Re: Re: Definition of reasonable, and why so disparate results?
This. If Congress were to enact a statute granting police qualified immunity, it would be unconstitutional because it would create a (very large) class of less privileged citizen.
Yet somehow, despite the courts having no authority whatsoever to create new laws, the courts have been able to create qualified immunity despite it being both unconstitutional and them having no authority to create it.
But how do you hold the gatekeeper for the justice system accountable for breaking the law?
Get some non-permanent marking material, colored residue-free masking tape, perhaps, and use it to write a message on the floor outside of the Senate or House of Representatives, in the Capitol building.
Have it spell out something like "For a good time, call Jenny at 867-5309"
Under the terms of FOSTA, being physically capable of writing the message on the floor means that Congress facilitated the message, and sending a janitor to remove it means they had knowledge of its presence. And therefore Congress could be in legal trouble for their sex trafficking that is not covered by CDA 230.
No damage done, building unharmed, obviously fake message, all should equal no charges or a dismissal of charges if some are brought. A conviction for that would be absurd. But it would neatly highlight the problems with FOSTA.
If I intercept a wireless communication, I have committed wiretapping, a felony.
If I pull files off someone’s computerized device under false pretenses, I have violated the Computer Fraud & Abuse Act.
People are being arrested and prosecuted (Aaron Swartz for example) for accessing public information in creative ways, yet the government is accessing confidential information without bothering with warrants via far more invasive means.
Every government exemption built into the laws I mentioned in this comment absolutely require a valid warrant and make it absolutely clear that doing without a warrant is a felony.
Cops like to talk about a few bad apples and isolated incidents, but for a government agency to get away with this sort of thing without being prosecuted or even arrested for it, means that 100% of the government officials involved in even the most peripheral way are corrupt and criminal.
If it were one good cop amongst an army of bad ones, we’d hear about them being fired for opposing this crap. But we don’t. Our government appears to be in the hands of domestic enemies of the Constitution and the people.
An illegal seizure is a theft even if unprosecuted
So the local cops illegally seized property, which if the system weren't corrupt as all hell would be prosecuted as armed robbery, but is without doubt at least theft of property.
So the cops now have illegal possession of that property, and turn it over to the feds. The feds received stolen property, and used it as they saw fit.
The Equal Protection Clause seems to apply here -- a fence does not ask where the goods came from, he just buys them. He may suspect that they were stolen but the FBI as the agency in charge of investigating police abuses of power has that suspicion about police seizures too. For them to accept a seized phone without the necessary seizure paperwork is highly suspicious. If that's acting in good faith, then the fence is too!
Result: The Equal Protection Clause has effectively, pending an appeal to the Supreme Court, abolished the laws against receiving stolen property in the Fifth Circuit.
Legislatures and Congress CAN'T define qualified immunity by statute -- the US Constitution flatly forbids creating a less privileged class (in this case a VERY large class comprising 99.7% of the population) of citizen.
If any legislative branch body were to enact a law giving anyone qualified immunity, it would be completely unconstitutional; Which is why it's so mystifying that the judicial branch, supposedly unable to create new laws, was able to do what Congress cannot.
Re: Expediency, Legislating from the Bench and Tyranny
Holding them accountable makes you a member of a hate group. Treating them as you would any other violent criminal makes you a terrorist. Expecting them to know the law is unreasonable because they don't have law degrees (even though non-cops without law degrees get told ignorance is not an excuse). Expecting them to obey and uphold the law as they are paid and sworn to do is just crazy talk.
That's their narrative, and the courts seem to have bought into it hook, line and sinker.
Cops are used to being above the law. Whether a cop can get away with even the most outrageous behavior comes down to whether a prosecutor is having a bad day -- and most don't have those.
It's no mystery why cops do crap like this. They know they'll get away with it 9999 times out of 10000.
This. When it comes to cameras, you get the quality you pay for. A 'cheap' camera with some but not all of the features you'd want in a body camera will set you back close to $100. A truly cheap camera in the $20-$50 range probably won't capture what you need it to.
And like TRX said, a police-grade camera is firmly in the 'other peoples money' range, starting around $600 for a dirt cheap no-frills model, and going as high (in some cases) as $1000-$2000. And that's per camera -- the base station that secures the footage so it cannot be tampered with is a lot more.
About the best anyone using their own money can reasonably afford is a GoPro -- which isn't bad, but lacks a lot of the extras a real body cam has.
Re: Re: Gotta love those 'friendly little scuffles'
Any sentence of more than 365 days (366 in a leap year) is considered a felony conviction for purposes of losing one's right to possess a firearm.
Since a cop can't be hired in the USA without being able to be armed, this is a career ender for Dukes unless the Supreme Court reverses the appeals court.
Possibly untrue. The federal evidence tampering law in the US could be read to cover deleting non-informational things that would aid in a federal criminal investigation. Violating that law has a 20 year prison sentence.
Re: Re: 347.07 Special restrictions on lamps and the use ther
Ah, but police are exempt. They're always exempt from any law that does not specifically say it applies to police. Even the laws that say they apply to EVERYONE without exception don't apply to police unless they specifically say they do. Even if the statute actually does say it applies to police, it doesn't REALLY apply to police until a court agrees that it does.
That's the basis of the Qualified Immunity doctrine as it is currently interpreted.
It IS a really bad system. It's a complete dumpster fire on its best day. And it's the best in the world at what it attempts to do, by at least an order of magnitude.
Watching what happens to Europe now that every site pretty much is mandated to use filters nowhere near as good everywhere in the EU will be HILARIOUS. But only from a safe distance.
I get that you might not have a choice on what the partner offers. But honestly, most of these are pretty lackluster for the price, compared to what else is out there.
For example:
A Qi-enabled 8000 mAh power bank that plugs directly into the wall. Lacks the built-in cables, but a good bit cheaper at $26:
The North was winning that competition handily. The South knew it, and was trying to shift from a slave farming society to the Northern industrial model, but was being blocked by Northern industrial interests, often with truly absurd tariffs. Shipments of machine tools sat on Northern docks awaiting inspections that never came, import tariffs were set so high that no one could afford to pay them, Northern companies refused to sell machine tools to Southern companies.
Part of why the South rebelled was it became clear that there was no way to get around the unofficial blockade while the North still had the power to block the South from modernizing.
Modern revisionists are desperate to make it 'all about slavery' but that's an enormously simplified description of an enormously complex problem. If the South had been allowed to modernize (and thereby become competition to Northern factories) they'd have abolished slavery on their own because they knew it didn't work for what they needed.
On the post: St. Louis County Pays Woman $750,000 After Cops Perform A No-Knock Raid, Kill Her Dog... All Over Unpaid Utility Bills
Re: Whatever happened to...
They did cut the gas. And when that didn’t get the past-due bill paid they sent men with guns.
On the post: Court: No Immunity For SWAT Team That Hurled A Flash-Bang Grenade In The General Direction Of A Two-Year-Old Child
Re: Re: Definition of reasonable, and why so disparate results?
This. If Congress were to enact a statute granting police qualified immunity, it would be unconstitutional because it would create a (very large) class of less privileged citizen.
Yet somehow, despite the courts having no authority whatsoever to create new laws, the courts have been able to create qualified immunity despite it being both unconstitutional and them having no authority to create it.
But how do you hold the gatekeeper for the justice system accountable for breaking the law?
On the post: No Shirt, No Shoes, No Facescan, No Service: Welcome To 21st Century Convenience Store Shopping
Re: One More reason to Avoid Brick-&-Mortar Shopping
Amazon Fresh FTW.
On the post: Section 230 Is Not Exceptional, It Is Not Unique, It Is Not A Gift: It's The Codification Of Common Law Liability Principles
I'm tempted to try to organize a protest
Set it up like this:
Get some non-permanent marking material, colored residue-free masking tape, perhaps, and use it to write a message on the floor outside of the Senate or House of Representatives, in the Capitol building.
Have it spell out something like "For a good time, call Jenny at 867-5309"
Under the terms of FOSTA, being physically capable of writing the message on the floor means that Congress facilitated the message, and sending a janitor to remove it means they had knowledge of its presence. And therefore Congress could be in legal trouble for their sex trafficking that is not covered by CDA 230.
No damage done, building unharmed, obviously fake message, all should equal no charges or a dismissal of charges if some are brought. A conviction for that would be absurd. But it would neatly highlight the problems with FOSTA.
On the post: EFF Posts New White Paper On Stingray Device Capabilities
How can this possibly be lawful?
If I intercept a wireless communication, I have committed wiretapping, a felony.
If I pull files off someone’s computerized device under false pretenses, I have violated the Computer Fraud & Abuse Act.
People are being arrested and prosecuted (Aaron Swartz for example) for accessing public information in creative ways, yet the government is accessing confidential information without bothering with warrants via far more invasive means.
Every government exemption built into the laws I mentioned in this comment absolutely require a valid warrant and make it absolutely clear that doing without a warrant is a felony.
Cops like to talk about a few bad apples and isolated incidents, but for a government agency to get away with this sort of thing without being prosecuted or even arrested for it, means that 100% of the government officials involved in even the most peripheral way are corrupt and criminal.
If it were one good cop amongst an army of bad ones, we’d hear about them being fired for opposing this crap. But we don’t. Our government appears to be in the hands of domestic enemies of the Constitution and the people.
On the post: EFF Posts New White Paper On Stingray Device Capabilities
How can this possibly be lawful
On the post: Court: It's Cool If The (Federal) Government Searches A Phone The (Local) Government Seized Illegally
An illegal seizure is a theft even if unprosecuted
So the local cops illegally seized property, which if the system weren't corrupt as all hell would be prosecuted as armed robbery, but is without doubt at least theft of property.
So the cops now have illegal possession of that property, and turn it over to the feds. The feds received stolen property, and used it as they saw fit.
The Equal Protection Clause seems to apply here -- a fence does not ask where the goods came from, he just buys them. He may suspect that they were stolen but the FBI as the agency in charge of investigating police abuses of power has that suspicion about police seizures too. For them to accept a seized phone without the necessary seizure paperwork is highly suspicious. If that's acting in good faith, then the fence is too!
Result: The Equal Protection Clause has effectively, pending an appeal to the Supreme Court, abolished the laws against receiving stolen property in the Fifth Circuit.
On the post: Court Upholds Conviction Of Cop Who Threatened, Beat, Tased, And Arrested A Man For Complaining About Being Beaten By Him Earlier
Re: Qualified immunity...
Legislatures and Congress CAN'T define qualified immunity by statute -- the US Constitution flatly forbids creating a less privileged class (in this case a VERY large class comprising 99.7% of the population) of citizen.
If any legislative branch body were to enact a law giving anyone qualified immunity, it would be completely unconstitutional; Which is why it's so mystifying that the judicial branch, supposedly unable to create new laws, was able to do what Congress cannot.
On the post: Court Upholds Conviction Of Cop Who Threatened, Beat, Tased, And Arrested A Man For Complaining About Being Beaten By Him Earlier
Re: Expediency, Legislating from the Bench and Tyranny
Holding them accountable makes you a member of a hate group. Treating them as you would any other violent criminal makes you a terrorist. Expecting them to know the law is unreasonable because they don't have law degrees (even though non-cops without law degrees get told ignorance is not an excuse). Expecting them to obey and uphold the law as they are paid and sworn to do is just crazy talk.
That's their narrative, and the courts seem to have bought into it hook, line and sinker.
On the post: Court Upholds Conviction Of Cop Who Threatened, Beat, Tased, And Arrested A Man For Complaining About Being Beaten By Him Earlier
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Qualified immunity provides zero protection against a criminal charge. It only applies to civil lawsuits.
On the post: Court Upholds Conviction Of Cop Who Threatened, Beat, Tased, And Arrested A Man For Complaining About Being Beaten By Him Earlier
Re: 42 months wasn't enough...
Cops are used to being above the law. Whether a cop can get away with even the most outrageous behavior comes down to whether a prosecutor is having a bad day -- and most don't have those.
It's no mystery why cops do crap like this. They know they'll get away with it 9999 times out of 10000.
On the post: Court Upholds Conviction Of Cop Who Threatened, Beat, Tased, And Arrested A Man For Complaining About Being Beaten By Him Earlier
Re: Re:
This. When it comes to cameras, you get the quality you pay for. A 'cheap' camera with some but not all of the features you'd want in a body camera will set you back close to $100. A truly cheap camera in the $20-$50 range probably won't capture what you need it to.
And like TRX said, a police-grade camera is firmly in the 'other peoples money' range, starting around $600 for a dirt cheap no-frills model, and going as high (in some cases) as $1000-$2000. And that's per camera -- the base station that secures the footage so it cannot be tampered with is a lot more.
About the best anyone using their own money can reasonably afford is a GoPro -- which isn't bad, but lacks a lot of the extras a real body cam has.
On the post: Court Upholds Conviction Of Cop Who Threatened, Beat, Tased, And Arrested A Man For Complaining About Being Beaten By Him Earlier
Re: Re: Gotta love those 'friendly little scuffles'
Any sentence of more than 365 days (366 in a leap year) is considered a felony conviction for purposes of losing one's right to possess a firearm.
Since a cop can't be hired in the USA without being able to be armed, this is a career ender for Dukes unless the Supreme Court reverses the appeals court.
On the post: Court Upholds Conviction Of Cop Who Threatened, Beat, Tased, And Arrested A Man For Complaining About Being Beaten By Him Earlier
Re: Re: Pardon?
Because Trump has done it before?
On the post: Chinese Border Agents Now Installing Malware On Foreigners' Cellphones
Re: Re:
Possibly untrue. The federal evidence tampering law in the US could be read to cover deleting non-informational things that would aid in a federal criminal investigation. Violating that law has a 20 year prison sentence.
On the post: Federal Judge Says Flashing Headlights To Warn Drivers Of Hidden Cops MIGHT Be Protected Speech
Re: Re: 347.07 Special restrictions on lamps and the use ther
Ah, but police are exempt. They're always exempt from any law that does not specifically say it applies to police. Even the laws that say they apply to EVERYONE without exception don't apply to police unless they specifically say they do. Even if the statute actually does say it applies to police, it doesn't REALLY apply to police until a court agrees that it does.
That's the basis of the Qualified Immunity doctrine as it is currently interpreted.
On the post: YouTube Copyright Filters Suck: The 'Beat Saber' And 'Jimmy Fallon' Edition
Re: Re: First to File
It IS a really bad system. It's a complete dumpster fire on its best day. And it's the best in the world at what it attempts to do, by at least an order of magnitude.
Watching what happens to Europe now that every site pretty much is mandated to use filters nowhere near as good everywhere in the EU will be HILARIOUS. But only from a safe distance.
On the post: GDPR Concerns Temporarily Result In The Removal Of Trash Cans From Ireland Post Office
Re: Re: Everything is fine, see...
They could even call the exemptions "indulgences" and sell them on the individual level to those with enough money to pay.
On the post: Daily Deal: SCOUT Wireless 5,000mAh Portable Charger
I get that these are partnership deals
I get that you might not have a choice on what the partner offers. But honestly, most of these are pretty lackluster for the price, compared to what else is out there.
For example:
A Qi-enabled 8000 mAh power bank that plugs directly into the wall. Lacks the built-in cables, but a good bit cheaper at $26:
https://www.amazon.com/Gigastone-Wireless-8000mAh-Charging-Smartphones/dp/B07L4BQDSM
A 10000 mAh power bank that lacks Qi but plugs in directly and has its own cables for $37:
https://www.amazon.com/Portable-Charger-External-Battery-Type-c/dp/B07NXY34MF
I'd be a lot more likely to buy the daily deal if it actually was worth buying!
On the post: Bloomberg Appears To Flub Another China Story, Insists Telnet Is A Nefarious Huawei Backdoor
Re: Re:
The North was winning that competition handily. The South knew it, and was trying to shift from a slave farming society to the Northern industrial model, but was being blocked by Northern industrial interests, often with truly absurd tariffs. Shipments of machine tools sat on Northern docks awaiting inspections that never came, import tariffs were set so high that no one could afford to pay them, Northern companies refused to sell machine tools to Southern companies.
Part of why the South rebelled was it became clear that there was no way to get around the unofficial blockade while the North still had the power to block the South from modernizing.
Modern revisionists are desperate to make it 'all about slavery' but that's an enormously simplified description of an enormously complex problem. If the South had been allowed to modernize (and thereby become competition to Northern factories) they'd have abolished slavery on their own because they knew it didn't work for what they needed.
Next >>