MCSCOTT

I agree with that as well, but we're both getting side tracked now on which thread we're in...

Again this is where I start partially agreeing with you, but it does not hide the fact that order must be maintained in these places. If the judge must abide by the Constitution in a courtroom, then what gives them the right to even tell people to be quiet? Could you imagine how hard it would be to have a trial, where the judge and the jury needs to hear the case, while everyone else in the room is talking so loud that it sounds like Logan's Roadhouse on Friday night? What about a classroom where a teacher is trying to give lessons?

You're pretty well dead on, my comment was a partial attempt at humor. I also have to agree that in this case if the only issue was the shirt then no jail time should have been handed out, the girl should have simply been asked to leave if the judge doesn't allow that type of shirt in her courtroom. This is where the fact comes in to play that there has to be more to this story. I would have to think the girl was asked to leave starting out, especially since she wasn't the accused. If she then chose to argue with the judge and refused to leave, that is when jail time should be issued for contempt.

Right, but you must not have read my entire reply, and I can understand why since I type too much in them. The fact that comes after the morality point is that certain judges in certain courtrooms are given the power to decide what is morally right and wrong because it is THEIR courtroom. Again I will bring up the point that this is also true in people's homes, such as mine, where I am in power to decide what is morally right and wrong. Are you saying that I don't have the right to tell someone what they can and can't say in my own home? So your way of thinking is that if I came to your home I should be allowed to raise my voice, curse, whatever, and even direct it at your family. This should be ok based on the Constitution...right? Personally anyone that comes to my home would quickly find out that I take a different stand on such things, and your opinion seems to be that I am wrong in doing so.... As for the comments about the 2nd, your statement is true but I really don't see how it comes into play in these situations. Before a judge can be put in power there has to be some kind of knowledge of their moral beliefs, same goes true for any jury that's picked out. They are given their power based partially on this, so those that think shooting someone is wrong even if it was self defense will most likely never become a judge. There is a chance they could be come a teacher that could kick a kid out of school for wearing a certain shirt, but just honestly it's getting pretty far out there when you start relating shooting someone to wearing a shirt with a flag on it.

I thought that removing a person's rights is exactly what a judge is suppose to be doing.

Never underestimate your abilities though, because in a SHTF situation I'm sure you would find a way. You simply have to keep your child in mind when choosing your safe location, as well as who can go with you if the SHTF so that you can have some help looking out for the child while you go out in search of food or other needs.

I agree with you to an extent, however we live in a country where too many people hide behind the Constitution in order to do things that are morally wrong. Taking that into account, certain people are given a certain amount of power in certain places so that they can maintain order in these places. Based on this, a courtroom does in fact = a classroom in that order needs to be maintained. Same holds true for my house even, where I have the power to maintain order, even if doing so means that you do not have complete freedom of speech when you walk through my door. This basically leads us to what those in power (judges, teachers, etc.) feel is morally right and wrong in these locations. Since those students most likely weren't aware of any flag rules, and unless I missed the part of the article that mentions flag rules, then the simple fact in this case is that they were wearing the shirts as their way of showing support for our country. What is sad about this, is that those in power in this location view this as being morally wrong, because what I gather from the article is the problem came in the fact that it was done on the holiday of another country. I'm betting if they had worn a flag pin, close to their heart in accordance to the flag rules, they would have still gotten similar results or at least been asked to remove the pin. That's just part of my .02 on it. My other opinion, knowing how teenagers are these days, is that these kids chose to wear these shirts to get the Mexican students in the school riled up, and are in a way hiding behind the excuse that they were trying to show support for their country. This would leave the teachers no other option than to kick the kids out of school so that order can be maintained. It is simply my opinion that those that are offended by someone showing their support for their country should have been the ones that got kicked out though, so that it gives them a lesson that it is morally correct to support the country that you live in.

X2 Try some light sanding and see if you start getting any decent results. If not the only other options I know of would be replacing the glass, or etching over the area kinda like scribbling out something you've written in ink on paper.

But the issues of rob/rape/whatever was not what I mentioned, I simply mentioned you being shot at and whether you would shoot back. How can you determine if the one shooting at you is going to rob/rape/whatever, without them having a fair trial? If you hit and kill them, then you've carried out their execution without knowing because there was no trial. None of what I said involves killing innocent civilians on their home land, and like I said I don't 100% agree with their torture either, I simply don't think we should have to waste time and tax dollars to have to try to prove that they did something that is this obvious. Should also be noted that WE will also have to waste even more time and tax dollars because we will have to pay for someone to try to prove he is innocent.

Of course you can't without due process. I'd like to hear more on it though because I would have to think that the process of stripping someone of their citizenship in such an event would move along much quicker than the process of seeking the death penalty for a citizen. Stripping him of it, in theory, should mean that he could then be executed without further trial or chance for appeal. I dunno though, I just think this country really needs to refurbish it's legal system.

I doubt something as simple as those back plates would get you in any trouble. I'm sure there's always a chance it could be used against you, but then again there's always a chance that just about anything you own could be used against you in court. Like others have said before, I wouldn't carry some of the personalized firearms that I've seen around, with extensive engraving and things like that, but for the item you mentioned I wouldn't have a problem with it. Especially cosidering it's cost as compared to other costs for things that alot of people do to their firearms. Heck I would be much more worried about losing the Lasermax in my Glock than I would be a back plate like that.

I'm no expert, but I would be willing to bet good money on that if more people in this country had this way of thinking we wouldn't have half the problems we have today. like this just seems to keep coming up in this country, and it makes me want to cry to see what our country. It makes me especially sad for those that are fighting for such a country.

Going back over the thread again I now realize that you were responding to the same post as strick was. The comment was the main thing I caught which put me back to 6.8 giving a similar response to my calling for him to be executed, so my aim on the comment was a little off and you got hit by the stray rant. In the end I partially agree with you though, and my opinion on the matter has changed from the beginning of this thread to read "he should be stripped of citizenship and then swiftly executed without further trial", instead of "he should be executed without wasting time and money on a trial".

I didn't miss your point, but maybe you're missing mine. My point is that you shouldn't consider those that think this guy should be put to death as being in the same category as he is. If that's the case, then why do any of us carry firearms? If someone shoots at you and you shoot back, doesn't that make you no different than they are? If in doing so you hit them and kill them, aren't you wrong because they didn't get their fair trial? I know your point is that he has been caught, and since he is a US citizen he is entitled to due process. You also made me realize that by not giving him this it our Constitution loses part of it's value, so people should first be stripped of citizenship in this kind of situation. Either way, don't put me in the same category as a terrorist because of my opinion that they should be swiftly executed.

No, what you said I can agree with, I wasn't referring to your comment. The others that I mention were making that kind of comment based on those that mention giving the guy a swift execution.

I can definately see your point, even though I don't really agree with comparing the American flag to what was on that girl's shirt. The fact was mentioned in that thread that there are dress codes in court rooms which is what caused the girl to get jailed. Those that hide behind our Constitution in order to break rules such as this are exactly what's wrong with this country. If this school had a dress code as well that doesn't allow for the students to support their country, then I could partially agree with them being sent home. If there was no school dress code, then saying that they can't wear a flag to support this country on the same day that another country celebrates a certain holiday is rediculous.

There's no flood waters in these pics, but they're of damage caused by the flooding to Highway 7 coming into Columbia. It's amazing how much power fast moving water has. No telling how long it will take to repair all of the roads.

I was thinking about all that yesterday, and it's the kind of thing that really bothers me with something like this going to trial. For starters he didn't kill anyone. Also, there's not anything wrong with having propane tanks, I have some that are bigger than the ones he had. I also get those tanks filled at the farm supply place here, where I could also legally buy fertilizer. On top of that, I have some wires running to stereo equipment in my truck that could short out at some point, and as far as I know having things like that isn't against any laws either, nor is owning a clock and having it in the truck because most vehicles have a clock of some sort from the factory. If he hadn't confessed to what his intentions were, a decent lawyer would try to argue all of that in order to get him out. Even though I'm sure our justice system works better than that, but there would be a slight possibility for someone like this to simply have to pay a parking ticket for leaving the vehicle where he did. Like I say though, we all know that wont happen in this case, I just hate the fact that our tax dollars could possibly go toward a trial where these facts could be argued. Mike, I agree with your argument that as long as he is a citizen he has the right to fair trial, and like I said this is why we should start out by stripping him of his citizenship. What I can't understand is how you and some of the others that posted think that by executing a terrorist, we are no better than they are. How exactly would executing someone who attempted to kill multiple amounts of innocent people make us anything like they are?

I'm starting to like it more. Seems like the continued storyline is finally starting to pick up more and link everyone together, as with the first couple of episodes it didn't seem like it was going to go that direction.

Well pointed out, because my thinking on the other thread was in issues of what to keep in a vehicle in case of having to abandon it and head out on foot. What's in the vehicle would be minimal, for basic survival for a couple of days until I can get home. The bug out bag at home would consist of slightly more in the event that I had to head out from home, but would be enough to last until I could get to my safe location, on foot if need be. It's best to have one of each, in case you're in your vehicle and can't get home in a timely manner. The one in the vehicle should be seperate from the one kept at home, because there may be a situation where you can't get to the bug out bag that's in the vehicle. Or maybe I'm just over thinking things....

I can tell you from knowing tons of bike riders, as well as several LEO's, that with a half helmet there is always the risk of citation, or at least getting pulled over. Best bet would be like someone else mentioned, if you want to keep the half helmet style, talk to some LEO's as to which one would be your best bet to keep you from getting pulled over for verification. They might not all know, but I'm sure there's a few that could point you in the right direction as to which one would be your best option.

On the citizenship note as well, there was talk earlier of stripping him of his citizenship. My initial take on that was that it would be a waste of time, but after this kind of discussion maybe stripping him of his citizenship would be the best thing they could do starting out. With this it would mean he could no longer hide behind the Constitution, and in such would speed up the process. Actually stripping him of his citizenship would be exactly what I've been arguing that they should do in such situations, but I still don't think the process should take as long as it will.

That's what I was telling my boss this morning. They're making it out like they caught the thing before it went off, when what really happend was they got lucky and it failed. And yes emotion is a big part of it, and don't get me wrong Mike I know that our differences are simply what we base our opinion on. Yours is based on what WILL happen, where I base mine on what SHOULD happen. He's already been proven guilty with the evidence against him, and also his admission of guilt. Personally I think that should be trial enough. The part that gets my emotions involved is the part where people like this can use our Constitution against us.

Shouldn't come into play in an act of terrorism against the US, and in all honesty my opinion of those that think terrorists should be allowed to hide behind it is about as low as an opinion could get.

I kinda figured it would end up being a half helmet, as this kinda thing is pretty common with those. A LEO could answer it better, but as far as I know he can definately use it as an excuse to pull you over, and he can also cite you for it. Most usually don't, and maybe that is because of what you mentioned about the individual testing. However, to answer your question, I'm pretty sure he could have issued you a citation and/or had your bike towed. In court it might be dismissed, but most likely you would have to pay the court costs as well as costs of getting your bike out of impound. The other option would be getting a lawyer to fight the case and try to make the state pay for court and other costs, but who knows how that would turn out.