Welcome to PatsFans.com

Carmin Ortiz makes case for

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by IllegalContact, Jan 17, 2013.

  1. IllegalContact

    IllegalContact On the Roster

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    10,892
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +297 / 4 / -9

    why we still need the 2nd amendment today and why government is better off being smaller rather than larger........

    she should be fired immediately for screwing the pooch so badly in the Aaron Swartz case
  2. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    15,473
    Likes Received:
    261
    Ratings:
    +377 / 8 / -3

    #11 Jersey

    Why????????????
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2013
  3. IllegalContact

    IllegalContact On the Roster

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    10,892
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +297 / 4 / -9

    to protect ourselves from an increasingly incompetent legal system.......I simply cannot entrust our government to assure my best interests.

    The fact that a federal prosecutor drove someone to suicide due to overzealousness makes this necessary...

    I'm sorry for what happened in Newtown......doesn't change a thing as long as the primary characterstic of a government person is personal ambition.

    just the way it has to be

    if Aaron Swartz was my son, I'm not sure I could contain myself
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2013
  4. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    15,473
    Likes Received:
    261
    Ratings:
    +377 / 8 / -3

    #11 Jersey

    No one "drives" anyone else to kill themselves.

    You've said so yourself.

    http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...d/12/766667-3-counting-page6.html#post2572663

    Aaron Schwartz had a long history of depression. DId his current troubles add to his anxiety and depression? I'm sure they did - but, in the end, he chose to commit the act which led to his arrest.

    As you say, there are consequences to our actions which we, alone, are responsible for.
  5. IllegalContact

    IllegalContact On the Roster

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    10,892
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +297 / 4 / -9

    doesn't excuse the acts of an overzealous prosecutor basing their case on a 25 year old computer law. an obvious personal ambition drove this to what it was.

    the company (JSTOR) did not even want to prosecutre, but that did not stop the ortiz.

    this is completely different from any madoff investor

    to correlate, this would be like madoff giving the money back to the investor, but the government takes it away and says 'tough' and then the person killing themselves

    Last edited: Jan 17, 2013
  6. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,066
    Likes Received:
    114
    Ratings:
    +199 / 7 / -24

    To advocate for more gun violence will not solve anything..
  7. RI Patriots fan

    RI Patriots fan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2012
    Messages:
    3,771
    Likes Received:
    64
    Ratings:
    +141 / 7 / -19

    The Second Amendment is just as relevant today as it was when it was enacted.


    1.) Protection from tyranny

    2.) Protection from foreign threats

    3.) Protection of ones person, family, and home
  8. scout

    scout Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    7,703
    Likes Received:
    26
    Ratings:
    +37 / 0 / -2

    #15 Jersey

    I heard a taped interview the other day with Aaron Swartz. Wow! The interview took place in the mid 90's, which was of course was when the Internet was fairly new. Aaron was a visionary and was able to nail what the Internet could become. I am always amazed with people that write or create something that is still relevant 100 years later. The Internet still is relatively new, but ranks very high in the world's innovations. Aaron Swartz gave the interview when he was 14 years old.
  9. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    38,157
    Likes Received:
    309
    Ratings:
    +626 / 4 / -13

    #87 Jersey


    Having a gun in one's house for protection seems very standard to me. I'm not sure why anyone would not consider it unless there were problems related to that in that household - mental illness, history of violence, alcoholism and situations like those where more careful thought is needed.

    Living here in Rhode Island my house has:

    Generator, canned goods, bottled water, shovel, snow blower, ice melt, candles, small propane tanks, extra batteries, fire extinguishers, all exterior doors with door knob lock, dead bolts, chains and I have 3 guns - a 38, 9mm and an old double barrel shotgun. If I have enough time my choice will be the shotgun with the others tucked in my clothes. The dead bolts should give me the time I need.

    This satisfies my thinking for possible emergencies ... as the man of the house I feel it's my responsibility to protect my family. Whether or not I'll have capacity to do so is a separate discussion ... but hopefully I can react as needed. If someone feels the need to have a semi automatic rifle in their house ... I see no problem with that.

    I'm not willing to roll the dice - gambling is not my style I would rather be prepared and thankfully the 2nd Amendment allows me the freedom to protect my family as needed.

    I have no problem with tightened restrictions of gun laws, better screening to get them, licensing, training, better protection in the mental health category. But I do think there has been a major over reaction to the Sandy Hook tragedy. if the passion was there on this issue where was it after Aurora or before Sandy Hook? True passion of a cause should not need tragedy to bring about more awareness.

    I think many people who already hated guns are using it to strengthen their own gun opinions. it's near impossible to protect for everything and sadly there will be more tragedies that will probably have more creative ways to create carnage. Those intent on mass killings ... especially if they want to kill themselves will just go the suicide vest route if they cannot get a gun. or they may go the car bomb route ... more alertness by ordinary citizens and family members is the answer to reducing violent deaths.
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2013
  10. RI Patriots fan

    RI Patriots fan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2012
    Messages:
    3,771
    Likes Received:
    64
    Ratings:
    +141 / 7 / -19


    I think most Progressives think that the state will be protecting them and the reality is that the police have no obligation to protect individual citizens (unless they have committed to some special relationship).

    Everyone is responsible for their own protection.
  11. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    38,157
    Likes Received:
    309
    Ratings:
    +626 / 4 / -13

    #87 Jersey

    i have faith in police protection to a point ... like when you call them. But they are so overwhelmed with mundane crap everyday there is only so much they can do. I'd rather be safe than sorry. is it a gamble with guns in the house - yes it is but I believe the need outweighs the minimal risk.
  12. RI Patriots fan

    RI Patriots fan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2012
    Messages:
    3,771
    Likes Received:
    64
    Ratings:
    +141 / 7 / -19


    A doctor when he treats you has an obligation to "protect" you from harm. The police have no such obligation to individuals. You can call the police...they can tell you someone is on the way and then not show up.

    Why rely on people who have no obligation to even show up and protect you?
  13. Mrs.PatsFanInVa

    Mrs.PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2009
    Messages:
    15,473
    Likes Received:
    261
    Ratings:
    +377 / 8 / -3

    #11 Jersey

    Yes, and then you can sue them.

    Family says slow response by police contributed to death | KSBY.com | San Luis Obispo, Santa Maria, Santa Barbara, Paso Robles

    Actually, they do.

    All police departments have a code of conduct and ethics which they swear to abide by when they are sworn in as police officers.

    This is Florida's code:
    Florida Department of Law Enforcement

    El Paso, Tx.

    http://shr.elpasoco.com/NR/rdonlyres/7A3D02A5-E92B-4055-AF7E-90D92A3DF6D3/0/code_of_conduct.pdf

    Idaho:

    http://www.post.idaho.gov/Professio...eace Officers Codes of Ethics and Conduct.pdf

    And so on and so forth......
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2013
  14. IllegalContact

    IllegalContact On the Roster

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    10,892
    Likes Received:
    143
    Ratings:
    +297 / 4 / -9

    Who's advocating that?

    Simply put, the government can't be counted on to make the right decisions. The need for the private citizen to be armed still exists.......end of story
  15. RI Patriots fan

    RI Patriots fan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2012
    Messages:
    3,771
    Likes Received:
    64
    Ratings:
    +141 / 7 / -19



    Sigh.....I guess you have never heard of Warren vs District of Columbia:


    Warren v. District of Columbia[1] (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981) is an oft-quoted[2] District of Columbia Court of Appeals (equivalent to a state supreme court) case that held police do not have a duty to provide police services to individuals, even if a dispatcher promises help to be on the way, except when police develop a special duty to particular individuals.

    By a 4-3 decision the court decided that Warren was not entitled to remedy at the bar despite the demonstrable abuse and ineptitude on the part of the police because no special relationship existed. The court stated that official police personnel and the government employing them owe no duty to victims of criminal acts and thus are not liable for a failure to provide adequate police protection unless a special relationship exists. The case was dismissed by the trial court for failure to state a claim and the case never went to trial.[


    Warren v. District of Columbia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia




    Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone

    The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that the police did not have a constitutional duty to protect a person from harm, even a woman who had obtained a court-issued protective order against a violent husband making an arrest mandatory for a violation.


    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html

    Police have no responsibility to protect individuals (reference)
  16. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,771
    Likes Received:
    132
    Ratings:
    +169 / 4 / -4

    If you look at the great revolutions in the history of our nation after 1776, they are:
    - The northern revolution against southern racism
    - The worker's largely nonviolent revolution against oppressive employers
    - The woman's nonrevolution against sexist society
    - The black nonviolent revolution against racism
    - The gay nonviolent revolution against homophobia.

    The reality is that the only time we really needed weapons was when the US government waged war against the slave-owning south that wanted to secede.

    All the other wars against tyranny did not involve weapons.
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2013
  17. RI Patriots fan

    RI Patriots fan Rookie

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2012
    Messages:
    3,771
    Likes Received:
    64
    Ratings:
    +141 / 7 / -19


    The gay nonviolent revolution against homophobia. Now that one is funny. :D

    Let's see some of that gay "non-violence"

    Anti-Proposition 8 Mob Attacking Grandmother - YouTube
  18. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,066
    Likes Received:
    114
    Ratings:
    +199 / 7 / -24

    The Wikipedia is suspect, not to say it is not valid, but there is no corraboration of the article and there is no record of the actual decision on the internet...

    You are aware that Wiki is self edited, and when I commented on the article they invited me to edit it.. but, someone else can do that.

    Interestingly enough here is where they got the information for the article... which creates a great deal of skepticism on my part..

    PT Barnum loves those folks who just believe..

  19. 1228

    1228 Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2012
    Messages:
    219
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0


    Hilarious. Why don't you click on that first citation and read it rather than dismissing it because it's hosted by a pro-gun site?

    If I'm not being clear enough:

  20. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    41,066
    Likes Received:
    114
    Ratings:
    +199 / 7 / -24

    You are not being clear enough, information from blogs without the actual citation is unreliable.. as is Wikipedia..

    There is no caption of case law that was decided.. a quick and dirty search of the internet shows up nothing..

    BTW Guns Right Alert is a pro gun sie.. not sure where you figured that one out, but check it out.. at best it is a liberatarian site, that relies on audio blogs.. unreliable??
    Last edited: Jan 18, 2013

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>