For the U.S. Constitution

Message boards : Politics : For the U.S. Constitution
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1406090 - Posted: 21 Aug 2013, 19:04:26 UTC - in response to Message 1406066.  

OMG Gary, you're continuing to dodge my main assertion with this thread. Let me try to explaine with this current example.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/08/12/judge-says-new-yorks-stop-and-frisk-law-unconstitutional/

When Dinkins was mayor of NYC, there were more than 2,000 murders in the city per year.

When Juliani took over, he initated this "stop and frisk" law. Last year, there were only 414 murders in NYC.

So if we follow the LETTER OF THE LAW as written in the 4th Amendment, yes, since there's no (specifically enumerated legal terms created through precedence, such as the Miranda case) "reasonable articulation of suspicion", and no "probable cause," yes, this NYC law is FEDERALLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

But the original intent of the 4th amendment was to prevent some judge from writing up some general search warrant which allowed police to bust down any door at any hour of the day to find something. And if we follow the INTENT of the U.S. constitution, the idea was to give the federal government just enough power to handle the things at a federal level that the state(s) could not handle well in any reasonable fashion.

In this case, Juliani passed a law in his municipality to handle a problem IN HIS MUNICIPALITY. (Why wasn't it challenged legally then?) The neat thing about allowing states and municipalities to write their own laws is that those who like it can stay there and those who don't like it ARE FREE TO LEAVE.

In this case, if we follow the LETTER of the federal law, we are killing 1,600 NYC residents per year. Does that make any sense at all? But if we follow th e INTENT of the federal law, we are SAVING the lives of 1,600 NYC residents every year.

I see you support the massive increase in police powers, essentially creating a police state. That is a nearly 100% statist position. Tea flavor Kool Aid.

How about this example ...
Texas state police regularly perform full body cavity searches of women during routine highway traffic stops for minor infractions, like tossing a cigarette out the window, or speeding. The searches are performed in full view of other drivers on the highway, include penetration of the vagina and anus, and the officer performing the search does not always change gloves when searching more than one woman, according to a lawsuit.

Police car dash cam videos posted to YouTube show both black and white women being assaulted by the female officers, who are not always the officer initially involved in the traffic stop — forcing the accused to wait until a woman officer arrives.


In the NY case the judge, not at the appellate level, will undoubtedly be overturned at the appellate level. It is a long standing rule of SCOTUS that outside your castle the police can search you and all your papers and electronic devices as often as they want. It you go back through the case history you will see where the reason given is there are "highway men" out there waiting to rob you and because of this you have no reasonable expectation of privacy outside your castle. Obviously this is a never changing ruling of a never changing constitution that must be interpreted exactly as was the day the ink dried.

You should continue reading the post ...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/08/20/ray-kelly-says-stop-frisk-saves-lives-theres-no-good-evidence-for-that/


ID: 1406090 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1406185 - Posted: 21 Aug 2013, 22:38:53 UTC - in response to Message 1406118.  

As for the link stating there's no good evidence that it saves lives... both studies seem to be minimizing the effect (AKA BIAS) of the SQF (stop, question, and frisk) by making statements like:

I was looking for a link to a more interesting study, which compared the drop in the crime rate in NYC over the stop and frisk time period with the national - no stop and frisk - drop in crime rate. IIRC, that indicated the national drop was essentially the same as the NYC drop. (I can't find the link right now, might be in my others computers history.) That study also noted the same trend internationally. They speculated it was related to the end of the world wide crack and other drug use epidemics.

Rather obviously if the trend where there is no stop and frisk is identical to a stop and frisk area, then stop and frisk plays zero role in that trend.

Perhaps one of the other readers here has the link handy.



ID: 1406185 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1406725 - Posted: 23 Aug 2013, 3:22:08 UTC

I think someone was posting about DENIAL ...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/21/obama-hurricane-katrina_n_3790612.html?utm_hp_ref=mostpopular
A Third Of Louisiana Republicans Blame Obama For Hurricane Katrina Response Under Bush
A large number of Louisiana Republicans think President Barack Obama is to blame for the federal government's poor response to Hurricane Katrina, according to a new Public Policy Polling survey released Wednesday -- despite the fact that the storm occurred three years before he took office.


ID: 1406725 · Report as offensive
bobby
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 22 Mar 02
Posts: 2866
Credit: 17,789,109
RAC: 3
United States
Message 1406843 - Posted: 23 Aug 2013, 11:07:58 UTC - in response to Message 1406185.  

As for the link stating there's no good evidence that it saves lives... both studies seem to be minimizing the effect (AKA BIAS) of the SQF (stop, question, and frisk) by making statements like:

I was looking for a link to a more interesting study, which compared the drop in the crime rate in NYC over the stop and frisk time period with the national - no stop and frisk - drop in crime rate. IIRC, that indicated the national drop was essentially the same as the NYC drop. (I can't find the link right now, might be in my others computers history.) That study also noted the same trend internationally. They speculated it was related to the end of the world wide crack and other drug use epidemics.

Rather obviously if the trend where there is no stop and frisk is identical to a stop and frisk area, then stop and frisk plays zero role in that trend.

Perhaps one of the other readers here has the link handy.


The misguided emphasis on numbers explains the exponential increase in stop and frisks during Mayor Michael Bloomberg's tenure, a leap of 600 percent, from 97,296 in 2003 to 685,724 last year. Echoing the dubious claims of his police commissioner, Raymond Kelly, Bloomberg defends tactics like stop and frisk by citing crime reduction in the city. But the relevant data hardly serve his argument. The drop in murders in New York City, for example, from 2002 until now has been about 12 percent, from 587 annually to 536. During the same period, the number of murders declined by 43 percent in Washington and by 50 percent in Los Angeles, two cities that have less aggressive stop and frisk tactics.


source
Looks like a good candidate. It's referenced by this from media matters that aims to show just how "fair and balanced" Fox was in it's reporting on stop and frisk in NYC.

The primaries next month will allow NYC registered Democrats to pick a candidate for mayor committed to ending the policy. If one of them should win, and then win the election for mayor we could get some interesting before and after data to see just how much difference the policy is making.

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

ID: 1406843 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1407008 - Posted: 23 Aug 2013, 18:07:20 UTC

reserved to the states or the people

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/08/23/authorities-in-las-vegas-arrest-2-in-sovereign-citizen-plot-to-kidnap-torture/
LAS VEGAS – A couple spent hundreds of hours over four months plotting to abduct, torture and kill Las Vegas police officers as a way to attract attention to their anti-authority "sovereign citizens" movement, police said.

David Allen Brutsche and Devon Campbell Newman attended training sessions about sovereign citizen philosophy, shopped for guns, found a vacant house and rigged it to bind captives to cross beams during interrogation, and recorded videos to explain their actions and why officers had to die.


ID: 1407008 · Report as offensive
Profile MOMMY: He is MAKING ME Read His Posts Thoughts and Prayers. GOoD Thoughts and GOoD Prayers. HATERWORLD Vs THOUGHTs and PRAYERs World. It Is a BATTLE ROYALE. Nobody LOVEs Me. Everybody HATEs Me. Why Don't I Go Eat Worms. Tasty Treats are Wormy Meat. Yes
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Jun 02
Posts: 6895
Credit: 6,588,977
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1407013 - Posted: 23 Aug 2013, 18:16:28 UTC

U.S. Constitution protected Free Speech Is Lovely

College Education Good.

FO SHO

Bound FO "IT"

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!
ID: 1407013 · Report as offensive
Profile MOMMY: He is MAKING ME Read His Posts Thoughts and Prayers. GOoD Thoughts and GOoD Prayers. HATERWORLD Vs THOUGHTs and PRAYERs World. It Is a BATTLE ROYALE. Nobody LOVEs Me. Everybody HATEs Me. Why Don't I Go Eat Worms. Tasty Treats are Wormy Meat. Yes
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 16 Jun 02
Posts: 6895
Credit: 6,588,977
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1407014 - Posted: 23 Aug 2013, 18:21:54 UTC

Another US Constitution Protected Free Speech Web Site of DHS Manager

Having Goverment Job is Good.

FO SHO

Bound FO "IT"

May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!!
ID: 1407014 · Report as offensive
Profile j mercer
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 3 Jun 99
Posts: 2422
Credit: 12,323,733
RAC: 1
United States
Message 1407056 - Posted: 23 Aug 2013, 19:52:01 UTC - in response to Message 1407018.  

With the States being as dysfunctional if not more than the Federal government this is not going to happen in any near future. I do like some of his "liberty amendments" to the Constitution though.
...
ID: 1407056 · Report as offensive
Profile Bill Walker
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Sep 99
Posts: 3868
Credit: 2,697,267
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1407943 - Posted: 26 Aug 2013, 13:58:53 UTC

Chris, you are being very logical. That has no place in modern politics.

ID: 1407943 · Report as offensive
Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1407952 - Posted: 26 Aug 2013, 15:04:56 UTC

There is ONLY one interpretation of our Constitution and that would be the Federalist Papers.
Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...
ID: 1407952 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1407963 - Posted: 26 Aug 2013, 15:40:57 UTC - in response to Message 1407946.  

It's time to term limit ... SCOTUS!

I suspect this puts you at the other end of the spectrum than ID.

Before you can term limit them, you need to decide on the length of a term. Right now the length of the term is until death.

Are you sure you want to put SCOTUS into the political arena, making them run for office, subjecting them to the whipsaw pendulum that is politics? Just imagine a decade or so of the bad political party with super majority power and the decisions that SCOTUS would be politically forced into making. How long those decisions will shape the country through stare decisis? Even after the good party gains power, but not a super majority? Are you sure you want this?

ID: 1407963 · Report as offensive
Profile Intelligent Design
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 12
Posts: 3626
Credit: 37,520
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1407967 - Posted: 26 Aug 2013, 15:50:53 UTC

It's not the "term limit" in that court that bothers me. And like so many problems we have it's the confirmation process. I have watch that process on C-Span a few times now and before C-Span on the news. NOT ONE, not ONE person during the confirmation process has EVER asked a question pertaining to the Federalist papers. It could be I missed it but I don't think so.
Must not conflict resolve by suggesting that someone should go sit on an ice pick...
ID: 1407967 · Report as offensive
W-K 666 Project Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 19014
Credit: 40,757,560
RAC: 67
United Kingdom
Message 1408056 - Posted: 26 Aug 2013, 19:26:47 UTC - in response to Message 1407952.  

And that interpretation would be;

The intent of the Foundling Fathers,
The understanding of those who voted for it
Or the meaning an educated man would think appropriate.



ID: 1408056 · Report as offensive
Profile Gary Charpentier Crowdfunding Project Donor*Special Project $75 donorSpecial Project $250 donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 30608
Credit: 53,134,872
RAC: 32
United States
Message 1408100 - Posted: 26 Aug 2013, 21:17:38 UTC - in response to Message 1408056.  

And that interpretation would be;

The intent of the Foundling Fathers,
The understanding of those who voted for it
Or the meaning an educated man would think appropriate.

The intent the author of the amendment.
The understanding of the state legislatures.
The meaning an educated man would apply to the case at hand.

ID: 1408100 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · Next

Message boards : Politics : For the U.S. Constitution


 
©2024 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.