RKBABob
Member
I'm at work, NavyLT. Its not MY time that I'm wasting!
License need to exercise fundamental Right
- Thread starter Topgunner
- Start date
- Status
NavyLCDR
member
Hey! So am I! It's 19:30 here though.
expvideo
Member
I agree that the arrest was legit and the OP deserved to be arrested for the crimes commited. However, the OP has not come on here to ask us to help him fight any charges accept for the unconstitutional concealed weapon permit charge. He has been criticized for his driving violations and for wearing a vest, but those are not the issues at hand. He hasn't asked us to help him with his registration or suspended license issue. He has asked us to help him to fight an unconsitutional law, which he admits was a crime. We have spent 4 pages grilling him over this, but we haven't addressed what can be done to help get the weapon charges to the supreme court, so that we can fight concealed permits as unconstitutional.
I agree that the OP deserves the charges that he faces. But I also do see the opportunity for the supreme court to overturn the requirement for CCW permits, based on the grounds of them being unconstitutional.
So the OP was obviously breaking some laws, (albeit that they were traffic laws and he wasn't exactly raping anyone) but can we stay on topic here and see what we can do to help him fight the unconstitutional weapon charge?
BTW, to the OP's wife, Civil Disobedience in protest is one thing. Ignoring laws is another. You can break the law all day in the name of civil disobedience and I will support your protest, but if you are using it as an excuse I don't feel sorry for you. Civil disobedience would be trying to go through airport security with a CCW, knowing that you would be caught, so that you could fight it in court and rally people for your cause. Civil disobedience is not sneaking around breaking the law and hoping you won't get caught. That is just criminal behavior. Civil disobedience is a method of fighting unconstitutional laws, not an excuse to break them. If you aren't TRYING to get caught, it's not civil disobedience... it's criminal behavior. Big difference. So no. I'm calling BS on your "civil disobedience" claim.
It's one thing to claim an unconstituitional law and another to claim the MV stop was without merit. I believe he did just that. Now that we have that out of the way.....
I think that the courts have ruled that "some" restrictions on use/ownership are reasonable.
It's "unreasonableness" that won Heller. Where is this violation of the constitution? The fact that he was allegedly carrying concealed? He's allowed to "bear" the arm unconcealed, right?
I think that the courts have ruled that "some" restrictions on use/ownership are reasonable.
It's "unreasonableness" that won Heller. Where is this violation of the constitution? The fact that he was allegedly carrying concealed? He's allowed to "bear" the arm unconcealed, right?
expvideo
Member
Oh I'm not saying his point is good... I'm just saying that his point isn't being addressed. It doesn't sound to me like this guy is a scumbag. Like I said, we're talking about traffic violations (criminal traffic violations, but traffic violations none the less). It sounds like he made some mistakes that he needs to own up to, and it sounds like he might be a little kookoo. Not over the top crazy or anything, but a just little bit nuttier than the average gun owner.
However, I see his point about concealed weapon permits being unconstitutional. Just because he could carry openly without a permit doesn't mean that he should have to have a permit to conceal. At least that's my opinion. I think this is a good opportunity for an attepted supreme court ruling to get rid of that need for a permit.
But to the OP and his wife, civil disobedience is one thing, but ignorance of the law is another. I don't really have a whole lot of pity for someone who goes around breaking the law and trying not to be caught. If you disagree with a law you can petition the government to have it changed, or you can deliberately get yourself arrested for it and challenge the law in the supreme court. That is the American way. If you just ignore it and then try to claim "civil disobedience" after you are caught, you will get zero sympathy from me.
Well said, I do agree with your analysis of the situation & see the point you're making, he does appear to meet the minimum requirements to own a firearm, nonetheless he has bought himself an expensive challenge to the law.
I suggest his lawyer handles all the talking
I suggest his lawyer handles all the talking
And if the point of the exercise is to support a case to challenge the Constitutionality of a conceal carry permit law, this would be a lousy case. It would be better to have a nice, clean case. This one is too muddied up with other issues.
cassandrasdaddy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2006
- Messages
- 4,206
am not particularly happy about people driving around around in illegal vehicles with suspended licenses - my guess is that they are none to careful to keep up their liability insurance.
they had none and she offers her 12 years of accident free driving as justification
ridleys not getting recruited by the networks is he
they had none and she offers her 12 years of accident free driving as justification
ridleys not getting recruited by the networks is he
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
Oh I'm not saying his point is good... I'm just saying that his point isn't being addressed. It doesn't sound to me like this guy is a scumbag. Like I said, we're talking about traffic violations (criminal traffic violations, but traffic violations none the less). It sounds like he made some mistakes that he needs to own up to, and it sounds like he might be a little kookoo. Not over the top crazy or anything, but a just little bit nuttier than the average gun owner.
Well gee, when you put it that way, where do I send my check?
In case you haven't noticed, the charges all run together. It isn't like you can send him money to fight the possible Constitutional issues without helping pay for the rest. And do you suggest we pay for Ivy as well? Come on.
Well gee, when you put it that way, where do I send my check?
In case you haven't noticed, the charges all run together. It isn't like you can send him money to fight the possible Constitutional issues without helping pay for the rest. And do you suggest we pay for Ivy as well? Come on.
Thank you
Patriot Henry, expvideo, and Officers'Wife - thank you for understanding the "forest" of the case without getting hung up in the "trees."
Your kind thoughts and support are much appreciated.
This is all just one more thing - heaped upon all the others - that we have to get through. Thank you for lending me strength.
Thanks go out to all of the wonderful people I've never even met who have freely donated their time, some money (some folks have donated a LOT), and legal information on freedom to travel and the core issue at hand - RKBA.
I simply brought the issue to the forum to alert people that I was involved in a pending court case - however complicated it may seem - and let them make their own judgements and draw their own conclusions.
Beatcop:
"I think that the courts have ruled that "some" restrictions on use/ownership are reasonable."
The RKBA is an inalienable Right granted by God, and enumerated and protected by the Constitution. Courts don't have the authority to usurp a Right that God gave me, and they don't have the jurisdiction to rule on a Right that pre-exists the courts, the Constitution, and the united States of America itself.
"You can be ordered to step from the vehicle, blame the supreme court if you don't like it. Whether they asked you to step out because something was suspicious or just to chat, they can do that."
Hmm. Might I ask if you have a court ruling you can quote or a case law reference? I've heard that they need cause to ask me to leave the truck - they can chat with me perfectly fine while I'm sitting right where I am. I'd like to clarify. Does it vary from state to state like identification [Hiibel]?
We do have some decent cops up here, lol.
http://ridleyreport.com/video/2008/dec/nh_hooksett_officers_defend_open_carrier_masshle
http://ridleyreport.com/video/2008/oct/keene_pd_ride_along_15_open_carry
RKBABob:
"I'm sure there were laws in Jefferson's day prohibiting colonists from shooting a blunderbuss at a town hall meeting while screaming "King George is a wank!""
Discharging a firearm without just cause in an occupied public meeting place is in - a different realm - from passively carrying a pistol on your person.
"...maybe you think its unConstitutional that your neighbor is forced by law to have a proper septic system, rather than a simple pit full of you-know-what next to the property line?"
I have private property, and any leachate from a neighbor's septic system is direct demonstrable damage to my property. A law - a real law, based upon moral principles - that protects my Rights from the actions or negligence of another is in accord with properly administered justice.
"Would it be my right to fly ... and land where ever I please?"
Good question on the grey area of air space usage, but where you have a Right to land is determined by ownership. If you own the property you're landing on, then hell yes. If you plan on landing on someone else's property, then they can grant you permission or license by contract to do so.
"Violations of human liberty? Oh, please! I'm free to travel at a moment's notice to anywhere between the two great oceans, so just how has my travel been restricted?"
You're not free to travel if you have a metric ****-ton of prerequisite conditions that you must satisfy before you can begin your journey. This is a huge topic, best discussed on another forum where it is on-topic, and Patriot Henry has provided a nice starter link on the Right to travel.
Double Naught Spy:
[Quote:To me, the Second Amendment protects a pre-existing God-given Right to protect myself and my family. It is not a privilege subject to "reasonable restrictions" that vary from State to State at the whim of legislators or varying legislatures. ]
"I believe this as well. HOWEVER, I also recognize that this is not how the government system sees and enforces the law."
And that's the fundamental problem. It irks me to no end that some city ordinance can trump the Constitution. I shouldn't have to engage in expensive and time-consuming legal battles to challenge an unconstitutional law that is void on its face. The Constitution is the _highest_ law and all others are subordinate. SCOTUS has ruled that laws that are repugnant to the Constitution are ... no law at all. Cities and states don't have the jurisdiction or authority to just ignore the Constitution and just go ahead and pass laws anyway - if their arguments of "the law is the law and everyone has to follow it are valid as they allege, then they have to follow the law as well - the highest one. If THEY don't like it, THEY can try to change the highest law by amending the Constitution that they don't agree with through the legitimate and lawful procedure to do so. THEIR ignorance and disrespect of the Constitution that is there to limit their authority and protect my Rights is no excuse. Even if the Second Amendment were repealed, it would have no bearing on my Right, as the Constitution only enumerates and protects a pre-existing Right that would continue to exist even in the absence of the Second Amendment. Repealing the Amendment doesn't strip me of my Right since it isn't granted by the government - it's a Right that existed before the government and is outside their lawful authority as set down in Article I, Section 8. It's not a democracy, it's a Constitutional Republic. It's not mob rule or Mafia mentality might-makes-right thuggery.
THAT's what makes us FREE.
All I ask you to do is think it through, don't stop, keep thinking.
"As RPCVYemen hinted, you didn't exactly tell us the whole story..."
No, that's why I provided a link to ChipIn that has links to the story.
No reason to cut and paste the whole bloody mess. Sorry - kinda busy on this end as you can imagine.
fiddletown:
"[2] You did come here asking us to contribute money so that you could get yourselves out of your predicament. You have thus exposed yourselves to our inquiries and scrutiny."
Yep. Scrutinize away. Not afraid of that whatsoever.
Though I'm now in the stupid situation, as Target Terror so aptly pointed out, where I can't say much about the facts of the case since it's pending. I dislike the way the deck gets stacked in this game.
It's charity. Donate or not, as you please. I won't try to make up your mind for you.
Navy LT
"No Victim = No Crime?!? Did anybody else pick up on that? Isn't that one of the reasons that we have laws, is to establish some sort of order to minimize the numbers of victims?"
No, you confuse LAWS passed by those with just authority derived from the consent of the governed - with arbitrary rules generated by an army of busybody government agencies.
It is an important distinction, and the fundamental reason for the morass of 20,000+ stupid gun laws we all suffer under.
How is carrying concealed without a permit/license in VT or AK perfectly legal, while the identical act is a FELONY in certain draconian police states?
What sane person knowingly and willingly accepts and defends that stepping one foot over the state line from VA to MD while exercising a Constitutionally protected Right converts a Right into a crime - a felony, no less?
As to other comments about suspicious activity, "sneaking around," being "up to something," etc. I'll just say that nope, sorry, we were just on our way home after attempting to visit friends. Really.
Watch the videos, see all the people coming out in support, read the forum posts on NHUnderground.com and NHTeaParty.org
Just business as usual in the "Land of the free and the home of the brave."
... or is it the land of the meek, and the home of the slave?
This is what I believe with all my heart, mind, and soul.
I'm simply going about my life and living it with as much dignity as I can.
http://nhliberty.org/philosophy
I won't speak on behalf of my wife Ivy, as she has demonstrated herself quite capable of defending herself.
That's why I married her.
(We're not sure what happened to Dave Ridley as a small child. Sorry. )
http://ridleyreport.com/video/2008/dec/nh_judge_cop_isnt_rhode_island
http://ridleyreport.com/video/2008/dec/nh_judge_dismisses_ankrom_disorderly_charge
http://ridleyreport.com/video/2008/dec/nh_cops_try_stop_ridleographer_filming_trial
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNPUfsdPXxw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=907ChKMQOPk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlbUkP0_S_c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iKx6gnG7aI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLZqgE3UE8k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikQWYCgYza8
Patriot Henry, expvideo, and Officers'Wife - thank you for understanding the "forest" of the case without getting hung up in the "trees."
Your kind thoughts and support are much appreciated.
This is all just one more thing - heaped upon all the others - that we have to get through. Thank you for lending me strength.
Thanks go out to all of the wonderful people I've never even met who have freely donated their time, some money (some folks have donated a LOT), and legal information on freedom to travel and the core issue at hand - RKBA.
I simply brought the issue to the forum to alert people that I was involved in a pending court case - however complicated it may seem - and let them make their own judgements and draw their own conclusions.
Beatcop:
"I think that the courts have ruled that "some" restrictions on use/ownership are reasonable."
The RKBA is an inalienable Right granted by God, and enumerated and protected by the Constitution. Courts don't have the authority to usurp a Right that God gave me, and they don't have the jurisdiction to rule on a Right that pre-exists the courts, the Constitution, and the united States of America itself.
"You can be ordered to step from the vehicle, blame the supreme court if you don't like it. Whether they asked you to step out because something was suspicious or just to chat, they can do that."
Hmm. Might I ask if you have a court ruling you can quote or a case law reference? I've heard that they need cause to ask me to leave the truck - they can chat with me perfectly fine while I'm sitting right where I am. I'd like to clarify. Does it vary from state to state like identification [Hiibel]?
We do have some decent cops up here, lol.
http://ridleyreport.com/video/2008/dec/nh_hooksett_officers_defend_open_carrier_masshle
http://ridleyreport.com/video/2008/oct/keene_pd_ride_along_15_open_carry
RKBABob:
"I'm sure there were laws in Jefferson's day prohibiting colonists from shooting a blunderbuss at a town hall meeting while screaming "King George is a wank!""
Discharging a firearm without just cause in an occupied public meeting place is in - a different realm - from passively carrying a pistol on your person.
"...maybe you think its unConstitutional that your neighbor is forced by law to have a proper septic system, rather than a simple pit full of you-know-what next to the property line?"
I have private property, and any leachate from a neighbor's septic system is direct demonstrable damage to my property. A law - a real law, based upon moral principles - that protects my Rights from the actions or negligence of another is in accord with properly administered justice.
"Would it be my right to fly ... and land where ever I please?"
Good question on the grey area of air space usage, but where you have a Right to land is determined by ownership. If you own the property you're landing on, then hell yes. If you plan on landing on someone else's property, then they can grant you permission or license by contract to do so.
"Violations of human liberty? Oh, please! I'm free to travel at a moment's notice to anywhere between the two great oceans, so just how has my travel been restricted?"
You're not free to travel if you have a metric ****-ton of prerequisite conditions that you must satisfy before you can begin your journey. This is a huge topic, best discussed on another forum where it is on-topic, and Patriot Henry has provided a nice starter link on the Right to travel.
Double Naught Spy:
[Quote:To me, the Second Amendment protects a pre-existing God-given Right to protect myself and my family. It is not a privilege subject to "reasonable restrictions" that vary from State to State at the whim of legislators or varying legislatures. ]
"I believe this as well. HOWEVER, I also recognize that this is not how the government system sees and enforces the law."
And that's the fundamental problem. It irks me to no end that some city ordinance can trump the Constitution. I shouldn't have to engage in expensive and time-consuming legal battles to challenge an unconstitutional law that is void on its face. The Constitution is the _highest_ law and all others are subordinate. SCOTUS has ruled that laws that are repugnant to the Constitution are ... no law at all. Cities and states don't have the jurisdiction or authority to just ignore the Constitution and just go ahead and pass laws anyway - if their arguments of "the law is the law and everyone has to follow it are valid as they allege, then they have to follow the law as well - the highest one. If THEY don't like it, THEY can try to change the highest law by amending the Constitution that they don't agree with through the legitimate and lawful procedure to do so. THEIR ignorance and disrespect of the Constitution that is there to limit their authority and protect my Rights is no excuse. Even if the Second Amendment were repealed, it would have no bearing on my Right, as the Constitution only enumerates and protects a pre-existing Right that would continue to exist even in the absence of the Second Amendment. Repealing the Amendment doesn't strip me of my Right since it isn't granted by the government - it's a Right that existed before the government and is outside their lawful authority as set down in Article I, Section 8. It's not a democracy, it's a Constitutional Republic. It's not mob rule or Mafia mentality might-makes-right thuggery.
THAT's what makes us FREE.
All I ask you to do is think it through, don't stop, keep thinking.
"As RPCVYemen hinted, you didn't exactly tell us the whole story..."
No, that's why I provided a link to ChipIn that has links to the story.
No reason to cut and paste the whole bloody mess. Sorry - kinda busy on this end as you can imagine.
fiddletown:
"[2] You did come here asking us to contribute money so that you could get yourselves out of your predicament. You have thus exposed yourselves to our inquiries and scrutiny."
Yep. Scrutinize away. Not afraid of that whatsoever.
Though I'm now in the stupid situation, as Target Terror so aptly pointed out, where I can't say much about the facts of the case since it's pending. I dislike the way the deck gets stacked in this game.
It's charity. Donate or not, as you please. I won't try to make up your mind for you.
Navy LT
"No Victim = No Crime?!? Did anybody else pick up on that? Isn't that one of the reasons that we have laws, is to establish some sort of order to minimize the numbers of victims?"
No, you confuse LAWS passed by those with just authority derived from the consent of the governed - with arbitrary rules generated by an army of busybody government agencies.
It is an important distinction, and the fundamental reason for the morass of 20,000+ stupid gun laws we all suffer under.
How is carrying concealed without a permit/license in VT or AK perfectly legal, while the identical act is a FELONY in certain draconian police states?
What sane person knowingly and willingly accepts and defends that stepping one foot over the state line from VA to MD while exercising a Constitutionally protected Right converts a Right into a crime - a felony, no less?
As to other comments about suspicious activity, "sneaking around," being "up to something," etc. I'll just say that nope, sorry, we were just on our way home after attempting to visit friends. Really.
Watch the videos, see all the people coming out in support, read the forum posts on NHUnderground.com and NHTeaParty.org
Just business as usual in the "Land of the free and the home of the brave."
... or is it the land of the meek, and the home of the slave?
This is what I believe with all my heart, mind, and soul.
I'm simply going about my life and living it with as much dignity as I can.
http://nhliberty.org/philosophy
I won't speak on behalf of my wife Ivy, as she has demonstrated herself quite capable of defending herself.
That's why I married her.
(We're not sure what happened to Dave Ridley as a small child. Sorry.
)http://ridleyreport.com/video/2008/dec/nh_judge_cop_isnt_rhode_island
http://ridleyreport.com/video/2008/dec/nh_judge_dismisses_ankrom_disorderly_charge
http://ridleyreport.com/video/2008/dec/nh_cops_try_stop_ridleographer_filming_trial
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNPUfsdPXxw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=907ChKMQOPk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlbUkP0_S_c
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6iKx6gnG7aI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RLZqgE3UE8k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikQWYCgYza8
Last edited:
expvideo
Member
Good luck in your court case! I really hope that this turns out well for you.
Double Naught Spy
Sus Venator
Yep, thought it through. You lost me in the misrepresentation of the original posts and the more I think about how you manipulated the information to suit your needs, the more I have trouble with your credibility.
Yes, well his absolutely bizarre presentation does zero to help with your credibility. In fact, it hurts you.
Good that you have friends. I don't know what seeing you have friends means in regard to the court case.
cassandrasdaddy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2006
- Messages
- 4,206
if your intent was to disabuse folks of the opinion that you are a bit far on the fringe or bring more folks into the fold i suspect you've failed. if your desire is to further certain negative stereotypes of gun folks you have succeeded albeit less successfully than the browns
woodybrighton
member
unfortunatly as a state gets bigger more sophisticated the ability to do harm by stupidity/negligence rises
so regualtion creeps in
so regualtion creeps in
crebralfix
member
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2004
- Messages
- 1,356
1) SCOTUS ruled you have unlimited right to contract. When you sign government papers, such as a drivers license, you are signing a contract.
2) 2nd Amendment to Federal Constitution has NOT been incorporated into the 14th Amendment. SCOTUS has been doing so one by one for awhile due to an interpretation that the FEDERAL Constitution does NOT limit state action. Understand that you have NO rights in state territory under the FEDERAL constitution UNLESS that right has been incorporated. This is why Heller is important (though they effectively neutered the right with "limits").
3) Given #2, you have rights under the state constitution.
[Art.] 2. [Natural Rights.] All men have certain natural, essential, and inherent rights - among which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing, and protecting, property; and, in a word, of seeking and obtaining happiness. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by this state on account of race, creed, color, sex or national origin.
June 2, 1784
Amended 1974 adding sentence to prohibit discrimination.
[Art.] 2-a. [The Bearing of Arms.] All persons have the right to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves, their families, their property and the state.
In terms of property, they have violated your right to property UNLESS any contract you signed with the state includes the ability to confiscate.
Additionally, they have violated your 2-a rights under the NH constitution. Again...you may have signed your rights away. Have your lawyer look into it.
All of this is demonstrated in VA by the case of Chet Szymecki Jr.
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum54/19701.html
He was harassed and arrested for openly carrying a firearm in Virginia. He originally sued the state for violations of the FEDERAL 2nd Amendment and he lost that part of the case:
Notice how silly this has become? They violated property rights...because of an SSN (yet another contract with Federal government). Never mind the fundamental right to keep and bear arms...can't possibly be important.
People, we need to get smarter in how we play the game. Just going along with "the program" means we sign our rights away.
2) 2nd Amendment to Federal Constitution has NOT been incorporated into the 14th Amendment. SCOTUS has been doing so one by one for awhile due to an interpretation that the FEDERAL Constitution does NOT limit state action. Understand that you have NO rights in state territory under the FEDERAL constitution UNLESS that right has been incorporated. This is why Heller is important (though they effectively neutered the right with "limits").
3) Given #2, you have rights under the state constitution.
[Art.] 2. [Natural Rights.] All men have certain natural, essential, and inherent rights - among which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing, and protecting, property; and, in a word, of seeking and obtaining happiness. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by this state on account of race, creed, color, sex or national origin.
June 2, 1784
Amended 1974 adding sentence to prohibit discrimination.
[Art.] 2-a. [The Bearing of Arms.] All persons have the right to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves, their families, their property and the state.
In terms of property, they have violated your right to property UNLESS any contract you signed with the state includes the ability to confiscate.
Additionally, they have violated your 2-a rights under the NH constitution. Again...you may have signed your rights away. Have your lawyer look into it.
All of this is demonstrated in VA by the case of Chet Szymecki Jr.
http://opencarry.mywowbb.com/forum54/19701.html
He was harassed and arrested for openly carrying a firearm in Virginia. He originally sued the state for violations of the FEDERAL 2nd Amendment and he lost that part of the case:
Notice how silly this has become? They violated property rights...because of an SSN (yet another contract with Federal government). Never mind the fundamental right to keep and bear arms...can't possibly be important.
People, we need to get smarter in how we play the game. Just going along with "the program" means we sign our rights away.
cassandrasdaddy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2006
- Messages
- 4,206
lawyer? i bet self representation
rscalzo
Member
Common in every state. A check of the mv laws of the state might clear it up. Regs can be suspended for several reasons. Each state has differing ways to determine why they were suspended. In NJ a lack of insurance is one of the more common ways to have a reg. suspended.
1) SCOTUS ruled you have unlimited right to contract. When you sign government papers, such as a drivers license, you are signing a contract.
That's why I made a point of not signing anything, and don't have any of those "contracts".
2) 2nd Amendment to Federal Constitution has NOT been incorporated into the 14th Amendment. SCOTUS has been doing so one by one for awhile due to an interpretation that the FEDERAL Constitution does NOT limit state action. Understand that you have NO rights in state territory under the FEDERAL constitution UNLESS that right has been incorporated. This is why Heller is important (though they effectively neutered the right with "limits").
So, the government that was instituted to protect the Rights of We the People has turned around and actively destroyed and denied those Rights.
So much for inalienable.
And people continue to blindly cheer the government on as they steal our "money" to pay themselves to pass more "laws" that further oppress us and bolster a system aimed at enslaving us. And it's "right" that we're somehow bound under threat of violence to obey every microscopic dictate until we wage a colossal legal battle to regain that inch, while every day they continue to take miles by passing unconstitutional legislation.
Every day I find myself viewing "the government" more of a static machine that operates under inertia by the complicity of the citizenry, and viewing the people who fell asleep at the wheel more and more as the real enemies that enable the wholesale destruction of everything that ever made the uSA the greatest place to ever live.
3) Given #2, you have rights under the state constitution.
[Art.] 2. [Natural Rights.] All men have certain natural, essential, and inherent rights - among which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing, and protecting, property; and, in a word, of seeking and obtaining happiness. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by this state on account of race, creed, color, sex or national origin.
June 2, 1784
Amended 1974 adding sentence to prohibit discrimination.
Small consolation.
[Art.] 2-a. [The Bearing of Arms.] All persons have the right to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves, their families, their property and the state.
In terms of property, they have violated your right to property UNLESS any contract you signed with the state includes the ability to confiscate.
Additionally, they have violated your 2-a rights under the NH constitution. Again...you may have signed your rights away. Have your lawyer look into it.
I never signed anything, Anything that I have signed (Voter registration, court papers, etc.) I made an explicit reservation of Rights.
All of this is demonstrated in VA by the case of Chet Szymecki Jr.
Yes, I'm very familiar with that case, as I was living in VA at the time that Chet was being whipped by the plantation foremen, and followed the story closely through VCDL.
Notice how silly this has become? They violated property rights...because of an SSN (yet another contract with Federal government). Never mind the fundamental right to keep and bear arms...can't possibly be important.
People, we need to get smarter in how we play the game. Just going along with "the program" means we sign our rights away.
Unfortunately, most people don't care, and the rest for some strange reason not only think it's OK - they WANT it this way. Look at all the government cheerleaders. Look at all the people who worship the infinite rules and regulations of the Beast that tie us down like Gulliver, look at all of those in the "you're BAD, and the police can do no wrong" camp.
I've actually had people _at gun shows_ get hostile with me because they didn't think anyone "needed" something like an AR15. He'll probably be just fine with anything Obama does to gun owners once the power is laid at his feet. I grew up behind the iron curtain of the People's Republik of New Jersey, so I know what brainwashing looks like. Something terribly, frighteningly, sadly wrong is happening to the American people.
I asked Double Naught Spy to "think it through." He's still stumbling over the particulars of my case and not seeing that I'm addressing the whole big ball of wax. The whole system isn't only broken - it's been completely subverted and made to operate in exactly the opposite manner that it's supposed to.
That's why I moved. That's why I'm not following the program anymore. I didn't expect it to be easy. I didn't expect most people to agree with me.
I just find it profoundly disturbing that some people march in lock step with "the system" and WANT it to punish me because I refuse to bow before it and help it devour THEIR Rights. I don't understand the lemming mentality.
That's why I made a point of not signing anything, and don't have any of those "contracts".
2) 2nd Amendment to Federal Constitution has NOT been incorporated into the 14th Amendment. SCOTUS has been doing so one by one for awhile due to an interpretation that the FEDERAL Constitution does NOT limit state action. Understand that you have NO rights in state territory under the FEDERAL constitution UNLESS that right has been incorporated. This is why Heller is important (though they effectively neutered the right with "limits").
So, the government that was instituted to protect the Rights of We the People has turned around and actively destroyed and denied those Rights.
So much for inalienable.
And people continue to blindly cheer the government on as they steal our "money" to pay themselves to pass more "laws" that further oppress us and bolster a system aimed at enslaving us. And it's "right" that we're somehow bound under threat of violence to obey every microscopic dictate until we wage a colossal legal battle to regain that inch, while every day they continue to take miles by passing unconstitutional legislation.
Every day I find myself viewing "the government" more of a static machine that operates under inertia by the complicity of the citizenry, and viewing the people who fell asleep at the wheel more and more as the real enemies that enable the wholesale destruction of everything that ever made the uSA the greatest place to ever live.
3) Given #2, you have rights under the state constitution.
[Art.] 2. [Natural Rights.] All men have certain natural, essential, and inherent rights - among which are, the enjoying and defending life and liberty; acquiring, possessing, and protecting, property; and, in a word, of seeking and obtaining happiness. Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by this state on account of race, creed, color, sex or national origin.
June 2, 1784
Amended 1974 adding sentence to prohibit discrimination.
Small consolation.
[Art.] 2-a. [The Bearing of Arms.] All persons have the right to keep and bear arms in defense of themselves, their families, their property and the state.
In terms of property, they have violated your right to property UNLESS any contract you signed with the state includes the ability to confiscate.
Additionally, they have violated your 2-a rights under the NH constitution. Again...you may have signed your rights away. Have your lawyer look into it.
I never signed anything, Anything that I have signed (Voter registration, court papers, etc.) I made an explicit reservation of Rights.
All of this is demonstrated in VA by the case of Chet Szymecki Jr.
Yes, I'm very familiar with that case, as I was living in VA at the time that Chet was being whipped by the plantation foremen, and followed the story closely through VCDL.
Notice how silly this has become? They violated property rights...because of an SSN (yet another contract with Federal government). Never mind the fundamental right to keep and bear arms...can't possibly be important.
People, we need to get smarter in how we play the game. Just going along with "the program" means we sign our rights away.
Unfortunately, most people don't care, and the rest for some strange reason not only think it's OK - they WANT it this way. Look at all the government cheerleaders. Look at all the people who worship the infinite rules and regulations of the Beast that tie us down like Gulliver, look at all of those in the "you're BAD, and the police can do no wrong" camp.
I've actually had people _at gun shows_ get hostile with me because they didn't think anyone "needed" something like an AR15. He'll probably be just fine with anything Obama does to gun owners once the power is laid at his feet. I grew up behind the iron curtain of the People's Republik of New Jersey, so I know what brainwashing looks like. Something terribly, frighteningly, sadly wrong is happening to the American people.
I asked Double Naught Spy to "think it through." He's still stumbling over the particulars of my case and not seeing that I'm addressing the whole big ball of wax. The whole system isn't only broken - it's been completely subverted and made to operate in exactly the opposite manner that it's supposed to.
That's why I moved. That's why I'm not following the program anymore. I didn't expect it to be easy. I didn't expect most people to agree with me.
I just find it profoundly disturbing that some people march in lock step with "the system" and WANT it to punish me because I refuse to bow before it and help it devour THEIR Rights. I don't understand the lemming mentality.
hankdatank1362
Member
OK!
Now, I didn't read all 5 pages of this, but I read the majority of it.
Frankly, dude, I believe you and your wife are in the wrong.
BUT.....
Like beatcop said, the only way to fight this case is to attack the cause for the traffic stop... i.e., the loud exhaust.
Is there an actual dB rating in whatever town or state you got pulled in as to the limit of SPL (Sound Pressure Level) your exhaust may put out?
Do you still have all the factory parts on your Mazda's exhaust? (Headers, catalytic converter, muffler, pipes) You're not one of those mini-truckers are you? (Lowered truck bodies, custom wheels, LOUD custom exhausts...)
You can always pick up a cheap dB meter at just about any Radio Shack, and meausre the SPL of your exhaust. If it's nowhere close to the limit, I'd say that the probable cause for stopping you is null and void.
If it is close (within 1.5 dB... remember, dB are logarithmic, and an increase of 3 dB is doubleing the actual loudness) then the officer can just say he was acting in "good faith" that a crime was committed and your exhaust was in fact illegal.
In which case, you're screwed.
But you guys seem like nice people. A little kooky, but we all can be at times. So good luck!
Now, I didn't read all 5 pages of this, but I read the majority of it.
Frankly, dude, I believe you and your wife are in the wrong.
BUT.....
Like beatcop said, the only way to fight this case is to attack the cause for the traffic stop... i.e., the loud exhaust.
Is there an actual dB rating in whatever town or state you got pulled in as to the limit of SPL (Sound Pressure Level) your exhaust may put out?
Do you still have all the factory parts on your Mazda's exhaust? (Headers, catalytic converter, muffler, pipes) You're not one of those mini-truckers are you? (Lowered truck bodies, custom wheels, LOUD custom exhausts...)
You can always pick up a cheap dB meter at just about any Radio Shack, and meausre the SPL of your exhaust. If it's nowhere close to the limit, I'd say that the probable cause for stopping you is null and void.
If it is close (within 1.5 dB... remember, dB are logarithmic, and an increase of 3 dB is doubleing the actual loudness) then the officer can just say he was acting in "good faith" that a crime was committed and your exhaust was in fact illegal.
In which case, you're screwed.
But you guys seem like nice people. A little kooky, but we all can be at times. So good luck!
Art Eatman
Moderator In Memoriam
Enuf righteous politics...
Insofar as commentary on this website, "the law is the law". We may not like some of them, we may not approve of some of them, but that's beyond the purview of THR.
IOW, this is not the place for civil disobedience. There are many websites which cater to the subject.
Insofar as commentary on this website, "the law is the law". We may not like some of them, we may not approve of some of them, but that's beyond the purview of THR.
IOW, this is not the place for civil disobedience. There are many websites which cater to the subject.
rscalzo
Member
What planet are you on? A suspended registration makes it a lawful stop. Any check after that is permitted by law which lead to the suspended DL most likely. Random checks of registrations in a public place are also legal based on prior case law.
Get a lawyer. He probably needs the business.
cassandrasdaddy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2006
- Messages
- 4,206
he runs a restaraunt? do you do those permits and inspections? where do you draw line
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked