Here Is the Truth Protrayed Before Our Eyes

reply to post by MyHappyDogShiner


I am sorry how am I protecting the banks again?

reply to post by ChesterJohn


Conditioning for what? If the police and the military have some master plan to enslave the citizens of this country what are we waiting for?

Trust me if we ever see a true SHTF or TEOTWAWKI event the last thing I am going to do is protect big bank or big business. I will be taking care of my family, friends, and community. Kind of like what I do today.

I agree that conspiracies exists. I also agree that certain people control the global economy. I also agree that these people/corporations don't care about us one bit and would steal all of our wealth at the drop of a dime.

I just can't get behind the conspiracy that the entire military and police are in on the plot.

reply to post by TorqueyThePig


They're forcing you to say that, aren't they.

Post once for yes, double post for heck, yes.

reply to post by ChesterJohn


It is not an unlawful search. I explained that in one of my first posts. It was exigent circumstances.

Whether you agree or not with the police actions, it was not unconstitutional.

TorqueyThePig
reply to post by ChesterJohn

 

It is not an unlawful search. I explained that in one of my first posts. It was exigent circumstances.

Whether you agree or not with the police actions, it was not unconstitutional.

In all seriousness, it may be legal and "constitutional" but it is also gross and disturbing.

reply to post by ChesterJohn


Are you suggesting that a person cannot conceal a firearm on their person if they are wearing shorts and a t shirt?

I carry a Glock 26 and an extra 17 round magazine concealed on my person via an inside the waistband holster everyday.

I live in Florida and wear shorts and a t shirt 99% of the year. When I am in public no one knows I am carrying. I don't print at all.

reply to post by beezzer


I am not saying it isn't controversial. Just simply stating that it is not unconstitutional.

How would you have handled the situation?

I am not being sarcastic. What do you think the best way to determine that there were not other shooters involved would be?

reply to post by TorqueyThePig


I'm no policeman, perhaps though, I'd have kept them in their rooms. Done a more private search with consideration towards those trapped.

I would not have done a (what's the term?) a "perp-walk"?

Zaphod58

abeverage
random full body searches at airports lined with body scanners

When you buy your ticket you are agreeing to comply with security requirements as put forth by the airlines/FAA.

TSA is a government agency so perhaps you should rethink that...

Tax payer money is paying for the luxury of body cavity searches, not free enterprise and consumer capitalism through the purchase of said ticket!

I'm a little confused by this idea of conditioning. Perhaps I should apologize to Chester John for not following his line of reasoning. Doesn't conditioning have to be a repetitive thing with some kind of incentive for going along with it? Something like Pavlov's dogs, is what I picture.

I'm guessing that over the last dozen years many of you have gone through an TSA security check. Did that make you willing to happily continue flying? It just got me irritated and rebellious, and it's been a long time since my last flight. I drive a lot.

I'm not sure peoples attitudes are being changed to welcome these kinds of intrusions, rather, they go along with them because they are forced to. I would think that would breed a defiant spirit.

But my knowledge of psychiatry is poor, and I welcome more information.

reply to post by beezzer


So you are okay with the frisk, just not the way they were made to lineup?

I can understand and even agree with that.

I am sure the situation was chaotic and the decision was made on the fly.

Char-Lee

Zaphod58

abeverage
random full body searches at airports lined with body scanners

When you buy your ticket you are agreeing to comply with security requirements as put forth by the airlines/FAA.

That is the point though, if you want to FLY you must COMPLY. Even if it is something totally not useful or even unconstitutional you have no choice if you wish to use services.

Char-Lee, I like that quote, "If you want to fly you must comply."

However, the same can't be said if you're running a private business that doesn't want to cater to the gay community because of religious beliefs. Of course, that is only with some religious beliefs that is, I haven't heard of any Islamic businesses that got harassed because of their practices related to their beliefs. If there is any info about a case where an Islamic business was harassed for it's religion related business practices, I'd like to see the article.

reply to post by TorqueyThePig


Hardly, what kind of a person would walk out with the crowd without dropping their weapon.
Sounds like a weak excuse.
Lemme just step into this line here with my pistol, just doesn't seem accurate.

reply to post by abeverage


And the law that they are following is from 1972, when the FAA, also a government agency was in charge of security.

reply to post by g146541


I understand where you are coming from.

However criminals do stupid things all the time.

I guess it's a lose, lose thing for law enforcement.

Don't frisk the students for weapons and someone else gets hurt or a suspect gets away, or evidence is destroyed = the police are not doing their job and it's their fault.

Frisk the students to make sure there are no more suspects or evidence = the police are tyrannical and trying to condition the population.

It was just an all around crappy situation.

reply to post by ChesterJohn

Yeah, thanks.

But as you can see, I was addressing abeverage about his post.

Thanks for answering for him though--really helped a lot to get his response.

Chamberf=6
reply to post by ChesterJohn

 

If you are told to frisk ALL students at an event like this, you do it by informing the students they must get in line, place their hands above their heads and follow your instructions. This is called conditioning, and you are part and parcel to that conditioning.

Well then I guess it's preferable to have another student possibly concealing another gun to skip along out of there.

edit on 12/16/2013 by Chamberf=6 because: (no reason given)

I'd imagine in that case, the overwhelming majority of people present would be screaming at the top of their lungs something along the lines of "HE or SHE WAS SHOOTING TOO!" or similar.

Has common sense gone out of the window all of a sudden?

What next...someone get's shot in New York and the police frisk everyone in the city in case they are the shooter...

reply to post by MysterX


I arrested a student at the high school I work at for bringing a loaded 1911 to school last year.

The student showed it to several other students 1st period which started at 9:00 AM.

Only one student came forward during the last period of the day which started at 2:30 PM.

That student told me that they initially weren't going to "snitch", but felt that something may have happened if they didn't.

So yes, common sense is lacking nowadays. Yes, it is not beyond the realm of possibilities that students would know another suspect and not say anything.

Hell, I have parents that will literally tell their student not to snitch on their friend when I am present. It's unreal.

That being said, I do understand where you are coming from.

You can't trade liberty for safety. These kind of situations suck all around and have me one the fence as to which is the best way to handle it.

It is an extremely difficult job to balance peoples liberty and safety.

It is very easy to Monday morning quarterback an officers actions (not directed toward you MysterX) when sitting at home, not in danger, and not having the responsibility of protecting innocent lives.

reply to post by TorqueyThePig


Entertaining their agenda unaware is part of the plan of using regular forces Police, Fire, TSA and FEMA etc . . . You don't have to be in on it you are already part of it even though you don't see it.

I hope you live in my area when the SHTF because I will be right with you.

TorqueyThePig
reply to post by ChesterJohn

 

Are you suggesting that a person cannot conceal a firearm on their person if they are wearing shorts and a t shirt?

I carry a Glock 26 and an extra 17 round magazine concealed on my person via an inside the waistband holster everyday.

I live in Florida and wear shorts and a t shirt 99% of the year. When I am in public no one knows I am carrying. I don't print at all.

yeah, but I and any trained individual can pick you out of a crowd. I pick people out all the time that are concealed carrying especially those in light clothes, it is the ones in winter Jackets on that are hard to spot.

I got one guy who had one in his thick trench coat and that only because he had a strange bounce in the front of his coat as he walked. It wasn't confirmed until I asked him to check his fire arm which he pulled out and checked it in.