The Glade 4.0

"Turn the lights down, the party just got wilder."
It is currently Fri Nov 22, 2024 11:00 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 75 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author Message
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 12:00 pm 
Offline
The Game Master.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:01 pm
Posts: 3729
Leshani wrote:
You can take Wal mart off you open carry list every wal mart I've ever seen has signs posted no firearms allowed, I know in AZ that applies to both open and concealed, you can be arrested for carrying there.
But then that only really applies to law abiding gun owners.



Pretty sure in my state I'd ignore all those signs if I were CC'ing.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:05 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
You can be arrested for ignoring a private property sign prohibiting concealed carry. That siad, it does have to be properly posted. I don't recall all the specifics but if they pull something cute like not having it on the door where you can see it before you come in... not a legal sign.

A lot of handicapped parking signs are illegal and unenforceable too.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:22 pm
Posts: 5716
Diamondeye wrote:
You can be arrested for ignoring a private property sign prohibiting concealed carry. That siad, it does have to be properly posted. I don't recall all the specifics but if they pull something cute like not having it on the door where you can see it before you come in... not a legal sign.

A lot of handicapped parking signs are illegal and unenforceable too.


Good. That crap's always pissed me off. Of course, they can always tell you to leave - for any reason.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:08 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Arathain Kelvar wrote:
Diamondeye wrote:
You can be arrested for ignoring a private property sign prohibiting concealed carry. That siad, it does have to be properly posted. I don't recall all the specifics but if they pull something cute like not having it on the door where you can see it before you come in... not a legal sign.

A lot of handicapped parking signs are illegal and unenforceable too.


Good. That crap's always pissed me off. Of course, they can always tell you to leave - for any reason.


They can. On the other hand if they try to detain you for the police based on an illegal sign you might be able to charge them with kidnapping.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 8:22 pm
Posts: 5716
Diamondeye wrote:
Arathain Kelvar wrote:
Diamondeye wrote:
You can be arrested for ignoring a private property sign prohibiting concealed carry. That siad, it does have to be properly posted. I don't recall all the specifics but if they pull something cute like not having it on the door where you can see it before you come in... not a legal sign.

A lot of handicapped parking signs are illegal and unenforceable too.


Good. That crap's always pissed me off. Of course, they can always tell you to leave - for any reason.


They can. On the other hand if they try to detain you for the police based on an illegal sign you might be able to charge them with kidnapping.


Hey, while we're on the subject - can they detain you at all for any reason? I regularly tell people to get lost and call the police if they think i'm stealing something, rather than allow them to treat me like a theif and search my bags, "validate" my receipt, etc. I never stay there or cooperate, I always leave. If they ever try to detain me, it's on.


Last edited by Arathain Kelvar on Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:11 pm 
Offline
adorabalicious
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:54 am
Posts: 5094
Leshani wrote:
You can take Wal mart off you open carry list every wal mart I've ever seen has signs posted no firearms allowed, I know in AZ that applies to both open and concealed, you can be arrested for carrying there.
But then that only really applies to law abiding gun owners.


I've OC'ed in Walmart and many people in Pa have - corporate is a ok with it to.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:12 pm 
Offline
adorabalicious
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:54 am
Posts: 5094
Diamondeye wrote:
You can be arrested for ignoring a private property sign prohibiting concealed carry. That siad, it does have to be properly posted. I don't recall all the specifics but if they pull something cute like not having it on the door where you can see it before you come in... not a legal sign.

A lot of handicapped parking signs are illegal and unenforceable too.


In Pa signs carry no legal weight in an area open to the public - you have to be asked to leave.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:13 pm 
Offline
The Game Master.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:01 pm
Posts: 3729
Diamondeye wrote:
You can be arrested for ignoring a private property sign prohibiting concealed carry.


I know, but my understanding is that it is something like a 3rd or 4th degree misdemeanor trespass in Ohio at least.

I'd rather risk that than remove my ability to defend myself.


That is, if I utilized CC. Which I currently don't.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 1:18 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Arathain Kelvar wrote:
Diamondeye wrote:
They can. On the other hand if they try to detain you for the police based on an illegal sign you might be able to charge them with kidnapping.


Hey, while we're on the subject - can they detain you at all for any reason? I regularly tell people to get lost and call the police if they think i'm stealing something, rather than allow them to treat me like a theif and search my bags, "validate" my receipt, etc. I never stay there or cooperate, I always leave. If they ever try to detain me, it's on.


I believe they can but that depends on the state, the law, what the reason is. "Validating your receipt" with no reason to think you've stolen something is not something that you have to do, as far as I know. I'd check with someone more knowledgeable about your state.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 2:53 pm 
Offline
Perfect Equilibrium
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:27 pm
Posts: 3127
Location: Coffin Corner
Xequecal wrote:
Rafael wrote:
Would you be apprehensive about someone openly carrying a sword (not that there are many other ways to carry a sword)?


It depends on where they are. Obviously open carry at a shooting range or if you're hunting is fine. But if you're at a school, or like a retail store, or a restaurant, and you're openly carrying a firearm, that's just going to stir **** up and make people apprehensive for no reason. If I'm at Wal-Mart or Panera Bread and there's some guy in there with a **** rifle strapped across his back, I'm going to be a little apprehensive.


First of all, you didn't answer the question. I'm not talking about open carrying a gun, I said sword. Why the hell would anyone bring a sword to the range?

Secondly, why does someone openly carrying a gun frighten you? Anyone could be carrying a gun concealed (legally or not) and decide to shoot you at any point. You are completely right, it makes you apprehensive, for no reason.

_________________
"It's real, grew up in trife life, the times of white lines
The hype vice, murderous nighttimes and knife fights invite crimes" - Nasir Jones


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 3:19 pm 
Offline
adorabalicious
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:54 am
Posts: 5094
This is often the case. A gun out of sight is forgotten about and the fact that any person around you may be armed is a fear a hoplophobe can dismiss however when one is visible it cannot be dismissed and so the irrational fear seeks to take an action to go back to a state where it can dismiss the probable because it is not evident.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 4:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 7:35 pm
Posts: 396
Elmarnieh wrote:
Leshani wrote:
You can take Wal mart off you open carry list every wal mart I've ever seen has signs posted no firearms allowed, I know in AZ that applies to both open and concealed, you can be arrested for carrying there.
But then that only really applies to law abiding gun owners.


I've OC'ed in Walmart and many people in Pa have - corporate is a ok with it to.


No their not it's actually corporate policy no weapons allowed although most management and staff don't know the policy. I have a Relative that manages a Walmart, and other than the signs no detail on it or procedures for it.

That's brings about another Issue that has come up in Arizona. Recently a law was passed that allowed CCW holders to carry their weapon in to a restaurant that serves alcohol, provided that they don't drink. It also included and option the the owner to post a no weapons allowed sign if they choose.
Prior to this it was illegal to carry (open or CC) in any establishment that served alcohol. This gives the owners some choice, Though open carry is still Illegal.

_________________
History of the Condom
In 1272, the Muslim Arabs invented the condom, using a goat's lower intestine.
In 1873, the British somewhat refined the idea, by taking the intestine out of the goat first.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:09 pm 
Offline
adorabalicious
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:54 am
Posts: 5094
Um, I know several people who have gotten written statements from corporate that the local managers can do whatever they want with regards to firearms so long as it is within state law.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:12 pm 
Offline
adorabalicious
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:54 am
Posts: 5094
I've OC'ed at the bar as I drank my beer. Perfectly legal in Pa. Other states have weird laws like no guns in church or bars.

Meh

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 5:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 7:35 pm
Posts: 396
I believe corporate only wants the signs, and haven't really done anything beyond that, But it does give them something to work from if a problem does arise.

Arizona laws were no guns in Churches, Courts, establishments that serve alcohol, or if prohibited by the property owner.

That was the second law recently passed, that allows employees to keep weapons in their vehicle when parked at work even if the company prohibits weapons on site.

_________________
History of the Condom
In 1272, the Muslim Arabs invented the condom, using a goat's lower intestine.
In 1873, the British somewhat refined the idea, by taking the intestine out of the goat first.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 8:46 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Elmarnieh wrote:
This is often the case. A gun out of sight is forgotten about and the fact that any person around you may be armed is a fear a hoplophobe can dismiss however when one is visible it cannot be dismissed and so the irrational fear seeks to take an action to go back to a state where it can dismiss the probable because it is not evident.


Elmo... what the hell are you trying to say here? I can't understand a word of this. Can you... well, do something to make it more readable?

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 8:59 pm 
Offline
adorabalicious
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:54 am
Posts: 5094
I'm saying its easy to dismiss the idea of people around you having a gun on them if you don't actually see it. You put it at the back of yoru mind and assume no one has guns. That kind of thinking is impossible when directly confronted with someone carrying - which leads a hoplophobe to freak out because they are confronting rather than dismissing their irrational fear.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 9:00 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Elmarnieh wrote:
I'm saying its easy to dismiss the idea of people around you having a gun on them if you don't actually see it. You put it at the back of yoru mind and assume no one has guns. That kind of thinking is impossible when directly confronted with someone carrying - which leads a hoplophobe to freak out because they are confronting rather than dismissing their irrational fear.


Ahh..
That's a good point.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 17, 2009 10:32 pm 
Offline
Perfect Equilibrium
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:27 pm
Posts: 3127
Location: Coffin Corner
Moreover, people do not freak out when a LEO is open carrying. Why should they freak when a person is? I'm not saying an LEO is more likely to commit a random act of violence than a person, but that LEO's ultimately are people too. That means it is reasonable to expect any given "person" (since we have checks in place to sell guns to only certain types) to be just as deterred from committing random acts of violence as an LEO, and that people in general (which includes LEO's) are reasonable enough to know why random murder is bad.

_________________
"It's real, grew up in trife life, the times of white lines
The hype vice, murderous nighttimes and knife fights invite crimes" - Nasir Jones


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:56 am 
Offline
The Game Master.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:01 pm
Posts: 3729
Rafael wrote:
Moreover, people do not freak out when a LEO is open carrying.


Some people do. I think they're retarded; but they do.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 7:52 am 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Rafael wrote:
Moreover, people do not freak out when a LEO is open carrying. Why should they freak when a person is? I'm not saying an LEO is more likely to commit a random act of violence than a person, but that LEO's ultimately are people too. That means it is reasonable to expect any given "person" (since we have checks in place to sell guns to only certain types) to be just as deterred from committing random acts of violence as an LEO, and that people in general (which includes LEO's) are reasonable enough to know why random murder is bad.


While that's true, LEOS are more heavily screened, have significant personal stake in not going on a shooting spree, and in most cases wear a nice convenient uniform and drive a nice convenient marked car that makes them very easy to identify.

Yes, LEOs are people too, and yes sometimes they do make mistakes or commit criminal acts and sometimes those include firearms in them. However, the average person, even if he knows nothing else about an armed cop verss an armed random citizen, at least knows the cop has a good-paying job and clean history to lose; the random person may or may not.

Some people do freak out as well; I know of some schools that have tried to insist that officers coming there for various programs remove their guns (which is invariably refused) or people who get upset when a police officer on duty wears his gun into the sanctuary of their church. Anecdotally I know of a guy who would stop in his own church on Sunday mornings if he wasn't busy just for communion (not the whole service) and some people were scandalized that he had a gun.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 8:34 am 
Offline
Evil Bastard™
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:07 am
Posts: 7542
Location: Doomstadt, Latveria
Diamondeye wrote:
While that's true, LEOS are more heavily screened, have significant personal stake in not going on a shooting spree, and in most cases wear a nice convenient uniform and drive a nice convenient marked car that makes them very easy to identify.
I'm not entirely convinced this is the case, unless we're talking about the FBI, DEA, or State Level agencies. Local and County agencies can get pretty lax and make up the majority of LEO's nationwide.

_________________
Corolinth wrote:
Facism is not a school of thought, it is a racial slur.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 8:39 am 
Offline
Perfect Equilibrium
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 8:27 pm
Posts: 3127
Location: Coffin Corner
Don't Federal Agencies (especially the FBI) have much different force contiuum laws than County and Local agencies? I thought Border Patrol agencies could almost shoot anyone for any reason since they are considered faux military in the sense that they are protecting a national border?

_________________
"It's real, grew up in trife life, the times of white lines
The hype vice, murderous nighttimes and knife fights invite crimes" - Nasir Jones


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:31 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Khross wrote:
Diamondeye wrote:
While that's true, LEOS are more heavily screened, have significant personal stake in not going on a shooting spree, and in most cases wear a nice convenient uniform and drive a nice convenient marked car that makes them very easy to identify.
I'm not entirely convinced this is the case, unless we're talking about the FBI, DEA, or State Level agencies. Local and County agencies can get pretty lax and make up the majority of LEO's nationwide.


I don't know of any agency so lax that they don't require patrol officers to wear uniforms.

If you're talking about lax screeing, that may be the case in some places. In many cases (such as, I suspect, Philadelphia) the screening process is not so much lax as it is poorly designed, excessivly subjective, and

To be brief and put it another way, many senior command officers fancy themselves amateur psychologists based on their experiences. They also are used to people lying to them. This tends to creep into the hiring process. Combined with the premium pretty much every department puts on not being sued, this tends to result in placing a high value on people with uncomplicated and unsophisticated personal histories. This is compounded by the fact that while most departments ostensibly value education the actual officers there are often not well educated (high school or associates) and may resent or fear education, or simply assume anyone well educated (and in some cases anyone with glasses) is too bookish to be successful.

In other words, in many places the combination of assumptions and habit results in hiring a lot of kids who are tall, good-looking, and have worked at Jiffy Lube since graduation, with possibly a 3- or 4-year stinit in the military, or else who have been in corrections. This makes for a personal history that's easy to investigate and doesn't lead to the paranoid response of "gee this guy has been all these places and done all these things and we don't want to spend the time and resources to investigate it all so we'll assume he's hiding something". In the end, what it really ends up in is people being hired who are frequently immature in terms of life experience; essentially mistakes of ANY kind (I mean mistakes like getting a traffic ticket or being in an accident; even ones where the applicant was clearly not at fault) are disqualifiers in reality even if they tell the applicant "not going to be a problem".

Federal agencies avoid this by establishing more strict minimums to apply in the first place, and by having more objective hiring criteria. They also have an investigation process that is highly standardized and takes the background check mostly out of the hands of the hiring agency thus avoiding institutionalization of certain perceived needs. They also do not make the mistake many local agencies make of confusing capability and qualifications with background, personal history, and the like. Too many agencies mix these things together.

I chalk this up first and foremost (but not solely) to our litigous culture. Being a police chief in this country means you will be sued at some point, for something someone else did, and often while you were at home in bed and despite the fact that it's either A) perfectly reasonable or B) completely against your policies. Even if the lawsuit eventually ends up groundless it will be a major headache if you're, say, buying a house.

I think that if our tort system were changed so that police and public officials could not be personally named in a lawsuit until after a successful lawsuit against their agency or city or whatever that established misconduct or gross negligence on their part, we would see a significant betterment of he average police officer hired. I think that most states really need to look closely at what their municipalities are doing and standardize things more at the state level. Some hiring processes are truely absurd in terms of their focus on irrelevancies; the most common one is "name every police agency you ever applied to and why you didn't get hired there". I's a lazy man's way of saying "I don't want to investigate so I'll just assume that anyone who has too many applications either doesn't want to be here because they applied too many other places or has something wrong with them so no one hired them." Of course, this means a vicious cycle where initial rejections make the applicant look on future applications. I think this practive really ought to be banned by states. Federal agencies don't have any such question because they really don't give a **** that Podunk Illinois didn't hire you.

Another irrelevancy I've seen, just as an example is "where do your relatives work and for how long?" Who cares? You're investigating the applicant. We don't have corruption of blood in this country; a shitty employment record by one's brother should not be a factor.

There's the further problem that applicants not hired are generally not told why. This prevents good applicants from correcting things that may be simple misconstruement of some information, a poor interview habit, or from giving good answers on the aforementioned question of where you have applied and why you weren't hired.

I didn't mean to turn this into a rant, and yes, in some places hiring standards amount to being fully mobile with normal eyesight and a high school diploma, but in most cases I think the real problem is a poorly run hiring process that lacks objectivity, quality control, and confuses the role of the interviewer, the background investigator, and the psychologist.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:40 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Rafael wrote:
Don't Federal Agencies (especially the FBI) have much different force contiuum laws than County and Local agencies? I thought Border Patrol agencies could almost shoot anyone for any reason since they are considered faux military in the sense that they are protecting a national border?


No. Force continuum is based almost entirely on Fourth Ammendment Seizure (where killing someone is a seizure) and is directly related to the behavior of the subjects.

The Border Patrol is in a funny situation. Their primary imperative is to enfore law, not defend against external attack. The problem is of course that the line between the two in the types of things they confront is fuzzy. It's fairly safe to assume, though, that a person that is not an immediate threat to the agent if confronted is not an external attacker, and even if they are there's still nothing wrong with arresting them.

Even in cases where there's a very serious threat, such as say 15 men with automatic weapons smuggling things, the agent will still attempt to make an arrest by calling for sufficient backup to overwhelm the threat. If that backup is beyond the ability of law enforcement to reasonably provide, the threat has essentially elevted to a military one and the agent is merely the detector.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 75 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 141 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group