91895
Post by: Ghazkuul
Still simply amazing. Me thinks the guy without a leg is a veteran 
20373
Post by: Inquisitor Lord Bane
I know in PA you can hang out as long as theres not a "No Loitering" sign. But I doubt the cops are gonna give them a hard time past someone calling the cops because "bearded guys with gunz", which happens all the time when you open carry.
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
 Inquisitor Lord Bane wrote:I know in PA you can hang out as long as theres not a "No Loitering" sign. But I doubt the cops are gonna give them a hard time past someone calling the cops because "bearded guys with gunz", which happens all the time when you open carry.
Plus going by the servicemen standing there they seem to be ok with them hanging out. And I think loitering would require the property owner/business to ask them to leave. Could be wrong, not familiar with the definition of loitering.
20373
Post by: Inquisitor Lord Bane
Legal Free Dictionary wrote:
loiter
v. to linger or hang around in a public place or business where one has no particular or legal purpose. In many states, cities, and towns there are statutes or ordinances against loitering by which the police can arrest someone who refuses to "move along." There is a question as to whether such laws are constitutional. However, there is often another criminal statute or ordinance which can be applied specifically to control aggressive begging, soliciting prostitution, drug dealing, blocking entries to stores, public drunkenness, or being a public nuisance.
State of Pennsylvania wrote:
As used in this chapter the following words and terms shall have the following meanings:
LOITERING
Lingering, staying, remaining or waiting at one location.
MALICIOUS
Vexatious, annoying, injurious, or with intent to do a wrongful act.
PROWLING
Roving or wandering in a stealthful manner.
PUBLIC PLACE
Any place to which the public has access and includes any street, highway, road, alley, or sidewalk. It also includes the front or the surrounding area of any store, shop, restaurant, tavern, or other place of business and public grounds, areas and parks, as well as parking lots or other vacant private property not owned by or under the control of the person charged with violating this chapter or, in the case of a minor, not owned or under the control of his or her parent or guardian.
Enforcement
A.
No person shall be convicted of maliciously loitering or prowling in a public place in violation of this chapter unless a police officer, at the time and upon observation of the alleged malicious loitering or prowling, determines that such person was causing or was likely to cause any of the conditions enumerated in the preceding section;
B.
Unless flight by the person or other disabling circumstances make it impracticable, a police officer shall, prior to any arrest for an offense under this chapter, afford the person an opportunity to dispel any alarm which would otherwise be warranted, by requesting him or her to identify him/herself and explain his or her presence and conduct; and
C.
No person shall be convicted of malicious loitering or prowling in a public place in violation of this chapter if the police officer did not comply with Subsection B hereof or if it appears to the fact finder at trial that the explanation given by the person was true and, if believed by the police officer at the time, would have dispelled the alarm.
So yeah, as long as they aren't goading people or causing trouble they are cool here 
20243
Post by: Grey Templar
They also definitely have a specific purpose. They may or may not have a specific legal purpose, but I could see an argument that they are volunteering their time. And really how different is this from providing security at a charity event?
20373
Post by: Inquisitor Lord Bane
That wouldn't fly here, because you need to be ACT 235 certified by the state police (Lethal weapons training) to be a "legit" security detail, even if its volunteer. But theres no reason Joe, Bob, and Charlie can't hang out with the recruiters outside, in a public space, doing nothing specific all day.
Note: The laws for each state are different as far as this goes, but no clue where this picture is taken, so I'm going by my state's laws
50512
Post by: Jihadin
Over enthusiasm if something happens 
37231
Post by: d-usa
Security at a charity event is usually still provided by trained volunteers, and organized by either the venue or the organization. I doubt that any location with a recruiter is going to ask for or officially authorize volunteer armed security, especially if they are not providing armed security already. I also doubt that the military is asking for or authorizing these volunteers, and I would just guess that the individual recruiters certainly don't have the authority to do so.
With that said I don't think that anybody is going to kick them off the property (especially anytime soon), but nobody will want to be responsible for these volunteers in case anything happens and have the hammer of "who told them this was okay" coming down on them.
39550
Post by: Psienesis
You usually need to hold a valid security license to pose as security at an event, though that will vary by state.
We have some armed civilians hanging around the Recruiting station in Spanaway, WA, this week. Not anyone, anywhere, was ever planning to attack Spanaway, but I suppose it's the thought that counts.
50512
Post by: Jihadin
Spanaway is right by JBLM.
Would probably take a 10K forklift to lift the body off the ground being it would be riddle with bullets
39550
Post by: Psienesis
Indeed. Spanaway, however, is pretty fly-speck, as WA state towns go. I'd imagine that Tacoma/Lakewood would be a more-likely target...
... on the other hand, Lakewood is likely to erupt into a free-fire zone involving hundreds.
50512
Post by: Jihadin
 Psienesis wrote:Indeed. Spanaway, however, is pretty fly-speck, as WA state towns go. I'd imagine that Tacoma/Lakewood would be a more-likely target...
... on the other hand, Lakewood is likely to erupt into a free-fire zone involving hundreds.
I5 running between JBLM and Camp Murray be the Highway of Death instead of Vehicle Congestion from Hell around 1700ish. Still though I'm sure Service Members are carrying when off post either on themselves or in their vehicles. I am also sure that August Monthly performance counseling will consist of safety concerns of owning a personnel weapon (Blanket CYA)
15571
Post by: BaronIveagh
 Ghazkuul wrote:They do something similar right now, except instead of mortars they rig up 107mm Rockets with kitchen timers and then flee so when we tried to retaliate they were long gone, that one we never figured out how to counter.
it took England about 30 years to learn there was no counter unless someone made a lucky traffic stop. Successful terrorists all eventually learn tricks like that. It's like suicide truck bombs. It's a waste when there are perfectly good ways to drive the truck by remote with a dummy in the driver seat.
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
Psienesis wrote:Indeed. Spanaway, however, is pretty fly-speck, as WA state towns go. I'd imagine that Tacoma/Lakewood would be a more-likely target...
No kidding... we don't have our own police, or fire department. We're completely unincorporated, so we are forced to "rely" on the benevolence of Pierce County for pretty much everything.
While I would agree that Lakehood would be a more likely target, I suspect that most people who would be shooting up a place around there, would choose other targets.
4402
Post by: CptJake
 BaronIveagh wrote:
it took England about 30 years to learn there was no counter unless someone made a lucky traffic stop. Successful terrorists all eventually learn tricks like that. It's like suicide truck bombs. It's a waste when there are perfectly good ways to drive the truck by remote with a dummy in the driver seat.
Depends on your resources. It is easier and cheaper to get some guy to drive the truck than to invest the time and money into creating/installing what you would need to make it drivable via remote. And the signal between the truck and remote operator can be jammed (and spoofed and the source triangulated).
39550
Post by: Psienesis
And here we go...
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2015/07/23/recruiting-center-shot-fired.html
Fortunately, no injuries or fatalities, but... damn. It did not take long.
12313
Post by: Ouze
Maybe he saw a bad guy with a gun.
50512
Post by: Jihadin
“We are not a redneck group,” the Lancaster resident added. “We are prior military.”
Yet the idiot could not clear his weapon properly
and the Idiot had a live round chambered
91
Post by: Hordini
Luckily no one was hurt. Openly armed civilians actually have a pretty decent track record, statistically. I don't recall any NDs from the civilian volunteers in Ferguson, there have been a lot of armed pro-second amendment rallies and I don't recall ever hearing much reporting about NDs during one of those (not saying it's never happened), and it sounds like there are a lot of people guarding recruiting stations across the country. This guy sounds like an idiot though, and he was charged with a misdemeanor and his weapon confiscated, so hopefully it will be a lesson learned for everyone who chooses to do this kind of thing and they'll tighten things up. Automatically Appended Next Post:  Jihadin wrote:“We are not a redneck group,” the Lancaster resident added. “We are prior military.”
Yet the idiot could not clear his weapon properly
and the Idiot had a live round chambered
Plenty of people carry condition one, and do so in a safe manner, so having a round in the chamber isn't a big deal in and of itself. I'm more concerned about his inability to either properly clear his weapon and/or be aware of what condition his weapon is in.
10097
Post by: Ensis Ferrae
 Hordini wrote:
Plenty of people carry condition one, and do so in a safe manner, so having a round in the chamber isn't a big deal in and of itself. I'm more concerned about his inability to either properly clear his weapon and/or be aware of what condition his weapon is in.
Agreed on that one.... Apparently he forgot Rule #1
Always, ALWAYS treat a weapon as if it is loaded and ready to fire.
50512
Post by: Jihadin
My prior experience on my many wonderful trips in Paradise going around with a "Live" weapon influence my post.
Think the only time my weapon was "Clear" was on board aircraft's 
39550
Post by: Psienesis
Apparently, the chucklehead who fired the round has done this before. This is not his first charge of unlawful discharge of a firearm.
/facepalm
50512
Post by: Jihadin
Judge has bet make him go through remedial training and a hefty damn fine.
15571
Post by: BaronIveagh
 CptJake wrote:Depends on your resources. It is easier and cheaper to get some guy to drive the truck than to invest the time and money into creating/installing what you would need to make it drivable via remote. And the signal between the truck and remote operator can be jammed (and spoofed and the source triangulated).
There are ways around both of those. Short burst transmissions are harder to identify and triangulate, requiring more time, or maybe an above or below visible spectrum laser to transmit the information. Only hard part would be the laser and the sensor to detect it; you can get most of the parts you'd need out of a couple of old VCRs or model airplanes, as long as you had something to write some proms and a few lengths of tie wire to attach the servos to the steering wheel, gas, and breaks.
I suppose it depends on how expendable you think your associates are and what sort of return you expect on having trained them. Terrorists who survive do tend to improve over time. I'm not a fan of the Russian approach to training. I can understand it if you have more men than materials, but when you have enough to go around, get your money's worth out of their experience rather than just throw them away.
5470
Post by: sebster
 Grey Templar wrote:They also definitely have a specific purpose. They may or may not have a specific legal purpose, but I could see an argument that they are volunteering their time. And really how different is this from providing security at a charity event?
I've never in my life heard of people spontaneously turning up to provide security at a charity, when the charity didn't ask them and don't actually want them there.
15571
Post by: BaronIveagh
 sebster wrote:I've never in my life heard of people spontaneously turning up to provide security at a charity, when the charity didn't ask them and don't actually want them there.
I have, but it's been a very long time. Back when terrorists in white sheets were more common than ones with towels on their heads, you'd see it sometimes.
|
|
