I think this calls for a different kind of new content. If the vast majority of it can be pre-written (I mean the background, not the made-up sinking in your chair and sobbing) maybe instead of publishing a new article each time with repeat information we need something a bit more like a wiki which is updated when something new happens.
You have an amazing ability to foresee the past. I'm pretty sure false-arrests make the "search-incident to arrest" illegal. But I'm not a lawyer. I just read loads of law blogs.
That's not the issue. Your car is private. But if you get arrested, you and your car can get searched. In this case, the cops had no right to search that house. They were invited them in which only allows them to look, not search. Moving the mouse to reveal what was behind the screen saver was a search. An illegal one. Same would have been true if the cop had instead started looking through a cellphone.
It's not actually the location that matters. It's the circumstances that lead to the information being uncovered. When you are arrested, police officers can perform a "search incident to arrest" which would otherwise be a violation of your 4th amendment right. Basically, they can search your person and what you carry. Since your phone is on your person, it is covered by the "search incident to arrest". If a police officer knocks on your door and you let them in, (a bad idea BTW) they are allowed to use their eyes and see what is in "plain view". However, being in your house does NOT allow them to search your house. They are allowed to use their eyes and notice anything that is "in plain view" such as a printout lying on your coffee table or a pot plant in your open closet. Similarly, if your computer screen is on, they can look at what is currently displayed. Same for your phone. But, they cannot pick up your phone and pull up data, nor can they start using your computer because that is then a search which was not authorized.
tl;dr; Moving a mouse or using a cellphone counts as a search. If you are arrested, they can search what you carry on you. If you invite them inside your house, they can't "search" they can only see what's in plain view.
"If Obama ever got the Amy Alkon treatment, the TSA would evaporate overnight."
That's the saddest part. I think the fairest thing to do is this: Let the president, the VP, the head of the DHS and their respective families go through the groping in front of everybody. Then the rest of us might feel a little better about it.
"How about we shame file traders every where they go?"
I for one don't find file trading to be something worthy of shame and public opprobrium so I won't participate in such an enterprise. But if you believe that file-sharing is a despicable act, then it would make sense for you to apply social pressure on file sharers.
"Would you like to introduce a scarlet letter thing, where we can mark on people's foreheads who they work for and what crimes the have allegedly committed without being brought to justice?"
No. That would involve coercion and the threat of force and would be unacceptable. I would instead be satisfied if TSA agents hid their professions for fear of being mocked and shunned. You should realize that there are norms which society abides by which are not codified in laws. For instance, a person who is a manipulative jerk and emotionally abuses people around him will be the target of public opprobrium no matter what the law may say. Are you saying it is wrong for me to refuse to invite to my parties people who are manipulative jerks? Would it be wrong for me to refuse to do business with companies that perform extraordinary renditions for the US government? If TSA agents could be prosecuted in a court of law for sexual harassment and rape, I would find that preferable. But given that it is not an option, I will settle for not inviting them at my parties, refusing to do business with them, ignoring them whenever possible and encouraging others to do the same.
Let's say those were breast-implant bombs... How is the pat-down going to allow you to differentiate them from breast-implants?
The solution is clear, TSA agents should be shamed and made uncomfortable and unwelcome everywhere and every single second of their lives until the TSA changes its policy. Being a TSA agent should be met with the same opprobrium as being a rapist.
It seems to me those "people" (I use the term loosely) are connection to wireless networks in order to identify infringers. That sounds like an unauthorized access to a computer system to me. Toss the pinheads in jail and throw away the key.
"Our cops are no longer there to protect citizens; they simply are out of control thugs doing the bidding of whoever pays them the most. At the moment it's the super rich Wall Street executives."
What's your evidence. I see them as being out of control thugs period.
My understanding is that you have a right to defend yourself against police officers carrying out unlawful acts. However, good luck in court. Courts tend to show lots of deference to police thugs.
This is a good time to remember answering a cop's questions is a bad idea. When asked if he was recording the whole time, the guy should have remained silent or given the ubiquitous: "Is there a problem officer?" Remember, cops are NOT your friends.
I am torn. On the one hand, I want to make fun of your spelling, (I know auto-correct has a bad rep, but it would help you out) and debunk the absurdities you are saying. (If a full 10% of the population wants to kill cops, maybe there is something fundamentally wrong with cops.)
On the other hand I cannot believe you are actually a cop. I mean, this is just too beautiful. You are giving the impression of being an illiterate non-sense-spouting idiot. You have got to be a satire of sorts.
OK, I can't resist it: If there were no cops, there would be a wide variety of mechanisms which would emerge to replace cops. For instance, people might start carrying more guns. Private security companies would be more common. Your life-insurance might have a provision whereby the insurance company would pay for an investigator to find and punish the one responsible for your death. Most likely business associations would pay to provide security since a secure environment tends to be good for business.
But let's say none of that happens. Most human beings don't really care much for killing each other. Beyond the punishment and the fear of retribution, there is just the simple fact that its a messy and dangerous affair. Sure, there will always be some bad apples. But for the most part, people would rather live their lives without having to go through dangerous life-threatening conflict. So I think we would last for much longer than a week.
I don't see why the citizens of Chicago should have to shoulder that burden. The ex-police officer should have to personally pay for their own misconduct. A couple years of hard labor should be required to pay for the debt.
Let's be entirely honest here. I don't sympathize at all with much of the message promoted by the Wall Street protesters. I think a lot of it is hogwash. (Though they do have some good points) But when I watch these videos, all I can see is a bunch of uniformed thugs brutalizing terrified people who are trying to exercise their right to free speech. When cops pull unarmed protesters out of the crowd all I hear is panicked cries and pleas for help. Some say most of the police officers are doing their job professionally. But that is not true. They have a duty to protect and they are failing. When an unarmed woman is dragged out of the crowd and thrown on the floor they stand there and do nothing! When that cowardly criminal assaults those innocent protesters with his pepper spray before running away, the cops holding the line are clearly confused and appalled. You can see that they know what their superior did is wrong and illegal. Their duty at that point is to turn around, hunt down the criminal and lock him up so he can be prosecuted. But they just stand there. In their silence, they are complicit. When the police force closes ranks and protects their own, they are complicit.
If you are a cop and you witness police brutality, arrest the offender on the spot. Tell the world. Tell your superiors. If your organization refuses to act, buck the boat until something happens. Or remain quiet and remember that you are a disgusting failure, a traitor to your country and to its citizens.
Wait you mean the cop who cop who used his Tazer was afraid of getting involved? Seems he was perfectly happy to jump in the middle to shoot that one guy with his Tazer. On the other hand, calling out: "Stop! Police!" would just be an unacceptable risk.
No it's not. His first duty is to not violate the rights of individuals. If that means he leaves in a body-bag, well, that's sad but that's the way it is. If he can't handle that, he should look for a different job. Also please consider his actions. After he shot his Tazer, he is now close to everyone involved without any long-range options. He is now at more of a risk of being knifed than if he had stayed back and called a warning.
"Also if he'd called for backup and the kid(s) got hurt he would be crucified for not stepping in quick enough."
Yes well, there was an option between just waiting for back-up and walking up and shooting. He could have started with a warning and then shot with his Tazer. That cop deserves jail time.
On the post: Amanda Knox Is Guilty... Of Making Newspapers Jump The Gun On Guilty Headlines
On the post: Courts: Search A Cell Phone? No Problem. Touch A Mouse? Violate 4th Amendment.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Courts: Search A Cell Phone? No Problem. Touch A Mouse? Violate 4th Amendment.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Courts: Search A Cell Phone? No Problem. Touch A Mouse? Violate 4th Amendment.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
tl;dr; Moving a mouse or using a cellphone counts as a search. If you are arrested, they can search what you carry on you. If you invite them inside your house, they can't "search" they can only see what's in plain view.
On the post: TSA Force Breast Cancer Patient To Submit To Patdown, Refuse To Let Her Show ID Card About Implants
Re:
That's the saddest part. I think the fairest thing to do is this: Let the president, the VP, the head of the DHS and their respective families go through the groping in front of everybody. Then the rest of us might feel a little better about it.
On the post: TSA Force Breast Cancer Patient To Submit To Patdown, Refuse To Let Her Show ID Card About Implants
Re: Re: Re: Breast Implant Bombs?
On the post: TSA Force Breast Cancer Patient To Submit To Patdown, Refuse To Let Her Show ID Card About Implants
Re: Re: Re: Breast Implant Bombs?
I almost forgot... No.
"that has got to be the most dumb post in this thread, and that is saying a bunch."
Thank you for the compliment.
On the post: TSA Force Breast Cancer Patient To Submit To Patdown, Refuse To Let Her Show ID Card About Implants
Re: Re: Re: Breast Implant Bombs?
I for one don't find file trading to be something worthy of shame and public opprobrium so I won't participate in such an enterprise. But if you believe that file-sharing is a despicable act, then it would make sense for you to apply social pressure on file sharers.
"Would you like to introduce a scarlet letter thing, where we can mark on people's foreheads who they work for and what crimes the have allegedly committed without being brought to justice?"
No. That would involve coercion and the threat of force and would be unacceptable. I would instead be satisfied if TSA agents hid their professions for fear of being mocked and shunned. You should realize that there are norms which society abides by which are not codified in laws. For instance, a person who is a manipulative jerk and emotionally abuses people around him will be the target of public opprobrium no matter what the law may say. Are you saying it is wrong for me to refuse to invite to my parties people who are manipulative jerks? Would it be wrong for me to refuse to do business with companies that perform extraordinary renditions for the US government? If TSA agents could be prosecuted in a court of law for sexual harassment and rape, I would find that preferable. But given that it is not an option, I will settle for not inviting them at my parties, refusing to do business with them, ignoring them whenever possible and encouraging others to do the same.
On the post: TSA Force Breast Cancer Patient To Submit To Patdown, Refuse To Let Her Show ID Card About Implants
Re: Breast Implant Bombs?
The solution is clear, TSA agents should be shamed and made uncomfortable and unwelcome everywhere and every single second of their lives until the TSA changes its policy. Being a TSA agent should be met with the same opprobrium as being a rapist.
On the post: Patent Troll Says Anyone Using WiFi Infringes; Won't Sue Individuals 'At This Stage'
On the post: Phony Bologna: More Evidence Of Indiscriminate Pepper Spraying, As Police Defend Actions
Re: NYPD...
What's your evidence. I see them as being out of control thugs period.
On the post: Phony Bologna: More Evidence Of Indiscriminate Pepper Spraying, As Police Defend Actions
Re:
On the post: Guy Arrested, Threatened With 15 Years For Recording Traffic Stop In Illinois
On the post: Another Day, Another Story Of Police Lying... Only To Be Found Out Due To Video Of The Incident
Re:
On the other hand I cannot believe you are actually a cop. I mean, this is just too beautiful. You are giving the impression of being an illiterate non-sense-spouting idiot. You have got to be a satire of sorts.
OK, I can't resist it: If there were no cops, there would be a wide variety of mechanisms which would emerge to replace cops. For instance, people might start carrying more guns. Private security companies would be more common. Your life-insurance might have a provision whereby the insurance company would pay for an investigator to find and punish the one responsible for your death. Most likely business associations would pay to provide security since a secure environment tends to be good for business.
But let's say none of that happens. Most human beings don't really care much for killing each other. Beyond the punishment and the fear of retribution, there is just the simple fact that its a messy and dangerous affair. Sure, there will always be some bad apples. But for the most part, people would rather live their lives without having to go through dangerous life-threatening conflict. So I think we would last for much longer than a week.
On the post: Another Day, Another Story Of Police Lying... Only To Be Found Out Due To Video Of The Incident
Re: Re:
On the post: Another Day, Another Story Of Police Lying... Only To Be Found Out Due To Video Of The Incident
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Can The NYPD Back Up Its Claim Of A Confrontation That Required Pepper Spray, Despite More Video Evidence?
If you are a cop and you witness police brutality, arrest the offender on the spot. Tell the world. Tell your superiors. If your organization refuses to act, buck the boat until something happens. Or remain quiet and remember that you are a disgusting failure, a traitor to your country and to its citizens.
On the post: Police Caught Tasing Teen Without Warning
Re: Re:
On the post: Police Caught Tasing Teen Without Warning
Re: Re:
On the post: Police Caught Tasing Teen Without Warning
Re:
No it's not. His first duty is to not violate the rights of individuals. If that means he leaves in a body-bag, well, that's sad but that's the way it is. If he can't handle that, he should look for a different job. Also please consider his actions. After he shot his Tazer, he is now close to everyone involved without any long-range options. He is now at more of a risk of being knifed than if he had stayed back and called a warning.
"Also if he'd called for backup and the kid(s) got hurt he would be crucified for not stepping in quick enough."
Yes well, there was an option between just waiting for back-up and walking up and shooting. He could have started with a warning and then shot with his Tazer. That cop deserves jail time.
Next >>