And not just that, they actually check to make sure you don't have a gun, unlike other GFZs.Cedar Park Dad wrote:
Historically courts have been gun free zones, and full of cops. I'm ok with that.
Search found 4 matches
Return to “Denied Rigth To Vote...For Carrying Pocket Knife”
- Tue Mar 04, 2014 1:20 pm
- Forum: LEO Contacts & Bloopers
- Topic: Denied Rigth To Vote...For Carrying Pocket Knife
- Replies: 89
- Views: 33275
Re: Denied Rigth To Vote...For Carrying Pocket Knife
- Tue Mar 04, 2014 1:00 pm
- Forum: LEO Contacts & Bloopers
- Topic: Denied Rigth To Vote...For Carrying Pocket Knife
- Replies: 89
- Views: 33275
Re: Denied Rigth To Vote...For Carrying Pocket Knife
I agree on the gun free zones, mostly because most of them cannot offer adequate security and really have no need to remove guns in the first place. Courts are an entirely different animal: They can provide security (we can debate on whether they need to do a better job) and there are overwhelming reasons not to allow anyone to bring a gun into that environment. We can have gun rights and defend ourselves without being dogmatic.anygunanywhere wrote:Well, the judges, DAs, and LEOs on duty can protect us all then. Their right to defend themselves is much more important than ours.AlaskanInTexas wrote:My thoughts on the subjects at hand:
1. I see nothing offensive about having non-statutory rules in public buildings. You really want them to have to pass a law each and every time a local building sees a need to be addressed? If they don't want knives, fine. If they don't want you rolling in with a large pizza, fine. If they don't want you playing music from a boombox, fine.
2. I am pretty much on board with the any gun anywhere camp, but not in courts. BAD IDEA. You want some witness to a crime to be testifying knowing that the perps buddies are all sitting there armed? You want a judge to give out an impartial ruling knowing that it will incite powerful emotions in people that are armed? You want families of perps and victims to be sitted across the aisle armed? You want families of victims to be sitting there ready to take charge when the jury doesn't see things as they do. Courtrooms can be rendered relatively safe; I think disarming all is a good trade off here.
We will never be able to control others. This is what makes gun free zones killing fields.
I understand your stances, I just don't agree.
Anygunanywhere
Anygunjustabouteverywhere
- Tue Mar 04, 2014 12:08 pm
- Forum: LEO Contacts & Bloopers
- Topic: Denied Rigth To Vote...For Carrying Pocket Knife
- Replies: 89
- Views: 33275
Re: Denied Rigth To Vote...For Carrying Pocket Knife
My thoughts on the subjects at hand:
1. I see nothing offensive about having non-statutory rules in public buildings. You really want them to have to pass a law each and every time a local building sees a need to be addressed? If they don't want knives, fine. If they don't want you rolling in with a large pizza, fine. If they don't want you playing music from a boombox, fine.
2. I am pretty much on board with the any gun anywhere camp, but not in courts. BAD IDEA. You want some witness to a crime to be testifying knowing that the perps buddies are all sitting there armed? You want a judge to give out an impartial ruling knowing that it will incite powerful emotions in people that are armed? You want families of perps and victims to be sitted across the aisle armed? You want families of victims to be sitting there ready to take charge when the jury doesn't see things as they do. Courtrooms can be rendered relatively safe; I think disarming all is a good trade off here.
1. I see nothing offensive about having non-statutory rules in public buildings. You really want them to have to pass a law each and every time a local building sees a need to be addressed? If they don't want knives, fine. If they don't want you rolling in with a large pizza, fine. If they don't want you playing music from a boombox, fine.
2. I am pretty much on board with the any gun anywhere camp, but not in courts. BAD IDEA. You want some witness to a crime to be testifying knowing that the perps buddies are all sitting there armed? You want a judge to give out an impartial ruling knowing that it will incite powerful emotions in people that are armed? You want families of perps and victims to be sitted across the aisle armed? You want families of victims to be sitting there ready to take charge when the jury doesn't see things as they do. Courtrooms can be rendered relatively safe; I think disarming all is a good trade off here.
- Tue Mar 04, 2014 12:00 pm
- Forum: LEO Contacts & Bloopers
- Topic: Denied Rigth To Vote...For Carrying Pocket Knife
- Replies: 89
- Views: 33275
Re: Denied Rigth To Vote...For Carrying Pocket Knife
Simple answer - it is easier to enforce at the entry to the courthouse than at a hundred different courtroom entrances.SewTexas wrote:so far no one has explained why a camera phone would or should be banned from a court HOUSE. I totally understand a judge banning it from a court ROOM, ie: family court, juvi court ect....all of those have to do with a ROOM, nothing to do with the court HOUSE....there are other things that happen in a court HOUSE, business papers are filed, people are married, ect....maybe I NEED something that is stored on my phone while I am filling out that paper.