Just had three cops show up at my door...

[johnny bob]

Super ready?

Nah but I've got popcorn on. Many differing opinions and comments.

 

[Member 53328]

Aka certain members have not chimed in with an overdose of vitriol. Is there a badge for getting the most threads closed?

I don't think so. It's be cool if there was though. Haha.

 

[RobMa]

Yes I am partially venting about the situation, but I thought it might be OK since I am in a group of my peers with the same interest in our Second Amendment rights..

 

[RobMa]

I don't think so. It's be cool if there was though. Haha.

View attachment 990416

Is that who I think it is with his arm out of the window? Damn he was young..
Now I just see him in the car commercials once in a while and getting dumped on by the leftists.

 

[Member 53328]

Yes I am partially venting about the situation, but I thought it might be OK since I am in a group of my peers with the same interest in our Second Amendment rights..

I don't get the connection between the phone call and second amendment. Unless you are worried about "open view doctrine" and what could have been seen and seized if the police were given authority to walk through your residence.

 

[Member 53328]

Is that who I think it is with his arm out of the window? Damn he was young..
Now I just see him in the car commercials once in a while and getting dumped on by the leftists.

Possibly running for the governor of Texas.

 

[RobMa]

I don't get the connection between the phone call and second amendment. Unless you are worried about "open view doctrine" and what could have been seen and seized if the police were given authority to walk through your residence.

I just got my HK SP5, the last thing I want is for them to see it and go oh that's a scary gun, you should not be allowed to have it with a special needs child. Ahhh and yet another part of the mystery is unraveled…

 

[RobMa]

I just got my HK SP5, the last thing I want is for them to see it and go oh that's a scary gun you should not be allowed to have it with a special needs child. Ahhh and yet another part of the mystery is unraveled…

Like I've said before and on many other posts on this board "any excuse and every excuse to take away your guns"

 

[Member 53328]

I just got my HK SP5, the last thing I want is for them to see it and go oh that's a scary gun you should not be allowed to have it with a special needs child. Ahhh and yet another part of the mystery is unraveled…

I don't live in Washington. So I am not familiar with the gun laws. But if the gun is legal I don't see an issue and neither should the cops. Unless you have those unnecessary gun lockup laws….. and if the gun was loose I understand. Although why a loose firearm is around in the potential vicinity of your autistic child raises some questions. Although I will not be one to preach to another on how they should raise their child. Not saying that's the case, just a possibility with the scenario at hand. I hope that is not offensive.

 

[RobMa]

I don't live in Washington. So I am not familiar with the gun laws. But if the gun is legal I don't see an issue and neither should the cops. Unless you have those unnecessary gun lockup laws….. and if the gun was loose I understand. Although why a loose firearm is around in the potential vicinity of your autistic child raises some questions. Although I will not be one to preach to another on how they should raise their child. Not saying that's the case, just a possibility with the scenario at hand. I hope that is not offensive.

No no nothing like that, God forbid. He doesn't get near anything.. I have a huge heavy safe that's locked away far from his reach and it would take a bomb to get it open unless you know the combination so no that's not an issue. But if they were to take a walk around the house and find the safe then they could take the attitude of having any type of gun with a special needs child would be a risk therefore they need to confiscate them.
I hope I was a little more clear on this, I understand the last post was a little vague.

 

[RobMa]

Null

 

[Member 53328]

No no nothing like that, God forbid. He doesn't get near anything.. I have a huge heavy safe that's locked away far from his reach and it would take a bomb to get it open unless you know the combination so no that's not an issue. But if they were to take a walk around the house and find the safe then they could take the attitude of having any type of gun with a special needs child would be a risk therefore they need to confiscate them.
I hope I was a little more clear on this, I understand the last post was a little vague.

No I understand where you are coming from. The 2A is very frowned upon as of lately. And sadly many police officers are just bidders to the highest paying politicians. But there are a ton of good cops out there as well who fully support and defend the constitution. The west coast is leaning very left. Personally I wouldn't worry too much about officers seeing a safe. They have no knowledge of what is inside and would need a warrant to look. If they were worried about you owning guns they have a "list" that they could check. I understand your concern and appreciate your care and gun safety in regards to your child.

 

[baker3gun]

I believe him when he purports he is an Ex-Leo. I interpreted his post as a comment on the degree of alert the responding officers displayed.

I hear you Johnny.

I don't have the years exactly right because they vary from city to city, and county to county, and state to state, but...

40 years ago, cops ringing a doorbell was most often not a dangerous encounter.
Today, it is most often a dangerous encounter.
That is a reflection of the demise of American society.

Cops are people who want to live, the same way that other people want to live.
Their modern state of readiness and suspicious nature is a natural reaction to the increasing frequency with which this society wants to shoot or attack or sue or file charges against them, and the lack of support they receive when faced with those attacks.

This thread: the autistic son of an ex-LEO dialed 911. The call originated from an identifiable address. The call came from a phone not attached to an active phone service account. A return call was thus not possible. The dispatcher dispatched police to the scene in response to the call.
That is a totally normal and predictable outcome.

The ex-LEO at the scene is surprised that police were dispatched, and unhappy that they responded in a state of readiness. Okay.

His claim is that as an ex-LEO, he knows that the LEO's who banged on his door, and thus caused his autistic son to open the door (?) before anyone else in the house could say or do something to stop the door from being opened, are trained to be nasty to Americans. Okay.

I'm a member of this forum. I responded.

As i said before, I suggest that there is almost no difference in principle between cop-hating cop-bashers on gun forums and BLM cop-defunding arsonist looters using fake claims of racism as justification for burning and looting cities.

If I'm not mistaken, OP's claim is that his expertise informs him that cops are trained to be nasty to Americans, and that is his justification for being surprised and angry that cops responded to a 911 call placed by an autistic person from his house.

I counter.
This society is based on the rule of law.
Everything that happened to the OP (basically nothing happened to the OP) after his kid dialed 911 seems totally normal and predictable EXCEPT for OP's reaction to the predictable outcome.

In this discussion, gun forum members have been divided into two groups (roughly):
"those damn dirty coppers"
and
"what the hell are you people whining about? Of course the cops showed up!"

I guess I interpreted the post differently. Wikipedia? I still use a Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary to look up big words.

It is at least 50% probable that you interpreted it correctly and I am typing nothing for no reason.

Wikipedia evolution -
Stage 1 - Cool!
Stage 2 - This is crap!
Stage 3 - cleaned up, reviewed, evidence based, fully cited. Often but not always impartial.

IMO - not worthless. The citations are often high quality.

BUT - no one has to rely on wikipedia, because the internet is huge and full of quality reference materials on every subject, and so are libraries.

So perhaps your Wikipedia query is a tiny red herring?

If we need evidence of some thing to arrive at some common ground, that evidence is almost certainly available from sources other than wikipedia.

My specific point was this:
Logical argument has provided the pathway for the advancement of human civilization for more than 2000 years. This is fully documented. It is why many "Government 101" college course begin with a primer in logical argument.
For more than 2000 years, a list of fallacies has been defined and curated, for the express purpose of rejecting them outright rather than having to defeat them by argument every time some uninformed person begins to lose an argument and then results to fallacy to try to save his or her position.
The correct course of action is to accept defeat when your argument has been soundly and validly refuted, and abandon it in favor of the position which is logically correct. That is the path to advancement.
It helped create our republic 2000 years after it was used to form various early republics in the ancient Greek era.
The two greatest debates in our formation happened at Philadelphia and then amongst the public at ratification. A great number of self-reliant revolutionary gun-toting freemen were convinced to give distant strong centralized federal government a chance because the idea was well supported by good arguments and no other better option was elevated above it by convincing argument.
The crowning achievement of the anti-federalist political movement was a Bill of Rights, believed to be unnecessary by most Federalists.
But I digress.

Wikipedia is good enough to elucidate the above reality for persons who are not familiar with it.

I remain unsure whether you were just casually replying in your first response, or intentionally employing fallacy, so I responded in a way to cover both bases. [clink beer mugs here]

Gun forums have the potential to unite a large political base, but they unfailingly devolve into a morass of unstructured argument that relies on opinion and emotion rather than fact or logic.

It doesn't bother me that a wall of text is necessary to point out that sad irony, so every now and then, I make the point.

Too many people embraced the 140 character paradigm of twitter, and ignore long posts, so not many people read this stuff, but I still enjoy the discussion, and over time you can see that some people still respond and there is still a core of good thinkers on every gun forum.
Good meaning good.
Thinker meaning thinker.

Thx.

 

[baker3gun]

This is one of those threads where one has to wonder, "Why has this gone on for 7 pages?"

Because it took 7 pages before I showed up and killed it with a wall of text.

 

[baker3gun]

Aka certain members have not chimed in with an overdose of vitriol. Is there a badge for getting the most threads closed?

I'd like to avoid vitriol, but I can ramble with the best of them.

Is there a badge for killing the most threads with walls of text?

 

[johnny bob]

I think you are correct that the responses are in 2 different camps. Sometimes a thought thrown out there will inspire others to see a situation in a different light or spark a new thought. I like what you have posted as I view it as well thought out and articulated. There is quite a bit of experience and wisdom on this site and and thanks to all that share their thoughts.

 

[RobMa]

I'd like to avoid vitriol, but I can ramble with the best of them.

Is there a badge for killing the most threads with walls of text?

a: a sulfate of any of various metals (such as copper, iron, or zinc)especially : a glassy hydrate of such a sulfate
b: OIL OF VITRIOL

 

[RobMa]

I hear you Johnny.

I don't have the years exactly right because they vary from city to city, and county to county, and state to state, but...

40 years ago, cops ringing a doorbell was most often not a dangerous encounter.
Today, it is most often a dangerous encounter.
That is a reflection of the demise of American society.

Cops are people who want to live, the same way that other people want to live.
Their modern state of readiness and suspicious nature is a natural reaction to the increasing frequency with which this society wants to shoot or attack or sue or file charges against them, and the lack of support they receive when faced with those attacks.

This thread: the autistic son of an ex-LEO dialed 911. The call originated from an identifiable address. The call came from a phone not attached to an active phone service account. A return call was thus not possible. The dispatcher dispatched police to the scene in response to the call.
That is a totally normal and predictable outcome.

The ex-LEO at the scene is surprised that police were dispatched, and unhappy that they responded in a state of readiness. Okay.

His claim is that as an ex-LEO, he knows that the LEO's who banged on his door, and thus caused his autistic son to open the door (?) before anyone else in the house could say or do something to stop the door from being opened, are trained to be nasty to Americans. Okay.

I'm a member of this forum. I responded.

As i said before, I suggest that there is almost no difference in principle between cop-hating cop-bashers on gun forums and BLM cop-defunding arsonist looters using fake claims of racism as justification for burning and looting cities.

If I'm not mistaken, OP's claim is that his expertise informs him that cops are trained to be nasty to Americans, and that is his justification for being surprised and angry that cops responded to a 911 call placed by an autistic person from his house.

I counter.
This society is based on the rule of law.
Everything that happened to the OP (basically nothing happened to the OP) after his kid dialed 911 seems totally normal and predictable EXCEPT for OP's reaction to the predictable outcome.

In this discussion, gun forum members have been divided into two groups (roughly):
"those damn dirty coppers"
and
"what the hell are you people whining about? Of course the cops showed up!"


It is at least 50% probable that you interpreted it correctly and I am typing nothing for no reason.

Wikipedia evolution -
Stage 1 - Cool!
Stage 2 - This is crap!
Stage 3 - cleaned up, reviewed, evidence based, fully cited. Often but not always impartial.

IMO - not worthless. The citations are often high quality.

BUT - no one has to rely on wikipedia, because the internet is huge and full of quality reference materials on every subject, and so are libraries.

So perhaps your Wikipedia query is a tiny red herring?

If we need evidence of some thing to arrive at some common ground, that evidence is almost certainly available from sources other than wikipedia.

My specific point was this:
Logical argument has provided the pathway for the advancement of human civilization for more than 2000 years. This is fully documented. It is why many "Government 101" college course begin with a primer in logical argument.
For more than 2000 years, a list of fallacies has been defined and curated, for the express purpose of rejecting them outright rather than having to defeat them by argument every time some uninformed person begins to lose an argument and then results to fallacy to try to save his or her position.
The correct course of action is to accept defeat when your argument has been soundly and validly refuted, and abandon it in favor of the position which is logically correct. That is the path to advancement.
It helped create our republic 2000 years after it was used to form various early republics in the ancient Greek era.
The two greatest debates in our formation happened at Philadelphia and then amongst the public at ratification. A great number of self-reliant revolutionary gun-toting freemen were convinced to give distant strong centralized federal government a chance because the idea was well supported by good arguments and no other better option was elevated above it by convincing argument.
The crowning achievement of the anti-federalist political movement was a Bill of Rights, believed to be unnecessary by most Federalists.
But I digress.

Wikipedia is good enough to elucidate the above reality for persons who are not familiar with it.

I remain unsure whether you were just casually replying in your first response, or intentionally employing fallacy, so I responded in a way to cover both bases. [clink beer mugs here]

Gun forums have the potential to unite a large political base, but they unfailingly devolve into a morass of unstructured argument that relies on opinion and emotion rather than fact or logic.

It doesn't bother me that a wall of text is necessary to point out that sad irony, so every now and then, I make the point.

Too many people embraced the 140 character paradigm of twitter, and ignore long posts, so not many people read this stuff, but I still enjoy the discussion, and over time you can see that some people still respond and there is still a core of good thinkers on every gun forum.
Good meaning good.
Thinker meaning thinker.

Thx.

Yes I went to college as well....

 

[Provincial]

Warning: Thread Drift

I wouldn't be surprised if the Nanny People got on your case for having that big plastic bag (protecting the monitor) around your "vulnerable" son. I assume that he understands not to play with it, or you wouldn't have it there, but those sorts of people don't accept reasonable procedures instead of outright bans.

Now, back to your regular scheduled bickering programming!

OP - hang in there! You are doing the best for your kid, and I commend you! Illegitimi non carborundum.

 

[albin25]

Why does a cell phone's GPS tracking, automatically activate for 911 calls?

Imagine that you're pinned in the wreckage of your over-turned truck, in a ravine, 30 miles from the main road. You can just manage to reach your phone and dial 911 before passing out. Or, maybe you're the first on the scene at a mugging/injury/fire and, "uhhh, somewhere east of____. " isn't good enough...

Where do you want the first responders to go....
A) to your home address as listed by your Cell Provider ??
or....
B) to your cell phone's GPS location ??

Ya.... that's why.