• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The problem with how our system is run for those traveling with guns

D

DebateChallenge

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 30, 2017
Messages
12,099
Reaction score
3,439
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
There is a problem with how our system is run. As a matter of fact there are many problems with how our system is run but in particular Im talking about the problem if you're traveling with guns and your course takes you through some not so gun friendly states. Lets say you're pulled over for a broken light. The officer might ask to search your vehicle, now you can refuse a search but if the officer has a dog or if they call an officer with a dog the dog can sniff your vehicle for stuff such as drugs and even if you don't have drugs the officer can claim the dog smelled drugs because maybe the dog scratched at something. Supposedly dogs sniffing for drugs is about as accurate as a coin toss. If the officer claims the dog smelled drugs they can override your refusal to consent to a search and if you've got guns and you're in a not so gun friendly state at best you will be harassed and humiliated big time. At worst you will spend the night in jail or longer, even if you did nothing wrong. Although it is legal to transport guns through a state provided they're legal in the state you came from and the state you're going to you can still get in trouble. So this is the problem with how our system is run and changes need to be made.
 
Nice story. But what are the odds of that happening?

;)
 
Chomsky said:
:lamo

Nice set-up! Now would you please dump your sock! :2razz:
Click to expand...

Damn. Over 800 posts setting up the perfect joke and I get busted. What a waste of time.
 
DebateChallenge said:
There is a problem with how our system is run. As a matter of fact there are many problems with how our system is run but in particular Im talking about the problem if you're traveling with guns and your course takes you through some not so gun friendly states. Lets say you're pulled over for a broken light. The officer might ask to search your vehicle, now you can refuse a search but if the officer has a dog or if they call an officer with a dog the dog can sniff your vehicle for stuff such as drugs and even if you don't have drugs the officer can claim the dog smelled drugs because maybe the dog scratched at something. Supposedly dogs sniffing for drugs is about as accurate as a coin toss. If the officer claims the dog smelled drugs they can override your refusal to consent to a search and if you've got guns and you're in a not so gun friendly state at best you will be harassed and humiliated big time. At worst you will spend the night in jail or longer, even if you did nothing wrong. Although it is legal to transport guns through a state provided they're legal in the state you came from and the state you're going to you can still get in trouble. So this is the problem with how our system is run and changes need to be made.
Click to expand...

It's simpler than that. A search isn't even necessary. If you come from a State where it's perfectly OK to have a gun on your person, an you happen to be asked to get out of the car by a cop in another State and he sees the weapon, it's an instant problem.

This is why we need to be consistent. This is why the 2nd amendment.

Man has the right to defend himself. It is not a right granted by any document or constitution. It is an inherent right of man. The Constitution of the United States simply acknowledges this.

Laws restricting this inherent right of Man to defend himself should repealed, else the State is not honoring the very contract the Constitution of the United States is among the States. It also is being hypocritical of a State's own right to defend itself. That's what militias do.

Trump has mentioned that he wants to make the gun laws consistent in this country. I agree with his goals here.
 
Into the Night said:
It's simpler than that. A search isn't even necessary. If you come from a State where it's perfectly OK to have a gun on your person, an you happen to be asked to get out of the car by a cop in another State and he sees the weapon, it's an instant problem.

This is why we need to be consistent. This is why the 2nd amendment.

Man has the right to defend himself. It is not a right granted by any document or constitution. It is an inherent right of man. The Constitution of the United States simply acknowledges this.

Laws restricting this inherent right of Man to defend himself should repealed, else the State is not honoring the very contract the Constitution of the United States is among the States. It also is being hypocritical of a State's own right to defend itself. That's what militias do.

Trump has mentioned that he wants to make the gun laws consistent in this country. I agree with his goals here.
Click to expand...


so, Trump is for states rights but ONLY when it suits his agenda?

GW Bush wanted to have an across the board, all states inclusive, $250K maximum medical liability law.
Wow, that would have worked great for someone that was rendered a quadriplegic @ age 24 via medical negligence, that required an expected lifetime of 24/7/365 care that would costs a minimum $15 million.
That from the same asshat that wanted to privatize Social Security, right before the markets lost $11 trillion.
Yeah, Trump has the whole anti states rights thing figured out :lol:
Republi****s ............ meh ..........
 
Into the Night said:
It's simpler than that. A search isn't even necessary. If you come from a State where it's perfectly OK to have a gun on your person, an you happen to be asked to get out of the car by a cop in another State and he sees the weapon, it's an instant problem.

This is why we need to be consistent. This is why the 2nd amendment.

Man has the right to defend himself. It is not a right granted by any document or constitution. It is an inherent right of man. The Constitution of the United States simply acknowledges this.

Laws restricting this inherent right of Man to defend himself should repealed, else the State is not honoring the very contract the Constitution of the United States is among the States. It also is being hypocritical of a State's own right to defend itself. That's what militias do.

Trump has mentioned that he wants to make the gun laws consistent in this country. I agree with his goals here.
Click to expand...

This is a bit at odds with the often stated position here that "law abiding" citizens should have access to fire arms. If you travel to a different state it is incumbent on YOU to learn what the laws are in that state. Otherwise you might find yourself not "law abiding" You might need to put your seat belt on, you may not be able to buy a beer on Sunday, you may need to slow down on the highway, you might need to take precaution over how you store your weapon. If this is too hard, then you may need to stay closer to home so you don't break the law. Or take your chances. As we have seen over the course of the last 40 years with Roe vs. Wade, states have the right to determine how they regulate the constitutional rights of citizens.
 
Into the Night said:
It's simpler than that. A search isn't even necessary. If you come from a State where it's perfectly OK to have a gun on your person, an you happen to be asked to get out of the car by a cop in another State and he sees the weapon, it's an instant problem.

This is why we need to be consistent. This is why the 2nd amendment.

Man has the right to defend himself. It is not a right granted by any document or constitution. It is an inherent right of man. The Constitution of the United States simply acknowledges this.

Laws restricting this inherent right of Man to defend himself should repealed, else the State is not honoring the very contract the Constitution of the United States is among the States. It also is being hypocritical of a State's own right to defend itself. That's what militias do.

Trump has mentioned that he wants to make the gun laws consistent in this country. I agree with his goals here.
Click to expand...

You're missing the point. Lets say you have the guns unloaded and locked in cases in the back of the car. You can travel through any state like that even if the guns aren't legal in the state you're in provided you're "passing through," you're going straight through the state without any stops except for gas or other emergencies. In some states you can drive while openly carrying or while carrying concealed but not in all states regardless of what permits you might have. However in all states you can drive with the guns stored as I mentioned above if you're just passing through.

My point is, if you get pulled over and the officer wants to search your car you can refuse the search. If the officer has a dog sniff your car and the officer says the dog smelled drugs, even if you don't have drugs, the officer can search your car with or without your consent. If you have the guns properly stored and you're not in a gun friendly state you can get in trouble, even if what you're doing is perfectly legal.
 
cuban smokes said:
so, Trump is for states rights but ONLY when it suits his agenda?

GW Bush wanted to have an across the board, all states inclusive, $250K maximum medical liability law.
Wow, that would have worked great for someone that was rendered a quadriplegic @ age 24 via medical negligence, that required an expected lifetime of 24/7/365 care that would costs a minimum $15 million.
That from the same asshat that wanted to privatize Social Security, right before the markets lost $11 trillion.
Yeah, Trump has the whole anti states rights thing figured out :lol:
Republi****s ............ meh ..........
Click to expand...

Do we have to go through this again? States rights only cover things NOT covered in the constitution. The right to keep and bear arms is an uninfringible right just like freedom of speech.
 
Several have mentioned that I should just pay attention the many different gun laws as I travel.

That's what I try to do now.

The problem is that it's not that easy. Some States allow cities to have different laws than the State. Other States preempt city laws. Some States honor concealed weapons permits from other States. Other States don't. Other States don't even HAVE a concealed weapons permit. You can conceal carry without State 'permission' to do so. Some States consider pass-thru okay, even with an otherwise 'illegal' handgun. Some States don't. Most have different definitions on what 'pass-thru' actually entails.

This patchwork of laws is ridiculous.

I have the right to defend myself. Even the State Constitutions acknowledge this. So does the federal Constitution. This is not a right granted by any document or government. It is an inherent right of Man. Just because some State doesn't like my particular handgun I lose that right???

There are far more good men with guns then bad men with guns. There probably several near you right now. You don't know it because they are carrying concealed (so as not to scare the Villagers). They are not brandishing. They are not shooting the place up.

It's high time people realize that most people who are armed are NOT out to get you, but they are out to protect themselves, and even the people that choose not to arm themselves. It's high time to lose the fear of the gun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom