ixtow
Founder's Club Member
imported post
rodbender wrote:
rodbender wrote:
Maybe they should do it then....
-
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.
-
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.
Watch your step, there are rats aboard the ship...
- Thread starter Dreamer
- Start date
rodbender
Regular Member
imported post
ixtow wrote:
ixtow wrote:
WOW!!! What a novel idea.
buster81
Regular Member
imported post
rodbender wrote:
rodbender wrote:
Don't the border patrol folks ply their trade 50 or 100 miles inland from the border...ie. the Constitution Free Zone?
N6ATF
Banned
imported post
buster81 wrote:
buster81 wrote:
LOL, the CFZ is much larger than that.
since9
Campaign Veteran
imported post
Alexcabbie wrote:
Entrapment? I'll say!
We have a seldom-quoted saying in the flying world: Those who push the envelope will eventually cross the point of no return.
Interestingly, the same applies to us and weapons. In your FBI example, it was the FBI who crossed the bounds. When they did, they got their wrists slapped. In your FA example, if we were to cross that line, we'd get our butts kicked!
Moral: Know the edge. Stay away. Hold LEOs as accountable to the law as they attempt to hold us to the law.
ixtow wrote:
Back in the early 90's, I held a CWP for three years, and carried concealed all the time. I was never treated any differently than other law-abiding citizens, and that includes by LEOs during traffic stops, during which I always volunteered my CWP status and card, even though it wasn't required. Just professional courtesy, and the way in which I did so was well respected. Only once did an officer ever ask to see my weapon, and then, it was simply "Please unload your weapon and hand it to me." I did so, he examined it for about four seconds (what for, I have no clue - possibly trying to elicit a response), and handed it back, saying, "You may reload and proceed on your way."
I'm not quite sure how that's being treated worse than sex offenders, particularly as my name, address, and picture isn't up on some stupid website for all the world to see.
Thank God it won't be. Sex offenders violated the law. The potential for them to violate it in the same way is high, which is why they'll be in lights the rest of their lives. Owning/carrying a firearm isn't a violation of the law, and is commensurate with the law of the land, our Constitution, which is why Feinstein can prattle on all she wants. I swore to uphold and defend it, with my life if necessary, when I entered military service, and so did she when she was sworn into office. Her interpretation of our nation's most sacred of documents differs from that of most people and that of the Highest Court in the land.
Too bad! And I'm damned glad recent court decisions across all levels have stopped listening to prattle from her and others like her, and have instead gone back to the LAW in rendering their decisions, instead of nonsensical prattle from the anti-gun nuts.
The only area were use of a firearm would land us in a similar category as a sex offender would be it's illegal use while committing a crime. Well, I got news for you - it's a good things convicted felons can't carry a weapon, as the likelihood for a repeat offense for them is as high as it is for a sex offender.
Alexcabbie wrote:
They most certainly do have bounds. It's just that they're always pushing the edge, sometimes beyond their lawfully-authorized bounds.
Entrapment? I'll say!
We have a seldom-quoted saying in the flying world: Those who push the envelope will eventually cross the point of no return.
Interestingly, the same applies to us and weapons. In your FBI example, it was the FBI who crossed the bounds. When they did, they got their wrists slapped. In your FA example, if we were to cross that line, we'd get our butts kicked!
Moral: Know the edge. Stay away. Hold LEOs as accountable to the law as they attempt to hold us to the law.
ixtow wrote:
Well, I don't think sex offenders have to pay $152.50 to register! That's one point. The other is that as a CWP holder, I don't have to carry a photo ID and CWP card on my person at all times. Only when I'm carrying, and then, only while I'm carrying concealed. I can walk around town while OC all day long without any ID on me whatsoever.
Back in the early 90's, I held a CWP for three years, and carried concealed all the time. I was never treated any differently than other law-abiding citizens, and that includes by LEOs during traffic stops, during which I always volunteered my CWP status and card, even though it wasn't required. Just professional courtesy, and the way in which I did so was well respected. Only once did an officer ever ask to see my weapon, and then, it was simply "Please unload your weapon and hand it to me." I did so, he examined it for about four seconds (what for, I have no clue - possibly trying to elicit a response), and handed it back, saying, "You may reload and proceed on your way."
I'm not quite sure how that's being treated worse than sex offenders, particularly as my name, address, and picture isn't up on some stupid website for all the world to see.
Thank God it won't be. Sex offenders violated the law. The potential for them to violate it in the same way is high, which is why they'll be in lights the rest of their lives. Owning/carrying a firearm isn't a violation of the law, and is commensurate with the law of the land, our Constitution, which is why Feinstein can prattle on all she wants. I swore to uphold and defend it, with my life if necessary, when I entered military service, and so did she when she was sworn into office. Her interpretation of our nation's most sacred of documents differs from that of most people and that of the Highest Court in the land.
Too bad! And I'm damned glad recent court decisions across all levels have stopped listening to prattle from her and others like her, and have instead gone back to the LAW in rendering their decisions, instead of nonsensical prattle from the anti-gun nuts.
The only area were use of a firearm would land us in a similar category as a sex offender would be it's illegal use while committing a crime. Well, I got news for you - it's a good things convicted felons can't carry a weapon, as the likelihood for a repeat offense for them is as high as it is for a sex offender.
Deanimator
Regular Member
imported post
sudden valley gunner wrote:
And speaking of Woodrow Wilson, he was the dolt who referred to "Birth of a Nation" as "History written with lightning".
sudden valley gunner wrote:
http://www.justice.gov/oig/special/9603/
And speaking of Woodrow Wilson, he was the dolt who referred to "Birth of a Nation" as "History written with lightning".
ixtow
Founder's Club Member
imported post
since9 wrote:
Newspapers are still publishing CWP lists, and running searchable online databases with names, addresses, and more. Cops still get the 'Warning, Subject has a CWP" message any time they look you up, and may proceed from there based on how much they hate citizens with guns. Doesn't matter if you have The Card with you, or if you are carrying. Cops still cause headaches for people who have the CWP and are OCing without it. We still have to be on this special list of people who are considered sub-human, and pay to be on it. Some CWPs still contain SSNs and other Identity Theft assistants as public record.
It is, in some way, worse than a Registered Sex Offender. A Politically Prejudiced Officer is given free reign to go all-out Felony Stop, just becasue s/he is 'afraid for his/her safety' for no reason at all. Do you know how easy it is to become a Registered Sex Offender Felon, without ever doing anything wrong? All it takes is having some degenerate teenager get mad at you, or your kid at school, etc... But that's a different discussion.
Maybe you aren't personally a victim of it, but hundreds of thousands of other people are.
Does it not matter just because it isn't happening to you? Or were you honestly not aware?
since9 wrote:
A great deal of your counter may be true for you, but it isn't true for everyone.
Newspapers are still publishing CWP lists, and running searchable online databases with names, addresses, and more. Cops still get the 'Warning, Subject has a CWP" message any time they look you up, and may proceed from there based on how much they hate citizens with guns. Doesn't matter if you have The Card with you, or if you are carrying. Cops still cause headaches for people who have the CWP and are OCing without it. We still have to be on this special list of people who are considered sub-human, and pay to be on it. Some CWPs still contain SSNs and other Identity Theft assistants as public record.
It is, in some way, worse than a Registered Sex Offender. A Politically Prejudiced Officer is given free reign to go all-out Felony Stop, just becasue s/he is 'afraid for his/her safety' for no reason at all. Do you know how easy it is to become a Registered Sex Offender Felon, without ever doing anything wrong? All it takes is having some degenerate teenager get mad at you, or your kid at school, etc... But that's a different discussion.
Maybe you aren't personally a victim of it, but hundreds of thousands of other people are.
Does it not matter just because it isn't happening to you? Or were you honestly not aware?
Deanimator
Regular Member
imported post
ixtow wrote:
Here in Ohio, gun owners have been VERY aggressive in retaliating against such intimidation attempts.
Endangering women with restraining orders, hiding from abusive spouses = fun
Having YOUR home address, phone number(s), title info published = not so much fun
The editor of the Cleveland Plain Dealer seemed generally astonished that HIS personal information would be published on the web. The editor of a paper out west (Sandusky or Perkins, I think) seemed even more astonished at just how MUCH of his (and his family's) personal information was publicly available.
As one of the characters in the game "Redneck Rampage" used to say, "Mess with the bull, get the horn."
Gee, with the world knowing where they live, and being such arrogant, abrasive a-holes, maybe they ought to think about getting Ohio CHLs...
ixtow wrote:
As the saying goes, "It's all good fun until somebody loses an eye."
Here in Ohio, gun owners have been VERY aggressive in retaliating against such intimidation attempts.
Endangering women with restraining orders, hiding from abusive spouses = fun
Having YOUR home address, phone number(s), title info published = not so much fun
The editor of the Cleveland Plain Dealer seemed generally astonished that HIS personal information would be published on the web. The editor of a paper out west (Sandusky or Perkins, I think) seemed even more astonished at just how MUCH of his (and his family's) personal information was publicly available.
As one of the characters in the game "Redneck Rampage" used to say, "Mess with the bull, get the horn."
Gee, with the world knowing where they live, and being such arrogant, abrasive a-holes, maybe they ought to think about getting Ohio CHLs...
buster81
Regular Member
imported post
N6ATF wrote:
N6ATF wrote:
Yourright, but my point was that the border patrol operates in a less thanConstitutional fashion.
rodbender
Regular Member
imported post
buster81 wrote:
buster81 wrote:
Yes, they do. But I've discovered that if you have the time and hold your ground, they willl eventually give in. I've spent as much as an hour and a half refusing to show I.D.
buster81
Regular Member
imported post
rodbender wrote:
rodbender wrote:
I guess I'm confused. Sorry.
Dreamer
Regular Member
imported post
I'm bumping this thread, just to make sure people keep their ears perked up, and their whiskers sensitive...
I've noticed a marked uptake in the amount of "new members" posting questions regarding dubious activities, or asking for advice in matters were they were CLEARLY in the wrong.
Either there are just a LOT of goofballs finding this forum recently, or the "rats" are REALLY stepping up their "fishing expeditions" for "cheese"...
Don't take the bait.
Watch your step, brothers and sisters. We know how these critters operate. There's not point giving them what they want.
We need ALL the brave, law-abiding folks here to stay free and active...
(Open) Carry On...
I'm bumping this thread, just to make sure people keep their ears perked up, and their whiskers sensitive...
I've noticed a marked uptake in the amount of "new members" posting questions regarding dubious activities, or asking for advice in matters were they were CLEARLY in the wrong.
Either there are just a LOT of goofballs finding this forum recently, or the "rats" are REALLY stepping up their "fishing expeditions" for "cheese"...
Don't take the bait.
Watch your step, brothers and sisters. We know how these critters operate. There's not point giving them what they want.
We need ALL the brave, law-abiding folks here to stay free and active...
(Open) Carry On...
imported post
Agent provocateurs, trolls, antis, the press, computer ninjas, representatives of our on government, et cetera, ad infinitum, ad nusium.
Not paranoid, not really overly concerned, but nevertheless aware.
It is a good thing to keep in mind with every post you read or write.
Don't let your words return to haunt you or bite you in the a$$.
Yata hey
Agent provocateurs, trolls, antis, the press, computer ninjas, representatives of our on government, et cetera, ad infinitum, ad nusium.
Not paranoid, not really overly concerned, but nevertheless aware.
It is a good thing to keep in mind with every post you read or write.
Don't let your words return to haunt you or bite you in the a$$.
Yata hey
Superlite27
Regular Member
imported post
Dreamer wrote:
You're not the only one. In the past week I've seen questions regarding handcuffing folks that you see breaking the law (Like a police officer? I'm not a police officer. What makes them think I would 'cuff someone? OH! I SEE! I carry a gun, therefore I must think I'm a cop!)
To when to wave a gun in order to "protect" myself from someone who is angry with me. (Brandish my gun? OH! I SEE! Since I carry a gun, I must like to threaten people with it!)
There have been entirely too many of these strange "questions" that lead one down a road of heartache (Agree with any part of the premise, and you appear to advocate ILLEGAL actions if not sympathize with the person committing them)
It has to be more than a coincidence. There has to be some type of "behind the scenes" agenda by some coordinated anti-carry organization. There are just too many of "leading" questions lately. The "theme" seems to be "Hey, I just (insert illegal or irresponsible firearm use) what do you think?
All it takes is for one of us to say, "You done good!" and TA-DA! Look! Those crazy nuts over at OCDO advocate shooting old women like (insert idiot who advocated the illegal or irresponsible firearm use) did.
I say we form a thread containing links to "questionable" posts or threads posted for "questionable" reasons in order to promote the rationale or reason the OP asked. If the OP can explain a good reason, fine. If the OP disappears to never be heard from again, at least we won't have to suffer any more "fishing"
Dreamer wrote:
You're not the only one. In the past week I've seen questions regarding handcuffing folks that you see breaking the law (Like a police officer? I'm not a police officer. What makes them think I would 'cuff someone? OH! I SEE! I carry a gun, therefore I must think I'm a cop!)
To when to wave a gun in order to "protect" myself from someone who is angry with me. (Brandish my gun? OH! I SEE! Since I carry a gun, I must like to threaten people with it!)
There have been entirely too many of these strange "questions" that lead one down a road of heartache (Agree with any part of the premise, and you appear to advocate ILLEGAL actions if not sympathize with the person committing them)
It has to be more than a coincidence. There has to be some type of "behind the scenes" agenda by some coordinated anti-carry organization. There are just too many of "leading" questions lately. The "theme" seems to be "Hey, I just (insert illegal or irresponsible firearm use) what do you think?
All it takes is for one of us to say, "You done good!" and TA-DA! Look! Those crazy nuts over at OCDO advocate shooting old women like (insert idiot who advocated the illegal or irresponsible firearm use) did.
I say we form a thread containing links to "questionable" posts or threads posted for "questionable" reasons in order to promote the rationale or reason the OP asked. If the OP can explain a good reason, fine. If the OP disappears to never be heard from again, at least we won't have to suffer any more "fishing"
imported post
Superlite27 wrote:
If not I would suggest the restriction that the thread/post in question be discussed on the particular/original thread not here - save the new thread for simple reporting and giving the link.
Good idea BTW
Yata hey
Superlite27 wrote:
Have you done it yet - started such a thread?
If not I would suggest the restriction that the thread/post in question be discussed on the particular/original thread not here - save the new thread for simple reporting and giving the link.
Good idea BTW
Yata hey
Alexcabbie
Regular Member
imported post
Also there be just plain jerks around, like the cretin who started a thread asking if a .380 was big enough to stop an attacking baby. I don't know if the poster was (1) some clown trying to make fun of the .380 caliber, (2) some smartass kid from one of Colman McCarthy's "Peace Seminars" (If you have never heard of McCarthy look him up but wrap your head in duct tape before you read anything he says) or (3) someone trying to put up something really sick to make us look bad by association.
I don't really trust a poster until he has discussed guns, ammo, holsters, etc over on the tech threads. A lot of these folks who try to provoke don't like firearms in the first place and wouldn't know a safety from a slide release.( I enjoy looking at the tech threads myself, and have gained much knowledge from them)
Also, two big red flags: When a post or a thread makes you think ::question:then look and see if the poster is brand new and/or has declined to give a location. I am absoutely NOT saying that new members are automatically suspect, and sometimes a newbie is a bit nervous and inarticulate until he realizes he is among friends. But I remember one such who started out saying he was trying to find a "less offensive" way of open-carry". Until I know fer sure whether it is a coral snake or acorn snake, I ain't picking it up.
Also there be just plain jerks around, like the cretin who started a thread asking if a .380 was big enough to stop an attacking baby. I don't know if the poster was (1) some clown trying to make fun of the .380 caliber, (2) some smartass kid from one of Colman McCarthy's "Peace Seminars" (If you have never heard of McCarthy look him up but wrap your head in duct tape before you read anything he says) or (3) someone trying to put up something really sick to make us look bad by association.
I don't really trust a poster until he has discussed guns, ammo, holsters, etc over on the tech threads. A lot of these folks who try to provoke don't like firearms in the first place and wouldn't know a safety from a slide release.( I enjoy looking at the tech threads myself, and have gained much knowledge from them)
Also, two big red flags: When a post or a thread makes you think ::question:then look and see if the poster is brand new and/or has declined to give a location. I am absoutely NOT saying that new members are automatically suspect, and sometimes a newbie is a bit nervous and inarticulate until he realizes he is among friends. But I remember one such who started out saying he was trying to find a "less offensive" way of open-carry". Until I know fer sure whether it is a coral snake or acorn snake, I ain't picking it up.
Alexcabbie
Regular Member
imported post
sudden valley gunner
Regular Member
imported post
Alexcabbie wrote:
LOL. I don't spend time over there. I like gun and protecting myself and learn about the ones I have. But other than that it's like cars I like to drive 'em but don't spend to much time working on them.
Alexcabbie wrote:
Waaaaah Alex don't trust me.
LOL. I don't spend time over there. I like gun and protecting myself and learn about the ones I have. But other than that it's like cars I like to drive 'em but don't spend to much time working on them.