By declaring a national emergency. By invoking the war powers act. By using common sense.
The power to do none of those things is found in the Constitution. Nowhere does the Constitution say, "All this stuff applies except if the government says the word 'emergency', in which case the government can do whatever it wants'.
And the War Powers Act has no provisions for canceling an election, so that's a loser right out of the gate.
If teenagers were playing on either side of that border and even threw rocks at the guards on the other side those teenagers could expect to live through the experience.
Yeah, those North Korean border guards are well-known for their restraint and respect for human life.
But the fact of the matter is that every day hundreds of Mexicans cross the U.S. border illegally and face little to no consequence for it. When they're caught, they're detained and sent back to their own country.
When North Korean citizens illegally cross their own border while attempting to flee the hellscape that is their own country, they're summarily executed, sometimes by the dozens, and when caught alive, they're sent to a concentration camp for the rest of their lives and their families and extended relatives are rounded up and sent there with them, even if they had nothing to do with the attempted escape.
To say that the U.S./Mexico border is less friendly than the North Korean Demilitarized Zone is such a ridiculous absurdity one wonders what color the sky in your world is.
The Fourth Amendment governs what US government employees do.
Well, that's not entirely accurate. The military are US government employees, but the 4th Amendment has no application to what they do. When a B-52 Stratofortress drops a 10,000-lb bomb on the enemy, the 4th Amendment has nothing to do with it.
What it boils down to is that in practical reality it's impossible to raise a criminal charge against a LEO unless the DA is willing to do so.
You can apply to the court for a writ of mandamus, which is a judicial order to a government official that basically says, "Do your job or appear before me and explain why you can't."
Yes, that's where the focus needs to be placed. Reforming this idea that no matter what a person does is suspicious, therefore no cop is ever unreasonable.
As a black male he would undoubtedly have been gunned down cold
Not born out by the data. While there is racial bias in police encounters and those involving non-lethal force, the data shows that in incidents of lethal force, there blacks and hispanics are not any more likely to be killed by police than whites.
An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force
Roland G. Fryer, Jr.
July 2016
In stark contrast to non-lethal uses of force, we find no racial differences in officer-involved shootings on either the extensive or intensive margins. Using data from Houston, Texas – where we have both officer-involved shootings and a randomly chosen set of potential interactions with police where lethal force may have been justified – we find, in the raw data, that blacks are 23.8% less likely to be shot at by police relative to whites. Hispanics are 8.5% less likely. Both coefficients are statistically insignificant. Adding controls for civilian demographics, officer demographics, encounter characteristics, type of weapon civilian was carrying, and year fixed effects, the black (resp. Hispanic) coefficient is 0.924 (0.417) (resp. 1.256 (0.595)). These coefficients are remarkably robust across alternative empirical specifications and subsets of the data. Partitioning the data in myriad ways, we find no evidence of racial discrimination in officer-involved shootings. Investigating the intensive margin – the timing of shootings or how many bullets were discharged in the endeavor – there are no detectable racial differences.
Applying a different standard to Fourth Amendment jurisprudence makes sense.
Sense or not, it would violate the 14th Amendment to do this. We have an Equal Protection Clause for a reason and you can't violate one amendment in pursuit of bolstering another.
But the headlines they got for making it more expansive were so helpful. You label them a sex offender & people KNOW how horrible a person they are:
sexting
peeing in an alley...
Hell, in Georgia, they can now require you to register as a sex offender for anything. Burglary, extortion, reckless driving, doesn't matter. The court can order to you register as a sex offender.
Like I said, go ahead and keep ignoring common sense that tells us when you stop enforcing laws against criminal behavior, you get more criminal behavior.
Maybe you need a 'study' or a 'report' to tell you that, but most thinking people with even a decade of life experience under their belts know it to be true.
Barr is right. Nationwide violent crime is on the decline. That a few outliers are producing spikes has nothing to do with "progressive DAs"
But it's all just a huge coincidence that those 'few outliers' have nutcase DAs who are literally refusing to enforce the majority of the penal code in their cities?
Starting with radical socialist George Gascón and followed by Chesa Boudin (the adopted kid of Weather Underground terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn), and aided by Prop 47, the district attorney's office in San Francisco is almost wholly responsible for the syringe-strewn, disease-ridden open sewer that San Francisco has become. They've taken one of the most beautiful cities in America and turned it into a shitpile where almost all crime is tolerated, excused, and ignored. And having beheld the consequences of his work, Boudin is still not satisfied and is promising to enforce even fewer laws in the future.
And now Gascón is down in Los Angeles running for D.A. there, promising to bring San Francisco's Thunderdome to the City of Angels, too.
But yeah, let's ignore common sense, which tells us when you tolerate behavior, you get more of it, and keep pretending 'no one can say' why this explosion of crime, disease, and violence only seems to be happening in cities with radical 'progressives' in city government.
...a reminder that in the modern era, dumb technology routinely winds
up being the smarter option.
Amen. Up until last month, I was commuting in a 2019 Impala company car with all the new bells and whistles, everything connected to everything, whoop-de-doo, and I don't miss it at all. I had so many headaches with all that shit when it went haywire that I never have with my 1998 4Runner which still runs like a dream and isn't connected to anything.
However, the way it works, the command to wipe the phone would be invoked when it came out the faraday bag and it got a network connection again.
No, they take the electronics back to the cop shop, where they go into a shielded room, and only then are they taken out of the bag and worked on safe from outside interference.
Starting Rawls off with four years in jail before even bringing the case to trial is punishment for punishment's sake.
He'll almost certainly be credited for that time on his eventual sentence after conviction. So if he gets 30 years, they'll take those four off the top and he'll go in for 26.
On the post: Social Media Promised To Block Covid-19 Misinformation; But They're Also Blocking Legit Info Too
Re: Re:
The president has no such power.
Everyone.
On the post: Social Media Promised To Block Covid-19 Misinformation; But They're Also Blocking Legit Info Too
Re: Re:
The power to do none of those things is found in the Constitution. Nowhere does the Constitution say, "All this stuff applies except if the government says the word 'emergency', in which case the government can do whatever it wants'.
And the War Powers Act has no provisions for canceling an election, so that's a loser right out of the gate.
On the post: Social Media Promised To Block Covid-19 Misinformation; But They're Also Blocking Legit Info Too
Re:
No, socialism is the ownership of the means of production by the 'people'-- i.e., the state.
On the post: Supreme Court Says It's OK For Border Patrol Agents To Kill Mexican Citizens As Long As They Die In Mexico
Re: Re: Re:
Yeah, those North Korean border guards are well-known for their restraint and respect for human life.
But the fact of the matter is that every day hundreds of Mexicans cross the U.S. border illegally and face little to no consequence for it. When they're caught, they're detained and sent back to their own country.
When North Korean citizens illegally cross their own border while attempting to flee the hellscape that is their own country, they're summarily executed, sometimes by the dozens, and when caught alive, they're sent to a concentration camp for the rest of their lives and their families and extended relatives are rounded up and sent there with them, even if they had nothing to do with the attempted escape.
To say that the U.S./Mexico border is less friendly than the North Korean Demilitarized Zone is such a ridiculous absurdity one wonders what color the sky in your world is.
On the post: Supreme Court Says It's OK For Border Patrol Agents To Kill Mexican Citizens As Long As They Die In Mexico
Re: Re: Mexican FCA?
Except that the fence is on the U.S. side.
On the post: Judge Tears Into Cops For Beating A Man Who Dared To Question Their Words And Actions
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The judge can do more
Typically the county sheriff or the state police.
On the post: Supreme Court Says It's OK For Border Patrol Agents To Kill Mexican Citizens As Long As They Die In Mexico
Re:
Nothing, considering it's not true.
On the post: Supreme Court Says It's OK For Border Patrol Agents To Kill Mexican Citizens As Long As They Die In Mexico
Well, that's not entirely accurate. The military are US government employees, but the 4th Amendment has no application to what they do. When a B-52 Stratofortress drops a 10,000-lb bomb on the enemy, the 4th Amendment has nothing to do with it.
On the post: Judge Tears Into Cops For Beating A Man Who Dared To Question Their Words And Actions
Re: Re: Re: Re: The judge can do more
You can apply to the court for a writ of mandamus, which is a judicial order to a government official that basically says, "Do your job or appear before me and explain why you can't."
On the post: South Carolina's Top Court Decides Black Men Should Feel Free To Terminate 'Consensual' Stops By Law Enforcement Officers
Re: Re:
Yes, that's where the focus needs to be placed. Reforming this idea that no matter what a person does is suspicious, therefore no cop is ever unreasonable.
On the post: South Carolina's Top Court Decides Black Men Should Feel Free To Terminate 'Consensual' Stops By Law Enforcement Officers
Re: Re:
Not born out by the data. While there is racial bias in police encounters and those involving non-lethal force, the data shows that in incidents of lethal force, there blacks and hispanics are not any more likely to be killed by police than whites.
An Empirical Analysis of Racial Differences in Police Use of Force
Roland G. Fryer, Jr.
July 2016
https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/area/workshop/leo/leo16_fryer.pdf
In stark contrast to non-lethal uses of force, we find no racial differences in officer-involved shootings on either the extensive or intensive margins. Using data from Houston, Texas – where we have both officer-involved shootings and a randomly chosen set of potential interactions with police where lethal force may have been justified – we find, in the raw data, that blacks are 23.8% less likely to be shot at by police relative to whites. Hispanics are 8.5% less likely. Both coefficients are statistically insignificant. Adding controls for civilian demographics, officer demographics, encounter characteristics, type of weapon civilian was carrying, and year fixed effects, the black (resp. Hispanic) coefficient is 0.924 (0.417) (resp. 1.256 (0.595)). These coefficients are remarkably robust across alternative empirical specifications and subsets of the data. Partitioning the data in myriad ways, we find no evidence of racial discrimination in officer-involved shootings. Investigating the intensive margin – the timing of shootings or how many bullets were discharged in the endeavor – there are no detectable racial differences.
On the post: South Carolina's Top Court Decides Black Men Should Feel Free To Terminate 'Consensual' Stops By Law Enforcement Officers
Sense or not, it would violate the 14th Amendment to do this. We have an Equal Protection Clause for a reason and you can't violate one amendment in pursuit of bolstering another.
On the post: Federal Court Permanently Blocks Michigan's Sex Offender Registry Law, Tells Legislators To Try Writing A Constitutional One
Re:
Hell, in Georgia, they can now require you to register as a sex offender for anything. Burglary, extortion, reckless driving, doesn't matter. The court can order to you register as a sex offender.
https://www.wired.com/2010/03/sex-offender-databases/
On the post: AG Bill Barr Pretends The Nation Was Better Off Being Bullied By Cops, Lies About The Success Of 'Tough On Crime' Policies
Re:
Like I said, go ahead and keep ignoring common sense that tells us when you stop enforcing laws against criminal behavior, you get more criminal behavior.
Maybe you need a 'study' or a 'report' to tell you that, but most thinking people with even a decade of life experience under their belts know it to be true.
On the post: AG Bill Barr Pretends The Nation Was Better Off Being Bullied By Cops, Lies About The Success Of 'Tough On Crime' Policies
Crime
But it's all just a huge coincidence that those 'few outliers' have nutcase DAs who are literally refusing to enforce the majority of the penal code in their cities?
Starting with radical socialist George Gascón and followed by Chesa Boudin (the adopted kid of Weather Underground terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn), and aided by Prop 47, the district attorney's office in San Francisco is almost wholly responsible for the syringe-strewn, disease-ridden open sewer that San Francisco has become. They've taken one of the most beautiful cities in America and turned it into a shitpile where almost all crime is tolerated, excused, and ignored. And having beheld the consequences of his work, Boudin is still not satisfied and is promising to enforce even fewer laws in the future.
And now Gascón is down in Los Angeles running for D.A. there, promising to bring San Francisco's Thunderdome to the City of Angels, too.
But yeah, let's ignore common sense, which tells us when you tolerate behavior, you get more of it, and keep pretending 'no one can say' why this explosion of crime, disease, and violence only seems to be happening in cities with radical 'progressives' in city government.
On the post: Open Source Voice Assistant Promises To 'Nuke From Orbit' Patent Troll
Re: Re: Patent Trolls... they mostly come at night. Mostly.
All true, but really, since the CEO's 'nuke from orbit' line was from ALIENS, I was just responding in kind.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nnHmUk_J6xQ
On the post: Driver Stranded After 'Smart' Rental Car Can't Phone Home
Amen. Up until last month, I was commuting in a 2019 Impala company car with all the new bells and whistles, everything connected to everything, whoop-de-doo, and I don't miss it at all. I had so many headaches with all that shit when it went haywire that I never have with my 1998 4Runner which still runs like a dream and isn't connected to anything.
On the post: Open Source Voice Assistant Promises To 'Nuke From Orbit' Patent Troll
Patent Trolls... they mostly come at night. Mostly.
We've got a dozen canisters of CN-20, I say we roll them down there and gas the whole fucking nest.
On the post: Michigan County Sued For Stealing Cars From Innocent Car Owners Via Civil Forfeiture
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
No, they take the electronics back to the cop shop, where they go into a shielded room, and only then are they taken out of the bag and worked on safe from outside interference.
On the post: Appeals Court Rules That People Can't Be Locked Up Indefinitely For Refusing To Decrypt Devices
He'll almost certainly be credited for that time on his eventual sentence after conviction. So if he gets 30 years, they'll take those four off the top and he'll go in for 26.
Next >>