It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

New California bill lets authorities temporarily remove guns in some cases

page: 3
12
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

A SCOTUS ruling doesnt make it right. 20 minutes of my time wasted is plenty for me to feel violated.
Same with the checkpoints. Just because a blip on the evening news has been decreed enough to move it from 4th violation into 'lawful' territory doesnt make it right.

Using the SCOTUS to simply make it all okay plays into my initial point. Nothing is a violation as long as you can manufacture an excuse to justify the violation and excuses run wild from an anonymous tip to a simple claim of "traced a phone call to here" and that's all you need to make somebodys life a living hell and take their property.

The police state cannot police itself as it currently does. Every violation is justifiable to the SCOTUS.

The phone comment is regarding the habitual behavior of confiscating phones (often while threatening) with video and photos on them.

I've had plenty of interactions with police. Weeks of middle of the night harassment, being pulled over because a neighbor buddy who was friends cops decided to use them to harass me, got shouted down by one for asking if her know where a street was, ran a bunch through my pistol classes years ago who were all raging douchebags and miserable shots.

It seems the moment I start to think, hey they arent all psychos, some psycho cop decides to pop into my life and prove they all are.




posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 11:19 AM
link   
Would this bill include trigger happy cops? I know a few officer i would report right away!



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 11:25 AM
link   
a reply to: thisguyrighthere

On the contrary SCOTUS has issued many rulings that further restricts law enforcement actions when it comes to motor vehicles. We operate in the box SCOTUS established.

Law Enforcement does not make the laws.
Law Enforcement does not issue charges.
Law Enforcement does not determine guilt or innocence.
Law Enforcement is not the group to argue with roadside, the courts are.

Don't like a law - push to change it.
Issues with cops - Contact the agency and request to file a complaint.
Contact the governing state agency for law enforcement accreditation / certification and file a complaint.
Issues with constitutional rights and wrongs talk to a lawyer.

Constitutional issues - learn how the constitution is applied to the individual. Its easy to get pissed and think a right has been violated.

As an example I see a lot of people bring up the 4th - Search and Seizure.
* - The 4th amendment does not apply to the individual, it applies to the government.
* -The 5th amendment applies when a person is in police custody / under arrest and the officer is asking guilt seeking questions.

* - why restrictions for drivers and passenger movement during traffic stops?
The officer who stopped you is responsible for your safety and well being, in addition to third parties in the area. If we let you walk around and you get hit by a car we are at fault / responsible. It applies to everyone in the car we stopped.
* - recording / sing cell phones - make sure your state allows one party consent and let the officer know what you want to do. Ive done that and ive told the person they can leave the phone recording and that I want to check to make sure its not a weapon (there are cell phone guns out there). Once done I hand it back and give them ground rules on recording (IE don't get out fo the car etc). It just depends on what is going on.

If you ask and they say no - no harm no foul.

As for the rest of your post fair enough. I am not trying to be an ass towards you so if it comes across in that manner my apologies. What I am trying to do is explain the side of the coin that you don't care much for.

Ive said this in many other threads. Get involved with government at all levels. Be heard, offer ideas and suggestion to your reps. Vote them out if they deserve to be fired. When it comes to laws and what not you get to access the playbook for free.

Its not enough to identify the problem. Once identified we need to fix it.

Just because you don't like a law does not mean you should ignore it. Research it, see how its applied, identify its problems and develop a law more to what you think works and go from there. Honestly I wish more people would do that.

Its like one football team having access to their oppositions football strategies. You get to read it and find a way to counter it.


edit on 3-6-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 12:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: thisguyrighthere

Law Enforcement does not make the laws.


See here: We Don't Make the Laws


Don't like a law - push to change it.
Issues with cops - Contact the agency and request to file a complaint.
Contact the governing state agency for law enforcement accreditation / certification and file a complaint.
Issues with constitutional rights and wrongs talk to a lawyer.


What's a push get you? Maybe in 75 years a slight policy change? Pushing all day and everyday with nothing to show for it. The vast majority of the voting public is still happily deluded that tossing flashbangs into cribs and pummeling an old man working on his truck are perfectly fine and acceptable measures.


Constitutional issues - learn how the constitution is applied to the individual. Its easy to get pissed and think a right has been violated.


Seeing as how the Constitution is interpreted however it needs to be to suit whoever it needs to I won't rely on it or defer to it to establish or defend my rights. If it were dissolved today I'd still be able to tell when I'm being trampled on.


* - why restrictions for drivers and passenger movement during traffic stops?
The officer who stopped you is responsible for your safety and well being, in addition to third parties in the area. If we let you walk around and you get hit by a car we are at fault / responsible. It applies to everyone in the car we stopped.


If so concerned with my safety why stop me in the first place? A situation was created not by me but by someone else and now that someone else imposes restrictions on me to keep me safe under that situation I did not create? Kafka much?


* - recording / sing cell phones - make sure your state allows one party consent and let the officer know what you want to do. Ive done that and ive told the person they can leave the phone recording and that I want to check to make sure its not a weapon (there are cell phone guns out there). Once done I hand it back and give them ground rules on recording (IE don't get out fo the car etc). It just depends on what is going on.


You know literally everything is a weapon, right? And any weapon, literally everything, can be disguised as another weapon. So for the sake of consistency you'd have to strip and hog tie everyone to stay safe.


Ive said this in many other threads. Get involved with government at all levels. Be heard, offer ideas and suggestion to your reps. Vote them out if they deserve to be fired. When it comes to laws and what not you get to access the playbook for free.


Since turning 18 I've never cast a winning vote so from my perspective voting doesnt work.
Yeah, we get the playbook for free. I read it regularly. Trouble is they call audibles all the time.

WIthout majority backing it's a lost cause.

I eventually moved from the harassment I was getting. Reporting it made it worse and I was leaving the state anyway so I just stuck it out.

After I moved they started to harass me by phone at home and work. Eventually I did get a lawyer. At $200 an hour it's not simply as easy or accessible as simply stating "get a lawyer". Fortunately one hour was all it took. A call from the lawyer to the offending cops and it stopped. Which tells me they knew they were wrong in the first place.

So while advice like 'get a lawyer' and 'change it' sound good in theory in practice you may as well be telling people to go # themselves because lawyers arent cheap and change takes lifetimes. Lifetimes during which the bad behavior continues unabated.



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 12:29 PM
link   
We have a law like this in Australia if you commit violence, your registered guns get confiscated by the police.
This is fair enough if you a violent person you don't deserve a gun.

We have lots of stolen guns here in Australia and imported guns. Guess who is importing them the ones that don't deserve a gun, the criminals, the violent people.

Think what will happen in America if you ban guns, people will die from a gun just like every other day. nothing will fix people dying because of a gun shot wound, just like fixing a road won't stop people dying in car accidents.

Your government is scared of a revolt against their corrupt system.



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 01:29 PM
link   
I live in Kalifornia and this is a reality unfortunately. I have several friends in law enforcement who have all advised me to NEVER register any guns with the state. There's far too many anti-gun wackos with a hard-on for gun control and sooner or later the authoritarians will figure out a way to take everything from law-abiding citizens.....the message here is that law-abiding citizens ARE the target.

It's never been about safety. It's far easier to confiscate a gun from your lawful, domesticated family then a gang-banger. Truth is that these people want you unarmed, defenseless and ultimately dead.

Gun control = Victim disarmament.



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Dear God, X, as eruditely as you post in many areas, I thought you were a lawyer …my apologies lol … God bless you, then, for your line of work. I honestly don’t know how you do it! I know I couldn’t.

I’m guessing that I have a lot a lot more years behind me than you do, so I can remember what it was like before the effects of deinstitutionalization played out. As a community based mental health worker neighbor told me almost 40 years ago, now that a 300lb adult male was no longer in a state hospital to monitor his meds and behavior, what was his 80 lb elderly mother going to do when he locks himself in the bathroom, refusing to take his meds, and was belligerent? Call the police. You may not see law enf as playing a major part of the mental health system, but I, and others, disagree.

This following was published in Police Chief Magazine - December 1986. It refers to deinstitutionalized persons showing up on the beat of the cop (which does not even cover those individuals, like Rodger, who are not homeless):


By default, law enforcement has become both the guardian of and custodian for the transient mentally ill population residing on the streets of the nation's communities.


And a more recent article from the conservative Heritage Foundation:


the nation’s jails and prisons have become de facto the nation’s public psychiatric inpatient system.



edit on 3-6-2014 by desert because: punc



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 02:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: links234

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
In response to the Isla Vista shootings?
Half of the victims were STABBED TO DEATH.
What will they do in response to the Isla Vista mass stabbing?
Never let a good crisis go to waste!


You need to work on your math skills. There were 19 victims, three of them were stabbed, 11 were shot and the rest were hit by the perpetrators car.

As for the topic in the OP, it sounds like a great bill. I hope it passes. The sooner the better.


However, of the fatalities, 3 were stabbed, 3 were shot, and 2 were run down. It is a bad bill in that your get deprived of your rights without due process.



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 02:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: links234
a reply to: Deny Arrogance

No, I got that. But there were more victims than just the ones that died. I see you clarified your statement in your reply to me; "Half the victims killed were in fact stabbed."

And this is hardly an infringement on the second amendment, especially if it works as intended. Getting guns out of bad peoples hands.

Now, this isn't the be all, end all solution to our gun crime problem in the country. I realize that. I realize that there are various people who kill other people with various types of guns. I do believe that this bill, if it passes, can help reduce gun related deaths.


But nothing to stop overall deaths. If someone is too dangerous to be trusted, the answer is not to take people's property at a whim or a complaint, but to remove them from society. I find it ironic that the bill does not enable exigent hospitalization and observation on the dangerous person, just remove an object because, well, it's the object that they really want to control.



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 02:59 PM
link   
a reply to: CB328

How about putting dangerous and crazy people somewhere they can't hurt anyone and leave law abiding citizens alone?



posted on Jun, 3 2014 @ 08:12 PM
link   
What's crazy is that there are still idiots out there that don't believe they are trying to take away people's gun rights.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 07:22 AM
link   
I can't say how much you are actually 'discussed' but you probably meant disgusted.



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 03:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
Property rights? What are those?



I live in CA, I could tell you tales.



I got left on the side of a mountain road at night with my tool box one time. They pulled me over for driving an old truck. I was in the middle of scrapping a bunch of stuff for a company in the valley. When they ran my license it was two weeks expired, so they towed my truck, easy as you please.



I couldn't afford the tow and storage to get it back, it was worth less than the total fees. I lost the job I had because I couldn't haul or even get to the job. Then I had to go to court to get my license back.



It was one of those things where you have a license so long you forget to check the expire date… silly me, what a crime.






That's your best story?


You didn't renew your license (no one ever has to do that, right?) and then get stopped, the expired license is found but you're the victim?

No way you were serious, no way that was the best thing you got.


Derek



posted on Jun, 5 2014 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Viesczy


You didn't renew your license (no one ever has to do that, right?) and then get stopped, the expired license is found but you're the victim?

Theres more to it than that. I had renewed but (I found out later) it arrived at my old address (I had moved since). I didn't know about the new law either. It became active on the new year. Two weeks later I was stopped.

There was no crime committed, just a fix it ticket. The cop knew all this and stole my truck anyway.

Took my horse at night in a rain storm. Taking a man's horse used to be a hanging offense. A mans horse is his survival.

Nowadays there is no due process to take property, just a whim on a rainswept mountain hiway.



posted on Jun, 6 2014 @ 08:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: links234
There were 19 victims, three of them were stabbed, 11 were shot and the rest were hit by the perpetrators car.


It's the anniversary of D-Day, and I got to thinking of this comment re victims. I got to thinking of Viet Nam, where body counts were used to define success to the public. The number of "kills" in re to Rodger is using an accounting method chosen to represent success/failure in warfare. Defining a tragedy in terms of the number dead is not a complete accounting of the horrors of the tragedy.

Those who are wounded by gunfire, those other victims, are the walking dead. The body is outwardly scarred for life, and the damage done to the inside can be horrific. Also just as in warfare, there is damage to the psyche. Those living dead victims might forever startle at a loud sound, then relive the original moment when they first heard that sound and its accompanying horror.

And the circle of victims enlarges, when those untouched by a weapon, but at the scene, startle and relive, then those who know the victims or are directly affected by them relive the horror with them. And so on. So, to define tragedy only in the number of deaths is misleading. PTSD is a reality. The horror of warfare/tragedy is defined by all victims, not just the kills.
edit on 6-6-2014 by desert because: punc & clarity



posted on Jun, 9 2014 @ 01:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: LightningStrikesHere

originally posted by: [post=17991339]DocMartiga/post]
a reply to: marg6043

why exactly do you hate cali so much? it is one of the greatest, and beautiful places on earth



No.....no.. Its not

Have you been to other parts of the world?


Its really in the eye of the beholder ..

I have been in CA my whole life , its exspesive and most people are jerks on the road.

Oh and the gun laws suck!!


Their are better places out their for sure!


I left Kalifornia 3 years ago when I met the right woman and moved to Virginia. I can attest to the validity of what you say. It has taken me all 3 of these years to get over the culture shock. When you walk through the grocery line here and someone says how are you they really mean it. There is no hustle and bustle, the attitude, the people, the TREES are all very nice. I was in SO Cal for 53 years, can drive from The SF Valley to San Diego by surface streets if I have to, the funniest thing is the people in Virginia's perception of traffic. People in my neighborhood wave when driving by and offer rides and I have never met them. They sell AR's in walmart, and the swap meets (Flea Markets) no problem no trouble no scary reports, in the paper or media.

This is easily a better place, and I can even drive into a Home Depot without driving over a hispanic. Plan check in my town includes a invite into the office to discuss the plans and help to finish them. Los Angeles was a 6 month wait after you waited in line for an hour and no one spoke english. Where I live if there is two people at the DMV it is busy, post office 5 minutes tops, the cops ask me to slow down when out one night, no ticket, homes and property don't even ask.

I hope you get to have this in your lifetime, I wish I had done it earlier. Oh and history is everywhere, real history, touchable, tangible, beautiful history.



posted on Jun, 12 2014 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: MarlinGrace


Sheesh. . .. Sounds like a great place to live! California is just way to fast ..

And your right people are jerks here no doubt..


Some day I'll get out of this hell hole!



posted on Jun, 16 2014 @ 10:43 AM
link   
Having been in Key West, Fl, Portland, ME, Bellingham, WA, and San Diego, CA, (along w Alaska and Hawaii) and driven through/flown over states to get to those places, I found spectacular beauty and people in every state. Geography and climate gives each state a special quality.

To judge CA based on the megalopolis of San Angeles makes as much sense as believing that downtown Honolulu represents all there is of Hawaii. About 40 years ago, I left San Angeles and went to live in another part of CA sans traffic and rat race. It only got worse down there and better for me. Lol But I left behind family and friends who loved the urban/suburban life and remain there still.

To understand what CA is like, think of it as Disneyland with its various “lands”. You might favor one land over another, but they’re all there. I have my reasons for staying here

I am a weather wimp.
I don’t like to sweat just sitting still.
I won’t live where mosquitoes are so large, that if one gets in your car, it needs to ride in a carseat.
I like living where one can surf in the morning, snow ski in the afternoon, and bed down under the desert sky next to your off road toy….in the Winter.

My trade offs for the above mean I live in a town with a river that would be labeled a creek in another state. I think what’s most important is that a person gets a chance to live where they love, or at the least, to use a phrase my sister borrowed, be able to “bloom where you’re planted”.

BTW I don’t think China will use CA to invade, as the last time I looked, the Pacific Fleet was not docked in Kansas; and I too often run upon military fencing when I off road in the desert.

Using state’s rights, we can do what we want out here, including coming up with a plan to close a gap in our system. That’s what legislation like the subject of this thread would do. If your state doesn’t want it, so be it.

Edit to add…. Oh, BTW I took it to mean China invading America militarily, because CA ports already off load tons of shipping containers filled with Made in China (and other Asian) crap that ends up in every state.

edit on 16-6-2014 by desert because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join