Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2012/12/17 19:20:20
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
This is not a wild frontier, where daily raids happen requiring citizens to turn out with rifles at the walls.
That's sort of funny considering I spent the morning in a rifle pit. In a Blue State, no less!
See there's your problem. If it were a Red State, you'd have been in the back of a pickup, with bad American beer.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2012/12/17 19:20:58
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
And yet Americans cheered on as a vast majority of those rights were stripped away when some planes crashed into some buildings a few years ago, but giving up the "right" that would actually make your country safer is a taboo subject!
Please point to me what rights were stripped away?
If the police are allowed to enter my home for a random gun inspection, and I place my rifle in my closet and shut the door, do the police or ATF have cause or reason to enter my closet?
Considering the whole theoretical situation is to ensure that responsible gun owners continue to be responsible gun owners, what reason do you have to not allow them entry to your closet?
I should have quoted you,but several posts had occurred between when you said it, and when I posted my question. It was more for the post you made about things needing to be in plain sight. If my gun is in my closet and the door is shut, what reason would the police have to search something that is not in plain sight. I could see if it was leaning up against my door, but in a closed closet?
I wouldn't allow them entrance to my closet based on the fact that entrance into my closet would violate the policy of plain sight (at least as I understand your words a few pages ago about it)
Plain view is complex but I'll try to simplify it.
There are three basic requirements.
1. The item must be within the officer's sight;
2. The officer must legally be in the place from which the item is seen; and
3. It must be immediately apparent to the officer that the item is subject to seizure.
There used to be a fourth requirement, "Inadvertence"(the accidental finding by an officer of the item rather than prior knowledge that the item is in a particular place) which was removed by Horton v. California (496 U.S. 128 [1990]).
YUet you've said they can open closets, which is violative of the plain view doctrine. Plus the plain view doctrine does not give you permission to enter a residence and exert your "plain view." You still need a warrant to enter a person's residence. Thats simple law back to the freaking British common law.
Kanluwen wrote: This is not a wild frontier, where daily raids happen requiring citizens to turn out with rifles at the walls.
I will certainly agree with you here. We MUST stop pretending it is or is soon going to be zombie apocalypse time. A lot of people in this country are living in a fantasy land where the moon landing is fake, President Bush ordered the Twin Towers destroyed, and the Mayans correctly foresaw that health care reform would destroy the world (i.e., the Yoo-knighted States Uvahmurka). But let's please don't answer the delusions of the right with delusions from the left, about gun control or whatever else.
No no no. You need .22LRs for zombies.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/17 19:24:18
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2012/12/17 19:27:20
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Kanluwen wrote: This is not a wild frontier, where daily raids happen requiring citizens to turn out with rifles at the walls.
I will certainly agree with you here. We MUST stop pretending it is or is soon going to be zombie apocalypse time. A lot of people in this country are living in a fantasy land where the moon landing is fake, President Bush ordered the Twin Towers destroyed, and the Mayans correctly foresaw that health care reform would destroy the world (i.e., the Yoo-knighted States Uvahmurka). But let's please don't answer the delusions of the right with delusions from the left, about gun control or whatever else.
Well at least we can agree on that.
In opposition to a lot of the beliefs that some in this thread might have, I really do not want to just have a flat ban on firearms. I want to see something done to ensure that access to firearms and continued usage is done in such a way that it is both responsible and sensible.
2012/12/17 19:28:40
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Do I agree with everything in this article? Not at all, but here are some decent portions.
That campaign should be led from outside the political system, by people who have suffered loss and grief from gun violence. Only that way can the campaign avoid being held hostage by the usual conflict of parties -- Democrats who fear that gun control will lose them rural congressional districts; Republicans who exaggerate for partisan gain exactly what gun control would mean.
Gun control should no more mean the abolition of guns than Mothers Against Drunk Driving abolished the car. Guns are part of the cherished American culture of the outdoors. In many parts of the country, a deer rifle literally puts meat on the table.
In other parts, a revolver in the bedroom dresser drawer is the frightened spouse's last defense against an abusive partner, or the gay urban homesteader's final protection against violent bigots. Guns can be souvenirs of heroic moments on faraway battlefields, mementoes of national history, or art objects of great beauty.
It's harder to imagine why any civilian would need a semiautomatic weapon. Still, it's a free country, and gun ownership is one of the freedoms specifically cited in the Constitution. Responsible gun owners have a right to their guns. The challenge for the grass-roots gun-safety movement of the future is to focus on the danger posed by irresponsible owners. The goal should be less to ban particular classes of weapons -- such a goal puts the law in a race against technology, a race the law will likely lose -- and more to change the rules defining who may keep a gun.
Prospective gun owners should be required to take serious training and pass a safety exam before qualifying for a license. They should be screened for mental illness and histories of violence, very much including domestic violence. They should be required to buy insurance against the harm done by wrongful use of their weapons, and if that insurance proves expensive -- well, too bad. People apprehended in possession of an unlicensed weapon should face severe sanctions.
2012/12/17 19:28:54
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
If the police are allowed to enter my home for a random gun inspection, and I place my rifle in my closet and shut the door, do the police or ATF have cause or reason to enter my closet?
Considering the whole theoretical situation is to ensure that responsible gun owners continue to be responsible gun owners, what reason do you have to not allow them entry to your closet?
I should have quoted you,but several posts had occurred between when you said it, and when I posted my question. It was more for the post you made about things needing to be in plain sight. If my gun is in my closet and the door is shut, what reason would the police have to search something that is not in plain sight. I could see if it was leaning up against my door, but in a closed closet?
I wouldn't allow them entrance to my closet based on the fact that entrance into my closet would violate the policy of plain sight (at least as I understand your words a few pages ago about it)
Plain view is complex but I'll try to simplify it.
There are three basic requirements.
1. The item must be within the officer's sight;
2. The officer must legally be in the place from which the item is seen; and
3. It must be immediately apparent to the officer that the item is subject to seizure.
There used to be a fourth requirement, "Inadvertence"(the accidental finding by an officer of the item rather than prior knowledge that the item is in a particular place) which was removed by Horton v. California (496 U.S. 128 [1990]).
YUet you've said they can open closets, which is violative of the plain view doctrine. Plus the plain view doctrine does not give you permission to enter a residence and exert your "plain view." You still need a warrant to enter a person's residence. Thats simple law back to the freaking British common law.
I did not ever once say that they could open the closets. I made a point of insinuating that a responsible, law abiding citizen gun owner would have no qualms with consenting to a search.
Kanluwen wrote: This is not a wild frontier, where daily raids happen requiring citizens to turn out with rifles at the walls.
I will certainly agree with you here. We MUST stop pretending it is or is soon going to be zombie apocalypse time. A lot of people in this country are living in a fantasy land where the moon landing is fake, President Bush ordered the Twin Towers destroyed, and the Mayans correctly foresaw that health care reform would destroy the world (i.e., the Yoo-knighted States Uvahmurka). But let's please don't answer the delusions of the right with delusions from the left, about gun control or whatever else.
No no no. You need .22LRs for zombies.
You don't need anything for zombies because they are not real.
2012/12/17 19:30:58
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Kanluwen wrote: This is not a wild frontier, where daily raids happen requiring citizens to turn out with rifles at the walls.
I will certainly agree with you here. We MUST stop pretending it is or is soon going to be zombie apocalypse time. A lot of people in this country are living in a fantasy land where the moon landing is fake, President Bush ordered the Twin Towers destroyed, and the Mayans correctly foresaw that health care reform would destroy the world (i.e., the Yoo-knighted States Uvahmurka). But let's please don't answer the delusions of the right with delusions from the left, about gun control or whatever else.
First of all:
The moon landings were faked.
Bush the Elder was behind 9/11
But Mayans Machu? Don't be ridiculous.
Avatar 720 wrote: You see, to Auston, everyone is a Death Star; there's only one way you can take it and that's through a small gap at the back.
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters..
0023/12/17 19:32:56
Subject: Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Law abiding citizens don't have to consent to a search, nor should they feel bad about refusing to consent to one "if they have nothing to hide".
It appears the constitutional laws against warrant-less searches were not written to protect people with something to hide, but for law abiding citizens to use.
2012/12/17 19:37:04
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Do I agree with everything in this article? Not at all, but here are some decent portions.
That campaign should be led from outside the political system, by people who have suffered loss and grief from gun violence. Only that way can the campaign avoid being held hostage by the usual conflict of parties -- Democrats who fear that gun control will lose them rural congressional districts; Republicans who exaggerate for partisan gain exactly what gun control would mean.
Gun control should no more mean the abolition of guns than Mothers Against Drunk Driving abolished the car. Guns are part of the cherished American culture of the outdoors. In many parts of the country, a deer rifle literally puts meat on the table.
In other parts, a revolver in the bedroom dresser drawer is the frightened spouse's last defense against an abusive partner, or the gay urban homesteader's final protection against violent bigots. Guns can be souvenirs of heroic moments on faraway battlefields, mementoes of national history, or art objects of great beauty.
It's harder to imagine why any civilian would need a semiautomatic weapon. Still, it's a free country, and gun ownership is one of the freedoms specifically cited in the Constitution. Responsible gun owners have a right to their guns. The challenge for the grass-roots gun-safety movement of the future is to focus on the danger posed by irresponsible owners. The goal should be less to ban particular classes of weapons -- such a goal puts the law in a race against technology, a race the law will likely lose -- and more to change the rules defining who may keep a gun.
Prospective gun owners should be required to take serious training and pass a safety exam before qualifying for a license. They should be screened for mental illness and histories of violence, very much including domestic violence. They should be required to buy insurance against the harm done by wrongful use of their weapons, and if that insurance proves expensive -- well, too bad. People apprehended in possession of an unlicensed weapon should face severe sanctions.
Couple good points, but it is worth noting that misdemeanor domestic violence crimes and higher are listed on the ATF transfer form and do show up as a flag for an NICS check.
That whole last paragraph after the last sentence is just bollocks however to borrow a term from our British associates.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
d-usa wrote: Law abiding citizens don't have to consent to a search, nor should they feel bad about refusing to consent to one "if they have nothing to hide".
It appears the constitutional laws against warrant-less searches were not written to protect people with something to hide, but for law abiding citizens to use.
Madness!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/17 19:38:17
I beg of you sarge let me lead the charge when the battle lines are drawn
Lemme at least leave a good hoof beat they'll remember loud and long
d-usa wrote: It appears the constitutional laws against warrant-less searches were not written to protect people with something to hide, but for law abiding citizens to use.
I already offered a slogan for your New Order but here's another "THE GUILTY ARE NOT CITIZENS."
If the police are allowed to enter my home for a random gun inspection, and I place my rifle in my closet and shut the door, do the police or ATF have cause or reason to enter my closet?
Considering the whole theoretical situation is to ensure that responsible gun owners continue to be responsible gun owners, what reason do you have to not allow them entry to your closet?
I should have quoted you,but several posts had occurred between when you said it, and when I posted my question. It was more for the post you made about things needing to be in plain sight. If my gun is in my closet and the door is shut, what reason would the police have to search something that is not in plain sight. I could see if it was leaning up against my door, but in a closed closet?
I wouldn't allow them entrance to my closet based on the fact that entrance into my closet would violate the policy of plain sight (at least as I understand your words a few pages ago about it)
Plain view is complex but I'll try to simplify it. There are three basic requirements. 1. The item must be within the officer's sight; 2. The officer must legally be in the place from which the item is seen; and 3. It must be immediately apparent to the officer that the item is subject to seizure.
There used to be a fourth requirement, "Inadvertence"(the accidental finding by an officer of the item rather than prior knowledge that the item is in a particular place) which was removed by Horton v. California (496 U.S. 128 [1990]).
YUet you've said they can open closets, which is violative of the plain view doctrine. Plus the plain view doctrine does not give you permission to enter a residence and exert your "plain view." You still need a warrant to enter a person's residence. Thats simple law back to the freaking British common law.
I did not ever once say that they could open the closets. I made a point of insinuating that a responsible, law abiding citizen gun owner would have no qualms with consenting to a search.
I would want to know why I was being picked for Random Gun Inspection before I let them into my house. If you don't give me a good reason, you're going to get a solid wooden door closed politely on your face with me peeping through the mail slot telling you to return with a warrant and I will gladly let you inspect my house.
I was just curious about the plain view thing, you did clarify it, but the cops wouldn't be allowed into my premises without reasonable cause. "Random Gun Inspection" (or w/e you want to call it) is not a reasonable cause.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2012/12/17 19:47:27
DR:80+S++G+M+B+I+Pwmhd11#++D++A++++/sWD-R++++T(S)DM+ Ask me about Brushfire or Endless: Fantasy Tactics
2012/12/17 19:48:00
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters..
2012/12/17 20:02:23
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
That is not really true.
Look at Syria for an example. The "government fears the people" there, for the time being, and as it stands the people are on the losing side.
Alfndrate wrote:I would want to know why I was being picked for Random Gun Inspection before I let them into my house. If you don't give me a good reason, you're going to get a solid wooden door closed politely on your face with me peeping through the mail slot telling you to return with a warrant and I will gladly let you inspect my house.
I was just curious about the plain view thing, you did clarify it, but the cops wouldn't be allowed into my premises without reasonable cause. "Random Gun Inspection" (or w/e you want to call it) is not a reasonable cause.
You're right; at this point in time.
If a measure was added that required individuals to be subject to "random gun inspections", there could easily be provisions written within it putting restrictions on what the police/ATF could do in the process of executing a "random gun inspection".
2012/12/17 20:03:34
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Individuals known to have firearms should, in my opinion, be subject to random "inspections" by law enforcement officials to ensure that firearms are stored properly in accordance with the training and certification that the individuals received.
You better have a warrant and you better bring a lot of friends.
And people wonder why people consider the pro-gun lobby to be so confrontational...
Yeah I tend to be confrontational with fascist windbags. Wierd.
I tend to be confrontational with anyone that stands between me and coffee/chocolate. I'm pretty confrontational with the local chicken hawk which suddenly reappeared. He and I may have fisticuffs if he gets near the house again. TBone will not tolerate raptors trying to fly away with him.
Unwanted, unannounced inspection by a government agency is itself the main problem with ... involuntary, unannounced government inspection. No matter how thick the reg book, it's still bad. It's like saying, "don't worry, there will be limits on what the police can do during the randomized body cavity search." Ugh.
Kilkrazy wrote: My impression is that a significant number of Americans would object to a scheduled police inspection of their weapon security cabinet.
In the UK and Japan, this is a feature of the licensing system, designed to prevent people from leaving guns and ammo lying around the house.
Scheduled is different than random gun inspections . I would agree to such schedule inspections for licensing reasons... Though I wouldn't be a gun owner lol, like I said earlier in the thread don't need a license to own my gun, just gotta not be crazy. It does help that I have FBI and BCI criminal background checks done, thanks to my student teaching.
DR:80+S++G+M+B+I+Pwmhd11#++D++A++++/sWD-R++++T(S)DM+ Ask me about Brushfire or Endless: Fantasy Tactics
2012/12/17 20:19:26
Subject: Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
If the police are allowed to enter my home for a random gun inspection, and I place my rifle in my closet and shut the door, do the police or ATF have cause or reason to enter my closet?
Considering the whole theoretical situation is to ensure that responsible gun owners continue to be responsible gun owners, what reason do you have to not allow them entry to your closet?
I should have quoted you,but several posts had occurred between when you said it, and when I posted my question. It was more for the post you made about things needing to be in plain sight. If my gun is in my closet and the door is shut, what reason would the police have to search something that is not in plain sight. I could see if it was leaning up against my door, but in a closed closet?
I wouldn't allow them entrance to my closet based on the fact that entrance into my closet would violate the policy of plain sight (at least as I understand your words a few pages ago about it)
Plain view is complex but I'll try to simplify it.
There are three basic requirements.
1. The item must be within the officer's sight;
2. The officer must legally be in the place from which the item is seen; and
3. It must be immediately apparent to the officer that the item is subject to seizure.
There used to be a fourth requirement, "Inadvertence"(the accidental finding by an officer of the item rather than prior knowledge that the item is in a particular place) which was removed by Horton v. California (496 U.S. 128 [1990]).
YUet you've said they can open closets, which is violative of the plain view doctrine. Plus the plain view doctrine does not give you permission to enter a residence and exert your "plain view." You still need a warrant to enter a person's residence. Thats simple law back to the freaking British common law.
I did not ever once say that they could open the closets. I made a point of insinuating that a responsible, law abiding citizen gun owner would have no qualms with consenting to a search.
I would want to know why I was being picked for Random Gun Inspection before I let them into my house. If you don't give me a good reason, you're going to get a solid wooden door closed politely on your face with me peeping through the mail slot telling you to return with a warrant and I will gladly let you inspect my house.
I was just curious about the plain view thing, you did clarify it, but the cops wouldn't be allowed into my premises without reasonable cause. "Random Gun Inspection" (or w/e you want to call it) is not a reasonable cause.
Random gun inspection is not a legal search. Sorry, if you kick in my door for that I just made lots of money. THANKS FOR THE RETIREMENT FUND!
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2012/12/17 20:19:48
Subject: Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Kilkrazy wrote: My impression is that a significant number of Americans would object to a scheduled police inspection of their weapon security cabinet.
Your impression is correct, at least as far as I am concerned. And I hasten to add that I am not nor do I have any plans to become in the foreseeable future a gun owner.
Powder Burns wrote:what they need to make is a fullsize leatherman, like 14" long folded, with a bone saw, notches for bowstring, signaling flare, electrical hand crank generator, bolt cutters..
2012/12/17 20:24:34
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
If a measure was added that required individuals to be subject to "random gun inspections", there could easily be provisions written within it putting restrictions on what the police/ATF could do in the process of executing a "random gun inspection".
At least until the first random inspection was challenged in court and thrown out for "being so goddamn unconstitutional I should slap you so hard that your mom's face burns" - Antonin Scalia.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2012/12/17 20:25:25
Subject: Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Having to deal with the occasional inspection: It's a pain to set aside an entire day to show idiots your toys. The last one was hilarious: 'You sure do have a lot of guns laying around.' No, really, I would never have noticed. If I hadn't pointed it out, he probably wouldn't have noticed the tank gun at all.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2012/12/17 20:26:10
Fate is in heaven, armor is on the chest, accomplishment is in the feet. - Nagao Kagetora
2012/12/17 20:25:26
Subject: Re:Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Individuals known to have firearms should, in my opinion, be subject to random "inspections" by law enforcement officials to ensure that firearms are stored properly in accordance with the training and certification that the individuals received.
You better have a warrant and you better bring a lot of friends.
And people wonder why people consider the pro-gun lobby to be so confrontational...
Yeah I tend to be confrontational with fascist windbags. Wierd.
I tend to be confrontational with anyone that stands between me and coffee/chocolate. I'm pretty confrontational with the local chicken hawk which suddenly reappeared. He and I may have fisticuffs if he gets near the house again. TBone will not tolerate raptors trying to fly away with him.
Couldn't you shoot it?
Now you're sounding like a Texan.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
2012/12/17 20:31:55
Subject: Connecticut elementary school shooter shot dead [updated first post]
Kilkrazy wrote: My impression is that a significant number of Americans would object to a scheduled police inspection of their weapon security cabinet.
In the UK and Japan, this is a feature of the licensing system, designed to prevent people from leaving guns and ammo lying around the house.
Scheduled is different than random gun inspections . I would agree to such schedule inspections for licensing reasons... Though I wouldn't be a gun owner lol, like I said earlier in the thread don't need a license to own my gun, just gotta not be crazy. It does help that I have FBI and BCI criminal background checks done, thanks to my student teaching.
Random drug testing is allowable for employment in many areas.
Why would this be any different? The caveat is that it has be truly random or applied in such a way that it is not prejudicial.
. I would agree to such schedule inspections for licensing reasons... Though I wouldn't be a gun owner