Slashdot Mirror


Stormtrooper Arrested

Kexel writes: Nope, not an April Fools joke. A forty-year-old man in Massachusetts bought a Stormtrooper outfit, and then walked through a neighborhood near a school to show his friends. The principal saw his fake blaster and called 911. The man was then arrested and charged with disturbing a school and loitering. A police spokesman said the man "used bad judgment." I guess this shows you what not to do when geeking out on Star Wars.

535 comments

  1. Lynn, Lynn, the city of sin... by jpellino · · Score: 5, Funny

    Stormtroopers don't come out the way they went in.

    --
    "Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
    1. Re:Lynn, Lynn, the city of sin... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trot trot to Boston, trot trot to Lynn.

      That's where it ends now, I guess. Yours is better. :)

    2. Re: Lynn, Lynn, the city of sin... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At first reading I thought this was crap. However, if the principal had two buns in her hair and at least one of the cops had a plastic light saber I think I'm ok with it

  2. Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Maybe schools should require some kind of basic course to familiarize kids with real guns, so they don't grow up into these principals who can't tell the difference.

    1. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That kind of common sense didn't stop them with a pop tart. What makes you think they care any different when it's a mock up made of plastic?

    2. Re:Fear of guns by damn_registrars · · Score: 0

      Maybe schools should require some kind of basic course to familiarize kids with real guns, so they don't grow up into these principals who can't tell the difference.

      How far away was the guy in the costume from the principal's office? I'm not familiar with that school district but most public schools I attended were set back quite a ways from the road and sidewalk. If the blaster was black plastic, would you be able to distinguish it from a real gun from 100 feet away?

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    3. Re:Fear of guns by sexconker · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Contrasting it against a white stormtrooper outfit, yes, even if I was some dumbass who didn't know what a stormtrooper was.

    4. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Maybe schools should require some kind of basic course to familiarize kids with real guns, so they don't grow up into these principals who can't tell the difference.

      The Principal exhibited the ID10T diagnostic code.

    5. Re:Fear of guns by dcbrianw · · Score: 0

      If we taught gun safety in every school, that would stem gun violence far more than any background check or ban ever could.

    6. Re:Fear of guns by clonehappy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      would you be able to distinguish it from a real gun from 100 feet away?

      No, and does it even fucking matter? Guns aren't illegal.

      This guy's a moron, and maybe it's OK that they ran him in just to make sure he wasn't up to no good, but fuck pressing charges. And the principal? A pussy who has no business being in charge of anyone, let alone our children. And we wonder why kids are growing up so soft...look at these "role models" they see in schools! Nanny-state limp-wrists who soil themselves at the sight of a plastic gun.

    7. Re:Fear of guns by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Let's assume for a moment that the principal spent the last 35ish years off this planet and hence does not know what a Stormtrooper is...

      What does he see? A guy in a plastic suit. Why would anyone who has anything indecent in mind put himself into gear that impacts his ability to move and see negatively?

      The principal's behaviour is irrational at best. Insane at worst.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    8. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      So which was it? Was he close enough to the school that special rules should apply, or far enough away that you can't identify a toy?

    9. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Getting an education does not fix fear of irrational things. Much like the principal who flipped out because of the sticker she was required to put on the door to her school.

      In fact in this case a 'stormtrooper' gun *WILL* look like a real gun as in the movies they were real guns or model kits based on real guns with extra bits glued on. If you dig on the image you can see a picture of one. I could totally see rocking into a gun store and buying something that looked exactly like that. So in this case the only way to know if it is real or not is to walk up and pick the thing up.

      What is the difference between a tactical assault riffle and hunting riffle? Nothing except the ornamental bits. One 'looks' intimidating the other looks ornamental.

      What you are seeing is an over reaction because of fear of the unknown. People pretending to be 'educated' because they watched MSNBC. Then deciding everything needs a swat team response because it involved a gun. The swat teams used to be the last guys you called in. Now they are the first. Instead of sending a black and white by and cruising up to the dude and ask what is going on. Then giving him a lecture on what is going on and why what he is doing is stupid. Instead they went into lock down and started arresting people. Educating them on guns will not fix that.

      This is a deeper issue.

    10. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Since the early 90s, toy guns sold in the US have been required by law to have an orange tip, to clearly indicate that it is not a real weapon, for a mix of safety and "safety" (political) reasons. If this man's gun did not have such a tip, then it was either very old (which I guess is possible for a storm trooper gun...) or it was a prop gun / replica. A prop blaster rifle, from a distance, would look similar enough to a real assault rifle that I can understand why the principle would be concerned (especially if his experience with either and/or both is lacking).

      Charging the man with a crime is an entirely different matter. I can't imagine a man in storm trooper garb with a prop gun would be facing criminal violations if he did that on Halloween, and AFAIK there's nothing in the law which says the other 364 days are any different. I chalk this up to a principle buying in to decades of media fear-mongering, cops inventing laws via intimidation/plea-bargaining, and a general lack of common sense from everyone involved.

    11. Re:Fear of guns by fizzer06 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Did most of us automatically assume the principal is a man?

    12. Re:Fear of guns by Altus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't think open carry is allowed in mass. All permits for handguns atleast are concealed carry as I understand it. So a man carrying a pistol shaped gun openly could be arrested.

      That doesn't change the fact that this is incredibly stupid. A toy is a toy and a storm trooper outfit should be a dead give away. Even if the principal fucked this up the police should have had more sense

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    13. Re:Fear of guns by geekmux · · Score: 1

      Maybe schools should require some kind of basic course to familiarize kids with real guns, so they don't grow up into these principals who can't tell the difference.

      I'm sorry, did you just suggest that a highly trained adult be allowed to make a judgement call?

      How dare you. You should know better. We have zero tolerance laws for this very reason, to remove that "risk".

      (Try and remember how our fucked-up legal system would view it. Then this insanity makes perfect sense.)

    14. Re:Fear of guns by shmlco · · Score: 1

      "Why would anyone who has anything indecent in mind put himself into gear that impacts his ability to move and see negatively?"

      You mean, like a helmet and body armor? I don't know, why not ask James Holmes?

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    15. Re:Fear of guns by Simulant · · Score: 1

      Sure! There are no rational reasons to fear guns. We just need LOVE guns more.

    16. Re:Fear of guns by clonehappy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Admittedly, I did. I just Googled the school and saw a picture of the principal. It makes more sense now. But rest assured, nanny-statists come in all sexes, races, colors, and creeds.

    17. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      open carry is allowed everywhere. gun laws are unconstitutional and should not be obeyed.

    18. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well the principle didn't arrest the guy. So how about we require a basic course to familiarize police with what a threat is, so they don't go around arresting harmless civilians for no reason.

    19. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      open carry is allowed everywhere. gun laws are unconstitutional and should not be obeyed.

      That's very nice. Don't hit your head as you get in the back of the car, sir.

    20. Re:Fear of guns by shmlco · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "What is the difference between a tactical assault riffle and hunting riffle? Nothing except the ornamental bits."

      Ah. You mean the equipment mounting rails, carrying handle, recoil buffer, flash suppressor, tripod mounts, and high-impact plastic barrel shrouds and butts are just ornamental and serve no other purpose? Wow. Who knew?

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    21. Re:Fear of guns by captnjohnny1618 · · Score: 1

      The six sentence "article" may leave out a few details about how long this guy was really hanging out near the school. I think the gun angle might be a little intentionally inflammatory considering the source (fox news).

      I think it's reasonable to call the cops to come by and check it out considering that the guy "walking through the neighborhood" was in one spot long enough for not only the principle to notice him, but for the cops to get the call, dispatch someone, and then have that cop arrive on scene. It also kinda looks like he posed for a picture outside of the school too... sounds like he might've been hanging out for a little while.

      Still though, didn't the school have an SRO (or employee for that matter) who could have stepped outside and asked the guy to move along?

    22. Re:Fear of guns by Minwee · · Score: 2

      We just need [to] LOVE guns more.

      But not in public, and certainly not on school grounds. That will definitely get you arrested.

    23. Re:Fear of guns by shmlco · · Score: 1

      Or any member of a SWAT team, for that matter.

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    24. Re:Fear of guns by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      What is the difference between a tactical assault riffle and hunting riffle?

      Hmm, the selective fire capability? How about the really wimpy cartridge? Yeah, I suppose the cartridge is comparable to a good varmint rifle (if you squint real hard - most varmint guns in that general size range will be using a rather more powerful round than a .223)...

      Plus there's the crappy sights (yeah, you can do really good sights on an assault rifle, but they're generally iron sights, which does not compare favorably to the scope on your average hunting rifle).

      Note, for reference, that I'm comparing typical assault rifles to typical hunting rifles where I live. Which hunting rifles are as likely as not to be something similar to a scoped .30-06 bolt-action.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    25. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It's NOT okay that they ran him in.  Wearing a Stormtrooper costume, including a prop blaster is NOT a source of probable cause.  It's called False Imprisonment if they did it.  False Imprisonment's a fancy name for kidnapping by an LEO.  18 USC 242's interesting reading on this subject.

      <blockquote>"Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death." -- 18 USC 242, Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law</blockquote>

      Heh...does an act that, if it were properly enforced against, would result in the possible execution of the LEOs involved or a life sentence sound like it's "okay" to you?

    26. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh...she's also culpable and involved as an accessory to the violation of 18 USC 242 by the cops.  I wouldn't want to be her if they were enforcing the actual LAW like they're supposed to.

    27. Re:Fear of guns by lgw · · Score: 2

      Seriously, what a chain of fuckups. The school should have had the balls to check him out in person, ask him to move along. The cops should have seen he's no threat, and done the same. Unless the real story here is that all of that happened, and the guy was just off his meds (which I'm certainly not discounting as possible), this is exactly the sort of paranoid nonsense that heralds the end of a free nation.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    28. Re:Fear of guns by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 4, Interesting

      If the blaster was black plastic, would you be able to distinguish it from a real gun from 100 feet away?

      I was raised around guns, and also enjoyed the original Star Wars movies when they were popular. So I'm going to say, I could distinguish between a toy and a real gun from farther away than that, even with failing eyesight. Here's a stormtrooper gun vs. a 9 mm. Which is probably going to be fairly common. How blind would you have to be to not be able to see the difference? Even if you are not very familiar with guns, you'd have to be pretty obtuse to mistake these two. If you can't tell the difference between them, then you probably wouldn't be able to distinguish a gun from a stick.

      Probably the most similar weapon you'd see in the US would be a TEC-9 But even that would be pretty hard to confuse with a toy blaster. Quite honestly, someone would probably have a better chance of hitting you by throwing the toy at you than hitting you with a TEC-9, unless you are less then a few inches from the barrel, and it doesn't jam.

      Apparently the Stormtrooper blaster is based off of the Sterling L2A3 But the toy has a lot of extra crap attached to it, so you'd have to be pretty far to mistake the two. Plus, I can't say I've ever seen a Sterling L2A3 in the US. I doubt many people in the US, other than serious gun collectors, have ever seen one.

    29. Re:Fear of guns by redmid17 · · Score: 1

      What Holmes was wearing looked *nothing* liked a stormtrooper outfit. Nothing in this world does.

    30. Re:Fear of guns by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      most public schools I attended were set back quite a ways from the road and sidewalk

      In suburban areas, perhaps. In more urban areas, they can be right on the main road.

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    31. Re:Fear of guns by xfade551 · · Score: 1

      How far away was the guy in the costume from the principal's office? I'm not familiar with that school district but most public schools I attended were set back quite a ways from the road and sidewalk. If the blaster was black plastic, would you be able to distinguish it from a real gun from 100 feet away?

      Using Google Maps and Streetview, you can see that school is tiny, it's about 200ft of frontage along a commercial-zone 2-lane road (+parking shoulders and sidewalks) sandwiched between two very narrow residential streets. The play area between the school and sidewalk is maybe 15 feet wide. So, even if this guy was on the opposite side of the commercial street, I doubt the principle would have been any farther than 100ft away at close observation, and probably much closer than that.

      The news story photo definitely looks like it was taken in that generally vicinity, but I can't pin the location down, exactly.

    32. Re:Fear of guns by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      So, all I have to do is paint the front of a Beretta with orange paint and I am free and clear?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    33. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The police don't care. They get to arrest someone so they're happy. Anybody else find it ironic that a guy got dressed up in a storm trooper costume(soldier of a facist, police state) and then got arrested by soldiers of what many would argue has become a fascist police state?

      hahahaha.....

    34. Re:Fear of guns by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      The Principal exhibited the ID10T diagnostic code.

      Next time I play Star Wars RPG, that's my droid's name.

    35. Re:Fear of guns by war4peace · · Score: 1

      Don't mess with the ID10T gun.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D...

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    36. Re:Fear of guns by larryjoe · · Score: 5, Informative

      It may not be the principal's fault. Many schools have "zero tolerance" policies, which is basically PC-speak for common sense and reasoning is prohibited. In my daughter's school, using your fingers to form a pretend gun will get you in trouble.

    37. Re:Fear of guns by captnjohnny1618 · · Score: 1

      Yup. I agree 100%. Maybe they've had issues with this guy prior to now, or something. I'm trying to make sense of this somehow. The principle calling it in as a person with a gun is really the most insane part of this all, no getting away from that. If he was afraid of getting shot, just yell at the guy through a window... Sheesh.

    38. Re:Fear of guns by OhPlz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I must have missed the part where he had an actual firearm. No firearm, no grounds for arrest.

    39. Re: Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Thank you for being the only person with sense enough to say this. Even if the principal is a complete moron at what point did officers decide this guy dressed in a costume with a plastic gun was a threat? Really?

    40. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I assume you're part of an armed militia so, yep, carry whatever you want.

    41. Re:Fear of guns by jklovanc · · Score: 1

      The storm trooper blaster is actually a conversion of a Sterling L2A3.

    42. Re:Fear of guns by zieroh · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      open carry is allowed everywhere. gun laws are unconstitutional and should not be obeyed.

      Next time I see some dipshit open-carrying his rifle into Chipotle, I'm going to sneak up on him in the parking lot and tackle him. At best, I'll be a hero. At worst, I'll be wrong. But the guy carrying might learn a valuable lesson: even if open carry is illegal, it's still not socially acceptable. And I'll have plausible deniability either way.

      --
      People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
    43. Re:Fear of guns by zieroh · · Score: 0

      Grrr. Legal, not illegal.

      --
      People who say "sheeple" have about as much sophistication as an AOL user, and in fact are probably actually AOL users.
    44. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      open carry is allowed everywhere. gun laws are unconstitutional and should not be obeyed.

      Next time I see some dipshit open-carrying his rifle into Chipotle, I'm going to sneak up on him in the parking lot and tackle him. At best, I'll be a hero. At worst, I'll be wrong. But the guy carrying might learn a valuable lesson: even if open carry is illegal, it's still not socially acceptable. And I'll have plausible deniability either way.

      At worst, you'd get shot.

      On second thought, make that at best.

    45. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      open carry is allowed everywhere. gun laws are unconstitutional and should not be obeyed.

      You are correct sir!

    46. Re:Fear of guns by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      No, and does it even fucking matter? Guns aren't illegal.

      That's correct, by themselves guns are not illegal. But there are several otherwise-legal things that you are allowed to do which become illegal if you do them with a gun.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    47. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      for the most part, yes. The recoil buffer may be the other thing on your list that significantly effects the functionality of the device, much like getting the satellite stereo option really doesn't change how your car functions compare to a plain radio.

    48. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe schools should require some kind of basic course to familiarize kids with real guns, so they don't grow up into these principals who can't tell the difference.

      Storm trooper blasters look very much like real guns. Or more likely, if you the gun the blaster is designed to look like, you would probably think it was fake because it looks so much like a blaster you would assume it is a toy or a prop or something.

    49. Re:Fear of guns by amicusNYCL · · Score: 2

      It's a suit of armor and a helmet. Brand recognition doesn't matter if someone isn't familiar with the suit. They don't see a giant nerd walking down the street in plastic, they see someone apparently in full armor with a helmet and weapon. And besides, everyone knows that only Imperial stormtroopers are so precise.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    50. Re:Fear of guns by mr_mischief · · Score: 1

      .30-30 lever action Marlin is a popular choice where I grew up, but a semi-auto or bolt action in .300, .270 Winchester, .30-06, or .308 would be just as acceptable.

    51. Re: Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gun laws are unconstitutional? Including the one that talks about the right to bare armsarms?

      Listen, next time you feel like being your own lawyer, stop mouth breathing first.

    52. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Basically all of the open carries I've seen have had their rifle shouldered, you will not have plausible deniability.

    53. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indecent? No, he's just an attention whore, and that's disruptive to a school.

      The guy wasn't charged with having a gun. He was charged with disturbing a school and loitering in front of it. He dressed up as something that's going to grab kids attentions in a way that normal things wouldn't, and he hung around a school, apparently trying to get the kids' attention. That gets the kids off their lessons and paying attention to some attention whore outside.

      When the cops show up, he's still there, being an asshole. So, they charge him with loitering and disturbing a school, which would be the appropriate charges.

    54. Re:Fear of guns by spire3661 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You do realize that if he can justifiably shoot you for attacking him, right? Assault is more socially unacceptable than open carry.

      --
      Good-bye
    55. Re:Fear of guns by Noah+Haders · · Score: 5, Insightful

      its legal to open carry a TOY, even in Mass. Ffs the dude was dressed like a storm trooper.

    56. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The six sentence "article" may leave out a few details about how long this guy was really hanging out near the school. I think the gun angle might be a little intentionally inflammatory considering the source (fox news).

      I think it's reasonable to call the cops to come by and check it out considering that the guy "walking through the neighborhood" was in one spot long enough for not only the principle to notice him, but for the cops to get the call, dispatch someone, and then have that cop arrive on scene. It also kinda looks like he posed for a picture outside of the school too... sounds like he might've been hanging out for a little while.

      Still though, didn't the school have an SRO (or employee for that matter) who could have stepped outside and asked the guy to move along?

      Well they tried that but it turns out the SRO was the droid the trooper was looking for and things sort of escalated from there.

    57. Re:Fear of guns by OhPlz · · Score: 2

      Ahh, he was impersonating a cop then.. I'm sure MA can get him on that too.

    58. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      None of the effect the ballistic characteristics of the rifle in any way, shape, or form.
      Mounting rails? They let you mount a scope, light, or other accessory in a way that is easily removable. You can do the same with a non 'assault rifle', and many of them *also* have the same sorts of rails.
      Recoil Buffer? That's where the bolt goes during recoil so it can strip a new round out of the magazine. There are functionally identical parts on non 'assault rifles', and not every 'assault rifle' even has a recoil buffer tube.
      Flash suppressor? Common on all sorts of rifles. Has no effect on the function. (Most of what you probably thing are 'flash suppressors' are not.)
      Tripod mounts? Haven't seen many rifles with *tripods*. Bipods are much more common, and the 'mount' is just you repeating the *rails* mentioned earlier. (They also come designed to mount over a sling attachment, for rifles without any sort of rail.
      Barrel shrouds? They serve the exact same purpose as the part of a 'classic' wooden stock that is forward of the trigger. It keeps you from burning you hand on the barrel. (They get hot.) Again, no functional difference between the two styles of rifle.

      Of all the stuff you listed, literally *none* of them have anything to do with the function of the rifle. In fact, you could strip almost every last one of them off the rifle, and still shoot it exactly as if it were there. The only one that that isn't true of is the recoil buffer tube, but not every so-called 'assault rifle' has them.

    59. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Assault *rifles* have select fire capability, and are effectively illegal for normal people in the US to own due to a combination of the fact that any made after 1986 are completely illegal for private ownership, and the limited number made before then that are still functional resulting in extremely high prices ($10K and up).

      Assault *weapons* are semi-automatic rifles (just like hunting rifles), with certain *cosmetic* characteristics, including (but not limited to), detachable magazines, telescoping stocks, pistol-grips, and black plastic 'furniture', none of which effect the functional properties of the rifle.

    60. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Please don't do this. You've got good intentions if you're trying to effect what you believe is positive social change, and I don't want to see you get shot.

      But the problem anti-gun folk have with guns is the 'idea' that in a civilized society they somehow make people behave more violently.

      Solving that problem with violence will not produce the results you are looking for.

      It's like Nazi hate speech, anyone carrying their AR-15 into one of my local restaurants is regarded as a dipshit and not taken seriously. The difference is the hate speech is more likely to belong to a violent person than the gun.

      I want to continue to live in a place where both are legal because I've seen the alternatives. Not because I have any inclination toward either.

    61. Re:Fear of guns by IgnitusBoyone · · Score: 4, Insightful

      At worst you will get shot and he will have a very good case for "Afraid for his life". You might be better off if you tacle him while yelling "Shooter in the Parking lot lets detain him". Then all those individuals who conceal carry have an excuse to be "Afraid for their lives". Its all about making the legalize work for you!

      --
      Momento Mori
    62. Re:Fear of guns by Mister+Transistor · · Score: 1

      Which is REALLY funny, because they can't normally hit anything with their pew-pew lasers!

      --
      -- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
    63. Re:Fear of guns by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      So it should b e illegal to carry something that might be confused with a gun at a hundred feet?

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    64. Re:Fear of guns by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      No, and does it even fucking matter? Guns aren't illegal..

      I see your 2cd and raise you with they are in some areas like schools.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    65. Re:Fear of guns by randalware · · Score: 2

      So kids playing cowbys and indians or cops and robbers, should keep their "guns" concealled.

      There are way too many idiots teaching, voting, judging and in the police force !

      --
      This is my opinion based on what little I know and understand of the rumors and lies Thanks, Randal
    66. Re:Fear of guns by Penguinisto · · Score: 3, Informative

      Err, no, that's not how it works. At best, you'll get your ass kicked into the dirt. At worst, you'll end up dead with a largish ragged hole bored into your skull or chest.

      Dude is minding his own business - you have no rights at all to commit assault and battery on him, and the act gives your target free rein to respond however he thinks necessary... neither option will end well for you.

      But then, I've lost count of the number of keyboard warriors who claim online that they intend to do such a thing, so maybe common sense will hit you right before you decide to run and jump?

      --
      Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
    67. Re:Fear of guns by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Contrasting it against a white stormtrooper outfit, yes, even if I was some dumbass who didn't know what a stormtrooper was.

      The principal may have been a dumbass, but the real problem here is the cops. The principal was somewhat justified in reporting him, since she didn't know if the gun was real or not. But the cops knew it was a toy, and arrested him anyway. As soon as they realized it was not a real gun, and didn't even look like a real gun, they should have said "This is not the stormtrooper we are looking for. You can go about your business."

    68. Re:Fear of guns by Trachman · · Score: 1

      So a man carrying a pistol shaped gun openly could be arrested.

      Except, there is no law that forbids carrying plastic toy gun. Using that kind of logic, next time 5 year old boy impersonating a cowboy during Halloween may be arrested or killed by policemen for disobedience.

    69. Re:Fear of guns by CameronNeil · · Score: 4, Informative

      He wasn't arrested for carrying a toy gun. He was arrested and charged with disturbing a school and loitering. So my guess is he was walking around the school trying to show off... but show off to who? It's an elementary school...

    70. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this Mass so yeah they basically are.

    71. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you chose to escalate a situation instead of just talking to the guy? Like, "hey nice rifle. what is it?" - you know, a way to get a feel for the guy without being an asshole.

    72. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ask him to move along

      perhaps by waving one's hand and saying "this isn't the street you're looking for" ?

    73. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You might actually get the first shot off with an orange-tipped real gun. If the police are trained properly, it will make them second-guess the situation.

    74. Re:Fear of guns by anagama · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This guy's a moron, and maybe it's OK that they ran him in ...

      Really? What makes him a moron -- the fact that our society has become so ridiculously rigid you can't wear a costume outside? Are we all going to have assume the uniform of loafers, dockers, and a button down shirt?

      The morons here are the cops, the principal, and a society that has totally lost any contact with good sense. But then, this is Massachusetts -- home of the city that accepted a total eradication of the 4th Amendment (1) and lost it's shit over a blinky toy (2).

      (1) http://poorrichardsnews.com/po...
      (2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2...

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    75. Re:Fear of guns by shmlco · · Score: 1

      Didn't say that it did. Was simply replying to, "Why would anyone who has anything indecent in mind put himself into gear that impacts his ability to move and see negatively?"

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    76. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      open carry is allowed everywhere. gun laws are unconstitutional and should not be obeyed.

      Next time I see some dipshit open-carrying his rifle into Chipotle, I'm going to sneak up on him in the parking lot and tackle him. At best, I'll be a hero. At worst, I'll be wrong. But the guy carrying might learn a valuable lesson: even if open carry is illegal, it's still not socially acceptable. And I'll have plausible deniability either way.

      You better hope no one's not watching your unprovoked assault, Mr hero. Unlike the dipshit, you'd be a criminal.

    77. Re:Fear of guns by Qzukk · · Score: 1

      Those are metric stormtroopers

      --
      If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
    78. Re:Fear of guns by lgw · · Score: 1

      perhaps by waving one's hand and saying "this isn't the street you're looking for" ?

      Only a Texas Ranger could pull that one off.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    79. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is Massachusetts. I lived in that h*** hole for 10 years. In that place, the North Korea of North America, people are afraid of PICTURES of guns and some folks won't even say the word 'gun' - they spell out 'g-u-n'

      If the whole state collapsed into the Atlantic we'd be better off.

    80. Re:Fear of guns by DocSavage64109 · · Score: 1

      That's why you have to take him out with the initial attack. Guns are useless when the holder isn't immediately ready to use it.

    81. Re:Fear of guns by yodleboy · · Score: 1

      "Ah. You mean the equipment mounting rails, carrying handle, recoil buffer, flash suppressor, tripod mounts, and high-impact plastic barrel shrouds and butts are just ornamental and serve no other purpose? Wow. Who knew?"

      None of those items increases the lethality of the weapon. Get shot with a .223 bolt action or an AR15 and the results will be the same. Just because someone puts a bunch of doodads on their rifle it doesn't mean it suddenly becomes a super weapon.

    82. Re:Fear of guns by nanoflower · · Score: 1

      Kids playing cowboys and Indians or cops and robbers should hide their fingers as there has been at least one case of a kid getting in trouble for shooting another kid with a finger.

    83. Re:Fear of guns by thegarbz · · Score: 0

      A toy is a toy and a storm trooper outfit should be a dead give away.

      You just gave me an idea for my next school shooting.

      A gun is a gun. It doesn't matter if the man is dressed as a storm trooper. A gun should be treated with a bit of sensitivity, especially in a country where mass shooting of school students is so in vogue. Save the trooper outfit for your convention.

    84. Re:Fear of guns by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      It may not be the principal's fault. Many schools have "zero tolerance" policies, which is basically PC-speak for common sense and reasoning is prohibited. In my daughter's school, using your fingers to form a pretend gun will get you in trouble.

      The buck stops with the principle on what is enforced at a school. It is most definitely his "fault", but I do find it hard to lay blame in this case. Toy guns even carried by storm troopers look worrying real.

    85. Re:Fear of guns by The+Rizz · · Score: 1

      No, he was impersonating a military serviceman (equivalent of either army or national guard) - the Stormtroopers in Star Wars never operated like police. They operated as ground troops in an occupation.

    86. Re:Fear of guns by Copid · · Score: 1

      If you really want to question the wisdom of open carry, don't get all violent and do stupid things. Just participate in open carry yourself. Get as many of your black or Middle Eastern friends as you can to do it with you, and do it in as many really busy places as you possibly can.

      --
      An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
    87. Re:Fear of guns by shmlco · · Score: 1

      Oh please. You know as well as I do that a typical "tactical assault rifle" and a classic "hunting rifle" are two different things, and are designed as such.

      A typical "tactical assault rifle" is designed to be extremely rugged yet lightweight, is shorter since it's often used in close quarter situations, is designed for rapid firing and minimum recoil, and trades off accuracy in the process. It probably has multiple attachment points for scopes, sights, bayonets, slings, tripods, and even grenade launchers (M-16/M-209).

      A classic hunting rifle, say, 30-06 or 308, has a heavy, long barrel, has heavy wood stocks, has no recoil buffer, a single scope mount, no flash suppression, and typically has a bolt-action mechanism. The size, weight, design, and mechanics are intentional, as it's primary function is to deliver fewer rounds accurately over a longer distance.

        (This disregards, of course, the "modern sporting rifle" attempt at rebranding the former to mean the later, all while letting the owner look like the local SWAT team might call him up for action at any moment.)

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    88. Re:Fear of guns by OhPlz · · Score: 1

      I think I'm more disturbed by the school admins than by this guy, unless there's something else missing from the very short news articles about it. Sounds like the cops made up something so they could take him in.

      So what that it's an elementary school? Maybe he wanted to entertain the kids. I don't know. We're a pretty sick society if you instantly read something nefarious into that. Let it be know, by the decree of a bunch of elected hacks, there shall be no fun had within the borders of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

    89. Re:Fear of guns by reboot246 · · Score: 1

      The principal was just jealous of the outfit.

      On a more serious note, I routinely check natural gas service lines and meters around schools, and the equipment I use looks very much like a terrorist's bomb vest. Makes me wonder when some idiot will call the police on me. And, no, we can't go to every school office and tell them what we're doing. We simply don't have the time.

    90. Re:Fear of guns by OhPlz · · Score: 2

      Have you seen our cops lately?

    91. Re: Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Open carry only applies to weapons. In this case he had a fake and wasn't even pointing it at anybody.

      The charges are there for making the police look foolish.

    92. Re: Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He was on public property or they would have charged him with trespassing. Those charges are definitely not constitutional. Remember the anti-choice demonstrations outside my school that the school couldn't get ended despite being disruptive.

      He's legally allowed on public property even if he is silly. The charges are just an effort to sidestep the consequences of an illegal arrest.

    93. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me just check the local news coverage ... and there is none.

      Instead they're all covering some story about how the Boston police "heroically" shot and killed some guy for carrying a knife.

      Wow. I guess the guy in the stormtrooper costume should be glad he wasn't dealing with those cops.

    94. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How about you either obey the laws as you'd have others obey them and if the laws don't suit what you find acceptable feel free to get the fuck out.
       
      People don't need to bow to the whim of the bullies of the anti-gun crowd.
       
      So go fuck yourself.

    95. Re:Fear of guns by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      "Next time I see some dipshit open-carrying his rifle into Chipotle, I'm going to sneak up on him in the parking lot and tackle him. "

      Here in Arizona, you would be known as a 'target'.

    96. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should probably learn how rifles work. They're terrible at CQB ranges, occupy both hands, and render you quite ineffective in hand-to-hand.

    97. Re:Fear of guns by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      They have accessories for that. Special training too.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    98. Re:Fear of guns by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      The local elementary school is embedded in the neighborhood. If you want to go from point A to point B sometimes the only sane route is past the school down one or two sides of it.

      The principal was probably more of a disruption than the Stormtrooper.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    99. Re:Fear of guns by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      There's that. There's the general hysteria. Guys walking alone in my neighborhood are likely to get stopped and bothered. Age and race don't matter. People around here are just hysterical nitwit suffering from 30 years of media overkill about child abductions.

      Still wouldn't think it would escalate to an arrest around here.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    100. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Next time I see some dipshit open-carrying his rifle into Chipotle, I'm going to sneak up on him in the parking lot and tackle him.

      Have fun serving your jail sentence for assault. People like you who can't tolerate freedom might even enjoy being locked up, surveilled 24/7, and told when you can or can't take a shit. Meanwhile I'll be walking around in the sunshine carrying my firearm.

    101. Re:Fear of guns by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      TFA says he was arrested for loitering. There was no mention in TFA of "disturbing a school". And if there was such a crime, the principal was the only person committing that crime.

    102. Re:Fear of guns by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but with no other details, why not assume he was a parent, showing up early to get his kid, so waiting outside the school? Or a paid performer for a student's birthday, also waiting for school to end?

      Nope, must be a gun, and he must be up to no good. We assume everyone is a criminal unless proven otherwise.

      Burn the country to the ground and start over. It's too far gone.

    103. Re:Fear of guns by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Never heard of a backup gun like a small pistol? Or a knife. The fact is if you tackle a person holding a weapon, you GREATLY increase your chance of being summarily executed, lawfully.

      --
      Good-bye
    104. Re:Fear of guns by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 2

      Well, this was Massachusetts; where light-up Mooninite signs are treated as a "terrorist threat" worthy of a city-wide alert; wearing a t-shirt with some blinkenlights on it is "justification" for threatening Course VI students with submachine guns (and then arresting them); and where police, entering with neither warrant nor invitation, accost (black) university professors in their own homes, arresting them for disturbing the peace should they get irate and raise their voice; and all of this goes unpunished.

      So, expecting a reasonable and calm common-sense reaction out of the police there is Quixotic at best.

      --
      Imagine all the people...
    105. Re:Fear of guns by publiclurker · · Score: 2

      oh, please, if this psychotic ammosexual was so tough then he wouldn't need a strapon, would he.

    106. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a great way to get your black or middle eastern friends killed.

    107. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought open carry was always allowed, in that it was how they got around the 2nd amendment. In other words, "we're not infringing your right to bear arms, we're just requiring that you follow certain rules when you do, such as not concealing the weapon."

      So what is the justification these states have for allowing neither concealed-carry nor open-carry without a permit?

    108. Re: Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If that was the best response I could come up with, I'd post as AC.

    109. Re: Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Another case of cops being dickholes to make themselves feel powerful..

    110. Re: Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The bigger question is how you eat at Chipotle and live with yourself?

    111. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe schools should require some kind of basic course to familiarize kids with real guns, so they don't grow up into these principals who can't tell the difference.

      I really really hate to defend the rampant stupidity in school system administrators, but technically there isn't any difference. The prop guns used in Star Wars are actual guns with a few mods and extra doodads attached. For example the standard Stormtrooper blaster is based on a British Sterling sub-machine gun and fired blanks during filming with the "blaster bolts" added later during post production. Of course costume suits will come with plastic blasters, but high quality reproductions will LOOK like a real gun unless you get a really good look at them.

    112. Re:Fear of guns by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      Contrasting it against a white stormtrooper outfit, yes, even if I was some dumbass who didn't know what a stormtrooper was.

      The principal may have been a dumbass, but the real problem here is the cops. The principal was somewhat justified in reporting him, since she didn't know if the gun was real or not. But the cops knew it was a toy, and arrested him anyway. As soon as they realized it was not a real gun, and didn't even look like a real gun, they should have said "This is not the stormtrooper we are looking for. You can go about your business."

      I'll just leave this here.

      https://youtu.be/0nM0asnCXD0

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
    113. Re: Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You haven't lived until you've smashed somebody's face in with the butt of a rifle or shotgun.

    114. Re:Fear of guns by Mr.+Shotgun · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Let's say you scenario plays out perfectly, you manage to attack a gun owner unprovoked in broad daylight and miraculously end up not getting shot. What then? What will you do when the police arrest you and you are staring down a trial and conviction for assault and battery? More over, what defense will you offer up when the prosecutor cites the post you and that other chucklehead made as evidence of premeditation, bumping your charges up to aggravated assault?

      Face it, you and your ilk or no different than a bunch of homophobes talking on Facebook about how you're gonna go gay-bashing later. Just because you don't like something does not give you the right to attack others for it. Grow the fuck up, people will do things you don't approve of but no one made you judge, jury, and executioner of what is right or wrong.

      --
      Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the (supposed) good of its victims may be the most oppressive
    115. Re:Fear of guns by Headw1nd · · Score: 2

      You can always recognize a real gun from a prop, my ass. Here's a G11, which looks like a goddamn 2x4 someone attached a pistol grip to. Not production enough for you? How about the P90, which looks like it might be part of a comfy chair. There are tons of guns that don't look like normal guns, it's ridiculous to expect someone to be able to identify them all at a distance. The idea that they should saunter out to go check is even more ludicrous, hell half the people in this thread are so damn scared they won't even walk out the door unarmed, much less confront someone in a mask.

      But you've already torpedoed your main point when you pointed out that the stormtrooper blaster is based off a real, actual gun. As you pointed out, it has a bunch of random attachments. Good thing nobody's ever attached anything to a stock gun before, eh?

    116. Re: Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless the folks nearby who happened to watch you assault the guy without cause happen to be carrying also. . . . .

      Then your DRT ( Dead Right There )

    117. Re: Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, of course you will do it, Neo Matrix Big Hero (snicker).

    118. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      At best, you'll get your ass kicked into the dirt.

      Becuase, you see, the guy carrying the gun into Chipotle is a _REAL_ man and people who aren't gun enthusiasts are all weak, pathetic half men. With or without his gun, you see, the gun enthusiast can just slap you into the dirt as if you were a small child. You understand he likes _guns_ right? It automatically makes him superior to you both morally, intellectually and physically.

    119. Re:Fear of guns by cyn1c77 · · Score: 1

      If the blaster was black plastic, would you be able to distinguish it from a real gun from 100 feet away?

      What you should really be worried about is:
      If a real gun was put under someone's shirt or under their jacket, could you distinguish it from 100 feet away?

      Because that is how a real sociopath intent on inflicting serious damage would approach a target.

      He wouldn't dress up in a stupid TIGHT white suit that not only stands out like a sore thumb, but also restricts his field of view, his movement, and his ability to hide any weapons.

      He'd do something that would enhance his changes of accomplishing his goals. For example, he'd dress up like a cop, walk into the school with his badge out, say he was responding to a threat, and then start killing people. There, now you have a real concern to worry about.

    120. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let's say you scenario plays out perfectly, you manage to attack a gun owner unprovoked in broad daylight and miraculously end up not getting shot. What then? What will you do when the police arrest you and you are staring down a trial and conviction for assault and battery?

      Well, since Chipotle has a very well known policy of not allowing guns on its premises, you could point out that you saw someone using a gun in commission of a crime (knowingly going onto the property of someone who doesn't allow guns with a gun is trespassing) and you feared for public safety.

    121. Re: Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And we let these uneducated fascists be principles??? The principle needs to learn the Constitution.

    122. Re: Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Absolutely comrade! A right is non-negotiable, no matter how threatened you are. Go back to school, study history, and learn why it is a right. Don't believe the uneducated mainstream liberal talking point.

    123. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But they are cops. If they don't feed their compulsions, who will generate income for lawyers?

    124. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      open carry is allowed everywhere. gun laws are unconstitutional and should not be obeyed.

      Next time I see some dipshit open-carrying his rifle into Chipotle, I'm going to sneak up on him in the parking lot and tackle him. At best, I'll be a hero. At worst, I'll be wrong. But the guy carrying might learn a valuable lesson: even if open carry is illegal, it's still not socially acceptable. And I'll have plausible deniability either way.

      At worst, you'd get shot.

      On second thought, make that at best.

      Bill Hicks: "We lost a moron. Fucking celebrate!"

    125. Re:Fear of guns by Mr.+Shotgun · · Score: 1

      Well, since Chipotle has a very well known policy of not allowing guns on its premises, you could point out that you saw someone using a gun in commission of a crime (knowingly going onto the property of someone who doesn't allow guns with a gun is trespassing) and you feared for public safety.

      Interesting idea, argue it in court because that is where you will end up. Again, consider you are still plotting a premeditated attack on an open forum. Slashdot may not have the readership it once did, but it is still the internet. Also cmdrtaco may have resisted a subpoena for poster information, but do you think the DHI group will?

      --
      Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the (supposed) good of its victims may be the most oppressive
    126. Re: Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So in vogue that as of 2011 rifles made up .000104% of ALL murders. Guns accounted for ~13k murders. Rifles were 323, hands and feet listed as weapons killed 728!

      But yeah, totally in vogue.

    127. Re:Fear of guns by hankwang · · Score: 2

      Even if you are not very familiar with guns, you'd have to be pretty obtuse to mistake [a stormtrooper gun for a 9 mm gun]. If you can't tell the difference between them, then you probably wouldn't be able to distinguish a gun from a stick.

      Of course, it's obvious to anyone that a stormtrooper gun is not a standard 9 mm gun. But that's not the point. The question is whether it's reasonable to assume that anyone would be able to tell in an instant that there exists no firearm that looks like a stormtrooper gun. I would surely be scared as hell if a stranger pointed that thing at me.

      Here in the Netherlands, it's illegal to carry something in public that could reasonably be mistaken for an actual firearm. That's why toy guns here are invariably made of bright-colored plastic. I believe that this policy has prevented quite a few (fatal) misunderstandings.

    128. Re: Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But he's just an earthling in a costume. 242 covers real aliens.

    129. Re: Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And this is where irony hits you right in the face....the spectacle of a stormtrooper being arrested was probably way more disturbing than a stormtrooper walking around

    130. Re:Fear of guns by fafalone · · Score: 1

      You forgot one gigantic loophole. While ordinary citizens cannot claim not understanding whether what they were doing was illegal or not, our wonderful courts have ruled that police face no such burden. It's perfectly ok for them to arrest you if they thought the act was illegal, even if they were wrong. It's the kind of precedent that really shows the courts for what they are, just another arm of law enforcement.

    131. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ahh, he was impersonating a cop then.. I'm sure MA can get him on that too.

      Strictly no... he was impersonating a storm trouper.
      There is no jurisdiction to act on without some treaty agreement with an interstellar organization.

      Consider that it is illegal to impersonate a priest in the Vatican and you can get arrested there
      for that. No such law applies in much of the world.

      Comic-con would be the locality of a thousand arrests. Including the poor schlep dressed
      as GI-Joe. Golly clowns...

      There is a growing power base in the law that is mindless. At some point that power
      could be taken over by the "dark side" and serious bad things will happen. In history
      we have seen the equivalent of CNN troupers invading the headquarters of FoX news
      and wreck the facility and incarcerate all that are found. Or turn it about as the FoX
      storm troupers gut the CNN and MSNBC centers and hold the BBC at bay with a firewall
      and short wave jamming.

      The mindless part is what scares me.

    132. Re:Fear of guns by DocSavage64109 · · Score: 1
      You're right about consequences. I'm merely pointing out that escalating things by carrying a gun means that anyone who attacks you will do so with deadly force. Can't we all just go back to fist fights? :D

      Grow the fuck up, people will do things you don't approve of but no one made you judge, jury, and executioner of what is right or wrong.

      Double standard much?

    133. Re:Fear of guns by Samizdata · · Score: 1

      Let's assume for a moment that the principal spent the last 35ish years off this planet and hence does not know what a Stormtrooper is...

      What does he see? A guy in a plastic suit. Why would anyone who has anything indecent in mind put himself into gear that impacts his ability to move and see negatively?

      The principal's behaviour is irrational at best. Insane at worst.

      What does SHE see?

      --
      It's not the years, honey, it's the mileage. - Colonel Henry Walton Jones, Jr., Ph.D.
    134. Re:Fear of guns by MercTech · · Score: 1

      So you are stating an intention to commit a crime, assault and battery, because you don't like a person's fashion accessory?

      --
      NRRPT/RCT
    135. Re:Fear of guns by ubrgeek · · Score: 1

      Depends. Did it go *pew pew* or *bang bang*

      --
      Bark less. Wag more.
    136. Re:Fear of guns by Reziac · · Score: 1

      The trouble with loitering as a crime is that it's too open to interpretation. Standing on the corner watching cars go by? That's loitering. Walking down the street with no particular destination? That can be loitering too. Too often it boils down to "We don't serve your kind here" rather than being an act which causes harm.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    137. Re:Fear of guns by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Actually in some states (CA for one, IIRC) it IS illegal to carry a toy gun unless it's clearly marked with bright pink. Cuz, ya know, realism kills.

      Smart criminals will just apply a little spraypaint to their weapons to disguise them as toy guns.

      I don't know what they're going to do about the hot-pink rifles they sell at Murdoch's and Cabella's... are they already legally toy guns??

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    138. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe schools should require some kind of basic course to familiarize kids with real guns, so they don't grow up into these principals who can't tell the difference.

      I really really hate to defend the rampant stupidity in school system administrators, but technically there isn't any difference. The prop guns used in Star Wars are actual guns with a few mods and extra doodads attached. For example the standard Stormtrooper blaster is based on a British Sterling sub-machine gun and fired blanks during filming with the "blaster bolts" added later during post production. Of course costume suits will come with plastic blasters, but high quality reproductions will LOOK like a real gun unless you get a really good look at them.

    139. Re:Fear of guns by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Agreed, Highland Park, TX got in trouble about 20 or 30 years ago for arresting minorities for loitering. Their lame excuse? "I was standing at a bus stop". Dirty thugs.

    140. Re:Fear of guns by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      If people really cannot tell a movie costume which is obviously a movie costume apart from a practical body armor suit, I guess I just found an argument for a draft...

      Quite seriously, when did it become illegal to apply a hint of common sense and logic? LOOKING at that damn costume tells you that it's bulky, ugly and the helmet is made for anything but good visibility. It has two EYES to look out for crying out loud! There is a reason why no sensible helmet has such an element, and that reason is that you can't see jack through such eye holes!

      And yes, I'd consider it general knowledge to know something like that. Maybe not for some hillbilly from hicksville, but for a principal of a school who is supposedly teaching our kids something.

      Why again do we allow such idiots to rule over our kids?

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    141. Re:Fear of guns by Reziac · · Score: 1

      Indeed, a very lame excuse. Those bus stops shouldn't let people hang around waiting for a bus; anyone might loiter, and public decency would be offended! 'Course when you've got a captive audience like that, well, it must be hard for a hardworking cop to resist.

      My college roommate got arrested for sitting on a public curb enjoying the evening (this was in 1973), tho I imagine it had more to do with that he would not give the cops his name. Why wouldn't he give his name? His family had escaped from Soviet Ukraine just after the Stalin era, and he took Constitutional freedoms seriously; you are not required to identify yourself if no crime has been committed. Next morning the judge released him, but even so -- it's the kind of thing that should never happen in the first place.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    142. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      soon you will have to wear ur prison made uniform when u go outside so we know ur mearican

    143. Re:Fear of guns by gzuckier · · Score: 1

      Contrasting it against a white stormtrooper outfit, yes, even if I was some dumbass who didn't know what a stormtrooper was.

      I'd have to say, a Nazi stormtrooper outfit would be more worrisome.

      --
      Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
    144. Re: Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for that Strat.

    145. Re:Fear of guns by fuzzy2k · · Score: 1

      - snip - even if I was some dumbass who didn't know what a stormtrooper was.

      If they did not know a piece of information, they are not a dumbass. That makes them an ignoramus. If they were a principal of a school, that only confirms it.

      --
      --- Say something clever. Pretend it was me. Thanks.
    146. Re: Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, if I see someone entering a store with a firearm openly exposed I can not know that have no intention of commuting a crime. Simply put, given the number of mass shooting by idiots it is reasonable and justifable to take that person down.
      And depending on the state in which it is done...Stand Your Ground.

    147. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is so fucked up !!!!!!! 'MURICA

    148. Re:Fear of guns by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Nanny-state limp-wrists who soil themselves at the sight of a plastic gun.

      cool, we now know that Chuck Norris posts on slashdot under the pseudonym clonehappy.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    149. Re:Fear of guns by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      I must have missed the part where he had an actual firearm. No firearm, no grounds for arrest.

      Dressing up like a retarded cunt and hanging around outside schools seems like reasonable grounds for arrest to me.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    150. Re:Fear of guns by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Apparently the Stormtrooper blaster is based off of the Sterling L2A3 [google.com] But the toy has a lot of extra crap attached to it, so you'd have to be pretty far to mistake the two. Plus, I can't say I've ever seen a Sterling L2A3 in the US. I doubt many people in the US, other than serious gun collectors, have ever seen one.

      So if someone who is keen on guns has never seen a Sterling sub machine gun, why the fuck do you expect a school principal to be able to categorically identify a vaguely similar Star Wars toy as definitely not one?

      There are plenty of movie sci fi guns based on real weapons, and plenty of accessorised real weapons which are indistinguishable from movie sci fi guns unless you get to examine them properly. Which you don't if someone is pointing one at you.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    151. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It does look like a real gun. The screen accurate E11 stormtrooper blaster is a replica Patchett Sterling sub machine gun with a shortened magazine. Its the ideal way for someone to carry a fully automatic weapon in public and claim "it's just a toy!"

    152. Re:Fear of guns by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      The principal did the right thing by calling the police to make contact with a guy walking by the school who appeared to be carrying a weapon. It's not the principal's job to figure out if it's a real weapon, that's the job of the police. I would say the police failed in this situation, but maybe the costumed guy was being an argumentative dick and the cop had a bad day. Either way, it's not the principal's fault. If the guy decided to put on a costume (because it conceals his identity), take a gun, and head to the school to shoot someone, and the principal decided not to call because the guy was wearing a movie costume, then it would most definitely be the principal's fault. It's his (or her) job to keep the kids safe, not verify whether a weapon is real.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    153. Re:Fear of guns by The+Grim+Reefer · · Score: 1

      So if someone who is keen on guns has never seen a Sterling sub machine gun

      I didn't say I never saw one. Just that I've never saw in the US. I suppose that's not true though. I've seen nonfunctional ones in the US. I only ever saw ones that could be fired outside of the US. They are not very common in the US. Even at a glance they have only a similar appearance. The Sterling has a 30 round banana clip sticking out of the side. If there's no clip then the wielder may have one round chambered (at most). But that would be pretty stupid.

      There are plenty of movie sci fi guns based on real weapons, and plenty of accessorised real weapons which are indistinguishable from movie sci fi guns unless you get to examine them properly. Which you don't if someone is pointing one at you.

      Agreed. But how may of these mass shootings occur with collector type of guns? I'm not going to say that they never happen, as I'm sure some kid had a gun collector father that went nuts. But even then, most handguns and rifles used in these tragedies are standard hunting/"assault weapons" or standard handguns.

      If you're planning to attack a school or whatever, you're not going to go buy $2K and $3K weapons to do so. And you aren't going to get a bunch of bulky heavy rifles to do so. You're sure not going to need to attach a scope or bi-pod mount to walk around shooting people with. It adds weight and is going to have a better chance of getting caught on things.

      Not that any of this matters. The guy was dressed as a stormtrooper. It's pretty damn obvious he wasn't carrying a Sterling.

    154. Re:Fear of guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except they were, Stormtrooper guns were Sterling Submachine guns with a 5 round clip, and a few fins and such attached to them.

    155. Re:Fear of guns by Scotsman,+True · · Score: 0

      Sorry for the OT reply, but do you mind explaining your sig? I Googled it in case it was a quote, but if it is, Google hasn't heard it before either.

    156. Re:Fear of guns by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

      Consider that it is illegal to impersonate a priest in the Vatican and you can get arrested there
      for that. No such law applies in much of the world.

      Comic-con would be the locality of a thousand arrests. Including the poor schlep dressed
      as GI-Joe. Golly clowns...

      to be fair, if you're dressed as a clown, you're not impersonating a clown per se, you're actually being a clown, albeit an amateur clown. if you dress as a storm trooper, you don't magically turn into an actual stormtrooper, you're just some fucker who needs to leave his childhood behind and finally embrace adulthood.

  3. Obviously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The force is not strong with this one.

    1. Re:Obviously by Opportunist · · Score: 2

      No, but the farce is strong in that story. What the fuck has this country come to? We're putting people in charge of our children who have exactly ZERO common sense!

      No wonder that the people they teach have none. I'll never complain about youth without a hint of common sense anymore. Apparently they have to drop it to get through school.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Obviously by OzoneLad · · Score: 1

      We're putting people in charge of our children who have exactly ZERO common sense!

      No, in charge of everything. See also: Congress.

  4. Gun Rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    The funny thing about this is that if the guy had been carrying a real gun he probably would have fallen within the ambit of the second amendment. The NRA would have been outside the school picketing; Fox News would have done a feature and the Republican 2016 candidates would have been falling over themselves to defend this guy's 'rights'. Instead, because he was carrying a toy gun, he comes across as a geeky moron.

    1. Re: Gun Rights by halivar · · Score: 0

      No, guns are prohibited outside schools across the country.

    2. Re: Gun Rights by Anubis+IV · · Score: 2

      I don't know how it is in Lynn, but down here in Texas, weapons are banned in school zones. Walking through a school zone with a real gun, or even having one in your car while parked on school premises, is grounds for an arrest, last I checked. There are obvious common sense reasons for why those sorts of laws are in place (i.e. "think of the children!"), but I won't claim to understand the legal basis on which they are founded, nor will I assert that they are in any way constitutional.

      Even so, he didn't have a real gun, and it doesn't sound like he was acting in any sort of a threatening manner, so the real failure here is on the part of the principal and the police to exercise some common sense in allowing a harmless citizen to exercise his freedom to walk around in public as he should please...even if it means in a stormtrooper outfit.

    3. Re: Gun Rights by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 0

      Generally, weapons aren't allowed in a school zone. If he was a white person, he could have asserted his 2nd amendment rights. If he was a black person, the police would kill first and ask questions later.

    4. Re: Gun Rights by sexconker · · Score: 0

      No, guns are prohibited outside schools across the country.

      Such "gun free zones" are blatantly unconstitutional.

    5. Re: Gun Rights by tmosley · · Score: 2

      I don't know if you noticed or not, but most of our presidents since Woodrow Wilson tend to use that particular document to wipe their asses with.

    6. Re: Gun Rights by fche · · Score: 2

      "There are obvious common sense reasons for why those sorts of laws are in place"

      "Unobvious common nonsense" would be more accurate.

    7. Re: Gun Rights by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2

      From what I understood the guy was not on school grounds. So, legally define the area of "outside schools"? The middle of the woods is "outside schools"...

    8. Re: Gun Rights by clonehappy · · Score: 2

      Oh, everyone's noticed. That doesn't make it OK, there, Champ. If everyone walking down the street for the past few days has been kicking you in the nuts, does that make it perfectly fine if it just continues to happen?

    9. Re: Gun Rights by halivar · · Score: 1

      It's not about what's constitutional, it's about what's enforceable, pragmatically speaking. We do not live in a Constitutional utopia, but one where people in power get to do whatever the fuck they want.

    10. Re: Gun Rights by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      And hence the NRA would be all over it.

      But it's just some geek with toys that were mistaken for guns. We may be tough on that one. Makes the parents happy that we're "tough on guns" and it's one of the few times the NRA won't mind.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    11. Re: Gun Rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, everyone's noticed. That doesn't make it OK, there, Champ. If everyone walking down the street for the past few days has been kicking you in the nuts, does that make it perfectly fine if it just continues to happen?

      What makes it perfectly fine is the fact that you let him kick you in the nuts every day.
      The moment you kick him back is when you get your point across: no, it's not fine.
      American citizens haven't kicked back yet, so yes, it's perfectly fine.

    12. Re: Gun Rights by halivar · · Score: 5, Informative

      Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 prohibits firearms within 1,000 feet of public, private, or parochial school grounds.

    13. Re: Gun Rights by Opportunist · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I'm pro gun. I'm anti idiocy.

      I'd just wish everyone who wants one has to spend a week with my old drill sergeant. He had some rather ... graphic ways of showing you just WHY guns are no toys and why these things deserve your respect. He taught us certain rules and procedures that, if used properly, make sure you CANNOT harm anyone you do not want to harm. And I think he's got to do something right, in his whole career not a single soldier he trained got wounded by a bullet while under his command.

      He retired last Fall with 70.

      I think fewer people would get hurt by guns if they had to go through such a training. And FAR fewer idiots like that principal would litter the streets and our courts with idiotic panic reactions like that.

      Panic reactions is one of the things that kill people, btw. With or without guns.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    14. Re: Gun Rights by JazzLad · · Score: 2

      I don't know how it is in Lynn, but down here in Texas, weapons are banned in school zones. Walking through a school zone with a real gun, or even having one in your car while parked on school premises, is grounds for an arrest, last I checked.

      Here's a handy link so you can check again :)

      I have a Texas CHL; if I am called in to pick up my daughter at school (sick, whatever), I can have my gun in my car, but I must lock it in the car.

      --
      "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
    15. Re: Gun Rights by executioner · · Score: 5, Informative

      though in most states, that is being amended to allow legally licensed parent to carry within school zones as long as they are dropping off and picking up. the restriction adopted in 1990 has been changed multiple times in the 25 years since then.

      --
      "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
    16. Re: Gun Rights by danbert8 · · Score: 1

      How exactly would the cops know he was white or black under a stormtrooper helmet? Would they ask him to take his mask off and then shoot him? I guess they assumed he was white since except for Lando, Mace Windu, and the new trailer, black people don't exist in Star Wars.

      --
      Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    17. Re: Gun Rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is bullshit if you live inside that distance, like across the street, or if you are carrying around, you know, a fucking toy.

    18. Re: Gun Rights by geekmux · · Score: 1

      Oh, everyone's noticed. That doesn't make it OK, there, Champ. If everyone walking down the street for the past few days has been kicking you in the nuts, does that make it perfectly fine if it just continues to happen?

      Given the fact the parent referenced a president who was in office a fucking century ago, yeah I'd say everyone's pretty much gone numb by now and is MORE than content with it.

      Besides, even bitching about it with words doesn't make a difference anymore, and you have no more ability to take action. That was made illegal.

    19. Re: Gun Rights by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Funny

      The cops would ask the stromtrooper to take his helmet off and make a split-second decision.

      • White, let him wave his toy gun around and assert 2nd amendment rights.
      • Black, shoot first and ask questions later.
      • Alien (Hispanic), throw in slammer and call immigration.
      • Alien (Non-Human), run away screaming like a little girl and call Men in Black (MiB).
    20. Re: Gun Rights by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      A fucking toy usually looks like either a penis or a vagina, not a gun.

    21. Re: Gun Rights by OhPlz · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile in New Hampshire, just north of the Commie-wealth.. we had an incident a few years ago where a hunter had an actual firearm and was within hundreds of feet of the grounds of a middle school, the school called police. The police showed up, found nothing wrong, and merely made a suggestion that the guy think about purchasing a case for it instead of carrying it open.

    22. Re: Gun Rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      though in most states, that is being amended to allow legally licensed parent to carry within school zones as long as they are dropping off and picking up.

      the restriction adopted in 1990 has been changed multiple times in the 25 years since then.

      More accurately, all individuals licensed to carry a concealed weapon by the state in which the Gun-Free School Zone exists are exempted from that zone. That's a federal law that applies across the board. Carry on actual school grounds is what varies from state to state.

      The act itself is a joke, and egregious violation of the Second Amendment, since it's almost impossible to pass through any urban or suburban area without passing within 1000 feet of some school's property and makes transporting arms - letting alone bearing them - illegal for any unlicensed person. Get in a car accident on a road that passes through that zone while on your way to a hunting trip? Congrats, if the responding police officer sees your properly transported rifle or shotgun in the trunk, it could be federal prison time for you! Hooray!

    23. Re: Gun Rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Does that also include things that are not firearms? I think its pretty clear that there were no firearms involved here.

    24. Re: Gun Rights by Anubis+IV · · Score: 1

      Thank you. Wish I could mod you up, since I'm always happy to be corrected when I get facts incorrect.

    25. Re: Gun Rights by JazzLad · · Score: 1

      No worries, it's been known to happen to me too :)

      It actually gets worse: You and I can have a gun on the school grounds in our cars, but my daughters' teachers (along with the rest of TX [at least public, not I believe Charter it's up to the administration] teachers) cannot. So, if they are working late (not likely in elementary, but more common in HS), they have to just hope for the best. It's a really horribly written law.

      --
      "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear." - Every fascist, ever
    26. Re: Gun Rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And look at all the school shootings that has prevented in the last 25 years...

    27. Re: Gun Rights by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      Gun safety isn't that hard. You don't point the gun at anything you don't want to kill, regardless of whether you think it's loaded or not. Guns are designed to kill things, that purpose so you don't point them at things you don't intend to kill.

      I still have a reaction of moving the gun if someone walks in front of the barrel when I'm cleaning it (ie no firing pin and a cleaning stick halfway down the barrel). Needless to say this rule was pretty effectively ingrained into my consciousness when I was learning to shoot at 12 years old.

    28. Re: Gun Rights by BitterOak · · Score: 1

      Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 prohibits firearms within 1,000 feet of public, private, or parochial school grounds.

      What if your house is within 1000 feet of a school. Are you not allowed to keep a gun in your house in that case? Does it matter if your house was there first and the school was built later?

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    29. Re: Gun Rights by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Most accidents don't happen when you point the gun. That's the whole problem. Don't point the gun at something that you don't want shot is one part of the package, but you know, handling the gun means that it will point at various things while you handle it.

      "You don't shit where you eat so you don't clean where you shoot" was one of those ... graphic rules of my sarge. And it makes sense. If there is a mental separation between shooting and cleaning, it also doesn't "feel" right to mix them. Most accidents with guns happen during cleaning and handling. And this is also the time when people are usually least conscious about where it is pointing.

      Which isn't to mean that he didn't rip you a new one if he noticed your barrel pointing where it shouldn't... His attitude towards the whole deal was that if you have 5 things that avoid an accident each by itself, and you try to heed them all, chances are good that you'll at least get one of them right.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    30. Re: Gun Rights by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      People have been shot with ramrods or cleaning sticks before, after all. I like your reaction.

      My son knows that guns he handles are always loaded and able to fire, and should never be pointed at anyone you're not planning to kill. I think that covers the basics.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    31. Re: Gun Rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately, pro-gun, anti-idiocy doesn't get much press time because the NRA is too busy derping all over itself to get anything useful done. The fanaticism of that group is probably one of the more dangerous threats to the right to bear arms; it's entrenched in a notion that rights can be had without responsibilities, which is a horribly dangerous delusion to propagate.

      I got uninvited from family get-togethers because my redneck, card-carrying NRA family let kids (16, 17 years old) with no idea how to handle guns shoot SKS and AK rifles, and I went full drill instructor on them when they, with round chambered and safety off, hoisted their rifles over their shoulders and flagged every last one of us. Because as a collective we've gotten ourselves whipped into such a tizzy that people will shut their brains off and say "you can't make me go to training or demonstrate responsible ownership, I have rights!"

      Makes me sad.

    32. Re: Gun Rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He retired last Fall with 70.

      70 what?

    33. Re: Gun Rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the NRA's fault that your family doesn't know how to handle firearms? Wow. Just wow.

    34. Re: Gun Rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A fucking toy usually looks like either a penis or a vagina, not a gun.

      you'll notice I wasn't commenting on the ID10T error from the school but the law.

      it's okay though most people in MA can't tell the difference between the three items you spoke off anyway so..... that might be part of the problem.

    35. Re: Gun Rights by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      If the NRA condones such behaviour, then yes.

      I'd consider it a huge step forward if the NRA offered gun safety handling instructions to its members. That's what I'd pretty much expect from the NRA. The right to own a gun includes the responsibility for its safe use.

      If you want rights and powers you have to take the responsibility for them. It's quite sad that people take their constitutional rights as granted. Else they'd assume responsibility for the second.

      Or maybe even defend the first.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    36. Re: Gun Rights by Reziac · · Score: 1

      That leotard thing under the armor, it's black, right??

      Makes about as much sense as the rest of this...

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    37. Re: Gun Rights by Agripa · · Score: 1

      Such "gun free zones" are blatantly unconstitutional.

      That has not stopped the courts from upholding them and this law in particular; in this case because it affects interstate commerce.

    38. Re: Gun Rights by Agripa · · Score: 1

      The act itself is a joke, and egregious violation of the Second Amendment, since it's almost impossible to pass through any urban or suburban area without passing within 1000 feet of some school's property and makes transporting arms - letting alone bearing them - illegal for any unlicensed person.

      The act also makes carrying a firearm in states where it is legal to do so *without* a permit (constitutional carry) unlawful and it has the same effect if you are licensed in a different state which the current state recognizes so all of those out of state permits are useless in the event that you are charged with this felony.

  5. Goddamnit by Guy+From+V · · Score: 5, Funny

    This is why TK-421 isn't at his damn post.

    1. Re:Goddamnit by dcbrianw · · Score: 1

      C'mon Slashdot. This deserves better than a 3.

    2. Re:Goddamnit by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      Next time give it more than five minutes.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    3. Re:Goddamnit by mrdogi · · Score: 1

      Actually, "TK-4TWO1" is right down the street from me. Used to be on a pick-up truck, now is on a sedan of some sort. Odd thing is, I'm not sure how many people have picked up on the license plate's reference. My Cow-Orker didn't until I told him.

  6. A police spokesman said the man "used bad judgment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    O_o
    And the police used what? Not to mention the principal! About the only sane person in the middle of all this seems to be the poor guy that got arrested!

  7. Real Headline by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Idiot Principal Wets Himself, Calls Cops on Guy in Stormtrooper Outfit with a Fake Gun

    Hoplophobia is just a natural extension of zero tolerance (a.k.a. zero common sense) that has infested the school system.

    --
    Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    1. Re:Real Headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Schools all over the country are paranoid about people coming near the school carrying anything that looks like a weapon. If a school authority thinks there is a possible danger, they call the police and let them take care of the matter. It is not the principal's job to accost people on the sidewalk and determine any possible daneger. If the police mischarged, then blame the police not the principal who really didn't know if there was a danger or not.

    2. Re:Real Headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Idiot Principal Wets Himself, Calls Cops on Guy in Stormtrooper Outfit with a Fake Gun

      A quick google of the school name (I know, you have to RTFShortA for that) will point out that the correct pronoun here is herself, as the principal is an old biddy named Eileen Cole.

    3. Re:Real Headline by david_thornley · · Score: 2

      My school system defined a "weapon" as something that could be used to hurt another person.

      Despite that, I always walked into schools wearing shoes with shoelaces, with coins and pens in my pockets, not to mention keys. Fortunately, they never noticed how heavily armed I was.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    4. Re:Real Headline by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll kill you with my teacup.

      also, how do people have enough time to post this shit:http://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/The_Chronicles_of_Riddick?

  8. Charges by Coren22 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Those charges make no sense. Perhaps there is missing information here, but how exactly is walking by a school loitering, and it sounds like the principle did more to disturb the school than the storm trooper. After all, we all know that walking by a school with a plastic laser rifle is totally equivalent to shooting up a school.

    I guess this is what we get in a society where everything must be punished.

    --
    APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    1. Re:Charges by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

      Perhaps there is missing information here,

      They forgot to mention the music that was playing at the time.

    2. Re:Charges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Be afraid of everyone. All the time. And if it's a man near a school, shoot on sight.

    3. Re:Charges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      principal, not principle

    4. Re:Charges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The cops won't have transported in instantly (Wars not Trek) so he can't have juts been walking by. He had to have been hanging around to some degree which is loitering.

    5. Re:Charges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He wasn't charged with a firearms violation. He wasn't even charged with having a "gun" within a school's no-gun zone. He was charged with loitering and disturbing the peace because he argued with the principal who threatened to call the cops if he didn't get his "gun" off school grounds. He then argued with the cops who showed up over the ridiculous notion that a plastic blaster could be a gun. Arguing with the cops is disturbing the peace. Standing there, arguing with the police, or the principal is loitering - especially if he had to wait around for the cops to show up. Move along, citizen.

    6. Re: Charges by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bed wetting coward, not principal

  9. Which Stormtrooper is it... by Geoffrey.landis · · Score: 1

    Well, if he had been an actual Nazi stormtrooper, that's kind of frightening. Except that he would have to be pretty old by now.

    A guy in a costume from a 1977 movie, though....

    --
    http://www.geoffreylandis.com
    1. Re:Which Stormtrooper is it... by koan · · Score: 1

      Gun, he had a toy gun, people at schools aren't going to screw around any more.

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    2. Re:Which Stormtrooper is it... by tmosley · · Score: 2

      Sounds a lot like screwing around to me, wasting everyone's time over absolutely nothing.

    3. Re:Which Stormtrooper is it... by koan · · Score: 1

      Look at it another way, it's a real gun, he shoots up the school and the officials at the school state "we thought it was a toy".

      Face it, he's a 40 yo idiot dressed up in a costume from a 3rd rate movie series.

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    4. Re:Which Stormtrooper is it... by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      So the cops go out, find out it's some guy in a suit, pose for some pix, and bid him a good day.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    5. Re:Which Stormtrooper is it... by tmosley · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and your dog could just go psycho for no reason and eat your children. Better put him down!

      How do you think the kids will like that?

      I don't think terrorists or even al-CIAda and associated ISISraelholes would be so whimsical as to buy their guys funny costumes before they murder innocent people to stir up resentment for heavily oppressed brown people.

      Really all it is is telling people "DON'T DO ANYTHING DIFFERENT, WE DON'T LIKE THAT". Fuck that.

  10. as a school administrator, i can explain. by nimbius · · Score: 4, Funny

    The stormtrooper was easily and clearly observed brandishing a blaster (obviously a danger to people.) This of course is totally different than the numerous calls from parents and students about the recent appearance of the moon during all hours of the afternoon. The moon visible near the school is clearly a celestial body, and poses no harm to the students. This morning we've even observed its brilliant glimmer from th$T22$@@%%^[CARRIER LOST]

    --
    Good people go to bed earlier.
    1. Re:as a school administrator, i can explain. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, to be fair, blasters are random and, therefore, dangerous.

    2. Re:as a school administrator, i can explain. by TWX · · Score: 5, Funny

      The stormtrooper was easily and clearly observed brandishing a blaster (obviously a danger to people.)

      Apparently you haven't seen the movies. Stormtroopers with blasters are about the safest group that you can have shooting at you.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    3. Re:as a school administrator, i can explain. by tmosley · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I saw an interesting commentary on that--there was supposition that the storm troopers actually let them get away on purpose in hopes that they would lead them to the Rebel base, which they did. Normally Storm Troopers are deadly accurate, as seen when they shot up the sand cruiser.

      But of course, that is too intelligent an idea to credit George Lucas with, so it was probably just a coincidence.

    4. Re:as a school administrator, i can explain. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I saw an interesting commentary on that--there was supposition that the storm troopers actually let them get away on purpose in hopes that they would lead them to the Rebel base, which they did. Normally Storm Troopers are deadly accurate, as seen when they shot up the sand cruiser.

      This would be a valid theory, had an entire legion of the Emperor's best troops not lost to the build-a-bear workshop at then end of the Jedi.

    5. Re:as a school administrator, i can explain. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Check it

      "Principle of Evil Marksmanship"

    6. Re:as a school administrator, i can explain. by Shimbo · · Score: 1

      This would be a valid theory, had an entire legion of the Emperor's best troops not lost to the build-a-bear workshop at then end of the Jedi.

      Well, a legion is probably in the region of 1000-10000 troops: more than enough to deal with a commando raid but not an entire indigenous population. I give Lucas the benefit of the doubt and assume that the Ewoks were slaughtered in large numbers out of shot but they just kept coming.

    7. Re:as a school administrator, i can explain. by danbert8 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, it's Han you have to worry about... Depending on the revision, you may not even get a shot off.

      --
      Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    8. Re:as a school administrator, i can explain. by hypergreatthing · · Score: 1

      eh, gi joe with laser rifles beats the accuracy of storm troopers

    9. Re:as a school administrator, i can explain. by david_thornley · · Score: 2

      We do know that their ability to make military vehicles is somewhat less than the US in WWII. My best calculations about swinging logs come up with energy and momentum far below a medium 75mm gun in the earlier Shermans, and while they could slide into bad positions they would not explode, and a tank recovery vehicle could pull them out. At least the Imperials could probably have wiped the floor with the Marines from Avatar.

      Really, I like science fiction military forces to be better equipped than armies that existed before I was born.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    10. Re:as a school administrator, i can explain. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not exactly a coincidence if one of the characters actually suggests in the movie's dialog...

    11. Re:as a school administrator, i can explain. by TWX · · Score: 1

      Don't forget about literally just about everyone in The A-Team...

      I grew up with really confused notions of what gunfights were like.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    12. Re:as a school administrator, i can explain. by tmosley · · Score: 1

      Sorry, not really a Star Wars aficionado. Do you know where it was said? I'd like to waste some time looking at nerdy things before bed tonight.

    13. Re:as a school administrator, i can explain. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The especially selected elite troops guarding the base on Endor who were roundly defeated a kind of monkeys?

    14. Re:as a school administrator, i can explain. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Immediately after the TIE Fighter battle.

      Leia: They let us go. It's the only explanation for the ease of our escape.
      Han: Easy- You call that easy?
      Leia: They're tracking us.

    15. Re:as a school administrator, i can explain. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's actually spelled out pretty clearly in the film itself, when Vader and Tarkin are discussing the dangers of allowing them to escape. Shortly followed by Han claiming (incorrectly) that nobody can track the Falcon. The stormtroopers were *literally* herding the heroes back to their ship so they'd 'escape' and lead the Empire straight to the hidden Rebel base.

  11. Charges? by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 2

    I can see why the police would come and check it out... if they don't and something bad happens because of mr. TK-421, anything at all, it's their ass for not taking that call seriously. And I suppose that in some messed up version of reality there was also cause to take the guy in for some questioning... But why the hell charge the guy? Loitering and "disturbing a school"? Sounds like charges that they can bring anyone in on. And that's probably the point.

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    1. Re:Charges? by DRJlaw · · Score: 4, Informative

      Sounds like charges that they can bring anyone in on. And that's probably the point.

      They can bring anyone in on anything they want. The question is whether the prosecutor has enough to believe that they can bring a successful case.

      Disturbing a school:
      You need to prove that he intentionally sought to disturb the school. Maybe he did... maybe he didn't. It sounds weird that he was there, but then again "bad judgment" is not the same thing as having an intent to disturb the school.

      Loitering:
      You need to prove that someone in authority asked him to leave. In most of the US it's not loitering simply because you don't have a good reason to be there. The story doesn't say that he refused any instruction to go, so this is actually the more curious charge of the two to me.

    2. Re:Charges? by blueshift_1 · · Score: 1

      Hell, they probably could have charged me with that when I was in school...

    3. Re:Charges? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2

      You need to prove that he intentionally [malegislature.gov] sought to disturb the school. Maybe he did... maybe he didn't. It sounds weird that he was there, but then again "bad judgment" is not the same thing as having an intent to disturb the school.

      Weird that he was there???

      I walk past two schools every morning for routine exercise. A hell of a lot closer than this clown got.

      I walk past a third school about once a week, just because it happens to be on one of my alternate routes.

      No, I didn't plan the routes that way. Well, okay, one of the schools I pretty much have to walk past to get out of my neighborhood, but the others just happened to be there when I was measuring out the loops....

      It's really getting bad when we start having to think that it might be "weird" that someone walked past a school....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    4. Re:Charges? by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      Weird that he was there???

      Yes, weird that he was there. Weird that a man in a Stormtrooper costume was in front of an elementary school with no apparent reason to be associated with the school.

      As I indicated in the GP post, the loitering charge is the really odd one. I'm not going to invest the time necessary to investigate where he lives, where the school is, where he was going (assuming it to be true), where he was actually located, the time of the 911 response, etc., etc. simply in order to to qualify the weirdness. A guy in a Stormtrooper is automatically weird. Your decision to read weirdness as meaning creepy or nefarious instead of simply unusual and out-of-the-box is your own deal.

    5. Re:Charges? by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      The story doesn't say that he refused any instruction to go, so this is actually the more curious charge of the two to me.

      Nah, the story is most likely wrong in the details. Most stories are, so don't take it too curiously.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    6. Re:Charges? by Shortguy881 · · Score: 1

      I had a friend arrested for resisting arrest. It was the only charge. Just because they can do it doesn't make it right.

      --
      Brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants.
    7. Re:Charges? by rahvin112 · · Score: 1

      Hah. The prosecutor threatens to prosecute for prison time then offers a plea deal for a misdemeanor charge.

      You obviously don't know how prosecutors work.

    8. Re: Charges? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those are already misdemeanor charges.

    9. Re:Charges? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I'm sure the guy will beat those charges easily. He just needs to pay $5000 or so to a competent defense attorney, $5000 that he ain't getting back even if acquitted.

    10. Re:Charges? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      A guy in a Stormtrooper is automatically weird.

      Umm, I live in a place that has Mardi Gras. A guy in a stormtrooper costume isn't even enough to get people to pull out cameras to take pictures....

      Mind you, it would prolly be considered weird to wear your stormtrooper costume on Ash Wednesday....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    11. Re:Charges? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Weird that a man in a Stormtrooper costume was in front of an elementary school with no apparent reason to be associated with the school.

      Have you seen that asserted, or is that your assumption? I've seen nothing that indicated he was even asked why he was there.

    12. Re:Charges? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Mind you, it would prolly be considered weird to wear your stormtrooper costume on Ash Wednesday....

      You'd just assume he was walking back "home" (or hotel or whatever) after waking up from the night before. Fat Tuesday may end earlier than most nights, as it ends at midnight with the street sweepers blasting water on those who are still around at 12:01 a.m. Ash Wednesady, but people know it, so they start earlier, and go harder, last night.

    13. Re:Charges? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A person dressed in a costume may be a tiny bit insane. I once paraded with the cast of a play in full regalia to whip up public interest on a busy street corner. I would never do that alone and near a place like a school that would have a pastoral care policy by default.

    14. Re:Charges? by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1

      You'd just assume he was walking back "home" (or hotel or whatever) after waking up from the night before.

      *I* wouldn't even notice him that morning. *I* would be too hungover to notice the Second Coming....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  12. They did the right thing by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's easy to criticize the police over this, but what if this had turned out to be an authentic Stormtrooper? That blaster would have packed serious firepower that would outclass our current military capabilities. Even if the Stormtrooper had no bad intentions, I'm sure that Federal authorities would want to dissect that weapon to find out how it works and keep it out of the hands of the terrorists and/or unfriendly countries.

    1. Re:They did the right thing by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Funny

      I don't think Storm Trooper blasters can actually hit anything, judging by the movies.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    2. Re:They did the right thing by Guy+From+V · · Score: 1

      This all depends, if it was a standard E-11 BlasTech sidearm then of course, but if it were the much more scary-looking DLT-19 skirmish rifle then you are obviously crazy.

    3. Re:They did the right thing by halivar · · Score: 1

      No. If this had been a real stormtrooper, he would not have been a threat to anyone, as he would not have been able to hit the ground if he aimed for it.

    4. Re:They did the right thing by Junta · · Score: 4, Funny

      But what if the school uniform was red shirts? What then?

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    5. Re:They did the right thing by iggymanz · · Score: 4, Funny

      The red shirts would be immune to the missing stormtrooper fire but would nevertheless be killed by other incidents and accidents. I would send in Ewoks to handle the storm troopers, hopefully there are many useful trees in the neighborhood. Ewoks are a budget friendly resource, instead of pay one just tells them to "do it for the trees".

    6. Re:They did the right thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where I work we have an authentic Stormtrooper, with blaster, in the main lobby not ten yards from the "no weapons" sign on the outside of the building. (We're a media-related company; it's a life-sized dummy.) We also have Darth Vader, with what sure looks like a light saber in his belt. I guess he's there to keep the Stormtrooper in check.

    7. Re:They did the right thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      children are small like ewoks

    8. Re:They did the right thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Judging by the fact that nobody died in the incident and all police vehicles as well as neighboring properties were intact it is hard to argue to the contrary.

    9. Re:They did the right thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Honestly, if you're a redshirt, you don't even need someone shooting at you to be in danger. You're gonna get screwed somehow, no matter what.

    10. Re:They did the right thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stormtrooper armor is plastic. A bullet would go directly through it. They are literally less armored and less trained than our police. So no. Their terrible blasters are irrelevant.

    11. Re:They did the right thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stormtrooper armor is plastic. A bullet would go directly through it. They are literally less armored and less trained than our police.

      Well, considering they're actors in a film wearing cheap costumes, I won't hold that against them!

  13. Wha?!? by MondoGordo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Possibly the stupidest thing I've heard this year .. and considering the year so far ... that's saying a lot.

  14. Free Candy by Major+Blud · · Score: 5, Funny

    Did he have "Free Candy" written on the side of his TIE Fighter?

    --
    If you post as Anonymous Coward, don't expect a reply.
    1. Re:Free Candy by penguinoid · · Score: 1

      If he's fighting ties then he has my approval 100%.

      --
      Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
  15. Fear by koan · · Score: 1

    And more fear.

    But yeah walking around with a toy gun by a school is bad judgement these days.

    --
    "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    1. Re:Fear by iggymanz · · Score: 1

      He did no such thing, he walked with a toy blaster that does not look like any gun nor weapon employed on this planet. Our society is devolving into a bunch of psychological marshmallows.

    2. Re:Fear by koan · · Score: 1

      Yes and all school officials are weapons experts, it looks enough like a real gun.

      --
      "If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
    3. Re:Fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Star Wars Blaster Rifle - based on (and built from) the Sterling Submachine Gun
      Star Wars Blaster Pistol - based on (and built from) the Mauser C96 Pistol

      You were saying they don't look like what?

    4. Re:Fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Gee, why don't you post that same sentiment a few more times ...

    5. Re:Fear by sjames · · Score: 1

      TFA suggests that he was walking around his neighborhood and the school happens to be there. It's not like he deliberately donned the costume and headed for the nearest school.

    6. Re:Fear by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      he walked with a toy blaster that does not look like any gun nor weapon employed on this planet.

      Are you sure? It looks a lot like a Sterling L2A3 to me.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    7. Re:Fear by ancientt · · Score: 2

      Makes this spring to mind:

      "The designer of the gun had clearly not been instructed to beat about the bush. 'Make it evil,' he'd been told. 'Make it totally clear that this gun has a right end and a wrong end. Make it totally clear to anyone standing at the wrong end that things are going badly for them. If that means sticking all sort of spikes and prongs and blackened bits all over it then so be it. This is not a gun for hanging over the fireplace or sticking in the umbrella stand, it is a gun for going out and making people miserable with.'"

      RIP Mr. Adams.

      --
      B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
    8. Re:Fear by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Is that a Z-140? Alleviated titanium, neuro-charged assault model. That is a very dangerous gun. Maybe you better let me hang on to this one for you, huh?"

  16. Not as bad as... by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2
  17. Principal did the right thing by rlp · · Score: 1

    The stormtrooper could have posed a threat to the younglings and Padawans at the school.

    --
    [Insert pithy quote here]
    1. Re:Principal did the right thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The stormtrooper could have posed a threat to the younglings and Padawans at the school.

      How so? They never seem to be able to hit anything.

    2. Re:Principal did the right thing by TWX · · Score: 1

      Not compared to a Jedi he couldn't...

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
  18. Stronger Open Geek Wearing Laws needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This person's Nth amendments rights were infringed. Isn't every american's right to wear silly costumes in public guaranteed somewhere in the constitution. I mean, I have never read it, and probably wouldn't understand it if I did, but it has to be somewhere in there.

    1. Re:Stronger Open Geek Wearing Laws needed by TWX · · Score: 1

      I'm wondering if this could get tossed simply out of being a violation of his freedom of expression. He was not on the school grounds nor does appear that he attempted to enter school grounds, he did not have a real weapon on his person in the vicinity of the school grounds, and the toy-weapon he had on him was completely in-context to the ubiquitously-recognizable costume that he was wearing.

      If burlesque dancing can be legally considered artistic expression and subject to first amendment protections, then this should certainly pass muster.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:Stronger Open Geek Wearing Laws needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course there is a real weapon which looks extremely similar to a Stormtrooper blaster, mainly because it's the (prop) weapon the blaster was built on: the Sterling 9mm SMG, with folded stock. Mind, the blaster is sans the Sterling's 30-round side mounted magazine, and without that the Sterling can't do much damage either. (If I remember right (it's been about 40 years since I've fired one), you can't keep "one in the chamber" in a Sterling, it fires from an open bolt. The breech block picks up the next round and chambers it as it slides forward to fire.)

    3. Re:Stronger Open Geek Wearing Laws needed by Time_Ngler · · Score: 1

      It probably will be. The police were likely just mad for being called out and wanted to punish/intimidate him. Whether it sticks or not isn't really the point.

  19. No Recourse by Mycroft-X · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Those charges make no sense.

    Yet the individual arrested now has a record, misses work, possibly loses their job, and if prosecuted by the DA, has the expense of defending himself against the charges. All without recourse.

    1. Re:No Recourse by naasking · · Score: 3, Interesting

      He can sue the police, which is the recourse available everyone should exploit for being wrongfully arrested.

    2. Re:No Recourse by Iamthecheese · · Score: 5, Insightful

      America: If you can't afford lawyers, fuck you.

      --
      If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
    3. Re: No Recourse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol. And if you even win which can take years, you then have many states that cap the pay out at 200k-250k before lawyer fees. It can even take lobbying the states congress critters to let you fully receive the money that you are awarded.

    4. Re:No Recourse by phorm · · Score: 1

      Or he was off and going to some event to show off the outfit (or maybe having some fun with his kid... it didn't say if he had a child at the school).

    5. Re:No Recourse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Qualified Imunity

    6. Re:No Recourse by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 3, Insightful

      He can sue the police, which is the recourse available everyone should exploit for being wrongfully arrested.

      Possibly, but not likely. Police generally have qualified immunity, which basically will prevent their being sued unless there's proof of serious and unreasonable violation of Constitutional rights. This was just upheld again by the Supreme Court last year.

      Read that last link to see how far "qualified immunity" goes -- guy gets pulled over for broken headlight, then takes off in the car after cops ask him to get out of the car for no apparent reason. Cops set off in high-speed pursuit, fired three shots at the car, and AFTER he finally crashed, the police fired 12 shots into the vehicle killing the guy and the (completely innocent) passenger... for no apparent reason.

      Supreme Court ruled unanimously that cops have qualified immunity in that case. There's basically NO CHANCE they'll be able to be sued for arresting a guy carrying something that looked like a gun near a school in a state where carrying guns near schools is illegal.

    7. Re:No Recourse by AthanasiusKircher · · Score: 3, Informative
      Argh. This is what I get for reading the NPR summary instead of the actual opinion.

      Apparently, the reason the cops asked him to step out of the car was because the windshield was broken and there was fresh glass on the hood. And, contrary to the NPR report, apparently the 3 shots were fired while the car was basically "boxed in" by the cops, though apparently he wasn't really trapped, since he escaped and then the cops fired 12 more shots during his flight.

      Very different account from what NPR says.

      In any case, police still usually have "qualified immunity" unless their actions are clearly illegal or unconstitutional, as well as "unreasonable" given the circumstances.

    8. Re:No Recourse by geekmux · · Score: 1

      He's a 40 year old man(child) walking around a neighborhood in the middle of a work day wearing a movie costume. He obviously doesn't have a job, or at least doesn't have one worth keeping.

      Well, I guess this level of blind ignorance would explain why the actors involved in filming the actual fucking movie had to go to another damn country to do it.

      You know, to avoid the harassment of automatically being labeled an unemployed loser...

    9. Re:No Recourse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And then move out of that jurisdiction promptly before the local sheriff finds a way to take vengeance through the criminal justice system.

    10. Re:No Recourse by ToddInSF · · Score: 1

      The police are a criminal class.

  20. Could you tell a difference at distance? by Junta · · Score: 0

    Imagine you are on school grounds and you can see this guy on the street, distance of maybe 200 feet. Would you be able to be sure the black gun shaped thing was a toy from that distance? One might reasonably infer that it was a toy from the blatantly obvious stormtrooper outfit, but if you make that assumption, a malicious person could wear a stormtrooper outfit to catch people off guard. If it were such a person and did open fire because the principal did nothing, the principal would be crucified by the media.

    Basically, this was the option open to the principal, knock it over to the police.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
    1. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by clonehappy · · Score: 0, Troll

      Would you be able to be sure the black gun shaped thing was a toy from that distance?

      Guns. Aren't. Fucking. Illegal.

      So tired of light-loafered nanny-statists piddling themselves at the mere sight of a firearm. Go live in North Korea.

    2. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Zero__Kelvin · · Score: 5, Funny

      "Imagine you are on school grounds and you can see this guy on the street, distance of maybe 200 feet. Would you be able to be sure the black gun shaped thing was a toy from that distance? "

      Of course not. My natural assumption would be that Star Wars was not just a movie, and there was an actual frigging Stormtrooper in my sights! I totally understand the Principal taking this seriously. What baffles me is why the Principal thought the police would be able to do anything about it. Why the hell didn't they call Luke Skywalker?

      --
      Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
    3. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      That guy wears a friggin' costume! We're not talking about someone running around in jeans or even combat fatigues. We're talking about someone who is OBVIOUSLY wearing something that is either a theater prop, a mascot suit or something along these lines, in no way this could remotely be considered something anyone would willingly don if he was to start an assault on anyone!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by PsychoSlashDot · · Score: 1

      Imagine you are on school grounds and you can see this guy on the street, distance of maybe 200 feet. Would you be able to be sure the black gun shaped thing was a toy from that distance?

      If the "gun" is at such a distance I can't, then maybe* I shouldn't be pissing my pants.

      *Maybe as in, unless I hear shots and see bodies dropping, no.

      --
      "Oh no... he found the .sig setting."
    5. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by penguinoid · · Score: 5, Funny

      Besides, a Stormtrooper would be more likely to shoot himself than to hit anyone at even 10 paces.

      --
      Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    6. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by bev_tech_rob · · Score: 5, Informative

      Would you be able to be sure the black gun shaped thing was a toy from that distance?

      Guns. Aren't. Fucking. Illegal.

      So tired of light-loafered nanny-statists piddling themselves at the mere sight of a firearm. Go live in North Korea.

      Apparently THEY ARE ILLEGAL at a Massachusetts school!! Source >> https://malegislature.gov/laws...

      (j) Whoever, not being a law enforcement officer, and notwithstanding any license obtained by him under the provisions of chapter one hundred and forty, carries on his person a firearm as hereinafter defined, loaded or unloaded or other dangerous weapon in any building or on the grounds of any elementary or secondary school, college or university without the written authorization of the board or officer in charge of such elementary or secondary school, college or university shall be punished by a fine of not more than one thousand dollars or by imprisonment for not more than one year, or both. For the purpose of this paragraph, “firearm” shall mean any pistol, revolver, rifle or smoothbore arm from which a shot, bullet or pellet can be discharged by whatever means.

      Any officer in charge of an elementary or secondary school, college or university or any faculty member or administrative officer of an elementary or secondary school, college or university failing to report violations of this paragraph shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and punished by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars.

      So, if you DON'T report it you can be fined and prosecuted at least for a misdemeanor according to the last paragraph. So the principal is screwed both ways and cannot use common sense like the rest of us would...

      --
      You're messin' with my Zen Thing, man.....
    7. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Talderas · · Score: 1

      Stormtroopers are only foiled by plot armor and even then one shot Leia. They routinely stomp rebel troopers.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    8. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Coren22 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      For the purpose of this paragraph, “firearm” shall mean any pistol, revolver, rifle or smoothbore arm from which a shot, bullet or pellet can be discharged by whatever means.

      So, now a plastic blaster is a firearm capable of discharging shot, bullets or pellets?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    9. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "limp-wristed"

      "light-loafered"

      How about we leave the anti-gay bigotry out of this, tough guy.

    10. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      Stormtroopers are only foiled by plot armor and even then one shot Leia. They routinely stomp rebel troopers.

      But their best troops lost to the build-a-bear workshop.

    11. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by war4peace · · Score: 4, Funny

      Not really. The E-11 was pretty damn good, and a DC-15A would have ripped through the entire school easily. Not to mention the police.
      The plastoid armor, however, was shit. Too many known weak spots, unwieldy, horrible color choice. The only nice thing about it was the helmet, or rather its technical capabilities. Still, it was a couple magnitudes below the Mandalorian helmets.
      But we digress.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    12. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by lgw · · Score: 1

      Basically, this was the option open to the principal, knock it over to the police

      What absurd cowardice. Just walk up and ask the guy what he's up to, for fucks sake.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    13. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by flink · · Score: 1

      ...in any building or on the grounds of any elementary or secondary school, college or university...

      Was he walking through the school grounds or just passing by on the sidewalk? Big difference.

    14. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Hasaf · · Score: 1

      in any building or on the grounds of any elementary or secondary school, college or university

      Is in the text. Walking past a school should be safe, even for a stormtrooper.

    15. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Jeez. When I was in college -- in Canada -- a teacher brought a rifle to class and fired it, multiple times.

      He was a physics prof, and he was demonstrating the use of a ballistic pendulum to determine e.g. bullet velocity. Nobody cared. Mind, this same college also had a pistol club, and a range on campus. And no, it wasn't a military college.

      Kind of ironic that the state where one of the signal events of the American Revolution (ie, Boston Tea Party) started is now populated by bigger pansies than the United Empire Loyalists who left. "Home of the brave." snort

    16. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 3, Informative

      He wasn't at the school. He was near the school.

      Having said that, I hardly think the principal is an idiot for not waiting until the guy crossed the line onto school property with his finger hovering over the final "1" on the phone.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    17. Re: Could you tell a difference at distance? by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Fuck; well said.

    18. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      If he was in the school, or on the school grounds, then the excuse "it was too far away to see that it wasnt a gun" doesn't fucking fly. Either he was close enough or he wasn't breaking this law even if it was a real fucking gun instead of a star wars toy.

      Now make up your mind. Was this guy too far away? If so, then you quoted shit that doesnt apply. If he was not too far away, then since it was a fucking toy the you quoted shit that still doesnt apply. In either scenario the shit you quoted doesnt apply. So why did you quote it? Active dishonesty.

      You dont get to make up your own version of the rules just because you are petrified of plastic things that are in the general shape of guns, a condition which is due to being pussified by the system. Also, being actively dishonest for this same reason isnt excusable. There is no excuse.

      You were wronged by the system when it conditioned you to be this horrible childlike way, but we dont have to bend over for you just because you were wronged. Here you are trying to perpetuate further wronging of people through active dishonesty: Its not an excuse for child molesters that were themselves molested, so its not a god damned excuse for you.

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    19. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by halivar · · Score: 1

      Do you believe gays are limp-wristed and light-loafered?

    20. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      Okay, but for the sake of argument Mass is an open carry state (with permit). I don't know the specific details because I don't live there.

      Hypothetically if someone has a gun permit in Mass. and walks down a public street past a school, not on school grounds mind you, only the street in front of it, while having a gun on their hip or even their bushmaster for that matter can they be charged with "disrupting a s school".

        See I don't understand how doing something that without probably cause to suspect otherwise (ie you know the guy does not have permit) doing something that is most likely perfect legal on public, though not school grounds, in the vacinity of a school can be a crime. It sounds like "loitering" on of the laws that every municipality keeps on the books to hassle people with but rarely press whenever anyone lawyers up demonstrats intent to contest the matter rather than entering a quick plea of guilty. They know if fought to its logical conclusion that statute will be struck for vagueness.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    21. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by eth1 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So, if you DON'T report it you can be fined and prosecuted at least for a misdemeanor according to the last paragraph. So the principal is screwed both ways and cannot use common sense like the rest of us would...

      No he's not... There's a world of difference between:
      Operator: 911, do you have an emergency?
      Overreacting principal: OMG! There's a guy with a gun on campus!!!1!one! Help! I have the school on lockdown!

      and

      Operator: 911, do you have an emergency?
      Reasonable principal: There's some guy wearing a Star Wars costume here. He has what's probably a prop/toy gun, but I'm required by law to report firearms on campus. Can you send an officer to make contact and make sure it's just a toy?

    22. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by OhPlz · · Score: 1

      "in any building or on the grounds of any elementary or secondary school, college or university"

      The short article says he was walking around the neighborhood which doesn't sound like he was on school grounds.

    23. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not that this is the only applicable law, but he wasn't on school grounds.

    24. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      in no way this could remotely be considered something anyone would willingly don if he was to start an assault on anyone!

      Yes, spree killers being so well known for their rational behaviour and all. I'm sure no-one would adopt an affectation to commit a massacre when more practical clothing is available.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    25. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know, so this is a real question - are gun permits unlimited, or do they say you can have so many of type X and so many of type Y, or do you have to match them to the serial number of specific guns?

    26. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Insightful

      True but the police should have just checked it out and went on their way. Dressing up a stormtrooper should not be a crime. I wonder if I dressed as a giant Penguin if I would have been arrested.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    27. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by LWATCDR · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Yes, spree killers being so well known for their rational behaviour and all. I'm sure no-one would adopt an affectation [wikipedia.org] to commit a massacre [wikipedia.org] when more practical clothing is available."

      I have no problem with someone calling the police. The police should have stopped him and asked to see the blaster. When it was shown to be nothing but a toy then they tell him, "cool costume but you might not want to wear it all the time. It can freak some people out. Have a nice day."
      End of story.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    28. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reasonable principal:

      Yeah. Good luck finding one of those in Massachusetts.

    29. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's pretty obvious that you're a wingnut. Try Somalia, rather than trying to drive out civilized Americans.

    30. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by mr_mischief · · Score: 3, Funny

      Only if Happy Gilmore calls it in.

    31. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't see any reference to him being in a school building or on school grounds in the article.

    32. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by kingnite9915 · · Score: 1

      Didn't you see NCIS? They proved you could

    33. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're the one who assumed that "limp-wristed" and "light-loafered" meant gay.

      Don't project your own anti-gay bigotry on others.

    34. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1
      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    35. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      And YOU get a link! Everyone gets a link!

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    36. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you miss the bit that the Stormtrooper was not on school grounds? Or that he was not armed? That law does not apply here.

    37. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There doesn't seem to be any mention of the stormtrooper standing on school grounds, only "near" the school, whatever that means.

      To your point however, it's easy to see how a malcontent might wear a seemingly innocent outfit like this in order to have a justification for carrying a fake weapon which isn't fake at all.

    38. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      This link to a federal law may be relevant in your fucking shitty god damned tough guy rant.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    39. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1
      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    40. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Muh Feeeeeels!! They hurt so much!!!!

    41. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, what makes spree killers so scary is that their behavior *is* rational. It's their goal (killing a bunch of innocent people) that isn't rational. They plan in depth, prepare (sometimes for weeks or even months), and wait for the 'right' time in a way that an irrational person wouldn't.

    42. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Darth Vader: The liberal butthurt is strong with this one.

    43. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unconstitutional laws are illegal. That may be relevant in your liberal pansy sissy rant. Go fuck yourself asshole.

    44. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Ksevio · · Score: 0

      So being so afraid that you feel the need to carry guns everywhere is "brave" now?

    45. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Ksevio · · Score: 2

      Need to start a movement to walk by the school in a different costume every day to see what triggers the police response. Think storm trooper man is up for the job?

    46. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by OhPlz · · Score: 1

      Well fine, I'll play the gun nut then..

      "Shall not be infringed"

      That trumps the law you cited. Next thing you know, someone will be arrested on their own property because some jerks less than a thousand feet away home school their kids.

      Besides which.. he still didn't have a firearm. He can't violate the gun free school anti-Constitution zone if he didn't actually have a gun.

    47. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Infiniti2000 · · Score: 2

      Note you could call the non-emergency number. The law doesn't require you dial 911.

    48. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Mister+Transistor · · Score: 1

      No, but Batman would have been called...

      --
      -- You are in a maze of little, twisty passages, all different... --
    49. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      I think that it meets the "dangerous" level as required by that statute.. assuming of course you coat it in lead and swing it like a club...

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    50. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by MozeeToby · · Score: 2

      I think you're find that many of the times storm troopers failed to hit anything it could be argued that they were failing to hit anything on purpose. The most obvious instance is when the hero's escape the death star, it's clear Vader knew there were people on board the Falcon and wanted to use it to find the rebel base planet. Their escape was allowed because their ship was already lowjacked.

    51. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Reasonable principal:

      Yeah. Good luck finding one of those anywhere in the US.

      FTFY

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    52. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      This person has not bothered to read at least a large portion of what they keep quoting. Read the Provisions and Exceptions section of the link they keep claiming makes this a-okay. Those two areas are very clear that this is not okay.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    53. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      umm States, especially the east coast states predate the constitution. and the constitution does not apply to state governments.

    54. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      There's still the question of whether he "disturbed a school" which is what he was arrested for* - not "carrying something that looked like a gun but wasn't," which is how some people here (not you) seem to be desparately choosing to interpret it for the purposes of outrage.

      *although I don't know if that's, like, the official name of the alleged crime.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    55. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by HiThere · · Score: 1

      They also don't seem to be charging him under it. So they probably agree with you.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    56. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by yodleboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Oh get a grip. The only thing people who carry are afraid of is being in the wrong place at the wrong time and having to watch their loved ones die because they didn't have the means to at least try to defend them or get them to safety. If you feel comfortable with pleading for mercy or waiting on the arrival of 'the authorities' to ensure their safety then that's your choice.

      I keep a first aid kit handy because bad things happen sometimes. I have insurance because bad things happen sometimes. I carry because bad things happen sometimes. Being somewhat prepared to take some responsibility for your own ass is not crazy, paranoid or illegal (yet).

    57. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bah. The DC-15 was a tibanna gas hog. Inefficient as hell.
      Now a modified DL-44...

    58. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      Next thing you know, someone will be arrested on their own property because some jerks less than a thousand feet away home school their kids.

      First, a home school is not a legal school ground. Second, there is an exception if the person is on private property even if the private property is within distance of a school.

      Besides which.. he still didn't have a firearm. He can't violate the gun free school anti-Constitution zone if he didn't actually have a gun.

      I know, it's stupid. He should not have been charged with any crime, as far as I can tell no crime was committed. The law I'm citing is only justification for the principal to call the police, not for the police to arrest the guy. He wasn't charged with violating that, after all.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    59. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      pellet... down the barrel, you whip the barrel in a parabolic arc, it will be "discharged" from the weapon... technically spitballs shot through straws could be considered a fire arm with the generic terminology....

    60. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      Well don't keep me waiting, explain how that law doesn't make it OK for a principal to call the police when he sees someone walking by the school with something that he thinks is a gun.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    61. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it has always been populated by puritans... they're also the ones who banned the most books, banned the most videos, banned the most music... Boston has ALWAYS been like that... anyone believing otherwise just has to look at history of Boston and Massachusetts.

    62. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by DocSavage64109 · · Score: 1

      So is it impossible to put a plastic surround on a real gun?

    63. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by DocSavage64109 · · Score: 1

      Unless this guy is the slowest walker on earth, I can't imagine how he managed to be seen by someone, that someone told the principal, the principle called the police, and eventually the police showed up before he was gone. I tend to agree with the loitering charge.

    64. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Because the Provisions state explicitly that a Firearm must be present. There is quite a bit more by the way, but your username implies at least that you know this already.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    65. Re: Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More people watch loved ones die due to firearm accidents than that. People are crappie at estimating the likelihood of rare but scary events.

    66. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently THEY ARE ILLEGAL at a Massachusetts school!! Source >> https://malegislature.gov/laws...

      Except the guy wasn't on school grounds, making the law you cited irrelevant in this case.

    67. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoever voted this funny is a faggot.

    68. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 1

      Well, even if he did open fire; an Imperial Stormtrooper would be hard-pressed to hit the side of the school's *buildings* at more than ten yards or so. So, unless I'd happened to wear a red shirt to school that day, I wouldn't worry very much.

      --
      Imagine all the people...
    69. Re: Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "People are crappie "

      Excuse me, but I am NOT a fish!

    70. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      So the law says that the principal (or whoever) needs to go out to the person and verify that they have an actual weapon before calling the police? I thought it was the job of the police to check if the person is carrying a weapon. Maybe we're not reading the same thing. I understand why the person was not charged under this law, but I don't understand why you appear to be arguing that the principal had no reason to call in the first place.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    71. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      he wasn't on campus. he was walking in the neighborhood, which means he could have been across the street or in the same zipcode.

    72. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Nobody in your links "dressed up" for the assault any differently than they had many times before, and the "dress up" was in clothes you can find in thousands of stores, and is commonly warn by many.

      I'm grateful I'm an old bastard. I saved up my Christmas money one year and bought myself a trench coat, when I was a teen. It was great. Warm when you want it to be, but open and breezy when you wanted as well. And pockets that held everything. A full bag of popped microwave popcorn could be smuggled into a movie theater in one of the pockets. But these days, I'd get killed by the cops for having a baggy coat on.

    73. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      I could make a firearm that looked like it. The movie props were based on a real firearm, so they should look (at least a little) realistic.

    74. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      In countries where guns are illegal, even the cops are unarmed, and people are safer. An escalation of force isn't a safe move.

    75. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by AK+Marc · · Score: 2

      The law doesn't, but the police do. The last time I called the non emergency number, I was told that the only way to generate a police response was to call 911. The non emergency number exists solely for people who want to complain, but don't want to be arrested for falsely calling 911. The calls are taken and ignored. That's what the person on the other end of the line told me.

    76. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Yeah, like the Highland Park police who would arrest minorities for "loitering" all the time. The best place to collect such undesireables is a the bus stop.

      Yes, the police pulled up to a bus stop, and arrested all the minorities standing there for "loitering". They had been called on it quite a few times, but didn't officially "stop" it until they arrested the maid of a rich, white, family who pushed the issue until there was a civil rights violation conviction against the city. After that, they now only arrest minorities at bus stops for resisting arrest.

      Loitering is 99% of the time a bogus charge. It's not illegal to "loiter" in most places someone is arrested for it. It's like trespassing. It's confusing enough that they can get away with it.

      Is it loitering to wait for a bus? Do you know he wasn't waiting at a bus stop? Is it illegal to wait for school to get out so you can collect your child? The only place you are allowed to wait is in your own house? What silly world do you live in? I bet the nice public parks in the rich neighborhoods don't have all the children playing on the swings for hours arrested for loitering.

    77. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Krishnoid · · Score: 1

      Actual principal: I've got some weirdo carrying a gun on our school campus. Can you send someone over? Good, thanks. Kirk out.

    78. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Time_Ngler · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Or someone could have a real gun in a potato sack. If you saw someone carrying a potato sack, and assumed there wasn't a gun in there, a malicious person could carry a potato sack with a gun in it to catch people off guard, too!

    79. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      The only thing people who carry are afraid of is being in the wrong place at the wrong time and having to watch their loved ones die because they didn't have the means to at least try to defend them or get them to safety.

      The world must be a scary place for them!

      The good thing about first aid and insurance are that they help make realistic issues better. I don't keep a surgical table or have volcano insurance because those aren't issues I will realistically have to deal with, and if they are then there are others better equipped to handle them

    80. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you mean less than 12 parsecs?

    81. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who are you to say it's not OK for a guy to be a little flamboyant and effeminate? Your childish white knighting treatment of common gay body language is patronizing and insulting.

    82. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I was a kid in Canada, I was a bit of a misfit (surprised?).

      I went to a lab every lunch hour, to the delight of a science teacher. Except, I ended up building a pretty good amount of gun powder. When he noticed it, he flushed it down the sink.

      End of story!!

    83. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "For the purpose of this paragraph, “firearm” shall mean any pistol, revolver, rifle or smoothbore arm from which a shot, bullet or pellet can be discharged by whatever means"

      I think the principal would have been fine. Standard weapons for Stormtroopers are energy based. They don't fire bullets, pellets, or shots.

    84. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      So the law says that the principal (or whoever) needs to go out to the person and verify that they have an actual weapon before calling the police? I thought it was the job of the police to check if the person is carrying a weapon.

      Please stop with the ridiculous arguments, you are not going to be correct on this. Being in a costume is not illegal, even if the person has a toy gun. There is no probable cause for the Police to detain this person, so the Police have violated the person's rights.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    85. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Would you be able to tell that a large teddy bear or a bouquet of flowers, or a duffel bag, or a backpack, or a rolled up exercise mat, or a large stuffed fish, etc., etc. _wasn't_ a gun? Sure, the stormtrooper outfit might be some sort of bizarre double bluff, but you logically don't need a double bluff when there are so many other ways of hiding guns.

    86. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wonder if I dressed as a giant Penguin if I would have been arrested.

      No, but if you dressed up as Barney the Purple Dinosaur, you would have been shot dead on sight!

    87. Re: Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Liberal wing nut? Haven't liberals been proven wrong time after time?

    88. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You call 911 if it requires immediate attention and the non-emergency line if they can show up when they like. If in doubt you call 911 and let them deal with it. People don't get prosecuted for a false call unless it's obvious that the call shouldn't have been made. Somebody with a gun replica is a reason to call 911, even if you later learn that it was a replica. Running out of McNuggets isn't.

      But, if you see a burglar running off you'd still call 911 because it requires prompt attention. They may or may not do anything, but it's for the dispatcher to decide.

    89. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by sound+vision · · Score: 1

      Sir, I invite you to register a Slashdot account and encourage you to participate in any discussions where guns are mentioned, when the inevitable "...but the rest of the world has banned them!" guy comes up.

    90. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So, now a plastic blaster is a firearm capable of discharging shot, bullets or pellets?

      Interesting question.
      With the numerous stories of 3D-printed guns, I wonder if it would be possible to 3D-print a plaster-looking gun that actually can fire a shot or two.
      A couple of those around and one would have to consider bright orange obviously fake plastic guns to be as dangerous as real guns.

    91. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm fine with that as long as you take responsibility for it if one of those things ends up in the wrong hands and are misused.

      The only thing people who carry are afraid of is being in the wrong place at the wrong time and having to watch their loved ones die because they didn't have the means to at least try to defend them or get them to safety.

      Apart from Bollywood movies people doesn't have the reaction time to pick out a gun, fire it and hit the oncoming bullet to divert it.
      Having a gun won't prevent you from having to watch your loved ones die. Having a gun makes it possible to kill the bastard who did it afterwards.

    92. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're being sarcastic, right? Spree killers are often highly rational in the planning of their acts.

    93. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being somewhat prepared to take some responsibility for your own ass is not crazy, paranoid or illegal (yet).

      Apart from the last but, yes it is.

      Far more friends and family are killed by honest America's firearms than bad guys'guns. Bad guys are rarely, to the point of statistically NEVER stopped by good guys carrying 'just in case'.

      You're deluded if you think otherwise. Ergo, crazy and paranoid.

    94. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh get a grip. The only thing people who carry are afraid of is being in the wrong place at the wrong time and having to watch their loved ones die because they didn't have the means to at least try to defend them or get them to safety. If you feel comfortable with pleading for mercy or waiting on the arrival of 'the authorities' to ensure their safety then that's your choice.

      I keep a first aid kit handy because bad things happen sometimes. I have insurance because bad things happen sometimes. I carry because bad things happen sometimes. Being somewhat prepared to take some responsibility for your own ass is not crazy, paranoid or illegal (yet).

      Carrying a gun IS crazy. Defending yourself with a weapon won't be like some hollywood action flick. You are better off running... Or using common sense to avoid getting in such a situation in the first place.

    95. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apparently THEY ARE ILLEGAL at a Massachusetts school!! Source >> https://malegislature.gov/laws...

      At a school perhaps, but he wasn't AT a school so your argument is meaningless.

    96. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

      1. The news report said that the man was walking down the street of he neighborhood near school grounds. If it is like my old neighborhood, there is an elementary school right in the middle of the neighborhood with homes surrounding it.

      2. A plastic toy gun doesn't qualify as a dangerous weapon so the above law wouldn't even apply.

      A sane person or police officer would check out the situation and simply said there is nothing to worry about.

      --
      These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
    97. Re: Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just curious here, which countries do you consider to be the most liberal? How are they failing (economically, educationally, industrially etc.)?

    98. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by hawk · · Score: 1

      >Basically, this was the option open to the principal, knock it over to the police.

      When your lightsaber is in the shop for repairs, calling the police is the only way to deal with a blaster . . .

      hawk, reminding everyone to engage in preventative maintenance

    99. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you seen that new BT-16? They say it's quite a thing to see

    100. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, you could argue that, but I think that would be giving Lucas too much credit.

    101. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Different guy here, but my high school had a rifle range in the basement...... in Canada

    102. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is the message may not get through so clearly. Everyone thinks school and panics.

      I remember an occasion:
      911: What is your emergency?
      Teacher: This is XYZ school. We have dropped a flask of fuming nitric acid in a laboratory. There are no injuries or external contamination. The building has been evacuated and sealed off. We need the fire service to enter the laboratory with breathing apparatus and deploy the spill kit.

      In this case, the fire service showed up with 5 fire engines, 6 ambulances, 2 dedicate Hazmat vehicles and 2 cops for escort.

    103. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Agripa · · Score: 1

      The interesting part about the federal law is that it applies to unlicensed carry whether legal in the state or not.

    104. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      "Yes, spree killers being so well known for their rational behaviour and all. I'm sure no-one would adopt an affectation [wikipedia.org] to commit a massacre [wikipedia.org] when more practical clothing is available."

      I have no problem with someone calling the police. The police should have stopped him and asked to see the blaster. When it was shown to be nothing but a toy then they tell him, "cool costume but you might not want to wear it all the time. It can freak some people out. Have a nice day." End of story.

      But then it wouldn't have been a story which slashdotters could get all Second Amendmenty about.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    105. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Basically, this was the option open to the principal, knock it over to the police

      What absurd cowardice. Just walk up and ask the guy what he's up to, for fucks sake.

      And if he's an armed nutter, he might just shoot you. There are things which it's best to leave to the police, although I appreciate this is blasphemy now on slashdot.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    106. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      I'm definitely right, you just apparently think I'm arguing some point that I'm not. I'm arguing that the principal was correct to call the police, and that most likely the police messed up.

      There is no probable cause for the Police to detain this person

      How do you know that, were you there? Did you see the interaction? Do you know if the guy in costume was cooperative or did he argue with the police, refuse to let them inspect the gun, etc? You seem to have the details, so I'm curious what exactly transpired there. I can see a possible situation where the guy in costume deserved to get arrested, and I don't have the necessary details to know whether or not the cops acted correctly. I'm assuming that the cop was having a bad day and decided to be a dick, but I don't know if that's the case or not.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    107. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Being cooperative with the police is not a requirement, and if you are innocent of any criminal actions the police have no right to question you or detain you. Check the law on that one, because there have been numerous cases thrown out of court where the only crime has been not cooperating with police. There is another mass of overturned cases because cops behaved illegally and unconstitutionally.

      The law as written does not claim that a person can not be in a costume, and several courts have repealed lower convictions of idiocy like the Pop-tart gun. The times when that law has been active are cases of real firearms on school property. Other laws and policies have been used to expel kids for toys.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    108. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      Being cooperative with the police is not a requirement, and if you are innocent of any criminal actions the police have no right to question you or detain you.

      You're suggesting that if you are walking near a school with a toy gun which looks at a glance like it might be real, that the police do not have the right to question you about whether the gun is real? If it's real, then you're breaking the law. If it's not real, then you aren't. If the police are only allowed to question you if you have broken the law, then how do they determine if you have?

      What you wrote above is only partly correct. The police have every right to question you if they suspect you have broken a law. If the police walk up to you and start questioning you, you can often end that encounter by simply asking them if they suspect that you committed a crime and, if so, what. If you disagree, feel free to go buy a toy gun (like this one, for example) and then stroll around your neighborhood elementary or high school. When the police approach you, go ahead and tell them how you haven't committed any crime so they don't have the right to question you. Note how they say that they're trying to determine whether a crime has been committed, and they'd like to find out if that's a real gun.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    109. Re:Could you tell a difference at distance? by Infiniti2000 · · Score: 1

      You're missing the point. The idea here is that a reasonable person realizes that the dude in the stormtrooper outfit isn't carrying a real gun. To fulfill the "law" the principal must report this, but she might as well do so using the non-emergency number. If the police don't actually respond, who cares.

  21. The 501st Rule by Daetrin · · Score: 4, Informative

    I wonder if it would have helped if he'd had a friend. The 501st has a rule "never troop alone", which they came up with after observing that under identical circumstances many people will think one stormtrooper is a little scary but two (or more) stormtroopers are awesome.

    --
    This Space Intentionally Left Blank
    1. Re:The 501st Rule by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The 501st should hold a damn parade past that school.

    2. Re:The 501st Rule by Archwyrm · · Score: 1

      I do enjoy a good military parade! It would need a proper marching band too!

      --
      Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power. -- Mussolini
    3. Re:The 501st Rule by rsmith-mac · · Score: 2

      Yes, but you have to use the right version of the song. Star Wars Rebels did a take on the Imperial March that is an upbeat, brass band version that is perfect for a parade (and indeed that was the scene it was used in).

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vV5Cckw_fKo

  22. Invented COMPLIANCE 'laws' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    There is ZERO difference between the actions of this 'principal', and ISIS enforcers operating in lands targeted by Saudi Arabia, the USA and Israel. It is always about sheeple COMPLIANCE, and making it clear to the sheeple that reasonable and harmless 'deviation' from expected 'norms' will NOT be tolerated.

    That gay kid denied the right to give his speech at his graduation- same thing. And before the usually neo-liberal trolls on this site suggest this is a 'right-wing' phenomenon, such suppression is actually far better organised by the neo-liberals/SJWs.

    A a kid, I once saw a older man curiously dressed in Victorian formal garb. My fellow schoolmates fell over themselves to express OUTRAGE at his appearance. These young sheeple had been successfully conditioned to look out for 'black' sheep, and demand they be 'torn to pieces'. You may see mob outrages on video from Africa or South America and think "that could never happen here"- but it does, all the time. Maybe the level of overt violence is 'less', but that really isn't the point.

    1. Re:Invented COMPLIANCE 'laws' by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      There is ZERO difference between the actions of this 'principal', and ISIS enforcers

      I think that, except in brevity, that matches "literally Hitler" as an hysterical over-reaction.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  23. So? by mbadolato · · Score: 1

    Even if it WAS a real gun, it's not like a Stormtropper can actually hit anything!

    Also, I went to that elementary school until mid-year 2nd grade

    1. Re:So? by sls1j · · Score: 1

      Even if it WAS a real gun, it's not like a Stormtropper can actually hit anything!

      Also, I went to that elementary school until mid-year 2nd grade

      I must say your grammar is quite good for someone who was kicked out of school half way through the 2nd grade.

    2. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Stormtropper

      Should've stayed in school, kid.

    3. Re:So? by mbadolato · · Score: 1

      I must say your grammar is quite good for someone who was kicked out of school half way through the 2nd grade.

      I'd joke about it being an accelerated class, but this is a public school in the city of Lynn, MA we're talking about... :)

  24. Idiot Principal and Idiot Police officers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Walking from point A to point B - is not loitering.

    Carrying an obviously fake laser pistol isn't a crime.

    False arrest, sue the City and School district both for everything in their budgets.

    1. Re:Idiot Principal and Idiot Police officers by theNetImp · · Score: 1

      you've never been to Lynn before... they don't have budgets....

  25. point proven by meglon · · Score: 2

    If the guy had been dressed as a redshirt with a phaser, nothing would have happened.

    --
    Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
    1. Re:point proven by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2

      If the guy had been dressed as a red shirt with a phaser, nothing would have happened.

      You don't watch much Star Trek, do you?

    2. Re:point proven by Jason+Levine · · Score: 1

      But what would have happened if a guy dressed as a red shirt met up with the Stormtrooper?

      --
      My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
    3. Re:point proven by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

      well, he would have died, instead of getting arrested. so it probably worked out in his favor.

    4. Re:point proven by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aside from a visit to a soon-to-be-grieving widow by some fine young gentlemen from Starfleet's Office of Personal Management, no... Nothing.

  26. Well, *someone* showed bad judgment.... by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 1

    But probably not the guy obviously dressed as a storm trooper with a fake blaster. What was he doing to do in that costume? Shoot someone and run away. Because it's so easy to be inconspicuous running in a storm trooper outfit....

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    1. Re:Well, *someone* showed bad judgment.... by CrashNBrn · · Score: 1

      Dude, didn't you see the previous posts? He had a Tie Fighter with Free Candy painted on it.

  27. On the other hand... by Attack+DAWWG · · Score: 1

    On the other hand, what if he had been wearing a turban, instead of a stormtrooper costume?

    The entire school would have been closed down for a week, Congress would be scrambling for new laws to "protect our children from turra!!!" and Fox News would still, even now, be on site with 24/7 coverage.

    1. Re:On the other hand... by Osgeld · · Score: 1

      dont be silly, they would have invited him in and kissed his ass to show they are not racist

  28. Same school shit that I remember by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    Schools, both public and private, want make everyone to Toe the Line. They coerce parents and students to this goal. The administrative staff at every school lives and breathes this life style, and are quick to apply the same methods to anyone within their territory. Every day of school was a battle of wills for me, the staff trying to break me to comply, me trying to survive with my dignity intact.

    I recommend that all of you tell your children that when they go out in the real world to get a job, recognize that their experience in school should be considered the low bar and hold their employers and peers to a higher standard. Don't take shit from anyone for longer than you have to.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  29. Police state of MA by Pro923 · · Score: 2

    I don't know about the rest of the country, but Mass has really become a police state. They have amassed complete power, and are able to basically arrest anyone at any time if they feel like doing so. The laws are made such that almost everyone is breaking the law on any given day. This gives the police the power to circumvent the law, human rights, innocent until proven guilty, etc - they can racially profile, or whatever they want. For example, Mass is the only state (FL has a similar law, but is only about a tenth the duration) where someone can go to the police station and say "I think my husband has a drinking problem". an hour later, they will walk right into your house and take you out in cuffs, bring you to the courthouse where upwards of 95% of the time they determine that you need help - with no proof whatsoever - and ship you off to Bridgewater prison for up to 90 days. Bridgewater is a cesspool of germs and filth, which makes even hardened criminals cringe - where you're treated worse than a rabid mutt in a kennel - completely devoid of human rights or care of any kind. I couldn't even describe it in a way that would convey the actual horror of the whole thing.

    It's big business for the state - this is how we create jobs in MA. It's a vicious machine that chews often innocent people and shits them out with a shade of PTSD. Worse, people are catching on, and using this "section 35" to get rid of their husband as a precursor to stripping them of their money, family, children, career and anything else that you might have worked your whole life to create. Why choose between your cake and eating it too when you can have both - sponsored and encouraged by the state.

  30. Apparently by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "the way things are in today's society" is braindead.

  31. Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by mangu · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    to familiarize kids with real guns

    Why? Why the fuck should kids be familiar with real guns? I think you grew up in the wrong neighborhood.

    I hope some day the only familiarity kids will have with guns will be in visits to a museum, where they will also see steam engines and whalebone corsets.

    1. Re:Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by operagost · · Score: 5, Insightful

      They'll be right down the hall from where quaint notions like the rights to life, liberty, and property are exhibited.

      --

      Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
    2. Re:Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Why? Why the fuck should kids be familiar with real guns? I think you grew up in the wrong neighborhood.

      Hmm, a bit of a hoplophobe, I see...

      Why should you be familiar with guns? Well, how about because you're much less likely to do something stupid with one (like treat it as a toy) if you know something about them?

      Also, you're much less likely to wet yourself at sight of one if you know something about them.

      Keep in mind that we have no problems giving 15-year-olds access to automobiles (in some States. 16 in others), which are MUCH more dangerous than guns. Note that there are probably more guns in the US than cars, yet more people killed by cars than by guns.

      Plus there's the old "we fear what we do not understand" thing. Knowing something about guns will be more likely to lead to less panic over the things....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    3. Re:Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why the fuck should kids be familiar with real guns?

      I already explained that. So that people walking down the street with toys don't generate hysterical 911 calls.
      Apparently there's a certain segment of our adult population who haven't been exposed to firearms in the normal course of their life, and they could use some experience with them. They're useful tools whose possession is protected by the highest law of the land. They're also pretty dangerous, and a little training could go a long way to prevent some of the problems these ignorant people have with them.

      I hope some day the only familiarity kids will have with guns will be in visits to a museum, where they will also see steam engines and whalebone corsets.

      What technology do you expect to take the place of the guns?

    4. Re:Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by geekmux · · Score: 1

      to familiarize kids with real guns

      Why? Why the fuck should kids be familiar with real guns? I think you grew up in the wrong neighborhood.

      I hope some day the only familiarity kids will have with guns will be in visits to a museum, where they will also see steam engines and whalebone corsets.

      Ironically we'll teach kids about condoms, but won't teach them how to properly handle and unload a weapon.

      A (educated) child might just save the life of an (ignorant) one if they KNOW how to disarm a potentially deadly situation.

      Nah, fuck that. Avoidance and ignorance is the answer I'm sure. Let's also teach kids that water is BAD so we don't have to teach them how to swim too.

      Oh, and about that museum idea. A new gun is purchased in the US every 3 seconds. Good luck.

    5. Re:Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by SuiteSisterMary · · Score: 1

      Same reason they should be familiar with dogs, pools, household cleaners and chemicals, the big-ass knives in the kitchen, power tools in the house, and so on:

      So they know how to safely interact with them if it's not possible to avoid them.

      --
      Vintage computer games and RPG books available. Email me if you're interested.
    6. Re:Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by danbert8 · · Score: 1

      I was familiar with all the fake guns in Goldeneye 64. I was so disappointed to find out that a PP7 was not a thing...

      --
      Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    7. Re:Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      grew up in the wrong neighborhood

      Yeah, I know, Drenthe, MI is quite the ghetto. Look it up on Google Maps. It'll send you to Zeeland, MI, then you have to locate 64th and Adams St. in the lower right part of the highlighted area.

      (For those who don't want to go through the exercise, it's a firehouse and a church surrounded by farmland.)

      Every time I drive through there I fear that some violence is going to break out between the Vandenbergs and the Vanderveenderhovens! And never take 64th to the north side in Overeisel! That's Vandenwiersma territory!

    8. Re:Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm, a bit of a hoplophobe, I see...

      Hmm, a bit of a smart arse who goes out of his way to use somewhat obscure words in an effort to make himself look smarter than everyone else, I see...

    9. Re:Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by halivar · · Score: 1

      Context should have given you immediate understanding. Do you have a rough time learning new vocabulary?

    10. Re:Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by ancientt · · Score: 1

      During development, this pistol was called the Walther PPK after its real-world counterpart. The name was presumably changed for legal reasons.

      See: http://goldeneye.wikia.com/wik...

      and: http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Walt...

      --
      B) Eliminate all the stupid users. This is frowned upon by society.
    11. Re:Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by goose-incarnated · · Score: 1

      to familiarize kids with real guns

      Why? Why the fuck should kids be familiar with real guns? I think you grew up in the wrong neighborhood.

      I hope some day the only familiarity kids will have with guns will be in visits to a museum, where they will also see steam engines and whalebone corsets.

      Really now! Are you seriously prepared to argue that abstinence works better than education?

      --
      I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
    12. Re:Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by Ksevio · · Score: 1

      Should we teach everyone about all dangerous things? Have a class on crossbow safety just in case people come across a medieval crossbow?

      We give 16 year olds access to cars because cars are useful. Guns really have no use in modern society other than dangerous toys.

    13. Re:Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      to familiarize kids with real guns

      Why? Why the fuck should kids be familiar with real guns? I think you grew up in the wrong neighborhood.

      I hope some day the only familiarity kids will have with guns will be in visits to a museum, where they will also see steam engines and whalebone corsets.

      This will also be where they see most terrestial megafauna due to their extinction.

    14. Re:Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have 2 daughters, and I have tried to give them some basic familiarity with guns. I think they should, at a minimum, know how to drop a magazine & clear the chamber in a semi-auto. I think all kids in America should know the basics of how a gun works, because they are likely to come across one at some point in their life. Not in a bad way, just in a "they're around" kind of way. They should respect them, like a bench saw or other dangerous piece of machinery, but know enough not to fear them.

    15. Re:Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by shmlco · · Score: 1

      "Ironically we'll teach kids about condoms..."

      Ironically, most of the people in the states that advocate teaching kids about guns are terribly afraid to teach little Johnny and little Billy Jean that condoms even exist, much less how to use them.

      Which is too bad, since that might go pretty far in cutting soaring teen pregnancy rates in those red "abstinence-only" states.

      Nah, fuck that. Avoidance and ignorance is the answer I'm sure.

      --
      Any sect, cult, or religion will legislate its creed into law if it acquires the political power to do so.
    16. Re: Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guns are made to kill. That's all they do. How can Americans seriously think that a car is designed to kill. It's designed to transport!!

    17. Re:Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Why should you be familiar with guns? Well, how about because you're much less likely to do something stupid with one (like treat it as a toy) if you know something about them?

      But most people don't need to have any real familiarity with guns in order not to do something stupid with them, for the simple reason that they don't ever come across them.

      I know enough not to try to lick a black widow spider or jump off the top of a skyscraper without needing any more detailed knowledge.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    18. Re:Maybe we SHOULD fear guns by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      A (educated) child might just save the life of an (ignorant) one if they KNOW how to disarm a potentially deadly situation.

      It's only a potentially deadly situation because gun-loving arseholes leave loaded weapons lying around the house.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  32. What has this world come to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When you can't even walk outside looking like a stormtrooper.

  33. Lame by sootman · · Score: 1

    It's messed up that they arrested some poor working Joe who was just trying to do his job. He was just looking for droids.

    --
    Dear Slashdot: next time you want to mess with the site, add a rich-text editor for comments.
  34. If you think you're free... by RavenLrD20k · · Score: 1

    The Vandals had the lyric "If you think you're free, try walking into a deli and pissing on the cheese" in Anarchy Burger. It was featured in xXx.

    I think it could safely be changed to "If you think you're free, try doing cosplay (strike)in a school-zone(/strike)," now. (If only the -strike- tag actually worked here)

  35. Race Baiting by danbert8 · · Score: 2

    I'm just waiting for the media headline: "How Would the Police React if the Stormtrooper Was Black?"

    --
    Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
    1. Re:Race Baiting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The answering headline would read "Cosplayer shot in back while resisting arrest".

    2. Re:Race Baiting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then they'd assume he was one of theirs.

  36. Constitution protects real weapons only by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fuck the first amendment says principal Skinner.

  37. Wearing a stormtrooper costume is bad judgement? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Large groups of people dressed and carrying the same as this guy should start walking by schools all over the nation.

    This being anything more than a phone call and the cops talking to the guy for a minute to make sure he's not a threat is the absolute most that should have happened.

    "Excuse me, sir. We heard reports of someone carrying a gun near the school over there. Oh, it's a fake blaster to go along with your very well known costume? We'll let the school know. Have a great day. Also, great costume."

  38. Surprised? by ArhcAngel · · Score: 1

    Is this really surprisisng?

    --
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
  39. I think this article is fake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And is intended to get the "obummer took our guns" crows all riled up. CAW CAW CAW

  40. Storm Trooper by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's a good thing he wasn't a 12 year old black kid or the cops would have shot him...

  41. And you know what this means by foreverdisillusioned · · Score: 1

    Lucas can solve this by simply turning the blasters into walkie talkies in the next special edition.

  42. you are projecting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    let me guess, you don't like anything that lead to you not being able to carry your real penis replacement into a school.

    1. Re:you are projecting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you have an SJW blog somewhere to update?

      Fuck off, cunt.

  43. Police spokesman said by Culture20 · · Score: 1

    "The principal used poor judgement so we've warned the principal."
    It would be nice if this were the quote, but it would be less of a story.

  44. Left out the important part of that police quote by cHiphead · · Score: 1

    A police spokesman tells the Salem News the way things are in today's society, "you can't have that" and said Cross "used bad judgment."

    I don't normally say this, but in this case I will:

    Fuck the police.

    --

    This is my sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
  45. Stormtrooper VS redshit by phorm · · Score: 1

    The stormtrooper would take the and miss. However the haywire shot would take out an important girder, which would then cause the ceiling to collapse killing both trooper and redshirts.

  46. Shoe; other foot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The man was then arrested and charged with disturbing a school and loitering. A civilian spokesman said the police "used bad judgment."

  47. Oh, THAT stormtrooper... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I checked in with Slashdot just after leaving an exhibit at the Missouri History Museum about Nazi propaganda. Not the stormtrooper I expected ...

  48. Hysterical ninnies by K.+S.+Van+Horn · · Score: 1

    "I guess this shows you what not to do when geeking out on Star Wars."

    No, this shows you what hysterical ninnies the principal and the police were.

  49. The Real Reason He Was Arrested by Jason+Levine · · Score: 2

    The real reason he was arrested? A friend of his left a few Android devices for him to pick up. He found someone else's Android devices and took them instead

    Those weren't the droids he was looking for.

    *ducks the rotten tomatoes thrown at me*

    --
    My sci-fi novel, Ghost Thief, is now available from Amazon.com.
  50. That man was extremely lucky ... by DrJimbo · · Score: 0

    If he had noticably dark skin then he might have been shot dead instead of simply being arrested.

    --
    We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
    -- Anais Nin
    1. Re:That man was extremely lucky ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      relative to the amount of crime committed, white people are disproportionately shot by the police compared to blacks

      but thanks for trying to shove your SJW bullshit on us anyway.

  51. Re:A police spokesman said the man "used bad judgm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It would have been alrighty had he driven a car, but since he walked on a public street in Americah it's all-out arresto-fest.

  52. unlawful arrest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the principal and arresting officer should go to prison for a few years and the stormtrooper should get a million in damages.

  53. Can we arrest the police for bad judgment? by Agent0013 · · Score: 1

    It seems like bad judgment to go around arresting people who are in a costume. Perhaps we should arrest the police chief. And if I see anyone in a police uniform with a weapon, I can assume they are a burglar in disguise and kill them before they try to hurt me, right? I mean, it can only be considered bad judgment to be in a uniform that criminals would wear when doing crime.

    --

    -- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
  54. civil suit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sue the school and the principal

    the school for hiring the principal

    the principal for endangering the life of the storm trooper with an unnecessary police interaction

  55. So many of these things are theater by Karmashock · · Score: 1

    They fear the impression of a gun more than an actual gun.

    I could put a gun in a pineapple... and this guy wouldn't even know.

    If I were a bad guy... a mass shooter... why would I make it easy for any moron to look at me and tell what I'm doing? I could put the gun in anything. A box of f'ing cheerios.

    Every person that wants to make society safe by taking away the guns needs to watch this...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    Ta Da!

    I can blow your house up with a water heater. You can make a bomb that can take down a big office building out of fertilizer.

    You're policing the wrong thing. Instead of policing weapons, police INTENT... police CRAZY... police INCOMPETENCE.

    You could give me a thermonuclear weapon. Put the button to detonate that thing right in my hot little hand.

    Know what would happen? Nothing. I've no intent to mass murder people. I am no crazy. And I'm not so stupid that I'm going to accidentally press the button.

    In Switzerland they give their own people machine guns and a bag of bullets. Everyone in Switzerland has a machine gun and a bag of bullets. How many mass shootings are there are Switzerland despite the fact that everyone has a machine gun and a bag of bullets?

    Do you see? I'm sure some of you don't... But that's on you... because this is really fucking simple.

    Who is the one that shoots a school up? Just some guy with a gun? Any guy with a gun? No. It is a crazy person with a gun. Or a radical terrorist of some stripe.

    Well what is the lowest common demoninator?

    Think about it. No motherfucker... don't react like a fucking animal. Use your brain. Actually work it out.

    The lowest common demoninator in violent uses of weapons:
    Criminals
    Crazy people
    Terrorists

    The vast majority of gun owners are none of these and don't do anything against anyone with them.

    Here you might say "but we're not mind readers, how do we police for things that are ideas or mental states?"

    Easily.

    1. The police know where the criminals are and they know where the gangs operate. They are very predictable and tend to have established territories. Finding a gang member with an illegal weapon is about as easy as finding a cop with an official firearm. It is really really easy. So if you want to disarm the gangs... make any effort to do it. Current policy in the US is to let the gangs do whatever they want so long as they only kill each other. Literally that. We have these big death tolls in the cities because when push comes to shove... no one cares if the gang members kill each other.

    2. Crazy people out themselves almost always especially early on when they ask for help. A lot of the people that later went on to do shootings were involved in some kind of mental health program that didn't work out very well. Sending these people to asylums is the way to go. Seriously... big building... nice gardens... lots of jello... lots of great drugs... lots of jigsaw puzzles and water colors.

    3. The domestic terrorists all have a "message" they want to "show the world" or show the country they're in or show some ethnic group or something. And that tends to start with a lot of violent preaching LONG before any violence happens. Go to the Mosques that terrorists frequented and you'll find a lot of violence and intolerance preached in the Mosque. The moderate Muslims LEAVE these mosques and join more moderate ones. And that just leaves a cluster of increasingly radicalized people in the existing mosque. And for the other sorts of terrorists you get the same thing. They write manifestos and send them to the news and write crazy violent statements online... and a fair number of these people are ALSO crazy... and so you have TWO opportunities to catch them.

    Now will taking our guns away reduce violence? Depends. If the gangs want to kill each other and the police still don't care... then what does that change?

    As to crazy people... they

    --
    I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
  56. Your tax Dollars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hard at work.. At least they didn't bust the Meth lab across the street from the school.. Else where would the principal have to hook up

  57. Re:Left out the important part of that police quot by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

    Fuck the police.

    Seriously. Even Sting's solo work isn't all that great.

    --
    "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  58. Hmmm by camazotz · · Score: 2

    Must have been one of the new black stormtroopers.

  59. Buried the Lead... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "A police spokesman tells the Salem News the way things are in today's society, "you can't have that" and said Cross "used bad judgment."

    The police telling us what we can and can't have as far as otherwise legal behavior, bad judgment or no.

    So, the stormtrooper was whom? From TFA doesn't seem to be the person in the plastic suit.

  60. Re:Wearing a stormtrooper costume is bad judgement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If exercising bad judgment were a crime, all of Congress would be in jail!

  61. A != B by khasim · · Score: 2

    ... are just ornamental and serve no other purpose?

    You added the "and serve no other purpose" onto the original statement:

    Nothing except the ornamental bits.

    Everything you listed DOES serve another purpose.

    BUT none of them affect the operation of the weapon. I spent 7 years in the Army and I can shoot a weapon with a carrying handle as effectively as one without a carrying handle.

  62. Read it yourself! by s.petry · · Score: 1

    A plastic toy does not meet any of the criteria required for it to be illegal! A Plastic toy is not a firearm, and can NOT be discharged.

    Provisions

    18 U.S.C. 922(q)(2)(A) states:
    It shall be unlawful for any individual knowingly to possess a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the individual knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, is a school zone.

    18 U.S.C. 922(q)(3)(A) states:
    Except as provided in subparagraph (B), it shall be unlawful for any person, knowingly or with reckless disregard for the safety of another, to discharge or attempt to discharge a firearm that has moved in or that otherwise affects interstate or foreign commerce at a place that the person knows is a school zone.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:Read it yourself! by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      A plastic toy does not meet any of the criteria required for it to be illegal! A Plastic toy is not a firearm, and can NOT be discharged.

      Yeah, I know, which is why he was not charged under this law (and should not have been charged at all). But this law is probably the specific reason why the principal called the police with a report of a man with what appeared to be a gun near a school. Everyone here is saying it doesn't matter because he's not actually on school property. Well, it DOES matter if he's within 1000 feet of the grounds. That is why I keep citing it. Apparently it is not common knowledge that it is not legal to carry guns near schools. I learned this when purchasing a gun, but not everyone knows it.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    2. Re:Read it yourself! by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I know, which is why he was not charged under this law (and should not have been charged at all).

      Yet you keep posting the link and claiming that the arrest was justified...baffling

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    3. Re:Read it yourself! by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      and claiming that the arrest was justified

      Please point out where I did that. What I am justifying is the principal calling the police. Show me where I said it was fine for him to be arrested.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    4. Re:Read it yourself! by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Sure, you never explicitly stated that the guy should be arrested but that claim is idiotic given your repeated claim that the Principle was right and repeatedly falsely claiming that a law (which you repeated linked) supports the principle and police actions (the latter I demonstrated to be false, indicating that your premise is also false). So what you are attempting to do is nitpick something to look correct, and you and I both know that is bullshit.

      If you claim the principle was correct in calling the police the _only_ obvious implication is that the person was in the wrong, not the principle.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    5. Re:Read it yourself! by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      your repeated claim that the Principle was right and repeatedly falsely claiming that a law (which you repeated linked) supports the principle and police actions

      If there was a guy walking down the street, wearing a costume, carrying an actual weapon, with an intent to go on school grounds and start shooting people, and the principal saw this person and decided to ignore him because he was wearing a costume, would that principal be doing his job?

      You keep mis-stating my position. My position is this:

      1. The principal acted correctly in telling the police to make contact with the guy and check him out.
      2. The law that I keep citing is what the principal may use to justify police making contact with the guy. If it was a real weapon, he would have been violating that law.

      That's it. That's my position. Notice there's no judgment of what the police actually did. You're claiming that I am using that law to justify the police actions. No I'm not. That law does not say that the police can arrest someone for disturbing a school or loitering if they are carrying a toy gun. I'm not claiming that it does say that. The law is not a factor at all in how the police responded once they determined that the gun was not real, and I never said it did. The law is the reason why the principal would (and should) call the police in the first place. If that's a real gun then the principal isn't doing his job if he ignores it, it doesn't matter what the guy is wearing and it's not the job of the principal to determine if the weapon is real.

      If you claim the principle was correct in calling the police the _only_ obvious implication is that the person was in the wrong, not the principle.

      Why does someone have to be in the wrong? Why is there a good guy and a bad guy? The principal was correct and justified to do what he did. The costumed guy was justified to be walking down the street if that's what he felt like doing. I doubt the cops were justified in arresting the guy, but I didn't see the interaction they had. I find no fault with the principal or the costumed guy, assuming he proved early on that the gun wasn't real. If the police knew the gun wasn't real then the arrest probably was not justified. There's no reason to vilify the principal for doing his job though.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
    6. Re:Read it yourself! by s.petry · · Score: 1

      I believe you are giving the wrong hypothetical and action. Let me put this out instead of trying to answer yours.

      If a person was walking down the street in a costume and it appeared like they had a gun, what is the appropriate responses and legal actions from law enforcement?

      Police can ask the person what they are doing in the area, ask them anything they want including whether or not the gun is real. Police can notify the person that they received a complaint, and even suggest that the person move along to make someone feel more comfortable. Key in on "ask", and "notify" because that is all they can do.

      The person does not legally have to respond to any questions, nor do they have to provide any information. They are not committing a crime if they are in a public area. It is not illegal to exercise your 5th amendment rights, and police can not file charges against on a person exercising for their 5th amendment rights.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    7. Re:Read it yourself! by amicusNYCL · · Score: 1

      If a person was walking down the street in a costume and it appeared like they had a gun, what is the appropriate responses and legal actions from law enforcement?

      In this hypothetical scenario, is the person in a place where the possession of a gun is restricted? Because, if so, I think you know my answer.

      --
      "Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
  63. Come ON... by TaleSpinner · · Score: 1

    In a school system whose policies literally cannot differentiate between an actual loaded and cocked gun and a half-eaten pop-tart, do we really expect these people to be smart enough to tell when a BLASTER is fake? I mean, ASIDE from the fact that ALL blasters are fake? Come ON, really!

    http://gawker.com/5988299/scho...

    http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ex...

    To even BEGIN doing this we would first have to teach the "authorities" the difference between "fact" and "fiction" which we already KNOW is beyond their poor mental capabilities!

  64. Things have changed by Vinegar+Joe · · Score: 2

    "The principal saw his fake blaster and called 911."

    When I was growing up, people thought the school principal and teachers were the smartest people around. They don't anymore.

    --
    "The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
  65. Nope. by Travelsonic · · Score: 1

    I guess this shows you what not to do when geeking out on Star Wars.

    No, it shows how hyper-paranoid we've become, to the point where we're too afraid to even ask people questions, just jump to conclusions. >_

    --
    If you believe in privacy, and believe you have "nothing to hide" at the same time, you're a goddammed idiot
  66. Where have you been hiding ?? by Archfeld · · Score: 1

    This has happened several times already. A 9 year old sporting a very realistic looking CO2 pellet gun was killed a couple of years ago, and a bank robber dressed a sawed off shotgun up as a super soaker. The key is don't wave anything around that can be misinterpreted as weapon, people have no common sense and the cops will arrest anyone for anything and then let the DA decide whether to press charges.

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
    1. Re:Where have you been hiding ?? by Trachman · · Score: 1

      Nowhere the article says that stormtrooper was waving the gun.

      "... the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed".

      Common sense tells me that you have to assume that storm trooper has a gun, and ... ignore it.

    2. Re: Where have you been hiding ?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The key is don't wave anything around that can be misinterpreted as weapon, people have no common sense"

      This is the wrong attitude to have because eventually it leads to "the key is to let the jackboot thugs search your home without a warrant. It's common sense"... The real key is to not let the police get away with shit like this. It slowly erodes freedom, and that's exactly what the government wants. It's just like in Animal Farm, freedom isn't lost overnight, it's slowly whittled away and eventually nobody remembers what freedom was really like..

  67. Pff by Greyfox · · Score: 1

    You know stormtroopers can't hit shit with their blasters anyway. The blast goggles interfere with their depth perception.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  68. I went to that school by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The front of that school is on a very busy "main" street.

    I don't know what this guy might also have been doing / or what he might have said to the cops / or refused to "move along" (no star wars pun intended), but its a busy public street. If the principal's gonna call the police on the thousands (maybe tens of thousands) of cars that pass by every morning, they are going to be really really busy.

    I dunno. I can't see how wearing a costum gets you arrested, I have to assume he gave the police a hard time.

  69. Re:how about you buy more viagra by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Who is more to be pitied -- someone who feels a need to carry a 'manhood enhancement', or someone who feels they're justified in taking away everyone else's 'manhood enhancement'?

  70. Ask for a trial... by BringMyShuttle · · Score: 1

    Judge and Jury nullification is a sure bet on this one.

  71. I'm guessing... by darniil · · Score: 1

    ...that the principal was actually a Star Trek fan.

    Can't we all just get along?

  72. Ban on all Rice Cookers and Pressure Cookers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Personally, I am surprised that Mass, and the City of Boston specifically, haven't leveled a ban on the sale of pressure cookers and devices which resemble a pressure cooker. So, rice cookers, hot air popcorn makers, slow cookers... You know.

    Thought I'd just "run it past you" and see if it made an impact.

  73. OH PLZ! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those blasters are all clumsy and random. I prefer an elegant weapon from a more civilized age.

  74. We're fine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    NO! It was a reactor leak. VERY dangerous!

  75. My bad! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, that wasn't TK-421. All those stormtroopers look alike, ya know...

  76. why are gun nuts so illiterate by publiclurker · · Score: 1

    that they can't comprehend words like well regulated?

  77. Lies! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He WAS NOT resisting arrest. He was trying to Move Along!

  78. Getting arrested is nothing. by Snufu · · Score: 1

    Wait till he has to fie his report with Vader.

  79. Re:Fear of guns making my head spin by ne0n · · Score: 1

    I'm no lawyer but it's probably not a crime to carry plastic space weapons in the USA.

    How about teaching "educators" such as that simple principal to recognize basic Constitutional rights, eg. freedom to bear arms? Or did they repeal that in Massachewiesetts? And if you can't carry guns'n'shit WHY would anybody want to live there?

    --
    $ :(){ :|:& };:
  80. Bad Judgement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As is so common today, it is the police who displayed bad judgement. What do you expect in a proto-police state where there are so many laws that everyone is a law breaker if some little man in a uniform is in a bad mood. Jefferson said, "liberty is when the government is afraid of the people. Tyranny is when the people are afraid of the government.". But I guess we get what our national character deserves. A nation that does not desire liberty does not deserve it.

  81. Huh? by s.petry · · Score: 2

    Rifles do not make you ineffective at hand to hand combat. In fact, the US Army and Marines teach you how to make a rifle lethal in hand to hand combat.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You put a pointy thing on the end?

    2. Re: Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, I remember that from my time at Benning. Butt stroke to the head...yes, they did teach that. I also remember Drill Sgt. Bednar saying anyone who ever tried it was a damned fool...

  82. I wish the cops had shot him dead in da head by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    One less weirdo nerdo.

  83. Is this a sign of things to come? by Bill_the_Engineer · · Score: 1

    Areas around schools (not on the school property itself) are being turning into constitutional free zones. They have taken the "think of the children" argument to the extreme. In Massachusetts, you can't walk to a friend's house in a Storm Trooper costume because you are carrying something that looks like a gun near school grounds. In Alabama, they are creating a law to ban abortion clinics within 2000 feet of school property so that they can take advantage of all the school property located around towns to close the last remaining clinics.

    --
    These comments are my own and do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of my employer or colleagues...
  84. Society by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

    It's not just moral decay anymore. Now we're into complete reasoning. Duh, he's a threat. Just look at what they did in the movies.

    Beam me up Scotty, no intelligent life left down here. It's fine to demolish this planet for our hyper space freeway.

  85. fuh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Showed bad judgement. Fuck off and die.

  86. stormtrooper was a slang by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stormtroopers was a type of slang for a type of militant mentality before the Star Wars movies came out. I think in today's world they are "ninjas"

  87. It depends on what you say... by iq145 · · Score: 1

    As long as he didn't say "Chewie, we're home" then he wasn't being a pervert.

  88. Next time.... by rew · · Score: 1

    ... arrest the 5-year-old with glasses in a superman costume. Everybody knows that Superman's glasses are a lethal weapon.

    The shoot first, ask questions later attitude in the US is making me afraid. And the willingness of the police to come up with "charges" when they find nothing out of the ordinary.

    The idea of a free country is that you can go about your business without getting arrested and thrown in jail for nothing. That "business" should include say hobbies that not everybody shares. Some people like to dress up. Some girls "fancy", some guys "as girls" and some nerds "as TV characters".

    If on the report of a "gun sighted" the police rush out: Great. If they then arrest him, take him to the police station and then tell him: You had us scared for a moment, please don't do this again, that's "so so". But if they then CHARGE him with things just to make their trip seem useful then that's bad.

    If they tell the man who reported this: Hey, that was just a guy in a costume from a TV show, please look better before you call us over. Then that's good. If they tell him: "great! we arrested the guy", then that's bad.

  89. foriegn soldier on US soil by Archfeld · · Score: 1

    A storm trooper is unlikely to be a US citizen, and should be treated as a hostile combatant/invader at the very least.
    The empire must be stopped at all costs....

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?