Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
This is just another example of people not understanding their rights, but thinking they do. People learn your rights...
What did he get wrong? People have the absolute right to ask police if they are being detained whenever they are stopped. The fact that the cop said he wasn't being detained, and then claimed he was not free to leave, showed that the cop was the one that didn't understand the law.
the constitution gives us the right to travel, without gvt interference, right???
This is just another example of people not understanding their rights, but thinking they do. People learn your rights...
What did he get wrong? People have the absolute right to ask police if they are being detained whenever they are stopped. The fact that the cop said he wasn't being detained, and then claimed he was not free to leave, showed that the cop was the one that didn't understand the law.
No in fact you are wrong sir, and so was the driver.
Detained is a legal term. SCOTUS has ruled that the brief time taken to initially question each driver does not arise to the level of detainment and in order for an officer to then detain a driver he THEN must have a reasonable suspicion to do so.
So legally speaking you are not detained when you roll through a check point.
By definition , the Supreme Court can't be wrong about what they rule Constitutional and unconstitutional. I mean they ARE the definition.
You may not like their ruling, but that is irrelevant, they are right no matter how they rule.
Yet they have actually reversed their decisions occasionally. If, by definition, they were right when they ruled one way, and still right when they ruled the other way, the definition is wrong.
Want to try again?
I'm just trying to figure out what MadScientist was trying to say early on in the thread, about making certain you say you are traveling and not driving???the constitution gives us the right to travel, without gvt interference, right???
Sure does, and you can walk wherever your heart desires when you are no longer allowed to drive.
the constitution gives us the right to travel, without gvt interference, right???
I'm just trying to figure out what MadScientist was trying to say early on in the thread, about making certain you say you are traveling and not driving???the constitution gives us the right to travel, without gvt interference, right???
Sure does, and you can walk wherever your heart desires when you are no longer allowed to drive.
That would require going to the URL, which I haven't since that fateful day in college where I was "corrected" for using such a sewer of a site.
No in fact you are wrong sir, and so was the driver.
Detained is a legal term. SCOTUS has ruled that the brief time taken to initially question each driver does not arise to the level of detainment and in order for an officer to then detain a driver he THEN must have a reasonable suspicion to do so.
So legally speaking you are not detained when you roll through a check point.
I'm just trying to figure out what MadScientist was trying to say early on in the thread, about making certain you say you are traveling and not driving???the constitution gives us the right to travel, without gvt interference, right???
Sure does, and you can walk wherever your heart desires when you are no longer allowed to drive.
That would require going to the URL, which I haven't since that fateful day in college where I was "corrected" for using such a sewer of a site.
In other words, no.
I'm just trying to figure out what MadScientist was trying to say early on in the thread, about making certain you say you are traveling and not driving???the constitution gives us the right to travel, without gvt interference, right???
Sure does, and you can walk wherever your heart desires when you are no longer allowed to drive.
if you say you are driving, a smart ass cop can say "you don't have a right to drive"
If you say I am traveling, a smart ass cop can suck a dick.
All he had to do was say, no, you are not being detdetained, but this checkpoint is for us to check license and registration in an attempt to generate money for the city from poor people that cannot afford insurance. In order to facilitate that the state has allowed us to set up these bogus safety checkpoints to look for people who are driving without insurance. We would appreciate it if you showed your license and registration now.
Rebellion is meaningless without a clear purpose. The jackass in the OP was just being a jackass.
Had the cop actually been engaged in unethical behavior, I'd have been in the front row of the cheering section. But being a dickhead for the sake of being a dickhead and then self-promoting such dickheadedness is idiotic, just like the suckers that buy into the garbage.
Rebellion is meaningless without a clear purpose. The jackass in the OP was just being a jackass.
Had the cop actually been engaged in unethical behavior, I'd have been in the front row of the cheering section. But being a dickhead for the sake of being a dickhead and then self-promoting such dickheadedness is idiotic, just like the suckers that buy into the garbage.
Meaningless? It's got everyone here talking about Constitutional rights. I don't call that 'meaningless'.
No in fact you are wrong sir, and so was the driver.
Detained is a legal term. SCOTUS has ruled that the brief time taken to initially question each driver does not arise to the level of detainment and in order for an officer to then detain a driver he THEN must have a reasonable suspicion to do so.
So legally speaking you are not detained when you roll through a check point.
How does that make me wrong? I said the cop didn't understand the law because he contradicted himself. All he had to do was say, no, you are not being detained, but this checkpoint is for us to check license and insurance in an attempt to generate money for the city from poor people that cannot afford insurance. In order to facilitate that the state has allowed us to set up these bogus safety checkpoints to look for people who are driving without insurance. We would appreciate it if you showed your license and insurance now.
Rebellion is meaningless without a clear purpose. The jackass in the OP was just being a jackass.
Had the cop actually been engaged in unethical behavior, I'd have been in the front row of the cheering section. But being a dickhead for the sake of being a dickhead and then self-promoting such dickheadedness is idiotic, just like the suckers that buy into the garbage.
Meaningless? It's got everyone here talking about Constitutional rights. I don't call that 'meaningless'.
People don't need to act like a dickhead to start a conversation... especially on a political messageboard. So yeah I call that pretty damned meaningless.
And the more government encroaches on our rights, the more we should avail ourselves of the "dickhead" tact.
Rebellion is meaningless without a clear purpose. The jackass in the OP was just being a jackass.
Had the cop actually been engaged in unethical behavior, I'd have been in the front row of the cheering section. But being a dickhead for the sake of being a dickhead and then self-promoting such dickheadedness is idiotic, just like the suckers that buy into the garbage.
Meaningless? It's got everyone here talking about Constitutional rights. I don't call that 'meaningless'.
People don't need to act like a dickhead to start a conversation... especially on a political messageboard. So yeah I call that pretty damned meaningless.
They don't "need" to, but it's always an option.
Rebellion is meaningless without a clear purpose. The jackass in the OP was just being a jackass.
Had the cop actually been engaged in unethical behavior, I'd have been in the front row of the cheering section. But being a dickhead for the sake of being a dickhead and then self-promoting such dickheadedness is idiotic, just like the suckers that buy into the garbage.
Meaningless? It's got everyone here talking about Constitutional rights. I don't call that 'meaningless'.
People don't need to act like a dickhead to start a conversation... especially on a political messageboard. So yeah I call that pretty damned meaningless.
They don't "need" to, but it's always an option.
