Nice one 
"officer walking across the crosswalk talking on his phone" in video at 1:34

EEF:
"The LEO did not violate any law."
           My comment was my opinion in reference to LE not subject to the same laws as us "law abiding citizens" as it would have been a crime for us.
Why the double standard again.
Regardless "Legal possession of a firearm carry's with it responsibility"

Yes they recovered the firearm from that last officer whose car was taken IIRC.
SOURCE ?

Sorry but I don't recall the source. If you doubt it was recovered thats fine, it isn't something wroth arguing over.

BTW the cell phone ban while crossing the street is when someone is looking at their phone, not talking on it.

Again, I agree that the officer may have been negligent in the storage of his firearm but since there isn't much detail I think such a claim is premature.

In my opinion, several of the posts in this thread should have been prefaced with a statement along the lines of, "I am not a (subject matter expert/lawyer/etc), but in my opinion..."

Not trying to single anyone out with this comment, because this happens quite frequently, but when speaking about certain issues (safety-related, legal, etc., in particular), I am concerned that, without such caveats, there exists a real danger of spreading inaccurate information, to the detriment of the community.

I don't think anyone should rely on the advice from an anonymous post on the internet, but when someone makes a conscious effort to post about certain issues (i.e., safety-related, legal, etc), I personally believe that the individual has a duty to post responsibily, or explicitly state that he/she is simply stating an opinion, so as not to spread misleading or inaccurate information.

... again, this is just my opinion.

I would disagree, it's the readers responsobilty to apply due dillegemce when take it advice from the internet,

In my opinion, several of the posts in this thread should have been prefaced with a statement along the lines of, "I am not a (subject matter expert/lawyer/etc), but in my opinion..."

Not trying to single anyone out with this comment, because this happens quite frequently, but when speaking about certain issues (safety-related, legal, etc., in particular), I am concerned that, without such caveats, there exists a real danger of spreading inaccurate information, to the detriment of the community.

I don't think anyone should rely on the advice from an anonymous post on the internet, but when someone makes a conscious effort to post about certain issues (i.e., safety-related, legal, etc), I personally believe that the individual has a duty to post responsibily, or explicitly state that he/she is simply stating an opinion, so as not to spread misleading or inaccurate information.

... again, this is just my opinion.

I would disagree, it's the readers responsobilty to apply due dillegemce when take it advice from the internet,

I am not a lawyer, nor an expert in the field, but... Are you a lawyer? Or an expert in the field? Or is that just your personal opinion, belief, thought, assessment, assumption, attitude, conclusion, feeling, idea, impression, judgment, notion, point of view, sentiment, speculation, theory, view, conception, conjecture, estimation, guess, hypothesis, inclination, inference, persuasion, postulate, presumption, presupposition, supposition, surmise, suspicion, take, or thesis?



 

Everyone on the internet is an expert, at everything.  This site is no different.  Actually I take that back as a matter of fact 2AH has way more than its fair share and they have no qualms with pontificating. 

2AH should be different as we are not necessarily your run of the mill internet spot.  We share many commonalities that are unique to a certain subset of society.  We all live in Hawaii, enjoy shooting, supposedly want to further the positive outlook on firearms, firearm owners and the Second Ammendment, many know each other, yet if we look at this thread the amount of divisiveness is quite sad. 

Anyone who is a pretty reasonable person that is a firearm enthusiast would quickly disregard this website / forum in short order with just a small bit of reading here.  It happens with regularity.  Anyone wonder why new members don't stick around?  Because the playground bullies like to control their pulpit.  Pretty soon all 3 or 4 members will have their very own chat group to pat each other on the butts.  And I say chat group, because the amount of membership would not even qualify as a forum.

And yes, someone might actually be an attorney behind a screen name and not just playing one on the internet.

Everyone on the internet is an expert, at everything.  This site is no different.  Actually I take that back as a matter of fact 2AH has way more than its fair share and they have no qualms with pontificating. 

2AH should be different as we are not necessarily your run of the mill internet spot.  We share many commonalities that are unique to a certain subset of society.  We all live in Hawaii, enjoy shooting, supposedly want to further the positive outlook on firearms, firearm owners and the Second Ammendment, many know each other, yet if we look at this thread the amount of divisiveness is quite sad. 

Anyone who is a pretty reasonable person that is a firearm enthusiast would quickly disregard this website / forum in short order with just a small bit of reading here.  It happens with regularity.  Anyone wonder why new members don't stick around?  Because the playground bullies like to control their pulpit.  Pretty soon all 3 or 4 members will have their very own chat group to pat each other on the butts.  And I say chat group, because the amount of membership would not even qualify as a forum.

And yes, someone might actually be an attorney behind a screen name and not just playing one on the internet.

I suppose if you cared more than enough to just post your "accusations" and "complaints" you could contact the moderators/owners of the site (perhaps you already have) and work with and convince them to institute "rules" (aka "censorship") that would result in the site content being more to your liking and boosting the site membership and traffic by being whatever your version of a "politically correct" site would be, and without any nasty "divisiveness". I'm sure if everyone agreed and were "like-minded" on all the poltical and legal issues the "environment" would be much more "friendly" and "agreeable", you know, just like, say, the Hawaii state legislature where those attitudes and conditions prevail and we see so much being done to restore our rights. Maybe you could also convince them while you are at it to somehow make it possible for people not to be forced to read the threads and comments that they find "offensive" or "divisive" or "bullying" or whatever it is you object to that readers are now being forced to read. I'd like to hear your suggestions for the "rules" that would eliminate or minimize the appearance of (what you deem to be) "objectionable" material. Also, have you ever read the calguns.net politically- and legally-oriented threads/forums?

I suppose if you cared more than enough to just post your "accusations" and "complaints" you could contact the moderators/owners of the site (perhaps you already have) and work with and convince them to institute "rules" (aka "censorship") that would result in the site content being more to your liking and boosting the site membership and traffic by being whatever your version of a "politically correct" site would be, and without any nasty "divisiveness". I'm sure if everyone agreed and were "like-minded" on all the poltical and legal issues the "environment" would be much more "friendly" and "agreeable", you know, just like, say, the Hawaii state legislature where those attitudes and conditions prevail and we see so much being done to restore our rights. Maybe you could also convince them while you are at it to somehow make it possible for people not to be forced to read the threads and comments that they find "offensive" or "divisive" or "bullying" or whatever it is you object to that readers are now being forced to read. I'd like to hear your suggestions for the "rules" that would eliminate or minimize the appearance of (what you deem to be) "objectionable" material. Also, have you ever read the calguns.net politically- and legally-oriented threads/forums?

you just crossed the line, PP
surf was an internet SME since al gore invented the internet, he's entitiled to his opinion

you just crossed the line, PP
surf was an internet SME since al gore invented the internet, he's entitiled to his opinion

Hey mac. I don't have any problem at all with him/her expressing their opinions, nor anyone else's (of course I may, possibly vehemently, disagree with them), even if they are not lawyers or experts and even if they don't label their writing as "opinion" or whatever (I'm pretty sure that nothing I read anywhere was handed down from Odin, or Krishna, or Jehovah, or any other "god", but from a "mere" fallible human). In fact I seriously want to know what surf would have the rules be in order to create the forum he wants, or believes would be "better" or have more members, etc., and to eliminate what he finds objectionable (divisiveness", "bullying", etc.). Seriously. I hope (I'm "asking", without any intent to "bully") he/she gives us a detailed list of rules that would accomplish that goal. I'm truly curious. And if I'm one of those "divisive" or disagreeable or deplorable or whatever people who ends up being banned, so be it. I'm really curious what the "legal and activism" and "political" threads would read like were the "new rules" instituted. 

back to the topic.
Officer left his rifle in the car - got stolen - shame on him
whoever stole it shall be punished to the full extent of the law. no HOPE. no work furlough

back to the topic.
Officer left his rifle in the car - got stolen - shame on him
whoever stole it shall be punished to the full extent of the law. no HOPE. no work furlough

Police say the firearm in the car has also been recovered.

25-year-old Jonaven Mason of Makakilo was arrested, but has not been charged.
need more gun laws ? 

Police say the firearm in the car has also been recovered.

25-year-old Jonaven Mason of Makakilo was arrested, but has not been charged.
need more gun laws ? 

I guess he forgot to scratch of that 1 serial number that's on the rifle.

I would like to know how the rifle was stored.  As in was it just in a case in the trunk, or in a tool box type drawer that's attached to the vehicle so the guy had to pry it open.  Or LAPD style, locked in between the driver and passenger seat pointing up.

Police say the firearm in the car has also been recovered.

25-year-old Jonaven Mason of Makakilo was arrested, but has not been charged.
need more gun laws ? 

MOAR laws! Of course. How about a specific law that makes it illegal to steal an AR15 from an officers car.

 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

MOAR laws! Of course. How about a specific law that makes it illegal to steal an AR15 from an officers car.

He saw the weapon wasn't properly secured (evidenced by the fact he was able to take possession of it).  He had no intention of stealing the rifle.  He was merely securing it so some irresponsible youth didn't get their hands on it.   

He was just about to leave the house to turn it into the police department when the officers showed up at his front door, saving him from having to drive himself to the station.   

He saw the weapon wasn't properly secured (evidenced by the fact he was able to take possession of it).  He had no intention of stealing the rifle.  He was merely securing it so some irresponsible youth didn't get their hands on it.   

He was just about to leave the house to turn it into the police department when the officers showed up at his front door, saving him from having to drive himself to the station.   

Or he found it on the ground outside of his house.  Because it's still theft if he took it even though to property secure it.

Or he found it on the ground outside of his house. 

And, no doubt, someone stole his fingerprints and put them on the car the gun was stolen from.

You guys are forgetting what a nice guy he his, would never hurt anyone.