Chucktshoes

There are much more than Libertarian Presidential candidates. There are LP candidates in many federal, state and local races across the country. http://www.lp.org/candidates-13

What libertarians have been getting recently is the message out that there is another option. Every day more people are hearing it and seeing the truth in it. Libertarians have been playing the long game for quite a while and continue to remain stedfast and principled that the only real difference between the Republicans and Democrats is style. The end result of an overly intrusive government controlling your life and your money is the same with both major parties. Occasionally there will be a candidate on one side or the other who isn't a total scumbag and is worth voting for at least one cycle and sometimes two. After that they are usually toast. They become corrupted and no different than the rest. So I choose to keep on the current path and growing (if slowly) the coalition over playing with one side or the other and selling out what I believe in.

So who should the libertarians decide to play with? The Democrats who wish to control how we live our lives & spend our money? Or maybe we should play with the Republicans who unlike the Democrats only want to control how we live our lives and spend our money? ;)

I know several solid, clear thinking officers on the MPD. I also have interacted with a few morons too. Sounds like she got one of the latter.

Wrong. Already been covered many, many times. Call or no call, absent any other evidence of a crime, the carrying of a gun where legal does not meet the threshold to warrant a Terry Stop.

I fail to see how this is news to anyone not in dire need of a rectal craniotomy.

I imagine the office asked her to unload it as an alternative to taking possession of the weapon for the duration of the stop which is something the law specifically allows for reasons of "officer safety". My question to the officer would be to ask how having me handle my weapon helps increase his safety? Wouldn't the weapon staying put in its holster be a much safer course of action for everyone involved?

I'd love to see him receive the Julius Streicher Award for Journalistic Integrity.

South Cackalacky seems to be snagging almost all of the NY based manufacturers.

That's just a big ol' bucket of fail right there. 

Thanks for the heads up on this one. I too added it to the list.

How'd we end up in agreement on a subject? :lol: There is not a word of what you have written here that I would disagree with. I understand the difference between what the law is and what I think it should be regardless of whether I agree with it or not. When I draw a line in the sand I do it with open eyes and acceptance for all possible outcomes.

If you demand my ID and do not allow me to leave, am I not being detained? If an officer detains me, are they not required to have a RAS that I have or am about to commit a crime?

There is difference between checking out someone due to a mwag call and having the ability to compel them to produce ID or answer questions.

That question is a red herring and not germane to the discussion at hand. The courts have pretty consistently ruled against your position. If the carrying of a gun is not in and of itself a crime then there is no legal right for the officer to demand ID on the basis of identifying the citizen's (not subject) legal status. To put it bluntly, unless the citizen is or has engaged in an activity that provided RAS for the stop to fall under Terry V. Ohio, then who the citizen is and their legal status is none of the officer's business without being consensually provided by the citizen.

In a state like MO where the open carrying of a firearm is not a crime, the courts have ruled that it does not rise to the level of providing RAS for a Terry stop. In MO or any other unlicensed OC state walking down the street with a gun on your hip is the legal equivalent of walking down the street wearing a red shirt.

I commend him for his quick thinking and bravery in saving the beer. I salute you good sir, whomever you are!

And yet even people that homeschool, private school on those with no kids pay taxes for all of those public school teachers.

The laws are different here than there. In TN the carrying of a firearm is a crime, in Missouri it isn't. That means that here the open wearing of a firearm provides RAS. In Missouri where open carrying is a legal activity, the open wearing of a firearm does not in and of itself provide RAS of a crime. Therefore unless there were some other evidence that provided RAS of a crime, he can ask all the questions he wants to but the girls were under no legal obligation to answer them. The cop also had no standing to detain them without providing that RAS.

Unless the officer has a RAS that someone has committed crime, then to be blunt, it isn't any of their damn business. When did things change that it was incumbent upon a citizen (subject?) to prove that they are innocent of any wrongdoing to the overseers...errr...authorities?

I wouldn't be so sure of that statement. In fact, I would second this advice from Sigmtnman and read the work of John Taylor Gatto before I said something like that with any certainty. Public schools are doing exactly what they were designed to do and helping make a complete, thinking person ain't it.     Read "The Underground History of Education" here.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/10/25/jewish-americans-get-on-board-the-immigration-reform-train.html   The headline for this op-ed on The Daily Beast advocating for Jews to "get on the train" for immigration reform. Let that sink in for a second.

Just tell them this and then wait for the head explosion. "The oppression of native peoples is part of my cultural heritage and you must respect it." 

I think that's every day.

Here is a politically charged video out of Hollywood I can actually agree with.   [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGmiw_rrNxk[/media]