Soju
-
Content Count
2,258 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4 -
Feedback
0%
Posts posted by Soju
-
-
once again... you agree that there is no absolute right and wrong...
with that said.. you agree there is NO standard of measure...
Not sure where you are getting that from.
this means that an officer choosing to enforce or not enforce a law based on his values COULD Have a horrible outcome...and IMO is never really OK...
I am not an idiot and I understand a minor traffic offense and things like that may be ignored? and I get that.... but I still don't really agree with it...
I don't agree with it based on the greater scheme of things... I have certainly gotten a break on more than one occasion... and I definitely appreciated those...
but we are not talking about going 8mph over on the parkway at 11pm with not a car insight....
Correct, we weren't talking about speeding. We were originally talking about somebody who was arrested for speaking at a pro-marijuana rally. I still don't know what law you think he was breaking that makes his arrest legitimate, and that is despite any feelings of whether that mystery law is just or not.
we are in the situation earlier today.. talking about a group of people that were warned there would be police.. warned that smoking pot is illegal... I even read the quote "we knew this would not end well"... so people assembled.. and antagonized the police that were present when their gripe really had not a thing to do with the police (it is really with the law makers in Washington).. you want to show up.. break the law.. scream fugg the police.. and expect a break?
I mean come on..
I'm not sure I made comment about those who were arrested for smoking pot. We were talking about the arrest of Adam Kokesh, the arrest you agreed with on grounds that he was antagonizing and verbally attacking the police.
now if we are talking about gun control and gun confiscation (for example).. you (and I) have no idea how each individual officer would REALLY act until that day....
We weren't.
-
if the law is wrong.. we need to change it at the source.. we need to put people up to be elected that make sense...
what confuses you about what I said.. let me make it simple..
the law.. is the law..
if a law is "wrong" it needs to be changed.. not ignored...
Of course it should be changed. I fail to see how ignoring it (in terms of enforcement) in the mean time is a bad thing.
it is not up to the police to decide the moral weight of a law BECAUSE "good".. "right"... is not a measurable value... what is right to me and you.. which to your surprise may be very similar.. may not be right to your neighbor.. or the guy from the "bad part of town"..... LAW.. right or wrong is measurable.. and is a standard.. and that is why I feel it should be enforced universally.. because it removes the VAST variation from one cop to another...
Do you disagree with the quote from Jefferson I posted earlier?
If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so. - Thomas Jefferson
and just to add the other side.. for every "tell it to the judge" there is a "I am just going to give you a warning today"
so (right or wrong) cops already use judgement to a degree..
And this is a bad thing???
-
my point is society is VAST and morals vary greatly from one individual to another...
that is why the LAW should be enforced blindly and uniformly...
if we disagree with a law the burden is on us to change it.. at the level of government.. not at the level of the police..
This confuses me greatly. Because society is vast means that laws should be blindly enforced? Holy ravioli batman! The part about me not agreeing, well you got that right!
I don't doubt your sincerity. I do question your logic however. If you feel all laws should be blindly enforced, are you also against jury nullification? I find it odd earlier you stated that the government was the source of your problem (presumably referring to politicians and lawmakers), yet feel that only those same people are the ones who should be able to change laws.
What makes you think politicians should be trusted more than police and the general public?
so you blame the police for enforcing the laws...want them to just use their judgement..
as long as their judgement mirrors yours?
I'm under no delusion that people have different feelings as to what is right or wrong. I'm also aware that for many things, what is enforced and how things are enforced comes from the higher levels of law enforcement. Policing is very political.
Do you wonder why, for the most part, the LEO's who are coming out against gun control and saying they won't enforce certain laws (what I am saying), are mostly elected Sheriffs and NOT politically appointed police chiefs?
-
"hey listen I know you robbed that store.. but you obviously have a drug problem.. and I feel bad for you.. so I am gonna let you go.. just promise me you will straighten up.."
"well yeah you are WAY over the limit.... but you seem to have a decent driving record.. so just promise me you will get home alright"
Clearly that isn't what I was talking about because that lacks all morals and has little to do with using anything resembling good judgment. If they want to do that already they can.
"hey listen that gun MIGHT be legal.... but it kind of looks like a gun that might be illegal.. so I am going to go ahead and make the arrest.. and we will figure it out later.."
"yeah I know your gun turned out to be totally legal.. but the officer is at no fault.. he was just doing what he felt was right"
That is exactly what already happens. How many examples of "just tell it to a judge" do you need to hear? How many examples of people being arrested and the charges dropped because it was not a lawful arrest do you need to read about, where there is no repercussions and the actions are defended by the department?
our society has a structure.. and that structure does NOT allow for police to make up laws as they go long..
you can't possibly really believe cops should just make up laws as they go along..
Of course it doesn't allow police to make up laws as they go. I never suggested they should just make up their own laws. That is exactly what I don't want to happen, though it already does. I am at a loss how you could have possibly thought I was suggesting police should be allowed to make up their own laws.
-
See I think the problem is people who do not possess the intellectuall ability to form a rational argument, think critically, look at things from another POV (i.e. play devil's advocate), and take criticism objectively and not personal. Their only recourse is the ad hominem attack. Since they can not assail by argument, they resort to irrelavent attacks.
Welcome to the internet.
-
I find it more sad you don't have enough faith in law enforcement officers to decide themselves whether they think something is moral or not. I mean, do you think that law makers are more moral and than LEO's, or a jury for that matter?
-
So making bad laws is worse than enforcing bad laws? Interesting thought process. A law is meaningless without enforcement, so police enforcing bad laws are much more a direct source of a problem then a law maker, though I take issue with both.
If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so. - Thomas Jefferson
-
him personally.. I dont know that he did or did not have marijuana on him.. obviously the premise of the whole thing was to cause problems....
it was not
"we are here.. with signs... and literature.. protesting laws we do not agree with.. in a civil way..."
it was instead...
"we are here being defiant.. and disrespectful to cause some type of response.. "
It is called civil disobedience. It is okay if you disagree with the tactic. Some people do. Some people don't.
people have a right to protest.. and do their thing..
but implying that ALL cops would rather "test drugs and lock up someone for weed over catching a rapist" is wrong.. it is an insulting personal attack on someone you do not know.. there is no reason to treat another human being that you do not know in that manner...
But it is okay to arrest them for that? Odd rationale.
people have a right to assemble.. and protest..
do they have a right to be hostile? and disruptive?
does this chaos occur at gun rallies? maybe? but I am not aware of any....
people assemble.. make their points in an organized adult manner.. and move on...
does that make any sense to you?
like does any part of you feel that this could have been handled in an entirely different manner?
Sure it could have been handled differently. I was not involved. But the police have been known to target him specifically. That video that appears someone is planting something on him is pretty damning. I'm not sure exactly what he was arrested for, the rumor is 'resisting arrest'. That is a misdemeanor in PA. He is still being held.
-
so...
the government makes laws... laws that you disagree with...
you then show up somewhere and break that law...
and try to bait police into confrontations by doing nothing but talking down to them...
to me.. these people are scumbags...
Which law was he breaking. He wasn't smoking nor did he have any marijuana on him.
-
As demonstrated by these posts, this is another one of those vague, poorly worded, undefined areas that may or may not land you in legal land, depending on a number of factors that likely have nothing to do with the statute.
-
Dude, I'm pretty sure he was saying the same thing as you. Anybody could read it differently than you because you read it wrong. He isn't a mod. He doesn't lock threads. He was saying what happened, not that he agreed. You were arguing a point with someone who wasn't arguing against you.
-
This guy is a bigger attention whore than Alex Jones
Didn't you attend the pro-2A rally in Trenton? Are you an "attention whore" or just a hypocrite? I suppose the 1st Amendment is conditional to you...
-
Sickening. Absolutely disgusting.
-
BLF on his high horse stirring things up again? Who would have guessed?!?!
-
Some people take an oath to protect...
I don't disagree. That is honorable. It is unfortunate that the courts have ruled it isn't a requirement though. By law, there is no obligation to do so. I would hope most would still treat it as an obligation.
-
No duty to protect?
Correct.
Castle Rock v. Gonzales
Warren v. District of Columbia
and others.
7 out of 8 on target in a hi pressure situation not to bad.
Ordinarily. But when you consider that the other round killed an innocent victim, describing that as 'not too bad' is pretty disgusting.
-
I couldn't figure out what it meant by 'Orange Cop' at first. I thought we were talking about
-
fair enough . . .the debate was because he kept ammo in the range bag?
Where else would you keep it? Rolling around on the seats?
Your confusion confuses me.
-
What makes you think it wouldn't be?
It is not like because the gun is in a case, and a bag, that it is some sort of double negative and they cancel each other out.
-
In NJ, I am a sheep (or is it shoop?)
Outside of NJ I am just a shoop with a gun.
-
-
Below is my 15 step process for cleaning firearms.
Step one: Pick up firearms.
Step two: Turn on shower to warm/hot temperature.
Step three: Put down firearms.
Step four: Take off clothes.
Step five: Find towel, put on shower curtain rod.
Step six: Re-pick back up firerms.
Step seven: Enter shower.
Step eight: Jump out of water, shout profanity.
Step nine: Adjust water temperature from scolding hot to prefered warm/hot temperature.
Step ten: Re-enter water.
Step eleven: Generously apply Old Spice body wash to body and firearms.
Step twelve: Lather.
Step thirteen: Rinse off.
Step fourteen: Turn off shower.
Step fifteen: Dry everything off.
-
-
It does say that he was charged with "unlawful possession", so maybe he didn't have an FID?
Doubtful that he had an FID but just as doubtful as that being the reason for the charge. You don't need one to possess a firearm.
Smokedown Prohibition V: Adam Kokesh and NA Poe Arrested (video and pictures)
in General Discussion
Posted
Fair point. That was indeed lost. I was never talking about the arrest of the pot smokers (though I disagree with). I suppose it helps the discussion if we are on the same page...
With that said, let me ask you a few questions.
Are you against jury nullification?
Do you think laws like the NY SAFE act should be enforced? Is there any law you wouldn't follow (say tomorrow PA outlawed all AK, AR, or any other semi-auto rifle)?