RobertNashville

[quote name='101' timestamp='1352230543' post='840186'] I understand this entirely. My issue with this is the state, has removed my right to bear arms and handed it back to me in the form of a privilege. Since they have granted the right of exemption for this crime in the form of HCP, they have given the right to police to violate my Constitutional rights as a citizen of the Country, by treating me like a criminal until I prove to the state that I have been given back the right to bear arms that I never should have lost in the first place. So, our state constitution violates the Constitution. This needs changed.[/quote] What have you been doing to get it changed? [quote name='101' timestamp='1352230543' post='840186']Then, the police will no longer be able to disarm us against our will....which technically is violating my rights now, just not in the eyes of the state.[/quote] Law enforcement officers are given a lot of discretion in the field...and for pretty good reasons. It's one thing to discuss philosophically what an officer "should" or "shouldn't do"; it's quite another matter when an officer is alone and at the side of the road walking up to a vehicle and not knowing anything about who or what might be waiting for him - I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt; at least until they've shown they don't deserve it. I'm not suggesting that a LEO should trample on a citizen's rights just because he can but I don't know of any state where an officer, if he has justification to detain you at all, doesn't [u][i]also[/i][/u] have both the authority and the right to disarm you/secure your weapon while he has you detained and is conducting his investigation...I would also suggest that officers have had that authority long before our individual 2A rights were first infringed as well as after the infringements started to be reversed (if anyone knows of a state where they don't have that right, feel free to share!).

[quote name='piercedan' timestamp='1352232019' post='840220'] My word against two officers? I'm ashamed to say, I did nothing. I just took my lumps, learned my lesson, and moved on. The amount of effort to get any satisfaction seemed disproportionate to the likelihood of actually making a difference. Probably a pessimistic attitude, but I'm too busy to pursue it. You better believe I'm running 64mph or less through there any more. [/quote]Wouldn't it have been your word against two officers and at least one dash cam?

[quote name='Flatwoods Forge' timestamp='1352228315' post='840150'] He argued with the gestapo on the most dangerous of all black ops missions....the traffic stop [/quote] We have somewhat limited information about all that happened...we don't have video, just audio and apparently, audio edited by the marine. I think the various cops overacted and I think the marine didn't do himself any favors. It will be interesting to see where this lawsuit goes (although by then, none of us here will likely remember this thread).

Yeah...I think the answer to the OP's question is that while it may be a requirement at that store, it isn't a requirement as a matter of law. I don't believe I've ever paid for a firearm and then had the check done and I'd I'm not sure I'd do business with a store that did; as long as you make the store whole on the cost of the background check it's no skin off their nose if the purchase is denied.

[quote name='LINKS2K' timestamp='1352215586' post='840002'] Like others have said, if nothing else there are other local issues to vote on. [/quote]Unfortunately, the majority of people who are eligible to vote won't bother to do so. It's very sad that a freedom purchased as so high a price is ignored with little regard for the blood and misery that purchased it. What I find truly amazing (and reprehensible) is that research shows that a majority of conservatives and libertarians who profess to be concerned with public policy and the direction or country is heading aren't registered or don't vote if they are registered.

[quote name='piercedan' timestamp='1352228484' post='840153']...This guy was a bad cop who was prepared to wipe his feet on the constitution. I was powerless and felt betrayed. This is why I don't trust law enforcement automatically. This is why I will not consent to a search and will not volunteer any information other than what I am required to do. There are too many of these guys mixed in with the good cops to let my guard down.[/quote] What did you do about it?

[quote name='101' timestamp='1352226760' post='840134']...Thank you for the banter Robert. I must go to work now. I've been following you around the forums long enough to know that you love to dance in the world of bickering and try to turn the meanings and intent of comments upside down.[/quote] You've been following me around??? You need a better hobby! ROTFLMAO

[quote name='101' timestamp='1352225676' post='840119'] Paid my dues. Meaning myself and others like me have deposited a form of payment to their Country. We now have a special interest in what happens in this Country. The work never ends. The dues never expire. All citizens work is never done. [/quote]The question was prompted because in post #32 you said you had "more than paid your dues"...that statement seems to be in conflict with what you just said here.

[quote name='101' timestamp='1352223826' post='840101'] Six years in the Army. I have more than paid my dues. That is why I get so frustrated with people like you that justify trampling on citizens rights. [/quote]I wonder....how "much" do you have to pay before you've "paid your dues"? Is there a set point at which one can stop and then just sit back and leave the work of being a citizen to others?

[quote name='101' timestamp='1352222243' post='840081']...Just because someone expects someone else to do their job properly makes me a problem? [/quote] I didn't say you were a problem but what you've said and more to the point, how you've said it, leads me to think that you are going to have one. It's just an observation and I hope I'm wrong.

[quote name='kieefer' timestamp='1352220868' post='840063'] When BHO loses I'll also have a sigh of relief that our country hasn't gone down the tubes. IF he wins my cranium won't combust but I'll be depressively disappointed. After 4yrs of Romney IF he hasn't done what he said he was going to do, at least on the big issues, then I will vote him out too. Life goes on. The next fight will be in 2014 with 33 of the 100 seats in the Senate being contested. I hope everyone will remember what we went through in 2008 when it comes for that time to vote.[/quote] Amen...anyone who things "it's over" if Romney wins would be a fool. Restoring and protecting our republic is a job that never ends nor is it a spectator sport - we can't let up on the pressure just because Obama gets replaced. Individual people CAN make a difference but ONLY if they engage themselves in the process.

One of the things I've noticed about some firearm enthusiasts is that some seem to have a chip on their shoulder when it comes to LEOs. We all know there are "bad cops" out there who will stomp all over our "rights" and/or who on on some kind of power trip but whether the LEO is right or wrong, the side of the road is NEVER the place for such things to be decided. Statements like "[i]Where in the Constitution does it say my rights can be trampled on so someone who knowingly accepted a dangerous job could feel all warm and fuzzy[/i]?" reflect an attitude that will, in my opinion, not serve one well long-term no matter how many times one has been pulled over with no problems...[b][i]yet[/i][/b].

[quote name='101' timestamp='1352218970' post='840041'] This is why our Country is heading down the path it is. Where in the Constitution does it say my rights can be trampled on so someone who knowingly accepted a dangerous job could feel all warm and fuzzy? Statements like that boil my blood. Cops need to respect the law and follow it, not "suspend" it for their safety. [/quote]Based on the above, I wouldn't be surprised if, some day, you have an unhappy traffic stop encounter with a LEO that we'll all read about here.

For me, my day tomorrow will go as each day does...I'll go to work, earn some money, pay some bills, read some, watch some TV and play with my cat and my dog then go to bed and repeat the same thing on Thursday and on Friday. If Romney wins, as I expect he will, I'll be doing all this things with a renewed hope that this country may begin the slow, slow, process of stopping our headlong plunge over the financial and socialist cliff and start to turn back toward liberty and freedom and personal responsibility. If Obama wins then I truly believe that the country our founders gave us will be lost as we'll continue to spend trillions of dollars we don't have...leave Americans to die without help and without repercussions...punish achievers so that we can reward the inept and lazy...dole out "justice" at the whim of unscrupulous, morally bankrupt people...and call our friends enemies and our enemies, "friends"; all done, of course, in the name of "fairness" and "equality". At least at my age I can be pretty sure I won't be around long enough to see the worst of it.

I think a LEO taking your firearm at a traffic stop and checking the SN is probably on a fine line; it may even cross the line but I seriously doubt you'll ever get a court to agree with you assuming you took it that far. Not giving consent (which I would suggest we all do) could help you in your defense should the LEO actually find something to charge you with since if it's later found that he had no authority to search I believe any evidence found would have to be excluded (base on many hours watching Law & Order ). I've been stopped a couple of times while carrying and I've never had the office take my weapon...the last time, he didn't even mention or ask if I was armed...I suspect what you'll find is that the LEO is going to escalate things the more uncomfortable he is (based on many, many different issues). I tend to give LEOs the benefit of the doubt given the danger of their jobs and that so many have been killed at a "routine traffic stop"...I guess I'd be pretty damn cautious were I the one walking up to a vehicle and having no idea what I might actually be dealing with.

[quote name='rebeldrummer' timestamp='1352138074' post='839435']i agree...its kind of hard not to when you do in fact put your time into "getting into" the show. T- Dog getting killed....sucked, will be missed...but what an AWESOME way to go out! a hero Lori...sucks yea, for Rick and the boy (and the baby) but I will cope just fine. Her as a character got on my nerves. Summary.....that was a FREAKING AWESOME EPISODE that made up for the weeks before show![/quote] As much as I didn't like how some things turned out, I do agree that it was an awesome episode. T-Dog went out a real hero and while I'll miss him I do agree - it was a great way to go out.

[quote name='G27ATT' timestamp='1352171389' post='839798']Is that me being snide? Guess so. Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk 2[/quote]Yuup.

[quote name='G27ATT' timestamp='1352168189' post='839754'] So the fact that they have handcuffs is a deciding factor in how you decide to act around them? That doesn't mean a thing. It's their job to know when to cuff and when not to cuff. I think they should face lawsuits for detaining people for no good reason. That prick just thinks he's a badass. Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk 2[/quote] There is no reason for the snide comment. They are facing a lawsuit apparently you missed that. This marine may or may not win his suit but either way, it doesn't change simple truth that debating the law on the side of the road with a police officer usually doesn't turn out well.

[quote name='LagerHead' timestamp='1352161628' post='839659'] Next time you're handcuffed for nearly an hour by an officer who admits you committed no crime come back and tell me YOUR rights weren't breached.[/quote] All I'm saying is my think both parties played a part of what happened. It seems me that the Marine was showing a bit more attitude than necessary and the cop responded - Maybe this puts me in the minority, but I try to avoid confrontation on the side of the road with people that have handcuffs. I am not saying that the cops were correct in how they handle this, only that both sides played their own parts and what happened

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1352159761' post='839635']Not taking anything personal. I Just seems you want to laugh at the factual statistics that I posed instead of actual providing information to the contrary. Going back to your professors comment. Did you professors accept papers with no sources at all?[/quote] What my professors expected was for me to do a hell of a lot more research than just take the first couple of links from a Google search. LOL

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1352158737' post='839619'] Laugh it up. At least I provided a backing instead of just laughing at you. [b]If my numbers are wrong then provide the correct numbers.[/b] I'll not hold my breath waiting on Fox news to say something negative about their poster child. [/quote] You've made it overwhelmingly clear what you think of Romney and for at least the last six months you've ignored anything that anyone has posted that might tend to not support how you see him so what would be the point of me posting numbers or anything else for that matter - nothing is going to change your mind. Tomorrow is election day so so go vote for whoever you want to vote for (if you haven't already) or don't vote; whatever you want to do.

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1352158494' post='839615']...[/quote] Look...I get it; Okay? You don't like Romney so you'll post anything that supports your opinion of him...it's only human nature to do so.

[quote name='strickj' timestamp='1352157096' post='839600'] Any site showing a negative on Romney will be biased against Romney? Duh. The numbers I posed are fact. Fact. Fact. Fact. I do invite you to research the facts that I posted yourself. Post the results here. And I expect a totally unbiased link [/quote] So are you suggesting that so long as a source says what you need it to say, it doesn't matter where it comes from or what their bias might be? It sure didn't seem to work that way for my master's degree....those professors always insisted on "competent sources"; the Huffington Post and Wikipedia were not acceptable! ROTFLMAO

Okay...at first blush, I don't see this as some big breech of this marine's rights. Regardless of our "rights" and regardless of whether the state we are in at the moment does or doesn't allow open carry and/or constitutional carry; I don't think it should be difficult to understand that when an officer stops us, whether he was or wasn't justified in doing so, it's not unreasonable that the officer may be concerned about the fact that we are armed and may be overly cautious. I guess what I'm saying is that both this marine and this officer could benefit from some relaxation techniques. In the meantime; I'll listen to this again...maybe I missed something.

[quote name='OhShoot' timestamp='1352155158' post='839586'] Did you leave out a "not" or are you joining the Gestapo also? - OS [/quote] Yuup...fixed it.