 |
|
 |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Kizzume
Site Admin
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 2781
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
|
 Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:43 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Yes, but this is like making people take a random test.
I just think allowing officers to do this opens up a can of worms that would allow officers to do this same thing to check for more than just whether someone is legally able to drive.
When they start pulling people over to check to see if someone is part of an organization, or works for THIS company, or is associated with THESE people, maybe you'll feel differently about checkpoints.
The bad thing about checkpoints is this: If you have ANYTHING in your vehicle that doesn't come up to code, they could ticket you for that. Oops, you didn't have that garbage bag--time for a ticket. Your light wasn't bright enough around the license plate--time for a ticket. THAT is the primary reason why I'm against this type of thing. If they simply decide they don't like you, they can find a way to get you in trouble because of all the frivolous laws that are on the books that never get enforced.
Why can't police apply this same thing to places where people walk? Maybe they should be able to randomly ask for people's ID's when they're passing people by on the street? I know I'm bringing up extremes, but they're actually not that extreme when put into contrast the extreme of being able to have random road checkpoints.
_________________
Meow.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
debateman
Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 349
Location: New Mexico
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 5:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kizzume wrote: | Yes, but this is like making people take a random test.
I just think allowing officers to do this opens up a can of worms that would allow officers to do this same thing to check for more than just whether someone is legally able to drive.
When they start pulling people over to check to see if someone is part of an organization, or works for THIS company, or is associated with THESE people, maybe you'll feel differently about checkpoints.
The bad thing about checkpoints is this: If you have ANYTHING in your vehicle that doesn't come up to code, they could ticket you for that. Oops, you didn't have that garbage bag--time for a ticket. Your light wasn't bright enough around the license plate--time for a ticket. THAT is the primary reason why I'm against this type of thing. If they simply decide they don't like you, they can find a way to get you in trouble because of all the frivolous laws that are on the books that never get enforced.
Why can't police apply this same thing to places where people walk? Maybe they should be able to randomly ask for people's ID's when they're passing people by on the street? I know I'm bringing up extremes, but they're actually not that extreme when put into contrast the extreme of being able to have random road checkpoints. |
They do randomly ask people for ID's on the street. Once your ID has been issued to you, you should keep it on your person at all times. It sounds like you are against checkpoints because it is a multipurpose enforcement point. You have to be following all the laws to avoid a ticket.
I have a novel idea. Follow all of the laws and don't get a ticket. You should be doing this anyway. Don't put yourself in a position to give them reason to stop you beyond the simple sobriety test.
I know you don't like it, but it's fully Constitutional.
_________________
www.politicalwrinkles.com
www.kizzumeforum.com
www.politicalfever.org
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kizzume
Site Admin
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 2781
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Actually, I'm not fully sure that it is constitutional. We have many laws that are not constitutional, but the only thing that makes them acceptable is that they're not enforced in a way that infringes on the rights of anyone. In this case, where people are presumed to be guilty until proven innocent, this is not possible. I'm sure that if this continues, the validity of a lot of silly laws will be actually looked into, which is a good thing.
But if people aren't even free to travel freely without being persecuted just for doing something they're legally allowed to do, which is exactly what a checkpoint is--it's a way to persecute people for driving a car and try to dig around to see what they can find. It's wrong and it can lead to horrible things being done to people in the future.
I sure don't want to live in the places where they ask people's ID's on the street. I'm not a dog--I don't need to wear a collar at all times, and I shouldn't have to carry that ID on me at all times. I personally DO carry one at all times, but I shouldn't be made to feel like I HAVE to.
As far as "follow all the laws"--there are SO many laws that are out there that we don't even know about. I'm not going to be forced to have the interior of my car looking a particular way--oh no--there's something as sharp as a butter knife on the dash because it's an old car and something broke off--you know, lots of things they could get a person for. Then it's just an issue of whether or not that particular officer likes someone or not, or just "gets a hunch" so they can keep digging further. It's wrong--it's just plain wrong.
_________________
Meow.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kizzume
Site Admin
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 2781
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Oops--your car has a dent in it in THIS spot. Your steering wheel is falling apart. The bag you use for garbage isn't THIS size and it isn't located in THIS place in the car. Your windshield isn't clear enough--you need to wash it more often.
Hell no. I'm not going to have to worry about those kinds of things, HELL HELL HELL NO!
Sorry, but this issue is a real hot button for me. It gets me going very quickly. Nothing against you.
_________________
Meow.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chuck
Joined: 31 Dec 2007
Posts: 11
Location: Way up the Holler
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 7:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So debateman
The Fifth Admendment to the Constitution protects you from incriminating yourself.
And yet, if you refuse to tell a cop at a checkpoint where you've been or where you're going, they use that as probable cause to search your vehicle.
The Fourth Admendment protects us from unwarranted, unreasonable searches.
And yet, police will search ANYBODY just to write them a ticket.
Often, on the show COPS, they will search all parties of a dispute before even talking with the people.
Are you defending this oppression?
_________________
Give a man a fish to feed him once and he'll come back tomorrow.
Teach a man to fish and feed him forever
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
debateman
Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 349
Location: New Mexico
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 8:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chuck wrote: | So debateman
The Fifth Admendment to the Constitution protects you from incriminating yourself.
And yet, if you refuse to tell a cop at a checkpoint where you've been or where you're going, they use that as probable cause to search your vehicle.
The Fourth Admendment protects us from unwarranted, unreasonable searches.
And yet, police will search ANYBODY just to write them a ticket.
Often, on the show COPS, they will search all parties of a dispute before even talking with the people.
Are you defending this oppression? |
You have the right to plea the fifth in any scenario, as the police have the right to detain you. The checkpoint is no more grave of a scenario than any other.
The fourth amendment still applies. It's not unreasonable to request basic information including drivers license and proof of insurance. In fact, it's against the law to travel without them.
If you aren't breaking the law, you have nothing to fear from these stops.
I don't like the stops, but the police have the right to create them in an effort to provide for public safety. This has been upheld multiple times.
_________________
www.politicalwrinkles.com
www.kizzumeforum.com
www.politicalfever.org
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kizzume
Site Admin
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 2781
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 05, 2008 11:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| debateman wrote: | | Chuck wrote: | So debateman
The Fifth Admendment to the Constitution protects you from incriminating yourself.
And yet, if you refuse to tell a cop at a checkpoint where you've been or where you're going, they use that as probable cause to search your vehicle.
The Fourth Admendment protects us from unwarranted, unreasonable searches.
And yet, police will search ANYBODY just to write them a ticket.
Often, on the show COPS, they will search all parties of a dispute before even talking with the people.
Are you defending this oppression? |
You have the right to plea the fifth in any scenario, as the police have the right to detain you. The checkpoint is no more grave of a scenario than any other.
The fourth amendment still applies. It's not unreasonable to request basic information including drivers license and proof of insurance. In fact, it's against the law to travel without them.
If you aren't breaking the law, you have nothing to fear from these stops.
I don't like the stops, but the police have the right to create them in an effort to provide for public safety. This has been upheld multiple times. |
Where does their right to do this stop? Should they be able to block the ends of residential streets? Should they be able to card people as they're leaving their house? Should they be able to knock on people's doors to demand ID? How far are we willing to go? I'm not willing to live in a police state--cameras are fine, but when I'm actually being harassed just for doing normal things, I don't know. If I've thought I've hermited myself in the past, I won't ever want to go anywhere if things get that bad. Quite frankly, I don't think I'd literally want to live if I was living under those conditions.
_________________
Meow.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
debateman
Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 349
Location: New Mexico
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 3:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kizzume wrote: | | debateman wrote: | | Chuck wrote: | So debateman
The Fifth Admendment to the Constitution protects you from incriminating yourself.
And yet, if you refuse to tell a cop at a checkpoint where you've been or where you're going, they use that as probable cause to search your vehicle.
The Fourth Admendment protects us from unwarranted, unreasonable searches.
And yet, police will search ANYBODY just to write them a ticket.
Often, on the show COPS, they will search all parties of a dispute before even talking with the people.
Are you defending this oppression? |
You have the right to plea the fifth in any scenario, as the police have the right to detain you. The checkpoint is no more grave of a scenario than any other.
The fourth amendment still applies. It's not unreasonable to request basic information including drivers license and proof of insurance. In fact, it's against the law to travel without them.
If you aren't breaking the law, you have nothing to fear from these stops.
I don't like the stops, but the police have the right to create them in an effort to provide for public safety. This has been upheld multiple times. |
Where does their right to do this stop? Should they be able to block the ends of residential streets? Should they be able to card people as they're leaving their house? Should they be able to knock on people's doors to demand ID? How far are we willing to go? I'm not willing to live in a police state--cameras are fine, but when I'm actually being harassed just for doing normal things, I don't know. If I've thought I've hermited myself in the past, I won't ever want to go anywhere if things get that bad. Quite frankly, I don't think I'd literally want to live if I was living under those conditions. |
Ooooh the hyperbole. A slippery slope argument is not logical. To say that one thing happens doesn't mean the next one will.
_________________
www.politicalwrinkles.com
www.kizzumeforum.com
www.politicalfever.org
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kizzume
Site Admin
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 2781
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 4:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| debateman wrote: |
Ooooh the hyperbole. A slippery slope argument is not logical. To say that one thing happens doesn't mean the next one will. |
It's not really a slippery slope. Not that long ago, BOTH of those things--police asking for people's ID just because on the sidewalk or creating checkpoints--it would have been considered horrible "1984" stuff. Now it's starting to get looked at as being just normal stuff. How much police state do you find acceptable? At what point does it become unacceptable? It's not a slippery slope--not if you define where that line is so I know what point of reference we're both having for this.
_________________
Meow.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
debateman
Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 349
Location: New Mexico
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 6:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kizzume wrote: | | debateman wrote: |
Ooooh the hyperbole. A slippery slope argument is not logical. To say that one thing happens doesn't mean the next one will. |
It's not really a slippery slope. Not that long ago, BOTH of those things--police asking for people's ID just because on the sidewalk or creating checkpoints--it would have been considered horrible "1984" stuff. Now it's starting to get looked at as being just normal stuff. How much police state do you find acceptable? At what point does it become unacceptable? It's not a slippery slope--not if you define where that line is so I know what point of reference we're both having for this. |
Well I think the line comes to private locations. The road is not one of those places. I think that is the line that the court has drawn. I think that the line is a bit excessive, but then again it's not my responsibility to provide for the common defense. As long as we expect the government to provide our defense, we should expect that our rights are limited. We, as a culture, have brought this our ourselves.
_________________
www.politicalwrinkles.com
www.kizzumeforum.com
www.politicalfever.org
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kizzume
Site Admin
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 2781
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
|
| Posted: Sun Jan 06, 2008 9:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
We certainly HAVE brought this on ourselves.
The thing is--there are some rights that we shouldn't allow to be limited, and I think we have crossed that line by allowing police to do this. We need to find a way to help reduce the need for things like this--and I don't have any ideas either.
_________________
Meow.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
teacher
Joined: 20 Dec 2007
Posts: 26
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 4:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| teacher wrote: | | Chuck is an idiot, |
I don't want to be accused of not being solid on this point.
Simple question.
Has any of you spent some time in jail cause you stood up for your rights?
I've done it more than once, I'll do it again. I'll do it every f*ckin time.
In case you ain't figured this $hit out, it's the kinda guy I am.
Make no bones about it.
F*ck you morons, until you are ready to do time standing on your head, you're a bunch of girls.
quote="debateman"]Actually as you pass through a check point you are innocent until through your actions you prove that you aren't. If you are a driver who is innocent, no 'punishment' comes from a checkpoint.[/quote]
What f*ckin world do you live in?
"Here's my valid licence, registration, and proof of insurance".
"Where you coming from Sir"?
"I pleade the 5th".
(Now, at this point don't ask me about pleading the 5th, it's always the same, it's always ugly. You WILL go to jail. Which brings me right back to being ready to do time. And yes, you still have to pay for the impound. You morons are rookies, ain't you? Think you teacher talks the walk? At this point we can go all through all everything, don't matter, you gonna go to jail. Stand firm. Eat balony, pay for the lawyer, lose your money, in the end, you will walk, you've lost buku cash, you ain't proved a damn thing, but, if you are like me, if ever that same lying police officer pulls me again, I'm gonna get outta my truck, I'm gonna beat his azz, I'm gonna leave him for dead on the side of the road, and before his lights go out, I'm gonna ask him, "think you deserve the publics trust"? Kids, I'm teacher, this is not my first rodeo, I've been locked up by a guy that broke the law to make it look like I broke the law. Cause I knew his job better than him, and I pizzed him off. Ah, fresh idea Kizzume, real life true police/teacher stories...want some of that? Who wants to be a cop? Justice crusaders or control freaks? I'm a good man, I served, I'm a Father, can you see how my attitude will run me afoul of the law? "Yes officer, I do live here, have for some time, and, yes, these are nunchuks in my hand. Don't wake my children up").
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kizzume
Site Admin
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 2781
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 10:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Correct. There is no way one can plead the 5th on that kind of thing without the high potential of being taken to jail. It's none of the officer's business, but they'll make it their business.
_________________
Meow.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
debateman
Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 349
Location: New Mexico
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 11:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kizzume wrote: | | Correct. There is no way one can plead the 5th on that kind of thing without the high potential of being taken to jail. It's none of the officer's business, but they'll make it their business. |
But the only way to realistically fight the law is to go ahead and plea the 5th. Let the officer take you in, and then have your lawyer sue the piss out of the local department. Those rights are still available. So there is a recourse if you want one. Could even score you some money.
_________________
www.politicalwrinkles.com
www.kizzumeforum.com
www.politicalfever.org
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kizzume
Site Admin
Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 2781
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 07, 2008 11:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| debateman wrote: | | Kizzume wrote: | | Correct. There is no way one can plead the 5th on that kind of thing without the high potential of being taken to jail. It's none of the officer's business, but they'll make it their business. |
But the only way to realistically fight the law is to go ahead and plea the 5th. Let the officer take you in, and then have your lawyer sue the piss out of the local department. Those rights are still available. So there is a recourse if you want one. Could even score you some money. |
Seriously--I'm not going through that just because I wanted to go from geographic point a to point b. That is not something people should have to go through.
_________________
Meow.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You can attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
| |
|
