WA: New "Risk Protection Order" law working as expected
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
WA: New "Risk Protection Order" law working as expected
"Stare menacingly" = no civil rights for you.
http://katu.com/news/nation-world/seatt ... health-law
http://katu.com/news/nation-world/seatt ... health-law
Re: WA: New "Risk Protection Order" law working as expected
Creepy guy with a firearm staring people down through windows. Yeah, I'd rather he not have a gun.USN_Hokie wrote:"Stare menacingly" = no civil rights for you.
http://katu.com/news/nation-world/seatt ... health-law
Posted from my Commodore 64 using Tapatalk
Re: WA: New "Risk Protection Order" law working as expected
Meh...we'll do "due process" later. What could possibly go wrong?!?USN_Hokie wrote:"Stare menacingly" = no civil rights for you.
http://katu.com/news/nation-world/seatt ... health-law
- awesome guy
- Posts: 54187
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
- Party: After 10
- Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Re: WA: New "Risk Protection Order" law working as expected
Why should that trample his rights?BigDave wrote:Creepy guy with a firearm staring people down through windows. Yeah, I'd rather he not have a gun.USN_Hokie wrote:"Stare menacingly" = no civil rights for you.
http://katu.com/news/nation-world/seatt ... health-law
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
Re: WA: New
Big Dave stared menacingly at me, and I think he has a gun.awesome guy wrote:Why should that trample his rights?BigDave wrote:Creepy guy with a firearm staring people down through windows. Yeah, I'd rather he not have a gun.USN_Hokie wrote:"Stare menacingly" = no civil rights for you.
http://katu.com/news/nation-world/seatt ... health-law
No civil rights for Big Dave.
Re: WA: New
Well, if I stare menacingly at you and a bunch of other people, then the world might be better off if I didn't have a gun.USN_Hokie wrote:Big Dave stared menacingly at me, and I think he has a gun.awesome guy wrote:Why should that trample his rights?BigDave wrote:Creepy guy with a firearm staring people down through windows. Yeah, I'd rather he not have a gun.USN_Hokie wrote:"Stare menacingly" = no civil rights for you.
http://katu.com/news/nation-world/seatt ... health-law
No civil rights for Big Dave.
The freedom of speech doesn't give you the right to shout "fire" in a crowded theater and the right to bear arms doesn't give you the right to intimidate people.
Posted from my Commodore 64 using Tapatalk
- awesome guy
- Posts: 54187
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
- Party: After 10
- Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Re: WA: New "Risk Protection Order" law working as expected
You can shout "fire" in a crowded theater provided that there is a fire. Likewise I can intimidate with a firearm, that's part of their purpose. You saying "intimidate" when what you really mean is you feel scared.BigDave wrote:Well, if I stare menacingly at you and a bunch of other people, then the world might be better off if I didn't have a gun.USN_Hokie wrote:Big Dave stared menacingly at me, and I think he has a gun.awesome guy wrote:Why should that trample his rights?BigDave wrote:Creepy guy with a firearm staring people down through windows. Yeah, I'd rather he not have a gun.USN_Hokie wrote:"Stare menacingly" = no civil rights for you.
http://katu.com/news/nation-world/seatt ... health-law
No civil rights for Big Dave.
The freedom of speech doesn't give you the right to shout "fire" in a crowded theater and the right to bear arms doesn't give you the right to intimidate people.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
Re: WA: New
You can shout "fire" in a crowded theater provided that there is a fire. Likewise I can intimidate with a firearm, that's part of their purpose. You saying "intimidate" when what you really mean is you feel scared.[/quote]awesome guy wrote:The freedom of speech doesn't give you the right to shout "fire" in a crowded theater and the right to bear arms doesn't give you the right to intimidate people.
Staring menacingly at a number of people is not the same as walking down the street minding your own business and someone freaking out at a gun.
Posted from my Commodore 64 using Tapatalk
- awesome guy
- Posts: 54187
- Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
- Party: After 10
- Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Re: WA: New "Risk Protection Order" law working as expected
Sure it is. You're simply using your perception to differentiate. Looking menacingly isn't a crime, even with a gun.BigDave wrote:
Staring menacingly at a number of people is not the same as walking down the street minding your own business and someone freaking out at a gun.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
-
- Posts: 13399
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm
Re: WA: New "Risk Protection Order" law working as expected
I read the story, what did the guy do? Is he mental? the article does not say that. He walks around with a firearm, so what? Sorry but did he threaten anyone or anything, either verbal or on the internet?BigDave wrote:Creepy guy with a firearm staring people down through windows. Yeah, I'd rather he not have a gun.USN_Hokie wrote:"Stare menacingly" = no civil rights for you.
http://katu.com/news/nation-world/seatt ... health-law
Those folks that were so freaked out may want to stay out of the rural areas during hunting season...... they would be calling the cops every second
Re: WA: New
1. If the 2A only exists until you have offended someone, then it doesn't exist at all. That was my point.BigDave wrote:Well, if I stare menacingly at you and a bunch of other people, then the world might be better off if I didn't have a gun.USN_Hokie wrote:Big Dave stared menacingly at me, and I think he has a gun.awesome guy wrote:Why should that trample his rights?BigDave wrote:Creepy guy with a firearm staring people down through windows. Yeah, I'd rather he not have a gun.USN_Hokie wrote:"Stare menacingly" = no civil rights for you.
http://katu.com/news/nation-world/seatt ... health-law
No civil rights for Big Dave.
The freedom of speech doesn't give you the right to shout "fire" in a crowded theater and the right to bear arms doesn't give you the right to intimidate people.
2. Your cliche analogy is not even settled law. It was part of an overturned opinion used to prosecute a man for distributing anti-war flyers 100yrs ago.
Re: WA: New "Risk Protection Order" law working as expected
Big Dave thinks every guy who has been turned down for a date should lose his 2A rights.cwtcr hokie wrote:I read the story, what did the guy do? Is he mental? the article does not say that. He walks around with a firearm, so what? Sorry but did he threaten anyone or anything, either verbal or on the internet?BigDave wrote:Creepy guy with a firearm staring people down through windows. Yeah, I'd rather he not have a gun.USN_Hokie wrote:"Stare menacingly" = no civil rights for you.
http://katu.com/news/nation-world/seatt ... health-law
Those folks that were so freaked out may want to stay out of the rural areas during hunting season...... they would be calling the cops every second
Last edited by USN_Hokie on Mon Mar 05, 2018 8:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Posts: 18547
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm
Re: WA: New "Risk Protection Order" law working as expected
ERPO, coming to a country near you.Hokie5150 wrote:Meh...we'll do "due process" later. What could possibly go wrong?!?USN_Hokie wrote:"Stare menacingly" = no civil rights for you.
http://katu.com/news/nation-world/seatt ... health-law
-
- Posts: 13399
- Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:25 pm
Re: WA: New "Risk Protection Order" law working as expected
it goes along with if an allegation is made it must be true and you are to be fired, tarred and feathered and banished to some island in the south pacific.... we are not on a good trendHokieFanDC wrote:ERPO, coming to a country near you.Hokie5150 wrote:Meh...we'll do "due process" later. What could possibly go wrong?!?USN_Hokie wrote:"Stare menacingly" = no civil rights for you.
http://katu.com/news/nation-world/seatt ... health-law
-
- Posts: 18547
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm
Re: WA: New "Risk Protection Order" law working as expected
I agree. I'm not the one in favor of guns first, due process later...cwtcr hokie wrote:it goes along with if an allegation is made it must be true and you are to be fired, tarred and feathered and banished to some island in the south pacific.... we are not on a good trendHokieFanDC wrote:ERPO, coming to a country near you.Hokie5150 wrote:Meh...we'll do "due process" later. What could possibly go wrong?!?USN_Hokie wrote:"Stare menacingly" = no civil rights for you.
http://katu.com/news/nation-world/seatt ... health-law
-
- Posts: 1479
- Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2013 2:50 pm
Re: WA: New "Risk Protection Order" law working as expected
The Tony Montana I remember wouldn’t have been intimidated by a little 25 cal. He would have just said “Let me introduce you to my little friend”.