Separate names with a comma.
Are you a current member with account or password issues?
Please visit following page for more information
Discussion in 'Handguns' started by Crude, Aug 7, 2012.
I don't think it is so out of the ordinary for bag carry.
Wether he had a permit or not still remains to be seen I believe. But two spare magazines? So what. I either carry a full sized 1911 and 2 spare mags, or 1 spare mag and a 380 backup gun. I don't believe in off-body though. If something had gone on in that theatre would he have been able to access the gun in a bag at his feet among the stampeding people? A flashlight is one of the things I always have on me, even before I got my CCW. A flashlight in a movie theater how silly! Nobody ever drops their keys in those pitch black rooms!
Also, was he planning on shooting up the joint and then using his bandages for his victims? Or perhaps they were for himself after being shot by police during his rampage?
What were the water purification tablets for? Obviously to make sure he could hide in the woods and purify his water after his shootout with the police.
If I can, I would like to add my take on this.
I'm from the UK, don't (can't) carry a weapon, but do 'EDC'.
From what I've gathered from my time on this and other forums, he wasn't carrying anything out of the ordinary. Maybe the number of knives was higher than normal, but not silly.
'sitting at the back in the middle for a tactical advantage' is . He had 3 mags, 2 on the floor, in an empty theatre. Not a mass killer in my opinion. From the recent occurrence in a cinema there, sitting in the middle for a tactical advantage would be better, but for the opposite reason. If anything happened (ie a shooting) being at the back would give a better advantage to see it start, and get the hell out of there.
On meds? Many people are, for many varied reasons. It doesn't mean you have mental health issues.
Breaching the 'no carry' house rule, that I don't know enough about. Your laws vary greatly throughout the country regarding this, and I won't pretend to understand them. However, for those saying 'if you can't carry, then the house/whoever wrote that rule is responsible for your safety'? Rubbish. You don't have to go there. If you don't like the rule, you don't go in. Simple.
Not looking to start any arguments, just saying it how an outsider sees it
That's helpful. I don't carry so I didn't know what those who did considered reasonable.
That's part of what drives the big old lost war on drugs, money. Confiscating property and then you have to put up money to stop them from doing it and most people don't have that kind of money unless they really are...drumroll please...a real DRUG LORD. Just like blaming the Second Amendment for drug cartels in Mexico being armed, like multimillionaire drug dealers cannot purchase arms across the globe.
That's what bothers me about that whole concept: there's no place in it for idea of individual "sheep" protecting themselves. It reduces us mere "civilians" to children to be looked after. It's kinda insulting.
"When seconds count, the police are only minutes away!"
I think that will vary depending on a lot of things. I recently went to a movie and was carrying my Maxpedition Sabrecat. Not one raised eyebrow. It might have something to do with the flashlight, white leather work gloves, and Blackburn Mars 3.0 bicycle tailighlight on the outside of the bag.
Another reason I carry a gun.
It's simpler than carrying an officer.
It is posted as a no carry zone and a civil suit would go nowhere. It is private property and they can these types of rules. You, however, do not have to patronize the business thus making the lawsuit dead in the water. There is no such thing as one type of private property trumping another type of private property, i.e. public access private property.
Aleister, thanks for telling me I should be sued for doing my job and enforcing the laws. I don't agree with all the laws but I still have to enforce them. I don't have the discretion to say, "I don't like this law so I'm not going to enforce it". Think before you say something like that. Everyone wants to sue and it's really not as easy as you would like to think.
Our weapons are not confiscated but if your injury prevents you from being able to fire your weapon effectively then you are not allowed to carry it. Most of us do anyway though.
We are a reactionary organization. When seconds count we are minutes away. In order to prevent most crimes you would see a lot of the police state search and seizure and detention issues that people complain about so much. Sometimes we get lucky and are in the area when a 911 call comes out and can get there quickly.
"as though it were a box of donuts", good one.
There is no such thing as a "general warrant". All warrants are very specific as to what is to be searched/seized. If it is not listed on the warrant then it is off limits. The computer is taken without a warrant and held in evidence until the search warrant is signed. It can be done so because of the high likelihood of the evidence being lost if it was allowed to sit in the suspects house, office, etc. Typically the other stuff(monitor, printer, etc) is left behind. We are not allowed to take things that aren't of value as evidence. We, don't use evidence gathing as an opportunity to steal your stuff to auction off for money at a later date. That's what traffic tickets are for(yes, I'm being serious. I speak the truth in this realm because I'm not a big fan of writing them but I have to hear about it if I don't). Evidence, after it is no longer needed, is typically retuned to the owner or destroyed. The exception is murder cases in which the evidence is kept indefinitely because of the high likelihood of an appeal or additional victims being discovered down the road.
We don't access everyone's smartphone during a traffic stop but there are rare instances where we do want to access it. Typically, if it's that important to do so then we will confiscate it and get a search warrant just to avoid any 4th amend issues brought up by a defense attorney.
If you don't like the cell phone deal, you are really going to hate this one. In the state of Colorado, when you are charged with a felony we swab your mouth to collect DNA as part of the booking process. No search warrant. Just have probable cause to charge. Again, I dont agree with this, it's just what the state mandates.
There is no money to put up to block a search warrant because it's not done via a court proceeding. It's an application that is presented to a judge and it is either signed or not. You have to move to suppress the evidence at trial to fight the evidence obtained during a search warrant.
Good for you. I fully support your decision.
an off duty cop working as security spotted him? wha? no overtime at the station?
I'm not following you.
I didn't say an individual officer should be sued, I said the police should be sued.
But, generally, I don't think that orders or laws take away any officer's responsibility (or any other human's responsibility). I mean, everyone is responsible for his actions, doesn't matter for what reason he made his choice to act like he acts, and if a police officer - for easy example - hits a peaceful protestor, I consider the action unfair an him accountable and I don't care if it was a legal action or he was ordered to do so. Every gear in a machine plays its part and every gear shares responsibility. But, my opinion has a cent's value so...
Edit: I considered my answer as, well, trolling and I recall
You can confiscate property via drug seizure and forfeiture laws. Please, by all means, read what I wrote instead of assuming what I wrote or simply making something up. I never stated you could block a search warrant with money, I was referring to property being seized by asset/property forfeiture laws. Please look them up before you respond again, thanks.
Oh, really? So, they are only allowed to break the law by 50% then? Search and SEIZURE. If you SEIZE something without a warrant you are in violation of the 4th Amendment and don't give me all of the old nonsense about the courts allow it, etc., etc., the courts allow a lot of things that are later found out to be wrong. You know, like slavery.
If you take something from me, you seize it, you don't have a warrant for the computer so you take it anyway and get some lawyer in a robe to call it good and write you a piece of paper so its nice and tidy.
And cops wonder why people are beginning to hate them.