GlockTalk.com
Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-04-2013, 04:37   #226
nmk
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 5,718
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
The problem is not that I don't have a clue.


The problem, is that a bunch of you, have no clue or grasp of what I was ever talking about.
Either you've chosen your words very poorly or the vast majority here see exactly what you're implying.
nmk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 04:48   #227
dwhite53
Senior Member
 
dwhite53's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Central North Carolina
Posts: 1,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
I applaud their actions, but every single one of them should be fired.


It is not the polices job to decide what law is constitutional or right. Its their job to enforce the law.

Publicly announcing they will not fulfill their oath should be considered a verbal resignation and treated as such.
So they should never let anyone walk on a traffic violation regardless of reason?

All the Best,
D. White
__________________
Amendment 10.
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
dwhite53 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 05:00   #228
AK_Stick
AAAMAD
 
AK_Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alaska, again (for now)
Posts: 20,170
Send a message via AIM to AK_Stick Send a message via Yahoo to AK_Stick
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmk View Post
Either you've chosen your words very poorly or the vast majority here see exactly what you're implying.


No, the problem, is in typical GT fashion, a bunch of you can not be bothered to think or read. So you fell all over yourselves trying to liken me to hitler and the nazi party, and never once actually thought about what I said.


But somehow, in GnG logic, defending doing things the right way, and actually making the system function like it should makes one a "grown up nazi youth"


And this is why so many people see us as loons. So many of you were in such a hurry to get your ill conceived nazi comparison off that no one actually ever took the time to read, and then understand what I had said. Which is fine, because I've had quite a bit of laughter at several of you. Especially the last oh, 30 people who jumped in with nazi or hitler comparisons, like they were the first to think of it
__________________
Quote:
Thomas Paine:

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my children may have peace"
AK_Stick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 05:08   #229
AK_Stick
AAAMAD
 
AK_Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alaska, again (for now)
Posts: 20,170
Send a message via AIM to AK_Stick Send a message via Yahoo to AK_Stick
Quote:
Originally Posted by dwhite53 View Post
So they should never let anyone walk on a traffic violation regardless of reason?

All the Best,
D. White

That's not a valid comparison in any way shape or form.

Moving violation stops are about compliance. The cop can give a citation, or let you off, whatever he feels he needs to do to get you to comply with the law.


That has nothing to do with the fact, that his job is not to decide wether moving violations are constitutional.


What I have issue with, as I've said several times, is with LEA's deciding that they don't need the SC, and that they can dictate to the American people what laws are, and are not constitutional.
__________________
Quote:
Thomas Paine:

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my children may have peace"
AK_Stick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 05:10   #230
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,852
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
No, the problem, is in typical GT fashion, a bunch of you can not be bothered to think or read. So you fell all over yourselves trying to liken me to hitler and the nazi party, and never once actually thought about what I said.


But somehow, in GnG logic, defending doing things the right way, and actually making the system function like it should makes one a "grown up nazi youth"
When you say an LEO should do as they are told as long as its "legal" people tend to think of the many bad things (think Syria right now) that have been done in the name of "legal acts." I doubt the Syrian courts would say the govt using Scud missiles against its population is illegal?

During the Green Revolution in Iran, was sniping a yound girl doing nothing wrong illegal?

But in omne post, you actually showed you know the difference, the rest of this is you just being stubborn and trying to argue that people dont understand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
Absolutely, there are legal things that I find morally reprehensible.

If I can't get clarification, then I'll go off my moral compass. Even if I'm wrong about the legality, I will not feel bad about sticking to my beliefs.
This quote from you above is the correct answer and what people are saying.

They say that LEO who find gun confiscation morally reprehensible, or they themselves find it violates what they themselves believes the constitution stands for, should not participate.

That does not mean their wont be backlash against these police. But often times in history, the right thing to do hasn't been the easy thing to do.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 05:21   #231
AK_Stick
AAAMAD
 
AK_Stick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Alaska, again (for now)
Posts: 20,170
Send a message via AIM to AK_Stick Send a message via Yahoo to AK_Stick
Trying to draw a comparison between enforcing a legal, and constitutional law that one doesn't agree with, and say, the Iranian girl getting shot, is as invalid a comparison as the much tried, and still very tired hitler argument.


It just doesn't work.

The problem, is that the vast majority of posters are so emotionally invested in guns, especially here in GT, that they can not separate that from the argument.

"This is a good thing, because they're breaking the rules in favor of guns" and no thought is given to the fact that were letting them completely over rule and invalidate the body who's job it is to review and decide what laws are and are not just.
__________________
Quote:
Thomas Paine:

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my children may have peace"
AK_Stick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 05:30   #232
BradD
Senior Member
 
BradD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Mid-South
Posts: 4,844
AK, I read most of the thread, and I don't think anybody brought up the following. I'm an engineer, not a political scientist or govt specialist, so hopefully someone can help me understand.

I think, in a way, you are correct, and our govt system is set up so that the SCOTUS is the last word on what is constitutional, but...

It doesn't take a legal scholar to read quotes from the Founders and know exactly what they meant in the Second Amendment. IF the SCOTUS interprets the Constitution, then we know what they'll decide: any law more stringent than a very minor limitation on citizen gun ownership is unconstitutional.

However, we have no reason to think the SCOTUS will strictly and honestly interpret the Constitution. Does anybody here think that if we have two more left-wing presidents in a row, that the SCOTUS will not be packed with people who will (lie and) say the Second Amendment allows severe restrictions or complete bans?

So what are citizens to do at that point? What should LEOs do that that point? We all will know that the courts will be lying and that freedom is about to go down the drain.

It's as if there is a short-circuit in our checks and balances system. The BoR is not supposed to be up for debate and legislative whims. However, with political domination for just a decade or two, one side can stack the judicial branch with judges who will provide decisions along idealogical lines.

So it seems to me that the LEOs are probably correct. They're just ahead of most of us on these thoughts. There's what the courts will probably (lie and) say is constitutional, and then there's what all of us KNOW is constitutional, regardless of what the courts say.
__________________
GT Strength and Conditioning Forum

Romans 3:23 -> 6:23 -> 5:8 -> 10:9 -> 10:13

An Excellent Gospel Presentation

Last edited by BradD; 03-04-2013 at 05:36..
BradD is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 05:43   #233
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 20,122
But if the Supreme Court ruled that a total civlian gun ban was Constitutional that would be a ruling that is very much against what significant numbers of lower courts and significant numbers, probably a majority of legislatures have determined.
__________________
Bruce
I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me" Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.
Bruce M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 05:55   #234
BradD
Senior Member
 
BradD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Mid-South
Posts: 4,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce M View Post
But if the Supreme Court ruled that a total civlian gun ban was Constitutional that would be a ruling that is very much against what significant numbers of lower courts and significant numbers, probably a majority of legislatures have determined.
They can still rule however they want, right? Who's going to step in and say "Hey, there are x number of cases in which previous courts ruled the other direction!" If there are seven very left-wing SCOTUS justices in a few years, and another case such as Heller comes up, what's stopping them from ruling that the anti-gun law is constitutional?

BTW, I realize I'm no expert in constitutional law and other legal matters, so I am open to being corrected.
__________________
GT Strength and Conditioning Forum

Romans 3:23 -> 6:23 -> 5:8 -> 10:9 -> 10:13

An Excellent Gospel Presentation

Last edited by BradD; 03-04-2013 at 05:56..
BradD is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 06:16   #235
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,852
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
That's not a valid comparison in any way shape or form.

Moving violation stops are about compliance. The cop can give a citation, or let you off, whatever he feels he needs to do to get you to comply with the law.


That has nothing to do with the fact, that his job is not to decide wether moving violations are constitutional.


What I have issue with, as I've said several times, is with LEA's deciding that they don't need the SC, and that they can dictate to the American people what laws are, and are not constitutional.
9 idiots in black robes that cant read is doesnt mean what is written isnt there.

The courts are MAKING laws and that in of itself is unconstitional
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 06:28   #236
Bruce M
Senior Member
 
Bruce M's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S FL
Posts: 20,122
The Supreme Court could rule however they want. But if we look at the rulings historically, generally the rulings are in line with what some other court or legislature has already ruled. Consider the two recent rulings by the court regarding guns. They suggested Heller has a right to have a gun. No huge groundbreaking there; I have had a handgun since sometime in the late seventies, and a long gn before that. They ruled that a complete prohibition of allowing concealed carry for civilians is not legitimate. I have had a permit again, since the late seventies, mostly in FL but first for a few years in a state generally thought of to have very strict, prohibitive laws. Even people in New York City can get a permit. Maybe not many, but it can be done.

My point is in my opinion while sometimes the Supreme Court may break totally new ground, generally they are closer (to me at least) to clarifying and choosing between two different schools of thought that are currently in production, based on the few items I have read that they have offered out over the years.
__________________
Bruce
I never talked to anyone who had to fire their gun who said "I wished I had the smaller gun and fewer rounds with me" Just because you find a hundred people who agree with you on the internet does not mean you're right.

Last edited by Bruce M; 03-04-2013 at 06:32..
Bruce M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 06:31   #237
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,852
Blog Entries: 1
One issue with how "constitutional" is currently determined is 9 people, with political agendas, are making the decision. They are supposed to apply the law WITHOUT their political bias.

Look, if the Constitution would say, "stars must be on a blue background on the USA flag" and that came to court because someone decided they wanted to use black dye because its cheaper than blue, the court wouldnt be able to read the word "blue"

They would try and say blue really might mean a rainbow because we dont want to offend the GBLT community. Maybe the founding fathers meant purple and not reallt blue since back then colorad were differnt.

The courts would try and re-define blue to fit the the judge(s)'s political agenda.

The couldnt figureout when blue was written, they actually did mean "the primary color between green and violet in the visible spectrum, an effect of light with a wavelength between 450 and 500 nm."
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 08:35   #238
SitkaBob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4
Dana, I'm not sure of your intent with the following: "Originally Posted by WarCry
Yes, rights are controlled by the government. No matter what anyone says, the rights in THIS COUNTRY are bestowed by the Constitution. And, yes, that does mean there is a risk that those rights could be restricted."

In our country under our Constitution our right are "Endowed by our Creator." The Declaration is our founding document and the Constitution is our guarantee that our inalienable rights are protected from government over-reach.

Last edited by SitkaBob; 03-04-2013 at 08:36..
SitkaBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 08:41   #239
flw
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 357
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
I applaud their actions, but every single one of them should be fired.


It is not the polices job to decide what law is constitutional or right. Its their job to enforce the law.

Publicly announcing they will not fulfill their oath should be considered a verbal resignation and treated as such.
So you do not believe in moral or ethical laws?

I would hope that our LEO's are not robots. I do not believe they are.

In the military you can disobey a order, if you believe it is a illegal order. I do not know about civilian LEO's.

Last edited by flw; 03-04-2013 at 08:43..
flw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 08:53   #240
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,852
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by SitkaBob View Post
Dana, I'm not sure of your intent with the following: "Originally Posted by WarCry
Yes, rights are controlled by the government. No matter what anyone says, the rights in THIS COUNTRY are bestowed by the Constitution. And, yes, that does mean there is a risk that those rights could be restricted."

In our country under our Constitution our right are "Endowed by our Creator." The Declaration is our founding document and the Constitution is our guarantee that our inalienable rights are protected from government over-reach.
I am sorry. My sig line didnt enough room to copy the full post.

Quote:
Originally Posted by WarCry View Post
But where does the idea that they "predate" government come from?

The government. They're codified in the Constitution.

If you ABSOLUTELY believe those rights exist, then how was the government able to write off slavery, the denial of liberty and in some cases life, when "all men" are created equal?

It's rhetoric. It's rhetoric that we, as Americans, believe in. If they were truly universal rights, then they would apply around the world.

But they don't. And anyone that says otherwise is absolutely full of crap
, because life, liberty, and pursuits of happiness are repressed to a very, VERY wide part of the world population.

Yes, rights are controlled by the government. No matter what anyone says, the rights in THIS COUNTRY are bestowed by the Constitution. And, yes, that does mean there is a risk that those rights could be restricted.

Isn't that the entire argument for supporting the Second Amendment, to PROTECT those rights? If they are universal, God-given, natural rights, why would they need protecting from men?
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 09:06   #241
Will Beararms
Senior Member
 
Will Beararms's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 1,226
Blog Entries: 1
The founders did not intend for the Supreme Court to legislate. We need to get back to the Constitution. I believe the only hope for this is to have term limits in Washington with the bureaucrats being turned over frequently so they do not end up running the country more than they do already.

MOST of the problems we have in this country now can be attributed to our Congress failing to stick with the original blueprint, ignoring a higher power aside. I am not here to debate whether it is right for a given LEO to hold to their belief that 200 plus years of precedent with our 2nd Amendment is not by accident. I am here to encourage everyone to encourage those men and women in Blue who while they may not always advertize it who do stand for our RKBA. Just a verbal thank you when the time is right if nothing else.
__________________
"Without a rifle you are nothing, worthless, you are waiting for death, any minute, any second." -- Aron Bielski.

Last edited by Will Beararms; 03-04-2013 at 09:07..
Will Beararms is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 09:16   #242
series1811
CLM Number
Enforcerator.
 
series1811's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Retired, but not expired.
Posts: 14,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by G19G20 View Post
That solidified to me that once the people start shooting back (and they will), most cop's own survival instincts kick in and suddenly "the job" is just...well, a job.
Yeah, kind of like during the North Hollywood bank robbery where Los Angeles police officers armed with 9mm pistols, kept running towards two bank robbers with full automatic weapons and body armor, resulting in sixteen police officers being shot.
__________________
I sure miss the country I grew up in.
series1811 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 09:57   #243
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,852
Blog Entries: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by series1811 View Post
Yeah, kind of like during the North Hollywood bank robbery where Los Angeles police officers armed with 9mm pistols, kept running towards two bank robbers with full automatic weapons and body armor, resulting in sixteen police officers being shot.
I think a better example is the recent targeting of police by Dorner. I think it is fair to say that the police were worried about their safety when they became the hunted.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 12:08   #244
series1811
CLM Number
Enforcerator.
 
series1811's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Retired, but not expired.
Posts: 14,311
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaT View Post
I think a better example is the recent targeting of police by Dorner. I think it is fair to say that the police were worried about their safety when they became the hunted.
You don't think police are worried about their safety every time they walk up on a car in the middle of the night, with absolutely no idea whether it is a mother with three kids on their way to get ice cream, or an armed robber, who thinks you are about to take him to prison for the rest of his life if he doesn't kill you?

I wish there was some way to take a citizen like yourself on an arrest, or a search warrant, and let you go through the door to arrest someone who has already killed one person who has pissed them off, to find out what was about to happen, and see what your thought processes were. There is no way to duplicate that feeling on TV or the internet (not that that stops anybody from being an expert on it from watching TV and the internet).
__________________
I sure miss the country I grew up in.

Last edited by series1811; 03-04-2013 at 12:10..
series1811 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 13:28   #245
DanaT
Pharaoh
 
DanaT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: CO & Baden –Württemberg
Posts: 15,852
Blog Entries: 1
I believe what happened in LA put much worry into LEO than the level they have conducting "normal" business. If you cant see that someone declaring "asymmetrical warfare" against them that has already killed people and LEO made them worry more, I dont know what to say.

If it were come down to door to door confiscations, it is my opinion, and not that I am saying it is right wrong or indifferent that it is so, but I think f police and/or military participated the members of agencies would become targets 24/7 with many more people conducting "asymmetrical warfare" against them. I have said many times, that armed revolt is a very bad thing and would be horrible on the country (ala Syria) and we are far from it. But I also do not kid myself that there are enough people that if widespread confiscations occur, that the ones doing it will become targets.
__________________
Quote:
Twice a week? 14 times a month?
Quote:
2x4=8, not 14.
Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view.
DanaT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 14:07   #246
SitkaBob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4
Isn't that the entire argument for supporting the Second Amendment, to PROTECT those rights? If they are universal, God-given, natural rights, why would they need protecting from men?

Dana, the very same human character flaws, the "Seven Deadly Sins," which make government necessary are what make government dangerous. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights were written the way they were was to put a series of checks and balances; a box around the expansion and exercise of governmental power.


For WHO ARE A FREE PEOPLE? Not those, over whom government is reasonable and equitably exercised, but those, who live under a government so constitutionally checked and controlled, that proper provision is made against its being otherwise exercised.” (emphasis in original)
From: Letters From A Farmer In Pennsylvania, Letter VII. John Dickinson. 1767.


The powers delegated by the proposed constitution to the federal government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the state governments, are numerous and indefinate. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce; with which last the power of taxation will, for the most part, be connected. The powers reserved to the several states will extend to all the objects, which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people; and the internal order; improvement, and prosperity of the state.
--James Madison, Federalist XLV

That, in a nutshell, is what our Constitution is and how is is supposed to operate.
SitkaBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 14:58   #247
Glockworks
Ready/Aim/Fire
 
Glockworks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 628
Blog Entries: 9
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
No, the problem, is in typical GT fashion, a bunch of you can not be bothered to think or read. So you fell all over yourselves trying to liken me to hitler and the nazi party, and never once actually thought about what I said.


But somehow, in GnG logic, defending doing things the right way, and actually making the system function like it should makes one a "grown up nazi youth"


And this is why so many people see us as loons. So many of you were in such a hurry to get your ill conceived nazi comparison off that no one actually ever took the time to read, and then understand what I had said. Which is fine, because I've had quite a bit of laughter at several of you. Especially the last oh, 30 people who jumped in with nazi or hitler comparisons, like they were the first to think of it
I will go out in a limb and assume you would tackle my 72 year old mom to get her one gun if she did not go and hand it over to you when you came a knocking? Like the New Orleans storm trooper did right after Katrina to some old lady?

You appear to be a stain on good law enforcement people unless you are putting us all on.

You are kidding on your inability to use your noggin, right?
__________________
If you disagree with my view(s) and are trying to paint me into a corner, note that I step on paint often.
Glockworks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 15:21   #248
Glock20 10mm
Use Linux!
 
Glock20 10mm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Land of Idiots and Libtards
Posts: 14,513
Quote:
Originally Posted by SitkaBob View Post
Dana, I'm not sure of your intent with the following: "Originally Posted by WarCry
Yes, rights are controlled by the government. No matter what anyone says, the rights in THIS COUNTRY are bestowed by the Constitution. And, yes, that does mean there is a risk that those rights could be restricted."

In our country under our Constitution our right are "Endowed by our Creator." The Declaration is our founding document and the Constitution is our guarantee that our inalienable rights are protected from government over-reach.
See this is where you and so many others fail... our rights are not bestowed by the Constitution. Far from it. They are delineated, defined, put into writing so there would be no question about what our rights are. No, go back and read... ALL of our rights come from our creator (note they used the word creator to include ALL religions and beliefs, and to exclude none).
__________________
Using Microsoft is like playing Russian roulette with an automatic pistol... the results are always messy
"The Constitution is my Law. The Declaration of Independence my bible. And Freedom my religion." - Me
Thick skin... a must in a free society.
Glock20 10mm is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 17:53   #249
Sam Spade
Lifetime Membership
Senior Member
 
Sam Spade's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 20,785
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glock20 10mm View Post
See this is where you and so many others fail... our rights are not bestowed by the Constitution. Far from it. They are delineated, defined, put into writing so there would be no question about what our rights are. No, go back and read... ALL of our rights come from our creator (note they used the word creator to include ALL religions and beliefs, and to exclude none).
God did not give us the right to a jury trial. The Constitution did. God did not give us the right to vote--in fact, He was in the business of ordaining kings. There's more, but I leave that for your study.

Just pointing out that your use of "ALL" is way incorrect.
__________________
"To spit on your hands and lower the pike; to stand fast over the body of Leonidas the King; to be rear guard at Kunu-Ri; to stand and be still to the Birkenhead Drill; these are not rational acts. They are often merely necessary." Pournelle
Sam Spade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-04-2013, 20:08   #250
GeneralSnafu
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 63
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK_Stick View Post
I applaud their actions, but every single one of them should be fired.


It is not the polices job to decide what law is constitutional or right. Its their job to enforce the law.

Publicly announcing they will not fulfill their oath should be considered a verbal resignation and treated as such.
Actually, they are not obligated to enforce any law that they themselves, believe to be unconstitutional. The same applies to our men and women in the military.
GeneralSnafu is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:45.



Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 811
246 Members
565 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,244
Nov 11, 2013 at 11:42