How much longer?

Fusion pimp · Post by **Fusion pimp** » Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:16 pm

We're restricted like never before with big brother watching over us. Protecting us.Freedoms are being taken while government powers are being added, in secret. Double, triple even quadruple taxed in many cases. I could go on and on and on and on and on....

How long are folks going to carry on as if everything is okay? Heads burried. At what point are people going to wake-up and realize just how far we have fallen in such short amount of time. More importantly, what, short of a complete revolt can be done to change it? I fear we're past the point of no return. I see things turning very sour once people have decided they've had enough.
The way I see it, we're either going to continue on being a people afraid of government instead of the other way around, or, civil uprising. There really is nothing in between.

fringe B.

Skyalmian · Post by **Skyalmian** » Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:24 pm

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:33 pm

The country was just as divided, if not even more so, at the time of Vietnam. I don't remember hearing of any civil wars then. This whole Big Brother/loss of civil liberties trip is really getting to me. What I want to know is, when will people take their heads out of their @$$es and stop believing all of this propaganda? Please, enlighten me: what are the specific civil liberties that Americans have lost, and what has gotten so Orwellian about the government? Don't give me the same old "Patriot Act" crap; try actually reading the document. More than anything else, it's meant to ease intelligence sharing. Sure, there may be one clause or two that pushes common sense a little bit, but I wish to God that everyone would stop getting irrational over it. Repeat after me: Bush is not "Big Brother," nor is he Hitler. He's just a president who's had to put up with a lot more crap during his term than any other during the past 30 years or so. If people would actually bother to learn the truth and lose their pre-conceived prejudices instead of believing so much propaganda, this "severe division" you speak of would vanish overnight.

As for the cultural war, I'll agree with you. America's youth are perpetuating a swing toward a more socially conservative way of thinking. This type of swing happens every few decades in US history; it's the opposite of the liberal mindset of the sixties. It can't happen too soon, in my opinion.

Avder · Post by **Avder** » Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:36 pm

An older friend of mine who actually lived through the race riots and the vietnam protests also thinks this country is ripe for civil war. In her opinion, all it would take to spark it is one blatently opressive action by any government entity.

I'm forced to say I agree with her.

Testiculese · Post by **Testiculese** » Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:37 pm

We've been past the point of no return for 30 years now...

Are you kidding me, Top? You don't step outside of rural areas much or something? The amount of oppression, coercion, and outright lies is unprecedented.

You are robbed blind every day. I bet you don't even know how.

The governemnt at all levels operate for the benefit of corporations, not you. Presently..insurance companies. They've been on a milk run for years. At your expense.

I bet you pay income tax. Do you even know the definition of income? I bet you don't.

Capital gains.
The fact that you are taxed every time you sell a car/house. Why was that again?
You can be arrested/fined for driving without shoes.
You can get 10 years in prison for a knife that 'they' don't like.
(Yes, random picks from the spectrum)

We don't have any freedoms left. Fools that spout "We have the first amendment!" are completely deluded. We have the right to complain, and that's it. If you want to do something about it..you have to get a permit from the government, or they can simply arrest you.

You can be arrested for not presenting your 'papers' to any officer that walks up to you at random and demands them. Even if he just asks your name, which is none of his business. Isn't that nice? You can join rapists and killers for not stating your name, rank and serial number on demand.

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:39 pm

Avder, tell me this: in the past 50 years, has our government ever done something "overtly oppressive," as you put it, to its own citizens? The Japanese interment is an obvious example, but I'm discluding it because it's universally accepted as oppressive and because I'm counting on the fact that we have learned something since then. In a way, I'm glad that some of this conflict is occurring; it's finally bringing out old lies and putting them to rest.

Testi, what "point of no return"? I swear, all you liberals make it sound as though the sky is falling. What's the matter, worried Bush might actually win?

Just chill, already.

(Boy, now who sounds like the hippie?

)

Skyalmian · Post by **Skyalmian** » Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:42 pm

Top Gun, what do you think would happen if there was another terrorist attack? The government, knowing that they didn't do their job well enough to protect us, would crack down hard on everyone, and all the powers the government gave itself would be put to use. A knee-jerk reaction like that would get a very bad one from the public.

Edit: Testi isn't a liberal. He isn't for either side, as he stated in another thread. And neither am I.

Fusion pimp · Post by **Fusion pimp** » Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:56 pm

Top Gun,

I'm not a lib, I'm a Bush supporter.
Where did I speak of a division?
I'm not spewing propaganda and if you'd step away from the computer for a bit you'd realize that.

I have read the patriot act( more than once) and while I don't think it's necessarily intended to encroach Americans' liberties, in many places it's so broad that it can.

Does the DBB have enough space for me to list the "specific civil liberties that Americans have lost"?

More importantly, Mr. Gun, is not what we have lost but what they have the ability to take, at will.

And finally, how old are you?

B-

Gooberman · Post by **Gooberman** » Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:57 pm

In response to Civil war between liberals and conservatives, I doubt it.

I think one of the things that keep this country great is the constant fight between the two groups.

I am just as afraid of an all liberal government as I am of an all conservative government, and would hate to see either one completely dominate.

Testiculese · Post by **Testiculese** » Tue Sep 07, 2004 9:57 pm

I'm for leaving people alone. Whatever that defines me as, so be it. Blanket laws are a joke, and used as money-gathering tools. Did you know that the state of PA dropped the legal limit for alcohol in DUI's? The number of infractions had dropped significantly, so it was lowered. Why? Ask yourself..where's the money in it? Right! More arrests! Even when you're walking. What kind of country would allow you to be walking down the street from a bar minding your own business, and the police come swooping by and place you in jail for public drunkeness? Where was the crime?

Common law is freedom. What we have is total ★■◆●.

Fusion pimp · Post by **Fusion pimp** » Tue Sep 07, 2004 10:00 pm

I'm for leaving people alone.

I love you, man..

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Tue Sep 07, 2004 10:14 pm

Fusion Pimp, if it matters or anything, I'm 18. I'm sorry for mis-identifying you as a liberal; it's just that the very statements you're making are usually coming from the mouths of liberals. By the way, any government has the ability to take civil liberties away from its citizens. With the power granted by the people to govern comes that ability. I just don't see our government, present or future, doing so to the extent you're talking about.

Testi, I know nothing about economic matters, nor do I care to. Just about everything you said doesn't apply to me. I think your version of corruption is somewhat exaggerated, as well. You seem to have an unnatural aversion to police officers. They're charged with keeping the peace. They have every right to ask you for your name/identification; with the amount of crap they have to put up with as part of their job description, they can't afford to be careless. By the way, freedom doesn't come without responsibility. You're not free to walk around the streets drunk; nothing in the Constitution or the legal code gives you that right. You'll get arrested for your own safety as well as those around you; drunks aren't exactly known for rational behavior. The legal limit for driving should have been dropped; a drunk driver is the single most dangerous thing on the road, and the fewer, the better. Your version of "freedom" seems to lean toward anarchy. "Leaving people alone" isn't a practical philosophy for day-to-day government.

Sky, I don't think the public reaction would be as great as you anticipate. If another attack as horrific as 9/11 occurred, I'm willing to bet the public would be willing to accept further government action, no matter the constitutionality. Like it or not, as has been said before, the average Joe would be looking for a greater sense of security at such a time. Also, when I referred to you and Testi as liberals, I wasn't referring to any sort of political affiliation. Testi's idea, at least, of "freedom" is by its very definition liberal. I don't have any impression of where you yourself stand, though.

Avder · Post by **Avder** » Tue Sep 07, 2004 10:15 pm

Thomas Jefferson wrote:When the Government fears the People, there is Liberty. When the People fear the Government, there is Tyranny

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Tue Sep 07, 2004 10:16 pm

You may fear the government, but I, for one, don't. I'm guessing that our current political candidates have a healthy fear of public opinion at the moment, as well

.

Skyalmian · Post by **Skyalmian** » Tue Sep 07, 2004 10:25 pm

Fusion pimp · Post by **Fusion pimp** » Tue Sep 07, 2004 10:28 pm

Fusion Pimp, if it matters or anything, I'm 18.

Thanks for answering. by your response I figured you to be young, not that it's bad.

I'm sorry for mis-identifying you as a liberal; it's just that the very statements you're making are usually coming from the mouths of liberals.

I was a bit taken back by being called a liberal, I don't think I've ever been called worse. Kidding!

By the way, any government has the ability to take civil liberties away from its citizens.

[How do you make that emoticon with the really big eyes?]

While there are certain intances that the gov can temporarily suspend civil liberties, they cannot take them away permanently. That's what our Constitution/Bill of Rights protects us from.

With the power granted by the people to govern comes that ability.

The people no longer have the power. It has become "what the government says is good for the people" rather than "what the people say is good for the people". The people have only what the government gives tham rather than the other way around.

B-

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Tue Sep 07, 2004 10:35 pm

When I said the "ability" to take away civil liberties, I meant the actual power as represented by military might/population control. Theoretically, if a dictatorially-minded president with full military support decided to suspend the Bill of Rights, he could do so by holding the public at ransom. Obviously, rebellion would ensue at this. Practically, though, it's obvious that the Bill of Rights protects the citizenry against such an occurrence and that no one would give the government such power. If a year of US Government taught me nothing else, it taught me that

.

Call me naive, but I still believe that the people have the power to establish government. We still hold the most fundamental power: suffrage. If a majority of the public feels that a certain candidate is misrepresenting them, they will elect a new candidate. To me, the issue lies not with governmental power but with the actual candidates who are running for office. Most of the time, there is no ideal candidate; it's simply the choice of which one is more appealing despite their faults. It's a sad but true fact, and I think it's about time that we got some fresh blood into the political process. I hope that my generation has the drive and commitment to do so.

Fusion pimp · Post by **Fusion pimp** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 12:55 am

When I said the "ability" to take away civil liberties, I meant the actual power as represented by military might/population control. Theoretically, if a dictatorially-minded president with full military support decided to suspend the Bill of Rights, he could do so by holding the public at ransom. Obviously, rebellion would ensue at this. Practically, though, it's obvious that the Bill of Rights protects the citizenry against such an occurrence and that no one would give the government such power. If a year of US Government taught me nothing else, it taught me that.

Okay, you've forced my hand.

The government will never take such actions against an armed citizenry. With the attack by the anti-gunners and anti-firearm legislation, the government will soon have the ability to take that action with very, very little resistance.
No one would give the government such power, huh?
Ask your US Gov teacher about F.E.M.A and who gave them the powers to declare martial law requiring no permission by the people or administrative/judicial branch. Emergency War Powers (more military jurisdiction imposed upon citizens and constitutional provisions suspended),N.S.A( don't get me started on these people), etc. While they have yet to use some of these powers, the fact is, they have the ability and the powers are slowly( and silently) stacking against the people.
The government gives the government the powers and more often than not it's done in secret.
Or how about those damn black helicoptors that keep circling my house!?

kidding.

You can call it propaganda if you wish, but what I'm telling you is easily verified.

B-

Tyranny · Post by **Tyranny** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:16 am

I think in this age of political correctness it is pretty safe to assume the government fears us more then we fear them or else most of what they conduct behind closed doors would be out in the open. Even before being PC the government has conducted its business much the same for over a century now. Do not fear though....

If my numbers are correct, I think we out number them

. Listen, if push came to shove they still couldn't overthrow the will of the people.

We the people still hold the ultimate power when everything is said and done no matter how intimidating the government might seem or become. Our individualisms are what make us powerful and what may start out as opinion in the beginning may come to action in the end.

History does not lie in these matters...

Now B...Testi...stop being little bitches and live your lives. If you don't like where the US is headed, move.

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 2:45 am

"Now B...Testi...stop being little bitches and live your lives. If you don't like where the US is headed, move."

even as a joke this is the worst possible thing you could do. If everyone who didn't like it moved away, who would be left? people that support or just go along with whatever happens. that would make whatever the gvmt wants to do easier, because there would be less people to convince.

"it is pretty safe to assume the government fears us more then we fear them or else most of what they conduct behind closed doors would be out in the open."

this also has the side effect of letting them do whatever they want, and sometimes it's something that's not good. give these guys enough time and they'll give themselves the power to arrest you on site if you're wearing so much as a shirt that says 'I only support the government 90%', let alone throw you in jail for speaking out against them.

You ever lock the door to your bedroom behind you and started doing stuff that was forbidden and hoped your parents wouldn't catch you in the act? same idea was used for rushing bills through at 4 AM.

"If my numbers are correct, I think we out number them"

they have laser guided bombs, cruise missiles, tanks, very well trained soldiers.. and MOAB's. You have pea shooters.

Tyranny · Post by **Tyranny** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 3:29 am

Ferny, don't make the mistake of assuming I'm pro-government. I'm far from it. To me it just seems pointless to live your life in fear of something that probably won't really ever effect your daily life the whole time you're on this planet to begin with. Theres nothing wrong with voicing your opinions on things you feel are wrong with the current system IMO. Doing such does indeed lead to change.

However some of the people on this board just get plain crazy with some things like every waking minute Bush or whoever is in charge at the time is banging down their door arresting them for some trivial BS every day.

Ferno wrote:even as a joke this is the worst possible thing you could do. If everyone who didn't like it moved away, who would be left? people that support or just go along with whatever happens. that would make whatever the gvmt wants to do easier, because there would be less people to convince.

Yes, it was a joke. Did you honestly think I meant for them to literally move? If there was a better country they'd be living there already

Ferno wrote: give these guys enough time and they'll give themselves the power to arrest you on site if you're wearing so much as a shirt that says 'I only support the government 90%', let alone throw you in jail for speaking out against them.

Heh, if that ever happens, then I'll move.

Ferno wrote:You ever lock the door to your bedroom behind you and started doing stuff that was forbidden and hoped your parents wouldn't catch you in the act? same idea was used for rushing bills through at 4 AM.

Not very often. I was fortunate that most of the time my parents respected my privacy and I never got involved in anything expressly forbidden. When I did get involved in things I probably shouldn't have been doing my parents were either A) never home or B) I was too old for it to be any of their damn business.

Ferno wrote:they have laser guided bombs, cruise missiles, tanks, very well trained soldiers.. and MOAB's. You have pea shooters.

Yeah, and we have the numbers. I never said there wouldn't be casualties

I'd wager we'd eventually get to them before they got all of us, but whatever, I could be wrong and by the time we find that answer out I'd probably be dead anyways

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 4:48 am

Recall that the guys manning all the guns, tanks, laser-guided bombs, etc. are our friends and family. You really think, if the government ordered them to fire on US civilians, they'd do it?

No wonder I keep hearing so much fear from all the Kerry supporters I know -- they've all dehumanized the military so much they've forgotten they're people. And yeah, if the military was a computer-controlled machine, I'd be pretty worried too -- but the military is made up of our brothers and sisters and sons and daughters and friends, so I don't have any fear of them.

Arol · Post by **Arol** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 6:44 am

Itâ??s clear to anyone American as well as non-American that there is a widening schism between liberal and conservative elements in the American public. From visits to the US over the past decade and more, and listening to discussions of deeply conservative family and friends, it has been impossible not to be amazed at the almost loathing that they expressed when talking of then President Clinton. I always thought that it had more to do with his lack of morals, instead of what is becoming more and more apparent, deeper social and political issues.
But for it to have reached such a level where open fears of a Second American Civil War, such as these are openly stated is for a non- American too, both chilling and ominous.
Because that is what some of the postings basically refer to isnâ??t it?
Granted that this election has seen some rather extreme forms of mud slinging, but isnâ??t that just characteristic of your election process? They happen before the primaries, before the nominations and they happen prior to the elections themselves.
Granted it doesnâ??t help for some idiot to run a suggestion like: Possibility of cancelling the election, in response to a new terrorist attack on US soilup the flagpole. But this item was soon vilified from almost all sides.
Granted that there are some elements of the Patriot Act that needs revising, but that is what you have your US Supreme Court for isnâ??t it?

Skyalmian wrote:â?¦ what do you think would happen if there was another terrorist attack? The government, knowing that they didn't do their job well enough to protect us, would crack down hard on everyone, and all the powers the government gave itself would be put to use.

If there was an action like Beslan on US soil, donâ??t you think that the public would demand that the authorities use those powers in attempting to get at the perpetrators

Skyalmian wrote:
Top Gun wrote:Sky, I don't think the public reaction would be as great as you anticipate. If another attack as horrific as 9/11 occurred, I'm willing to bet the public would be willing to accept further government action, no matter the constitutionality.
Both halves would be angry, but only one half of the nation would accept the government's action. The other half wouldn't. I'm sure you can correctly guess which wouldn't.

Donâ??t you think that it would be a question of what the target was. If like in Beslan it involved that taking out of an entire kindergarten? Donâ??t you think that in such an instance there would be a broader bi-partisan cry for action?

Fusion pimp wrote: While there are certain instances that the gov can temporarily suspend civil liberties, they cannot take them away permanently. That's what our Constitution/Bill of Rights protects us from.

Right, didnâ??t Lincoln temporarily, suspend your Bill of Rights without the US turning permanently into an iron heel dictatorship?

Lothar wrote:Recall that the guys manning all the guns, tanks, laser-guided bombs, etc. are our friends and family. You really think, if the government ordered them to fire on US civilians, they'd do it?

All right Lothar; time to play Devils Advocate!
Remember Kent State?.

Lothar · Post by **Lothar** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 7:04 am

I was born in 1980, so no, I don't remember anything that happened in 1970. But I have read a few things.

Keep in mind that a civil war would require far more than a single incident. From what I understand, Kent State was basically *one* totally nutty incident where some (ill-trained) guardsmen went off and shot into a crowd of rowdy protesting hippies. That's a far cry from civil war, where the military would have to be shooting at major civilian groups *regularly*. Not just once, but all the time. That's not going to happen.

I don't believe our military would be capable of actually turning on the population and waging war.

All this "civil war" talk... it's just hype. People are antsy about the election. Some people REALLY hate Bush, and some people REALLY like him, so people are going to hype up the "divide" between us in order to rally their base and try to frighten the other side's base. If there's such a divide, then this election becomes totally critical. But that divide doesn't really exist -- when the day's done, we're all still friends. When the day's done, we still have a lot more in common than we have different. And when the day's done, we're all a lot more sensible than you'd think from the wing-nuttery you see on this board.

Palzon · Post by **Palzon** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:05 am

Lothar wrote:...You really think, if the government ordered them to fire on US civilians, they'd do it?

No wonder I keep hearing so much fear from all the Kerry supporters I know -- they've all dehumanized the military so much they've forgotten they're people...

I agree that the army wouldn't fire on the people in any kind of concerted military action. I'm far from a conservative and far from a Kerry supporter. I wouldn't think it is strictly a "liberal" line of thinking to suggest that the military would oppress the people if ordered to do so. Otherwise, I agree with Lothar's train of thought here.

If the Chinese Army wouldn't go the distance after Tiananmen, then what chance do you think there is that our Army would?

Another Kent State would certainly be possible, and arguably has happened already since then. But Civil War? No.

DBB "wing-nuttery" would sooner lead to LAN fisticuffs.

Arol · Post by **Arol** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 9:25 am

Lothar wrote: And when the day's done, we're all a lot more sensible than you'd think from the wing-nuttery you see on this board.

Hope you're right!

Ferno · Post by **Ferno** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 10:50 am

"don't make the mistake of assuming I'm pro-government"

Never figured you were.

"Yes, it was a joke. Did you honestly think I meant for them to literally move? If there was a better country they'd be living there already"

That's in line with what I was thinking.

"I was fortunate that most of the time my parents respected my privacy and I never got involved in anything expressly forbidden"

yes, you were very fortunate.

"Yeah, and we have the numbers. I never said there wouldn't be casualties.

"

well duh.

"I agree that the army wouldn't fire on the people"

that's right, they wouldn't. But if ordered to, they just might. Some may be torn between firing on a brother and following orders. at that point they may just go AWOL or ask for discharge. Some may just do it because they were ordered to. Some may just go insane.

Testiculese · Post by **Testiculese** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 10:59 am

Top Gun wrote:...I know nothing about economic matters, nor do I care to.

They have every right to ask you for your name/identification

You're not free to walk around the streets drunk

You better learn about it, it will cost you 25-40% of your wages. Unless you only work minimum wage.

The police have NO right to interrogate you without a crime being committed unless you give consent. oops! Not anymore, now you can! Next? Property search and seziure. Think a court order/your consent is necessary still?

I have every right to walk the streets freely when drunk. Have I committed a crime? No. Could I? Sure, so could anyone, drunk or sober. That's not the point. I have not committed a crime, yet I can be hauled away and put in prison if I don't run and hide from any cop that happens to drive by. You call that freedom? You can be imprisoned, lose your job, permanent mark on your FBI profile by any one of a thousand no-crime, no-victim, 'offenses'.

You're just too young and too far out in the sticks to be affected yet. Even so, you've never known what freedom really is. This generation graduating now has never known it, and will never really understand it. Many freedoms were lost before I was old enough to realize what they were.

I bet you think you own that car you drive around.

Palzon · Post by **Palzon** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 11:27 am

Testiculese wrote: The police have NO right to interrogate you without a crime being committed unless you give consent. oops! Not anymore, now you can! Next? Property search and seziure. Think a court order/your consent is necessary still?

Not so. The police can legally detain and question you to determine whether or not a crime has been committed. Also, (i don't believe) they need your consent to search property such as a vehicle or bag you're carrying IF their probable cause is strong enough OR they already have enough to charge you with a crime. They tend to ask for your permission so that they don't get evidence thrown out. Your home is a different story. There are stronger protections for home searches.

Testiculese wrote:
I have every right to walk the streets freely when drunk. Have I committed a crime? No. Could I? Sure, so could anyone, drunk or sober. That's not the point. I have not committed a crime, yet I can be hauled away and put in prison if I don't run and hide from any cop that happens to drive by. You call that freedom? You can be imprisoned, lose your job, permanent mark on your FBI profile by any one of a thousand no-crime, no-victim, 'offenses'.

You're confusing me. Public intoxication is a crime. So is drinking and driving. Are you saying these things should be legal? Fleeing from police is actually a felony.

Testiculese wrote:You're just too young and too far out in the sticks to be affected yet. Even so, you've never known what freedom really is. This generation graduating now has never known it, and will never really understand it. Many freedoms were lost before I was old enough to realize what they were.

I think this is a little alarmist. If you are charged with a misdemeanor you can bond out practically right away. If you commit a felony you can probably still bond out unless it involved injuring someone or you're a flight risk. If the police detain and question you without charging you then they have only a limited time they can hold you. I believe it's about 72 hours. This is hardly describing a police state.

I'm not really sure what all the white-boys are worried about anyway. Newsflash: rejoice, for better or worse you are not the targeted demographic.

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 12:37 pm

News flash, Testi: I don't live in the "sticks;" I live in middle-class suburbia. And by the way, I wouldn't want to live in a country that used your standards of "freedom." As for the car, I don't even have a license yet

. However, if I did own a car, considering I paid for it, I would say that that constitutes ownership

.

Fusion pimp · Post by **Fusion pimp** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 12:39 pm

Lothar,
you can call us 'wing-nuttery' if you chose, but I'm not okay with paying .47 cents on my hard earned dollar to pay for government squandering. From January to mid-June you're working to pay for them. The good news is you get to keep the other 6 months of your pay. heh.

Tyranny,
We do outnumber them. My question is how long are people going to stand by and be taken advantage of? Also, what are they going to do when they've decided they've had enough?

Not so. The police can legally detain and question you to determine whether or not a crime has been committed.

Actually, they can only detain you if they have probable cause you have commited a crime. They cannot walk up to you on the street, demand to see some I.D and take you to jail if you refuse, assuming you have done nothing. They'll tell you otherwise though. If they detain you it is the same as being under arrest. If you ask them "Am I free to go?" and they tell you no, you are under arrest at that point whether they cuff you or not.

Also, (i don't believe) they need your consent to search property such as a vehicle or bag you're carrying IF their probable cause is strong enough OR they already have enough to charge you with a crime.

Right. The problem is that the definition of probable cause is so vague that they can almost always find a reason to search you , but only if a crime has been commited. Unless you give them permission.

They tend to ask for your permission so that they don't get evidence thrown out.

Right.

Your home is a different story. There are stronger protections for home searches.

They can only enter you home if they have a search warrent or you invite them in. If a crime has been commited and you run into your home, they have the legal right to search any room you have passed through or are currently in without warrent. The problem is that most people don't know their rights and they fall for the "mind if I do quick search of your vehicle? Then you'll be on your way".. or.. "Mind if I come in while we talk about this?"
Not protesting is the same as giving permission.

B-

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 12:44 pm

My question, though, is if you haven't done anything wrong, why should you care if the cop does a quick search of your vehicle/comes inside? If you have nothing to hide, why worry about it? On the other hand, if you have committed a crime, you deserve to be nailed

.

Fusion pimp · Post by **Fusion pimp** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 12:50 pm

Top gun,
Because it's my car and my house and it's not of his business what's inside either of them. You're posing the same argument as the pro-public surveillance people.
I'm a pretty private person and I don't like people(police or otherwise) looking through my things. I have nothing to hide, but that doesn't mean I have to prove it.

B-

Testiculese · Post by **Testiculese** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:11 pm

Top, I thought you posted you lived in an out of the way area?
"However, if I did own a car, considering I paid for it, I would say that that constitutes ownership"
Incorrect.

Palz, my point was..what crime? How is that a crime? No victim=no crime. That's the problem. We've been lied to that things that have no victims are somehow crimes.

Top Gun · Post by **Top Gun** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:13 pm

I don't think I said that anywhere. I live near Doylestown, PA, which is about 40 minutes outside of Center City, give or take.

Also, what are you specifically referring to regarding the whole car ownership issue?

Fusion pimp · Post by **Fusion pimp** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 1:21 pm

C'mon, Testi.. get your head out of your butt. It's a crime because they said so.

Definition of Crime

Except as enumerated in this document, all crimes involve a victim other than the perpetrator. A fully consenting adult can not be construed to be a victim. Furthermore, to be construed as a victim, an individual must have suffered the involuntary abridgement of one or more of the rights or privileges enumerated specifically or generally in this document. Any such abridgement is a crime, and if proved in court, the perpetrator must be penalized with punitive labor, incarceration, or both, as specified in law.

A crime, as described in law, involves exactly one perpetrator over exactly one uninterrupted interval. Biological crimes involve exactly one victim, who is an individual person.

Verbalizations, gesticulations, and other such actions of a purely communicative nature, cannot by themselves be construed to comprise a crime.

B-

Ford Prefect · Post by **Ford Prefect** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 10:18 pm

I also lived through the time of Kent State, the 1968 Democratic Convention in Chicago, the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, the Watts riots, the burning of Detroit in race riots in the mid 60s, the murders of JFK, Malcom X, RFK, and Martin Luther King.
Trust me children you are not even close. You have failed to take into account the apathy of the common man. You are amoungst a generation so comfortably ensconsed in material wealth that they are not going to do a damn thing that might interupt their cable TV reception.
So long as material wealth contiues to increase the way is has for the last 5 decades the government could force the implanting of an ID chip in everyones neck and the majority would be happy because is speeds up the checkout line at the supermarket.
A civil war would destroy the economy of the U.S. Do you feel so strongly about your liberty that you will do without reliable eletricity, imported goods, a stable food supply, fuel for your cars, cars at all as the infrastructure that supports the automotive industry collapses? You might but Mr. and Mrs. Average citizen won't be at all pleased with you if you call for a revolution that screws up the good life.
A mere 3000 people of 300,000,000 die one day due to the actions of a few madmen and the country is ready to suspend all civil liberties and go to marshal law if it keeps the status quo undisturbed.
You dare to ★■◆● about haveing to pay 47 cents of your "hard earned" dollar to ensure you have a defended border, roads to drive on, laws that are enforced, air that you can breath and water you can drink! Try living amoungst the so much less taxed lucky citizens of Somalia. You are getting huge value for your 47 cents kid and pray you never find out just how lucky you are.

Fusion pimp · Post by **Fusion pimp** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 10:23 pm

I hope you're talking to them.

Skyalmian · Post by **Skyalmian** » Wed Sep 08, 2004 11:23 pm

woodchip · Post by **woodchip** » Thu Sep 09, 2004 7:05 am

"The fact that you are taxed every time you sell a car/house. Why was that again? "

Wrong. You can sell your house tax free up to 500,000.00. When was the last time when YOU sold a car and had to pay a tax on it? The buyer pays a tax.

As to loss of freedoms, specifically what loss? How many here are old enough to remember black only/white only drinking fountains and entry ways? How many states have passed relaxed CCW laws? How many states still have police peeking in bedroom windows to bust people for illicit sex acts?
Problem here is too many younger people don't have a long enough memory to put things in their proper perspective.