1) "No person... shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself"
Providing the police with evidence that can be used against you at trial is covered by the 5th amendment. That is why we have the right to remain silent under miranda rights. We can remain silent with our words OR with our actions so that we do not incriminate themselves.
2) A judge may NOT issue a warrant for any reason he pleases. A judge may only issue warrants if there is evidence supporting the belief that a crime has been committed. Simply asking drivers to take a breathalyzer because they come through a checkpoint does not come close to being enough to warrant a warrant.
If there is evidence of DUI present, (glazed eyes, red eyes, slurred speech, open containers, ect) then I do believe that breathalyzers may be used. But I still do not think that refusing one is enough to allow a needle to be placed in a driver's arm.
It's a waste of money. Not only do you have to have the police at the check points, but you also have to have a judge and medical personnel. That's more money being wasted than I am ok with.
1: I don't know where you are, but New Years isn't "days away" here... It's here now.
2: Doesn't Florida fall under the same constitution as the rest of the US? Refusing to take a brethalyzer test is a constitutional right under the 5th amendment, and as much as I'd like to see all drunk drivers charged with attempted murder, I don't see how a judge can issue a warrant without evidence simply because someone exercises their rights. Two wrongs do not make a right in this case for sure.
Dog isn't nearly as bad as you make it sound. Sure, it's not horse, but it's better than raccoon by a long shot!
Also, taking pictures of the insides of someone's home wouldn't pass the first legal review. It's not exactly legal for the TSA to do what they are doing, they just don't care.
You're saying the solution to laws that could ruin your life in the short term is to sue after the fact? wow! You're what's wrong with this country, I'd just like to point that out.
How about instead of suing, we do something along the lines of not allow them to ruin our lives in the first place.
It's "by the people, for the people." not "by the government, to the people." I don't work for the government, the government works for me. Well, that's how it's supposed to work anyways.
"Someone" "decides" to pass a law: see health reform bill. (you know, the one the majority of americans said not to pass)
Thirs point: You don't have to be convicted of the crime to have your life wrecked by it. Just being accused of some things is enough to be fired from many places. Plus the fact that sitting in jail for a day or two, waiting on arrainment would cost most people their jobs.
Fourth point, lawyers have nothing to do with arrest warrants being issued. It's up to a judge and judging by this article, at least one of them is dumb as a sack full of turds. I wouldn't trust him not to sign off on one that shouldn't be issued.
But what happens when someone decides to pass a law making knives illegal. Or making brown hair illegal (It's happened before...) How about a law stating that associating with known terrorists is illegal? Then giving him the time may result in jail. Probably not a conviction, but you'd miss work for a few days and probably lose your job. Are you willing to go through all of that just to protect yourself from other people who might "associate" with terrorists?
Apparently that's the same thing Martin Niemöller thought right up until the point Hitler sent him to the camps. We have become so used to the government or other people doing everything for us in this country that now when we wish someone would stand up against the government's injustices we don't even think of doing it ourselves. It may be safer to allow others to fight our battles for us, but it's not healthy to rely on that.
Well, that's because people who play with toys in public are weird little nerds. Go up to any woman and ask her who she's rather be with; Luke Skywalker, or Jack fucking Bauer. She will probably pick the one who's best friend isn't a shiny little computer.
You're right, I could carry an unloaded one. The problem however is that if the other person has one also, he may very well decide to use his and then what? I just yell out "bang, bang?"
Carrying an unloaded pistol is sorta like using a condom with a hole in the end. It looks right, but when you need to use it, it just doesn't get the job done.
um... It's no harder to kill someone with a one inch knife than with an 8 inch one. The only major difference is that with the larger one, you don't get your hand as messy.
The spinal cord, carotid artery, femoral artery, subclavian artery, radial artery, and windpipe are all within an inch of the surface. And on most people, the heart is only 2 inches down.
That doesn't detract from your point that the wto were designed for totally different things, but they can be used for either. I, for instance, use a knife daily to open boxes at work that was clearly designed for the battlefield and is even restricted to purchase by law enforcement and military for that exact reason. (even though that is a stupid, stupid law)
I'm a southpaw. The safety on my 1911 sits on the outside of the pistol. The only times it has slipped off have been times when it has snagged on a counter top or table top as I was walking. Still, even with it off, a 1911 is completely safe as long as you don't do something stupid like pinning the grip safety and lightening the trigger pull. (Trust me, there are idiots out there who do that. I don't know why you would need to pin the backstrap, but they do.)
This is one of the reasons I LOVE 1911's. Between having two outside safeties, a heavy trigger, a drop safety, and (on newer models) a light firing pin which isn't affected by drops anyways, they are the most safe pistols to carry outside of single action revolvers.
You know, unlike some people, when it comes to the second amendment, I don't believe in "certain, inalienable rights." I do believe that we, as Americans, do have the right to own firearms. But along with that right, I believe that we have a responsibility to carry ourselves in a safe manner while under arms. I do believe that intelligent gun control is a good thing. I also believe that there should be a law that says that if you do stupid stuff with firearms that endangers others, they should be taken from you. "Be safe or go home," pretty much.
Now how can you be safe with firearms?
First, don't buy a glock. There is no safety on almost all glocks. I believe that owning safe firearms is the first step. Yes, all of them are dangerous, but they should only be dangerous when the intent is to fire.
Second, if someone knows you have a gun, you're doing it wrong.
Third, Just like cars, some people think bigger is better, while others prefer compacts over suvs. Find what you can drive well and are comfortable with and carry that. Personally, I carry a.45. I can handle it and find it more accurate in my hands than my 9mm.
Fourth and finally, just don't be dumb. Don't point your gun at someone you don't plan on shooting. Don't "shoot to wound" because that's how most misses occur. And don't let your emotions end the life of someone who wasn't a threat.
No, but considering that purchasing them off of a broke Mexican soldier would cost a fraction of what it would cost to have that same weapon imported from the US.
Plus, considering that there were never G3 rifles imported in this country for civilian ownership, and even the civilian legal H&K 91 had kess than 50k rifles EVER shipped to this country, stopping in 1989, those rifles could NOT have come from the US.
I believe if you harm someone, you should be held responsible. I believe in stronger penalties for breaking the law.
I don't brandish my pistol in public if that's the question. I would assume that 99% of the people I come in contact with on a daily basis have no clue I am carrying a firearm.
I do not believe that gun free zones should be used. businesses who ban firearms from their grounds open themselves to spree killers and the like since shooters know the area will be free from other armed citizens. There was a case here (Jackson, MS) not that many years ago where a man started firing on people at the mall randomly. Since it was not legal to carry firearms in the mall, he was the only one there with one.
A second example from close by would be the shooting at Pearl High School. A teacher went to his car and got his pistol to stop a school shooter and in the end, no one else was hurt. (the teacher was, however, fired for having a pistol.)
Third, the shooting at Virginia Tech was stopped when two students broke federal law by retrieving handguns from their car and confronting the shooter.
As to the first point, my answer is sorta both. It's a point I make in my head. Sure, the basics are slightly different between my.270 (actually, a.358 win) and my AR, but they both do basically the same thing. Point, click, bang.... I'm not the only person who does this though. Take automatic knives for instance: It is illegal to carry an automatic knife of any size, and yet perfectly legal to carry a 4 inch folder. Both do the same thing, but one is considered to be a weapon while the other is not. (although I still carry an auto. Most police officers who have seen it on me ask to play with it. They realize someone with a legal handgun is not likely to commit a crime with an illegal knife)
And yes, I would love to see a world in which all people of sound mind who are willing do carry a firearm. There would be much less violence. (well, after the first week or so of darwanian murder) I do consider myself to be above stupid, unpredictable people. Chances are, you probably do. It's perfectly normal to consider yourself to be saner than the mass of society. Ever hear of Pack Mentality? Groups act as groups, without individual thinking. That makes people unpredictable and dangerous.
I don't disagree that all firearms are designed to kill, but so are mouse traps and we don't call them weapons. Although Wikipedia agrees with you, I prefer to make a distinction between tools and weapons.
My deer rifle is designed to harvest animals. It is a tool. My pocket knife is designed to open boxes. It is also a tool. Either could be used to kill humans in a pinch, but that is not their intended use. My AR-15 and 1911 are weapons. I will never take my AR hunting, nor do I plan on using my pistol to kill a deer. They are designed and intended to take the life of another human if the need arises. No, it is not my goal in life to kill another human, but it doesn't take long to realize that people are unpredictable and do stupid things all the time.
The OKC bombing wasn't really carried out by a militia per se. Two people aren't a militia. They are a group of misguided fools intent on murder. Had it happened after 2001 we would call those individuals terrorists, not bombers.
That's exactly what I did the first month I owned the pistol. I kept it on my belt, fully cocked, with no round in the chamber just to see if it would stay on. In the 4 years I have carried the pistol, I have only found it off safety 3 or 4 times where I did not intentionally take the safety off. All of those times I heard the click and re safetied it.
I own a newer model 1911 with a sturdy slide safety and an internal drop safety (what is lacking in older models, making them very dangerous)
And to respond to the person who said that carrying one unloaded was crossing a line: When people do use handguns for self defense in this country, it is very rare for them to have the time to chamber a round beforehand. It's not like you can call "time out" to a mugger so you can load your pistol. Ayoob is famous for stating that "only hits count." but just the same every second counts.
There are not semi-automatic M-16's. There are AR style rifles and plenty of them, but those are not M-16's. That would be like calling a buick a Porche just because it has 4 tires and an engine...
1: Most guns in Mexico come from central america or from the mexican givernment/military. See those pictures of the drug lords with H&K G3 rifles or MP5 submachine guns? Yeah, those couldn't have come from America. We can't get those here. (Well, we can, but they're 30k or more)
2. Very few americans own M-16's. As in less than a thousand most likely. Why? Because the process of purchasing a fully automatic firearm is such a pain that most people don't go through with it. Do you want the ATF to have a sheet of paper where you signed a waiver allowing them to walk into your home at any point, on ant day, without notice to search your home? Neither do most of us, and that's EXACTLY what you have to do to own a fully automatic firearm in this country.
Those of us who do own full auto firearms fall into three categories: A: Law abiding citizens who like firearms and enjoy shooting. We pay our taxes, don't dream of murdering people, and largely consider our autos to be investments much like classic cars or sports memorabillia.
B: Criminals and thugs who don't go through the proper, legal channels to purchase their weapons (I use the word weapon here intentionally, as it is these people who consider their firearms to be weapons, and intend on using them.) Outlawing firearms will not affect these people in the least as it is already illegal for them to own these firearms. When guns DO move across the border (not often as Mexico throws anyone entering their country with even a single round of ammo into jail for 20+ years) it is these outlaws and criminals who do the moving and selling.
C: Fringe elements made up of crazy mountain men and people who consider their friends to be a militia of some sort and are still out in the woods each weekend preparing for the Soviet Union to invade their small town. Really? Are you worried about these people taking over your country? They aren't a threat to anything except their local dentist's children getting the money for college... Sure, they're vocal and love making a spectacle, but they're on every watch list in the country and are largely law abiding citizens like group A. Those who fall into group B don't usually last more than a year or two before the ATF is at their door taking their toys to the furnace and hauling them off to federal prison for drug or firearms charges.
Being scared of an armed citizenry is about as sane as being scared of dogs. Sure, there are bad apples out there, but just because one in ten dogs have bitten someone doesn't mean that your neighbors lab is about to rip into your leg as you walk by...
I carry a pistol every day. You know how many people I've ever shot? none.
The other day I was at the grocery store and a woman saw my pistol. When she noticed that the hammer was back (the proper way to carry a 1911 is with a round in the chamber, the hammer back, and the safety on) she asked me "Isn't that dangerous."
My answer to her: "Yes, that's the point of owning a pistol. They're dangerous when you need them to be."
She smiled, got the point, and went about her day.
Slashdot Mirror
1) "No person... shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself"
Providing the police with evidence that can be used against you at trial is covered by the 5th amendment. That is why we have the right to remain silent under miranda rights. We can remain silent with our words OR with our actions so that we do not incriminate themselves.
2) A judge may NOT issue a warrant for any reason he pleases. A judge may only issue warrants if there is evidence supporting the belief that a crime has been committed. Simply asking drivers to take a breathalyzer because they come through a checkpoint does not come close to being enough to warrant a warrant.
If there is evidence of DUI present, (glazed eyes, red eyes, slurred speech, open containers, ect) then I do believe that breathalyzers may be used. But I still do not think that refusing one is enough to allow a needle to be placed in a driver's arm.
It's a waste of money. Not only do you have to have the police at the check points, but you also have to have a judge and medical personnel. That's more money being wasted than I am ok with.
1: I don't know where you are, but New Years isn't "days away" here... It's here now.
2: Doesn't Florida fall under the same constitution as the rest of the US? Refusing to take a brethalyzer test is a constitutional right under the 5th amendment, and as much as I'd like to see all drunk drivers charged with attempted murder, I don't see how a judge can issue a warrant without evidence simply because someone exercises their rights. Two wrongs do not make a right in this case for sure.
Dog isn't nearly as bad as you make it sound. Sure, it's not horse, but it's better than raccoon by a long shot!
Also, taking pictures of the insides of someone's home wouldn't pass the first legal review. It's not exactly legal for the TSA to do what they are doing, they just don't care.
At least this guy is brewing with it instead of just bottling it right from the "tap"
You're saying the solution to laws that could ruin your life in the short term is to sue after the fact? wow! You're what's wrong with this country, I'd just like to point that out.
How about instead of suing, we do something along the lines of not allow them to ruin our lives in the first place.
It's "by the people, for the people." not "by the government, to the people." I don't work for the government, the government works for me. Well, that's how it's supposed to work anyways.
brown hair being illegal: see holocaust...
"Someone" "decides" to pass a law: see health reform bill. (you know, the one the majority of americans said not to pass)
Thirs point: You don't have to be convicted of the crime to have your life wrecked by it. Just being accused of some things is enough to be fired from many places. Plus the fact that sitting in jail for a day or two, waiting on arrainment would cost most people their jobs.
Fourth point, lawyers have nothing to do with arrest warrants being issued. It's up to a judge and judging by this article, at least one of them is dumb as a sack full of turds. I wouldn't trust him not to sign off on one that shouldn't be issued.
But what happens when someone decides to pass a law making knives illegal. Or making brown hair illegal (It's happened before...) How about a law stating that associating with known terrorists is illegal? Then giving him the time may result in jail. Probably not a conviction, but you'd miss work for a few days and probably lose your job. Are you willing to go through all of that just to protect yourself from other people who might "associate" with terrorists?
Apparently that's the same thing Martin Niemöller thought right up until the point Hitler sent him to the camps. We have become so used to the government or other people doing everything for us in this country that now when we wish someone would stand up against the government's injustices we don't even think of doing it ourselves. It may be safer to allow others to fight our battles for us, but it's not healthy to rely on that.
How do you turn you asking about my penis into me being the one who's perverted here?
And what does my facial hair have to do with anything?
What, are you asking for a picture or something? ...fag
Wrong! No period needed as "Another grammar Nazi" is not a complete sentence.
Well, that's because people who play with toys in public are weird little nerds. Go up to any woman and ask her who she's rather be with; Luke Skywalker, or Jack fucking Bauer. She will probably pick the one who's best friend isn't a shiny little computer.
You're right, I could carry an unloaded one. The problem however is that if the other person has one also, he may very well decide to use his and then what? I just yell out "bang, bang?"
Carrying an unloaded pistol is sorta like using a condom with a hole in the end. It looks right, but when you need to use it, it just doesn't get the job done.
um... It's no harder to kill someone with a one inch knife than with an 8 inch one. The only major difference is that with the larger one, you don't get your hand as messy.
The spinal cord, carotid artery, femoral artery, subclavian artery, radial artery, and windpipe are all within an inch of the surface. And on most people, the heart is only 2 inches down.
That doesn't detract from your point that the wto were designed for totally different things, but they can be used for either. I, for instance, use a knife daily to open boxes at work that was clearly designed for the battlefield and is even restricted to purchase by law enforcement and military for that exact reason. (even though that is a stupid, stupid law)
I'm a southpaw. The safety on my 1911 sits on the outside of the pistol. The only times it has slipped off have been times when it has snagged on a counter top or table top as I was walking. Still, even with it off, a 1911 is completely safe as long as you don't do something stupid like pinning the grip safety and lightening the trigger pull. (Trust me, there are idiots out there who do that. I don't know why you would need to pin the backstrap, but they do.)
This is one of the reasons I LOVE 1911's. Between having two outside safeties, a heavy trigger, a drop safety, and (on newer models) a light firing pin which isn't affected by drops anyways, they are the most safe pistols to carry outside of single action revolvers.
You know, unlike some people, when it comes to the second amendment, I don't believe in "certain, inalienable rights." I do believe that we, as Americans, do have the right to own firearms. But along with that right, I believe that we have a responsibility to carry ourselves in a safe manner while under arms. I do believe that intelligent gun control is a good thing. I also believe that there should be a law that says that if you do stupid stuff with firearms that endangers others, they should be taken from you. "Be safe or go home," pretty much.
Now how can you be safe with firearms?
First, don't buy a glock. There is no safety on almost all glocks. I believe that owning safe firearms is the first step. Yes, all of them are dangerous, but they should only be dangerous when the intent is to fire.
Second, if someone knows you have a gun, you're doing it wrong.
Third, Just like cars, some people think bigger is better, while others prefer compacts over suvs. Find what you can drive well and are comfortable with and carry that. Personally, I carry a .45. I can handle it and find it more accurate in my hands than my 9mm.
Fourth and finally, just don't be dumb. Don't point your gun at someone you don't plan on shooting. Don't "shoot to wound" because that's how most misses occur. And don't let your emotions end the life of someone who wasn't a threat.
No, but considering that purchasing them off of a broke Mexican soldier would cost a fraction of what it would cost to have that same weapon imported from the US.
Plus, considering that there were never G3 rifles imported in this country for civilian ownership, and even the civilian legal H&K 91 had kess than 50k rifles EVER shipped to this country, stopping in 1989, those rifles could NOT have come from the US.
I believe if you harm someone, you should be held responsible. I believe in stronger penalties for breaking the law.
I don't brandish my pistol in public if that's the question. I would assume that 99% of the people I come in contact with on a daily basis have no clue I am carrying a firearm.
I do not believe that gun free zones should be used. businesses who ban firearms from their grounds open themselves to spree killers and the like since shooters know the area will be free from other armed citizens. There was a case here (Jackson, MS) not that many years ago where a man started firing on people at the mall randomly. Since it was not legal to carry firearms in the mall, he was the only one there with one.
A second example from close by would be the shooting at Pearl High School. A teacher went to his car and got his pistol to stop a school shooter and in the end, no one else was hurt. (the teacher was, however, fired for having a pistol.)
Third, the shooting at Virginia Tech was stopped when two students broke federal law by retrieving handguns from their car and confronting the shooter.
As to the first point, my answer is sorta both. It's a point I make in my head. Sure, the basics are slightly different between my .270 (actually, a .358 win) and my AR, but they both do basically the same thing. Point, click, bang.... I'm not the only person who does this though. Take automatic knives for instance: It is illegal to carry an automatic knife of any size, and yet perfectly legal to carry a 4 inch folder. Both do the same thing, but one is considered to be a weapon while the other is not. (although I still carry an auto. Most police officers who have seen it on me ask to play with it. They realize someone with a legal handgun is not likely to commit a crime with an illegal knife)
And yes, I would love to see a world in which all people of sound mind who are willing do carry a firearm. There would be much less violence. (well, after the first week or so of darwanian murder) I do consider myself to be above stupid, unpredictable people. Chances are, you probably do. It's perfectly normal to consider yourself to be saner than the mass of society. Ever hear of Pack Mentality? Groups act as groups, without individual thinking. That makes people unpredictable and dangerous.
This reminds me of one of my favorite quotes. I can't remember where it is from, but it illustrates a point very well.
"I will stop carrying a firearm when I can fit a cop in this holster."
It takes seconds to die. It takes minutes for a police officer to respond to a call.
I don't disagree that all firearms are designed to kill, but so are mouse traps and we don't call them weapons. Although Wikipedia agrees with you, I prefer to make a distinction between tools and weapons.
My deer rifle is designed to harvest animals. It is a tool. My pocket knife is designed to open boxes. It is also a tool. Either could be used to kill humans in a pinch, but that is not their intended use. My AR-15 and 1911 are weapons. I will never take my AR hunting, nor do I plan on using my pistol to kill a deer. They are designed and intended to take the life of another human if the need arises. No, it is not my goal in life to kill another human, but it doesn't take long to realize that people are unpredictable and do stupid things all the time.
The OKC bombing wasn't really carried out by a militia per se. Two people aren't a militia. They are a group of misguided fools intent on murder. Had it happened after 2001 we would call those individuals terrorists, not bombers.
My name is not FAdcock. It's FCAdcock. I use the middle name in there...
So what does your F stand for?
That's exactly what I did the first month I owned the pistol. I kept it on my belt, fully cocked, with no round in the chamber just to see if it would stay on. In the 4 years I have carried the pistol, I have only found it off safety 3 or 4 times where I did not intentionally take the safety off. All of those times I heard the click and re safetied it.
I own a newer model 1911 with a sturdy slide safety and an internal drop safety (what is lacking in older models, making them very dangerous)
And to respond to the person who said that carrying one unloaded was crossing a line: When people do use handguns for self defense in this country, it is very rare for them to have the time to chamber a round beforehand. It's not like you can call "time out" to a mugger so you can load your pistol. Ayoob is famous for stating that "only hits count." but just the same every second counts.
There are not semi-automatic M-16's. There are AR style rifles and plenty of them, but those are not M-16's. That would be like calling a buick a Porche just because it has 4 tires and an engine...
1: Most guns in Mexico come from central america or from the mexican givernment/military. See those pictures of the drug lords with H&K G3 rifles or MP5 submachine guns? Yeah, those couldn't have come from America. We can't get those here. (Well, we can, but they're 30k or more)
2. Very few americans own M-16's. As in less than a thousand most likely. Why? Because the process of purchasing a fully automatic firearm is such a pain that most people don't go through with it. Do you want the ATF to have a sheet of paper where you signed a waiver allowing them to walk into your home at any point, on ant day, without notice to search your home? Neither do most of us, and that's EXACTLY what you have to do to own a fully automatic firearm in this country.
Those of us who do own full auto firearms fall into three categories:
A: Law abiding citizens who like firearms and enjoy shooting. We pay our taxes, don't dream of murdering people, and largely consider our autos to be investments much like classic cars or sports memorabillia.
B: Criminals and thugs who don't go through the proper, legal channels to purchase their weapons (I use the word weapon here intentionally, as it is these people who consider their firearms to be weapons, and intend on using them.) Outlawing firearms will not affect these people in the least as it is already illegal for them to own these firearms. When guns DO move across the border (not often as Mexico throws anyone entering their country with even a single round of ammo into jail for 20+ years) it is these outlaws and criminals who do the moving and selling.
C: Fringe elements made up of crazy mountain men and people who consider their friends to be a militia of some sort and are still out in the woods each weekend preparing for the Soviet Union to invade their small town. Really? Are you worried about these people taking over your country? They aren't a threat to anything except their local dentist's children getting the money for college... Sure, they're vocal and love making a spectacle, but they're on every watch list in the country and are largely law abiding citizens like group A. Those who fall into group B don't usually last more than a year or two before the ATF is at their door taking their toys to the furnace and hauling them off to federal prison for drug or firearms charges.
Being scared of an armed citizenry is about as sane as being scared of dogs. Sure, there are bad apples out there, but just because one in ten dogs have bitten someone doesn't mean that your neighbors lab is about to rip into your leg as you walk by...
I carry a pistol every day. You know how many people I've ever shot? none.
The other day I was at the grocery store and a woman saw my pistol. When she noticed that the hammer was back (the proper way to carry a 1911 is with a round in the chamber, the hammer back, and the safety on) she asked me "Isn't that dangerous."
My answer to her: "Yes, that's the point of owning a pistol. They're dangerous when you need them to be."
She smiled, got the point, and went about her day.