Locked Mag Box; should it become necessary

[Hooyah DeepSea]

My apologies; that was the 924; Sorry.

 

[GripItAndRipIt]

Exactly. If you know the laws and your rights you have nothing to stress over. Be smart and respectful and you will be ok.

Plain view doctrine. If you leave mags out in plain view then that's on you. Or in a glovebox where they will be seen when pulling out registration/insurance. But if they are hidden then the police would need a warrant to search your vehicle. You need reasonable suspicion and probable cause to even get a warrant. Minor traffic violations won't cut it.

So much stress and fear for no reason. But I do understand people wanting to stay "legal." With that mindset and cooperation our rights will continue to be dumbed down and stripped away.

None of this is directed at you personally.

Probable cause and reasonable suspicion comprise the rubric of the rule of law. But we're not doing that any more, remember? Of course, our rights are only as real as our willingness to defend them. Quite a pickle we've allowed them to put us in. Another far smarter man than me once said "we get the government we deserve." Speaking of, I think the 114ers actually did us all a big favor: The majority of its provisions are so blatantly unconstitutional that if the Ninth Circus doesn't overturn this pile of crap -- like they did in CA, the USSC will be compelled to take it up and as long as nobody on the court dies we may have a shot -- pun intended -- at codifying into statute the inviolability of the fundamental right to keep and bear arms. That's right -- constitutional carry across the Fruited Plain. I'm talkin all 57 states!

 

[Hooyah DeepSea]

And that includes all of the US, plus the State of Mass Confusion, and the states of matter, and the extra Obama states and extra Biden states!!!


We need to find a place where we all can drink together . . . That would be so much more fun !!!

 

[Koda]

It doesn't matter my location. I will live my life free and how I deem fit. If I have to pay the consequences then so be it. I am not a criminal. I am a legal and law abiding citizen. I work. I pay taxes. I was raised with the mentality to be responsible for the outcomes of your actions. And that's exactly how I will continue to live.

The only thing to remember here is, that when we encourage others to do "civil disobedience" we have to remember that not everyone else is in a position to deal with the consequences, just because you are.
therein lies the problem with these "shall not comply" public statements. When someone eventually does become a case law example, they broke the law and become an anti-gun statistic.

 

[GripItAndRipIt]

No one here is supporting sanctuary cities….. haha. With that being said….. the mentality that if we all just follow more laws and more laws, more infringement and more infringement…. then eventually it will all just straighten out is complete nonsense. Aint got no time for that.

I mean if only our forefathers would have just followed the law…… where would be. Hahaha.

You've put me on your ignore list before. You can do it again. I believe in you!

View attachment 1324587

But you are supporting sanctuary cities -- by supporting the same philosophies and attitudes that were their genesis.

Sorry that you have to resort to playground tactics. Must be why I ignored you before. We're on the same side here, pal. And if you behave like the sanctuarians then you are one and you do support them defacto -- by virtue of your willingness to subvert the rule of law as they have. You'll be on the same side -- the side of of the lawless, the side of the rule of men. You can't tell me you're a law-abiding citizen while simultaneously breaking the law.

 

[Koda]

Speaking of, I think the 114ers actually did us all a big favor: The majority of its provisions are so blatantly unconstitutional that if the Ninth Circus doesn't overturn this pile of crap -- like they did in CA, the USSC will be compelled to take it up and as long as nobody on the court dies we may have a shot -- pun intended -- at codifying into statute the inviolability of the fundamental right to keep and bear arms. That's right -- constitutional carry across the Fruited Plain. I'm talkin all 57 states!

^^this,
it needs to play out in the courts. Until then the "shall not comply" only makes things worse.

 

[PORSCHE928S4]

Take the 928 out for a spin, you'll get centered again in a jiffy!

Now you are talking !

 

[PORSCHE928S4]

I didn't say you had to follow them -- I said don't complain. At least if you want to be intellectually consistent. For my part, I think we should be better than them. Playing their game only validates it.

Truth we are better !

 

[salmon creek gary]

As for the Portland rioters; a good number were 'arrested and booked' . . . . even though they may not have been charged, their arrest and booking remains on the record. . . .

Is that record readily accessible? If not, how about a petition drive leading to a ballot measure?

Think about it, the good people of Oregon could vote in a law requiring the state to compile all those (past and future) arrest records for inclusion in a 'publicly accessible state-wide database'. Aw, there might be a few cries about rights violation and invasion of privacy, but heck, that doesn't matter. M114 already set one heckuva precedent revealing that the state is all aboard with stripping rights and tossing aside privacy concerns so long as the law gets codified by mob rule.

 

[Member 53328]

The only thing to remember here is, that when we encourage others to do "civil disobedience" we have to remember that not everyone else is in a position to deal with the consequences, just because you are.
therein lies the problem with these "shall not comply" public statements. When someone eventually does become a case law example, they broke the law and become an anti-gun statistic.

I'm strictly saying what I am doing. Me personally. Everyone else has to make their own decisions. I'm not encouraging or telling people what to do at all. We are all free. Do with it and interpret it as you wish. With that being said I'm leaving this conversation.

 

[WeaponizedMRE]

But you are supporting sanctuary cities -- by supporting the same philosophies and attitudes that were their genesis.

Sorry that you have to resort to playground tactics. Must be why I ignored you before. We're on the same side here, pal. And if you behave like the sanctuarians then you are one and you do support them defacto -- by virtue of your willingness to subvert the rule of law as they have. You'll be on the same side -- the side of of the lawless, the side of the rule of men. You can't tell me you're a law-abiding citizen while simultaneously breaking the law.

Bold of you to assume that all of us are law-abiding. You do you I guess, the rest of us have welding to do on our Komatsu's. Gotta make sure those coolant lines are reinforced.

 

[GripItAndRipIt]

^^this,
it needs to play out in the courts. Until then the "shall not comply" only makes things worse.

Exactly. Playing right into their hands. We either believe in the rule of law or we don't. The anti-gunners in Oregon have scored a temporary victory with their callow tyranny of the majority. It will be short lived. But in the mean time, what they want more than anything is one of us -- hundreds of us -- ensnared in their precious quagmire. We should not give them the satisfaction.

 

[Hooyah DeepSea]

Actually Gary, those records are available - through FOIA requests!

 

[GripItAndRipIt]

Truth we are better !

Not if we sink to their level. Sorry.

 

[GripItAndRipIt]

Bold of you to assume that all of us are law-abiding. You do you I guess, the rest of us have welding to do on our Komatsu's. Gotta make sure those coolant lines are reinforced.

I assumed nothing. I was responding directly to an assertion made by the poster to whom I was responding.

 

[Member 53328]

But you are supporting sanctuary cities -- by supporting the same philosophies and attitudes that were their genesis.

Sorry that you have to resort to playground tactics. Must be why I ignored you before. We're on the same side here, pal. And if you behave like the sanctuarians then you are one and you do support them defacto -- by virtue of your willingness to subvert the rule of law as they have. You'll be on the same side -- the side of of the lawless, the side of the rule of men. You can't tell me you're a law-abiding citizen while simultaneously breaking the law.

Very righteous of you. I hope you've never broken the law before. A high pedestal you stand on.

Never speed? Never enter a business with a firearm that has a sign suggesting otherwise? Never taken a mag that holds over 10 rounds into Washington? Never carried in a state that you weren't licensed in? Never carried in a post office?

John 8:7

None of us a perfect.

 

[Hooyah DeepSea]

I started this just for the fun of it and then got everybody all spun up. Dang!!

 

[Member 53328]

I started this just for the fun of it and then got everybody all spun up. Dang!!

Some of us are fed up with all this sh!t and get heated. My apologies.

 

[WeaponizedMRE]

Very righteous of you. I hope you've never broken the law before. A high pedestal you stand on.

Never speed? Never enter a business with a firearm that has a sign suggesting otherwise? Never taken a mag that holds over 10 rounds into Washington? Never carried in a state that you weren't licensed in? Never carried in a post office?

John 8:7

None of us a perfect.

Never accidentally drilled a third hole in a lower receiver?

I allegedly keep making that mistake all the time, I wish I was perfect.

 

[mhayd93]

But you are supporting sanctuary cities -- by supporting the same philosophies and attitudes that were their genesis.

Sorry that you have to resort to playground tactics. Must be why I ignored you before. We're on the same side here, pal. And if you behave like the sanctuarians then you are one and you do support them defacto -- by virtue of your willingness to subvert the rule of law as they have. You'll be on the same side -- the side of of the lawless, the side of the rule of men. You can't tell me you're a law-abiding citizen while simultaneously breaking the law.

You should read the Declaration of Independence. There is a time and place to resist and disobey unjust laws; "unjust" being the keyword.

Though not technically a legal document, the Declaration of Independence embodies the spirit of the United States, wherein the principles it expresses are clearly intended to be an everlasting set of duties/responsibilities.