What are our rights when being "searched"?

[NeuroTypical]

Rhetorical is intended to encourage, in this case, in my own rhetorical question, thought as to motivation. I can not presume to know another's motivation but sometimes I wonder if knowing wouldnt clarify the discussion.

My motivations for carrying a concealed firearm (in no particular order):

* My wife and I helped put a felon behind bars, and have helped to keep him there and modify terms of his parole. He finishes his nickel in September and may come looking for revenge. He knows who we are, what we and our children look like, and where we live. I'd be happy if he stays away. I'd be happy if we heard about him coming into our area and we just got a hotel room until he got bored trashing our house and went away. I'd be happy if we saw him coming and ran the other way and got away. But if none of those things are possible, and he intends us serious harm or death, I carry to have the means to stop that threat.

* We live out in the middle of nowhere, with a long drive through deserted wooded areas. If I got stuck in a ditch for a few days in a storm, a gun could signal for help, or scare away bears.

(Ok, maybe those are in a particular order.)

Anyway, that's about it. I'm no hero. You won't catch me running out to my car and run back into some firefight. (The security guards at my work share the same opinion, by the way.)

[MarginOfError]

You know, my son is allergic to peanuts and he had been in the ER for it. Hence, he is extremely nervous when he sees somebody with a peanut. But no, he doesn't go around telling people to please do not carry peanuts in their purse.

You have the idea that having guns put people in more danger. Don't go to Florida. You'll see lots of rifles on gun racks on the back window of trucks here. Now, let's see... in Washington, DC, Chicago, IL, and NYC, NY... there's a gun ban. Great crimeless cities, right? Okay, D.C suburb in Virginia - gun control virtually non-existent, lots of people carry guns... a lot less crime than a few miles across the state line. So, what does that tell me? I'm safer in a place where people carry guns that is next to a place where people can't carry guns. Because... bad people always go for the easy targets. You know, bad people don't usually care to follow laws or Articles of Faiths... So yeay for Virginia.

I think your statistics would be easily confounded by considering the socio-economic status of people in DC vs people in the VA suburbs. You're also likely to find a lot more and more advanced security systems in the VA suburbs. In short, it's more likely there's less crime in the VA suburbs because the people are wealthier and have better security...not because they have guns.

It's also important to note that the DC gun ban hasn't existed for very long. The crime rate was high before the gun ban. I wouldn't expect it to go down very quickly. It takes time to get the guns off the street.

[skalenfehl]

In a theater situation, like in Aurora, I think the scenarios are even more terrifying. A guy walks into a dark theater and opens fire. In all the commotion of people getting up and running for cover, five people with concealed weapons draw and start looking for the guy with his weapon drawn. Now you've got people shooting through a crowd at the "guy with the gun." That doesn't make me feel any safer at all.

One can never predict a scenario. One can only be responsible and be prepared. A war was fought for independence from tyranny so that a nation of liberty and law could be created. It was created and endorsed by the Lord, who justifies us in defending ourselves. We as LDS ought to know this better than anyone else, especially LDS in the US. If not, then it is no wonder that Moroni foresaw us having to awaken to our awful situation. No wonder the Lord has told us that our minds have been darkened. And if that final thread, from which our Constitution is hanging ever breaks, we may yet find ourselves in a land of desolation as prophesied for our neglect in learning that we may be repeating history:

Government MASS MURDER carried out throughout history, almost always immediately following the DISARMAMENT of the PUBLIC:

50+ million dead: Mao Ze-Dong (China, 1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50)

12+ million dead: Adolf Hitler (Germany, 1939-1945) – concentration camps, civilian deaths and dead Russian POWs

8+ million dead: Leopold II of Belgium (Congo, 1886-1908)

6+ million dead: Jozef Stalin (USSR, 1932-39)

5+ million dead: Hideki Tojo (Japan, 1941-44)

2+ million dead: Ismail Enver (Turkey, 1915-22)

1.7 million dead: Pol Pot (Cambodia, 1975-79)

1.6 million dead: Kim Il Sung (North Korea, 1948-94)

1.5 million dead: Menghistu (Ethiopia, 1975-78)

1 million dead: Yakubu Gowon (Biafra, 1967-1970)

900,000 dead: Leonid Brezhnev (Afghanistan, 1979-1982)

800,000 dead: Jean Kambanda (Rwanda, 1994)

I hope the Unites States of America is never added to that list because we, through neglect, apathy, fear, sloth, idleness, etc allowed our leaders to deprive us as a nation of our right to keep and bear arms. We don't need to worry about each other remotely near as much as we need to worry about the people we put in office:

Dr. Suzanna Hupp Testimony Before Congress on the 2nd Amendment - YouTube

Edited August 10, 2012 by skalenfehl

[MarginOfError]

One can never predict a scenario. One can only be responsible and be prepared. A war was fought for independence from tyranny so that a nation of liberty and law could be created. It was created and endorsed by the Lord, who justifies us in defending ourselves. We as LDS ought to know this better than anyone else, especially LDS in the US. If not, then it is no wonder that Moroni foresaw us having to awaken to our awful situation. No wonder the Lord has told us that our minds have been darkened. And if that final thread, from which our Constitution is hanging ever breaks, we may yet find ourselves in a land of desolation as prophesied for our neglect in learning that we may be repeating history:

Government MASS MURDER carried out throughout history, almost always immediately following the DISARMAMENT of the PUBLIC:

50+ million dead: Mao Ze-Dong (China, 1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50)

12+ million dead: Adolf Hitler (Germany, 1939-1945) – concentration camps, civilian deaths and dead Russian POWs

8+ million dead: Leopold II of Belgium (Congo, 1886-1908)

6+ million dead: Jozef Stalin (USSR, 1932-39)

5+ million dead: Hideki Tojo (Japan, 1941-44)

2+ million dead: Ismail Enver (Turkey, 1915-22)

1.7 million dead: Pol Pot (Cambodia, 1975-79)

1.6 million dead: Kim Il Sung (North Korea, 1948-94)

1.5 million dead: Menghistu (Ethiopia, 1975-78)

1 million dead: Yakubu Gowon (Biafra, 1967-1970)

900,000 dead: Leonid Brezhnev (Afghanistan, 1979-1982)

800,000 dead: Jean Kambanda (Rwanda, 1994)

I hope the Unites States of America is never added to that list because we, through neglect, apathy, fear, sloth, idleness, etc allowed our leaders to deprive us as a nation of our right to keep and bear arms. We don't need to worry about each other remotely near as much as we need to worry about the people we put in office:

Dr. Suzanna Hupp Testimony Before Congress on the 2nd Amendment - YouTube

See! I told you!

Please also note that I don't object to gun ownership. I don't object to people carrying. As long as the people carrying the weapons are held responsible for the damage they do with them. For instance, if Bob stood up in Aurora, drew his weapon, and fired at the shooter and his bullet killed a bystander trying to make an escape, Bob had better be charged with manslaughter. I don't care what the scenario is; if he doesn't have a clear shot, he'd better not shoot.

Edited August 10, 2012 by MarginOfError

[annewandering]

You know, my son is allergic to peanuts and he had been in the ER for it. Hence, he is extremely nervous when he sees somebody with a peanut. But no, he doesn't go around telling people to please do not carry peanuts in their purse.

You have the idea that having guns put people in more danger. Don't go to Florida. You'll see lots of rifles on gun racks on the back window of trucks here. Now, let's see... in Washington, DC, Chicago, IL, and NYC, NY... there's a gun ban. Great crimeless cities, right? Okay, D.C suburb in Virginia - gun control virtually non-existent, lots of people carry guns... a lot less crime than a few miles across the state line. So, what does that tell me? I'm safer in a place where people carry guns that is next to a place where people can't carry guns. Because... bad people always go for the easy targets. You know, bad people don't usually care to follow laws or Articles of Faiths... So yeay for Virginia.

People in Florida have a serious problem with people with guns getting out of control. You're right. I am not going to Florida.

I dont know anyone who is carrying peanuts that is going to start shoving peanuts down your sons throat. A very lacking analogy.

Gun control is not the issue here. Peoples common sense is. I dont care if you have an arsenal. My family certainly does. Just dont take them around me or mine. Kill your own family/friends off protecting them but leave mine alone. Your right to carry a gun ends when it interferes with my right to not have them around me in a crowded theater. YOUR desire to be superman is your problem. Dont make it mine.

[skalenfehl]

See! I told you!

Am I wrong, though? When the time comes, and it will come because it has been prophecied, there will be Captain Moronis and there will be Anti-Nephi-Lehis, while most of the rest perish. Those who will not fight will flee to Zion. And I strongly suspect the vast majority will be fleeing, leaving the Captain Moronis to fight.

Alma 48:17 Yea, verily, verily I say unto you, if all men had been, and were, and ever would be, like unto Moroni, behold, the very powers of hell would have been shaken forever; yea, the devil would never have power over the hearts of the children of men.

[MarginOfError]

People in Florida have a serious problem with people with guns getting out of control. You're right. I am not going to Florida.

I dont know anyone who is carrying peanuts that is going to start shoving peanuts down your sons throat. A very lacking analogy.

Gun control is not the issue here. Peoples common sense is. I dont care if you have an arsenal. My family certainly does. Just dont take them around me or mine. Kill your own family/friends off protecting them but leave mine alone. Your right to carry a gun ends when it interferes with my right to not have them around me in a crowded theater. YOUR desire to be superman is your problem. Dont make it mine.

Since I'm just in a mood to tick off everybody today:

You don't have a right to not have guns around you in a crowded theater. The right to carry a gun is an enumerated right. The right to not be in a room with a gun exists only insomuch as you have the right to leave the room.

[annewandering]

One can never predict a scenario. One can only be responsible and be prepared. A war was fought for independence from tyranny so that a nation of liberty and law could be created. It was created and endorsed by the Lord, who justifies us in defending ourselves. We as LDS ought to know this better than anyone else, especially LDS in the US. If not, then it is no wonder that Moroni foresaw us having to awaken to our awful situation. No wonder the Lord has told us that our minds have been darkened. And if that final thread, from which our Constitution is hanging ever breaks, we may yet find ourselves in a land of desolation as prophesied for our neglect in learning that we may be repeating history:

Government MASS MURDER carried out throughout history, almost always immediately following the DISARMAMENT of the PUBLIC:

50+ million dead: Mao Ze-Dong (China, 1958-61 and 1966-69, Tibet 1949-50)

12+ million dead: Adolf Hitler (Germany, 1939-1945) – concentration camps, civilian deaths and dead Russian POWs

8+ million dead: Leopold II of Belgium (Congo, 1886-1908)

6+ million dead: Jozef Stalin (USSR, 1932-39)

5+ million dead: Hideki Tojo (Japan, 1941-44)

2+ million dead: Ismail Enver (Turkey, 1915-22)

1.7 million dead: Pol Pot (Cambodia, 1975-79)

1.6 million dead: Kim Il Sung (North Korea, 1948-94)

1.5 million dead: Menghistu (Ethiopia, 1975-78)

1 million dead: Yakubu Gowon (Biafra, 1967-1970)

900,000 dead: Leonid Brezhnev (Afghanistan, 1979-1982)

800,000 dead: Jean Kambanda (Rwanda, 1994)

I hope the Unites States of America is never added to that list because we, through neglect, apathy, fear, sloth, idleness, etc allowed our leaders to deprive us as a nation of our right to keep and bear arms. We don't need to worry about each other remotely near as much as we need to worry about the people we put in office:

Dr. Suzanna Hupp Testimony Before Congress on the 2nd Amendment - YouTube

and anyone wonders why I remind people the right to bear arms is not the 1st Article of Faith? and also, you might remember the white horse prophesy is myth not reality. It is NOT doctrine anymore than the right to bear arms is part of church doctrine.

[Guest]

People in Florida have a serious problem with people with guns getting out of control. You're right. I am not going to Florida.

I dont know anyone who is carrying peanuts that is going to start shoving peanuts down your sons throat. A very lacking analogy.

It's not a lacking analogy - your perceived safety and my son's perceived safety are completely analogous. Both are reactions springing from "feelings" not "reality".

Gun control is not the issue here. Peoples common sense is. I dont care if you have an arsenal. My family certainly does. Just dont take them around me or mine. Kill your own family/friends off protecting them but leave mine alone. Your right to carry a gun ends when it interferes with my right to not have them around me in a crowded theater. YOUR desire to be superman is your problem. Dont make it mine.

Gun control is what you made an issue. We already acknowledged that guns do not belong to people lacking in common sense. You seem to believe that guns belong nowhere - even in the hands of people with common sense. Because you know, people with conceal carry permits are trigger happy and would surely fire at you at a crowded theater. So, yeah, lets just be content with James Holmes firing at a crowded theater as long as you with the conceal carry permits DON'T. Ever. Matter of fact, leave your gun out of public places.. because, you know, you took the effort to qualify for conceal carry so you can carry it around in your bedroom...

Edited August 10, 2012 by anatess

[Anddenex]

Your right to carry a gun ends when it interferes with my right to not have them around me in a crowded theater. YOUR desire to be superman is your problem. Dont make it mine.

I am sorry annewandering, but there is no right which specifies you have a right to not have guns around you.

A person carrying a gun, doesn't need to have a superman complex to carry a gun.

A person carrying a gun, isn't shoving anything down your throat, except the constitution. annatess is providing a point that there are some people who are so allergic to peanuts that even the fumes from a newly opened package could cause serious harm to the individual, but this doesn't affect anybody else who wants a peanut for a snack.

The same idea with guns apply. A person holding a gun is not shoving anything down a persons throat. It doesn't matter if it is concealed or not. Me, personally, I am with you in the sense that I would rather see the gun, then have no knowledge regarding the gun.

[MarginOfError]

Am I wrong, though? When the time comes, and it will come because it has been prophecied, there will be Captain Moronis and there will be Anti-Nephi-Lehis, while most of the rest perish. Those who will not fight will flee to Zion. And I strongly suspect the vast majority will be fleeing, leaving the Captain Moronis to fight.

Alma 48:17 Yea, verily, verily I say unto you, if all men had been, and were, and ever would be, like unto Moroni, behold, the very powers of hell would have been shaken forever; yea, the devil would never have power over the hearts of the children of men.

I'm not sure what prophecy you're referring to, but I don't foresee the same circumstances you're describing. I forsee a bunch of Captain Moronis taking up arms and getting decimated by a squadron of Apaches. In that case, the powers of hell are shaking in the form of hellfire missiles.

[annewandering]

I do have a right to not have guns around me in the hands of 'right to bear arms' nut cases of which there are many many many.

It is a felony for an insane person to own/buy a gun.

People who think they are going to save everyone around them in a shooting DO have a superman complex.

[Guest]

and anyone wonders why I remind people the right to bear arms is not the 1st Article of Faith?

Ahh, now I understand what you mean by that. I agree.

[annewandering]

Ahh, now I understand what you mean by that. I agree.

Thank you. I am happy to hear you do not think it is an Article of Faith. :)

[skalenfehl]

and anyone wonders why I remind people the right to bear arms is not the 1st Article of Faith? and also, you might remember the white horse prophesy is myth not reality. It is NOT doctrine anymore than the right to bear arms is part of church doctrine.

It is, though indirectly. The Lord speaking to Joseph Smith:

D&C 101

76 And again I say unto you, those who have been scattered by their enemies, it is my will that they should continue to importune for redress, and redemption, by the hands of those who are placed as rulers and are in authority over you—

77 According to the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles...

80 And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood.

D&C 98:6 Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;

The Lord speaks more in the D&C regarding the saints being justified in defending themselves and when it is appropriate to go to war. As a nation, we are seriously disregarding this.

[Guest]

I do have a right to not have guns around me in the hands of 'right to bear arms' nut cases of which there are many many many.

It is a felony for an insane person to own/buy a gun.

Yes it is. James Holmes is one of them. But that doesn't sweep the sane and responsible ones on that same bucket.

But then, since we're talking about theaters and searches... a Theater is a private enterprise. Regardless of your carry permits, a theater has the right to tell you you can't bring your gun inside and search you if need be. So, there are 2 choices here - people who are uncomfortable with firearms may go only to theaters with this rule, or, don't worry about it.

[annewandering]

It is, though indirectly. The Lord speaking to Joseph Smith:

D&C 101

76 And again I say unto you, those who have been scattered by their enemies, it is my will that they should continue to importune for redress, and redemption, by the hands of those who are placed as rulers and are in authority over you—

77 According to the laws and constitution of the people, which I have suffered to be established, and should be maintained for the rights and protection of all flesh, according to just and holy principles...

80 And for this purpose have I established the Constitution of this land, by the hands of wise men whom I raised up unto this very purpose, and redeemed the land by the shedding of blood.

D&C 98:6 Therefore, I, the Lord, justify you, and your brethren of my church, in befriending that law which is the constitutional law of the land;

The Lord speaks more in the D&C regarding the saints being justified in defending themselves and when it is appropriate to go to war. As a nation, we are seriously disregarding this.

Redress and defend can be done in a lot more ways that with a gun. I dont see the word armed there even once.

[Anddenex]

Redress and defend can be done in a lot more ways that with a gun. I dont see the word armed there even once.

It is implied with this statement anne:

redeemed the land by the shedding of blood.

The U.S. was redeemed by the shedding of blood. Which weapon do you think shed the blood of Brits so that America could establish the constitution?

[annewandering]

It is implied with this statement anne:

The U.S. was redeemed by the shedding of blood. Which weapon do you think shed the blood of Brits so that America could establish the constitution?

So do you think this is justification for carrying weapons into a movie theater?

I believe in guns to defend ourselves from the government. Not that it would do a lot of good anymore but sometimes you just have to do what you have to do.

Carrying guns into town an around town does not qualify in any way.

[MarginOfError]

Redress and defend can be done in a lot more ways that with a gun. I dont see the word armed there even once.

I'm with you. I see a lot of what-I-want-to-read-into-it going into skalenfahl's interpretation. Which I guess is his privilege. But let's recall that the Constitution that the Lord established for this land denied women and blacks the right to vote. That document, established by the Lord, still had to be improved upon and adapted in order for the nation to survive. I'm inclined to think that the Lord was more concerned about the principles of government than he was about the specifics.

I still hold that people have the right to gun ownership. But I don't think it's unreasonable to put limitations against assault weapons, or explosive tipped ammunition (among other things).

I will also continue to hold that anyone advocating that we have to have our guns in order to protect ourselves from the big bad government is deluding themselves about their chances of winning a war against the US military.

[skalenfehl]

Redress and defend can be done in a lot more ways that with a gun. I dont see the word armed there even once.

Which is why I said indirectly. And yes, I agree. Redress can be done in many ways.

[Guest]

I think your statistics would be easily confounded by considering the socio-economic status of people in DC vs people in the VA suburbs. You're also likely to find a lot more and more advanced security systems in the VA suburbs. In short, it's more likely there's less crime in the VA suburbs because the people are wealthier and have better security...not because they have guns.

It's also important to note that the DC gun ban hasn't existed for very long. The crime rate was high before the gun ban. I wouldn't expect it to go down very quickly. It takes time to get the guns off the street.

What do you classify as not very long? Because DC gun ban has existed since 1975. And guns are still not off the street.

Crime rate in DC dropped in the 90's when police made headway on getting rid of crack. Also, statistics always point to poverty going hand in hand with crime, so crime in DC is concentrated on the poor areas.

So, the important thing to note is that gun restrictions do not solve crime. Banning guns from anywhere does not solve crimes. Therefore, feeling "safer" because guns are banned is an illusion.

Raising the quality of lives of Americans has always been the most proven crime fighter. Case in point - North Dakota. Low poverty rate, low crime.

[Anddenex]

So do you think this is justification for carrying weapons into a movie theater?

No. I believe the constitution gives me that right, as long as the movie theater has no policy regarding guns.

Carrying guns into town an around town does not qualify in any way.

It does if the individual involved has honored the laws established in the town the person lives in.

[annewandering]

No. I believe the constitution gives me that right, as long as the movie theater has no policy regarding guns.

It does if the individual involved has honored the laws established in the town the person lives in.

I did not mean legally qualify. I mean common sense qualify.

[skalenfehl]

I'm with you. I see a lot of what-I-want-to-read-into-it going into skalenfahl's interpretation.

It is based on my studies of D&C as a whole about what the Lord expected and what resulted and what is coming because of neglect/failure. If you don't know what I mean, then study the parable of the nobleman in D&C 101 for starters. Seek the Spirit for your guide. Zion will be redeemed, but we are a long way off.

I know I seem to be cherry picking scriptures right now. But who will not fight with the sword shall flee to Zion. Of course, we don't have swords today...

D&C 45: 68 And it shall come to pass among the wicked, that every man that will not take his sword against his neighbor must needs flee unto Zion for safety.

A cleansing has begun and those who don't see it will likely fall to it. That is all. Bini, I only wanted to share some videos about our rights when being searched. I apologize for my videos that spawned this tangent.