3 ms·

You know it all don't you, even though you weren't there? Care to use your 'belligerence behavior' to embellish more tales? >they'll do what they want regardl

You know it all don't you, even though you weren't there? Care to use your 'belligerence behavior' to embellish more tales? >they'll do what they want regardless if the law says it's illegal and they're risking jail So go ahead and quote that, assuming it was said, and go on and explain where it creates articulable probable cause for an x-ray. I honestly can't believe I'm even responding to this victim-blaming garbage. Try reading Ms. Cervantes complaint, who's circumstances were incredibly similar to mine but she was treated even worse, and think again about your opinion here. https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.azd.985537/gov.uscourts.azd.985537.1.0.pdf https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.azd.985...

tablespoon 4y ago
> You know it all don't you, even though you weren't there? Care to use your 'belligerence behavior' to embellish more tales? The situation is this: I don't know what happened, but I also don't trust your account of what happened. >> they'll do what they want regardless if the law says it's illegal and they're risking jail > So go ahead and quote that, assuming it was said, Here you are advocating that convicted felons should manufacture guns that would be illegal for them to possess: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29985376 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29985376 Here you are claiming that you would continue to trade cryptocurrency from a prison ass-phone, in a hypothetical world were it was illegal: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29922956 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29922956 > and go on and explain where it creates articulable probable cause for an x-ray. Why? I never claimed that at all.
- notch656a 4y ago
  1) A felon can in fact legally manufacture certain firearms, such as working replica black powder rifles and pistols. These are not covered under federal law. 2) I stand by my belief that felons ought to be able to protect themselves with firearms of any type. 3) My belief that felons have 2nd amendment rights is not probable cause of having drugs. 4) There's no nexus by which officers inventing an alert or falsifying evidence is justified by my exercising of my first amendment right regarding belief in second amendment right of felons. >Here you are claiming that you would continue to trade cryptocurrency from prison, in a hypothetical world were it was illegal: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29922956 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29922956 Again not probable cause of possessing drugs. Your whole argument is a red herring. None of this is probable cause for possessing drugs. >Why? I never claimed that at all. So how is this even relevent? None of this first amendment protected activity and opinions provide any legitimacy to falsely accusing someone of having drugs up their ass.
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    > 1) A felon can in fact legally manufacture certain firearms, such as working replica black powder rifles and pistols. These are not covered under federal law. That thread was not discussing "replica black powder rifles." It was discussing stuff like the FGC-9 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGC-9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGC-9), under the assumption that guns like that were illegal for felons to possess. > Your whole argument is a red herring. None of this is probable cause for possessing drugs. I never said nor thought it was "probable cause for possessing drugs." It's evidence of an attitude, and attitude affects the probability of certain behaviors that you may not have reported in your account.
    - notch656a 4y ago
      1) I never directed a felon to manufacture a FGC-9, although I would be pleased to find out they had. At various times I have praised the idea of felons and prohibited possessors carrying, which by the way can be done completely legally for example by carrying a black powder six shooter that will work as good as any other revolver. 2) Felons can in fact legally own and manufacture modern firearms after having their rights reinstated. 3) Felons can in fact own firearms legally by leaving the jurisdiction of the united states. 4) None of this first amendment protected opinions provide any justification at all for CBP officers faking a dog alert or manufacturing evidence during a strip search. >It's evidence of an attitude, and attitude affects the probability of certain behaviors that you may have not reported in your account. Ergo illegal detention and causeless strip searches (which even at border require PC) are justified? I take it Ms. Cervantes was also an HN poster? Did you even stop to think about whether you would like to live in a world where some low level podunk border patrol officers can fabricate evidence merely on the extremely unlikely chance they happen to read my HN and decide to target me because of my absolute stance on 2A and 1A?
      - tablespoon 4y ago
        > Ergo illegal detention and causeless strip searches (which even at border require PC) are justified? I take it Ms. Cervantes was also an HN poster? No. I'll repeat the situation: I don't trust your account of what happened. That is all.

tablespoon 4y ago

> You know it all don't you, even though you weren't there? Care to use your 'belligerence behavior' to embellish more tales? The situation is this: I don't know what happened, but I also don't trust your account of what happened. >> they'll do what they want regardless if the law says it's illegal and they're risking jail > So go ahead and quote that, assuming it was said, Here you are advocating that convicted felons should manufacture guns that would be illegal for them to possess: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29985376 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29985376 Here you are claiming that you would continue to trade cryptocurrency from a prison ass-phone, in a hypothetical world were it was illegal: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29922956 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29922956 > and go on and explain where it creates articulable probable cause for an x-ray. Why? I never claimed that at all.

notch656a 4y ago
1) A felon can in fact legally manufacture certain firearms, such as working replica black powder rifles and pistols. These are not covered under federal law. 2) I stand by my belief that felons ought to be able to protect themselves with firearms of any type. 3) My belief that felons have 2nd amendment rights is not probable cause of having drugs. 4) There's no nexus by which officers inventing an alert or falsifying evidence is justified by my exercising of my first amendment right regarding belief in second amendment right of felons. >Here you are claiming that you would continue to trade cryptocurrency from prison, in a hypothetical world were it was illegal: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29922956 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29922956 Again not probable cause of possessing drugs. Your whole argument is a red herring. None of this is probable cause for possessing drugs. >Why? I never claimed that at all. So how is this even relevent? None of this first amendment protected activity and opinions provide any legitimacy to falsely accusing someone of having drugs up their ass.
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > 1) A felon can in fact legally manufacture certain firearms, such as working replica black powder rifles and pistols. These are not covered under federal law. That thread was not discussing "replica black powder rifles." It was discussing stuff like the FGC-9 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGC-9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FGC-9), under the assumption that guns like that were illegal for felons to possess. > Your whole argument is a red herring. None of this is probable cause for possessing drugs. I never said nor thought it was "probable cause for possessing drugs." It's evidence of an attitude, and attitude affects the probability of certain behaviors that you may not have reported in your account.
  - notch656a 4y ago
    1) I never directed a felon to manufacture a FGC-9, although I would be pleased to find out they had. At various times I have praised the idea of felons and prohibited possessors carrying, which by the way can be done completely legally for example by carrying a black powder six shooter that will work as good as any other revolver. 2) Felons can in fact legally own and manufacture modern firearms after having their rights reinstated. 3) Felons can in fact own firearms legally by leaving the jurisdiction of the united states. 4) None of this first amendment protected opinions provide any justification at all for CBP officers faking a dog alert or manufacturing evidence during a strip search. >It's evidence of an attitude, and attitude affects the probability of certain behaviors that you may have not reported in your account. Ergo illegal detention and causeless strip searches (which even at border require PC) are justified? I take it Ms. Cervantes was also an HN poster? Did you even stop to think about whether you would like to live in a world where some low level podunk border patrol officers can fabricate evidence merely on the extremely unlikely chance they happen to read my HN and decide to target me because of my absolute stance on 2A and 1A?
    - tablespoon 4y ago
      > Ergo illegal detention and causeless strip searches (which even at border require PC) are justified? I take it Ms. Cervantes was also an HN poster? No. I'll repeat the situation: I don't trust your account of what happened. That is all.