RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Polls and Other Random Stupidity



Message


christine1 -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 3:09:54 PM)

oh, at first i thought it said martial law, then i saw that it reads marital law...shrugs, almost the same thing i guess.  [8|]




slavejale -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 3:14:32 PM)

Well if they KNOW who are in the neighborhood, and believe me, they will know..then they can close in on the killers etc. even if somone is killed there, when the police are on duty then there will be no  where to run. Trinadad the street is a one way, so is Meigs and Montello i believe, which is why they made them ONE ways.

If you lived here in D.C. as i do, then you would understand. trust and believe.




martyrized -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 3:20:32 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Madame4a

wow... you sure got a headline there...

its hardly martial law ... you might want to read a bit more about this before deciding what it means...
and they did it last weekend, so this will be weekend two... your news is a week old

yep.. it may have legal implications, and she may not have done it right..
but its weekend two and the ACLU hasn't filed anything yet...

by the way, do you live in DC?  Don't think so.. you live somewhere else...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/04/AR2008060402205.html


/agree




SinLee -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 3:31:40 PM)

it's not my place to do either as i don't live there,  i was just pointing out the difficulty of it.




pinksugarsub -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 4:00:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Madame4a

wow... you sure got a headline there...

its hardly martial law ... you might want to read a bit more about this before deciding what it means...
and they did it last weekend, so this will be weekend two... your news is a week old

yep.. it may have legal implications, and she may not have done it right..
but its weekend two and the ACLU hasn't filed anything yet...

by the way, do you live in DC?  Don't think so.. you live somewhere else...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/04/AR2008060402205.html


The police action in DC is a form of 'martial law' in the sense that citizens' civil liberties have been temporarially suspended..  i read the article You linked U/us to, and it was dated June 5, 2008.
 
My search of the Post didn't find much more recent news. 
 
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/06/AR2008060603662.html
 
According to Your profile, You live in the "DC/Virginia' area.  I assume You don't reside in the Trinidad area of metro DC, which is the target of the extraordinary police actions. 
 
i live in Ohio, in a city with a much lower crime rate than metro DC.  i'm not clear on what bearing You think O/our real life addies have on the validity of O/our positions.
 
What i find disturbing -- as someone living in Ohio -- is that this action by the DC Police apparently never made the national news.
 
It seems to me the logical extension of the action of the DC police is that there will 2 classes of citizens in this country -- those with rights and those without rights.
 
When did this become acceptable to the point it wasn't even newsworthy outside the local DC area?
 
pinksugarsub
 




stef -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 4:06:37 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pinksugarsub
 
What i find disturbing -- as someone living in Ohio -- is that this action by the DC Police apparently never made the national news.

It did make the national news, the story surfaced a couple of weeks ago. 

~stef




FullCircle -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 4:11:14 PM)

When I think of Martial Law I think of a fat Chinese police chief living in the US in some kind of bizarre police exchange scheme.

ha cha!




FullCircle -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 4:24:02 PM)

I canny believe no one is impressed by the way he knocks a dart out of the air with a coin.[8|]




Alumbrado -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 5:43:34 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

Checkpoints such as these have been challenged in court before. They are legal and used in many other areas of the Country, usually as a means to get grunk drivers off of our highways..


Checkpoints can be done legally, I am not so sure about the turning people away part. I can't seem to find that 'unless  for legitimate purposes' clause in the Constitution....


And whatever happened to that nice Chief Ramsey?  [;)]




pinksugarsub -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 5:44:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

It's got to be said that 'marital' instead of 'martial' is an unfortunate typo [:D] .


<Adjusts  typo queen tiara.>
 
i'd like to thank the programmers who created spell-checker, and installed it on my work pc, for my stunning inability to proofread my own writing.
 
Thank you for this award.
 
pinksugarsub
 
ROFLMAO.




pinksugarsub -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 6:14:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: trappedinamuseum

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

I'm just wondering how will checking ID's stop random killings?

Butch


The idea of the checkpoints is that it will keep out people who don't belong in the neighborhood.  The police will be stopping people, checking identification, and asking people's reason for being there.  If they don't have one, or can't confirm it, they are turned away.

To the OP:
It was suspended today, by the way.  You can check out the article at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/12/AR2008061200778.html.

It certainly would not have hurt to do some cursory research on the subject.



trappedinamuseum, the link you provided does not work -- at least for me.
 
i went through all the trouble of signing up for access to the Post and searched for articles on the topic dated after June 5, 2008.
 
All i found was an article on June 7, 2008 about a Press Conference by the Police Chief and others.
 
i'd ask like to ask you some questions, though. 
 
1st:  If the police action was suspended after a brief time, why was it taken to begin with?  How did it have any effect on the problem of 'high crime', which evidentially is chronic in the Trindad area of DC?
 
2nd: Was the police action constitutional?  If it was unconstitutional, why would we as Americans accept such police conduct?  When did we adopt an 'ends justify the means' exception to the Bill of Rights?
 
3rd:  Why didn't the national news outlets pick up the story?
 
pinksugarsub




pinksugarsub -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 6:28:33 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961

quote:

Martial law is the system of rules that takes effect when the military takes control of the normal administration of justice.


Therefore, a police chief ordering road blocks and check points in a neighborhood that has recently had an escalation of violence does not fall under the definition.

Furthermore, unless the action taken is prohibited by city charter and ordinances, it is well within the legal authority of the chief of police to take such action.  It falls under the heading of protecting public safety.

Only if the action can clearly be shown as racially motivated is it unconstitutional.  This does not mean that if the neighborhood is predominantly non-white, it is racially motivated.

While the random checks of identification is not illegal, any search of vehicles based on those stops alone would be, there must be probable cause.

What you are discribing is similiar to actions taken in NYC, LA, and other large cities after outbreaks of gang related violence.  Increase patrols, establish check points for random stops, and pray that your officers dont become targets.

The American public is under the misguided notion that any activity that increases a police presence in a particular section of a city constitutes police oppression.  Good examples of police and law enforcement oppression can be found just by looking over the video records of the Berkley Protests, Kent State, and any of the civil rights marches in the south.

There is no easy way to deal with gang and drug related violence.  An officer involved in a shooting with gang bangers will more than likely find himself under invistigation from Internal Affairs and sued by the kids parents.

And please note, these gang members just spray bullets from a moving car, meaning that everyone is a target.

You still want to complain?



jif, i agree with Your definition of -- lemme see if i can spell it this time -- martial law. 
 
However, when the 'normal administration of justice' is disrupted by agents of the government, it doesn't seem material to me whether the government authorities involved are military or police.
 
i cannot accept Your premise that the only violation of the Bill of Rights the government can be charged with is one that is somehow racially motivated.  Infringing on the rights of citizens to be free of unreasonable search and seizure, for example, has no 'racial' requirement.
 
Note that the police action as described in articles i have read included refusing P/pl entrance to certain areas of DC if the police, after questioning the driver, were unsatifisfied with the reason given.
 
Among other things, i see nothing in the Constitution that allows an agent of the government to restrict the movements of any citizen (other than prisoners).  This type of government action seems to be a clear violation of the guarantee that W/we will not be deprived of O/our liberty without due process of law.
 
i also want to know what standards police intend to use in determing whether a driver's stated purpose is or is not acceptable.  i want to know if every police officer will apply the standards -- if they exist -- in the same way every time.  i don't see how that's remotely possible, and thus, i believe the DC police action violates the Equal Protection Clauses of the 5th and 14th Amendments.
 
pinksugarsub




pinksugarsub -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 6:41:49 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: parttimehotty

Desperate time call for desperate measures. DC is known as "Dodge the bullets City". People need the extra protection and since witnesses after the crime has been committed are few/far between, the powers that be have to resort to this. So what EVERYONE's presence is questioned? I'd rather have that than noone's presence is questioned and the drug selling continues, innocent kids/adults are shot just because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Sometimes they're in front of their own damn window!! 
I'm guessing those opposed to this are also opposed to taking off their shoes at the airport?  You can scream "Constitutional violation" all you want, but the C was written in 1787 (albeit ammended 27 times), but these same folks who are screaming about the violation are probably the same ones who say, "Someone should do something"!  Well, someone is doing something.


parttimehotty, the government has argued before that the people should quietly surrender T/their rights because 'desperate times call for desperate measures'.
 
IMO there is an alarming trend by the government at all levels to encroach on the freedoms and rights assured to the people by the Constitution. 
 
http://www.towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/911/
 
i look at the police activity in DC as part of this trend.
 
i question whether the DC police action was even effective in addressing a chronic problem.
 
i strongly desire to maintain my rights and freedoms, and force the government to carry out its reponsibilities in a lawful manner.
 
pinksugarsub
 
 




pinksugarsub -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 6:50:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: slavejale

Greetings

okay i have not read the WHOLE thread but the OP...i must say, that i do agree with what they are doing. Living in DC, you will see that the crime rate has SOARED tremendously especially in neighborhoods such as Trinadad, down in the lower part of SW (the ghetto/projects in laymens terms). In SE as well.

Granted, it might be "extreme" to some people, here in DC it is needed. Also granted, it might cause more traffic backups etc. etc. i really do believe that it is needed. SOMETHING, is needed. Now if they start only doing "white people" or "black people" (i.e. racial profiling) THEN i will "complain".

But really, i am glad that they are AT LEAST doing something about it...Eventually they will pan it out, but as of right now im glad.

well wishes


Let's assume you are right, and the actiions of the DC police were 'needed'.
 
The Constitution does not permit the government to argue 'necessity' when it's actions have been unlawful.  For example, the 4th Amendment prohibits the introduction of illegally-seized evidence at trial by the prosecution.  The prosecution does not get to obviate this prohibition by arguing it is 'necessary' to convict the defendant.
 
pinksugarsub




pinksugarsub -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 7:05:54 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: stef

quote:

ORIGINAL: pinksugarsub
 
What i find disturbing -- as someone living in Ohio -- is that this action by the DC Police apparently never made the national news.

It did make the national news, the story surfaced a couple of weeks ago. 

~stef



Can you provide me with a link stef?
 
i'm very disturbed at the thought that the news outlets did not pick up the story.  It seems like even more evidence that W/we have grown indifferent to the continuing attrition of the Bill of Rights.
 
pinksugarsub




pinksugarsub -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 7:09:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FullCircle

When I think of Martial Law I think of a fat Chinese police chief living in the US in some kind of bizarre police exchange scheme.

ha cha!


FullCircle, Sir, i think You may be deranged.
 
LMAO.
 
pinksugarsub




thornhappy -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 7:27:35 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pinksugarsub

quote:

ORIGINAL: stef

quote:

ORIGINAL: pinksugarsub
 
What i find disturbing -- as someone living in Ohio -- is that this action by the DC Police apparently never made the national news.

It did make the national news, the story surfaced a couple of weeks ago. 

~stef



Can you provide me with a link stef?
 
i'm very disturbed at the thought that the news outlets did not pick up the story.  It seems like even more evidence that W/we have grown indifferent to the continuing attrition of the Bill of Rights.
 
pinksugarsub

In the NYT, compliments of the AP.

thornhappy




Madame4a -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 7:48:28 PM)

reread what I wrote...




petdave -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 8:09:24 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Madame4a

I have no clue... and I don't necessarily condone the tactics, you'll have to check with DC Metro.. but I did, many moons ago live very near that neighborhood.. and its a war zone...


Well, if it's a war zone, we should stick to the tactics that work best for us in warfare... bomb it flat!

After a while, you really have to stop fucking around and do something productive...




pinksugarsub -> RE: Marital Law 'Unofficially' Declared in DC (6/13/2008 8:12:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thornhappy

quote:

ORIGINAL: pinksugarsub

quote:

ORIGINAL: stef

quote:

ORIGINAL: pinksugarsub
 
What i find disturbing -- as someone living in Ohio -- is that this action by the DC Police apparently never made the national news.

It did make the national news, the story surfaced a couple of weeks ago. 

~stef



Can you provide me with a link stef?
 
i'm very disturbed at the thought that the news outlets did not pick up the story.  It seems like even more evidence that W/we have grown indifferent to the continuing attrition of the Bill of Rights.
 
pinksugarsub

In the NYT, compliments of the AP.

thornhappy



TY, thornhappy.
 
i guess i'll have to rely more on the NY Times for my news from now on.
 
TV news outlets seem to have ignored the story.
 
i feel better that it received at least some national attention....maybe indifference hasn't reached the point i thought.
 
pinksugarsub




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875