens being armed. It is a very rare occasion that I am not armed and often times I have my primary and a backup. If more good people were armed there would be alot more dirtbags assuming room temparture.

I have been to Faith and I may be there on the 23rd. If so maybe we can chat a little. And in case your wondering, I will not go there on the clock.

Thanks for the good post. Hope to meet you on the 23rd. I too think its good that LEOs read this site for the same reasons you've listed. Personally, I think that probably more LEOs agree with your armed statements than not. And I can understand the caution in one's approach to a UOC'er in the field. I think the anti-LEO tone here should be qualified a little...it's more anti-LEO for the one's like in Wolfenstein's encounter. Did you read that thread? That's just out of order and needs to be addressed. Wouldn't you agree?
 

ChuckBooty

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2009
Messages
38
Location
, ,
imported post

coolusername2007 wrote:
ChuckBooty wrote:
So an LEO showed up at Faith Armory today and told Nate (the owner) that if he didn't WANT any UOC'ers that he could make them leave, since he was on private property. Strange, huh? Do LEO's routinely monitor this site? I imagine they do.
Not surprised at all. You betcha they are watching this site, LEOs, prosecutors, DAs, and who knows who else. Besides Faith has many LEO customers, and since he agreed to display the educational brochure I createdand pc brochure I'm not surprised some are commenting. Did this LEO come in specifically for this purpose, or was he/she just another customer?
He showed up, in uniform, SPECIFICALLY because of this thread. They said he was nice and all, but just telling them that if they don't want UOC'ers they don't have to have them. Basically UOC is not a RIGHT on private property.
 

The Nomadd

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Messages
31
Location
, ,
imported post

ready on the left...ready on the right wrote:
I'm LEO and I think its good that some of us are reading these blogs. Many of you have very good info and I have learned a lot from these blogs. I am very fortunate to be in a position where I have several LEOs that work for me and they are all in tune with open carry situations.

Most of you are well informed and you have your facts straight, good job. Based on my readings here I am confident none of you will get the opportunity to file a civil rights lawsuit against me or the LEOs that work for me becuase we are now more aware of this situation. And in case your wondering, yes, I do support open carry.

Often times there is a very 'anti-LEO' tone here and I think that contributes to some of the open carry conflict on the street level. I won't even touch the CCW issues because that is far out of my pay grade. However, my personal opinion is that CCW is much better for everyone than UOC. I fully support the idea of law abiding citizens being armed. It is a very rare occasion that I am not armed and often times I have my primary and a backup. If more good people were armed there would be alot more dirtbags assuming room temparture.

I have been to Faith and I may be there on the 23rd. If so maybe we can chat a little. And in case your wondering, I will not go there on the clock.
First off, since I didn't notice if anyone else had said it or not, welcome to the forum. We do have several members who are LEOS, and it's always good to get their support and perspective on the various topics brought up both here and over on Calguns. Especially since there seems to be various agencies that are monitoring these sites, some of them possibly being less 2A rights friendly. I do have to agree with the other poster's assessments, in regards to the "anti-LEO" tone that you bring up. It's not that we're "anti-LEO", (as a matter of fact, I'm a forensics major myself, and have friends who are LEOS) we're just tired of various agencies and/or officers not getting this right, given the wealth of info available to them, as well as the various memos now out there. Especially the ones who do know the laws, and continue to violate the rights of open carriers.
 
Top