User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 8:51:35 AM EDT
[#1]
Troll thread gonna troll
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 8:51:51 AM EDT
[#2]
No, because like Marriage Licenses, they shouldn't exist.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 8:52:30 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, because like Marriage Licenses, they shouldn't exist. I'll go with this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 8:53:10 AM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, because like Marriage Licenses, they shouldn't exist. I like the way this guy thinks |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 8:57:40 AM EDT
[#5]
Refusing to do your job should be a grounds for re-assignment or termination.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 8:57:52 AM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, because like Marriage Licenses, they shouldn't exist. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 8:58:56 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, because like Marriage Licenses, they shouldn't exist. Second post nails it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 8:59:23 AM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Refusing to do your job should be a grounds for re-assignment or termination. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:00:03 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I like the way this guy thinks Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: No, because like Marriage Licenses, they shouldn't exist. I like the way this guy thinks x2 |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:00:40 AM EDT
[#10]
They shouldn't exist, but since they do, refusal to issue should be a jailable offense. Much like the current marriage license shenanigans in KY
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:00:48 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Second post nails it. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
No, because like Marriage Licenses, they shouldn't exist. Second post nails it. Yes I agree. Now how do we leverage this ruling to apply to sheriffs in may issue states that NEVER issue? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:08:42 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Refusing to do your job should be a grounds for re-assignment or termination. yes, but there's a problem with that when it comes to marriage licenses and CCW' permits. both are issued by "ELECTED" officials so re-assignment or termination doesn't work. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:11:44 AM EDT
[#13]
That depends. Did a court order you to do it after you refused? And did you then refuse to obey the order?
If so, then yes. You should be jailed for contempt for disobeying the order. Are you people still barking at this cloud? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:13:45 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, because like Marriage Licenses, they shouldn't exist. This, and troll thread is troll. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:13:46 AM EDT
[#15]
I also believe I must take my application to "my" county sheriff. Not the next county over or anywhere else in the US for that matter. Apples and oranges bub.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:15:09 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
yes, but there's a problem with that when it comes to marriage licenses and CCW' permits. both are issued by "ELECTED" officials so re-assignment or termination doesn't work. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Refusing to do your job should be a grounds for re-assignment or termination. yes, but there's a problem with that when it comes to marriage licenses and CCW' permits. both are issued by "ELECTED" officials so re-assignment or termination doesn't work. Not in my state. Besides, even if the issuing authority is elected, that person is free to resign his position if he does not want to do what the law compels. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:15:12 AM EDT
[#17]
Not following the law as written as a public servant should be a jailable offense.
Not for just CCW's. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:16:01 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That depends. Did a court order you to do it after you refused? And did you then refuse to obey the order? If so, then yes. You should be jailed for contempt for disobeying the order. Are you people still barking at this cloud? It really is that simple. Why are people losing their shit over this? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:16:17 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not following the law as written as a public servant should be a jailable offense. Not for just CCW's. This. If the Supreme Court were to find that elected officials must issue a CCW, issued direct orders to each sheriff or what have you to do just that, then any who don't should be jailed for contempt. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:16:42 AM EDT
[#20]
Being reasonable?
Sheeeeeeet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:18:16 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This. If the Supreme Court were to find that elected officials must issue a CCW, issued direct orders to each sheriff or what have you to do just that, then any who don't should be jailed for contempt. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Not following the law as written as a public servant should be a jailable offense. Not for just CCW's. This. If the Supreme Court were to find that elected officials must issue a CCW, issued direct orders to each sheriff or what have you to do just that, then any who don't should be jailed for contempt. What to do with Police department employees who do not mirror your enthusiasm? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:19:34 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
yes, but there's a problem with that when it comes to marriage licenses and CCW' permits. both are issued by "ELECTED" officials so re-assignment or termination doesn't work. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Refusing to do your job should be a grounds for re-assignment or termination. yes, but there's a problem with that when it comes to marriage licenses and CCW' permits. both are issued by "ELECTED" officials so re-assignment or termination doesn't work. Sure, then maybe the fix for this is to simply just get the government out of these areas altogether? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:20:13 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, because like Marriage Licenses, they shouldn't exist. Someone has had their coffee this morning. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:20:49 AM EDT
[#24]
Quoted:
Let's count the hypocrites. I think the better question is why do we need a permit to exercise an explicitly stated constitutional right? I see no right to "marriage" in the constitution, and I see an amendment that says rights not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states. You fail at trolling. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:20:54 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What to do with Police department employees who do not mirror your enthusiasm? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not following the law as written as a public servant should be a jailable offense. Not for just CCW's. This. If the Supreme Court were to find that elected officials must issue a CCW, issued direct orders to each sheriff or what have you to do just that, then any who don't should be jailed for contempt. What to do with Police department employees who do not mirror your enthusiasm? Same thing. #It'sNotThatHardPeople |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:22:03 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, because like Marriage Licenses, they shouldn't exist. This guy gets it. There are quite a few Sheriffs who wont issue CCW's. None of them have gone to jail for it. Now who's the hypocrites OP? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:24:59 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Refusing to do your job should be a grounds for re-assignment or termination. And if it is an elected official, should the local people handle it through the election process, recall, or/and impeachment. Or should the federal government swoop in and force the issue even when no federal law has been violated. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:27:03 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
What to do with Police department employees who do not mirror your enthusiasm? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not following the law as written as a public servant should be a jailable offense. Not for just CCW's. This. If the Supreme Court were to find that elected officials must issue a CCW, issued direct orders to each sheriff or what have you to do just that, then any who don't should be jailed for contempt. What to do with Police department employees who do not mirror your enthusiasm? Contempt of the Supreme Court? You do the same as with any other government employee or elected official in this hypothetical, and throw them in jail until they resign or comply. It's not a complicated situation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:27:29 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It really is that simple. Why are people losing their shit over this? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
That depends. Did a court order you to do it after you refused? And did you then refuse to obey the order? If so, then yes. You should be jailed for contempt for disobeying the order. Are you people still barking at this cloud? It really is that simple. Why are people losing their shit over this? Feels |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:28:15 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They shouldn't exist, but since they do, refusal to issue should be a jailable offense. Much like the current marriage license shenanigans in KY That is a clear cut case of civil disobedience, IMO a rebellion against the overreach of of the USSC. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:28:27 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Feels Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
That depends. Did a court order you to do it after you refused? And did you then refuse to obey the order? If so, then yes. You should be jailed for contempt for disobeying the order. Are you people still barking at this cloud? It really is that simple. Why are people losing their shit over this? Feels feelz > realz A lot of people here, especially in other threads, are sounding an awful lot like crybaby "social justice warriors". 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:30:08 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Contempt of the Supreme Court? You do the same as with any other government employee or elected official in this hypothetical, and throw them in jail until they resign or comply. It's not a complicated situation. It would be contempt of the trial court that issued the direct order (consistent with the appellate decision(s)). But yes, that's how it works. Defy a court order. Go to jail for contempt. Doesn't matter what the order is - mow you lawn, pay your child support, issue a license. Makes no difference. Hard concept, I know. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:31:06 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No, because like Marriage Licenses, they shouldn't exist. Agreed, but they do, so yes, there should be legal repercussions. I like your thought process, OP. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:31:20 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
feelz > realz A lot of people here, especially in other threads, are sounding an awful lot like crybaby "social justice warriors". These are the same people who think SCOTUS is going to save us from illegal immigrant anchor babies. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:33:32 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It would be contempt of the trial court that issued the direct order (consistent with the appellate decision(s)). But yes, that's how it works. Defy a court order. Go to jail for contempt. Doesn't matter what the order is - mow you lawn, pay your child support, issue a license. Makes no difference. Hard concept, I know. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Contempt of the Supreme Court? You do the same as with any other government employee or elected official in this hypothetical, and throw them in jail until they resign or comply. It's not a complicated situation. It would be contempt of the trial court that issued the direct order (consistent with the appellate decision(s)). But yes, that's how it works. Defy a court order. Go to jail for contempt. Doesn't matter what the order is - mow you lawn, pay your child support, issue a license. Makes no difference. Hard concept, I know. Thank you for the clarification. You are, of course, absolutely right on the technical details, but the outcome is (and should be) the exact same. I don't get why some people are having so much trouble with this. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:41:21 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Thank you for the clarification. You are, of course, absolutely right on the technical details, but the outcome is (and should be) the exact same. I don't get why some people are having so much trouble with this. A combination of their lack of understanding of civics, and their disagreement with SCOTUS decisions, with a healthy sprinkling of religion. In other words, it's pretty much a waste of time to argue with them on the Internet. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:48:47 AM EDT
[#37]
Is refusing to issue marriage permits a jailable offense?
Well then, there's your answer. Refusing to issue liquor licenses should also now be a jailable offense.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:50:31 AM EDT
[#38]
Yes.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:50:59 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A combination of their lack of understanding of civics, and their disagreement with SCOTUS decisions, with a healthy sprinkling of religion. In other words, it's pretty much a waste of time to argue with them on the Internet. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Thank you for the clarification. You are, of course, absolutely right on the technical details, but the outcome is (and should be) the exact same. I don't get why some people are having so much trouble with this. A combination of their lack of understanding of civics, and their disagreement with SCOTUS decisions, with a healthy sprinkling of religion. In other words, it's pretty much a waste of time to argue with them on the Internet. Indeed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:51:44 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think the better question is why do we need a permit to exercise an explicitly stated constitutional right? I see no right to "marriage" in the constitution, and I see an amendment that says rights not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states. You fail at trolling. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Let's count the hypocrites. I think the better question is why do we need a permit to exercise an explicitly stated constitutional right? I see no right to "marriage" in the constitution, and I see an amendment that says rights not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states. You fail at trolling. You fail at what RIGHT means. The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. That IS in the Constitution. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 9:55:47 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I like the way this guy thinks Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
No, because like Marriage Licenses, they shouldn't exist. I like the way this guy thinks |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 10:04:31 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'll go with this. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
No, because like Marriage Licenses, they shouldn't exist. I'll go with this. Me too. (I'll have to change my vote though )
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 10:06:43 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Refusing to do your job should be a grounds for re-assignment or termination. "Just Following Orders." |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 10:13:07 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"Just Following Orders." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Refusing to do your job should be a grounds for re-assignment or termination. "Just Following Orders." Not sure where you are trying to lead this one... |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 10:15:02 AM EDT
[#45]
Yes, because guns are in the constitution and marrying who you're butt fucking isn't.
ETA: Oh, and FPNI. Troll. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 10:15:20 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
"Just Following Orders." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Refusing to do your job should be a grounds for re-assignment or termination. "Just Following Orders." Yes, doing your job and not violating rights is tantamount to the Nazi extermination of millions. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 10:17:33 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes, because guns are in the constitution and marrying who you're butt fucking isn't. ETA: Oh, and FPNI. Troll. You don't have enough emanations from your penumbra to understand, bro. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 10:22:22 AM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You fail at what RIGHT means. The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. That IS in the Constitution. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Let's count the hypocrites. I think the better question is why do we need a permit to exercise an explicitly stated constitutional right? I see no right to "marriage" in the constitution, and I see an amendment that says rights not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states. You fail at trolling. You fail at what RIGHT means. The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. That IS in the Constitution. Then everything can be argued to be a right. Ridiculous. That's a bullshit interpretation that creates yet another catch all for the federal government to constantly expand its power. If the federal government declares something a right, they then use incorporation to impose their will upon the states. This lys completely in the face of our constitutional foundation which called for a federal government with limited powers, strong protections for the states, and a very limited judiciary that has increased it's power through fiat. The powers not delegated to the federal government are reserved to the states. If marriage is a right, it's one that is regulated by the states, NOT the federal government. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 10:27:00 AM EDT
[#49]
I'd be ok with that if the law states that the chief or sheriff is obligated to issue them and he/she simply refuses.
Of course, in California the law is structured and worded suck that the issuing chief LEO has sole discretion over whether or not he/she will issue. It is "may issue" and requires "good cause". Most every department openly declares that "defense of self, family, and home" is NOT good cause. Fortunately, my Sheriff's policy is "shall issue". Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/4/2015 10:27:44 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
A combination of their lack of understanding of civics, and their disagreement with SCOTUS decisions, with a healthy sprinkling of religion. In other words, it's pretty much a waste of time to argue with them on the Internet. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Thank you for the clarification. You are, of course, absolutely right on the technical details, but the outcome is (and should be) the exact same. I don't get why some people are having so much trouble with this. A combination of their lack of understanding of civics, and their disagreement with SCOTUS decisions, with a healthy sprinkling of religion. In other words, it's pretty much a waste of time to argue with them on the Internet. Fun time-waster, though. Beats sitting here bored out of my mind, waiting to work. 
|
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
