Posted on 11/25/2013 6:58:33 AM PST by Kaslin
Problem...we are being freedoms are being perverted by all the yankees and West coast creeps lil by lil.
They can't find work or want a cheaper cost of living....so, there coming to Texas. I guess, someday all the Texans will have to migrate where they came from and set-r-free.
Actually, if Courts were interested in upholding the Constitution, the required step would be clearly defined. What's necessary is for courts to recognize that anything a cop says, including his claimed reasons for a stop or search, and the reasonableness and sincerity of any beliefs underlying those reasons, should be evaluated as a matter of fact subject to juror consideration. Even if it would be legitimate for cops to set up DUI checkpoints in cases where it they had probable cause to believe that a majority of drivers were intoxicated, that does not imply that DUI checkpoints are legitimate in every case the cops claim to believe that the majority of drivers are intoxicated. If cops had to convince juries that their actions were undertaken in good faith, and if juries had the right to find that defendants were owed restitution for legal costs because cops acted in bad faith, many forms of abuse would become much less profitable.
Problem...we are being freedoms are being perverted by all the yankees and West coast creeps lil by lil.
They can't find work or want a cheaper cost of living....so, there coming to Texas. I guess, someday all the Texans will have to migrate where they came from and set-r-free.
Well that sounded retarded. lol
...Our freedoms are being perverted...
I wouldn't mind such things nearly so much if courts would recognize that a cop's stated reasons for doing something and his actual reasons are often very different, and as such the question of whether a cop did something for a legitimate reason is in many cases more a question of witness credibility than of law. If cops' actions were under regular scrutiny by juries, they would have far more incentive not only to avoid behavior that was so patently outrageous that a judge couldn't find it otherwise, but also to avoid behaving in ways which a juror would not appreciate in a cop who stopped him.
Police are NOT a neutral thing.
They are agents of the state/govt.
As such they have No Business detaining me or questioning me if I have done no wrong.
Next up, random full-block house searches. After all, your house is IN public and easily seen from the road and on taxed land. ‘Just looking for drugs. Its for the children. Thank you for complying’.
I agree. I really resented it when it happened to me a couple months ago. I take the tollway to and from work. I don’t get off until midnight. On the night of my birthday, my husband waiting up for me so we could discuss our weekend plans, they had all tollbooth lanes blocked off where I get on. I asked the officer what’s going on and he says random safety check and I said I don’t think it’s constitutional to do this and he told me pull over to the left, then I asked why what did I do to be detained like this and he said I was going 40 through there when it’s supposed to be 15. No way was I going 40 after taking off from a light and stopping at the gate, which I had clearly seen was down, 30 feet ahead. So stupid me I pull over but also let it be known I was pissed while doing so....squealed the tires. Oops there’s a citation code for that. Cost me 90 bucks to show my ire regarding big brother’s tactics.
Nay
While I agree with your tack, I don’t think the video would be allowed as evidence, no matter how damning.
There are laws surrounding the video or audio recording of interactions and their admissibility in a trial. While you may get your video out on the Internet where a court of public opinion would damn the errant officer, the likelihood of a criminal conviction on that evidence would be slim.
What behavior do I practice that is against the law? If I am living a Christian lifestyle in the U.S., I'm not presently breaking any laws so I have no fear of checkpoints.
That doesn't mean the day isn't coming where I could be jailed for carrying a Bible or saying a prayer but that day hasn't arrived yet as long as I am not in front of an abortion clinic.
If you're afraid they're going to catch you drunk or stoned, that's not my problem. If you're going to do those things, don't get behind the wheel.
That’s the kind of heavy-handed gestapo tactics that cause riots and revolutions. Police do NOT want to be seen as the enemies of the public; their jobs are hard enough without that wall of mistrust and hostility.
Another reason these fascist stop-and-cop sideshows are ineffective, if not downright counterproductive.
In Indiana, they are bad about tinted window violations and they are allowed to bust out of state drivers too. On the non-resident drivers, they can require you to fix the tint, mostly by the small towns. State police usually just write you up and they are done with it. I also leave a vehicle there with the out of state plates and have concerns if driven, family member gets busted and hear about it and get a bunch of s—t for the tint. The law was lienient at one time, just the front windows but now the back windows can’t be tinted much anymore.
> I got a ticket once at a DUI checkpoint for having an illegal dark tinted window.
I don’t drive drunk.Or stoned.
You obviously don’t get the idea of freedom.
If you aren’t doing anything wrong you shouldn’t mind (the government,daddy,your neighbor,the fire department,your creditors,etc.) snooping through your home,car,purse,pockets, or body cavities ?!?
The government has no valid need to search my car,home, or person;and even if they think so ,there is a process under the Constitution .It calls for search warrants .Admittedly the statist enablers have weakened the practice but it is still there in the Constitution of the United States.
How many million law-abiding Jews did a modern socialistic government murder? Or how many Ukrainians ? Or Chinese? Or Cambodians? Or Cubans ?
I don’t equate Christian with being a slave to evil men’s wishes.
And don’t doubt for a minute that you ARE in violation of some law or government regulation. There are simply so many laws and rules that it is impossible to be completely in compliance.
Quote: The Supreme Court said YES: Michigan Dept. of State Police v. Sitz
And there is always the Dred Scott decision as just one example of the small group of black-robes making a obviously wrong ruling for political reasons.
Or John Roberts ACA ruling that it is a tax.
The Constitution ISN’T that difficult to understand ,nor its principles difficult to apply.
What has happened from the moment the Constitution was first ratified is that grasping men have sought to evade the clear intent to restrict the scope and reach of government.
If they want to inconvenience me by inspecting my vehicle, fine. They won't find anything (unless they plant it).
I take the attitude that God is ultimately in control and that He is my shield and my strength. Of course there are police that and other government types that abuse power and one can always be wrongfully imprisoned but I can't live in fear of that.
Even if the U.S. collapses into a totalitarian state, my God still reigns. I know it sounds foolish but the essence of faith is considered foolishness to those who don't believe it.
Yeah, I know. Don’t care, except in a practical sense. Remember, these are the guys who think Osamacare is Constitutional.
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.