Posted on 11/21/2013 5:45:52 PM PST by kiryandil
I heard someone this week say something like; the American people commit on average of 2 felonies a week.
The prosecution has to prove:
1. He had criminal intent.
2. He made the illegal modification for illegal purposes.
3. If this car was previously owned, prove the mod was made by the present owner.
How does a prosecutor prove any of this? Good luck.
“They pulled over the driver for speeding, but then troopers noticed several wires running to the back of the car. Those wires then led them directly to a hidden compartment.”
Since I don’t think that “wires” are necessary to hide drugs, maybe he was wiring it for an external drive to store music files to play, or something like that.
Yes, of course. They are taking ALL our freedoms, money and privacy because 1% of the population is addicted to $100/month (real value) worth of chemicals.
The percentage of addicts has not changed since the WOD began. It is most likely genetic and these mentally ill people are not influenced by any laws.
These addicts steal $10,000/month worth of property to buy $100 worth of drugs and hand it to gangbanger dealers. Maybe 1% are caught and then we pay $60k+ for prison until they get out and start immediately using again.
Even without counting the incredible cost of pointless law enforcement and prison, it would be far cheaper for society to give every addict free drugs, treatment and a place to sleep.
Nope. Drug users have no pull with the powers that be. It is the drug warriors who have profited so mightily by the status quo, and the damage they’ve done to our republic.
Most certainly he will prevail at trial, but its going to cost him $5000 to $8000 in legal fees which he will not be able recover. The States intent of the law is not to necessarily convict but impose pains and penalties to achieve their fascist unconstitutional objectives.
Actually its an add on charge for drug possesion, assumes you are then dealing without saying so. I was on a jury where the guy was growing more pot then his marajuana card allowed. They found ziplock bags in his kitchen so added that charge. We found him guilty of everything except the ziplock. Try and find a kitchen without a ziplock. It was pretty much jury nulification.
You bring in that dog from New Mexico to hit on the compartment?
Liberal world view you are presenting.
Pre-1980.
Simple, he screams louder than the next guy.
Good grief, it could have been simply for an anti-theft kill switch!
Someone please whack those prosecutors with a clue bat!
And they won’t. However an innocent citizen was put to a grand hassle for which he is unlikely to get recompensed by the hassling people.
When wind of the results gets back to the legislature then MAYBE they will put some sanity back into the law.
And in a larger sense, this is another divine lesson in the consequences of tolerating evils (and drugs have little to do with it, surprisingly enough — they are only one of myriad signs of the evils).
No, conservative. So conservative that they do not blame inanimate objects for sins committed by people using those objects.
“I still have a book I decades ago hollowed out for my stash of fire crackers. I’d better turn myself in.”
No need. They’re already on their way.
You can call me anything you like, but that doesn’t change the fact that the war on drugs has done more to destroy our freedoms than allowing idiots to do drugs ever would.
I did not call you anything, I described a viewpoint.
I disagree with your assertion and point out if no one used drugs there would not be a myriad of problems.
The users are the genesis of these problems.
I know you don’t understand and probably can’t as of yet.
“What if the secret compartment was built to hide his smokes from his wife?”
__
Or hide your Snickers from your kids. (I used to do that)
:-)
.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.