John Popper arrested with "arsenal"

to support his arrest, you are also agreeing that if someone shoots other people with you gun at the range after borrowing it from you, you get arrested for the crime. fair, no?
Click to expand...
Actually, it depends on the jurisdiction. Some jurisdictions make a vehicle owner responsible for the actions of the people whom he gives permission to operate his vehicle. A vehicle owner might also have additional duties if he is in the vehicle while the other person is driving it.

As to who is harmed, generally, society is considered harmed. If the driver is doing 111 mph in a 65 or 70 zone (or whatever it happens to be), especially with drugs in the vehicle, the driver has broken the law and will be in trouble. It doesn't matter whether the driver is Sterling Moss or Forrest Gump; it doesn't matter if Germany lets folks drive 200 mph. What matters are the laws of the jurisdiction and what the driver was doing in that jurisdiction. What also matters are the obligations the jurisdiction has for vehicle owners regarding the people they allow to drive their vehicles.
 
I dont think 111 mph hour is all that dangerous in todays modern cars.I have easily hit 100 on the way to vegas in my sedan while not paying attention.I will admit 111 is a little on the quick side and wasnt that smart but if it was on a freeway without alot of people around then I say no big deal.I will admit though that anything I have ever bought with a motor has been pegged out atleast 1 time just to see how fast it will go,so my opinion might be worthless on the subject.I always do it on a dead empty freeway in the middle of the night but I just had to know if that speedo on my Cadd CTS was lying when it says 160........
 
This is getting pretty rediculous. The fact of the matter is that the driver broke the law by speeding, speeding pretty excessively IMO. The passenger/owner of the vehicle broke the law by having the drugs and weapons (in the manner he was storing the weapons) in the vehicle. Now, it is not our jobs to debate the law, it is the jobs of our elected officials. I do not agree with the laws regarding how weapons must be transported in the states on the west coast. Regardless of how I feel however, it is my duty as a responsible citizen to NOT BREAK THE LAW! And for the analogy of some guy borrowing your gun and shooting someone, should you be held responsible......I would say that you should hold some responsibilty if you loaded the weapon, and then handed it to him and while standing right next to him he shot and killed someone. Sorry, we all have some type of responsibility in a social sense if we want to have a good and descent place for our children to grow up in. If you are sitting in the passenger seat of your vehicle, ALLOWING someone to drive in excessive speeds like that, you should bear some of the legal responsibility of those actions. Everyone should be a little more careful with who they trust important things with.
 
Now, it is not our jobs to debate the law, it is the jobs of our elected officials.
Click to expand...

Correction: no, it's not our job. It's our responsibility!. It is a privilege for our elected officials to debate our laws for us, a privilege which can be revoked . . . .
 
Now, it is not our jobs to debate the law, it is the jobs of our elected officials. I do not agree with the laws regarding how weapons must be transported in the states on the west coast. Regardless of how I feel however, it is my duty as a responsible citizen to NOT BREAK THE LAW!
Click to expand...

The law is dumb. I will debate it with my elected officials.

I'm sure all the people in the occupied states (CA, DC, IL) feel perfectly safe not breaking the law while the criminals do.

It's my duty as a responsible human being to protect myself. Screw the government. It's my life, not theirs. I'm not going to go around shooting people willy-nilly but I'm sure not going to bask in the pleasure of being unarmed and defenseless just so a few politicians can be "tough" on crime.
 
There's really nothing to debate

111 is speeding

drugs are illegal

guns in a vehicle with drugs is illegal

speeding with drugs and guns in a vehicle, now we're into the area of stupid.
 
Yep, in CA an officer is supposed to arrest at over 95 and impound the car. Yep, alternating flashing head lights is illegal. Once in a while I like to tip the paddle to 6th and let it roll but after I cross into Nevada. But, no drugs or booze in the car and the PP is, well, it can't be found.
 
Now, it is not our jobs to debate the law, it is the jobs of our elected officials.

Correction: no, it's not our job. It's our responsibility!. It is a privilege for our elected officials to debate our laws for us, a privilege which can be revoked . . . .
Click to expand...

That's funny, I would really like to see a debate between you and an elected official as to why you think you know better than they do. That would be hilarious. Our job is to elect the officials based on how good of a job we think they can and will do. It is there job to debate laws, it is your right to have an opinion but not to decide how fast others are allowed to drive.

The law is dumb. I will debate it with my elected officials.

I'm sure all the people in the occupied states (CA, DC, IL) feel perfectly safe not breaking the law while the criminals do.

It's my duty as a responsible human being to protect myself. Screw the government. It's my life, not theirs. I'm not going to go around shooting people willy-nilly but I'm sure not going to bask in the pleasure of being unarmed and defenseless just so a few politicians can be "tough" on crime.
Click to expand...

Nobody, especially me, is telling you to be "Unarmed and defenseless". If you feel "unarmed and defenseless" just because you don't have a gun on your person, then I truly feel sorry for you. And, "The law is dumb" is not going to cut you any slack with a LEO. No matter what thier personal belief is, if you get caught carrying a concealed weapon without a permit, or doing 111 miles an hour on the freeway with loaded guns and drugs in the car and your excuse is "The law is dumb", guess what, your day just got screwed. Now, while we may agree or disagree with the laws, it is our job to obey them. And, no matter what you may think, you do not have the right to break the law because you think it is "dumb".

If you want to debate the law with your elected official, then by all means, get them on the phone and give them your piece of mind. Doing it that way will get you alot farther than armchair quarterbacking here and saying "That's dumb and this is the way I do it", or "He shouldn't go to jail because the law is dumb". Replies like that just make people sound ignorant, and I for 1, do not like to give those that pass laws I disagree with any more ammunition or ignorant statements than have already been given by people who are responsible for allowing "dumb" laws to get passed in the first place.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top