Wearing My Patch 1% Of The Time!
#51
Zach
#52
Bingo. There it is. Whenever I get or my Brothers get profiled and harassed, we document everything. Once johnny law is done violating my constitutional rights, all the paperwork gets turned over to my Club P. From there it goes to the COC lawyers.
Keep in mind that complaints against johnny go (or should go) into his personnel file. Enough complaints and something should happen to correct his errant behavior. Or his supervisor who is probably dictating how the traffic cop should do his job.
Keep in mind that complaints against johnny go (or should go) into his personnel file. Enough complaints and something should happen to correct his errant behavior. Or his supervisor who is probably dictating how the traffic cop should do his job.
Ride safe
#53
[quote=SgtMic;6208755]That's the most ignorant thing I've read all day. I use the term ignorant due to the fact that you don't have a ****ing clue.
Who doesn't have a clue....Do you even know what a vanity plate is?
No more than a nickname for a personalized license plate.
My patches are not for vanity. I earned them and they mean a whole lot to me.
Isn't that exactly what I said...
All PHrs feel just the same way. They aren't bought or given away, you earn them and will do whatever necessary to keep them.
Thank you for your sacrifice and your service. But keep in mind that you aren't the only one to make sacrifices in combat and most folks in the civilian community could care less
You're ignorance around the wrong folks will get you an extremely painful education. One you won't forget.
This does not even warrant a reply.
Look, if you want to wear patches, wear patches. It's a personal thing and my feelings on it were stated in my original post which I stand by.
IMO, military awards and decorations belong on a military uniform or in a display case in the correct format and displayed according to current regulations.
Anything less is disrespectful to the uniform, the citations, and those who have been honored to receive them.
Have a nice day.
Who doesn't have a clue....Do you even know what a vanity plate is?
No more than a nickname for a personalized license plate.
My patches are not for vanity. I earned them and they mean a whole lot to me.
Isn't that exactly what I said...
All PHrs feel just the same way. They aren't bought or given away, you earn them and will do whatever necessary to keep them.
Thank you for your sacrifice and your service. But keep in mind that you aren't the only one to make sacrifices in combat and most folks in the civilian community could care less
You're ignorance around the wrong folks will get you an extremely painful education. One you won't forget.
This does not even warrant a reply.
Look, if you want to wear patches, wear patches. It's a personal thing and my feelings on it were stated in my original post which I stand by.
IMO, military awards and decorations belong on a military uniform or in a display case in the correct format and displayed according to current regulations.
Anything less is disrespectful to the uniform, the citations, and those who have been honored to receive them.
Have a nice day.
#55
is there a link to this video...would like to see it
#56
The majority of my patches are deployment patches that I bought to show where I have been for my country and what operations I have served on. I am proud of where I have been and what I have done for the US of A so that people can have the freedoms of all of the amendments including the 1st one. If they want to ticket me for that then what in the hell have all of us veterans been fighting for. It pisses me off that America is no longer the "Land of the Free" that it used to be. Take away freedoms + Pussification + F@#ked up government = the collapse of the greatest nation on earth and history repeats itself again. Rant over!
#57
Yes they are, which is why we had the "protest run" 2 months ago.
http://www.kingmandailyminer.com/mai...rticleID=34528
I know, I was there on the run...
http://www.kingmandailyminer.com/mai...rticleID=34528
I know, I was there on the run...
#59
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxQVS95EuZk
#60
There have been scattered instances of law enforcement stopping any/all riders wearing back patches. The assumption is that the action is aimed at gathering intel on certain well-known MCs and their support clubs. If a bust happens upon an individual rider, or even a group of riders, well, that's a little bonus.
Putting aside the constitutionality of stopping an individual who is doing nothing wrong, what appears to have happened all too often is that some jurisdictions are using pretty ridiculous standards to determine who to stop. At one location in Louisiana anyone with a patch was targeted; even Christian Motorcyclist Association riders were singled out. HOG patch - pull over; vet club - pull over; L2R, R2L patch - pull over; etc. ad nauseum.
As in nearly all cases of this sort the broad brush started with what some would think are needed and good intentions/actions. And in nearly all these cases the end result is that rights are violated, and those who commit the violations generally are not held responsible. And that is not how our country was formed, nor is it how it is supposed to work.
Addressing another comment I read in one of the links concerning the various Confederation of Club organizations - Most COCs will not allow LEO clubs to be members. There are exceptions to this, but they are just that - exceptions. Some seem to look at LEOs not being allowed as evidence of criminal intent. I'll present a small example of why I believe that dog won't hunt.
At a CoC meeting late last year a motorcycle rights lawyer addressed the gathering with information related to the type of stops/harassment that are the subject of this thread. If members of an LEO club were in attendance, and heard the information and strategy of the organization as it related to the stops, would there not be some sort of conflict of interest? Would they not be obligated to relay that information to their superiors?
Just a thought...
Putting aside the constitutionality of stopping an individual who is doing nothing wrong, what appears to have happened all too often is that some jurisdictions are using pretty ridiculous standards to determine who to stop. At one location in Louisiana anyone with a patch was targeted; even Christian Motorcyclist Association riders were singled out. HOG patch - pull over; vet club - pull over; L2R, R2L patch - pull over; etc. ad nauseum.
As in nearly all cases of this sort the broad brush started with what some would think are needed and good intentions/actions. And in nearly all these cases the end result is that rights are violated, and those who commit the violations generally are not held responsible. And that is not how our country was formed, nor is it how it is supposed to work.
Addressing another comment I read in one of the links concerning the various Confederation of Club organizations - Most COCs will not allow LEO clubs to be members. There are exceptions to this, but they are just that - exceptions. Some seem to look at LEOs not being allowed as evidence of criminal intent. I'll present a small example of why I believe that dog won't hunt.
At a CoC meeting late last year a motorcycle rights lawyer addressed the gathering with information related to the type of stops/harassment that are the subject of this thread. If members of an LEO club were in attendance, and heard the information and strategy of the organization as it related to the stops, would there not be some sort of conflict of interest? Would they not be obligated to relay that information to their superiors?
Just a thought...