View Full Version : Just got stopped by the police... and met the greatest officers ever!
I was just coming home from LA Fitness from swimming 1000m combat stroke in the pool in full cammies, well being that I own a Subaru STI I was being a total dumbass taking off fast at every stoplight. Well apparently there was a police car behind me but I had no idea because the wing on my Subaru STI obstructed my view so I had no idea the car had a light bar and thus was a police car.
He turns his lights on and my heart just absolutely sunk, I was absolutely screwed, I thought that was it, my life was over, I was going to get a ticket for aggressive driving, driving 20 over the speedlimit, reckless driving, the works and this was going to ruin my chances of becoming a Marine. I thought I was ****ed and my life was over I was literally going to have a heart attack right then and there. To complicate things, I was also carrying my Sig 229 DAK in my gym bag (I have a concealed weapons license). I immediately put my blinker on and pulled over to the side of the road, rolled down all my windows, turned the car off and put the keys on the dashboard, and had both hands on the steering wheel. Two officers approached my car, one on each side and I was so nervous because I thought I was about to get a huge thousand dollar ticket and have to go to court and all sorts of stuff. I immediately said "Sir, before anything I would just like to inform you that I have a concealed weapons license and I have a legally owned weapon in the side pocket of my gym bag with a round in the chamber. Also sir, my wallet is also in the same pocket which has both my drivers license and concealed weapons license." He told me that's fine and he appreciates me being up front with him and will take that into consideration. He said to just to keep both hands on the steering wheel, I was VERY nervous because I thought my whole life was going to be messed up with the huge tickets and everything i'm about to get, and he goes "Why are you so nervous?" And I told him this is the first time I have ever been stopped in 5 years and am very very worried this is going to effect me being able to join the Marine Corps because I know that I was breaking the law and some of the things were pretty serious.
He said he pulled me over because of the fast out of the stop lights, being reckless, going 15mph over the speedlimit, and my exhaust was not legal, I explained that the exhaust came stock on the car from the factory and he said that's fine.
He asked me for permission to take my gym bag back to his car and I said "Absolutely sir" and explained to him the exact location of my firearm, my wallet, etc. and told him to to be careful of the soaking wet cammies in the main compartment of the bag so he doesn't get wet. He told me that he's going back to his car now and I need to still keep both hands on the steering wheel and if I take them off he won't hesitate to drag me out of the car, I was scared as hell! Since it was night time and I was right next to a big grassy field with all my windows open there were mosquito's and all sorts of bugs flying around in my car and biting my legs, face, arms, everything but I was absolutely frightened of what would happen if I took my hands off the steering wheel so I just sucked up the pain and the extreme itching and just kept thinking that this is good practice for the sand fleas at PI, lol.
The other officer who stayed at the car with me started talking to me, he asked me why i'm 21 and waited so long to join the Marine Corps and I explained that I used to be 240 pounds and had to lose 80 pounds to join and he was really impressed. He told me that he just got out of the Coast Guard and he was in a Port Security Unit which is like a Coast Guard SWAT team and I thought that was awesome. He was a really cool guy and started telling me Coast Guard, like the time when he was at the police academy and they had everyone who was prior military stand up and say their branch and they went down the list "Marine Corps!" "Army!" and then they finally got to him and he goes "Coast Guard!" and he said they gave him so much **** for it, but it was all in good fun and I thought that was pretty funny. He was just telling me to keep my nose clean, etc. and i'll have the best time of my life, he goes "So do you have a girlfriend?" and I told him "not at the moment, sir!" and he told me once I become a Marine it's like all the woman will just gravitate to me and I won't be able to keep them off me, haha. I told him how i'm PT'ing everyday and doing lot's of things to prepare and all that and we just talked about PT and whatnot, he was a very very very cool guy.
Well the other officer who went back to the police car with my bag came walking back and says in a joking manner to the other officer "Hey Joe, weren't you in the Marines" and then the officer who I was talking to goes "Coast Guard, you jackass!" and we all laughed about it (all the while i'm getting bitten up by a thousand bugs, lol).
The other officer told me that he's going to let me off with just a warning... OH MY GOD I LITERALLY FELT LIKE I JUST WON THE LOTTERY!!! I couldn't believe it! I was so thankful! He said that he was just going to back to the car and verify that my CWL is valid and i'll be on my way!
He went back to the car and the officer who was in the CG and I talked some more, he was just wishing me good luck and things like that and he told me i'm going to be miserable as hell but 30 years from now i'll be able to look back at those times and be proud I went through them. I told him that I eventually want to go into some sort of law enforcement after the Marine Corps whether it's 4 years or 20 years from now and was just asking questions about that (these officers were with the Palm Beach County Sheriffs Office) and he told me that i'll basically be able to get any law enforcement job in the state once I become a Marine. I was pretty shocked and didn't think it would be that easy, I said "I won't even need a criminal justice degree or anything like that?" And he said he doesn't have a degree at all and PBSO hired him right out of the Coast Guard, so Marines will definitely not have any problems. That was pretty cool to hear.
The other officer came back to my car with my gym bag and he told me that he removed the magazine and locked back the slide and that put it back in the pocket of the bag where it originally was with the magazine next to it and he put the one round that was in the chamber back into the magazine. I thanked him and was very appreciative and explained to him how this is a huge wakeup call for me and that he will never see me again because I won't ever drive in such a stupid way ever again, and he stopped me before I could say anything else and told me that he HOPES he sees me again once I graduate and become a Marine and that I should look him up and come see him once I do! I responded with a very proud "YES SIR" and he stuck out his hand to shake my hand so I shook his hand and he goes "Hey, I thought I told you to keep both hands on the steering wheel!" and then laughed, LOL.
I thanked him again and he wished me good luck and then goes "Hey John, one more thing........ SEMPER FI!" which was really cool of him. I wanted nothing more than to be able to say Semper Fi right back to him but I knew deep down inside that I didn't rate it so instead of saying Semper Fi I just said "Thank you sir!"
These two officers were incredible, this was a huge wakeup call for me and they really got the point across. At the beginning I was literally terrified and i'm actually glad they pulled me over and I had this experience, I consider myself a law abiding citizen who does everything by the book and respects the law and my fellow citizens, it was very eye opening and you can bet your ass i'll be obeying all traffic laws from hereon out no questions asked.
Kildars
10-05-06, 11:55 PM
Awesome story, just wait till you graduate you'll never get tickets ;).
I remember when I was about to graduate everyone was writing "FWHS c/o 2005 Graduate -- UW Bound" or whatever collge.
I wrote, "FWHS c/o 2005! IRAQ BOUND!! U.S.M.C." and I have a "Semper Fi -- United States Marines" sticker on my back window. I got pulled over and at that point I was already planning on going to boot camp (I didn't think my hearing would get denied). So I told them I planned to ship out July 11th, which I did at the time. He asked if I knew the Gunny at my High School, and I did Gunny Willson and hes a FW Police officer now, our school was in the "rougher" area of town so we had 3 real cops at our school during the school day, fully armed etc. If you got in fights, chances are you went to jail, not suspended. He asked me what the fifth general order was, and I could recite it. He told me to enjoy my time at boot camp and is proud that I am stepping up to serve my country, he also asked why I had 3 girls in the car and I was driving 21 over the posted speed limit, I told him I had to hurry them home to hop in my hot tub. He laughed. I got off a lot of tickets for just being a poolee, especially if the cops were Marines. :)
jinelson
10-06-06, 12:05 AM
John ya got lucky dont expect another miracle obey the law.
Jim
jryanjack
10-06-06, 07:18 AM
Second that thought! You got real lucky!
But you did handle yourself professionally and admitted that you had done wrong - which is called holding yourself accountable for your actions, something that we sell darned little of in today's world and for that I commend you!
yellowwing
10-06-06, 08:24 AM
Being up front about the weapon was a good move. Good character too. :thumbup:
And uhh...the girls will want to see your DAK! ;)
Awsome yeah I had to drop 80 lbs to join also.. Its tough but got it all off from christmas to april
Marine84
10-06-06, 10:29 AM
How are you doing on that run time Poskew?
Marine84
10-06-06, 10:31 AM
Accord - get your caca together, keep the testosterone in check and quit doing stupid $h!t.
To be honest I havent even run yet. Ive been either in the hospital and it sounds horrible and feels horrible but waiting for my grandmother to die or Im at her house helping with the family if its either cooking or cleaning or calling people. Talked to my recruiter she doesn't even want me to be worrying about my run time at the moment and I dont want to worry about it either. Im going to go for a run later tonight but this is the only time ive had today to sit down and relax.
Accord, what possible good could come out of having a loaded weapon on you? Especially when you keep it in your gym bag that you bring inside of a gym?????
Accord, what possible good could come out of having a loaded weapon on you? Especially when you keep it in your gym bag that you bring inside of a gym?????
For starters, preserving human life comes to mind.
I am not a psychic and therefore cannot predict when and where crime will happen, therefore I exercise my right as an American citizen and a resident of the great state of Florida to legally carry a concealed firearm. It's nothing out of the ordinary and no different than carrying around a cell phone or anything else, I go about my day not even thinking about it, but it's there if god forbid I ever need it - nothing more, nothing less.
I will not be the guy lying in a pool of blood watching a family member being raped wishing I had a gun. A right not exercised is a right lost.
Any questions?
Gunman robs four people near Pembroke Pines gym
BY JENNIFER MOONEY PIEDRA
jmooney@MiamiHerald.com
Four people were robbed near an L.A. Fitness gym in Pembroke Pines Friday afternoon.
A man, carrying some type of handgun, held up two people near the gym at 1900 N. Flamingo Rd. about 3 p.m. He then robbed two others near an Atlanta Bread Company, located in a shopping center adjacent to the gym, Pines police said.
Police say the victims had items taken from them, but that no one was injured.
The man ran off, said Cmdr. David Golt, a police spokesman.
Police have set up a perimeter in the area of Taft Street and Flamingo Road to search for the suspect.
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/breaking_news/15697224.htm
Umm can I say hoo the **** rah ^^^
Ok, say the four people had a handgun, do you think it would have ended well, with no shots fired? I'm not here to argue with you about gun control laws. But a few people from my town have lay in a pool of blood because someone was "exercising their right to carry a firearm". Everyone can not have a firearm because frankly not everyones responsible enough and most do not know it.
Which is why Accord spent countless hours in training sessions and waited months for a background check to come through.
Those who don't know if they're responsible enough to carry a firearm, but do it anyways, aren't doing so legally.
As for what "good" can come from him carrying one....what "good" can come from a US Marine carrying a machine gun in Iraq?
I also know tens of people who died in a high school in Colorado because the teachers there weren't ALLOWED to exercise their right to carry a firearm. But hey, a responsible person with a gun is something to fear I guess.
Camper51
10-06-06, 06:05 PM
I also know tens of people who died in a high school in Colorado because the teachers there weren't ALLOWED to exercise their right to carry a firearm. But hey, a responsible person with a gun is something to fear I guess.
Bad, bad, bad timing around here in Colorado. We have just endured our second school shooting, followed by another in Lancaster County, Pa. I am in agreement with Concealed Carry laws, however I am NEVER in favor of guns in schools unless it is law enforcement carrying them. We have seen both good and bad results from two very different school shootings (Columbine and Bailey). These were handled very differently with very different results. I do not for one second believe that Columbine would have turned out differently had a teacher, or several teachers been carrying guns. I do however believe that had the response at Columbine been handled differently that there would have been fewer deaths. Had the Jefferson County sheriff acted more aggressively to stop the killers, instead of refusing to allow officers to enter the building until it was too damn late, because he did not want his officers injured or killed, there would have been far fewer deaths. The Park County sheriff acted far more agressively from the beginning and the results, while not perfect, were far less loss of life.
Those 13 people who died at Columbine did not die because of unarmed teachers, they died because of p*ssy police who would not risk their lives for others and I don't believe there would have been as much loss of life had those Police officers actively pursued and contained the killers.
By the way I had some personal interest in Columbine because I worked with the mother of a student there and my wife at the time was a co worker of one of the young girls who was killed. I also had a former sister in law who was a coroner who helped autopsy six of the victims. She said she cried constantly while doing her job at the school, and it affected her so much that she had a Columbine tattoo done on her ankle as a permanant reminder.
Just remember that when you say you "know" people who were involved with an event YOU were NOT at...
I have my CnC license, and I do carry my .45 with me often. I work at night, downtown KC, and I'll be damned if some crack head arguing with himself is gonna have hte upper hand on me when I'm outside on a smoke break...or even out and about with my younger daughter.
I've been through numerous classes, and can go head to head on accuracy with anyone here.
Mama don't take no Chit! :p
yellowwing
10-06-06, 06:42 PM
I've been through numerous classes, and can go head to head on accuracy with anyone here.
That's a huge invaluable difference! Knowing how and having the confidence and trained reflexes to shoot is as much as a lifesaver as the weapon itself.
Kildars
10-06-06, 07:22 PM
A better question is why do you have to have a permit to carry a weapon, when it is a right?
Rights are given, not granted, privelages are granted ;).
That's a huge invaluable difference! Knowing how and having the confidence and trained reflexes to shoot is as much as a lifesaver as the weapon itself.
*VERY* true !!!:thumbup:
Marine84
10-06-06, 07:52 PM
You also have to know that if you pull it, you better be ready to use it. And I had someone teach me one time (and, yes, it was another Marine) that, if you have one with a cylinder give yourself a 1 shot safety. If somebody is coming at me, the first click hears will make him think I'm another dumbass woman that don't know what she's doing so he'll keep coming at me.....................just to put himself closer for me to be able to hit his ass with the 2nd shot. BOOM! Party over, oops outta time................
A better question is why do you have to have a permit to carry a weapon, when it is a right?
Rights are given, not granted, privelages are granted ;).
You are incorrect.
Florida is a SHALL ISSUE state, that means the state of Florida is required by law to issue EVERYONE a concealed weapons license so long as they meet the requirements by passing the background check and obtaining the proper training. It is most definitely not a priviledge.
Unless you're a convicted felon or something of that nature, the state of Florida must issue you a license.
You also have to know that if you pull it, you better be ready to use it. And I had someone teach me one time (and, yes, it was another Marine) that, if you have one with a cylinder give yourself a 1 shot safety. If somebody is coming at me, the first click hears will make him think I'm another dumbass woman that don't know what she's doing so he'll keep coming at me.....................just to put himself closer for me to be able to hit his ass with the 2nd shot. BOOM! Party over, oops outta time................
That's a pretty good tip :)
today, (as much as I hate to say it), carrying a concealed weapon is almost neccessary. So many things happen and there are so many dumb people out there, that in order to protect yourself and/or your family, you may need a concealed weapon.
Its better to have one and not need it, than to need it and not have one.
alexpw62
10-10-06, 12:52 AM
Its better to have one and not need it, than to need it and not have one.
Amen, brother!:thumbup:
Kildars
10-10-06, 01:06 AM
You are incorrect.
Florida is a SHALL ISSUE state, that means the state of Florida is required by law to issue EVERYONE a concealed weapons license so long as they meet the requirements by passing the background check and obtaining the proper training. It is most definitely not a priviledge.
Unless you're a convicted felon or something of that nature, the state of Florida must issue you a license.
The state of florida also has the most liberal and loose Gun Laws in the Country, (minus Alaska and Vermont.) Law wise, Florida is passing laws left and right making it easier to use your firearm in public, facing little or no punishment.
My point is, not just in Florida, but in other parts of the country we're required to get a Permit to carry a weapon -- and you know where that first came up right? Right after the Civil war, we didn't want to give blacks guns, because we thought. "Hmm we've been making these guys slaves for years, and they might be a LITTLE bit ****ed off at us, so we'll give this one a gun, and this one can't have one." So we required permits for them to get guns, and eventually it was required for everyone.
The state of florida also has the most liberal and loose Gun Laws in the Country, (minus Alaska and Vermont.) Law wise, Florida is passing laws left and right making it easier to use your firearm in public, facing little or no punishment.
My point is, not just in Florida, but in other parts of the country we're required to get a Permit to carry a weapon -- and you know where that first came up right? Right after the Civil war, we didn't want to give blacks guns, because we thought. "Hmm we've been making these guys slaves for years, and they might be a LITTLE bit ****ed off at us, so we'll give this one a gun, and this one can't have one." So we required permits for them to get guns, and eventually it was required for everyone.
I don't think we know what you're trying to say. Accord just defended gun rights and you just blasted gun permits.
Are you saying since its a right, permits should be completely removed and anyone should be allowed to carry a weapon, that's legally allowed to own a weapon? I would agree with you on that. Vermont has a law. It says, if you're over 21, have no felonies, and you're mentally stable, you can carry a firearm with no restrictions at all.
However, if you're saying that concealed carry permits are BAD and that we shoudln't have any way for ordinary citizens to carry defensive firearms, I'd laugh at you now, and laugh again when the criminal (who doesn't care if its legal or not, and doesn't bother to get a permit) with a gun comes up to you and robs you blind.
Camper51
10-10-06, 10:58 AM
You are incorrect.
Florida is a SHALL ISSUE state, that means the state of Florida is required by law to issue EVERYONE a concealed weapons license so long as they meet the requirements by passing the background check and obtaining the proper training. It is most definitely not a priviledge.
Unless you're a convicted felon or something of that nature, the state of Florida must issue you a license.
You mistake rights and priviledges. Any CCW permit is a priviledge that can be taken away. Even in a "shall issue" state it is a priviledge that can be taken away. Our constitution says we have the RIGHT to bear arms, yet there are laws prohibiting certain people from this right, therefore within certain restrictions you may obtain a CCW, however it is not a right but a priviledge provided you follow the rules. Remember it is a PERMIT you are getting, if it were a God given right then you would not need a permit, would you...
Echo_Four_Bravo
10-10-06, 12:18 PM
First, great job. You handled the situation perfectly. While it is never a good idea to break the law, you learned first hand that a CCW can often help in situations like this. The cops knew that you were one of the "good guys" because you had the permit. Even in a shall issue state, the bad guys don't get a permit. So, when they saw that you did have one, they were more likely to go easy on you. I've seen it many, many times.
Now, I don't understand questioning someone for carrying a weapon. I don't leave my house unless I am armed. I am usually carrying a Glock 23 at all times. If it isn't possible to carry it, I will have something smaller in a pocket. (usually a Kel Tec 3AT or a S&W j frame) It is pretty easy to figure out why. Our world isn't safe. We could face a crazed drug addict that is looking for his next high, or a terrorist on a rampage. There are countless reasons why I am armed. It should be noted that my gun has never jumped out of the holster and started shooting people. It has never decided to go off without me telling it to do so. I am in no way more dangerous with a weapon than I am without. I am actually offended that someone here would question why another takes his personal protection seriously. Remember, the cops are not there to stop crime, they are there to arrest those that commit crimes.
Finally, I disagree whole heartedly with the post about arming teachers. There is no doubt in my mind that the Columbine shootings would have been much different if there were armed teachers on campus. As would the more recent shootings in schools. Presently our schools are a "free fire" zone for criminals. They know that they can go into a school and shoot innocent people without having to worry about someone shooting back. Until we change that situation, the shootings will continue. We either have to arm the staff at the school or hire multiple off duty police officers as security. I don't know where the school districts will get the money to spend thousands upon thousands of dollar to hire the police officers as security. That leaves us with only two options. We can send our children to unsafe schools or we can train and arm the people that are there to take care of them.
Kildars
10-10-06, 12:25 PM
Finally, I disagree whole heartedly with the post about arming teachers. There is no doubt in my mind that the Columbine shootings would have been much different if there were armed teachers on campus. As would the more recent shootings in schools. Presently our schools are a "free fire" zone for criminals. They know that they can go into a school and shoot innocent people without having to worry about someone shooting back. Until we change that situation, the shootings will continue. We either have to arm the staff at the school or hire multiple off duty police officers as security. I don't know where the school districts will get the money to spend thousands upon thousands of dollar to hire the police officers as security. That leaves us with only two options. We can send our children to unsafe schools or we can train and arm the people that are there to take care of them.
I agree with you, obviously the current system is not working. I remember my high school we always had three uniformed police officers that wore bullet proofs vests etc on campus at all times during the school day. This might have been necessary because I didn't live in a "good neighborhood," but it cut down on a lot of the violence we had prior to them coming in, if you got in a fight that was serious enough, you got arrested, not suspended. The year before the police officers we had multiple people bringing guns on campus etc due to gangs and stuff, but after the police the guns on campus dropped a lot.
I am all in favor of having armed police guards on campus. Teachers too, if they know how to use a firearm.
The state of florida also has the most liberal and loose Gun Laws in the Country, (minus Alaska and Vermont.) Law wise, Florida is passing laws left and right making it easier to use your firearm in public, facing little or no punishment.
If you use your firearm in the defense of human life, you shouldn't receive ANY punishment. That is the problem with states like California, if you're forced to use your firearm in self defense they'll lock you up and you'll go to trial and even if you're found innocent at the trial you will be financially ruined because you have to sell your house just to pay your legal fees, when you did nothing wrong. Then only to be hit with a civil suit months later by the "momma" of the "baby" you shot.
You mistake rights and priviledges. Any CCW permit is a priviledge that can be taken away. Even in a "shall issue" state it is a priviledge that can be taken away. Our constitution says we have the RIGHT to bear arms, yet there are laws prohibiting certain people from this right, therefore within certain restrictions you may obtain a CCW, however it is not a right but a priviledge provided you follow the rules. Remember it is a PERMIT you are getting, if it were a God given right then you would not need a permit, would you...
The attorney general of the state of Florida (and 38 other states) disagrees with you. In a shall issue state it is not a priviledge in the least bit seeing as though the state is required to issue a license to everyone who requests one as long as you're not a criminal. The definition of a priviledge is a benefit afforded only to certain people beyond the advantages of most, if everyone can easily get a concealed weapons license, then it is most definitely not a priviledge and even if this is not clear in the US constitution, it is very clear in the individual state constitutions. The only people prohibited from their right to bear arms are criminals and those adjucated mentally unstable - that's it, hardly a priviledge. In places such as California or New York where it is incredibly difficult to obtain one, your rights have been stripped from you and in those places it is a priviledge, which a majority of the states in this country find unconstitutional.
Echo_Four_Bravo
10-10-06, 12:54 PM
Accord, you're missing the point about it still being a priviledge and not a right even in shall issue states. Tomorrow the legislature can change the rules, making it illegal for anyone to have a weapon.
The reason that your state, and the other shall issue states allow permits to be issued isn't because they believe it is a constitutional issue. They do it because it is wanted by the people, and is the best political move. If the winds change, they will as well.
Accord, you're missing the point about it still being a priviledge and not a right even in shall issue states. Tomorrow the legislature can change the rules, making it illegal for anyone to have a weapon.
The reason that your state, and the other shall issue states allow permits to be issued isn't because they believe it is a constitutional issue. They do it because it is wanted by the people, and is the best political move. If the winds change, they will as well.
You're absolutely correct, but it doesn't change the fact that it's still technically a right, the root problem is that a certain political party has required so many restrictions, so many various stipulations, etc. that it now appears as if it's merely a priviledge on the surface. Our founding fathers would be rolling in their graves if they knew that a majority of the states actually required you to register your arms with your local and state governments, or if you actually had to apply for a license to simply carry a firearm to your local grocery store.
Camper51
10-10-06, 01:26 PM
Take your head out of your anal opening, Accord. The right is to bear arms (ie: own arms). The privilidge is to carry one concealed upon your person or in your vehicle. You do NOT have a right anywhere to carry a concealed weapon but you do have the right to own the weapon, thus the permit (a priviledge) to carry that weapon in a concealed manner. Even WHERE you can carry concealed is restricted in every state. Places such as schools, churches, bars, government offices are typically NOT included in the list of where you can carry a concealed weapon.
The right is to own the weapon, not to carry it around either concealed or unconcealed. Trust me, in many places if you openly carry a weapon you will go directly to jail, do not pass GO and do not collect $200.
Echo_Four_Bravo
10-10-06, 01:30 PM
I disagree camper. The "keep" part of the second amendment is about owning a weapon. Bearing arms would be to carry them or to have them on your person.
Kildars
10-10-06, 01:37 PM
If you use your firearm in the defense of human life, you shouldn't receive ANY punishment. That is the problem with states like California, if you're forced to use your firearm in self defense they'll lock you up and you'll go to trial and even if you're found innocent at the trial you will be financially ruined because you have to sell your house just to pay your legal fees, when you did nothing wrong. Then only to be hit with a civil suit months later by the "momma" of the "baby" you shot.
I agree that there should be no punishment for defending yourself or your family, but I disagree that there should be no laws on how you use your firearm after you get a permit (which i don't agree with).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4415135.stm
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...4/160309.shtml (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/3/24/160309.shtml)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...042501553.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/25/AR2005042501553.html)
http://www.local10.com/news/4349938/detail.html
It seems that Florida is allowing people to kill another person in the streets, without punishments, for thinking that person will attack them and unless the city can prove that the person wasn't thinking that (which really they cant cause they're dead.) this will lead to a lot of murders, imo.
Kildars
10-10-06, 01:41 PM
if everyone can easily get a concealed weapons license, then it is most definitely not a priviledge and even if this is not clear in the US constitution, it is very clear in the individual state constitutions. The only people prohibited from their right to bear arms are criminals and those adjucated mentally unstable - that's it, hardly a priviledge.
You just contradicted yourself accord, everyone can not have a CWP, criminals and mentally unstable people can not. I'm sure there is an age requirement too, correct?
<table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td class="dn" valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td></tr></tbody></table> <table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td class="dn" valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td></tr></tbody></table> <table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td class="dn" valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td></tr></tbody></table> <table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td class="dn" valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td></tr></tbody></table> <table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td class="dn" valign="top">
</td><td valign="top">
</td></tr></tbody></table>
Echo_Four_Bravo
10-10-06, 01:46 PM
Don't buy into the anti-gun crowd's arguments. You can't murder someone in the streets and get away with it, in Florida or anywhere else. The law is written in such a way that you don't have to retreat and that if a reasonable person would believe you were in danger you can defend yourself. The state doesn't have to prove what the dead person was thinking, they just have to prove that most people wouldn't have decided that there was a reason to start shooting. There will still be cases of people being prosecuted when they shouldn't be, and blood will not be running in the streets.
Besides, murder is a crime. Changing the laws around a person's ability to defend themselves will not lead to more people thinking its a good idea to kill someone. It should be remembered that violent crime rates always go down when the government makes it easier for the law abiding citizen to defend themselves.
I agree that there should be no punishment for defending yourself or your family, but I disagree that there should be no laws on how you use your firearm after you get a permit (which i don't agree with).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4415135.stm
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...4/160309.shtml (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2005/3/24/160309.shtml)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...042501553.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/25/AR2005042501553.html)
http://www.local10.com/news/4349938/detail.html
It seems that Florida is allowing people to kill another person in the streets, without punishments, for thinking that person will attack them and unless the city can prove that the person wasn't thinking that (which really they cant cause they're dead.) this will lead to a lot of murders, imo.
This is not true at all. There ARE laws on how you use your firearm after you get your license, and these laws are very strict and failure to obey they can result in you going to prison. You do not draw down and you do not fire unless there is a direct threat to your life - period. It is very straight forward and this is how it is in pretty much every state where you can carry concealed, however some states have a duty to retreat which means you must run away, the only difference is here in Florida you can stand your ground.
It has worked beautifully here in Florida, despite what some POS at the BBC 3,000 miles away thinks. As far as those "critics" who say Florida will become the "Wild West" - those critics have been proven absolutely wrong. That's what the critics said would happen in EVERY state before adopting their concealed carry laws, and no where in America has it turned into the Wild West, why? Because law abiding citizens with legally owned weapons who went through the proper channels to obtain their concealed weapons license do not commit crimes.
Kildars
10-10-06, 01:52 PM
Don't buy into the anti-gun crowd's arguments. You can't murder someone in the streets and get away with it, in Florida or anywhere else. The law is written in such a way that you don't have to retreat and that if a reasonable person would believe you were in danger you can defend yourself. The state doesn't have to prove what the dead person was thinking, they just have to prove that most people wouldn't have decided that there was a reason to start shooting. There will still be cases of people being prosecuted when they shouldn't be, and blood will not be running in the streets.
Besides, murder is a crime. Changing the laws around a person's ability to defend themselves will not lead to more people thinking its a good idea to kill someone. It should be remembered that violent crime rates always go down when the government makes it easier for the law abiding citizen to defend themselves.
I am very pro-firearm. I believe that if everyone or excericised their "privilege" to bear arms our world would be a safer place, I am sure the criminals would think twice about entering a bank and holding it up when any amount of people inside could have a gun too.. same for house robberies, rapes.. etc.
I just don't think that using florida as an example for the entire country actually following the "right" to bear arms is a good one, which is why I pointed out that florida has very loose gun laws, and they're making them more loose.
Kildars
10-10-06, 01:56 PM
This is not true at all. There ARE laws on how you use your firearm after you get your license, and these laws are very strict and failure to obey they can result in you going to prison. You do not draw down and you do not fire unless there is a direct threat to your life - period. It is very straight forward and this is how it is in pretty much every state where you can carry concealed, however some states have a duty to retreat which means you must run away, the only difference is here in Florida you can stand your ground.
Do me a favor and define a "direct threat to your life." Using unspecified terms like that don't really work on laws. I know that my perception of a "direct threat to my life." is probably different than yours, you could think a fight 20 feet away is a direct threat, and I could think even if I am IN the fight, it's not a direct threat.
It has worked beautifully here in Florida, despite what some POS at the BBC 3,000 miles away thinks. As far as those "critics" who say Florida will become the "Wild West" - those critics have been proven absolutely wrong. That's what the critics said wouldd no where in A happen in EVERY state before adopting their concealed carry laws, anmerica has it turned into the Wild West, why? Because law abiding citizens with legally owned weapons who went through the proper channels to obtain their concealed weapons license do not commit crimes.
Again, don't get me wrong, I am totally pro-gun. I just don't think you using Florida as an example about how, "the united states follows the 'right to bear arms'" right we have, is a good one. I was merely stating the Florida has loose gun laws. You compared my originial statement about the entire country -- to just Florida.
Echo_Four_Bravo
10-10-06, 01:57 PM
Kildars, much of the rest of the country is following suit. The NRA is pushing for Castle Doctrine laws in other states. Oklahoma's version goes into effect November 1. Arizona's has recently gone into effect, and other states have followed Florida's example as well. They may be leading the way, but many other states are right behind Florida in changing the laws to ensure that people are able to defend themselves.
That is the beauty of the law, you're immune from any criminal and civil prosecution as long as it was a rhiteous shoot in self defense. The police are certainly allowed to investigate what happened...
I am very pro-firearm.
Then act like it.
You're sitting here reciting typical arguments from the anti-gun Brady Bunch and claim to be pro-gun, it doesn't work that way.
Do me a favor and define a "direct threat to your life." Using unspecified terms like that don't really work on laws. I know that my perception of a "direct threat to my life." is probably different than yours, you could think a fight 20 feet away is a direct threat, and I could think even if I am IN the fight, it's not a direct threat.
The law specifically defines what a direct threat to human life is - if you do not immediately use lethal force you will die. Echo_Four_Bravo already outlined it above, I am not going to repeat what was already said.
Camper51
10-10-06, 02:06 PM
I disagree camper. The "keep" part of the second amendment is about owning a weapon. Bearing arms would be to carry them or to have them on your person.
I also believe the amendment says that these rights are in regards to a militia IE:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
and if put into the context of the time, bearing arms did NOT mean carrying around some pistol for protection, or carrying around your deer/squirrel gun. It meant to be in the militia. (read 2nd amendment in Wikipedia).
I read this portion of the amendment to mean that we are allowed to keep arms for the purpose of joining the militia, which cannot be denied. ( I feel it should mean that ANYONE can join any branch of the military, regardless of impairment because not every job is humping hills and shooting the enemy)
Interpretation has changed over the years and it is now generally accepted that it means you have the right to own firearms. I have no problems with the right to own firearms, however I do believe they and their use should be regulated to some degree and I do not believe that "people killer" weapons such as the TEC 9, MAC 10, etc should be owned by anyone. I also don't think that fully automatic weapons should be owned by anyone. Weapons used for hunting, target shooting and self protection I have no problems with. These beliefs of mine are why I have chosen to never join the NRA.
I also believe the amendment says that these rights are in regards to a militia IE:
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
and if put into the context of the time, bearing arms did NOT mean carrying around some pistol for protection, or carrying around your deer/squirrel gun. It meant to be in the militia. (read 2nd amendment in Wikipedia).
I read this portion of the amendment to mean that we are allowed to keep arms for the purpose of joining the militia, which cannot be denied. ( I feel it should mean that ANYONE can join any branch of the military, regardless of impairment because not every job is humping hills and shooting the enemy)
Interpretation has changed over the years and it is now generally accepted that it means you have the right to own firearms. I have no problems with the right to own firearms, however I do believe they and their use should be regulated to some degree and I do not believe that "people killer" weapons such as the TEC 9, MAC 10, etc should be owned by anyone. I also don't think that fully automatic weapons should be owned by anyone. Weapons used for hunting, target shooting and self protection I have no problems with. These beliefs of mine are why I have chosen to never join the NRA.
This is where the confusion comes into play. Because it says milita, people assume our founding fathers were referring to something along the lines of the National Guard, however we are all members of our states militia by default. Any able bodied man who is of legal age for military service is automatically a member of their particular states militia.
Automatic weapons in this country are really owned by only two groups of people - wealthy collectors or criminals who obtained them illegally. Most automatic weapons cost several thousand dollars which are out of reach for most people in this country not to mention the class III and NFA hoops you must jump through, even your typical run of the mill military surplus M16A1 that is transferrable will run you in the neighborhood of upwards of $15,000. The prices are so astronimical that regardless of any and all laws, very few people in this country are able to afford them. The NRA doesn't have any campaigns in regards to NFA and automatic weapons, they're more oriented to the hunter and self defense crowd.
Echo_Four_Bravo
10-10-06, 02:55 PM
The militia was nothing more than your average person. We didn't have a National Guard force or anything else. The idea behind the second amendment was to ensure that the people would have weapons to prevent the government from taking away the basic rights of a person.
Your arguments against owning fully automatic weapons are valid. I happen to disagree, simply because a criminal can get a full auto weapon without problem. They break the law, so having the law doesn't keep them from owning one. That said, I've never heard of the NRA trying to say that you should be able to own a machine gun. They are simply trying to keep from following other developed nations into the folly of getting rid of our weapons. Painting them as a group that seeks to put maching guns or machine pistols into the hands of people serves no purpose other than to help the gun grabbers of the world.
Kildars
10-10-06, 03:55 PM
Then act like it.
You're sitting here reciting typical arguments from the anti-gun Brady Bunch and claim to be pro-gun, it doesn't work that way.
I'm pro-gun, not pro-stupidity, you tried to tell me that being able to carry a gun is a right in florida when it's not. I was just saying that Florida has very loose gun laws as compared to the rest of the country (at least atm, until they follow suit.)
There are idiotic ways people use guns, and there are smart ways. Being pro-gun doesn't necessarily mean you defend everything about guns, all the time.
Kildars
10-10-06, 03:58 PM
This is where the confusion comes into play. Because it says milita, people assume our founding fathers were referring to something along the lines of the National Guard, however we are all members of our states militia by default. Any able bodied man who is of legal age for military service is automatically a member of their particular states militia.
Automatic weapons in this country are really owned by only two groups of people - wealthy collectors or criminals who obtained them illegally. Most automatic weapons cost several thousand dollars which are out of reach for most people in this country not to mention the class III and NFA hoops you must jump through, even your typical run of the mill military surplus M16A1 that is transferrable will run you in the neighborhood of upwards of $15,000. The prices are so astronimical that regardless of any and all laws, very few people in this country are able to afford them. The NRA doesn't have any campaigns in regards to NFA and automatic weapons, they're more oriented to the hunter and self defense crowd.
Sure, it says Militia and technically we're a militia, but it also says a "well regulated" militia which I would assume the general population of civilians is not a well regulated militia, notice what happens when an incedent happens. Most people duck, or run.
I'm pro-gun, not pro-stupidity, you tried to tell me that being able to carry a gun is a right in florida when it's not. I was just saying that Florida has very loose gun laws as compared to the rest of the country (at least atm, until they follow suit.)
There are idiotic ways people use guns, and there are smart ways. Being pro-gun doesn't necessarily mean you defend everything about guns, all the time.
It is most definitely a right in Florida according to our state constitution and attorney general. If you disagree, feel free to write him a letter.
Second, you say we have loose gun laws when compared to the rest of the country until we "follow suit." You couldn't be any farther from the truth. If anything, states all across the nation are follow suit of what we have done in Florida. We were the first state to adopt a stand your ground and castle doctine law and it has been an overwhelming success. The result? More than 30 states have since passed their own stand your ground and castle doctine laws or they're in the process of doing so.
In light of all these recent school shootings, the sheep all across the nation are finally realizing that more gun control is NOT the answer. You sit here talking about how we have "loose gun control" as if it's some sort of bad thing - get a clue.
Sure, it says Militia and technically we're a militia, but it also says a "well regulated" militia which I would assume the general population of civilians is not a well regulated militia, notice what happens when an incedent happens. Most people duck, or run.
Wrong again, and the United States Supreme Court disagree's with you.
http://www.saf.org/LawReviews/FinkelmanChicago.htm
http://www.lectlaw.com/files/gun01.htm
And then on top of this there are countless quotes from our founding fathers on what they intended when they wrote the 2nd Amendment. Let's use this one from Thomas Jefferson as an example:
"Every able-bodied freeman, between the ages of 16 and 50 is enrolled in the militia. In every county is a county lieutenant, who commands the whole militia of his county. The governor is the head of the military, as well as the civil power. The law requires every militia-man to provide himself with the arms usual in the regular service."
-Thomas Jefferson, 1781, Notes on the State of Virginia, Query IX
When you have direct quotes like this from our founding fathers, why on earth is there any question as to the original intent of what they meant in the 2nd Amendment?
You're not pro-gun. Sitting here trying to argue against the 2nd Amendment? You can claim to be whatever you want, but you are most certainly not pro-gun. The 2nd Amendment ensures that all the others are able to exist, and for people to want to severely restrict and in many cases abolish it, is disgusting.
Kildars
10-10-06, 04:38 PM
It is most definitely a right in Florida according to our state constitution and attorney general. If you disagree, feel free to write him a letter.
A right is something everyone has regardless of age, mental ability, sex, age, criminal record.
A privilege is something that is granted to you by a higher power, i.e. getting a weapons permit is granted to you by your states government. I'm sorry that you can not understand two very simple concepts in a document you're signing up to defend.
Second, you say we have loose gun laws when compared to the rest of the country until we "follow suit." You couldn't be any farther from the truth. If anything, states all across the nation are follow suit of what we have done in Florida. We were the first state to adopt a stand your ground and castle doctine law and it has been an overwhelming success. The result? More than 30 states have since passed their own stand your ground and castle doctine laws or they're in the process of doing so.
In light of all these recent school shootings, the sheep all across the nation are finally realizing that more gun control is NOT the answer. You sit here talking about how we have "loose gun control" as if it's some sort of bad thing - get a clue.
You read it wrong, I said that florida has loose laws compared to the other states in the United States until the other states follow through.
Kildars
10-10-06, 04:43 PM
And then on top of this there are countless quotes from our founding fathers on what they intended when they wrote the 2nd Amendment. Let's use this one from Thomas Jefferson as an example:
"Every able-bodied freeman, between the ages of 16 and 50 is enrolled in the militia. In every county is a county lieutenant, who commands the whole militia of his county. The governor is the head of the military, as well as the civil power. The law requires every militia-man to provide himself with the arms usual in the regular service."
-Thomas Jefferson, 1781, Notes on the State of Virginia, Query IX
I did not say that a person is not a militia, I just said the statement of a "well regulated militia" doesn't pertain to civilians down the street. While I think that everyone should be able to carry concealed weapons as outlined in the 2nd amendment, I don't think you can refer to it as a right when you have to get a "permit" to carry a gun.
Think about this, before the civil war there were no permits, you could carry a gun, keep one in your home, on your farm anywhere you wanted and you could not get arrested for this.
Now we have permits, why? Why should I have to get "certified" in a way to own a pistol, why do I have be twenty one years of age to legally be able to conceal a pistol but only have to be eighteen to get extensive training in the Marine Corps and go shoot rifles in other countries, you can cite the 2nd amendment quotes all you want but there are inconsistencies in the constitution, especially when people mistake getting a gun permit as a right as you have. I think you should get a clue.
You're not pro-gun. Sitting here trying to argue against the 2nd Amendment? You can claim to be whatever you want, but you are most certainly not pro-gun. The 2nd Amendment ensures that all the others are able to exist, and for people to want to severely restrict and in many cases abolish it, is disgusting.
I'm arguing FOR the second amendment, can you not read? I'm saying that we shouldn't HAVE to get permits to be able to own and carry guns. You think that us having to get a permit, regardless of whether it is easy to get or not, is a right. You're wrong.
KILDARS
ACCORD
WHY ARE YOU ARGUING? YOU'RE ON THE SAME SIDE!
Geez!!!
I tried nipping it in the bud but I guess it was harder than I thought.
A right is something everyone has regardless of age, mental ability, sex, age, criminal record.
A privilege is something that is granted to you by a higher power, i.e. getting a weapons permit is granted to you by your states government. I'm sorry that you can not understand two very simple concepts in a document you're signing up to defend.
I'm sorry, but you're wrong again. Criminals and children do not have the right to vote, so does that mean voting is not a right? Of course not. You don't know what you're talking about, how can you make the argument of what a right is and try and compare it to a priviledge, when you clearly do not even know the actual definitions of both even are?
"Right (n): a power, privilege, or condition of existence to which one has a natural claim of enjoyment or possession <the right of liberty> <that all men…are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights —Declaration of Independence> —see also NATURAL RIGHT b : a power, privilege, immunity, or capacity the enjoyment of which is secured to a person by law"
You will not win this argument.
KILDARS
ACCORD
WHY ARE YOU ARGUING? YOU'RE ON THE SAME SIDE!
Geez!!!
I tried nipping it in the bud but I guess it was harder than I thought.
We're arguing because it's fun. It may seem like we're getting ****ed at each other, but we're not - it's healthy debate and I enjoy it.
Adam1988
10-10-06, 05:03 PM
That's awesome. I wish I could get off of these charges for being a poolee, but it doesn't look like things are going that way!
Kildars
10-10-06, 05:11 PM
I'm sorry, but you're wrong again. Criminals and children do not have the right to vote, so does that mean voting is not a right? Of course not. You don't know what you're talking about, how can you make the argument of what a right is and try and compare it to a priviledge, when you clearly do not even know the actual definitions of both even are?
Voting is also a privilege granted to you by your government at the age of 18, if you become a felon you have that privilege revoked. If voting was a right you would be able to do it whenever you were smart enough to understand what the canidates were saying. When I was 16 I had enough knowledge about the government and laws that I could of known not to vote for bush ;), age is just a number. Your brain power has endless bounds and does not require a certain age in your life to mature to it's full content.
Examples of privileges are: Drivers license, Getting a concealed weapons permit, being able to travely freely between states, voting...
Notice how the government gives you the privilege of these luxuries -- but if you break rules they will be removed that is not a right, I'm sorry you think that they are, that's a misconception by the American People. I took a constitution class in college, you're wrong. Despite whatever the Media/Government has fashioned you to think. They have taken some of the things we have called rights, and turned them into privileges.
Examples of rights are: Innocent until provent guilty, being able to choose whether or not you enlist in the military. Choosing to protest or support any issues publically, being able to choose any religion and many others, the right to your own body being able to walk around freely, swing your arms in the air.
"Right (n): a power, privilege, or condition of existence to which one has a natural claim of enjoyment or possession <the right="" of="" liberty=""> <that all="" men…are="" endowed="" by="" their="" creator="" with="" certain="" unalienable="" rights="" —declaration="" of="" independence=""> —see also NATURAL RIGHT b : a power, privilege, immunity, or capacity the enjoyment of which is secured to a person by law"
</that></the> Privilege –a right, immunity, or benefit enjoyed only by a person beyond the advantages of most: the privileges of the very rich;
a special right, immunity, or exemption granted to persons in authority or office to free them from certain obligations or liabilities: the privilege of a senator to speak in Congress without danger of a libel suit.<o></o>
a grant to an individual, corporation, etc., of a special right or immunity, under certain conditions.<the right="" of="" liberty=""><that all="" men…are="" endowed="" by="" their="" creator="" with="" certain="" unalienable="" rights="" —declaration="" of="" independence="">
</that></the><table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td class="dn" valign="top">
</td><td valign="top"></td></tr></tbody></table>Notice it says under certain conditions, rights don't have conditions, when conditions are put on rights they become privileges.
You will not win this argument.
Ok, keep thinkin that ;). The way you win an argument is by making me speechless or changing my mind, so until you can do that keep trying!
Camper51
10-10-06, 05:58 PM
I'm sorry, but you're wrong again. Criminals and children do not have the right to vote, so does that mean voting is not a right? Of course not. You don't know what you're talking about, how can you make the argument of what a right is and try and compare it to a priviledge, when you clearly do not even know the actual definitions of both even are?
"Right (n): a power, privilege, or condition of existence to which one has a natural claim of enjoyment or possession <THE liberty of right><THAT of Independence —Declaration rights unalienable certain with Creator their by endowed men…are all>—see also NATURAL RIGHT b : a power, privilege, immunity, or capacity the enjoyment of which is secured to a person by law"
You will not win this argument.
You lose again, Accord. Voting is a priviledge NOT a right. Only US citizens have the priviledge of voting. Felons lose that priviledge, and children are not accorded it until they come of age (18). you do NOT have a natural right to vote because if you commit a felony you lose that right, or if you are not a US citizen you do not have that right, ergo it is a priviledge to vote. Living in the US is not a right unless you are born here. The law gives others the priviledge of living here, and in some cases by way of naturalization, the right...
You lose again, Accord. Voting is a priviledge NOT a right. Only US citizens have the priviledge of voting. Felons lose that priviledge, and children are not accorded it until they come of age (18). you do NOT have a natural right to vote because if you commit a felony you lose that right, or if you are not a US citizen you do not have that right, ergo it is a priviledge to vote. Living in the US is not a right unless you are born here. The law gives others the priviledge of living here, and in some cases by way of naturalization, the right...
The 15th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States explcitly states "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied."
How can you tell me it's not a right when it says so right there in the Constitution? US citizens have the right to vote which is also a priviledge, and by definition a priviledge can be and in this particular case is, a right. This is irrefutible.
The right to vote, the right to a speedy trial, the right to bear arms, the right to freedom of the press, etc. are all rights which have been granted to us by the Constitution. They are not god given rights and they are not unalienable rights like "you have the right to breathe," but they are still rights.
Kildars
10-10-06, 07:25 PM
The 15th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States explcitly states "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied."
How can you tell me it's not a right when it says so right there in the Constitution? US citizens have the right to vote which is also a priviledge, and by definition a priviledge can be and in this particular case is, a right. This is irrefutible.
Just because it says it does not mean it is followed, it is denied to people. It's denied to citizens under 18, even by a day before the elections, felons, and non citizens. It's not a right, it's a privelage.
The right to vote, the right to a speedy trial, the right to bear arms, the right to freedom of the press, etc. are all rights which have been granted to us by the Constitution. They are not god given rights and they are not unalienable rights like "you have the right to breathe," but they are still rights.
Notice how you said granted? How can you be GRANTED a right? You're GRANTED a privilege, granted means to be given the ability to do. If it was a right no one would have the power to give or take it away from you.
Why didn't you respond to my other post?
Just because it says it does not mean it is followed, it is denied to people. It's denied to citizens under 18, even by a day before the elections, felons, and non citizens. It's not a right, it's a privelage.
Notice how you said granted? How can you be GRANTED a right? You're GRANTED a privilege, granted means to be given the ability to do. If it was a right no one would have the power to give or take it away from you.
Why didn't you respond to my other post?
I am done with this. You clearly have no grasp over the english language. Open up a dictionary and start reading the definitions of these words. Rights, priviledges, unalienable, et. al.
These rights have been granted to us in the constitution, they are rights and who are you to say otherwise? Learn what semantics are, You do not even so much as understand the difference between a right and a priviledge, you do not not even realize the simple fact that a priviledge can also be a right, and in this case, it is. According to you, everything is a priviledge unless it's breathing, eating, drinking, and sleeping. The RIGHT to vote is not an unalienable god given right, but it is a RIGHT that American citizens are priviledged to have. And voting is just one of the dozens of examples.
Everything i'm saying here cannot be argued and is absolutely, entirely, 100% irrefutible and if you were in the least bit educated on the subject you would realize this. Everything i'm saying can easily be confirmed by simply opening a dictionary, but you continue to carry on with this nonsense. Look it up before you make another post here. Have you even read the Constitution or the words of our founding fathers?
When you educate yourself on the topic, I will be glad to continue this debate, but I know that when you do infact educate yourself on this and actually open up a dictionary you'll quickly and very clearly see that you were wrong. It is impossible to carry on a debate with someone who does not understand the subject matter that is even being debated.
Good day.
Kildars
10-10-06, 07:51 PM
I am done with this. You clearly have no grasp over the english language. Open up a dictionary and start reading the definitions of these words. Rights, priviledges, unalienable, et. al.
These rights have been granted to us in the constitution, they are rights and who are you to say otherwise? Learn what semantics are, You do not even so much as understand the difference between a right and a priviledge, you do not not even realize the simple fact that a priviledge can also be a right, and in this case, it is. According to you, everything is a priviledge unless it's breathing, eating, drinking, and sleeping. The RIGHT to vote is not an unalienable god given right, but it is a RIGHT that American citizens are priviledged to have. And voting is just one of the dozens of examples.
Everything i'm saying here cannot be argued and is absolutely, entirely, 100% irrefutible and if you were in the least bit educated on the subject you would realize this. Everything i'm saying can easily be confirmed by simply opening a dictionary, but you continue to carry on with this nonsense. Look it up before you make another post here. Have you even read the Constitution or the words of our founding fathers?
When you educate yourself on the topic, I will be glad to continue this debate, but I know that when you do infact educate yourself on this and actually open up a dictionary you'll quickly and very clearly see that you were wrong. It is impossible to carry on a debate with someone who does not understand the subject matter that is even being debated.
Good day.
I guess insulting people who try to give you some common sense about what are rights and what are not rights you decide to insult them and call them uneducated. Is this what you do when you lose? I am surprised by this reaction by you -- I figured your maturity level was beyond personal insults especially with your age which is higher than the average person in the poolee hall on this board.
You have blind faith in your government, which is good in some cases but bad in others. It's good in you trust what they say and that they're looking out for you -- but it's bad when you believe that requiring people to get CWP and being able to take away your proclaimed "right" to vote yet it continues to still be a "right."
I think YOU are the one who needs to educate yourself, I posted the defenition of a priviledge as it pertains to an individual and I bolded the parts that pertained to this argument. Even in your own quoted text you stated that "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied."
Yet you openly say that they're removing that "Right" for criminals and people under the age of 18, even by a day. How can a "right" be taken away by your government? It's because it's a PRIVILEDGE -- A special right to be excersized with CERTAIN CONDITIONS like I posted.
When you can accept the fact that not everything in the constitution is law, and that the constitution is being interpretted and changed by the government but you're lead to believing they're following what you are owed as an American citizen, then you can have this debate. You should at least STUDY the document that you are dedicating and risking your life to protect, I know I have. I took a "History and Reasoning of the United States Constitution" in college while I was trying to enlist. It taught me a lot.
I wish that this argument would not have ended with such immaturity and insults, it was entertaining to debate this point because people at my age usually can't debate in detail because they don't care enough, maybe another time.
yellowwing
10-10-06, 07:53 PM
Enough both of you, you slipped in splitting hairs and insults. No more. Civics class is canceled for the night.
Kildars
10-10-06, 07:59 PM
Enough both of you, you slipped in splitting hairs and insults. No more. Civics class is canceled for the night.
Rodger that Corporal.
Enough both of you, you slipped in splitting hairs and insults. No more. Civics class is canceled for the night.
Yes sir.
Echo_Four_Bravo
10-11-06, 12:48 AM
Dangit, I hate that this got cut off before I got a chance to get in on the argument about whether you have a right to vote or not. Oh well, another time or place I suppose. I was thinking about pulling out a 50 page paper I wrote on that very subject!
Im sorry but honestly... who cares. You have to get a permit .. Get over it.
Kildars
10-11-06, 01:38 PM
Im sorry but honestly... who cares. You have to get a permit .. Get over it.
This is the kind of mentality that allows the government to do this, oh this is just a minor thing who cares..
When does it start to matter, by then it's usually too late ;). Just think about that.
Echo_Four_Bravo
10-11-06, 01:59 PM
Kildars, you were asked to stop on this thread. If you must continue take it to a forum that caters to this type of talk of to PM off the board.
I had an Italian sub today...by far the best tasting sub on the planet. Ever.
jinelson
10-11-06, 02:54 PM
Kildars this is your final warning - KNOCK IT OFF NOW!