FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB General Discussion Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 09:28 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-08-2003, 06:27 PM   #81
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: NCSU
Posts: 5,853
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by fatherphil
no, i don't think the court would find him guilty under this misapplied statute.
Misapplied statute? HAHA

If he brought a gun on school property then he violated the law because he neither was preforming law enforcement duities nor had permission of the school board to do so. Sorry, but the law doesn't make exception for cops on their breaks sneaking into schools to take pictures of class projects.
RufusAtticus is offline  
Old 05-08-2003, 06:57 PM   #82
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: burbank
Posts: 758
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Calzaer
So fatherphil has no problem with me walking into his daughter's classroom at 1:30am, just because.

There's a reason they LOCK THE FUCKING DOORS. You know that, right?
no, not really. funny cause at first read i thought you said closet instead of classroom. that might have been a problem.

rufus, you know the statute was not meant to address police officers. they pretty much go everywhere armed.
fatherphil is offline  
Old 05-08-2003, 07:34 PM   #83
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 6,997
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by fatherphil
no, not really. funny cause at first read i thought you said closet instead of classroom. that might have been a problem.

rufus, you know the statute was not meant to address police officers. they pretty much go everywhere armed.
Wrong. the statute specifically says it doesn't apply to:

"(1) A law enforcement officer while engaged in law enforcement duties. " (emphasis added)

The police officer was not engaged in law enforcement duties (by his own admission, he was on break). Therefore the statute does apply to him. He is breaking the law by being in the school. It's really apparant and it's sad that you can't see that.
trunks2k is offline  
Old 05-08-2003, 07:58 PM   #84
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: NCSU
Posts: 5,853
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by fatherphil
rufus, you know the statute was not meant to address police officers. they pretty much go everywhere armed.
What trunks said.

Phil, there is a reason why that was bolded when I initially posted the statute: to point out that the law only makes exception for law enforcement officers when they are engauged in law enforcement duities. By his own admission this cop was on a break and not preforming any official duities. Sorry, but if he did wear his firearm into the school, he did break the law.
RufusAtticus is offline  
Old 05-08-2003, 08:00 PM   #85
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,762
Default

So you DON'T know why they lock the doors?

*pulls out another lawn sign and hammers it into the thread*
"DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS"
Calzaer is offline  
Old 05-08-2003, 09:21 PM   #86
Obsessed Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Not Mayaned
Posts: 96,752
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by RufusAtticus
Misapplied statute? HAHA

If he brought a gun on school property then he violated the law because he neither was preforming law enforcement duities nor had permission of the school board to do so. Sorry, but the law doesn't make exception for cops on their breaks sneaking into schools to take pictures of class projects.
If the court acted on common sense instead of the letter of the law I don't think they would do anything to him. After all, he could have carried it there legally earlier in the day and his carrying it then was merely incidental.

Techinically, though, I agree, he's guilty.
Loren Pechtel is offline  
Old 05-08-2003, 09:23 PM   #87
Obsessed Contributor
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Not Mayaned
Posts: 96,752
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Calzaer
So you DON'T know why they lock the doors?

*pulls out another lawn sign and hammers it into the thread*
"DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS"
* comes along, notes the sign that fell down because there wasn't enough dirt to hold it and bolts it to the wall*
Loren Pechtel is offline  
Old 05-08-2003, 10:37 PM   #88
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: burbank
Posts: 758
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Calzaer
So you DON'T know why they lock the doors?
i took the second question as rhetorical. apparently the locked door was not meant to keep the cop out cause the janitor let him in.
fatherphil is offline  
Old 05-08-2003, 11:36 PM   #89
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ohio
Posts: 2,762
Default

Quote:
apparently the locked door was not meant to keep the cop out cause the janitor let him in.
*puts one last Troll Chow pellet in the cage*
"Apparently the locked door was not meant to keep the raving lunatic/mad bomber/pedophile stalker/thief/axe murderer/Osama bin Laden out cause the janitor let him in" would make just as much sense as your statement.
Calzaer is offline  
Old 05-09-2003, 05:40 AM   #90
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: somewhere in the known Universe
Posts: 6,993
Default

Fatherphil,

Do you honestly believe that the janitor would have let this man in had he been out of uniform? (at 1:30 am and some strange man, unknown to him knocks on the door, asks to be let in so he can take some pictures)

Brighid
brighid is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:36 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.