Why would you announce that? Why wouldn’t you just say I have a weapon on me?
If you aren’t carrying there’s no need to announce the license. Duty to report applies to the weapon, is how I understand it.
That actually gives me an idea. (not really related to your story)
Let’s say ICE is present in some part of town, doing traffic stops. What is to stop local police from ordering diversions and blocking off that road for safety reasons?
I realize that the ICE/police Venn diagram has a somewhat large overlap, but surely local police are kind of pissed off at ICE usurping their authority?
This is from a Star-Tribune article that appears to be paywalled.
There were two gunshot wounds to Good’s right chest, one on her left forearm and one “with protruding tissue on the left side of the patient’s head” the report said. Blood was flowing out of her left ear.
Four shots, not three.
3 shots could cause 4 wounds. With one passing through the forearm.
True enough. Four wounds != four individual shots.
I stand corrected. Thanks.
I was once pulled over by a cop when I had a gun in the car. That was a long time ago, and I haven’t traveled with a gun in a decade or so, but there were a few times I did. I had a CPL (Concealed Pistol License, they don’t call them CCW around here since the license only applies to handguns) and I told the cop I had a gun and that I had a CPL. Because if I had said I had a gun, but not a CPL, and that gun wasn’t in plain sight (it wasn’t) then I might have been arrested. The cop said it was smart to tell me that I had both right away.
I mean, if I just said I had a gun, and didn’t mention the CPL, then maybe he would have followed up by asking if I had a license. But by being proactive about it, that helped defuse any tension that might have come up, albeit briefly.
In a car they already know I have a CCW license. I could be wrong but I was taught that I needed to announce it regardless.
Does your pharmacist or doctor send people to CECOT?
No, that’s not their job. My response related to people asking if we need to show papers. And I showed it was a routine event.
But you knew that.
My post related to ICE asking American citizens to show papers during random encounters. And we all know is not a routine event.
But you knew that.
Your last few replies have pushed into the trolling category. I’m issuing a warning and as of now banning you from this thread.
Warning issued for Trolling
Moderating:
Charts and poll results like this are very encouraging. The red (unfavorable) side of the chart is great!
What I can’t figure out is how the blue (favorable) side of the chart can still be so large! That is a boatload (many ocean liner-loads) of people!
Seventy percent of Republicans are okay with the way ICE is operating–are you shitting me? (I know you’re not, sadly.)
And how FFS can people still say they “don’t know”??
Here’s the thing though… That is literally the only demographic that favors it. It just goes to show how awful it is to be a Republican, and how weird they are.
Some people just don’t pay attention to the world around them. You could poll people on their opinion of rabies and get 5-6% “undecided”.
Legally speaking, no. While every state requires you to have identification in the form of a license if you’re driving a motor vehicle, I don’t know of a single state that requires you carry identification to just walk down the street. Nor is there any federal law requiring citizens to carry identification.
Sometimes my mouth gets dry, and I really like that rabies will keep my mouth filled with saliva.
I can’t swim the fear of water rabies gives me keeps me from drowning.
I think they are good at deliberately blocking any info that contradicts their beliefs, so they actively follow sources that don’t.
Because the Bill of Rights protects us from that requirement. The Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution states:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
There needs to be probable cause to ask you for anything. Whether it’s to search your car, your house, your pockets, or ask to see what’s in your wallet. And that includes asking for ID.
Now, there are things that you might be giving up by not carrying ID. Businesses have the right to deny you services, you might be disallowed from operating a vehicle (as you point out), and so on. But you can’t legally be accosted simply for failing to have identification. No matter what Kristi Noem insists.