Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 45 of 45

Thread: First the pentagon, now the President ricen!!!!

  1. #31
    Asst. Administrator ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,847
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1315 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by GRCarry View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I'm beginning, nope, already hate Amber Alerts. I'm on the west side of Michigan. At 2:00 am, my phone blares at me. I get out of bed to find out what the emergency is: it's an Amber Alert for someone in Detroit, 3 hours away from me. They want me to be on the lookout for someone headed to Ohio. If I could disable that thing, I would.
    Though, an Amber Alert relates to the imminent dire deadly threat to a child, similar to how an escaped triple murderer threatens everyone in the community. About the only way to enlist the help of everyone in the community is to get everyone's eyes/ears on the problem, keeping a watch for the folks involved.

    We allow flyers to be posted in the people's post offices, allow news programs to run over the airwaves to notify folks, allow the "town cryer" to notify folks of important information, allow the town's warning horns to go off for approaching emergencies. Messages on phones aren't much different than those, other than being carried in our pockets.
    Cardinal principle: Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Philosophy: Why the Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
    On the RKBA: Most of what you think you know about our Constitution is wrong -- Michael Badnarik

  2. #32
    Senior Member GRCarry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Location
    Grand Rapids, MI
    Posts
    2,628
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    602 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Though, an Amber Alert relates to the imminent dire deadly threat to a child, similar to how an escaped triple murderer threatens everyone in the community. About the only way to enlist the help of everyone in the community is to get everyone's eyes/ears on the problem, keeping a watch for the folks involved.

    We allow flyers to be posted in the people's post offices, allow news programs to run over the airwaves to notify folks, allow the "town cryer" to notify folks of important information, allow the town's warning horns to go off for approaching emergencies. Messages on phones aren't much different than those, other than being carried in our pockets.
    I don't mind amber alerts for times it is near me, even if I'm home and not planning on being out. If nothing else, I can pray for those involved. It's the ones that I get that are just somewhere in the lower peninsula that I can have no reasonable ability to do anything about and very late at night.

    The problem is what defines the community that can help. Two hours and a hundred and fifty miles isn't close enough for me to do anything, and 2:00 am isn't a good time to ask me to drive over to south Detroit and browse the freeways. Now, if it were in my city, I wouldn't mind, even if I am in bed. At least I am close enough to be considered.
    TANSTAAFL - "Moon is a Harsh Mistress"
    OldVet, 30 March 2018: "But being the agreeable sort, I agree."

  3. #33
    Senior Member Nakyak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Under the Twister
    Posts
    3,784
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1176 Post(s)
    There are some Amber alerts that cover a lot of ground. Just because something happened to a kid in city X doesn't always mean that it is contained to that city. Generally speaking, Amber alerts deal with abductions of kids and abductors that take them somewhere. If a kid is abducted in Colorado, it's believed is being taken to California, and hours have passed since the police have been called, where should the cut off be to notify the general public? Or better yet, what if it was your kid. Would you not want the Amber alert to burden sleeping citizens, or anyone outside of your city?

  4. #34
    Asst. Administrator ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,847
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1315 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by GRCarry View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    I don't mind amber alerts for times it is near me, even if I'm home and not planning on being out. If nothing else, I can pray for those involved. It's the ones that I get that are just somewhere in the lower peninsula that I can have no reasonable ability to do anything about and very late at night.

    The problem is what defines the community that can help. Two hours and a hundred and fifty miles isn't close enough for me to do anything, and 2:00 am isn't a good time to ask me to drive over to south Detroit and browse the freeways. Now, if it were in my city, I wouldn't mind, even if I am in bed. At least I am close enough to be considered.
    The thing with Amber Alerts, though, is that nearly all of the kidnappers and others involved in swiping kids are mobile. Whether via personal vehicles or otherwise. Which means that in just an hour or two, a fleeing person (with child in tow) can easily cross state lines and be a major city away.

    Similar to, say, notifying a region when a triple murderer escapes custody.
    Cardinal principle: Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Philosophy: Why the Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
    On the RKBA: Most of what you think you know about our Constitution is wrong -- Michael Badnarik

  5. #35
    Senior Member Siam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,489
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    864 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    The thing with Amber Alerts, though, is that nearly all of the kidnappers and others involved in swiping kids are mobile. Whether via personal vehicles or otherwise. Which means that in just an hour or two, a fleeing person (with child in tow) can easily cross state lines and be a major city away.

    Similar to, say, notifying a region when a triple murderer escapes custody.
    Also, you should not be looking at a text while you are driving which is one of the main purposes for the Amber alerts: to let drivers be aware

  6. #36
    Senior Member ctr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley
    Posts
    1,827
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    395 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Wasn't what I said.

    I said that providing for the common defense is a prime, stated constitutional directive. It's one of the key handful of reasons why government is formed, worldwide.

    As such, for that reason, when defense of the "realm" is required, people step up and do what's necessary. In one's own home, the community, the state, the nation. (And, if it ever comes to the point of guarding against asteroid strikes or climate catastrophes or whatnot, the world will eventually step up together.) That's just how it's done, for mutual survival. Notification of warnings is a key part of that. Whether one is talking about a raucous ride by Paul Revere through the night, or the warning klaxons sounding off as a tornado approaches, or notices of dire emergency (or tests) being sent to phones/TV/radio.

    Or do you imagine that defense on behalf of the people isn't something that should be done, that notification and warning in time of grave emergency shouldn't be tolerated?

    The cell phone is your own private property, sure. Not the messages or calls that get sent to it, though. Your mailbox is yours as well, but it's only a medium through which others can, do and have every right to send you stuff, notices, etc.

    Pretty simple, really.
    Seems like you're splitting hairs. If the messages and calls received are not my property whose are they? Isn't the letter I received my property? Isn't the data in my car's black box my data? You bet it's mine. Not the governments. This is just another form of government intrusion and over reach.
    I find supremely ironic that God in his wisdom and grace has given man freedom of choice bounded by 10 simple rules. Man in his finite wisdom has created millions of rules to limit freedom of choice and personal responsibility of man.

  7. #37
    Asst. Administrator ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,847
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1315 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ctr View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Seems like you're splitting hairs. If the messages and calls received are not my property whose are they? Isn't the letter I received my property? Isn't the data in my car's black box my data? You bet it's mine. Not the governments. This is just another form of government intrusion and over reach.
    Not splitting hairs.

    It's your phone. Fine.

    It's the People's airwaves, more or less. Which means, for the most part, anyone can make legitimate use of such for communications.

    More pointedly, despite you sitting on your property holding your property, an emergency warning broadcast (to TV/radio/phone or over the klaxons, or via town crier, whatever) amounts to legitimate use of these airwaves.

    It's hard to rationalize a person's lack of desire to hear certain things as justifying authority to halt or shut down or disallow certain communications deemed by our hired/elected staff as reasonable.

    I agree that the ridiculous stuff probably warrants having certain filtering built-in. Such as having a means of going after unwanted "spam" callers, junk emailers and the like. (Which there is.)

    But the emergency grade stuff? Hard to claim that's invalid communications or abusive use of the airwaves. About as justifiable as, say, claiming one's next door neighbor needs to be muzzled for daring to cry out for help due to some emergency inside that home. Pretty much the same thing, just varying by scale.
    Cardinal principle: Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Philosophy: Why the Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
    On the RKBA: Most of what you think you know about our Constitution is wrong -- Michael Badnarik

  8. #38
    Senior Member ctr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley
    Posts
    1,827
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    395 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Not splitting hairs.

    It's your phone. Fine.

    It's the People's airwaves, more or less. Which means, for the most part, anyone can make legitimate use of such for communications.

    More pointedly, despite you sitting on your property holding your property, an emergency warning broadcast (to TV/radio/phone or over the klaxons, or via town crier, whatever) amounts to legitimate use of these airwaves.

    It's hard to rationalize a person's lack of desire to hear certain things as justifying authority to halt or shut down or disallow certain communications deemed by our hired/elected staff as reasonable.

    I agree that the ridiculous stuff probably warrants having certain filtering built-in. Such as having a means of going after unwanted "spam" callers, junk emailers and the like. (Which there is.)

    But the emergency grade stuff? Hard to claim that's invalid communications or abusive use of the airwaves. About as justifiable as, say, claiming one's next door neighbor needs to be muzzled for daring to cry out for help due to some emergency inside that home. Pretty much the same thing, just varying by scale.
    We won't agree on this one. It's just more big brother to me.
    I find supremely ironic that God in his wisdom and grace has given man freedom of choice bounded by 10 simple rules. Man in his finite wisdom has created millions of rules to limit freedom of choice and personal responsibility of man.

  9. #39
    Asst. Administrator ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,847
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1315 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ctr View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    We won't agree on this one. It's just more big brother to me.
    Which is fine.

    Makes me wonder, though: back in the day, was a town crier unlawful, or an action giving anyone authority to close the guy's mouth for daring to enter town with a message for the citizens? Or, back to the Revolutionary War era, would anyone have had legitimate authority to halt Paul Revere and other folks, to shut them up, as they rode to inform people of the incoming British?

    Yesterdays "town crier" is today's phone call and emergency news report, yes?
    Cardinal principle: Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Philosophy: Why the Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
    On the RKBA: Most of what you think you know about our Constitution is wrong -- Michael Badnarik

  10. #40
    Senior Member ctr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley
    Posts
    1,827
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    395 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Which is fine.

    Makes me wonder, though: back in the day, was a town crier unlawful, or an action giving anyone authority to close the guy's mouth for daring to enter town with a message for the citizens? Or, back to the Revolutionary War era, would anyone have had legitimate authority to halt Paul Revere and other folks, to shut them up, as they rode to inform people of the incoming British?

    Yesterdays "town crier" is today's phone call and emergency news report, yes?
    No. The difference is the venue. Public vs private.
    I find supremely ironic that God in his wisdom and grace has given man freedom of choice bounded by 10 simple rules. Man in his finite wisdom has created millions of rules to limit freedom of choice and personal responsibility of man.

  11. #41
    Senior Member Arejay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Posts
    2,377
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    511 Post(s)
    I think an inconvenient amber alert at an awkward time or place to be of no bother to me when I think of the terror and pain an innocent abducted child could be experiencing. I don't care if that kid is on the other coast. Kids aren't as safe as they used to be anymore and I see Amber alerts as a country that still cares.
    An emergency broadcast to my phone causes no problems for me either.

  12. #42
    Asst. Administrator ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,847
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1315 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ctr View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    No. The difference is the venue. Public vs private.
    Hm.

    Consider the variety of examples of notifications or communications that exist these days and in prior eras:

    • Town crier -- voice heard inside homes as the crier heads through town.
    • Paul Revere's ride -- voice heard inside homes as the riders headed through towns.
    • Warning klaxon (for tornado and similar emergencies) -- heard inside homes as the klaxons sound.
    • Posting on doors/properties when mandatory evacuations are commanded -- found on properties by the residents.
    • Phone calls -- landing on phones wherever such phones are plugged in or held, whether that be a land line (thus inside a home) or carried on one's person (in which case it can be anywhere).


    Not all that different, really.

    About the only thing that can be argued is the reasonableness of certain messages. But the fact of such warnings being justifiable is still that, and the appropriateness of the communications medium is still that.

    Like you, I fully appreciate certain messages are hardly dire, deadly urgent and the same grade of "emergency" as others. IMO, the truly dire ones should be reserved for things where the whole neighborhood or community is under threat, but that's just my own opinion. None of which makes the standard, customary modes of communication in the various eras inappropriate or unlawful.
    Cardinal principle: Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Philosophy: Why the Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
    On the RKBA: Most of what you think you know about our Constitution is wrong -- Michael Badnarik

  13. #43
    Senior Member ctr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Shenandoah Valley
    Posts
    1,827
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    395 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ccw9mm View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    Hm.

    Consider the variety of examples of notifications or communications that exist these days and in prior eras:

    • Town crier -- voice heard inside homes as the crier heads through town.
    • Paul Revere's ride -- voice heard inside homes as the riders headed through towns.
    • Warning klaxon (for tornado and similar emergencies) -- heard inside homes as the klaxons sound.
    • Posting on doors/properties when mandatory evacuations are commanded -- found on properties by the residents.
    • Phone calls -- landing on phones wherever such phones are plugged in or held, whether that be a land line (thus inside a home) or carried on one's person (in which case it can be anywhere).


    Not all that different, really.

    About the only thing that can be argued is the reasonableness of certain messages. But the fact of such warnings being justifiable is still that, and the appropriateness of the communications medium is still that.

    Like you, I fully appreciate certain messages are hardly dire, deadly urgent and the same grade of "emergency" as others. IMO, the truly dire ones should be reserved for things where the whole neighborhood or community is under threat, but that's just my own opinion. None of which makes the standard, customary modes of communication in the various eras inappropriate or unlawful.
    We have the choice to ignore an incoming call, i.e. not answer. The government has somewhat begrudgingly acknowledged consumers' rights to be left alone with the do not call list. Historically, postal service carriers do not open and read the letters. Privacy aka private communications are recognized.
    I find supremely ironic that God in his wisdom and grace has given man freedom of choice bounded by 10 simple rules. Man in his finite wisdom has created millions of rules to limit freedom of choice and personal responsibility of man.

  14. #44
    Senior Member Siam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,489
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    864 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ctr View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    We have the choice to ignore an incoming call, i.e. not answer. The government has somewhat begrudgingly acknowledged consumers' rights to be left alone with the do not call list. Historically, postal service carriers do not open and read the letters. Privacy aka private communications are recognized.
    Except for charities, political groups, and a few others can still call if you are on the DNCL. They are worse than the telemarketers

  15. #45
    Asst. Administrator ccw9mm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    8,847
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quoted
    1315 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ctr View Post
    This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote
    We have the choice to ignore an incoming call, i.e. not answer. The government has somewhat begrudgingly acknowledged consumers' rights to be left alone with the do not call list. Historically, postal service carriers do not open and read the letters. Privacy aka private communications are recognized.
    Yes, we do.

    Nobody "opens" communications as you describe, either phone calls or mail. Except criminals. (Not that pertains to the question of delivery of communications to people.)

    In future, if there's a dire and deadly mandatory evacuation emergency notification, it'll separate the "wheat from the chaff" -- those who want to ignore it can; those who listen and decide if it's worthy of listening to will. Everyone's happy.
    Cardinal principle: Your best weapon is your brain. Don't leave home without it.
    Explain: How does disarming victims reduce the number of victims?
    Philosophy: Why the Gun is Civilization (Marko Kloos)
    On the RKBA: Most of what you think you know about our Constitution is wrong -- Michael Badnarik

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •