Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Yeager on September 14, 2007, 01:44:19 PM
-
thats right!
Old George, through his lackies in the FBI, is telling me I have to dress in accordance with regulations designed to make it more difficult to rob a bank by removing my 1st amendmant right to dress however I want to. For instance.....not wearing a hat and sunglasses makes it more difficult to rob a bank so I am supposed to take my hat off when I enter a bank.
This is an assault on my core rights as protected in the 1st amendmant. Everyone knows if you outlaw hats and sunglasses in banks, only outlaws in banks will wear hats and sunglasses
:confused:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003883943_bankrobberies14m0.html
-
I'll give up my hat and sunglasses when they pry them off my cold dead head.
-
i take my hat off anyways. i was just always taught to removehats when entering public buildings.
-
So, You are saying that when one agent of the FBI says something, he is speaking directly for the President… It is time replace the tinfoil hat! It has absorbed all of the control rays that it can.
-
Originally posted by C(Sea)Bass
i take my hat off anyways. i was just always taught to removehats when entering public buildings.
What do you do with the propeller?
-
Do you mean Amendment?;)
-
hehe, banks already have the ability to require confirmation of identities, they want the Feds to make it a law so the Banks don't make their customers mad.
Now, I'm just the opposite. I'd be Happy that the people that got so mad about the request left and went to my competitors shop. Leave them with the offended masses and I get the customers that want better security :)
-
Wow, you are truly being persecuted. :rolleyes:
-
i never wear a hat except if it gets real cold in the winter but that's just to keep my ears warm, also i never rob banks so it's a moot point for me.
how is a hat and sunglasses having anything to do with the right to speak out against the government?
-
Do you mean Amendment?
=====
damnit. did I spell it with a "a" again :cry
I should be able to dress how ever I want to as a expression of my individualityism as protected in the 1st amendmant :aok
-
Does the FBI actually expect criminals to follow the law?
-
Originally posted by Fishu
Does the FBI actually expect criminals to follow the law?
Well if all the good law-abiding people are not wearing hats and sunglasses, obviously anybody wearing a hat and sunglasses in a bank is there to rob it.
-
I wear a 1/2 helmet while riding my Fatboy, Ca. law requires a DOT approved helmet.
I'm going to the bank, Washington Mutual, later today.
I always wear my helmet inside but I do take off my sunglasses. We'll see what happens.
It's strange though...
State law requires me to wear a helmet but the feds seem to have decided that there are places I can't.
The juxtaposition of this situation piques the Libertarian feelings hiden deep within me.
It's ok though, just as long as they stay out of my bedroom....
oops, too late :huh
-
Originally posted by indy007
Well if all the good law-abiding people are not wearing hats and sunglasses, obviously anybody wearing a hat and sunglasses in a bank is there to rob it.
You'd think it'd be kind of late to worry about that by then and there would be already some other clues to the robbers intentions. How about making it illegal to shout "THIS IS A ROBBERY!" upon entering a bank? Oh yeah.. that one was already illegal. The system seems to work already as it is.
-
Originally posted by Yeager
Do you mean Amendment?
=====
damnit. did I spell it with a "a" again :cry
I should be able to dress how ever I want to as a expression of my individualityism as protected in the 1st amendmant :aok
:lol
-
What about wearing a wig?
-
Originally posted by Fishu
You'd think it'd be kind of late to worry about that by then and there would be already some other clues to the robbers intentions. How about making it illegal to shout "THIS IS A ROBBERY!" upon entering a bank? Oh yeah.. that one was already illegal. The system seems to work already as it is.
Don't spoil our delusions!
-
What if your like me and a helmet is required at all times, even when sitting or walking.
-
Please reference to the section in the First Amendment that you are referring to, along with the legal support that decision was based on ;)
-
Why would you wear a hat and sunglasses in a bank anyway??:confused:
-
Originally posted by RAIDER14
Why would you wear a hat and sunglasses in a bank anyway??:confused:
So the camera don't get a good look at yer mug when you rob the bank, duh. :p
-
Originally posted by RAIDER14
Why would you wear a hat and sunglasses in a bank anyway??:confused:
Maybe because the cameras don't like the glare from his bald head and he needs the bifocals to find the teller. You ARE blond aren't you. :huh
-
Originally posted by myelo
What do you do with the propeller?
OUCH! Coca Cola burns when blowing it through the nose
:rofl
-
Boy, that'll be a REAL stinker for bad hair days.
-
Yeager,
Dude...
Since when is the clothing you wear in and on the property of a private business considered protected free speech? Last I heard, banks and any other business can refuse service to anyone they want.
I admit it's a little strange that the feds are involved but this doesn't seem like a freedom of speech issue to me. The feds are required to take a certain amount of action to protect banks, and as private businesses there simply don't seem to be any constitutional protections involved.
Not only that, try entering any government facility wearing clothing considered threatening, offensive, or lewd. Guess what - not constitutionally protected. You can stand outside wearing your hat and sunglasses all day. As soon as you enter a facility that has specific security requirements that are significantly hampered by certain clothing choices, suddenly a dress code applies.
You might as well argue that your 2nd amendment right to bear arms is being trampled by you not being able to carry a loaded shotgun into that same bank, or into your city mayor's office for that matter.
Yea some things are going too far (such as the harassment photographers and tourists are getting when taking innocent photographs of public places, and the illegal arrests being made of people who videotape or photograph the public actions of uniformed police officers) but this one isn't one of them IMO.
-
Originally posted by C(Sea)Bass
What if your like me and a helmet is required at all times, even when sitting or walking.
Ah, so you DO wear one of those hockey helmets and ride the short bus :)
-
Originally posted by LePaul
Ah, so you DO wear one of those hockey helmets and ride the short bus :)
I like the shortbus, it has yummy windows:p
-
Haven't there been laws in place for a while now, barring people without shirts or wearing rollerskates from entry or service?
-
Originally posted by moot
Haven't there been laws in place for a while now, barring people without shirts or wearing rollerskates from entry or service?
Of course there has. Any quality restaurant will also deny you entry if you walk in dressed as a bum. The simple fact is Banks are private property. They wont let you in if you try banking in speedos while barefoot so whats the difference?
-
I won't mind taking off hat/shades in bank as long as Muslims aren't allowed to have their driver's license pictures taken with veil/headdress on. That said, I work on bank security systems, amongst other things, and a LOT of the banks where you see a camera behind each teller window, have it zoomed such that your face takes up 1/3 of the picture seen on other end, usually at a monitoring center in another state---without the hat, etc, they can fax/email accurate pictures of the would-be thief to the cops in a minutes or 2..WITH the hat, etc....not so much
-
I've always thought that people who wear hats indoors are big handsomehunkes anyways.
-
Just when you think the Feds have done everything that can possibly set off the "Stupid Alarms"...........they always top it.
This would be over the top in hilarious here in Texas.
Just yesterday I witnessed around 20 bank robber suspects in the local bank, going by these standards. :)
Is it time to start selling Tricky Dicky masks on eBay?
Picture this scenario.................
Two armed men are about to enter a bank with robbery on their mind.
Rushing to the door one reachs out and stops the other just before entering.
"Dude, take off your hat. It`s illegal you know".
Stupidity in it`s finest hour.
-
What amazes me is the people that decide to interpret there freedoms as only coming from the Bill or Rights. Why in gods name would you volunteerily automatically toss out countless freedoms like that....unless you know, you're a socialist.
The banks as private business should be able to put whatever conditions they want on people entering their private property.
The government passing a law telling you what clothing you can were when going to someone else's private property is freaking atrocious, and bizzare. You know who else tells you what to wear? That's right a freaking NANNY, literally! Jeebus.
-
Govt insures the money in these banks, and gets its agents kilt trying to catch these salamanders
-
The thing about it is......what would it do in reality to prevent or catch a bank robber?
Nothing! Does anyone honestly believe that a bank robber and or robbers would actualy give a crap about a law not allowing hats and shades?
I certainly hope noone is that naive.
What it would do in reality is be one more nail in the coffin of the average Joe.
One more thing controlling your everyday life and would do nothing to hinder the criminal in any shape, form or fashion . (Pun intended :))
-
Originally posted by Jackal1
The thing about it is......what would it do in reality to prevent or catch a bank robber?
Nothing! Does anyone honestly believe that a bank robber and or robbers would actualy give a crap about a law not allowing hats and shades?
I certainly hope noone is that naive.
What it would do in reality is be one more nail in the coffin of the average Joe.
One more thing controlling your everyday life and would do nothing to hinder the criminal in any shape, form or fashion . (Pun intended :))
Teller could hit hold-up as afore-mentioned salamander enters bank, which give police an extra 3 or so minutes to catch him
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Govt insures the money in these banks, and gets its agents kilt trying to catch these salamanders
So therefore they should be allowed to treat you and every other law abiding citizen like children?
-
Originally posted by Thrawn
So therefore they should be allowed to treat you and every other law abiding citizen like children?
But it's the Canadian way!!:confused:
-
Originally posted by Maverick
But it's the Canadian way!!:confused:
Geez, we aren't the borg...yet.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
But it's the Canadian way!!:confused:
Maverick..u spoutin like Ripsnort uszed tew.
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Teller could hit hold-up as afore-mentioned salamander enters bank, which give police an extra 3 or so minutes to catch him
Teller can hit hold-up when someone enters wearing a Tricky Dicky mask also.
Usualy makes absolutely no difference whatsoever. The only ones who ever gets caught in this manner or the occasional brain dead. A bank robber could give a rat`s *** how many stupid rules/laws you make up that only hampers the public, not them.
The ones that know what they are doing know the banks top to bottom before the robbery attempt.
On the other hand, if this was tried in Texas, the teller should apply Tuffskin to their punching finger for the first few weeks of any such BS. She/he would need it. After that time such alarms would be treated casualy and suspected another false alarm.
In the meantime the Fed boys would have took another step in total control and lack of freedom for the citizen. It`s ridiculously stupid. It`s also see through.
-
Originally posted by SirLoin
Maverick..u spoutin like Ripsnort uszed tew.
Nope, I just had experiance with Canadian customs. In 1986 they were like our airline security is now.
-
Originally posted by C(Sea)Bass
I like the shortbus, it has yummy windows:p
(http://www.hereinreality.com/more_funny_pics/albums/userpics/10001/pimp_school_bus~0.jpg)
What do you mean by yummy windows? :confused:
-
Originally posted by Jackal1
Teller can hit hold-up when someone enters wearing a Tricky Dicky mask also.
Usualy makes absolutely no difference whatsoever. The only ones who ever gets caught in this manner or the occasional brain dead. A bank robber could give a rat`s *** how many stupid rules/laws you make up that only hampers the public, not them.
The ones that know what they are doing know the banks top to bottom before the robbery attempt.
On the other hand, if this was tried in Texas, the teller should apply Tuffskin to their punching finger for the first few weeks of any such BS. She/he would need it. After that time such alarms would be treated casualy and suspected another false alarm.
In the meantime the Fed boys would have took another step in total control and lack of freedom for the citizen. It`s ridiculously stupid. It`s also see through.
It's just an example of "feel good" legislation designed to make it look as if the legislature was really doing something instead of nothing.
If the bank robbers were concerned about breaking laws, they wouldn't be robbing banks, a somewhat illegal activity in itself.
-
HOW can ya say it doesnt make any difference if the hold-up alarm can be fired as the guy walks in the door, instead of waiting until he goes thru line and hands teller the note? Perhaps some chithole towns in Texas (prolly peso's ANYway:D ), but for the vast majority of banks, it makes a damn big difference in catching the guy or not
-
I don't mind my hat or sunglasses even though i think some of you are overeacting, i can see where your going. As long as i can take my 380. semi auto in i'm cool though. Gotta have my thong while banking too. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by bj229r
HOW can ya say it doesnt make any difference if the hold-up alarm can be fired as the guy walks in the door, instead of waiting until he goes thru line and hands teller the note? Perhaps some chithole towns in Texas (prolly peso's ANYway:D ), but for the vast majority of banks, it makes a damn big difference in catching the guy or not
LOL I don`t think you can believe it does actualy make a difference. Like I said, they can hit the button when a Tricky Dicky adorned robber walks through the door also. The robbers, all but the brain dead knows this. Makes not one bit of difference. Robbers could care less how many stupid, touchy feely laws is on the books. Here`s a hint. Criminals are not known to be concerned with the law.
The only, the very only thing that such BS will and can do is chip at your everyday personal life and put more control over said life to some power other than the people.
If such stupidity ifs freely allowed, what`s next? Only government approved attire in any public place? Ready for the numbers to be tattooed on ?
It`s a no-brainer.
-
Originally posted by Jackal1
LOL I don`t think you can believe it does actualy make a difference. Like I said, they can hit the button when a Tricky Dicky adorned robber walks through the door also. The robbers, all but the brain dead knows this. Makes not one bit of difference. Robbers could care less how many stupid, touchy feely laws is on the books. Here`s a hint. Criminals are not known to be concerned with the law.
The only, the very only thing that such BS will and can do is chip at your everyday personal life and put more control over said life to some power other than the people.
If such stupidity ifs freely allowed, what`s next? Only government approved attire in any public place? Ready for the numbers to be tattooed on ?
It`s a no-brainer.
Who the F cares WHAT the robber thinks?--time doesn't enter into that. If cops have extra 3-4 minutes to respond, to a BANK ROBBERY, not some domestic dispute, etc, the chances of snagging said crook heap much better. Now if the guy is a master of disguise, puts on Groucho nose and glasses....
-
Originally posted by bj229r
Who the F cares WHAT the robber thinks?
Evidently not the morons that came up with this senseless BS. :)
The robber is the one it is supposed to control..which it will not because a bank robber doesn`t really give a rat`s *** how many moronic laws that we allow to be put on the books. It doesn`t pertain to their chosen occupation. It`s a feel gooder for the naive. It would, however, confuse, hinder and disrupt the average Joe`s normal, everyday life and put one more chip out the old people`s control dept.
You can also believe that any bank robber that isn`t flat lined in the upstairs dept. knows the response time way before entering the bank. It amounts to nada, zilch, zippo.
respond, to a BANK ROBBERY, not some domestic dispute
Their time would be more well spent responding to the domestic dispute since that is one of the most violent areas that most cops deal with.
Within 2 to 3 weeks of enactment of such law the button would have the enamel coating wore off of it from false alarms. After that time such panic alerts would be treated as such, a false alarm. Then it would be radio calls back and forth with confirmation phone calls, etc. Three minutes would be left biting the dust. It`s El Stupido. :)