Instead of confronting one person that obviously disagree's with you. You could join the NRA or a gun club and an atv club to support the things that you enjoy. It'll be more fun than arguing with someone that won't get your point. Also make sure you vote when your 18, for people who support your views.

 

The positive point in this discussion is that we have a 16 year old fine young American who hasn't bought the liberal brainwashing he's bathed in through his years in outcome-based public education and leftist media bombardment. Hang in there Blue Blaster, there are plenty of nuts out there, who only need the light of truth shone on them to expose their ill-conceived agendas. Yes, the price of liberty is eternal vigilance, but sleep soundly. They are seen mostly for what they are. We are in the majority. [img]i/expressions/face-icon-small-wink.gif[/img] Shady

 

Oops, Eigerman, for some reason I called you Blue Blaster-------sorry!

 

Everyone should read the book "Unintended Consequences" by John Ross... you will all appreciate it. I agree with the others, trying to talk to the guy is useless. Obviously he has an aversion to the concept of personal responsibility and the rights that were defined within the Constitution. I think that anyone that tries to infringe upon the Constitution (like all anti-gun, pro-censorship, freedom-stipping groups) should be deported, if nothing else.


"From my cold, dead hands." -- Charlton Heston

 

AlaskaYFM, I agree that there should be some kind of consequences for people or groups that try to under mine the Constitution. They try to twist the words to fit their own agenda.

 

Everyone is right dont waste your time with a retard. YOU now what im against people that try to push thing on other people like these man is doing. If he doesn't like it get out of the USA. Dont try to push someone to not do something you love to do. THE HOME OF THE FREE AND THE PROUD THE USA. THANK GOD I LIVE HERE. P.S. I'M READY TO RIDE

 

I'm the webmaster of billstclair.com. I offered Mark Ferran a directory to use for his writings because I thought they were valuable. I don't agree with everything he writes, heck, I don't even agree (later) with everything I write, but I think his head is generally in the right place. And he has legal training, which makes him a good, and rare, person to have on your side.

I think that Eigerman17 has misinterpreted Mr. Ferran's writings. First off, the "End Baseball Violence" piece was satire. Mr. Ferran is a gun owner, and a more careful reading of his ATV stuff shows that he believes that people have the right to be armed and that they are justified in using those arms to defend their person and property. Mr. Ferran participates in the SCOPENY Yahoo mailing list. SCOPE is a strongly pro-second-amendment group working hard to preserve the right to keep and bear arms for New York residents. ( http://scopeny.org/ )

As far as I can tell from reading his stuff, Mr. Ferran does not want to take away your ATVs. He does, however, want you to respect private property. If you want to ride your ATV on someone's privately-owned land, you need to get the landowners permission. If you ride there without that permission, you should not be surprised to encounter the landowner, shotgun in hand, demanding that you leave.

 

Like i said when i first posted this i did not read most of the baseball bat essay, no where near enough to even realize it was a satire. So sorry if i made it seem he was against guns. However i do not agree that people should be able to use force to remove an atv rider from their property. I think the use of deadly force( thats what it seems your talking about because you said he wants people to be able to arm themselves against these "horrible" atv riders) is not right for this matter unless the private land owners life is in jeopardy. Deadly force should only be used when someones life is in danger. Now Bill St.Clair this is not a defensive respose directed towards you because i know all you did was better interpret his writings and present them to the rest of us.

 

If you read Mr. Ferran's essay more closely, I think you'll discover that he is not saying that you may shoot an ATV rider or even point your gun at him just because he refuses to leave your property. You may, however, be in possession of a rifle, shotgun, or (legally licensed and registered) handgun, and if the ATV rider refuses to leave your property, you may arrest him for trespass. If the ATV rider attacks you, for example by attempting to run you over, then you may defend yourself by stopping him with whatever force is necessary. I don't remember all the details off the top of my head, but Mr. Ferran is very careful, in my opinion, in his interpretation of New York state law. The problem he is attempting to solve is that landowners have been prosecuted for simply being armed while telling ATV riders to leave their property. Personally, I consider NOT being armed in this situation to be foolhardy. And I certainly don't expect landowners to admit all passers by. The right to deny use is part of property ownership. Asking permission before using private property is an ATV rider's responsibility.

 

Why the hell not? Trespassing is trespassing!!! If I catch someone on my land that knowingly and willfully trespassed they are going to be in a world of hurt!!!