Deanimator
Member
Have you asked Diane Feinstein and Carl Rowan about that?How is he anti-gun when he owns one?
Have you asked Diane Feinstein and Carl Rowan about that?How is he anti-gun when he owns one?
In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community ... with the primary intent of provoking other users into a desired emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.
Why did he do that? Did you give him some reason to believe that the gun was stolen?and my gun for being stolen!?
So, did Feinstein and Rowan not own guns?No I'm asking ChaoSS to explain his remark about PandaBear being anti-gun when he owns one.
And if he can't do that without violating the law or somebody's rights, it needs to be a one way trip.that officer has every right to go home at night after his shift.
I live in Texas(must inform state), and have been disarmed in every legally armed encounter with officers(4by my count).
GC §411.207. AUTHORITY OF PEACE OFFICER TO DISARM. A peace officer who is acting in the lawful discharge of the officer's offi- cial duties may disarm a license holder at any time the officer reasonably believes it is necessary for the protection of the license holder, officer, or another individual. The peace officer shall return the handgun to the license holder before discharging the license holder from the scene if the officer determines that the license holder is not a threat to the officer, license holder, or another individual and if the license holder has not violated any provision of this subchapter or committed any other violation that results in the arrest of the license holder.
He ran the numbers, and when finised, he returned with my ticket
You're kidding, right?No I'm asking ChaoSS to explain his remark about PandaBear being anti-gun when he owns one.
I keep having to clarify my posts for you. My wife teaches reading comp; if you PM me, I'm sure I can send some links that will help. [Do you have any relatives that teach grammar, sentence construction and punctuation?]
BlkHawk73 said:My rights, my rights, my rights... Scream it all you want, but that officer has every right to go home at night after his shift. he doesn't know you from a hole in the ground and as said, many officers have been killed on the traffic stop.
Viewpoint 3: The 2nd Amendment doesn't "GIVE" anything. It recognizes and protects a preexisting right.Viewpoint 1: The 2nd amendment gives me the right to have my gun on me at all times.
Viewpoint 2: The 2nd amendment gives me the right to have my gun, with limitations.
Back to the SOP, of firearm on the roof, magazine out, round next to magazine. Same "don't load it until we leave" speech, but no worse for wear besides scaring my female friend.
I live in Texas(must inform state), and have been disarmed in every legally armed encounter with officers(4by my count).
Situation 1. I had just received my TXCHL when I was driving home and was pulled over for a simple traffic violation(rolling stop or running a yellow light). I was carrying a since long gone, Taurus PT-145 in holster at 3:30 on my hip, and it was around 9:00pm. Upon my informing, the officer had me leave my vehicle, place my hands on the top of my car, and disarmed me. After running my information( the basics, and my gun for being stolen!?), I was let off with a warning. The officer was polite as he placed my slide-locked firearm, the magazine, and the previously chambered round, on the roof of my car, and simply asked" Please don't load it until I leave". So I did just that. After he was on his way I reloaded the round manually to the chamber, returned the magazine to it's home , reholstered, and went about my merry way, thinking "I can't believe I just loaded a gun on the bussiest street in the little town. Beside the embarresed feeling of having my hands on he car as people drove by, I think it went ok.
What is special about schools? Or government buildings, or bars or any other restriction. I never understood that.Is that there are two diverging views on what should have happened.
Viewpoint 1: The 2nd amendment gives me the right to have my gun on me at all times.
Viewpoint 2: The 2nd amendment gives me the right to have my gun, with limitations.
I am personally somewhere in the middle. I don't think that the right exists without limitation, because I do think there is a legitimate reason to regulate some aspects of gun ownership (i.e. should convicted felons be allowed to own guns?) but I also sense that anti gunners will use anything less than a concrete ruling that the 2nd amendment stands without limitations, to continue to attack it.
As for some folks calling others hippies, and others responding with "troll", its obvious that the diverging political viewpoints are being attacked by simple name calling, which is not High Road in my book. I enjoy this forum, as a reader mostly, since I find much of what is said to be of my political viewpoint, but we shouldn't squelch diverging (narrow) viewpoints. The fella from Nevada is a GUN OWNER, calling him "anti-gun" or implying it simply doesn't reconcile with common sense.
We all fundamentally believe in the right to keep and bear arms, but like other rights of the bill of rights, there are clearly some limitations and it's obvious to me that the supreme court is going to rule in favor of the 2nd amendment, but still providing clarity for limitations of ownership (felons), location (schools) etc..
Texasrifleman:
Oh, I indeed care, and it may be illegal, but also know when to pick my fights. It is not too wise to argue the law with an officer that has just disarmed me. And probable cause, as I have found out, is whatever the officer wants it to be at the time sadly. If they want to searh you, they will find a "reason". I feel the disarming I stops works the same way, until we have it codified more clearly(cough...4th Ammendment...cough... cough!), that is.
Still 2 Many Choices!?
It is not too wise to argue the law with an officer that has just disarmed me.
What is special about schools?