![]() |
|
| The Debate Forums | Blogs | | | Donate | Register (it's free) | Chatroom | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| ||||||
|
| | Thread Tools |
| | #21 (permalink) (top) |
| Hot Lava Posts: 925 | Past actions mean nothing. He does not ( nor should he ) forfeit his God-given, Human, Natural, and Constitutional rights because of his prior crimes. I'm personally of the opinion that rape should he a hanging/life sentance. However, if the State released him, it is because they ( rightly or wrongly ) believed that he was no longer a danger. This is the legal supposition behind release; that the prisoner is no longer a danger and can be safely re-introduced to society at large. Upon release, he regainst all of his Rights before the law, as he should. tman: With all the heavily-corroborated evidence for widespread racial/economic "profiling" in this country, you must be truly blind or wilfully ignorant if you really believe that "If you get pulled over it's because you were breaking the law." |
| | |
| | #25 (permalink) (top) | |
| BANNED Posts: 5,021 | Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #26 (permalink) (top) |
| Hot Lava Posts: 925 | Tinybear: I'm not a legalist, I'm an extremely strict Constitutionalist. History shows us that a single violation of a rule, no matter how insignificant that violation is, quickly leads to more and larger abuses. "The Constitution should be taken like mountain Whiskey; Straight and undiluted." - Former USSC Cheif Justice Earl Warren Tman: I agree, one -should- never get pulled unless they were breaking the law. However, you and I both know that this is not always the case. |
| | |
| | #27 (permalink) (top) |
| Principled Observer Location: Toledo, Ohio Posts: 13,873 | Drug dogs are a violation of rights, when used in a "traffic stop". Drug dogs are not a violation if the "WARRANT" says the police are looking for "DRUGS" It requires a warrant, to enable special tools, such as a dog to search areas inside or out with his "sensitized" searching device.(his nose) Privacy is the hallmark of property ownership. My car is my property, and I am required to obey traffic laws when applying and receiving my license. The policeman has no way to use a dog to tell if I am breaking a "traffic law". This is common sense. Petition of Redress of Grievances: http://www.givemeliberty.org/default.htm Canadian Lawsuit Against Their National Banks: http://www.freewebs.com/classaction/ Osborn F. Enready |
| | |
| | #28 (permalink) (top) | |
| BANNED (Multiple usernames after another ban) Posts: 1,337 | Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #34 (permalink) (top) |
| BANNED (Multiple usernames after another ban) Posts: 1,337 | I'm not changing the subject. The problem is systemic. What, according to the constitution, was Cabelle doing wrong? Can you show damages as a result of his "crime"? Our law keeps the state from violating Canelle's rights. I don't think that makes our law an "ass". And Cabelle wasn't proven guilty, therefore he is not guilty, therefore he is innocent, therefore an innocent man walks. Case closed. |
| | |
| | #35 (permalink) (top) |
| Volcanic Erupter Location: Hong Kong (for now) Posts: 7,016 | He was caught red-handed with drugs in his car. Never denied the drugs were his. I'd call that guilty, wouldn't you? Despite that, you say, he should walk because our law protects him. OK, then in that case, I'd say the law's an ass. |
| | |
| | #36 (permalink) (top) |
| BANNED (Multiple usernames after another ban) Posts: 1,337 | Like I said before, what's the difference in what he was doing and what Budweiser does "legally"? And in any case, I think the police officer violating his civil rights is a far more egregious act than someone peddling dried flowers in order to make a living. |
| | |
| | #40 (permalink) (top) | |
| BANNED (Multiple usernames after another ban) Posts: 1,337 | Quote:
| |
| | |