Reasonable Suspicion.
Advertisement
by Wysten » Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:28 pm
by Fartsniffage » Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:32 pm
by Spirit of Hope » Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:38 pm
Imperializt Russia wrote:Support biblical marriage! One SoH and as many wives and sex slaves as he can afford!
by Fartsniffage » Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:44 pm
Spirit of Hope wrote:Fartsniffage wrote:
They can? That seems a bit excessive.
But my point was that schools can do thinks with students that wouldn't be legal most of the time.
I haven't seen any evidence that school administrators can do search and seizures outside of school grounds or activities. Everything points to it being restricted to those times/areas and requiring reasonable suspicion, if there is case law to the contrary I would love to see it.
by Ors Might » Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:45 pm
by Fartsniffage » Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:48 pm
by The Two Jerseys » Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:51 pm
by Fartsniffage » Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:54 pm
by Spirit of Hope » Fri Mar 16, 2018 7:56 pm
Fartsniffage wrote:Spirit of Hope wrote:I haven't seen any evidence that school administrators can do search and seizures outside of school grounds or activities. Everything points to it being restricted to those times/areas and requiring reasonable suspicion, if there is case law to the contrary I would love to see it.
So ask Sovaal.
They may find it necessary to carry with them a variety of legitimate, noncontraband items, and there is no reason to conclude that they have necessarily waived all rights to privacy in such items by bringing them onto school grounds.
Imperializt Russia wrote:Support biblical marriage! One SoH and as many wives and sex slaves as he can afford!
by The Two Jerseys » Fri Mar 16, 2018 8:12 pm
by Telconi » Fri Mar 16, 2018 8:30 pm
by Chernoslavia » Fri Mar 16, 2018 8:34 pm
by Taihei Tengoku » Fri Mar 16, 2018 8:58 pm
by Sovaal » Fri Mar 16, 2018 9:12 pm
by Arengin Union » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:17 am
by Albrenia » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:42 am
Arengin Union wrote:In support of what Taihei Tengoku one of the main reasons, if perhaps THE main reason why there's no real agreement or as many call it common ground or the famous "Common sense" as many in the left call it on gun control is because there simply is no real attempt at finding such things. Let me explain.
When there's a conversation of how to solve the "Gun violence" in the USA, the proposals are usually by the left and if we're to be honest, are completely lacking in real compromise at all. This is why many "Gun nuts" dont agree on the many proposals by the left on gun control, because they lose in the end and gain nothing in return. The basic idea of compromise or middle ground agreements is that the two or more sides gives up one or more things in order to come to an agreement that would benefit everyone while not oiling the forbidden tunnel and not buttering the eggroll of either side. In summary its a way to make all sides happy. But the left is not interest in agreements in which they have something to lose. Even if in your eyes, decreasing gun violence by taking away high capacity magazines or "Assault Weapons" is a compromise in your book, it truly isn't and you are really lacking in hindsight. Because only one side is giving up one thing or many things without getting anything in return rather than a VERY false sense of security.
Gun owners are against gun control because its about that, control, not legitimate concern for public safety by the left at all. I say this in regards to the left as a idea and political extreme, because im sure many individuals that are left leaning or supporters of gun control are so for legitimately good intentions. But the left as a whole wants to gain victory in achieving one gun control measure, while in their eyes "defending" the second amendment, however they will not cease in their endevours. They will take and take more and more as they see that they're not giving up anything. If this was the case then the compromise on gun control would be immigration control, or abortion control. After all millions of babies are aborted every year in the US alone, and many murders are committed by illegal immigrants. Shouldn't this be also a concern in safety for americans as well as safety for the children by the many liberals and democrats that support gun control?? As I've said, compromise. If one side loses one privilege (btw guns are not a privilege, they're a right) for the benefit of the greater good then so should the other. But of course this cannot happen since the Left takes the "give me what I want" attitude without the "I'll also give my part" to it. I could go much more into detail on this, but overall this is why there's not real agreement on gun control.
In conclusion the reason why gun control is impossible is because: One side has good intentions, accompanied by evil methods and a lack of integrity or consistency, as well as a fetish for control. And the other side is distrustful (and rightly so) of the former side.
My two cents.
by Arengin Union » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:50 am
Albrenia wrote:Arengin Union wrote:In support of what Taihei Tengoku one of the main reasons, if perhaps THE main reason why there's no real agreement or as many call it common ground or the famous "Common sense" as many in the left call it on gun control is because there simply is no real attempt at finding such things. Let me explain.
When there's a conversation of how to solve the "Gun violence" in the USA, the proposals are usually by the left and if we're to be honest, are completely lacking in real compromise at all. This is why many "Gun nuts" dont agree on the many proposals by the left on gun control, because they lose in the end and gain nothing in return. The basic idea of compromise or middle ground agreements is that the two or more sides gives up one or more things in order to come to an agreement that would benefit everyone while not oiling the forbidden tunnel and not buttering the eggroll of either side. In summary its a way to make all sides happy. But the left is not interest in agreements in which they have something to lose. Even if in your eyes, decreasing gun violence by taking away high capacity magazines or "Assault Weapons" is a compromise in your book, it truly isn't and you are really lacking in hindsight. Because only one side is giving up one thing or many things without getting anything in return rather than a VERY false sense of security.
Gun owners are against gun control because its about that, control, not legitimate concern for public safety by the left at all. I say this in regards to the left as a idea and political extreme, because im sure many individuals that are left leaning or supporters of gun control are so for legitimately good intentions. But the left as a whole wants to gain victory in achieving one gun control measure, while in their eyes "defending" the second amendment, however they will not cease in their endevours. They will take and take more and more as they see that they're not giving up anything. If this was the case then the compromise on gun control would be immigration control, or abortion control. After all millions of babies are aborted every year in the US alone, and many murders are committed by illegal immigrants. Shouldn't this be also a concern in safety for americans as well as safety for the children by the many liberals and democrats that support gun control?? As I've said, compromise. If one side loses one privilege (btw guns are not a privilege, they're a right) for the benefit of the greater good then so should the other. But of course this cannot happen since the Left takes the "give me what I want" attitude without the "I'll also give my part" to it. I could go much more into detail on this, but overall this is why there's not real agreement on gun control.
In conclusion the reason why gun control is impossible is because: One side has good intentions, accompanied by evil methods and a lack of integrity or consistency, as well as a fetish for control. And the other side is distrustful (and rightly so) of the former side.
My two cents.
Seems like a slightly one-sided look at things, but still insightful in its own way. As for compromise, I'm rather dubious about either side's willingness to concede completely on any major issue. I'd put both sides in the 'good intentions, evil methods' camp, same with their integrity.
Would the right accept the total de-regulation of guns in exchange for all abortions being made legal or totally open borders? I doubt it.
Would the left accept total banning of all guns in exchange for jail time for any abortion or immigration shutdown? I doubt that also.
Let's hope the problem of mass shootings can be lessened with non gun-control methods, and that politicians stop getting in the way of those methods. I also hope that I'm wrong about arming teachers not helping, time will tell.
by Albrenia » Sat Mar 17, 2018 12:56 am
Arengin Union wrote:Albrenia wrote:
Seems like a slightly one-sided look at things, but still insightful in its own way. As for compromise, I'm rather dubious about either side's willingness to concede completely on any major issue. I'd put both sides in the 'good intentions, evil methods' camp, same with their integrity.
Would the right accept the total de-regulation of guns in exchange for all abortions being made legal or totally open borders? I doubt it.
Would the left accept total banning of all guns in exchange for jail time for any abortion or immigration shutdown? I doubt that also.
Let's hope the problem of mass shootings can be lessened with non gun-control methods, and that politicians stop getting in the way of those methods. I also hope that I'm wrong about arming teachers not helping, time will tell.
Ohhh of course it's one sided. I can accept that I am biased because of my experiences with the Left in regards to gun control. Not to say the Right is perfect, it isn't. But I think the many methods and approaches by the Left to in their view fix gin violence is simply too restrictive at best, and outright authoritarian at worse. An example is the little things, I live in California and before 2016 buying an AR rifle was easy, as well as owning one. Yes there were rules but I always followed them. It came to the point of banning pistol grips, magazines of more than 10 rounds, and even "Bullet buttons" that my view on the Left and gun control simply changed from middle ground to distrust and at times hatred.
But still, I agree with your argument as well. And I can agree in my implicit biases, the problem is the Left (at least the many left leaning people i've meet) cannot. And that is a problem I hope you and I can agree on. Also arming teachers is a double edge sword to me that I hope works in the end.
by Hallistrom » Sat Mar 17, 2018 2:19 am
Ors Might wrote:Grinning Dragon wrote:I don't understand how a school can claim authority over a student, when said student isn't on school grounds, let alone dictate what said student can or cannot do on THEIR time.
NJ Gun Clubs Threaten Lawsuit Over Lacy Township Students’ Gun Range Photos
This is clearly unconstitutional, and an egregious power grab by school admins.
Jesus Christ this is some corrupt bullshit.
by Hallistrom » Sat Mar 17, 2018 2:20 am
Grinning Dragon wrote:I don't understand how a school can claim authority over a student, when said student isn't on school grounds, let alone dictate what said student can or cannot do on THEIR time.
NJ Gun Clubs Threaten Lawsuit Over Lacy Township Students’ Gun Range PhotosTwo students at Lacey Township High-school, NJ were suspended for posting a picture of themselves shooting guns at a private gun range with the caption “fun day at the range“. The school's zero tolerance policy says that students cannot be in possession of weapons at any time, whether on or off campus
This is clearly unconstitutional, and an egregious power grab by school admins.
by Hallistrom » Sat Mar 17, 2018 2:27 am
Arengin Union wrote:EVERYONE WHO SUPPORTS GUN CONTROL IS EVIL!!!!!!!!
by Kernen » Sat Mar 17, 2018 4:13 am
Hallistrom wrote:Arengin Union wrote:EVERYONE WHO SUPPORTS GUN CONTROL IS EVIL!!!!!!!!
Fixed that for you. Seriously though what compromise do you want? I cant think of any that would satisfy the 'cold dead hands' crowd. And as you lot throw a fit over even a proposal to have a discussion on an assault weapons ban, I don't see anything productive in inviting you to the table.
Hallistrom wrote:Grinning Dragon wrote:I don't understand how a school can claim authority over a student, when said student isn't on school grounds, let alone dictate what said student can or cannot do on THEIR time.
NJ Gun Clubs Threaten Lawsuit Over Lacy Township Students’ Gun Range Photos
This is clearly unconstitutional, and an egregious power grab by school admins.
The source is literally a site called 'Ammoland' are you fucking kidding me?
by Big Jim P » Sat Mar 17, 2018 4:36 am
Hallistrom wrote:Arengin Union wrote:EVERYONE WHO SUPPORTS GUN CONTROL IS EVIL!!!!!!!!
Fixed that for you. Seriously though what compromise do you want? I cant think of any that would satisfy the 'cold dead hands' crowd. And as you lot throw a fit over even a proposal to have a discussion on an assault weapons ban, I don't see anything productive in inviting you to the table.
by Ors Might » Sat Mar 17, 2018 4:58 am
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Bienenhalde, Big Eyed Animation, Camtropia, Eahland, Fort Viorlia, Hidrandia, Juristonia, La Cocina del Bodhi, New Saltice, Ohnoh, Orcland, Repreteop, Shearoa, So uh lab here, Soviet Haaregrad, Statesburg, Sublime Ottoman State 1800 RP, Sutalia, The Black Forrest, Tiami, Whizaka Qampte, Zurkerx
Advertisement