MonoChango: jayphat: Honest to god, and this is not a troll, can someone tell me WTF an "expanded background check" is? I have heard nothing about this except that it won't include mental health records. Sooooo, what the hell makes this any different than what we have now?From what I understand right now they just ask you if you are going to do anything naughty. Then check to see if you have any outstanding warrants or have ever been convicted of a felony. But the expanded check is two fold.- First, they want to check to see if you are crazy. I would assume this would mean the gov't can read your medical records to see if you have been to a therapist or take mood altering drugs.- Second, as mentioned above they want to stop private transfer of guns between normal people. This would then mean that you would have to find an FFL dealer, pay him $20 or so and he would then do the federal paper work, including filing the above linked form. If the gun nuts are to be believed, this would also include temporary ownership like training your kid with your 22 rifle, or borrowing your friends pistol for 5 minutes to see if you like that model.
liam76: So you think the first gives you the right to interupt any legally permitted gathering by standing next to the speaker, waving your hands betweent hem and their speech and talking over them?
bullsballs: You have freedom of speech, unless we don't like what you have to say, subjects...
Nina_Hartley's_Ass: dittybopper: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: Nina_Hartley's_Ass: dittybopper: Maybe the guy was just pissed because Mayor Bloomberg's organization thinks Tamerlan Tsarnaev is a victim of gun violence:No, he wanted to know what gun the speaker's daughter was shot with./was tamerlan mentioned as a victim or perpetrator?Ah.Alex Katz, the deputy communications director for Mayors Against Illegal Guns and Bloomberg's office, apologized for the inclusion."Mayors Against Illegal Guns relied on the public list compiled by Slate.com entitled 'How Many People Have Been Killed by Guns Since Newtown?', and his name was on the list," Katz said in an email. "He was absolutely not a victim, his name should have been deleted before the list was provided to a family member for reading and his name should never have been read. It was a mistake, it should not have happened and we sincerely apologize."But if they aren't checking that list, to see who actually was killed by the police, or who was killed in the act of committing a felony, or killed in righteous self-defense shootings, then why should we believe them?I mean, seriously, the reader didn't catch that before saying it?For all I know, "Tamerlan Tsarnaev" is as common as "John Smith."Here's a list you'll like better.It's a little out of date, though.
dittybopper: nobody is that offensively stupid in real life
liam76: ChaosStar: Let me rephrase, because I know how Farkers operate, it's not disturbing the peace if the disturbing the peace statue is constitutional. Many of them are vague and over-reaching so they turn out not to be.If soemone is holding a legal gathering and you stroll in shouting over the speaker, crowding his podium you are not "quitely behaved" your actions are not "free from strife ro disorder" and in fact your behavior is "contentious or quarrelsome".and in case you are wondering the italisized are exactly why it isn't protected.http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/peaceable
Headso: yeah we are thinking of different scenarios, I am referring to the video this thread is about.
ChaosStar: Really? Please point out where I said that, cause I never did.
Donnchadha: ChaosStar: Red light cameras? Really? You do know that apples and oranges are different right?Let me slow it down for you....In response to "Even if he was trying to "walk away" he could be arrested for disturbing the peace prior to that." you said "No, he really couldn't".What you're saying is that the police would be unable to arrest the man because they did not witness the act. The fact that whatever he had done was done before the police arrived somehow prevented the police from taking action.At this point, that statement is made with no knowledge or concern for what potential crime was being committed. It could have been disturbing the peace, jaywalking, assault, making terroristic threats -- it doesn't matter. If the police didn't witness it, they can't arrest him.I pointed out that that is BS. If there's evidence (especially video evidence captured by a third party) that somebody committed a crime, the police can arrest/charge/cite you for it within the statute of limitations.
ChaosStar: Let me rephrase, because I know how Farkers operate, it's not disturbing the peace if the disturbing the peace statue is constitutional. Many of them are vague and over-reaching so they turn out not to be.
MythDragon: Seriously? He just touched the cop. He wasn't threatning him. I've seen cops damn near lose their shiat when one is just standing around, and a guy walks up to ask him a general question and taps him on the shoulder 'Excuse me sir..." and the cop acts like the guy stuck his penis in his pocket. "DON'T TOUCH ME SIR! YOU GOT THAT? DO NOT TOUCH ME AGAIN OR I WILL ARREST YOU!" Arrest for what? Felonious shoulder touching?
Donnchadha: ChaosStar: liam76: natas6.0: guy had his arms crossed and was trying to walk awaywas even saying he was walking away..blocked by police until he gave them a reason to arrest himEven if he was trying to "walk away" he could be arrested for disturbing the peace prior to that.The inevitabel "assault" charge is BS.No, he really couldn't, but I'm to lazy to look everything up.So if the cops don't catch him actively "disturbing the peace", even if there's video evidence of him doing so, he gets off scot free?I should use that the next time I argue a traffic camera violation -- "You see, by the time you reviewed the camera footage, I had stopped speeding, therefore I was committing no crime"
snuff3r: Why is this even news? Let alone one lasting as long as it did. The guy was an asshole. Everyone's entitled to their opinions but there's a way to do it and a way to be an asshole.Also, you touch a cop, you're getting arrested. You're a farking IDIOT if you don't know this.
snuff3r: Also, you touch a cop, you're getting arrested. You're a farking IDIOT if you don't know this.
liam76: natas6.0: guy had his arms crossed and was trying to walk awaywas even saying he was walking away..blocked by police until he gave them a reason to arrest himEven if he was trying to "walk away" he could be arrested for disturbing the peace prior to that.The inevitabel "assault" charge is BS.
Pocket Ninja: Once again, a headline that demonstrates the fine line between "using creative snark to poke fun at the article" and "being a farking idiot who can't read."
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Apr 24 2017 00:37:04
Runtime: 0.411 sec (411 ms)