|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:17:56 PM
|
|
|
relady
Posts: 1040
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Greater St. Louis Metro
Status: offline
|
quote:
You cannot hold a person indefintely with no charge. Russia did. China does. N. Korea probably does. I'm sure Iran does. We are shooting for the stars here in America.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:19:45 PM
|
|
|
jkdjr25
Posts: 757
Joined: 2/19/2008
From: Michigan
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: colliefan
quote:
You cannot hold a person indefintely with no charge. It's immoral. There is zero argument around that simple fact.
On a civilian charge this is true, but this is war.
Which does not negate the rule of law in this country. Either the law always applies or it never applies you don't get to cherry pick these matters.
_____________________________
I reject your reality and subsitute my own.- Adam Savage, Mythbusters
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:20:45 PM
|
|
|
relady
Posts: 1040
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Greater St. Louis Metro
Status: offline
|
quote:
reasonable cause. NO. It's PROBABLE cause, they cannot just run around willy nilly making up excuses to search people's cars. Nor should they be able to do that! And to use "you look nervous" as probably cause should be cause for concern for all of us.
quote:
Call the local police station and I think you'll be informed that it is perfectly acceptable and legal procedure... Uh, no. He's already consulted an attorney familiar with this particular municipalities' servants in blue and what they did to him was ILLEGAL. Had they actually hit him he could have pressed charges but they stopped short of that. They were verbally abusive and overstepped their authority. Of that we are sure.
Again, the Patriot Act has made this sort of disgusting behavior even more prevalent.
< Message edited by relady -- 6/12/2008 10:28:51 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:23:04 PM
|
|
|
tafkam
Posts: 2232
Joined: 9/23/2005
Status: offline
|
Fact: Police can search any car they stop. Period. And if the driver acts funny, or "nervous" or whatever, they make note of it and act accordingly.
My cousin is a cop and has told me that "acting nervous" is often times a sure giveaway that the situation needs to be looked into a little more closely.
Let me guess, you're not in favor of police roadside stops where they check your license out and look in your car....
_____________________________
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' - Ronald Reagan
Tafkam
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:23:50 PM
|
|
|
colliefan
Posts: 2585
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Raleigh, NC
Status: offline
|
quote:
Which does not negate the rule of law in this country. Either the law always applies or it never applies you don't get to cherry pick these matters.
The are NOT citizens and have NO rights as such; that is until this sorry decisions which has NO basis in law.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:24:33 PM
|
|
|
jkdjr25
Posts: 757
Joined: 2/19/2008
From: Michigan
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
Fact: Police can search any car they stop. Period. And if the driver acts funny, or "nervous" or whatever, they make note of it and act accordingly.
My cousin is a cop and has told me that "acting nervous" is often times a sure giveaway that the situation needs to be looked into a little more closely.
Let me guess, you're not in favor of police roadside stops where they check your license out and look in your car....
Not without probable cause. If they just pull me over for no reason and try to search my vehicle the first thing I'll ask to see is a warrant. I have rights as a citizen and I won't allow them to be trod upon.
_____________________________
I reject your reality and subsitute my own.- Adam Savage, Mythbusters
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:25:43 PM
|
|
|
relady
Posts: 1040
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Greater St. Louis Metro
Status: offline
|
quote:
Let me guess, you're not in favor of police roadside stops where they check your license out and look in your car.... Not a big fan, no. But I do understand why they sometimes do them to nab drunk drivers. We usually get advance notice of them and I just avoid them when i know where they will be.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:26:19 PM
|
|
|
tafkam
Posts: 2232
Joined: 9/23/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
If they just pull me over for no reason and try to search my vehicle the first thing I'll ask to see is a warrant. I have rights as a citizen and I won't allow them to be trod upon.
You're also quite likely to be arrested, but whatever gives you your kicks, I guess.....
_____________________________
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' - Ronald Reagan
Tafkam
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:27:05 PM
|
|
|
relady
Posts: 1040
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Greater St. Louis Metro
Status: offline
|
quote:
Not without probable cause. If they just pull me over for no reason and try to search my vehicle the first thing I'll ask to see is a warrant. I have rights as a citizen and I won't allow them to be trod upon. Thank you. And what the cops say aside, this is the law. They hate it, because they can't be bullies, but this is the law. I would NEVER let them physically search my car without a warrant.
although, obviously, they still don't play by the rules. I am sure that if my son had had someone with him they wouldn't have bothered. But since it would be his word against theirs, they were just looking to have some fun at his expense. Absolutely abhorrent, shameful behavior by those who are sworn to protect.
< Message edited by relady -- 6/12/2008 10:33:39 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:28:41 PM
|
|
|
jkdjr25
Posts: 757
Joined: 2/19/2008
From: Michigan
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: colliefan
quote:
Which does not negate the rule of law in this country. Either the law always applies or it never applies you don't get to cherry pick these matters.
The are NOT citizens and have NO rights as such; that is until this sorry decisions which has NO basis in law.
They do have basic human rights. Whether you like it or not that is a fact. Among those rights is to actually be told what you're being charged with if you are being held prisoner by the government for a crime.
If they are being held on U.S. soil, military bases on foreign soil apply, then our laws apply. As such they cannot be held indefinitely without charge. I'll say it again. The act of doing so is immoral and evil not to mention illegal and in violation of the Geneva Convention.
_____________________________
I reject your reality and subsitute my own.- Adam Savage, Mythbusters
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:29:35 PM
|
|
|
tafkam
Posts: 2232
Joined: 9/23/2005
Status: offline
|
This from a police officer:
A police officer can ask to search your vehicle and if he/she can articulate the reason for suspicion of illegal activity in the vehicle a search with or without permission can be done on the spot. The smell of marijuana is sufficient in most jurisdictions to justify the search.
While the US Constitution expressly forbids warrant-less searches, the US Supreme Court has allowed a certain leeway in the situation of motor vehicles.
The Court stated that since motor vesicles are so mobile and the evidence of criminal activity that may be present so easily disposed of, exigent circumstances exist allowing a police officer to do a warrant-less search.
_____________________________
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' - Ronald Reagan
Tafkam
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:29:53 PM
|
|
|
jkdjr25
Posts: 757
Joined: 2/19/2008
From: Michigan
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
quote:
If they just pull me over for no reason and try to search my vehicle the first thing I'll ask to see is a warrant. I have rights as a citizen and I won't allow them to be trod upon.
You're also quite likely to be arrested, but whatever gives you your kicks, I guess.....
And they would then be sued for several million dollars for violating my civil rights. Or aren't you familiar with the term "illegal search and seizure"?
_____________________________
I reject your reality and subsitute my own.- Adam Savage, Mythbusters
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:31:10 PM
|
|
|
relady
Posts: 1040
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Greater St. Louis Metro
Status: offline
|
quote:
You're also quite likely to be arrested, If you are respectful about asserting your rights, they won't arrest you without cause. They can, but they'd probably lose their jobs, so they won't. They can't just run around arresting people for asserting their rights. At least not yet, but apparently it wouldn't bother you much if they could. wow, scary.
quote:
Or aren't you familiar with the term "illegal search and seizure"? LOL, apparently not.
< Message edited by relady -- 6/12/2008 10:37:10 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:31:14 PM
|
|
|
tafkam
Posts: 2232
Joined: 9/23/2005
Status: offline
|
Don't take my word for it.. Call your local police precinct, or even a lawyers office, and ask about the legality of cops searching a stoped vehicle.
I guarantee you have no leg to stand on....
_____________________________
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' - Ronald Reagan
Tafkam
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:31:25 PM
|
|
|
jkdjr25
Posts: 757
Joined: 2/19/2008
From: Michigan
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
This from a police officer:
A police officer can ask to search your vehicle and if he/she can articulate the reason for suspicion of illegal activity in the vehicle a search with or without permission can be done on the spot. The smell of marijuana is sufficient in most jurisdictions to justify the search.
While the US Constitution expressly forbids warrant-less searches, the US Supreme Court has allowed a certain leeway in the situation of motor vehicles.
The Court stated that since motor vesicles are so mobile and the evidence of criminal activity that may be present so easily disposed of, exigent circumstances exist allowing a police officer to do a warrant-less search.
The smell of marijuana is indication that a crime is being commited and thus, probably cause enters the picture. Just searching someone for no reason is opening oneself for a lawsuit.
_____________________________
I reject your reality and subsitute my own.- Adam Savage, Mythbusters
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:33:18 PM
|
|
|
tafkam
Posts: 2232
Joined: 9/23/2005
Status: offline
|
Again, call the local police dept. Ask them.
I'm not crazy about it either, because I think some abuse it, but it is their prerogative....
_____________________________
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.' - Ronald Reagan
Tafkam
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:35:18 PM
|
|
|
jkdjr25
Posts: 757
Joined: 2/19/2008
From: Michigan
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
Again, call the local police dept. Ask them.
I'm not crazy about it either, because I think some abuse it, but it is their prerogative....
That they abuse it is precisely why it is NOT their perogative.
_____________________________
I reject your reality and subsitute my own.- Adam Savage, Mythbusters
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:35:58 PM
|
|
|
relady
Posts: 1040
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Greater St. Louis Metro
Status: offline
|
quote:
Call your local police precinct, or even a lawyers office My son HAS spoken to a lawyer, and yes, he does have a leg to stand on. I hope your cop friend doesn't lose his job illegally searching a car one day.
quote:
Just searching someone for no reason is opening oneself for a lawsuit. YES, and this is exactly what happened to my son. There was no reason to pull him over in the first place, he broke no laws, they never told him WHY they pulled him over, he had nothing in the car, they got abusive but let him go when they found nothing. But they did physically search his car without his consent OR a warrant, which is illegal.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:37:53 PM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 4458
Joined: 4/15/2005
Status: offline
|
Great.. Charge them all with complicity in regards to murder and execute them...
John
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:38:52 PM
|
|
|
relady
Posts: 1040
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Greater St. Louis Metro
Status: offline
|
Back to the subject.......jkdjr25 has it right. Either the rule of law applies to all or none. No cherrypicking.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:39:45 PM
|
|
|
Peter_Gunn
Posts: 423
Joined: 6/12/2008
Status: offline
|
Maybe I'm missing something and I don't know diddly about the Geneva Convention, but...it seems odd that foreigners...no, not just foreigners, but foreigners who want us dead...would have any constitutional rights whatsoever.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we were to be "detainees" in a Middle Eastern country, how would we be treated??? Would they even worry about our "basic human rights", much less our constitutional rights?
In my line of sight, it looks like another case of political correctness. God forbid that someone should be offended by being detained in a country club after trying to annihilate our country!
Have you heard the recent news story about the perks these creeps already have? At least one has even refused the offer to go home!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:43:35 PM
|
|
|
relady
Posts: 1040
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Greater St. Louis Metro
Status: offline
|
quote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we were to be "detainees" in a Middle Eastern country, how would we be treated??? Would they even worry about our "basic human rights", much less our constitutional rights? Ummm, no, we would not be treated very well. But one of the things that America has always touted as making it great is that we don't treat people that way. We claim the high road, but seems we don't want to walk it when the going gets tough.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:44:26 PM
|
|
|
cow451
Posts: 3904
Joined: 5/6/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tafkam
Again, POWs are not protected by our Constitution....
Taf you are correct, but for the wrong reason. The administration does not call them POW's. That was a strategic decision made in order to avoid the Geneva Convention. By making this colossal blunder, the admin then had to invent this tribunal system, thereby throwing open the door for lawyers ready to get some headlines.
A significant factor in the Court's ruling is that we've had these guys for up to six years with little due process. The ruling doesn't completely undo the tribunals, but holds the administration accountable. And this administration has not been one for accountability.
_____________________________
Wenn Sie so intelligent sind, warum Sie hier sind?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:46:36 PM
|
|
|
relady
Posts: 1040
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Greater St. Louis Metro
Status: offline
|
As usual, Cow nailed it.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Supreme Court Gets It Right - 6/12/2008 10:48:46 PM
|
|
|
colliefan
Posts: 2585
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Raleigh, NC
Status: offline
|
quote:
They do have basic human rights
Look at how they have been treated at Gitmo; Islamic food. Korans, Prayer Rugs. All their needs.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
