PPD Strikes Again - Confiscates weapon because I "refused to conceal"

[whoshisface]

i'd love an oc event in philly!

[ThomasJ]

Now you're just being dishonest. Sorry, there's no other word for this.

"The end result is the same" is a lie. The end result can include "theft of gun" or "no theft of gun."

You need to answer this: given the same scenario, all else equal, would you rather, or rather not, have your gun stolen?

It's yes or no. Answer the question please.

I am never dishonest and have no reason to be. The end result is the same is is not a lie, because the end result is the same: your 4th amendment right has been violated by government. That's all that matters.

This is all silly anyway because there is no proof that the document is sincere; there is no proof that it did go out to commanding officers or to whomever it was addressed. There is no evidence that policy has changed. That people are suddenly expecting government to cooperate, and say "whoops!" despite their institutional corruption is foolish.

And this one question cannot be answered definitively: what has changed?

The ONLY way to resolve this institutional corruption and blatant disregard for the law is a lawsuit.

[phillykev]

i'd love an oc event in philly!

Have fun with that, enjoy the new and IMPROVED PPD policy of detaining you, disarming you, and confirming the validity of your LTCF, over and over every time you encounter a cop. Yes yes, they won't steal your firearm. Well, unless you forgot to carry your LTCF, or only have a copy of it. In which case they will steal it, and arrest you.

You guys don't get it, nothing's changed. Can anyone even point to an incident where the PPD confiscated and didn't return the firearm of someone openly carrying AND with their LTCF on them? I've read of incidents where people were stopped, detained, the ADA was called, and they were released with their firearm. The only time I read about it being seized is if they didn't have an LTCF on them or refused to present it, or were charged with other crimes.

[dgg9]

I am never dishonest and have no reason to be. The end result is the same is is not a lie, because the end result is the same: your 4th amendment right has been violated by government. That's all that matters.

You are in fact dishonest, and no, there's no reason to be. The only reasons I can see are a) insanity or b) you've become aware your initial argument is a losing hand and rather than own up and fold 'em, you double down on the mistake, by intentional dishonesty.

If the end result can be "loss of gun" or "no loss of gun," then it's dishonest wordplay to equate the two. You're using specious wordplay to try to "prove" that 2 + 2 = 5 (or, in this case, loss of $X00 gun equals no loss of $X00 gun).

If you actually think that ANY violation of the 4A is exactly the same as any other -- "That's all that matters" ..your words -- then I'm forced to go with explanation 'a' above. IOW, you're claiming that the "severity" (again, your word) of the infringement doesn't matter. But either explanation = no one need ever take you seriously.

Here's a question, which might answer the issue of your pathology: do you actually think you're getting away with this? Do you think ANYONE reading this thread is not seeing through your flim-flam?

[ThomasJ]

Ah, more personal attacks and deliberate distortions. I only used the word severity when you tried to claim that my stating that illegal is illegal means that I believe one extreme is equal to the other extreme. This is a falsehood and a deliberate misrepresentation. There's no flim flam here. I'm direct in stating my beliefs and how I view things. You've been running around trying to argue something that they are not. That you don't agree with my viewpoint in no way means that it is dishonest.

Congratulations, you've once again taken the discussion off track.

[dgg9]

I'm direct in stating my beliefs and how I view things. You've been running around trying to argue something that they are not. That you don't agree with my viewpoint in no way means that it is dishonest.

Your arguments have been presented dishonestly and evasively. You have equivocated with words, and tried shifting meaning. I am by far not the only person to think so, based on posts and PMs.

But, if we take your beliefs at face value, you are saying that, all else equal, it makes no difference if your gun is stolen or not. This is clinically insane.

Either way, you exit this thread without whatever credibility you might have had at the start.

[ThomasJ]

Your arguments have been presented dishonestly and evasively. You have equivocated with words, and tried shifting meaning. I am by far not the only person to think so, based on posts and PMs.

But, if we take your beliefs at face value, you are saying that, all else equal, it makes no difference if your gun is stolen or not. This is clinically insane.

Either way, you exit this thread without whatever credibility you might have had at the start.

We'll put equivocate along side relativism. There isn't one instance in which I've equivocated nor have I once tried to shift meaning, not that you would try and provide an example or point to an instance. Again, I've been direct and clear.

What I have said from the start is that I don't see how replacing one illegal practice with another is a step in the right direction. Boiling this all down to the bare bones essence, it makes no difference if the gun is seized or not: both policies are 4th amendment violations. That's not dishonest no matter how desperately you would it like it to be so. It is not dishonest to have the clarity and will to acknowledge that illegal is an absolute.

[dgg9]

Boiling this all down to the bare bones essence, it makes no difference if the gun is seized or not

...which identifies you as someone not to be taken seriously, with absurd, hysterically blinkered, ideological-to-the-point-of-insanity views.

Aside from that, your dishonest shifts and ploys have been noticed by multiple people.

[GunLawyer001]

This is my final word on the matter.
. . .

I can see that there's a problem here. This may help:

http://www.esl.ucsb.edu/

[AMW556]

What a bunch of nonsense, I hope you get your gun back soon and this is the kind of ridiculous garbage that must be stopped. Doesn't the PPD have a lot of crime to fight, instead of harassing innocent gun owners.

What a waste of tax dollars.