RE: "After the elections" (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


GotSteel -> RE: "After the elections" (10/8/2014 4:53:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr

I think the issue is that while the God-haters amongst us love to moan and wail about non-establishment, they hate to have to admit that we have a right to practice religion as we may seem fit.

People that get bothered by my belief aren't atheists; they're God-hating control freaks that want to wipe out any belief in any higher power (except, as evidenced here, lately, if we're speaking of "Allah").




That's not it, we just think your Nazi-klukluxklan ideology has no place in government. We're particularly disgusted by your desire to send minorities to death camps.




hot4bondage -> RE: "After the elections" (10/8/2014 7:38:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

quote:

ORIGINAL: hot4bondage
Yes indeed. The agency tasked with keeping track of our laws says they can't do it anymore. We literally have more laws, codes, and regulations than we can count. There's a case before the Supremes right now because a patrol officer didn't know the brake light law for his state.


For the simple minded, yes, there are to many laws.

For those that can actually access libraries, smartphones, and computers; the information is pretty easy to come about.

Gallup a few months ago asked a question of those that they surveyed. "Can you name the five parts of the 1st amendment"? 90% of those polled couldn't answer one item. 8% got one answer while 1% got two to three correct answers. The last two parts of the 1st amendment were only known to less than 0.001% of those polled. The percentages have just stuck in my mind for somereason....

And I've been looking around for that poll for days now, since it would be an interesting topic to discuss. Trying to Google '1st amendment, survey, Gallup' and variations of it, have proved to be useless.

The point here, is that most Americans can rattle off the 1st amendment, WITHOUT, looking it up. Just the same as they cant rattle off how to set the DVR without looking it up. There is a reason why things are written down. So the officer couldn't remember the exact law; could the person rattle off the 4th amendment perfectly?





If it's so easy to know our laws, why did the Congressional Research Service tell Congress that they lack the manpower and resources TO COUNT THEM? And that's just federal criminal law. The tip of the iceberg.

So the officer couldn't remember the exact law? In the case before the Supremes, he found some drugs while he was enforcing a brake light law that only existed in his imagination. That sounds to me like an easy way to abuse a position of authority. Are you saying that an officer shouldn't be expected to know the law that he's enforcing?




Aylee -> RE: "After the elections" (10/8/2014 12:56:26 PM)

How did he write a ticket without the statute code?




GotSteel -> RE: "After the elections" (10/8/2014 2:26:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee
How did he write a ticket without the statute code?


I've had one make up the code because he thought it was unreasonable that I was climbing a tree in Yosemite. He never expected me to take it to court rather than paying a couple hundred bucks. The prosecutor was pissed that I hadn't just payed it though the judges statements of "What is this supposed to be?" and "This begs to be dismissed!" probably had a lot to do with that.




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125