Discussion in 'General Self Defense' started by PhotonGuy, Oct 3, 2017.
Actually 45 states in the US allow open carry
You call them long guns but that term isn't used here. We like to be specific.
It's misleading and probably rightly so for security reasons. Certain people are allowed to own handguns in Northern Ireland for protection as they are known targets for para militaries. Court officials, judges, prison officers, police officers, civil servants, probation officers community workers, some church leaders etc. while the situation there is better there is still paramilitary activity. Paramilitary-style shootings double
Man And Woman Shot In Coleraine | Northern Ireland News, 20/02/2017
Belfast police officer injured in drive-by shooting
Hand gun ownership isn't for the general public.
Well do you support drunk guys right to own that gun?
If you support his right to be doing what he does there. You are supporting his behavior.
If we catch people drunk driving we take their licence off them. That would be not supporting drunk driving.
No, he is still responsible for his actions and if he commits a crime then he should be punished.
Although he is a complete moron.....he did not break a law and therefore his constitutional rights are just that..... his rights.
Sure I do, as long as they don't use it while they're drunk.
I never said I supported what he's doing.
I agree with taking licenses from people who drink and drive. However, I am not against drunk people owning cars as long as they don't drive them while they're drunk.
It’s a great idea... until there’s a fire and fire fighters have to break a window to get people who are trapped out. Then it’s a catastrophic mistake.
And that is the difference. I dont support his actions. I wont fight to support his actions.
Has anybody stated yet that they support his actions? Or would fight to support his actions? I missed it if so. I don't think anyone with any common sense would support his actions, much less fight to support his actions. His actions are foolishly dangerous.
But in the USA a person's right to keep and bear arms has recently been reaffirmed. There are people who don't agree with that, but it is constitutional law. Takes a lot to change it.
So you support the right of drunk guys to own cars but not use them while drunk?
Lets stay off the politics, I don't want this thread locked down.
Well depends what you mean by using them. Im against people driving cars while drunk but if an intoxicated person wants to use the car to listen to the radio or run the air conditioner Im fine with that as long as the car stays in park.
If a cop finds a person who is intoxicated behind the wheel, whether or not the car is in drive, he still gets a DUI.
Peace favor your sword,
Same in the UK and most European countries, just being behind the wheel will get you charged with 'being in charge of a vehicle while above the legal limit or unfit through drink' not necessarily driving it. If you are actually driving you will be charged with 'Driving or attempting to drive while above the legal limit or unfit through drink'. The first carries a potential 3 months custodial sentence, up to £2500 in fines and a driving ban, you can double the custodial sentence, there's an unlimited amount you can be fined and a driving ban for at least a year for the latter charge. Other penalties will include your car insurance costs going up and as you have a criminal record so probably can forget about visiting the USA, as they don't often give visas to people with them.
How about if the car is off?
You are in charge of the car whether the engine is on or no. Drunk in charge of a vehicle.
Yup. Even if the keys are not in the ignition.
Being behind the wheel is, apparently, seen as prima facie of intent to operate.
I disagree with it (in fact, it pisses me off) but that's the way it is.
Peace favor your sword,
In reality here it happens very rarely that someone is charged with being drunk in charge of a vehicle and hasn't actually driven in it. What usually happens is that the driver stops and switches off the engine before the police actually reach him. The driver says he's 'resting' or hasn't been driving ( even though the engine is warm) so the police charge him after breathalysing him, with drunk in charge. They aren't charging an innocent person, just someone who was lucky not to have caused an accident and killed someone.
During my time on patrol I arrested 2 people passed out behind the steering wheel.
One was so adamant that I couldn't arrest him for DUI that he actually decided to try and fight me when I told him he was under arrest.
It isn't a right. It is a completely different game. I support a drunk guy to have a lawyer or health care. But driving you earn.
And of course no I don't.
Police seizing vehicles - Legal Aid Queensland
Separate names with a comma.