Posted on 05/04/2006 8:53:59 AM PDT by StevenB
Which would you rather push around, five or five thousand??
That's how I read it too.
"I'd rather be tried by 12 than carried by 6."
Please see my post 120. It is neither expressly legal, nor illegal, to open carry in this state.
>Actually, BOTH citizens and illegal aliens have the exact >same Constitutional right to free speech and to peaceably >assemble. I see what you mean though about those who >wrote the Bill of Rights denied those to slaves, for >instance.
Yeah, maybe the also have rights to VOTE?
My understanding is that the guy wasn't open carrying or menacing, someone just noticed something like the bottom of the holster peeking out from under his jacket and reported it. I can sympathize with the position this puts the police in, but I tend to be pretty militant in my belief in the 2nd. I believe the officers should have assessed that these people were not a threat and let them remain if they were not. Maybe they got beligerant when confronted. Maybe they didn't cooperate when asked for their CCWs. We don't know yet. We have one side of the story and barely that. If they did, then I agree with what the officer(s) did. If Seattle Police policy under Nickels and Girlekowsky is to detain and intimidate all CCW permit carriers, then they need to be slapped hard on this one.
Illegal aliens do NOT have the right to vote (yet ; )
Sooo . . . to you, does that mean that any, say, illiterate, tubercular, destitute Russian who can scam his way onto a plane ought to be allowed to walk off at JFK airport without so much as a second glance from us? So he can find a better life over here?
And some Egyptian moslem with a PhD in languages coming to work for the DoD translating documents from Arabic to English ought to be denied a visa?
C'mon, guy, turn on the thought processes. You've established a false dichotomy, that all immigrants are good unless they are moslems, in which case they are bad. I'm no fan of Islam, but I'm not willing to make that kind of false choice.
APilgrim
so you are saying that these guys that are law abiding citizens are immigrants. And what in that article said that they were inciting a riot?
I'd rather spend $2 billion on voting fraud than a wall along the entire border.
I am not saying they are immigrants or inciting a riot.
Point out to me where it says in our Constitution that someone who is a Law Breaking Illegal Alien enjoys the same Constitutional Rights that a Citizen of these United States do.
If you are not a Citizen you do not enjoy the same Rights a Citizen does.
Never Have
Never will
oh and yes you're right. Slaves were not citizens, they were property and thus did not enjoy constitutional protections until they were freed.
Good luck with some here who are clearly irrational.
>Illegal aliens do NOT have the right to vote (yet ; )
So if they have the _same_rights_ under constitution.. why they can't vote?
Sure, some of them are not old enough to put on a bomb vest, and some of them just don't have the guts.
Islam is evil if it is practiced "by the book"
I never said that Law Breaking Illegal Aliens enjoy all of the same Constitutional Rights that Citizens of these United States do - voting, for instance - that being said, Law Breaking Illegal Aliens enjoy the same Constitutional Right to PEACEABLY ASSEMBLE that Citizens do. Get it?
See my post # 137.
Good - we are at least making some progress ; )
So the right to PEACABLY ASSEMBLE trumps the Right of a CITIZEN to Keep and Bear arms?
That's what I was getting at.
Get it?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.