For firearms enthusiasts from lovers of Glock, AR-15, XD, 1911s, shotguns, AK-47s, to black powder. For shooters, hunters, LEO'S, military, or casual enthusiasts. KAC is about firearms, and all the good things in life. Welcome!
Is this a good time to point out that NYPD surveiled Wahhaj's mosque because its security force was suspected of engaging in illegal weapons trafficking and participating in paramilitary training? And that this surveillance was shutdown by the ACLU? pic.twitter.com/q3k8suDwnG
— Kyle Shideler (@ShidelerK) August 9, 2018
I feel like… maybe in some alternate universe, this fact, and the fact that Wahhaj's son was arrested in an New Mexico desert compound while alleging training kids for jihad might make an interesting news story.
The ACLU intervened because of the 1st and 4th Amendments. Here are some of the "radicalization indicators" used by the NYPD to justify surveillance activities without a warrant:
- wearing traditional Islamic clothing [and] growing a beard
- abstaining from alcohol
- becoming involved in social activism
FWIW, I agree with the ACLU 100% in this case. We all know very well that security and liberty are often diametrically opposed to one another.
Rem700 wrote:Most of what they teach of the constitution is abridged (poorly and with a spin on it)
Who is this "they"?
I'll bet you that 99% of the members of this board couldn't tell me what freedoms (other than freedom from self-incrimination) are protected by the 5th Amendment without asking the Google.
History/civics books (or the writers/editors if you want to get technical) and the teachers. I distinctly remember having a civics teacher in high school who was teaching us the amendments and the book we were reading had very skewed explanations of the amendments. Lucky for me, the teacher pointed out the "issue" and did his best to explain it. I have also seen it in some of the paperwork my oldest has brought home. They give the amendment and then "explain" what it means with their own ideology/opinions thrown in (like the def. of well trained militia, etc)
Is this a good time to point out that NYPD surveiled Wahhaj's mosque because its security force was suspected of engaging in illegal weapons trafficking and participating in paramilitary training? And that this surveillance was shutdown by the ACLU? pic.twitter.com/q3k8suDwnG
— Kyle Shideler (@ShidelerK) August 9, 2018
I feel like… maybe in some alternate universe, this fact, and the fact that Wahhaj's son was arrested in an New Mexico desert compound while alleging training kids for jihad might make an interesting news story.
The ACLU intervened because of the 1st and 4th Amendments. Here are some of the "radicalization indicators" used by the NYPD to justify surveillance activities without a warrant:
- wearing traditional Islamic clothing [and] growing a beard
- abstaining from alcohol
- becoming involved in social activism
FWIW, I agree with the ACLU 100% in this case. We all know very well that security and liberty are often diametrically opposed to one another.
I'll choose liberty. Every. Single. Time.
Suspected illegal weapons trafficking combine with their connections sounds like grounds for a warrant to me. Something smells very fishy here and as it appeals to have turned out they may have been correct. Bet they wouldn't have any problem getting a warrant on you in this case.
There are criminals among us who are both homicidal and incorrigible. Their parents took a shot at civilizing them and failed. Their school teachers took a shot at them and failed. The odds are overwhelming that government welfare programs and penal institutions took a shot at them and failed. If it ever becomes your turn to take a shot at them, don’t fail.
There are criminals among us who are both homicidal and incorrigible. Their parents took a shot at civilizing them and failed. Their school teachers took a shot at them and failed. The odds are overwhelming that government welfare programs and penal institutions took a shot at them and failed. If it ever becomes your turn to take a shot at them, don’t fail.
Rem700 wrote:Most of what they teach of the constitution is abridged (poorly and with a spin on it)
Who is this "they"?
I'll bet you that 99% of the members of this board couldn't tell me what freedoms (other than freedom from self-incrimination) are protected by the 5th Amendment without asking the Google.
99% of the members of this board also dislike you. Numbers are fun.
Rem700 wrote:Most of what they teach of the constitution is abridged (poorly and with a spin on it)
Who is this "they"?
I'll bet you that 99% of the members of this board couldn't tell me what freedoms (other than freedom from self-incrimination) are protected by the 5th Amendment without asking the Google.
99% of the members of this board also dislike you. Numbers are fun.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Not me
I may disagree from time to time but that doesn't mean I dislike someone
There are criminals among us who are both homicidal and incorrigible. Their parents took a shot at civilizing them and failed. Their school teachers took a shot at them and failed. The odds are overwhelming that government welfare programs and penal institutions took a shot at them and failed. If it ever becomes your turn to take a shot at them, don’t fail.
Rem700 wrote:Most of what they teach of the constitution is abridged (poorly and with a spin on it)
Who is this "they"?
I'll bet you that 99% of the members of this board couldn't tell me what freedoms (other than freedom from self-incrimination) are protected by the 5th Amendment without asking the Google.
99% of the members of this board also dislike you. Numbers are fun.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Not me
I may disagree from time to time but that doesn't mean I dislike someone
Rem700 wrote:Most of what they teach of the constitution is abridged (poorly and with a spin on it)
Who is this "they"?
I'll bet you that 99% of the members of this board couldn't tell me what freedoms (other than freedom from self-incrimination) are protected by the 5th Amendment without asking the Google.
99% of the members of this board also dislike you. Numbers are fun.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
We usually hear that about you.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Mandy wrote:I meant Marcus post, he's like ninja slicer, he's nice he's nice he's nice, ....SWISH... he cuts your effin head off
Rem700 wrote:Most of what they teach of the constitution is abridged (poorly and with a spin on it)
Who is this "they"?
I'll bet you that 99% of the members of this board couldn't tell me what freedoms (other than freedom from self-incrimination) are protected by the 5th Amendment without asking the Google.
History/civics books (or the writers/editors if you want to get technical) and the teachers. I distinctly remember having a civics teacher in high school who was teaching us the amendments and the book we were reading had very skewed explanations of the amendments. Lucky for me, the teacher pointed out the "issue" and did his best to explain it. I have also seen it in some of the paperwork my oldest has brought home. They give the amendment and then "explain" what it means with their own ideology/opinions thrown in (like the def. of well trained militia, etc)
just last year caden brought home a worksheet from school that had some more than questionable language used to explain several constitutional amendments
Rem700 wrote:Most of what they teach of the constitution is abridged (poorly and with a spin on it)
Who is this "they"?
I'll bet you that 99% of the members of this board couldn't tell me what freedoms (other than freedom from self-incrimination) are protected by the 5th Amendment without asking the Google.
99% of the members of this board also dislike you. Numbers are fun.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
We usually hear that about you.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Nah that's just an attempt at a joke by you. I've been and am still invited to all the get togethers and actually go to most events. Other people talk online only. I'm grade A son!
Rem700 wrote:Most of what they teach of the constitution is abridged (poorly and with a spin on it)
Who is this "they"?
I'll bet you that 99% of the members of this board couldn't tell me what freedoms (other than freedom from self-incrimination) are protected by the 5th Amendment without asking the Google.
99% of the members of this board also dislike you. Numbers are fun.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
We usually hear that about you.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Nah that's just an attempt at a joke by you. I've been and am still invited to all the get togethers and actually go to most events. Other people talk online only. I'm grade A son!
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
You only know about the "get togethers" we tell you about.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Mandy wrote:I meant Marcus post, he's like ninja slicer, he's nice he's nice he's nice, ....SWISH... he cuts your effin head off
Rem700 wrote:Most of what they teach of the constitution is abridged (poorly and with a spin on it)
Who is this "they"?
I'll bet you that 99% of the members of this board couldn't tell me what freedoms (other than freedom from self-incrimination) are protected by the 5th Amendment without asking the Google.
99% of the members of this board also dislike you. Numbers are fun.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
We usually hear that about you.
Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Nah that's just an attempt at a joke by you. I've been and am still invited to all the get togethers and actually go to most events. Other people talk online only. I'm grade A son!
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
You only know about the "get togethers" we tell you about.
Rem700 wrote:Most of what they teach of the constitution is abridged (poorly and with a spin on it)
Who is this "they"?
I'll bet you that 99% of the members of this board couldn't tell me what freedoms (other than freedom from self-incrimination) are protected by the 5th Amendment without asking the Google.
99% of the members of this board also dislike you. Numbers are fun.
Rem700 wrote:Most of what they teach of the constitution is abridged (poorly and with a spin on it)
Who is this "they"?
I'll bet you that 99% of the members of this board couldn't tell me what freedoms (other than freedom from self-incrimination) are protected by the 5th Amendment without asking the Google.
99% of the members of this board also dislike you. Numbers are fun.
Rem700 wrote:Most of what they teach of the constitution is abridged (poorly and with a spin on it)
Who is this "they"?
I'll bet you that 99% of the members of this board couldn't tell me what freedoms (other than freedom from self-incrimination) are protected by the 5th Amendment without asking the Google.
99% of the members of this board also dislike you. Numbers are fun.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Not me
I may disagree from time to time but that doesn't mean I dislike someone
Right back atcha.
Adults can agree to disagree without getting emotional or personal.
Rem700 wrote:Most of what they teach of the constitution is abridged (poorly and with a spin on it)
Who is this "they"?
I'll bet you that 99% of the members of this board couldn't tell me what freedoms (other than freedom from self-incrimination) are protected by the 5th Amendment without asking the Google.
99% of the members of this board also dislike you. Numbers are fun.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Not me
I may disagree from time to time but that doesn't mean I dislike someone
Right back atcha.
Adults can agree to disagree without getting emotional or personal.
Personal is saying something about literally "99% of this board".
Rem700 wrote:Most of what they teach of the constitution is abridged (poorly and with a spin on it)
Who is this "they"?
I'll bet you that 99% of the members of this board couldn't tell me what freedoms (other than freedom from self-incrimination) are protected by the 5th Amendment without asking the Google.
99% of the members of this board also dislike you. Numbers are fun.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Not me
I may disagree from time to time but that doesn't mean I dislike someone
Right back atcha.
Adults can agree to disagree without getting emotional or personal.
Personal is saying something about literally "99% of this board".
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Now I understand. You thought I was taking a shot at everyone. You are mistaken.
My point was that we shouldn’t be so quick to judge young (and presumably “liberal”) college students for not being able to enumerate all the freedoms protected by the First Amendment, as even those of us who *think* we know (and know we love) the Constitution—like the members of this board—are often woefully ignorant of some of its details.
