Getting worked up about an actual violation of your rights is completely understandable and I am all for that. Getting worked up about a bill proposed in some other state that has a snowball's chance in hell of becoming a law, not so much.Originally Posted by Sinfix_15
I fear that ignoring the constitution will become popular. Lord knows we should all be aware of the danger of popularity.
And as I said, if you feel posting about every incident or proposal anywhere in the country no matter how isolated or minor it is will help alleviate that situation, then go for it. If you want I can tell you about an unconstitutional bylaw that was proposed at my HOA meeting last week. Then you can send out the alarm and warn everyone of their freedoms being further under attack.
I post misc rights violations in this thread when i read them, usually takes approximately 3 seconds of my time to do so, i assume it would take around the same amount of time to click the X if these are things you're not interested in reading.
I actually don't read most of the links you post for that reason but occasionally I do. I imagine you will continue to post them, which is fine, and I will continue to call them out when I find them to be paranoid or inconsequential. It's the ciiiiircle of liiiiiiiife (Elton John voice)!
Elton John.... you fag! (gotta make use of that word while it's still legal).
You also misuse the term paranoid.
Feel free to tell me how wrong I was when it becomes illegal for you to call me a fag. I will bow to your foresight and publicly state your superiority on the issue.
Noted.
The SCOTUS disagrees with both of you.
Michigan Dep't of State Police v. Sitz
Any chance you know where this case is from? I need that to get more specific info. As I said though, the belligerent attitude could easily be articulated by police for probable cause.
I'm guessing you didn't read that whole thing, did you? Because the language of that decision very much agrees with me.
I don't see any probable cause in this video, and had he been arrested, that department would have a shitstorm on its hands.
In summary, we hold that stops for brief questioning routinely conducted at permanent checkpoints are consistent with the Fourth Amendment, and need not be authorized by warrant. [Footnote 19] The principal protection of Fourth
Page 428 U. S. 567
Amendment rights at checkpoints lies in appropriate limitations on the scope of the stop. See Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. at 392 U. S. 24-27; United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, 422 U.S. at 422 U. S. 881-882. We have held that checkpoint searches are constitutional only if justified by consent or probable cause to search. United States v. Ortiz, 422 U. S. 891 (1975). And our holding today is limited to the type of stops described in this opinion. "[A]ny further detention . . . must be based on consent or probable cause." United States v. Brignoni-Ponce, supra at 422 U. S. 882.None of the defendants in these cases argues that the stopping officers exceeded these limitations.
Hope that clears things up for you.
Does the belligerent attitude apply to probable cause for suspecting police of criminal activity? If so, can i flee for my safety the next time a cop raises his voice at me?
I'm confused by how expecting your rights to be honored is belligerent. what is the point of having rights if expecting your rights to be honored is cause for your rights to be ignored. If you do not submit to having your rights ignored, your rights can be ignored based on your refusal to have them ignored? Can you please help me to understand this circle jerk of logic.
Who wrote that?
I was basing my response off the syllabus.
Before we go any further, is there any disagreement on the Constitutionality of a checkpoint?
Some checkpoints...
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/fede.../543/case.html
So... The DOJ was involved in some of the anti-Zimmerman protests.
The PJ Tatler » Newly Released Documents Detail the Department of Justice’s Role in Organizing Trayvon Martin Protests
Can anyone explain why the DOJ would help organize protests against a man that hadn't been charged (at that time) with a crime, let alone a federal one???
Long answer short, the DOJ wasn't organizing any protests. Involved in /= Organizing.
The CRS was set up by the civil rights act in the 60s. It's purpose is to resolve racially charged community conflicts, like the one this case created, not to organize protests, not to be judge and Jury.
It's like asking why do cashiers take my money when I go to buy groceries. That's what they do. Nothing nefarious involved.
Be wary of any website who uses hyperbole like "The EPA wants to regulate how cold your beer can be" and passes it off as news. LOL.
I have to admit that filtering the news is becoming a rather tiresome chore. The level of disinformation at play by all sides is troubling.
Oh... Well that explains everythiiiiIiIIIIIIIIIIIIIIALL HAIL THE HYPNOTOAD!!!
Stands to reason though, Eric Holder and the DOJ have been on the up and up since day one of the most transparent administration ever.
Though CRS purports to spot and quell racial tensions nationwide before they arise, the documents obtained by Judicial Watch show the group actively worked to foment unrest, spending thousands of taxpayer dollars on travel and hotel rooms to train protestors throughout Florida.
Does it say what they were training protesters?
In the original link I posted... No.
I was under the impression you liked to research all the facts yourself and not be spoon-fed information. Guess I was wrong.
On a similar note. This was caught on tape.
Trayvongate: Newest Obama Scandal is 17 Months Old
http://www.businessinsider.com/nbc-a...-racist-2012-4
I do. I knew the answer. ;-)
Be wary of any website who uses hyperbole like "Why Aliens Might Be Living Among Us" or "Of Course Humans Will Kill Each Other In Space" in the sidebar.
LOL.
Ayo, lemme git dat ocean-front property uze wuz talkin 'bout in Arizona.
The truth is starting to come out:
Ex-Sanford police chief: Zimmerman probe 'taken away from us' - CNN.com
"Racing is life. Anything before or after is just waiting." - Steve McQueen
Be wary of any website who uses hyperbole like "In Zimmerman's trial, it's a jury of millions".
It is a jury of millions
Are you saying it's completely unfathomable that aliens are living among us? have you not seen men in black?
If that were the case, then "millions" should be dealing with only the facts presented in the courtroom. Not planning on which store they are going to loot in a day or two.
As a scientist I have completely studied this area and know more than anyone here. Here's what I think of your post
Math and science stuff supports the possibility of life on other planets, but since I'm not on those other planets... No way they'll ever figure out space travel.
I am deeply offended and i have to come forward and say that this particular post is the most insulting thing i have ever had said to me in my few years participating on this forum.If that were the case, then "millions" should be dealing with only the facts presented in the courtroom. Not planning on which store they are going to loot in a day or two.
As a scientist I have completely studied this area and know more than anyone here. Here's what I think of your post
Math and science stuff supports the possibility of life on other planets, but since I'm not on those other planets... No way they'll ever figure out space travel.
I would never hold my gun so improperly.
Theoretically speaking, given our limited space exploration, would it be a safe and logical conclusion to assume that any species capable of traveling to our planet would be vastly more intelligent than people on our planet?
Theoretically speaking, such a species would have to be void of liberalism to make such an endeavor... Thus would innately be more intelligent.
Not at all. 99% of the world today is FAR less intelligent than Aristotle was, but technology gives us access to far more knowledge.
The correct description for your alien species would be more technologically advanced, not more intelligent.
How do you figure?
It's almost impossible to say whether an alien would be more intelligent than a human because you're comparing human intelligence to alien intelligence. No one knows what alien intelligence is because we haven't studied it
Think of it this way. Our eyes process light in 3 different colors, red, green and blue. Everything we see is based on this. There's a species of butterfly that processes light in 15 different colors. It can see more colors than we see, but since we cant see those extra colors, we cant understand what they really are. That's like the difference between human intelligence and alien intelligence. We don't know how their brains process information. Or if they even process information at all.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
