 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General ModelsRailroadsRocketsRadio Controlled Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater ModelsModelGeeks.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Model Forum / General / Rockets / April 2006ATF Busts Ningi on UGA Campus
You Federal tax dolors at work, protecting against terrosism.. Gota-love-it.. http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/14333392.htm > You Federal tax dolors at work, protecting against terrosism.. > Gota-love-it.. > > http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/14333392.htm Wonder what they wold have done to one of the Pirates ? Arrr.. > > You Federal tax dolors at work, protecting against terrosism.. > > Gota-love-it.. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Arrr.. The pirate could have paid them off with a few pieces of eight, but only if his hook was registered with local authorities. Probably easier to catch - the pegleg slows him down. Who knows about the parrot, however, as the parrot could be an illegal immigrant. > > You Federal tax dolors at work, protecting against terrosism.. > > Gota-love-it.. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Arrr.. It's BATFE, not BATFE&Arrrr. (Pirate socks - arrrrr-gyle.)  SignatureMike KD7PVT NAR #70953 - Sr/HPR Level-1 ~ BEMRC - NAR Section #627 NO Junk Email, please! Real email to: amphoto [at] blarg [dot] net. <WANTED: Experienced Kamikaze Pilot> >Wonder what they wold have done to one of the Pirates ? If the pirate was carrying a fake gun, they'd have taken him out! It sounds like LEUP inspections are going to be getting a bit tougher now :-) Glen Overby > You Federal tax dolors at work, protecting against terrosism.. > Gota-love-it.. So what do you do with a ninja suit? Drink it? Smoke it? Shoot it? Blow it up? Talk about an agency out of control! SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org A celibate clergy is an especially good idea, because it tends to suppress any hereditary propensity toward fanaticism. -- Carl Sagan Fortunately they weren't playing "cowboys and indians", or the ATF would have had to burn down the whole campus. >You Federal tax dolors at work, protecting against terrosism.. >Gota-love-it.. > >http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/14333392.htm > This one has a photo: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12303788/ What gets me even more is the quote "University Police Chief Jimmy Williamson said Ransom was released as soon as he was found to have violated no laws." I'm sorry, but I missed the part where they're (be it ATF or the police) supposed to go after someone WITHOUT believing a law has been violated??? David Erbas-White > What gets me even more is the quote "University Police Chief Jimmy > Williamson said Ransom was released as soon as he was found to have > violated no laws." > > I'm sorry, but I missed the part where they're (be it ATF or the police) > supposed to go after someone WITHOUT believing a law has been violated??? Didn't prevent him from being detained with a knee on his neck - that looks uncomfortable! And he was like that long enough for someone to find and ready a camera to take the picture. He was stopped and roughed up on suspicion of doing something unusual, which apparently is a crime these days. I have zero problem with jumping both feet on people who actually do something wrong, but all the action taken to supposedly "prevent crime" makes me nervous. Like the regulation that requires banks to make a report when someone moves more than a certain amount of cash - or darned near every provision of the humorously-named "Patriot Act" I hope your are not one of the people who also say that the feds should have stopped the 9/11 hijackers cuz they were suspicious (but did not yet break any laws). That would be a case of having your cake and eating it, too. If someone is lurking around looking suspicious, ANY AND ALL law enforcement officials should be doing something. The last time I saw someone with thier face covered in public, he popped open a cash register and broke for the door with a wad of money. I was not there, I didn't even read the article. I am saying that the officials are trained to react to situations and this was one of them. SignatureTom Koszuta Western New York Sailplane and Electric Flyers Buffalo, NY > I hope your are not one of the people who also say that the feds should have > stopped the 9/11 hijackers cuz they were suspicious (but did not yet break [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > I was not there, I didn't even read the article. I am saying that the > officials are trained to react to situations and this was one of them. Law enforcement officers are also trained to find out wtf is going on in the community around them. DECENT law enforcement officers would have asked their event coordinator about any other events happening on campus at the same time as their own shin dig. Bob >I hope your are not one of the people who also say that the feds should have >stopped the 9/11 hijackers cuz they were suspicious (but did not yet break [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > BZZZZTTTT!!! Wrong answer! They're fully within their rights to watch, follow, etc., someone looking "suspicious". But no way in hell do they have the right to do anything else until they've broken the law (or at the very least have 'reasonable grounds'). If dressing funny and acting goofy on a college campus was 'unusual' or 'suspicious', I don't know of a campus around that would have anyone left. Haven't you heard all of those stories about how they've seen someone looking suspicious, and then the follow them, and at the POINT WHERE THEY COMMIT AN ILLEGAL ACT, they are arrested? This is getting WAY beyond crazy (and I'm considered a very conservative Republican). I agree, the 9/11 hijackers committed no crime, up to the point where they attacked the people on the plane. AND AT THAT POINT, passengers (and or airline personnel) should have had their own weapons available to fight back. David Erbas-White > I agree, the 9/11 hijackers committed no crime, up to the point where they attacked the people on > the plane. Incorrect - they had committed conspiracy to hijack an airliner and commit mass murder. > > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > If the government had proof of the conspiracy, then yes, they could have done something. LACKING THAT, they did nothing up to the point where they pulled out and used (including threatened use) of their weapons. David Erbas-White >> >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > David Erbas-White Exactly...up until they actually did the act...the only thing they could have been convicted of was a "thought crime". (Unless we consider that some of them may have been here on expired visas, etc.) SignatureGreg Heilers Registered Linux user #328317 - SlackWare 10.2 (2.6.13) AUS ..... He gets it from your side of the family, you know. No monsters on my side. -- Homer Simpson Treehouse of Horror II > Exactly...up until they actually did the act...the only > thing they could have been convicted of was a "thought crime". > (Unless we consider that some of them may have been here on > expired visas, etc.) Conspiracy charges make me nervous. No one was harmed; and I'd wager 90% of the people who "conspire" to commit a crime never do. Certainly in high school (several decades ago) a couple of friends and I talked about who we'd like to see dead. Were we going to do anything about it? Of course not. But today, we'd be in held without bail just like some local boys right now - none of whom actually posess weapons. > I agree, the 9/11 hijackers committed no crime, up to the point where > they attacked the people on the plane. AND AT THAT POINT, passengers > (and or airline personnel) should have had their own weapons available > to fight back. As Robert Heinlein (who I consider my spiritual father) once wrote, "An armed society is a polite society." The details are hazy, but I recall an incident in Australia a few years ago where a looney wandered around a park for over an hour shooting people at random. There were over a dozen casualties; it took so long to stop him because the has to send for armed officers to deal with it. My thought at the time was that in an armed society this would have been a third page story rather than a mass-murder catastrophy. Are you a cop? You sure sound like one.. I hope he takes it to court, the bas%^rds over stepped the bounds of what is reasonable on a unarmed individual. > I hope your are not one of the people who also say that the feds should have > stopped the 9/11 hijackers cuz they were suspicious (but did not yet break [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Western New York Sailplane and Electric Flyers > Buffalo, NY I belive the standard answer is that he could have been armed which makes it ok if 10 of them beat the crap out of a one unarmed person. After all they are protecting us. Now all we need is someone to protect us from them. Phil >Are you a cop? You sure sound like one.. I hope he takes it to court, >the bas%^rds over stepped the bounds of what is reasonable on a unarmed [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> Western New York Sailplane and Electric Flyers >> Buffalo, NY > I belive the standard answer is that he could have been armed which > makes it ok if 10 of them beat the crap out of a one unarmed person. [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >>>Western New York Sailplane and Electric Flyers >>>Buffalo, NY My wife and I discussed this incident. We were figuring that the cops blew it for not checking out what local events were going on, and the kids throwing the pirates vs. ninja event blew it for not taking outside events into consideration. Bob > I belive the standard answer is that he could have been armed which > makes it ok if 10 of them beat the crap out of a one unarmed person. > After all they are protecting us. Now all we need is someone to > protect us from them. I wonder if any of these JBGTs remember the golden rule. I suppose that we shoud all treat these agents as armed thugs whenever we deal with them. In a situation like this, I'd grab the nearest phone, and dial 9-1-1 and tell the response center that it was a situation involving armed assailants. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org The president has broken the law and, in some way, he must be held accountable. -- Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) >>I belive the standard answer is that he could have been armed which >>makes it ok if 10 of them beat the crap out of a one unarmed person. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > dial 9-1-1 and tell the response center that it was a situation involving > armed assailants. Shouldn't that be "armed terrorists dressed as federal agents"? >>>I belive the standard answer is that he could have been armed which >>>makes it ok if 10 of them beat the crap out of a one unarmed person. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Shouldn't that be "armed terrorists dressed as federal agents"? You can't be too careful these days. Those IDs could be fakes. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org S&T is becoming this decades Steve Weaver! > I wonder if any of these JBGTs remember the golden rule. They sure don't remember how to handle firearms: http://www.ogrish.com/archives/2005/march/ogrish-dot-com-police_foot_shoot.wmv >> I belive the standard answer is that he could have been armed which >> makes it ok if 10 of them beat the crap out of a one unarmed person. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >dial 9-1-1 and tell the response center that it was a situation involving >armed assailants. Protect yourself first, then play the 911 circus. Only problem with that is reaching for ANYTHING may be construed (by them) as reaching for a weapon. Then you are double screwed. >> I belive the standard answer is that he could have been armed which >> makes it ok if 10 of them beat the crap out of a one unarmed person. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >dial 9-1-1 and tell the response center that it was a situation involving >armed assailants. > I was not there, I didn't even read the article. I am saying that the > officials are trained to react to situations and this was one of them. Alas, these days it seems that they are trained to OVERreact to situations. Law enforcement reaction to a situation should be proportional to the actual threat. To engage in a high speed chase for someone going 10mph over the speed limit is reckless. To treat someone dressed "unusual" on a college campus as a thug (refer to the picture of the JBGT kneeling on the kids neck, and the story about agents with guns drawn) is assult and battery, and a violation of the kids civil rights. I hope there's lots of lawyers on campus. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org Look at governmental programs for the past fifty years. Every single one -- except for warfare -- achieved the exact opposite of its announced goal. "Bob Kaplow" <kaplow_r@encompasserve.org.mars> wrote in message > Alas, these days it seems that they are trained to OVERreact to situations. Check out this poor guy's demise, at the hands of a SWAT team: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/26/AR2006012602136.html (the fact that a SWAT team was sent out to arrest an unarmed optometrist, on a BETTING charge, is like something out of the movie "Brazil" - yet this sort of crap happens every day) > http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/26/AR2006012602136.html > > (the fact that a SWAT team was sent out to arrest an unarmed optometrist, > on a BETTING charge, is like something out of the movie "Brazil" - yet this > sort of crap happens every day) Absolutely disgusting. And something that will continue until these thugs are arrested, tried, and jailed for manslaughter. If there were no warrant issued, then I'd elevate the charge to first degree murder, which is what the police would charge a civilian with in the case of a felony that results in a death. Government, especially police, MUST be subject to the same laws and punishments as the rest of society. No on is above the law because of their badge or office. Not a cop on the beat, a SWAT team member, or the president. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org Government's view of the econpmy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it. -- Ronald Reagan > Check out this poor guy's demise, at the hands of a SWAT team: > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > on a BETTING charge, is like something out of the movie "Brazil" - yet this > sort of crap happens every day) After thinking abut this a bit longer, it's right on par with Waco and Ruby Ridge. Murder charges definitely need to be filed here. No police officer should have to think twice before shooting an armed suspect that is a threat to them or others. But they MUST think twice before shooting any one else, or suffer the same fate as a civilian that accidentally shoots a cop. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org Government's view of the econpmy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it. -- Ronald Reagan >Alas, these days it seems that they are trained to OVERreact to situations. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >a violation of the kids civil rights. I hope there's lots of lawyers on >campus. That's a very reasoned and sane response to our brown-shirted friend's commentary, Bob >I hope your are not one of the people who also say that the feds should have >stopped the 9/11 hijackers cuz they were suspicious (but did not yet break [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >I was not there, I didn't even read the article. I am saying that the >officials are trained to react to situations and this was one of them . I bet you criticized Michael Moore's movie dealing with 911 without watching it either. (Farenheit 911). You're a patheitic lump of quavering jello,dude Only a MORON would need to watch the movie, considering first; who produced the movie, his publicly known and expressed dislike for GW, and the hyped trailers shown on TV. Of course, any MORON who would threaten someone on this forum, knows that. I'm sure you understand, being a anonymous poster and all.. Fred > I bet you criticized Michael Moore's movie dealing with 911 without > watching it either. (Farenheit 911). You're a patheitic lump of > quavering jello,dude >Only a MORON would need to watch the movie, considering first; who >produced the movie, his publicly known and expressed dislike for GW, and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > >Fred And you're a typical Shrub supporter. Talk to me after the village idiot leads us into another hunt for non-existent WMD. An anoymous poster? I have a valid e-mail address; is yours?And where exactly is the threat in my statement? Oh wait. Just like the brown shirted thugs who jumped thew ninja, you see threats everywhere. You too are a pathetic lump of quavering jello....dood. And incidently, only a MORON would criticize a movie without watching it. Sieg heil, muthafukka. Thanks for verifying your status, as it is in line and supports the on going moronic characterization of the vast majority of your responses on this forum. My email is munged, but the name is real. "Comcast" supports the "net", but be careful how and if you respond in email: Usenet responses are one thing, direct email is another. Your threat was in another of your responses in another thread; (If you're the Tony semenuk, I know, your azz is grazz.) BTW, if you ever have the pleasure of in person conversation with me, I doubt "lump of quavering jellow" will be the lasting impression you remember, about our conversation or encounter. Remember, Google is you friend.. Fred > And you're a typical Shrub supporter. Talk to me after the village > idiot leads us into another hunt for non-existent WMD. An anoymous [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > pathetic lump of quavering jello....dood. And incidently, only a MORON > would criticize a movie without watching it. Sieg heil, muthafukka. > >Only a MORON would need to watch the movie, considering first; who > >produced the movie, his publicly known and expressed dislike for GW, and [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > pathetic lump of quavering jello....dood. And incidently, only a MORON > would criticize a movie without watching it. Sieg heil, muthafukka. Awww, he's afraid to watch it! After all, if he saw it, it might cast doubt on his closely held beliefs. The refusal to listen to ideas other than your own has been taught be religous zealots for thousands of years. > Awww, he's afraid to watch it! After all, if he saw it, it might cast > doubt on his closely held beliefs. The refusal to listen to ideas other > than your own has been taught be religous zealots for thousands of > years. Would you watch a documentary on the "Protocols"? Or one that denied the Holocaust? Of course not, because you would know that the underlying reason for such a thing is the driving hate behind the producer, and there would be no merit in watching it - nor would you want to fatten the wallet of its creator. >>Awww, he's afraid to watch it! After all, if he saw it, it might cast >>doubt on his closely held beliefs. The refusal to listen to ideas other [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > would be no merit in watching it - nor would you want to fatten the > wallet of its creator. That's the thing, Michael Moore thinks he's a documentarian but in reality he's a film maker. And of course a film makers primary motive is the wallet first, entertainment second. Nothing new here. In all honesty I've only seen Roger and Me and not really too thrilled about it either. I've see bits of Bowling for Columbine and was somewhat entertained of the butchering of clips of Heston but that was only because it was all so obvious what Moore was attempting to do(and failed). I'll eventually get around to seeing all of Bowling and will also see Fahrenheit 451 but in no uncertain terms will I accept any of these flicks as facts, only topical entertainment at best. Hollyweird is, well, Hollyweird for a reason :) Ted Novak TRA#5512 IEAS#75 > failed). I'll eventually get around to seeing all of Bowling and will > also see Fahrenheit 451 but in no uncertain terms will I accept any of Fahrenheit 451 is a 1966 movie adaptation of Ray Bradbury's classic SciFi book. Methinks you mean Fahrenheit 9/11. Of course even I have trouble with movie titles with numbers in them. WHen Apollo 13 came out, I hadn't even seen Apollo 1-12 yet :-) SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org I think I left it in the basement, I'll run upstairs and look. -- M. C. Escher >>failed). I'll eventually get around to seeing all of Bowling and will >>also see Fahrenheit 451 but in no uncertain terms will I accept any of [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Of course even I have trouble with movie titles with numbers in them. WHen > Apollo 13 came out, I hadn't even seen Apollo 1-12 yet :-) Doh!!! You would be correct sir. And thanx for the reminder as I scored that DVD a few months ago but still haven't watched it ;/ Ted Novak TRA#5512 IEAS#75 That's OK Bob, the Apollo movies jumped the shark after Apollo 8, The Moon Strikes Back. Chuck W Sharc, NAR Section 613 www.flysharc.org Sharc, the section where two out of three certification flights always work just fine! > >>Awww, he's afraid to watch it! After all, if he saw it, it might cast > >>doubt on his closely held beliefs. The refusal to listen to ideas other [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > TRA#5512 > IEAS#75 As JI used to say. POINT, between the two of you, several!! (:-) Fred > Would you watch a documentary on the "Protocols"? Or one that > denied the Holocaust? Funny you should say that. Just recently I did some research on the "Protocols" (of Zion, I presume you mean). I learned a lot; I'd always assumed there was much doubt as to their authenticity, but discovered how thoroughly they had been discredited and how viciously the falsehoods had been used to promote an agenda. When there's that much buzz about something, you owe it to yourself to check it out and make up your own mind. And often, the first place to start is the propogandists material. > Of course not, because you would know that the underlying reason > for such a thing is the driving hate behind the producer, and there > would be no merit in watching it - nor would you want to fatten the > wallet of its creator. Again, I DON'T know that - I've been told that. And, silly me, I don't always believe what I've been told. You never know, there might be some truth there - if not, at least you understand the enemy better. > > >Only a MORON would need to watch the movie, considering first; who > > >produced the movie, his publicly known and expressed dislike for GW, and [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > than your own has been taught be religous zealots for thousands of > years. My doubts about the present administration, were in place long before that tub of s%&t made his movie. > I hope your are not one of the people who also say that the feds should have > stopped the 9/11 hijackers cuz they were suspicious (but did not yet break > any laws). That would be a case of having your cake and eating it, too. > > If someone is lurking around looking suspicious, ANY AND ALL law enforcement > officials should be doing something. It's a University campus...when is there NOT someone lurking around looking suspicious (or silly)? I went to UGA, trust me on this one. "Look, a Ninja. GET HIM!" Talk about silly. SignatureTweak > "Look, a Ninja. GET HIM!" Talk about silly. I really wish it was a Pirate they nabed myself. "Arrr me agent friend, over yonder lurks a Pirate, Arrrr.. nab him before he gets our booty..." Cranny Dane >>"Look, a Ninja. GET HIM!" Talk about silly. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Cranny Dane you know, hot cocoa hurts like hell, when forcefully ejected nasally... Bob > > "Look, a Ninja. GET HIM!" Talk about silly. > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Cranny Dane Good one. Arrrgghhh! SignatureTweak > I really wish it was a Pirate they nabed myself. > > "Arrr me agent friend, over yonder lurks a Pirate, Arrrr.. nab him before he > gets our booty..." http://www.talklikeapirate.com/ September 19th SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org I'll be happy to let them teach creationism in my science classroom, as soon as they let me teach evolution in their church. -- Marc Bonem >> I really wish it was a Pirate they nabed myself. >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > http://www.talklikeapirate.com/ September 19th we have some that dress like a pirate on that day at work during the "lunch hour". (our office does trick or treating as well , go figure ;) Now here is a pg-13 phrase I like, comes from a movie I forget. "Arrr.. me Pirate Friend... Mighty Nice Missy you got there...Arrrrrr....... Mind If I take a poke at 'er ?" Cranny Dane >> What gets me even more is the quote "University Police Chief Jimmy >> Williamson said Ransom was released as soon as he was found to have [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >jumping both feet on people who actually do something wrong, but all >the action taken to supposedly "prevent crime" makes me nervous. Exactly, just like Bush's preemptive strike policy. I'm still waiting for the "precogs". >Like the regulation that requires banks to make a report when someone >moves more than a certain amount of cash - or darned near every >provision of the humorously-named "Patriot Act" > Exactly, just like Bush's preemptive strike policy. I'm still waiting > for the "precogs". > >>Like the regulation that requires banks to make a report when someone >>moves more than a certain amount of cash - or darned near every >>provision of the humorously-named "Patriot Act" Seems the A-team was performing the following training class. This part is very funny. "Core materials frequently contain, but are not limited to, characteristics of armed gunmen" I guess the book has pictures of black clothed youth with red bandannas in that section. BTW, Hobby Lobby has bandannas for only 63 cents this week. ATF Site Support Description: The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives' (ATF's) Office of Training and Professional Development can deliver custom-designed training to local agencies, in conjunction with the ATF field division in the area. Classes can be designed for law enforcement officers, prosecutors, or a combination of both groups. The curriculum varies by site and is tailored to the needs of the jurisdiction requesting the training. Core materials frequently contain, but are not limited to, characteristics of armed gunmen, firearms identification and tracing, international firearms trafficking, federal firearms law, guns and gangs, and stolen firearms. > ATF Site Support > Description: The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives' [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > international firearms trafficking, federal firearms law, guns and gangs, > and stolen firearms. I don't see anything in there about APCP purchase, storage, and use. The WOOSH folks did get the BATFE to do a presentation for them once, but the BATFE refused to allow it to be taped for use by those who couldn't attend. I know there are regulations regarding taping phone conversations, but what are the regs regarding taping events in your own home or place of work? SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org S&T is becoming this decades Steve Weaver! > I know there are regulations regarding taping phone conversations, but what > are the regs regarding taping events in your own home or place of work? I've done a good bit of training for and by some large companies - generally the rule is that they not be taped. It's not a "regulation", it's the choice of the presenter. First, because the content is a salable commodity, which probably doesn't matter to the BATFE. Second, because what you say on tape can haunt you ad infinitum. Generally, I was allowed to noodle around and ad lib quite a bit in presentations; on the one or two sessions that were taped, I had to adhere precisely to a prepared and approved script. And that was just corporate stuff. Imagine how much harder to pin down the goon squad must be! do u feel safer now? I don't. shockie B( > You Federal tax dolors at work, protecting against terrosism.. > Gota-love-it.. > > http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/14333392.htm >> You Federal tax dolors at work, protecting against terrosism.. >> Gota-love-it.. >> >> http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/14333392.htm It is against state law in Georgia to wear a mask on an undesignated holiday. He could have been charged, he is lucky they weren't in the mood. >>> http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/14333392.htm > > It is against state law in Georgia to wear a mask on an undesignated holiday. He could have been > charged, he is lucky they weren't in the mood. I didn't know it was up to federal agents to enforce STATE laws. He also could have been charged with jaywalking, or resisting arrest, or any one of dozens of other "convenience" charges which give cops carte blanche authority to arrest and imprison anyone, anytime they feel like it. Welcome to our founding fathers' bad dream. Next stop, worst nightmare... Welcome to the Patriot Act... > Welcome to the Patriot Act... The Patriot Act had nothing to do with it. ATF agents have been acting like mindless goons for years, long before this event took place. They are mall-security-grade idiots with badges - Diane Feinstein's own personal Gestapo. >>Welcome to the Patriot Act... > > The Patriot Act had nothing to do with it. > > ATF agents have been acting like mindless goons for years, long before this event took place. > They are mall-security-grade idiots with badges - Diane Feinstein's own personal Gestapo. 1, It's weird, but every conversation and personal meeting I've ever had with the ATF has been professional and cordial. I don't know, but I'm wondering if the east coast, city ATF agents are part of a different culture than the other ATF. Bob > It's weird, but every conversation and personal meeting I've ever had > with the ATF has been professional and cordial. I don't know, but I'm > wondering if the east coast, city ATF agents are part of a different > culture than the other ATF. Out here, one was a nitwit, one was ok, two were thugs, and two made up rules as they went along. SignatureBob Kaplow NAR # 18L >>> To reply, there's no internet on Mars (yet)! <<< Kaplow Klips & Baffle: http://nira-rocketry.org/Document/MayJun00.pdf www.encompasserve.org/~kaplow_r/ www.nira-rocketry.org www.nar.org Klein bottle for sale -- inquire within. > >> You Federal tax dolors at work, protecting against terrosism.. > >> Gota-love-it.. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > It is against state law in Georgia to wear a mask on an undesignated > holiday. He could have been charged, he is lucky they weren't in the mood. I'll take your word for it. I guess it's just another of those things to add to, "that's what I like about the south" list; give me a G for God and Georgia. Eee haaa. > > >> You Federal tax dolors at work, protecting against terrosism.. > > >> Gota-love-it.. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > add to, "that's what I like about the south" list; give me a G for God > and Georgia. Eee haaa. Is this Gus? SignatureTweak > > > >> You Federal tax dolors at work, protecting against terrosism.. > > > >> Gota-love-it.. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > -- > Tweak You owe me 1 keyboard; root beer will not clean up very well.. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.