Dave Ross Show audio 10/4 & 10/5

start point: 14:50
Oct 4th - http://www.mynorthwest.com/?nid=577&a=21313

Start point: 21:10
Oct 5th - http://www.mynorthwest.com/?nid=577&a=21352

Thanks for the second link!

For a moment I thought Dave Ross was going to see the error of his ways when he acknowledged the Arizona identification scenario and his opposition. Silly me!

Why can he not see the difference between the two scenarios? An open carrier is breaking no laws by the mere fact that a weapon is visible. Absent suspicion of a crime, detainment and identification are not justified. Arizona requires that some infraction of the law be suspected prior to detainment and identification. The grey area, in my opinion, is what would merit an AZ officer to verify citizenship; but now we are way off topic.

Dave's suggestion that Arizona hispanics circumvent the problem by carrying firearms so they can't be stopped was a poor attempt at satire and is frustrating because he doesn't understand the difference between the two issues.

It is almost as if people like Dave think we want to be some special class of citizen that enjoys rights beyond those of others. The fact of the matter is that we are merely asking for respect of the fact that we are actively excercising our 2A while insisting on not forfeiting our 4A.

Stryker said:

Why can he not see the difference between the two scenarios? An open carrier is breaking no laws by the mere fact that a weapon is visible. Absent suspicion of a crime, detainment and identification are not justified. Arizona requires that some infraction of the law be suspected prior to detainment and identification. The grey area, in my opinion, is what would merit an AZ officer to verify citizenship; but now we are way off topic.

Click to expand...

He can't see the difference for the simple reason that he's been conditioned like all the other sheeple - guns are bad and the only reason to carry a gun is because you're bad. Did you notice how his buddy several times said there's a difference because "he's carrying a LOADED gun" and then basically it's ok to infringe upon his rights. It's all about the evil gun.

In his first broadcast he said that "...gun owners think they have more rights than the rest of society." Which is completely assinine. We just choose to exercise a right that others don't.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't having to "apply" for a CPL to exercise 2A rights silly? Why not require journalists apply for a permit to exercise their freedom of speach. They should take a test to make sure they're not being philisophically biased in their reporting.

Maybe I'm making an extreme example, but I have the right to thanks to 1A.

crunch14 said:

In his first broadcast he said that "...gun owners think they have more rights than the rest of society." Which is completely assinine. We just choose to exercise a right that others don't.

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't having to "apply" for a CPL to exercise 2A rights silly? Why not require journalists apply for a permit to exercise their freedom of speach. They should take a test to make sure they're not being philisophically biased in their reporting.

Maybe I'm making an extreme example, but I have the right to thanks to 1A.

Click to expand...

Excellent summation!

As I listen to the second audio clip , I'm thinking, "4th amendment, 4th amendment, 4th amendment!!!" The violation of Tom's 4th amendment rights is the bases for this whole thing. Throw out the gun and what do you have? You have an over reaching sheriffs department throwing the 4th amendment out the window. I think Mr. Bose and Ross both missed the point on each of their programs. They're like the rest of the sheeple staring at the gun and not the person.

I wish Schram would read this, but of course, he won't.

gogodawgs said:

Excellent summation!

Click to expand...

Thanks gogo.