quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

FR

At what point is it right to detain ? When a grand just hands won an indictment. They don't bother with that part of the process much anymore unless you are rich.

But there was a solution to all this put forth many years ago that makes total sense. Arm the pilots.

The pilots have been vetted and passed not only background checks but drug tests. They are sober and healthy and have good eyesight. Teach them like they teach the cops. (the ones who actually learn anyway and don't need 41 rounds for a guy with a knife)

The problem is making it a requirement but only one in the cockpit need be armed. They just pair them up properly. and many pilots are ex-military anyway so are not gunshy.

And there have been armed robberies on buses. What's more you can simply get off the bus and disappear into the crowd in a hurry. You hijack a plane you better have a plan, or a parachute. If you rob a cruise ship you need a boat. And not to forget, if you want to rob a police station you better want to die.

And of course lock the cabin door so nobody can get the drop on them. Problems with policy may arise when the flight goes to countries where guns are illegal, but there are very few places where they are totally illegal. If the pilots want to go out on the town because they have time to spare, with proper security the guns could be left in the cockpit.

This could bring up issues of course. Since the plane is subject to US jurisdiction that make make it a territory. What's more, what if someone on the no-fly list boards a plane and comes here ? They have to swim home or what ? What about people who get deported ? Usually deportation is for good reason so if anyone belongs on such a list it would be they.

The whole idea stinks, as does the ACA and PATRIOT ACT. Very poor lawmaking, no other country is worse as far as I can tell. I doubt Leviticus or Hamurabi could fuck it up worse. The problem is the people who write the bills, congress doesn't know WTF they're voting for half the time. Ron Paul introduced a bill to require a waiting period because these bills are so lengthy but that did not pass. If I was in congress I would tell them flat out if it is more than 12 pages double spaced in 12 point font I am voting against it. Part off that though is because I believe we have too many laws already. There are thousands of words regulating the sale of a head of cabbage FFS. Making them literally TLDR is obfuscation and I see it as an impediment to congress actually representing the people because they just get told what to vote for, either by the party or the lobbyists. That is not the way to do it.

If I could find another country where they would accept me, and I could have a half decent job and my guns I would be the fuck outta here before you could say adios. I would almost be willing to give up the guns if I am sure almost nobody had them either.

I don't mean to sound like I hate this country, I don't. I just think it is turning into more of a shithole every day. They are letting the wrong people in, they are putting the wrong people in jail and they are giving money away to the wrong people.

And now, the government controls who can use a private service like an airline ? Why don't they decide that certain Gay couples cannot buy a cake ? THAT is the issue with The Civil Rights Act, compelling performance even for money is slavery. Hey, slaves got fed and clothed and housed, even doctored for free. But it was still mandatory work, the fact that you get paid means nothing.

So what. It is over. The country I knew is gone. There is just nowhere to go.

T^T

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Either legislators are extremely out of touch with reality, or they have a very nasty agenda.

Or both.

T^T

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Bama

quote:

Now you want to cast the net over thousands of innocent people who once they find out that they are being penalized might gain the ability to go to Federal court and prove they are innocent, not demand that the government prove anything. This turns due process on it's head.
At the same time you want to assume the innocence (At least of terrorism) of people who murder 49 innocent victims. Don't you see a problem there?
How can you pretend that there aren't terrorist and at the same time violate peoples rights to fight that which you don't believe in.

I do not pretend there are no terrorists. I merely used a common communications protocol when I employed "alleged" as a descriptor. You are making too much of it. So, who is a potential terrorist anyway? Can you profile a potential by his/her ethnicity, by their travels, by their social media comments? What warrants an investigation? Yes, mistakes are made. The Terrorist Screening Center has their guidelines. I know that sounds very big-brotherish but the ACLU and others have filed FOI requests and appealed to the courts.

The question remains, given a number of attacks dating back to 1993, does the government have a compelling interest in maintaining an investigative list keeping suspected terrorists off airplanes to protect a large number of citizens? I presented that issue in some detail but you completely ignored it. What is your alternative plan?

As to your question: are trains safer than airplanes? Be careful what you wish for lest the NF List apply there as well.

So, you rant on about due process but you do not address the issues I presented. What can I say? Rant on.

You are missing the point.
I have no problem with the authorities conducting investigations.
I have a major problem with people being penalized because they took two business trips to Turkey.
Once he found he was on the list it took him over a year to get his name off the list.
If they put everyone on the list that does no more than that or that thier name is close to someone else's name they create a maze that gets in the way of investigation.
I object to penalizing people because they are on the list. True they don't convict them. They skip the indictment phase, they skip the trial phase, they go right to sentancing, you know like Klan supporting sheriffs did to blacks at one time.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Bama

quote:

Now you want to cast the net over thousands of innocent people who once they find out that they are being penalized might gain the ability to go to Federal court and prove they are innocent, not demand that the government prove anything. This turns due process on it's head.
At the same time you want to assume the innocence (At least of terrorism) of people who murder 49 innocent victims. Don't you see a problem there?
How can you pretend that there aren't terrorist and at the same time violate peoples rights to fight that which you don't believe in.

I do not pretend there are no terrorists. I merely used a common communications protocol when I employed "alleged" as a descriptor. You are making too much of it. So, who is a potential terrorist anyway? Can you profile a potential by his/her ethnicity, by their travels, by their social media comments? What warrants an investigation? Yes, mistakes are made. The Terrorist Screening Center has their guidelines. I know that sounds very big-brotherish but the ACLU and others have filed FOI requests and appealed to the courts.

The question remains, given a number of attacks dating back to 1993, does the government have a compelling interest in maintaining an investigative list keeping suspected terrorists off airplanes to protect a large number of citizens? I presented that issue in some detail but you completely ignored it. What is your alternative plan?

As to your question: are trains safer than airplanes? Be careful what you wish for lest the NF List apply there as well.

So, you rant on about due process but you do not address the issues I presented. What can I say? Rant on.

You are missing the point.
I have no problem with the authorities conducting investigations.
I have a major problem with people being penalized because they took two business trips to Turkey.
Once he found he was on the list it took him over a year to get his name off the list.
If they put everyone on the list that does no more than that or that thier name is close to someone else's name they create a maze that gets in the way of investigation.
I object to penalizing people because they are on the list. True they don't convict them. They skip the indictment phase, they skip the trial phase, they go right to sentancing, you know like Klan supporting sheriffs did to blacks at one time.

So, your friend did get due process but not overnight. That is common in American juris prudence. Criminal trials usually last much longer.

No one is being sentenced. They are investigated. I think you are being over dramatic.

Asking again, what is your alternative plan to fulfill the government's compelling interest in public safety?

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Bama

quote:

Now you want to cast the net over thousands of innocent people who once they find out that they are being penalized might gain the ability to go to Federal court and prove they are innocent, not demand that the government prove anything. This turns due process on it's head.
At the same time you want to assume the innocence (At least of terrorism) of people who murder 49 innocent victims. Don't you see a problem there?
How can you pretend that there aren't terrorist and at the same time violate peoples rights to fight that which you don't believe in.

I do not pretend there are no terrorists. I merely used a common communications protocol when I employed "alleged" as a descriptor. You are making too much of it. So, who is a potential terrorist anyway? Can you profile a potential by his/her ethnicity, by their travels, by their social media comments? What warrants an investigation? Yes, mistakes are made. The Terrorist Screening Center has their guidelines. I know that sounds very big-brotherish but the ACLU and others have filed FOI requests and appealed to the courts.

The question remains, given a number of attacks dating back to 1993, does the government have a compelling interest in maintaining an investigative list keeping suspected terrorists off airplanes to protect a large number of citizens? I presented that issue in some detail but you completely ignored it. What is your alternative plan?

As to your question: are trains safer than airplanes? Be careful what you wish for lest the NF List apply there as well.

So, you rant on about due process but you do not address the issues I presented. What can I say? Rant on.

You are missing the point.
I have no problem with the authorities conducting investigations.
I have a major problem with people being penalized because they took two business trips to Turkey.
Once he found he was on the list it took him over a year to get his name off the list.
If they put everyone on the list that does no more than that or that thier name is close to someone else's name they create a maze that gets in the way of investigation.
I object to penalizing people because they are on the list. True they don't convict them. They skip the indictment phase, they skip the trial phase, they go right to sentancing, you know like Klan supporting sheriffs did to blacks at one time.

So, your friend did get due process but not overnight. That is common in American juris prudence. Criminal trials usually last much longer.

No one is being sentenced. They are investigated. I think you are being over dramatic.

Asking again, what is your alternative plan to fulfill the government's compelling interest in public safety?

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
But it was the nutsuckers that have done all the depriving of constitutionally protected rights all along, as has been demonstrated repeatedly and factually.

quote:

ORIGINAL: H. R. 2578
...
16 (4) No discovery shall be permitted, unless the
17 court shall determine extraordinary circumstances
18 requires discovery in the interests of justice.
...

quote:

ORIGINAL: H. R. 2578
...
3 (B) LAWFULNESS AND CONSTITU-
4 TIONALITY.—No district court of the United
5 States or court of appeals of the United States
6 shall have jurisdiction to consider the lawful-
7 ness or constitutionality of this section except
8 pursuant to a petition for review under section.
...

quote:

ORIGINAL: http://pagenine.typepad.com/page_nine/2016/06/the-flake-amendment-hr-2578.html
...
Then isn't it insane to let people on the no-fly list travel?

And isn't it insane to let people on the no-fly list keep all the guns they have?
...
If people on the no-fly list are that dangerous -- why are they out walking around?

What's to stop them from driving to Orlando, or taking Amtrak or a bus?

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
But it was the nutsuckers that have done all the depriving of constitutionally protected rights all along, as has been demonstrated repeatedly and factually.

I don't know about that. Seems like Obama, at a bare minimum, has done a fine job shredding the bill of rights. I was too politically naive to be tracking previous administrations but I know Obama is no fan of the constitution or any rights of the people. For the most part, politicians grok corporate rights now not individual rights. That's true for both parties.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Thats how them lawless nutsuckers will do you though, everyone knows that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-26/congressman-only-politicians-need-firearms-protection
“Law-abiding citizens just shouldn’t have to carry a gun. You’re not gonna push me in that direction,” he said, standing just five feet from a Capitol Police officer, who stood at his post by the House Speaker’s Lobby.

TheDC noted to (Democratic Representative Charlie) Rangel he and other members of Congress are protected by armed members of the U.S. Capitol Police.

“Well that’s a little different. I think we deserve–I think we need to be protected down here.” Rangel laughingly insisted.

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Bama

quote:

Now you want to cast the net over thousands of innocent people who once they find out that they are being penalized might gain the ability to go to Federal court and prove they are innocent, not demand that the government prove anything. This turns due process on it's head.
At the same time you want to assume the innocence (At least of terrorism) of people who murder 49 innocent victims. Don't you see a problem there?
How can you pretend that there aren't terrorist and at the same time violate peoples rights to fight that which you don't believe in.

I do not pretend there are no terrorists. I merely used a common communications protocol when I employed "alleged" as a descriptor. You are making too much of it. So, who is a potential terrorist anyway? Can you profile a potential by his/her ethnicity, by their travels, by their social media comments? What warrants an investigation? Yes, mistakes are made. The Terrorist Screening Center has their guidelines. I know that sounds very big-brotherish but the ACLU and others have filed FOI requests and appealed to the courts.

The question remains, given a number of attacks dating back to 1993, does the government have a compelling interest in maintaining an investigative list keeping suspected terrorists off airplanes to protect a large number of citizens? I presented that issue in some detail but you completely ignored it. What is your alternative plan?

As to your question: are trains safer than airplanes? Be careful what you wish for lest the NF List apply there as well.

So, you rant on about due process but you do not address the issues I presented. What can I say? Rant on.

You are missing the point.
I have no problem with the authorities conducting investigations.
I have a major problem with people being penalized because they took two business trips to Turkey.
Once he found he was on the list it took him over a year to get his name off the list.
If they put everyone on the list that does no more than that or that thier name is close to someone else's name they create a maze that gets in the way of investigation.
I object to penalizing people because they are on the list. True they don't convict them. They skip the indictment phase, they skip the trial phase, they go right to sentancing, you know like Klan supporting sheriffs did to blacks at one time.

So, your friend did get due process but not overnight. That is common in American juris prudence. Criminal trials usually last much longer.

No one is being sentenced. They are investigated. I think you are being over dramatic.

Asking again, what is your alternative plan to fulfill the government's compelling interest in public safety?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Bama, anytime your blood pressure goes down look at forfeiture laws. A fifty grand boat for one joint. The coast guard is fully self funded. they stopped all the people ON THE STREET down in Florida and if they had more than $200 on them it was confiscated and it took a lawyer to get the money back, and of course he does not work for free. They took like five figures off a guy who flew down to Texas to make a large purchase of some cattle for slaughter, it took him months to get his money back, unlike the poor fuckers in Florida who could not afford to fight, pay a lawyer $500 to get $250 back. They took a guy's airplane for suspicion and it took him years to get it back and by the time he did, it was ruined because of lack of maintenance. They can dismantle your car completely, and I mean take the fucking pistons out of the engine and leave you with a pile of parts and no tools, and if they find nothing you cannot sue them, AND THEY DO THIS WITHOUT A WARRANT. And then they fine you for littering. They can give you so many enemas that the hospital refuses to give any more because it would be life threatening while seeking drugs in your colon, AND THEN THEY SEND YOU THE BILL FOR THE "treatment".

All of these things have happened, I am not making it up. When I heard about them I searched and found normal news sources about it, like not Alex Jones or any shit like that. I confirmed it myself.

They don't even do this shit in North Korea. China. Any civilized country would not do the enema thing. Even if the guy DID have drugs they should not be able to do that. They also called a female officer to "search" two Women stopped at random and she put on a rubber glove and stuck a finger up their ass and then vagina, one and then the other and never changed the glove. I HAVE THE ACTUAL VIDEO OF THAT.

And you now what ? I bet none of these motherfuckers were fired, or if they were they were likely hired as LEOs (if you can call them that) somewhere else. What do you think of LEOs fired for this type of shit do for a living ? Go run a fucking punch press or lathe ?

There is no justice system, it is now the just us system. The US is over. The days when they needed a warrant are over unless you are extremely rich. I know how to beat them in a criminal matter, but I have not been busted for anything big. The traffic shit, I either paid them or Frank at the bar. Real criminal shit I have not had to deal with. But I know a guy who beat the shit out of them. Had a grow room I helped setup, got busted selling an ounce. He had one of the best drug lawyers in Cleveland but they put him in. Well he filed his own appeal and totally beat the charge, is technically unconvicted. He hired an ex-lwa professor from Harvard who told him how to do it. I used to have the tapes because he was hard to understand on the tape so I had to equalize it and compress it. This was actually before he went to trial the first time. He prepared for it. He spent a little time in the joint but did beat them in the end.

And just-us is for the rich too. Another buddy got busted for 200 pounds. His bail was $2 million. He wound up only doing about two years. I want his lawyer's phone number but not really, what for ? I am not a courier. And I do not grow. I tried it and after thousands of dollars in electric bills, not just for the lights but the air conditioning, they all turned out to be males ! I am not trying that again. But then, even if it had worked out there is that risk in selling it.

Anyway, I did alot of shit, and thwarted the "law" quite a bit, but I am dine with that. I used to sig my own words to "I Fought The Law And The Law Won" and it went I fought the law and I won. I had one of the best lawyers in the state. I could not find a fucking judge he did not know.

I don't mean to brag, and I am not especially proud of that time of my life, but I want to illustrate how justice simply does not work in this country. I won. they are almost afraid of me and some of my ilk. Ad if they ever do put me in jail (I got like two dozen warrants and they know right where I am) I will cost them more money than they can imagine. Stomach problems, knee problems, all kinds of shit. And they cannot deny me because they leave themselves open for a lawsuit. And one of my lawyers' names ends in "stein". And they know it because of court records.

Fuck them people, I just wish others could work it that way. It is not fair really. I have been in "vacation" with Black people and would talk to them. They told me about their case and I really felt bad for them, they got railroaded. Sometimes just copped a plea, other times got threatened with like ten years over damnear nothing. They did get fucked over and I am sure it is happening still. I do not want anyone to have special treatment even though I did take advantage of it in the past, but I do not want to see them get fucked over by the just-us system. And I can't do a damnthing about it. I do not have a law license. I tried to educate but that is it.

They have no idea of filing for discovery. They cannot represent themselves at all. And I don't mean just Blacks. Almost everybody. They have no idea.

Due process is a gone idea. Forget it.

Don't have any more kids and give them collateral. Why do you think "accidental" deaths in war are called "collateral damage" ? Anybody here ever give that any thought ? I thought not.


T^T

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffBC

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail
But it was the nutsuckers that have done all the depriving of constitutionally protected rights all along, as has been demonstrated repeatedly and factually.

I don't know about that. Seems like Obama, at a bare minimum, has done a fine job shredding the bill of rights. I was too politically naive to be tracking previous administrations but I know Obama is no fan of the constitution or any rights of the people. For the most part, politicians grok corporate rights now not individual rights. That's true for both parties.

Politicians of both parties have been harming the Constition for decades.
But Obama is the first to come in declareing to "fundamentaly" change the country and to proclaim the Constitution to be a seriously flawed document.
He issues executive orders to do things that Congress has voted down, and he pushes government control of more of the the country.
That doesn't mean that those who oppose him are angels but right now he is the worst of the bunch. Do you know that he waited over 2 years to admit that Ft Hood was a terrorist attack? And that he refuses to admit that any terrorist attack can come from the Jihadists? When he first came into office he declared that we would no longer use the term terror attack and instead call them man made disasters? Or that his head of DHS said that the greatest security threat the U S faced was U S veterens? When they said that I couldn't help but wonder what they planned to do that would piss us off that bad.

BTW I like being able to have a civil conversation with someone who disagrees with me on most points.

quote:

The Constitution says you get due process first, not after the fact, it says that after the fact is not due process.