cop talks revolution

[OrangeIsTrouble]

imported post

I read all these posts, and still, I have no idea what you guys speak of. Rights? What rights? All we have are privileges.... as for police, I was thinking about just randomly asking Seattle officers about their stand on the firearms ban on CITY PUBLIC property, see what they are thinking. They might have to enforce these crap restrictions, but I really do hope at least some of them come to our side when the SHTF.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

imported post

Poosharker wrote:

I read all these posts, and still, I have no idea what you guys speak of. Rights? What rights? All we have are privileges.... as for police, I was thinking about just randomly asking Seattle officers about their stand on the firearms ban on CITY PUBLIC property, see what they are thinking. They might have to enforce these crap restrictions, but I really do hope at least some of them come to our side when the SHTF.

So you speaking your mind is a privilege not a right? You are absolutely wrong on this we have inalienable rights. These are rights the government has no power to infringe upon they just seem to have forgotten this.

Record and post these random askings, I would love to see that.

 

[OrangeIsTrouble]

imported post

SVG, that I will, however I am not sure how I could record with my camera without the officer refusing to answer or pulling off some other stuff. But ask away I shall! Its like what they say. Every vote counts. COWPISS! Votes within a hundred or thousand are "too close to call" and require a recount....pfffft.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

imported post

PM Technoweenie he has some cool covert recording gear.

 

[OrangeIsTrouble]

imported post

Quick question, I believe WA is a one party state correct? I am aware of the recording so other party doesn't need to know? You have any suggestions to questions I should be asking other than, what is your stand on this topic, how do you feel about enforcing a law that is not legal, etc?

 

[TechnoWeenie]

imported post

Poosharker wrote:

Quick question, I believe WA is a one party state correct? I am aware of the recording so other party doesn't need to know? You have any suggestions to questions I should be asking other than, what is your stand on this topic, how do you feel about enforcing a law that is not legal, etc?

WA requires consent of all parties to record PRIVATE conversations.

Public conversations are free game.


Edited to add: If you need any gear to hid in plain sight, let me know. They're fairly inexpensive.

 

[OrangeIsTrouble]

imported post

What is the difference between a private and public conversation? Is it depending on whether it is on private or public property? That would make sense. Also, I just remembered my girlfriend has an iPhoney, so *scratch, scratch* (+1 to anybody who knows what I am refering to)

 

[TechnoWeenie]

imported post

Poosharker wrote:

What is the difference between a private and public conversation? Is it depending on whether it is on private or public property? That would make sense. Also, I just remembered my girlfriend has an iPhoney, so *scratch, scratch* (+1 to anybody who knows what I am refering to)

IANAL.


The factors are determined after the fact, in court.

Generally speaking, if the conversation is supposed to be private, and there's an expectation of privacy, then you need consent.

If you're in public, there's no expectation of privacy, so you can't expect a private conversation.

Similarly, if you have an OBVIOUS recording device present, implied consent comes into play, where they KNEW they were being recorded, and continuing to be involved in the conversation/to be recorded implies their consent.

 

[gsx1138]

imported post

I'm not a giant fan of police, although one of my friends is an officer, but if they choose to defend the Constitution I'll be right there with them.

The only thing that scares me is the ones that will blindly follow orders with little thought to their own actions.

 

[Ajetpilot]

imported post

That is why Oath Keepers is a growing organization.

 

[OrangeIsTrouble]

imported post

GSX1138,
Of course most people would stand up with them if they were to defend the constitution, but the problem is, they are not. Officers will ask anyone with a firearm to leave and if they won't then they will be arrested for criminal trespass.

Edited to add:Referring to the ban of firearms on certain City of Seattle property.

 

[gsx1138]

imported post

Poosharker wrote:

GSX1138,
Of course most people would stand up with them if they were to defend the constitution, but the problem is, they are not. Officers will ask anyone with a firearm to leave and if they won't then they will be arrested for criminal trespass.

Edited to add:Referring to the ban of firearms on certain City of Seattle property.

Yeah, that is where my big concern is. There are so many Officers now who enforce unconstitutional orders. However, gun owners can't seem to agree on when enough is enough.

AJ, I thought the oathkeepers was some nutjob militia thing but after seeing the founders interview on Chris Matthews I realize I was wrong. I really hope they continue to grow.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

imported post

Poosharker wrote:

Quick question, I believe WA is a one party state correct? I am aware of the recording so other party doesn't need to know? You have any suggestions to questions I should be asking other than, what is your stand on this topic, how do you feel about enforcing a law that is not legal, etc?

In Washington State and many others you need no permission or don't have to inform public officials, eg. LEO's that you are recording them while they are acting in an official capacity.

 

[Ajetpilot]

imported post

gsx1138 wrote:

AJ, I thought the oathkeepers was some nutjob militia thing but after seeing the founders interview on Chris Matthews I realize I was wrong. I really hope they continue to grow.

I thought so, too. I held off joining for quite some time. Now, I'm glad I joined.

 

[gsx1138]

imported post

Ajetpilot wrote:

gsx1138 wrote:

AJ, I thought the oathkeepers was some nutjob militia thing but after seeing the founders interview on Chris Matthews I realize I was wrong. I really hope they continue to grow.

I thought so, too. I held off joining for quite some time. Now, I'm glad I joined.

Sadly, one of my bigger regrets, I never joined the military. So I'm assed out with Oathkeepers but thank you for joining.

 

[1245A Defender]

imported post

gsx1138 wrote:

Ajetpilot wrote:

gsx1138 wrote:

AJ, I thought the oathkeepers was some nutjob militia thing but after seeing the founders interview on Chris Matthews I realize I was wrong. I really hope they continue to grow.

I thought so, too. I held off joining for quite some time. Now, I'm glad I joined.

Sadly, one of my bigger regrets, I never joined the military. So I'm assed out with Oathkeepers but thank you for joining.

everybody can join! visit thier site, they keep moral oaths, you dont need a uniform to do that!

 

[gsx1138]

imported post

2, 4, 5 A defender wrote:

gsx1138 wrote:

Ajetpilot wrote:

gsx1138 wrote:

AJ, I thought the oathkeepers was some nutjob militia thing but after seeing the founders interview on Chris Matthews I realize I was wrong. I really hope they continue to grow.

I thought so, too. I held off joining for quite some time. Now, I'm glad I joined.

Sadly, one of my bigger regrets, I never joined the military. So I'm assed out with Oathkeepers but thank you for joining.

everybody can join! visit thier site, they keep moral oaths, you dont need a uniform to do that!

I did. I could've sworn it only mentioned Military and Law Enforcement.

Now that you made that statement I had to dig a little more and you're right. Looks like I'll have to take the Oath as well.