• 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.

Guns confiscated just for buying guns?

GLOCK21GB

GLOCK21GB

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Apr 22, 2009
Messages
4,347
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Interceptor_Knight wrote:
kwikrnu wrote:
Interceptor_Knight wrote:
kwikrnu wrote:
Interceptor_Knight wrote:

At the very least it appears to be a case of "Just because you can does not mean you should"...
Click to expand...
:banghead:
Click to expand...
'splain......... You support people making death threats?
Click to expand...
Are stating the man made death threats? I didn't read that in the article.
Click to expand...
I am suggesting that "very disgruntled" is alluding to such. If not specifically "death" threats, some threat of violence. My statement refers to the rationale that just because your speech may be "protected" does not mean that it is a good idea to utter some words.
Click to expand...
like saying...HI JACK on a plane :( or saying, HE HAS A BOMB at the Superbowl :(
 
kwikrnu

kwikrnu

Banned
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
1,956
Location
Brentwood, Tennessee
imported post

Glock34 wrote:
Unstable employee - snaps. Sad, but what ya going to do.:?
Click to expand...
Nothing.


The police can't do anything because if no threats are made they can't violate civil rights. The police have no responsibility to protect any individual/s.

Employees can't do anything because the second amendment has been gutted and employers do not allow the carry of handguns for protection.
 
kwikrnu

kwikrnu

Banned
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
1,956
Location
Brentwood, Tennessee
imported post

Interceptor_Knight wrote:

I am suggesting that "very disgruntled" is alluding to such. If not specifically "death" threats, some threat of violence. My statement refers to the rationale that just because your speech may be "protected" does not mean that it is a good idea to utter some words.
Click to expand...

"Very disgruntled" is how employers label dissatisfied employees. You don't like your new shift, disgruntled. You don't like a discontinued health benefit, disgruntled. Your boss yells at you, disgruntled.

Disgruntled means an employe doesn't like something. Disgruntled doesn't mean death threat or other threats of violence. If the man had made death threats it would have been reported that the man made threats of violence.

I've been labeled disgruntled at my old job. What did I do? I sent my wife out with a video camera and video taped school buses running over railroad tracks without stopping first. It is highly illegal and extremely dangerous. Yet, I was labeled disgruntled and a trouble maker.
 
Brass Magnet

Brass Magnet

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,818
Location
Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Better yet, let's reserve judgement until we all know the facts. Remember the thread when Hannon-Rock was first arrested? All the "he baited the cops he got what he deserved" stuff? Yeah, well this is like that. Why jump to conclusions? That's the anti's job.
 
L

Landose_theghost

Regular Member
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
512
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Brass Magnet wrote:
Better yet, let's reserve judgement until we all know the facts. Remember the thread when Hannon-Rock was first arrested? All the "he baited the cops he got what he deserved" stuff? Yeah, well this is like that. Why jump to conclusions? That's the anti's job.
Click to expand...
THANK YOU! Took the words right of my mouth. While he may have made threats, this still has no bearing untill he makes good on them. This was a clear &blatant violation of his civil liberties, and a clear example of how the thought police think they can bend the constitution and justify their actionsin the name of saftey.:banghead:
 
Brass Magnet

Brass Magnet

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,818
Location
Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Landose_theghost wrote:
Brass Magnet wrote:
Better yet, let's reserve judgement until we all know the facts. Remember the thread when Hannon-Rock was first arrested? All the "he baited the cops he got what he deserved" stuff? Yeah, well this is like that. Why jump to conclusions? That's the anti's job.
Click to expand...
THANK YOU! Took the words right of my mouth. While he may have made threats, this still has no bearing untill he makes good on them. This was a clear &blatant violation of his civil liberties, and a clear example of how the thought police think they can bend the constitution and justify their actionsin the name of saftey.:banghead:
Click to expand...

You misunderstand me. I'm not taking his side either. When I say reserve judgment; I mean for both him and the police.

Also, making threats (ifhe actually did)sure does have bearing whether or not you intend to make good on them.
 
L

Landose_theghost

Regular Member
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
512
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

@ Brass Magnet:

Don't lie to yourself man, the police were entirely in the wrong in everything they did. People thinking the way you do are the reason why the thought police are on the rise. Example being, how many times have you said "I'm going to kill that guy!" or somthing to the like whilst venting with your buddies? Under your logic then theSWAT team should break your door down and give you a free pshyc eval justbecause youwent out the same day and boughtkitchen knives, or a car, or a baseball bat...etc. and might make good on your threat using said items. Case in point is, a threat is nothing untill acted upon, it's the action that (Should) get you in trouble. Altho the pre-crime police state we are in currently doesn't seem tothink so.
 
Brass Magnet

Brass Magnet

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,818
Location
Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Landose_theghost wrote:
@ Brass Magnet:

Don't lie to yourself man, the police were entirely in the wrong in everything they did. People thinking the way you do are the reason why the thought police are on the rise.
Click to expand...
LOL, I'm one of the biggestadvocates for civil rights on this forum and I'm in no way siding with the police. OR THE GUY, yet.
Click to expand...
Example being, how many times have you said "I'm going to kill that guy!" or somthing to the like whilst venting with your buddies? Under your logic then theSWAT team should break your door down and give you a free pshyc eval justbecause youwent out the same day and boughtkitchen knives, or a car, or a baseball bat...etc. and might make good on your threat using said items. Case in point is, a threat is nothing untill acted upon, it's the action that (Should) get you in trouble. Altho the pre-crime police state we are in currently doesn't seem tothink so.
Click to expand...
Under my logic? I don't think I've made my logic clear with my one or two sentences in the previous posts. Don't put words in my mouth. As always, it is the circumstances in totality that will make this a legal or illegal action, and we DON'T KNOW THE CIRCUMSTANCES. Did the guy say "I'm going to go buy some guns today and come back here and use them" to one of his coworkers? And then follow it up by buying them? You don't know, if he did, that's an imminent threat and surely gives RAS, in the least and most likely probable cause.
Click to expand...
BTW.I've never said "I'm going to kill that guy" in any of my adult life.
Click to expand...
But you're free to go ahead and jump to conclusions, just don't blame me if you end up looking silly in the end. Why oh why do people make up their minds without knowing the facts?
 
L

Landose_theghost

Regular Member
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
512
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

@ Brass magnet:

WOW! You took the time to separate my words phrase by phrase, and then you even highlighted them just to show me what's what:lol:? I'm verytouched that your still concerned about this posting,but sadly my friend,all the adults have sincemoved on with thier lives.
 
Brass Magnet

Brass Magnet

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,818
Location
Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

Landose_theghost wrote:
@ Brass magnet:

WOW! You took the time to separate my words phrase by phrase, and then you even highlighted them just to show me what's what:lol:? I'm verytouched that your still concerned about this posting,but sadly my friend,all the adults have sincemoved on with thier lives.
Click to expand...

Yeah,addressing each of their points ishow you actually debate someone, you know; a structured civil argument? So basically, you have nothing to back up your opinion and have resorted to calling me a child. Or maybe you've realized your wrong, didn't want to admit it and just wanted the last word? Who's the child now?

I'll leave disagreements be disagreements, but I won't leave personal insults alone. If you have to resort to that, unprovoked; well, let's just say the people on this forum aren't stupid, they have fairly well tuned B.S. meters.
 
S

SAK

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
259
Location
ShaunKranish from ICarry.org, ,
imported post

precrime.jpg
 
P

PT111

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2007
Messages
2,243
Location
, South Carolina, USA
imported post

I don't know that I have ever said or heard anyone say that they were going to kill someone. If I heard someone say it even if I didn't think they really meant it I would still watch that person closely. :what:
 
M

McX

Guest
imported post

so, some time had unraveled here. did they let the poor ba**rd out, or is he still cooling it? and no crime was committed? just someone's rights trampled on on the "IF" category. discreet storm trooperin?
 
L

Landose_theghost

Regular Member
Joined
May 17, 2009
Messages
512
Location
Green Bay, Wisconsin, USA
imported post

McX wrote:
so, some time had unraveled here. did they let the poor ba**rd out, or is he still cooling it? and no crime was committed? just someone's rights trampled on on the "IF" category. discreet storm trooperin?
Click to expand...
Not sure, I think mandatory phyce evals have a 72hr max hold, I could be wrong tho? Not that he should've been put in there in the first place. I'll do sum digging meantime.
 
M

Master Doug Huffman

Banned
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
2,381
Location
across Death's Door on Washington Island, Wisconsi
imported post

Wasn't the bill just passed this week disbarring RKABA for involuntary psychological commitment? 72 hours is involuntary.

I have an acquaintance VN LRRP that committed himself to avoid the legal entanglements of an ugly family life of more than fifty VN refugees that he personally sponsored. Then I have to chew my tongue when I read the rank ignorance about the Hmong here. Dick Schenk is alive because the Hmong sheltered him.
 
T

Teddybearfrmhell

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2010
Messages
348
Location
Cottage Grove, Oregon, USA
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top