Men surrounded for exercising Second Amendment rights.

[bigrebnc1775]

The 2nd says nothing about permits.

…which is why the licensing requirements are perfectly Constitutional.

those licensing requirements are Jim Crow and Jim Crow laws have been struck down.

 

[danielpalos]

The people have a right to keep and to bear arms for the common defence. And as, in time of peace, armies are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be maintained without the consent of the legislature; and the military power shall always be held in an exact subordination to the civil authority, and be governed by it.

 

[struth]

oh so...there was proper reason to arrest the folks.

There was definitely a more than acceptable cause for detention and investigation.

The trooper didn’t pull them over. He stopped to do a safety and wellness check on two vehicles in the breakdown lane with their hazard lights on.

And having explained that one car had ran out of gas it was time to move on.

No..it was not. How stupid a cop would have to be to ignore the lack of the right to drive and the refusal to prove their legal right to bear arms. Unless you are proposing that LEA assume the legality of every armed individual? Are they even citizens? Any of them ex-cons? Why did they run?
Your premise is insupportable....the 2nd does not exempt people from questioning and once they ran...they guaranteed their arrest. All the yammering about the Constitution changes nothing...their attitude hung them. Fuck 'sovereign citizens'...this is the US..and ALL are subject to our laws...this applies on the state level as well.

They have to by law, assume the legality of every armed citizen, just as they have to assume that anyone operating a motor vehicle is fully legal to do so.


I understand that them not having the legitimate authority to demand ID and force everyone to explain themselves and justify their every move to agents of the state offends your latent totalitarian tendencies, but that's the way freedom works, guy. At least that's how it's supposed to work.

i am not sure where you are getting this. A police officer can assume whatever they want...the issue is can they stop you etc

in this case the car was stopped filling up gas because they ran out of gas, a police officer can certainly stop and try to aid the motorist and during such interaction gain reasonable suspension of other crimes...moreover he can certainly ask the driver for his DL

 

[danielpalos]

The 2nd says nothing about permits.

…which is why the licensing requirements are perfectly Constitutional.

those licensing requirements are Jim Crow and Jim Crow laws have been struck down.

Unequal protection of at-will employment laws is more, Jim Crow, yet right-wingers only care about loving their guns not equal protection of the laws.

 

[freyasman]

You should grow up and start engaging with reality

That's pretty funny coming from some whack-job conspiracy Dumbass.

You know what ain't funny?
That our society has gotten so fucked up that people like YOU are roaming around in it.

Just what is it that you think you know about me, wack-job?

I know you have an attitude towards truth and freedom that are inconsistent with living in a country that was founded on those principles. I also know shitty people like you never stop trying to fuck other people over of your own accord; you always need to be stopped by someone.

People like you in a free country are like syphilis; pretty easy to avoid if you're careful, easy to deal with when you address it early, but will ruin your health and make you crazy if left untreated.
And that's pretty much what you and all the other sick fucks like you have done to our society.

 

[freyasman]

I've read nothing of the sort. All the same, only two needed one

I have the benefit of having the local news stations here in Boston in my cable package.

Inly two may have needed them, but none had them. I looked it up this morning and apparently MA law also allows LEOs to request IDs from all individuals in a vehicle being stopped or investigated.,

It does NOT. This is repeated over and over and over but yet there is NO law anywhere that requires a non driver to have any sort of I.D. on them.

You all a bunch of "show me your papers" insane authoritarians and I'll never understand that.

That early conditioning to obey "authority" is pretty damn strong, ain't it?

 

[Anathema]

That early conditioning to obey "authority" is pretty damn strong, ain't it?

As it should be. We’d be far better off if thst conditioning was far more extensive in certain neighborhoods and segments of society.

 

[freyasman]

You all a bunch of "show me your papers" insane authoritarians and I'll never understand that

You know why I’m an Authoritarisn? You REALLY want to know why???….

Because stupid motherfuckers like you and these eleven idiots get to vote in a Democracy and that scares the living shit out of sane people like me.

I'd rather people vote in a voting booth than from a rooftop, but you take the booth option away and people will vote, regardless.

That goes for black militants who call themselves "Moors" just the same as it does for peckerwoods like me. If their rights, freedoms, liberties, and constitutional protections don't deserve respect then neither does anyone else's, and we might as well just start killing each other in earnest.

 

[freyasman]

derp

You’ve become a tedious and ridiculous troll in your own thread.

Well done.

No he's been consistent in his defense of people's civil rights, is all.

You simply despise freedom.

 

[Anathema]

L

If their rights, freedoms, liberties, and constitutional protections don't deserve respect then neither does anyone else's, and we might as well just start killing each other in earnest

Your proposal has been ACCEPTED.

 

[Anathema]

You simply despise freedom

I can’t speak for him, but I definitely do.

 

[freyasman]

Be that as it may – authoritarian dictatorships isn’t the answer

I’m more than willing to give it a try to determine that for myself.

Are you willing to end up like most dictators?
Or like the people they abuse?



Because I'm not, and I'm not interested in my grandkids having to deal with that shit either.

 

[Anathema]

Are you willing to end up like most dictators?
Or like the people they abuse?

I don’t want to be the dictator, personally. There are far better options out there than me to take that position. I’m more than happy to be a worker drone under the proper Leadership.

 

[freyasman]

oh so...there was proper reason to arrest the folks.

There was definitely a more than acceptable cause for detention and investigation.

The trooper didn’t pull them over. He stopped to do a safety and wellness check on two vehicles in the breakdown lane with their hazard lights on.

And having explained that one car had ran out of gas it was time to move on.

No..it was not. How stupid a cop would have to be to ignore the lack of the right to drive and the refusal to prove their legal right to bear arms. Unless you are proposing that LEA assume the legality of every armed individual? Are they even citizens? Any of them ex-cons? Why did they run?
Your premise is insupportable....the 2nd does not exempt people from questioning and once they ran...they guaranteed their arrest. All the yammering about the Constitution changes nothing...their attitude hung them. Fuck 'sovereign citizens'...this is the US..and ALL are subject to our laws...this applies on the state level as well.

They have to by law, assume the legality of every armed citizen, just as they have to assume that anyone operating a motor vehicle is fully legal to do so.


I understand that them not having the legitimate authority to demand ID and force everyone to explain themselves and justify their every move to agents of the state offends your latent totalitarian tendencies, but that's the way freedom works, guy. At least that's how it's supposed to work.

i am not sure where you are getting this. A police officer can assume whatever they want...the issue is can they stop you etc

in this case the car was stopped filling up gas because they ran out of gas, a police officer can certainly stop and try to aid the motorist and during such interaction gain reasonable suspension of other crimes...moreover he can certainly ask the driver for his DL

He can ask, and the person can refuse.
There is no law that obligates a person to provide ID or answer questions in the absence of any evidence of criminal activity.

The cop's feelings (and "suspicion" is a feeling) don't matter to the law.

 

[freyasman]

That early conditioning to obey "authority" is pretty damn strong, ain't it?

As it should be. We’d be far better off if thst conditioning was far more extensive in certain neighborhoods and segments of society.

If everyone shared the same values and social mores, we wouldn't need much of any laws at all, would we?
And we wouldn't have to deal with people who assert "authority" they don't have and were never given, over others at the point of a gun, either.

 

[freyasman]

L

If their rights, freedoms, liberties, and constitutional protections don't deserve respect then neither does anyone else's, and we might as well just start killing each other in earnest

Your proposal has been ACCEPTED.

I know I speak in a somewhat cavalier fashion about killing people from time to time, but I at least know what it's like and what a shitstorm that eventuality would be for our society....... do you?

You ever kill someone, guy?
You know what it smells like when you open them up?









I'm trying to gauge if you know what it is you're wanting to get us all into.

 

[freyasman]

You simply despise freedom

I can’t speak for him, but I definitely do.

I think you're living in the wrong type of society then.

Consider moving somewhere else.

 

[Anathema]

If everyone shared the same values and social mores, we wouldn't need much of any laws at all, would we?

No we wouldn’t, and we’d be far better off.

 

[freyasman]

Are you willing to end up like most dictators?
Or like the people they abuse?

I don’t want to be the dictator, personally. There are far better options out there than me to take that position. I’m more than happy to be a worker drone under the proper Leadership.

"Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem."

 

[struth]

oh so...there was proper reason to arrest the folks.

There was definitely a more than acceptable cause for detention and investigation.

The trooper didn’t pull them over. He stopped to do a safety and wellness check on two vehicles in the breakdown lane with their hazard lights on.

And having explained that one car had ran out of gas it was time to move on.

No..it was not. How stupid a cop would have to be to ignore the lack of the right to drive and the refusal to prove their legal right to bear arms. Unless you are proposing that LEA assume the legality of every armed individual? Are they even citizens? Any of them ex-cons? Why did they run?
Your premise is insupportable....the 2nd does not exempt people from questioning and once they ran...they guaranteed their arrest. All the yammering about the Constitution changes nothing...their attitude hung them. Fuck 'sovereign citizens'...this is the US..and ALL are subject to our laws...this applies on the state level as well.

They have to by law, assume the legality of every armed citizen, just as they have to assume that anyone operating a motor vehicle is fully legal to do so.


I understand that them not having the legitimate authority to demand ID and force everyone to explain themselves and justify their every move to agents of the state offends your latent totalitarian tendencies, but that's the way freedom works, guy. At least that's how it's supposed to work.

i am not sure where you are getting this. A police officer can assume whatever they want...the issue is can they stop you etc

in this case the car was stopped filling up gas because they ran out of gas, a police officer can certainly stop and try to aid the motorist and during such interaction gain reasonable suspension of other crimes...moreover he can certainly ask the driver for his DL

He can ask, and the person can refuse.
There is no law that obligates a person to provide ID or answer questions in the absence of any evidence of criminal activity.

The cop's feelings (and "suspicion" is a feeling) don't matter to the law.

agreed on last point hence why i said it depends on the reason for the encounter

while driving on a highway someone has to be licensed. If asked they have to provide it. The car didn’t get to the side of the road out of gas in its own