Tomahawk
Regular Member
imported post
Well, there's the old saying: A lottery is a tax on people with poor math skills.
Well, there's the old saying: A lottery is a tax on people with poor math skills.
-
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.
20 yo friend pulled over... gun taken.
- Thread starter leprechaun117
- Start date
TraumaRN
Regular Member
imported post
Agent19 wrote:
Agent19 wrote:
You have to agree to be identified when you accept your award, it is part of their promotional efforts for the lottery.
67390FE
Regular Member
imported post
Depends on the state. In Michigan, if it's a michigan lottery (not a multi-state) and the payout is over $10,000 your identity is protected by law. You can choose to ID yourself, but you are not required to.
http://www.michigan.gov/lottery/0,1607,7-110-1227-4251--F,00.html
Depends on the state. In Michigan, if it's a michigan lottery (not a multi-state) and the payout is over $10,000 your identity is protected by law. You can choose to ID yourself, but you are not required to.
http://www.michigan.gov/lottery/0,1607,7-110-1227-4251--F,00.html
67390FE
Regular Member
imported post
I know, wrong state forum :? I really should get some sleep, sorry
I know, wrong state forum :? I really should get some sleep, sorry
67GT390FB
Regular Member
imported post
67390FE wrote:
67390FE wrote:
ok next question is what is that 67390FE in? You can see my interest by my sign in name.I know, wrong state forum :? I really should get some sleep, sorry
kaiheitai17
Founder's Club Member
imported post
67GT390FB wrote:
67GT390FB wrote:
Yeah, inquiring minds want to know. I have a 68 390. Hopefully I'll have it out of the shop within the next month.67390FE wrote:ok next question is what is that 67390FE in? You can see my interest by my sign in name.I know, wrong state forum :? I really should get some sleep, sorry
67390FE
Regular Member
imported post
It's a '67 Fairlane 500.
It's a '67 Fairlane 500.
glocknroll
Regular Member
imported post
BIG SHAFE wrote:
BIG SHAFE wrote:
The problem here is that what we find unreasonable the police often do not.
KBCraig
Regular Member
imported post
LEO 229 wrote:
A retired lieutenant from my agency has taken a second job driving an armored car. He routinely carries much more cash than that.
And then there's this poor fellow, who had the temerity to save up $59,000 by washing dishes, only to have it seized by Customs when he tried to fly home to Guatemala:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/27/immigrant.money/index.html?section=cnn_topstories&eref=yahoo
LEO 229 wrote:
When you issue an absolute declarative statement, such as "NOBODY carries around cash in this amount.. NOBODY!!", you invite evidence to the contrary. That evidence is not necessarily "extraordinary"; cases of innocent people having cash and assets seized under drug forfeiture laws are so rampant that I won't bother listing them. Google is your friend.
A retired lieutenant from my agency has taken a second job driving an armored car. He routinely carries much more cash than that.
And then there's this poor fellow, who had the temerity to save up $59,000 by washing dishes, only to have it seized by Customs when he tried to fly home to Guatemala:
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/27/immigrant.money/index.html?section=cnn_topstories&eref=yahoo
imported post
KBCraig wrote:
If you do not view things so literally.... you can understand conversation and get the pointthat I am talking about the average, everyday citizen,
Let menarrow it down... I suspect that NOBODY on this boardcarries around $40,000 cash ona daily basis!!!
If you do... do you need a friend??? I do not charge much.
KBCraig wrote:
Oh Please... As I already explained... Nobody -was used asa general phrase that is not meant to actually include the entire world. Obviously the rich and those that have a ton of cashcould actuallycarry around $40,000. This is not the ordinary.
If you do not view things so literally.... you can understand conversation and get the pointthat I am talking about the average, everyday citizen,
Let menarrow it down... I suspect that NOBODY on this boardcarries around $40,000 cash ona daily basis!!!
If you do... do you need a friend??? I do not charge much.
67GT390FB
Regular Member
imported post
67390FE wrote:
I'd like to find another 66 fairlane gt.
I had a 66 fairlane gt conv, and a 66 cyclone gt vert, i think i'd like to find a nice 66 gt ht at some point.
67390FE wrote:
I'd like to find another 66 fairlane gt.
I had a 66 fairlane gt conv, and a 66 cyclone gt vert, i think i'd like to find a nice 66 gt ht at some point.
67390FE
Regular Member
imported post
PM sent
PM sent
imported post
If you read 2+2 forum (poker community) there been a lot of cases where people been traveling between states on air-planes and been stopped for large sums of money. As you are probably aware, as long as your traveling within the USA, there is no responsibility to report the amount of cash you have on you.
One of the funny stories was about some young adult with about a hundread grand. Airport security wouldn't believe it was his .... or he was planning to gamble with it.... mainly because he was young and wearing t-shirts/jeans (rich people not allowed to be normal I guess :?). Anyway, he ended up being "detained" for about 9 hours until they found out his "net worth" was a lot larger than what he was carrying. Apparently after the whole thing, one of the officers decided he should lecture this "kid" on how to spend his money.
Large sums of money shouldn't be probable cause. While it may be consider stupid/risky to carry such money, there are certaintly many situtations where people need cash. And people seem to be oblivious to the fact that other people have MUCH more money than they do .... and carrying around 50k grand is like a drop in the bucket to them.
If you read 2+2 forum (poker community) there been a lot of cases where people been traveling between states on air-planes and been stopped for large sums of money. As you are probably aware, as long as your traveling within the USA, there is no responsibility to report the amount of cash you have on you.
One of the funny stories was about some young adult with about a hundread grand. Airport security wouldn't believe it was his .... or he was planning to gamble with it.... mainly because he was young and wearing t-shirts/jeans (rich people not allowed to be normal I guess :?). Anyway, he ended up being "detained" for about 9 hours until they found out his "net worth" was a lot larger than what he was carrying. Apparently after the whole thing, one of the officers decided he should lecture this "kid" on how to spend his money.
Large sums of money shouldn't be probable cause. While it may be consider stupid/risky to carry such money, there are certaintly many situtations where people need cash. And people seem to be oblivious to the fact that other people have MUCH more money than they do .... and carrying around 50k grand is like a drop in the bucket to them.
Tomahawk
Regular Member
imported post
DDrake wrote:
DDrake wrote:
Exactly. If you're not free to be eccentric or even stupid, then you are not free, period.
AbNo
Regular Member
imported post
That's very... profound.
That's very... profound.
riegnman
Regular Member
imported post
LEO 229 wrote:
LEO,
Maybe you should change your name to washlady229 or something. That way people wouldn't hate you because of your occupation. I don't specifically distrust LEOs. I distrust EVERYONE.:celebrate That's why I carry a snub-nosed .357 ALL OF THE TIME, (Except church). It amazes me that people feel that all cops are out to get them, all cops are corrupt, etc.
Usually when you look at it, it stems back to something like:
well, I was coming home one night and got pulled over and I had only had a few drinks. The stupid cop said that I was all over the road. So I just barely tapped him on the chin with my fist and the next thing I know I was on the ground and he was pummelling me with his night stick. . . POLICE BRUTALITY!!!!!!!
I present this link as evidence:
http://www.intruderalert.com/cafe/index.cfm?page=topic&topicID=114240
This involves a motorcycle rider going down the highway at some outrageous speed and ends with a wrecked bike and the cops sitting on the guy on the side of the road. Some idiot chimes in with "just another case of LEO's out of control. Lucky they did not kill that poor biker! I wonder what the original stop was gonna be for. . . some $10 fine I bet"
So, take heart. It is not you that they dislike, only your occupation. I appreciate you for what you do and what you are. Keep in mind that I still believe it is not a LEOs place to keep me or my family safe. The LEOs get called to come collect the body and file the paperwork.
Problems fall into three categories. Those that need to be ignored, those that can be reasoned awayand those that need to be shot.:lol: You know what they say. To a man with a hammer, every problem is a nail.:celebrate
LEO 229 wrote:
LEO,
Maybe you should change your name to washlady229 or something. That way people wouldn't hate you because of your occupation. I don't specifically distrust LEOs. I distrust EVERYONE.:celebrate That's why I carry a snub-nosed .357 ALL OF THE TIME, (Except church). It amazes me that people feel that all cops are out to get them, all cops are corrupt, etc.
Usually when you look at it, it stems back to something like:
well, I was coming home one night and got pulled over and I had only had a few drinks. The stupid cop said that I was all over the road. So I just barely tapped him on the chin with my fist and the next thing I know I was on the ground and he was pummelling me with his night stick. . . POLICE BRUTALITY!!!!!!!
I present this link as evidence:
http://www.intruderalert.com/cafe/index.cfm?page=topic&topicID=114240
This involves a motorcycle rider going down the highway at some outrageous speed and ends with a wrecked bike and the cops sitting on the guy on the side of the road. Some idiot chimes in with "just another case of LEO's out of control. Lucky they did not kill that poor biker! I wonder what the original stop was gonna be for. . . some $10 fine I bet"
So, take heart. It is not you that they dislike, only your occupation. I appreciate you for what you do and what you are. Keep in mind that I still believe it is not a LEOs place to keep me or my family safe. The LEOs get called to come collect the body and file the paperwork.
Problems fall into three categories. Those that need to be ignored, those that can be reasoned awayand those that need to be shot.:lol: You know what they say. To a man with a hammer, every problem is a nail.:celebrate
PT111
Regular Member
imported post
riegnman It always amazes me the number of run ins with LEO that many on this board seem to have. I am 57 and have been stopped a few time for speeding, a couple of accidents and a few roadside checks but have never had any real conflicts with and LEO. Some made meaggravated but more from the fact that they caught me than anything else. But I have found that a little courtesy goes a long way.
I have several friends that are LEO's and I would not have their jobto put up with what they do. I have met a few that it is a power trip for them but I also see that wearing a gun is a power trip for a few posters on here.
I don't trust anyone but my mother and now that she has Alzheimers I can't trust her any more.
riegnman It always amazes me the number of run ins with LEO that many on this board seem to have. I am 57 and have been stopped a few time for speeding, a couple of accidents and a few roadside checks but have never had any real conflicts with and LEO. Some made meaggravated but more from the fact that they caught me than anything else. But I have found that a little courtesy goes a long way.
I have several friends that are LEO's and I would not have their jobto put up with what they do. I have met a few that it is a power trip for them but I also see that wearing a gun is a power trip for a few posters on here.
I don't trust anyone but my mother and now that she has Alzheimers I can't trust her any more.
riegnman
Regular Member
imported post
I agree with you completely. There are going to be bad cops. I know that as well as everyone else. I also believe in protecting my rights as a citizen of this great country. However, there is a right way and a wrong way to do things.
Some,(readMOST or ALL),LEOs don't know every law on the books. Does that surprise anyone? Some,(readMOST or ALL),LEOs make mistakes and they should be held accountable for those mistakes. But the "punishment should fit the crime" so to speak. We afford LEOs with a certain level of power and authority to "protect and serve", (I believe we should scratch the protect part of that, but I digress).
Some people want to fire an LEO because he isn't versed in our particular "pet peeve". If we were protesting for a gun ban and an LEO came along and told us that we had to move when we were legally assembled, we would be calling for his head because he is infringing on our First Amendment rights.
The point that I am trying to make in my limited way is that LEOs make mistakes also. If a LEO makes a mistake and there is some permanent damage that occurs, then he should be held accountable. If a LEO makes a mistake and no permanent damage he should still be held accountable. Just not at the same level.
I agree with you completely. There are going to be bad cops. I know that as well as everyone else. I also believe in protecting my rights as a citizen of this great country. However, there is a right way and a wrong way to do things.
Some,(readMOST or ALL),LEOs don't know every law on the books. Does that surprise anyone? Some,(readMOST or ALL),LEOs make mistakes and they should be held accountable for those mistakes. But the "punishment should fit the crime" so to speak. We afford LEOs with a certain level of power and authority to "protect and serve", (I believe we should scratch the protect part of that, but I digress).
Some people want to fire an LEO because he isn't versed in our particular "pet peeve". If we were protesting for a gun ban and an LEO came along and told us that we had to move when we were legally assembled, we would be calling for his head because he is infringing on our First Amendment rights.
The point that I am trying to make in my limited way is that LEOs make mistakes also. If a LEO makes a mistake and there is some permanent damage that occurs, then he should be held accountable. If a LEO makes a mistake and no permanent damage he should still be held accountable. Just not at the same level.
Deanimator
Regular Member
imported post
riegnman wrote:
1. Bad cops cluster where their behavior isn't monitored or controlled, Chicago and New Orleans, for instance. I'll bet that there have been more verifiable acts of serious misconduct in the last six months by officers of the Chicago PD than there have been in the last five years in your town, probably longer.
2. I expect cops to know the laws they ENFORCE. If you're going to prone somebody out and threaten to arrest them, it had BETTER not be for your INCORRECT reading of the law in a DIFFERENT state where you used to be a cop. God help you, if you threaten to MAKE UP charges against me because you don't like the laws in THIS state, which allow open carry, or anything else.
3. What's your definition of "permanent damage"? Should that 250lb. Chicago cop who stomped the 115lb. barmaid be fired? I don't think he did her any "permanent damage" (although I'm sure she'll be afraid of cops for the rest of her life).
I have fairly low expectations of the police:
1. Obey the law like everyone else.
2. Don't act like a thug or a bully.
3. I don't expect the police to "protect" me. They have almost no legal duty to do so, some of them don't want to, and in most cases they CAN'T.
Do you consider those unreasonable expectations?
riegnman wrote:
1. Bad cops cluster where their behavior isn't monitored or controlled, Chicago and New Orleans, for instance. I'll bet that there have been more verifiable acts of serious misconduct in the last six months by officers of the Chicago PD than there have been in the last five years in your town, probably longer.
2. I expect cops to know the laws they ENFORCE. If you're going to prone somebody out and threaten to arrest them, it had BETTER not be for your INCORRECT reading of the law in a DIFFERENT state where you used to be a cop. God help you, if you threaten to MAKE UP charges against me because you don't like the laws in THIS state, which allow open carry, or anything else.
3. What's your definition of "permanent damage"? Should that 250lb. Chicago cop who stomped the 115lb. barmaid be fired? I don't think he did her any "permanent damage" (although I'm sure she'll be afraid of cops for the rest of her life).
I have fairly low expectations of the police:
1. Obey the law like everyone else.
2. Don't act like a thug or a bully.
3. I don't expect the police to "protect" me. They have almost no legal duty to do so, some of them don't want to, and in most cases they CAN'T.
Do you consider those unreasonable expectations?
riegnman
Regular Member
imported post
Deanimator wrote:
Those are completely reasonable expectations.
Sorry, I missed the part in this story where his friend was on his face on the pavement. The problem arises that most people want to find any reason that they can to "get a lawyer". After all, if I can get a lawyer, I can maybe get some money out of this thing.
In this case, a law was broken. Not a firearm law, but a law none-the-less. It was probably a mistake or oversight, but everyone is allowed to make mistakes as long as they're not wearing a badge, right?
The fact that the cops in question confiscated his gun is something that I don't like either. However, there are ways to react and ways not to react.
Most people don't have the same expectations of cops that you do. Most people follow a different set of rules:
1. Don't get caught disobeying the laws that everyone else are supposed to follow and it will be fine. It's not illegal if you don't get caught, right?
2. Only act like a thug or bully when you don't think that you will be caught.Or when you think that you can blame someoneelse for your actions. Preferably blame the cops if you can and can get a lawyer to agree with you.
3. Expect the cops to do everything in their power to protect me and then do everything that I can to get something out of the deal once it's done.
Deanimator wrote:
Those are completely reasonable expectations.
Sorry, I missed the part in this story where his friend was on his face on the pavement. The problem arises that most people want to find any reason that they can to "get a lawyer". After all, if I can get a lawyer, I can maybe get some money out of this thing.
In this case, a law was broken. Not a firearm law, but a law none-the-less. It was probably a mistake or oversight, but everyone is allowed to make mistakes as long as they're not wearing a badge, right?
The fact that the cops in question confiscated his gun is something that I don't like either. However, there are ways to react and ways not to react.
Most people don't have the same expectations of cops that you do. Most people follow a different set of rules:
1. Don't get caught disobeying the laws that everyone else are supposed to follow and it will be fine. It's not illegal if you don't get caught, right?
2. Only act like a thug or bully when you don't think that you will be caught.Or when you think that you can blame someoneelse for your actions. Preferably blame the cops if you can and can get a lawyer to agree with you.
3. Expect the cops to do everything in their power to protect me and then do everything that I can to get something out of the deal once it's done.