[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Who was this? (Page 1 of 2)
Posted: 7/28/2014 3:01:38 PM EDT
|
http://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoenix-metro/central-phoenix/documents-tempe-man-faces-felony-charges-for-pointing-ar15-at-2-people-inside-sky-harbor
Doesn't sound like he was intentionally muzzle sweeping anyone, it sounds like he was unslinging it, the bystanders (a woman and a child, go figure) "felt threatened", and whatever officer was there just wasn't going to screw around. I guess if you are going to open carry a rifle to make a point at some place sensitive like the airport, don't be finger fucking it, leave it on your shoulder/slung? |
|
Quoted:
The report i read was that the guy is a no shit neurosurgeon IIRC. Some sort of intellectual dumb ass Fucking stop with the OC long rifle shit. We really have NO reason to make a "statement" in AZ the home of firearms freedom compared to the rest of the country Nailed it. There is a group of guys that like to make "statements" by open carrying all kinds of shit at restaurants in a large presence. I prefer to embrace my rights in a more subtle manner. |
|
According to the news on Fox 10, he had no business to conduct at the airport.
He was neither picking someone up, or traveling himself. Evidently he was carrying in the lounge area just to get a cup of coffee from the Starbucks there. The news also said that he had done the same thing before with a sidearm, but since he never "brandished" it, no charges were filed. |
|
If you can get Phoenix PD to arrest you over something like that, you've fucked up repeatedly.
There is no law enforcement agency that I would rather deal with, their officers are well aware of the laws, friendly for the most part, and very professional. In most cases I would question the officer first, not this time. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
I've been saying people open carrying long guns are at serious risk for disorderly conduct charges for a while now.
6. Recklessly handles, displays or discharges a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument. B. Disorderly conduct under subsection A, paragraph 6 is a class 6 felony. Disorderly conduct under subsection A, paragraph 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 is a class 1 misdemeanor. http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/13/02904.htm |
|
Quoted: The report i read was that the guy is a no shit neurosurgeon IIRC. Some sort of intellectual dumb ass Fucking stop with the OC long rifle shit. We really have NO reason to make a "statement" in AZ the home of firearms freedom compared to the rest of the country |
|
Quoted:
What is the point of you having any rights at all, if you're going to get all squeamish when someone actually exercises theirs? Your rights are all your rights; Not just the ones that don't make you wet your pants. Good for him. Jay No one here is saying what he is doing should be illegal. When people decide to exercise their rights in ways like this it invariably drags the rest of us into it that don't want to be involved. If they did try to change the law it invariably would prohibit all forms of carry in airports and would not make the distinction between constitutional carry concealed, ccw with permit, open carry with handgun, or open carry of long gun, He should use better judgment and not engage in amateurish activism without clearly defined goals. He also gave our political enemies more ammunition to use against us. The gun community has an obligation to police it's own through scrutiny and ridicule before we do see legislation occur. Arizona has a 100+ year history of open carry. Open carry of long guns inside city limits was never the norm here. Open carry rifle demonstrations are the equivalent of gay pride parades with BdSm fetish gear, or yelling racial slurs on a street corner in a minority neighborhood. I open carried every day for 8 years and stopped because the movement changed from normalizing the image of gun owners to shocking and offending people. The one thing I'll give him credit for is he did it by himself and he didn't need another couple dozen people with him to have the self validation to engage in the behavior. When people have to do these things in large groups it's because they're too insecure to do it own their own and need a group to psych themselves into doing Somethingtheyd never do alone. See Open Carry Texas as an example. Creating conditions where they feel persecuted because of the invariable response is part of what they want. So what was the point of open carrying in the airport? There is no threat of legislation to prohibit it. To protest the TSA as he said he had in the past, there are better options. |
|
Quoted:
What is the point of you having any rights at all, if you're going to get all squeamish when someone actually exercises theirs? Your rights are all your rights; Not just the ones that don't make you wet your pants. Good for him. Jay Just because I have freedom of speech doesn't mean I should walk around a shopping mart cursing at the top of my lungs. While I CAN do that, I SHOULDN'T. With rights come responsibilities, primarily to act reasonably and respecftfully to otheres. To act irresponsibly affects the future of those rights, for everyone. Open carrying a long gun into an airport is acting irresponsibly. |
|
Interesting quote from GSL's link:
Here is the Arizona law that the police used to arrest the doctor. The arrest resulted in national publicity and his suspension from his job. The only applicable part of the code seems to be number 6. ARS 13-2904: A. A person commits disorderly conduct if, with intent to disturb the peace or quiet of a neighborhood, family or person, or with knowledge of doing so, such person: 6. Recklessly handles, displays or discharges a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument. There are two elements to this law that must be met. First, the person has to have either the intent or knowledge that they are disturbing the peace or quiet of a neighborhood, family, or person. Then the law lists a number of ways in which it is impermissible to intentionally or knowingly do this. The last one listed, 6., involves weapons, and is a felony. The problem for the prosecutor in this case will be to prove intent or knowledge. The police have already said that the muzzle sweep was accidental and momentary. They already acknowledge that the doctor was not doing anything illegal up to that point. So how does a prosecutor show intent and/or knowledge for an accidental and momentary event? I do not think they can. I have mixed feelings on this. He is acting within the law 'exercising' his rights. He is also setting up a great example for any anti-gun group to exploit against us. Imaging a campaign showing a photo of him at the airport muzzle sweeping someone captioned: "Do we want people openly carrying assault rifles to be legal in our airports? This man thinks so and the DA agrees" Let's recognize we are in a perpetual struggle to keep our 2nd amendment rights intact. Public opinion is the battle ground and our opponents are very good at spinning "facts" to win that opinion. Once we lose the public majority it is only a matter of time before the laws reflect that majority. I know that rights aren't given by majority opinion, unfortunately our history and legal system shows they are taken away by that majority. Rich V Living behind enemy lines were the majority has removed my rights. 
|
|
Quoted:
Just because I have freedom of speech doesn't mean I should walk around a shopping mart cursing at the top of my lungs. While I CAN do that, I SHOULDN'T. Really? You think you CAN do that, and not be in violation of any ARS? You'd better have another look at the statute that the Phoenix Cops arrested and booked that guy on. While that statute, and for that matter, no AZ statute applied to what the Doctor did, because he wasn't breaking any law, that same statute, applied to your foul mouthed ranting at Wal Mart, will most certainly qualify you for a righteous visit before the local Judge, if not a guest booking into the local jail as well,,, I can pretty much promise you that. He didn't break any law: You did. Jay |
|
Quoted:
Really? You think you CAN do that, and not be in violation of any ARS? You'd better have another look at the statute that the Phoenix Cops arrested and booked that guy on. While that statute, and for that matter, no AZ statute applied to what the Doctor did, because he wasn't breaking any law, that same statute, applied to your foul mouthed ranting at Wal Mart, will most certainly qualify you for a righteous visit before the local Judge, if not a guest booking into the local jail as well,,, I can pretty much promise you that. He didn't break any law: You did. Jay Quoted:
Quoted:
Just because I have freedom of speech doesn't mean I should walk around a shopping mart cursing at the top of my lungs. While I CAN do that, I SHOULDN'T. Really? You think you CAN do that, and not be in violation of any ARS? You'd better have another look at the statute that the Phoenix Cops arrested and booked that guy on. While that statute, and for that matter, no AZ statute applied to what the Doctor did, because he wasn't breaking any law, that same statute, applied to your foul mouthed ranting at Wal Mart, will most certainly qualify you for a righteous visit before the local Judge, if not a guest booking into the local jail as well,,, I can pretty much promise you that. He didn't break any law: You did. Jay He didn't break a law by carrying his rifle, but he did when he muzzle swept people (even if that sweeping was merely perceived by a hoplophobe). There's no law against my cursing, but there is a law against my walking around yelling profanities. My point is, sometimes there's a fine line between having a right and exercising that right with responsibility. I find it hard to believe that you would not feel at the very least uncomfortable with a guy in the airport walking around with his rifle and then possibly sweeping people with a muzzle, intentionally or accidentally. With active shooters and such crazy people a very real threat these days, this guy and those like him are putting themselves in a potentially dangerous spot, and possibly endangering those around them when bullets may start flying, whether justified or not. Again, there is a responsible way to exercise open carry, and taking your rifle to an airport slung is not one of them. Do you agree or not? Part of the issue we are facing today in the gun community is a separation between 'them' and 'us', whether you are talking about Fudds vs. tactical crowd, OC vs. CCW, bean vs. no beans, whatever. We have to find a common ground (freedom? liberty?) and work from that, though that common ground must be found by those who are logical, not the illogical crazies like the OC demonstrators. I know you are one of those logical people, so how do we find a common ground on an issue such as the story we are discussing? |
|
Quoted: The report i read was that the guy is a no shit neurosurgeon IIRC. Some sort of intellectual dumb ass Fucking stop with the OC long rifle shit. We really have NO reason to make a "statement" in AZ the home of firearms freedom compared to the rest of the country This. I mean, what the fuck over. Do this shit somewhere else, we dont need any doors cracked open for the libs to try to wrench open.
|
|
Quoted:
You keep talking like he broke the law: I repeat: He did not break the law. The logical conclusion is if he did not break the law, one leaves the guy alone. Ref your Wal Mart analogy: You're still wrong, and you're still getting hooked, and unlike the airport guy, it would stick. Jay |
|
Quoted:
You keep talking like he broke the law: I repeat: He did not break the law. The logical conclusion is if he did not break the law, one leaves the guy alone. Ref your Wal Mart analogy: You're still wrong, and you're still getting hooked, and unlike the airport guy, it would stick. Jay Quoted:
Quoted:
You keep talking like he broke the law: I repeat: He did not break the law. The logical conclusion is if he did not break the law, one leaves the guy alone. Ref your Wal Mart analogy: You're still wrong, and you're still getting hooked, and unlike the airport guy, it would stick. Jay Muzzle sweeping someone in public is not breaking the law? |
|
Quoted: Muzzle sweeping someone in public is not breaking the law? Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: You keep talking like he broke the law: I repeat: He did not break the law. The logical conclusion is if he did not break the law, one leaves the guy alone. Ref your Wal Mart analogy: You're still wrong, and you're still getting hooked, and unlike the airport guy, it would stick. Jay Muzzle sweeping someone in public is not breaking the law? A. A person commits disorderly conduct if, with intent to disturb the peace or quiet of a neighborhood, family or person, or with knowledge of doing so, such person:
6. Recklessly handles, displays or discharges a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument. |
|
Quoted:
Muzzle sweeping someone in public is not breaking the law? Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You keep talking like he broke the law: I repeat: He did not break the law. The logical conclusion is if he did not break the law, one leaves the guy alone. Ref your Wal Mart analogy: You're still wrong, and you're still getting hooked, and unlike the airport guy, it would stick. Jay Muzzle sweeping someone in public is not breaking the law? |
|
Quoted:
Since the scared hen and her equally brain washed hen in waiting were most likely transients from some herp-a-derp state, I can almost assume that this wasn't even the type of flagging one would see in the military or at some range or store. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You keep talking like he broke the law: I repeat: He did not break the law. The logical conclusion is if he did not break the law, one leaves the guy alone. Ref your Wal Mart analogy: You're still wrong, and you're still getting hooked, and unlike the airport guy, it would stick. Jay Muzzle sweeping someone in public is not breaking the law? I agree, but what we want people to think and what they really think cannot always be controlled. |
|
Legal definitions:
http://www.azbar.org/media/58835/statutory_criminal_jury_instructions.pdf “Intentionally” [or “with intent to”] as used in these instructions means that a defendant’s objective is to cause that result or to engage in that conduct. 1.0510(a)(1) - Definition of “Intentionally” or “With Intent To” Intent may be inferred from all the facts and circumstances disclosed by the evidence. It need not be established exclusively by direct sensory proof. The existence of intent is one of the questions of fact for your determination. 1.0510(a)(2) - Intent - Inference “Recklessly [reckless disregard] ________” means that a defendant is aware of and consciously disregards a substantial and unjustifiable risk that conduct will result in . The risk must be of such nature and degree that disregarding it is a gross deviation from what a reasonable person would do in the situation. 1.0510(c) - Definition of “Recklessly (Reckless Disregard)” I still think long gun open carriers are risking arrest if they muzzle sweep someone, though charges may be dismissed or a jury find them not guilty, it's still costly and working class people are unlikely to be able to afford the consequences. |
|
The guy was careless with the orientation of his weapon in a sensitive area, just outside of a secured area, while he was intentionally drawing attention to himself.
He's stupid. People get arrested for doing stupid things all the time. Just because this idiot was "on our side" (despite damaging our cause), doesn't mean we are obligated to run to his defense. I carry at the airport all the time, I've even open carried at the airport, I've seen others open carry at the airport, I've walked by Phoenix Pd officers while doing it. The officers I've interacted with usually ask questions respectfully and let you go about your business. You would have to act like a real dick to get arrested. This guy was looking for trouble, got it, then asked for a second helping. I support open carry, not stupid carry. Edit: I don't open carry hardly ever anymore. |
|
Quoted:
You keep talking like he broke the law: I repeat: He did not break the law. The logical conclusion is if he did not break the law, one leaves the guy alone. Ref your Wal Mart analogy: You're still wrong, and you're still getting hooked, and unlike the airport guy, it would stick. Jay Quoted:
Quoted:
You keep talking like he broke the law: I repeat: He did not break the law. The logical conclusion is if he did not break the law, one leaves the guy alone. Ref your Wal Mart analogy: You're still wrong, and you're still getting hooked, and unlike the airport guy, it would stick. Jay He may not have broke any law but, accidental or not, he sure as shit violated some common courtesy and someone's right to not have some jackass point a weapon at them. If it was my family that he muzzled I would be pissed. |
|
Quoted:
Muzzle sweeping someone in public is not breaking the law? Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You keep talking like he broke the law: I repeat: He did not break the law. The logical conclusion is if he did not break the law, one leaves the guy alone. Ref your Wal Mart analogy: You're still wrong, and you're still getting hooked, and unlike the airport guy, it would stick. Jay Muzzle sweeping someone in public is not breaking the law? You're getting muzzle swept by pocket and purse guns, you just aren't aware of it. How upset about that are you? Any person with a hand in their coat or pocket could be pointing a gun at you with their finger on the trigger. I bet you wished there was a law preventing that, right? How many single action Jennings pistols are there out there with a bullet in the chamber walking around. |
|
People, we don't know how he swept them. Having a rifle slung on a back and then bending over without one finger on it can also be considered flagging...but have some common sense now. Right now all we're throwing is conjecture.
ETA: Just so I don't waster post #4500 without including Saturday's newest acquisition: 
|
|
Quoted:
People, we don't know how he swept them. Having a rifle slung on a back and then bending over without one finger on it can also be considered flagging...but have some common sense now. Right now all we're throwing is conjecture. I think those douchebags who complained were full of shit. But you're right, I don't know for sure. http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2014/08/video-doctor-with-ar15-at-phoenix.html |
|
Quoted:
You're getting muzzle swept by pocket and purse guns, you just aren't aware of it. How upset about that are you? Any person with a hand in their coat or pocket could be pointing a gun at you with their finger on the trigger. I bet you wished there was a law preventing that, right? How many single action Jennings pistols are there out there with a bullet in the chamber walking around. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You keep talking like he broke the law: I repeat: He did not break the law. The logical conclusion is if he did not break the law, one leaves the guy alone. Ref your Wal Mart analogy: You're still wrong, and you're still getting hooked, and unlike the airport guy, it would stick. Jay Muzzle sweeping someone in public is not breaking the law? You're getting muzzle swept by pocket and purse guns, you just aren't aware of it. How upset about that are you? Any person with a hand in their coat or pocket could be pointing a gun at you with their finger on the trigger. I bet you wished there was a law preventing that, right? How many single action Jennings pistols are there out there with a bullet in the chamber walking around. I agree and I don't worry about guns in somebody's purse because they don't go off on their own. In this case, I have a SOI that was at the airport and was present for at least part of the happenings. This person told me that the gentleman was manipulating the weapon with his hands and it was not just a slung weapon. This person has no reason to lie and I trust this persons word. If what my source told me is true, then a persons outrage over, at best, negligent handling of a weapon would be justified. Again, this is the only "reliable" info I have to go on, I mean who trusts the news anymore since their credibility is in the toilet. I've said it before and I'll say it again. I support the constitution and our state laws regarding firearms OC. But I think it was really poor judgement that led this person to OC a long gun, at the airport of all places, when he really has no reason to be there. The individual said he went for coffee. There is a freakin Starbucks in every other corner these days. IMHO, it was a bad idea and I'm not surprised people were freaked out, especially if he was in fact manipulating the weapon with his hands. At worst this guy is mentally unstable. At best he's a freakin attention whore who's not doing "our" cause any favors. Off my soap box. |
|
There's video of him in the link I provided. He's treating the gun like luggage. I think he's being unnecessarily provocative but probably because we don't see many guys treating AR-15s like luggage. But this is more a free speech argument than 2nd Amendment. He's making a political statement and trying to be a media whore. He got his 15 minutes, I hope he keeps it to that.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vtPZFUyaIE |
|
Quoted:
I agree, but what we want people to think and what they really think cannot always be controlled. Sure it can be controlled. We get calls all the time about people shooting in the forest, or hunting on state land. They 'think' there must be a law, and they 'think' someone must be breaking a law, and they 'think' the Cops need to get involved. And we explain the reality of it to them. So really,,, who cares what these kind of people think, or really think. Jay |
|
Quoted:
I still think long gun open carriers are risking arrest if they muzzle sweep someone, though charges may be dismissed or a jury find them not guilty, it's still costly and working class people are unlikely to be able to afford the consequences. No law was broke, they dropped the charges because he didn't break the law, and now you're quoting jury instructions. You guys are beginning to disturb my calm. Jay |
|
Quoted:
He may not have broke any law but, accidental or not, he sure as shit violated some common courtesy and someone's right to not have some jackass point a weapon at them. If it was my family that he muzzled I would be pissed. So you'd be pissed. So what. Here's an idea: Everyone here wringing their hands over this, get with their favorite pro 2A Arizona orginization, that has been fighting for your 2A rights, and press them to have the legislature pass, and the gov sign, a little feel good anti 2A legislation. Also, Just because there is a law, doesn't mean it's going to just be enforced. See ARS 13-104 Rule of Construction Jay |
|
The guy is an immature doushe who was trying to get "look at me" attention. i live 35 miles from the airport, i drive a soft top jeep that a long arm can't be responsibly secured in, if the airport had the only Starbucks in town and i really wanted a cup of $5 coffee i would drive home and leave my long arm in my safe to go get that cup o joe.
Did this guy have malice in his heart? Probably not. Is he within his rights to do what he did? Yes. Is he a self centered prick that wants attention and like a six year old will misbehave to get it? Yes As responsible gun owners lets try not to contribute to the anti gun sentiment, because its whats right. |
|
Quoted:
No law was broke, they dropped the charges because he didn't break the law, and now you're quoting jury instructions. You guys are beginning to disturb my calm. Jay So are you disputing that people are often arrested and charges later dismissed through negotiations involving attorneys that cost money? |
|
http://news.yahoo.com/man-bringing-gun-airport-political-statement-021211579.html
Man: Bringing gun to airport a political statement Associated Press PHOENIX (AP) — A medical researcher at a renowned neurological hospital who was arrested last month after police say he pointed a loaded rifle toward a woman and her teenage daughter inside Phoenix's main airport said Monday that his firearm "was never pointed at anyone" and he was just trying to make a political statement. Peter Nathan Steinmetz, 54, was carrying the AR-15 rifle July 25 inside Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport's busy Terminal 4 and bought a cup of coffee before stopping in front of some passenger gates, a court document says. Steinmetz removed the rifle from his shoulder, causing the muzzle to face a mother and her 17-year-old daughter, authorities said. They told police they feared for their lives. "I am a peaceful political activist and my purpose in walking around the airport with my AR-15 rifle was entirely political in nature," Steinmetz said at a news conference with his attorney. "I am also an educated and responsible gun owner. ... As I was making this political statement, I was careful not to disturb or endanger anyone. "At all times, I was extremely careful to ensure my firearm was never pointed at anyone. ... The safety was engaged at all times," Steinmetz said. Phoenix police said guns aren't restricted in that area of the airport. But "it certainly was concerning to other passengers at the airport, not knowing why this individual was walking around with an assault rifle slung over his arm," Sgt. Steve Martos said. Martos also said it wasn't the first time Steinmetz has brought a weapon to Sky Harbor. Officers questioned him Nov. 13 when he picked up his wife from the airport armed with an assault rifle. Steinmetz told police he was exercising his right to bear arms and he wasn't arrested in that incident, Martos said. Steinmetz does research at the Barrow Neurological Institute in Phoenix. Dignity Health's St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center, site of Barrow Neurological Institute, issued a statement last week that said Steinmetz was placed on administrative leave "following his arrest at Sky Harbor Airport and after careful analysis and review." It's unclear what his status with the institute is now, and he didn't take questions at the news conference. In the most recent case, Steinmetz was booked into jail on suspicion of one count of disorderly conduct with a weapon before bonding out. His attorney, Marc Victor, said his client has not yet been charged with a crime, and that Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery said he's sent the case back for further investigation. Steinmetz said Monday that he has no plans to bring a gun to Sky Harbor again. "I believe I have now made the important point that peaceful and responsible people can safely be trusted to handle firearms — even AR-15s, even at the airport," Steinmetz said. "There is never anything to fear from peaceful, responsible gun owners." |
|
Quoted:
So you'd be pissed. So what. Here's an idea: Everyone here wringing their hands over this, get with their favorite pro 2A Arizona orginization, that has been fighting for your 2A rights, and press them to have the legislature pass, and the gov sign, a little feel good anti 2A legislation. Also, Just because there is a law, doesn't mean it's going to just be enforced. See ARS 13-104 Rule of Construction Jay Quoted:
Quoted:
He may not have broke any law but, accidental or not, he sure as shit violated some common courtesy and someone's right to not have some jackass point a weapon at them. If it was my family that he muzzled I would be pissed. So you'd be pissed. So what. Here's an idea: Everyone here wringing their hands over this, get with their favorite pro 2A Arizona orginization, that has been fighting for your 2A rights, and press them to have the legislature pass, and the gov sign, a little feel good anti 2A legislation. Also, Just because there is a law, doesn't mean it's going to just be enforced. See ARS 13-104 Rule of Construction Jay I'm guessing your a cop based on your screen name. Well I'm in LE too and I understand there was no law broken and I don't give a shit that he wasn't charged. I don't want any anti 2a legislation passed. But it is my belief, and that of many others, that this type of jackassery runs contrary to what we are fighting to keep. And yeah, I question why somebody feels the need to go into the airport with a long gun for a cup of coffee. Couple that with the fact that he was finger fucking said long gun and in the process, unnecessarily muzzling a bunch of people. As a cop, if he was doing that to me or my family, I would address that shit right then and right there. As a cop, I would think you would understand that. Am I saying that this guy needs to be arrested? No, I'm not. But what he does need is a freaking education in basic firearm safety. All he's shown so far is that he either doesn't know or doesn't care about the issue of weapon safety. I don't want to be around someone that displays that kind of negligence or stupidity. Do you? If your ok with that kind of behavior,let me know what department your with so I can try and avoid ever working an enforcement action with you. |
He did accomplish educating everyone that it's fine to bring a firearm to Sky Harbor airport just as long as you don't try to bring it through a secured area. I'm betting not everyone knew that. To me, that public education was a benefit. So when dropping of a loved one, feel free to defend yourself right up to the TSA line. 
|
|
AZCOP is one of the good guys, and the type of person I want in law enforcement. I simply disagree with him on this issue.
I think most of us would give a second look at someone open carrying a rifle. Its just out of the ordinary here, especially at an airport. |
|
Quoted:
He did accomplish educating everyone that it's fine to bring a firearm to Sky Harbor airport just as long as you don't try to bring it through a secured area. I'm betting not everyone knew that. To me, that public education was a benefit. So when dropping of a loved one, feel free to defend yourself right up to the TSA line. Yeah, I had no idea. Always kept it in the center console while picking people up at the airport. I remember after 9/11, they had a no weapons/explosives sign up when going on the road headed to the terminals. They were using the mirrors and searching trunks of everyone going into the parking garage and even had a check point to roll up to the terminal. I just assumed it was still similar rules. |
