Erosion of rights...

Gato_Solo

Gato_Solo

Out-freaking-standing OTC member
This is pretty much a compilation/convergence of several threads that are floating through Real World.

1. Illegal Search and Siezure
2. The right against self-incrimination
3. The right to do on ones own property what one wishes (private property and smoking bans)
4. Legal gun owners
5. PC speech
6. Religion and secularism in the state
7. The media and bias/libel cases
8. The 2000 election 'theft'

When taken as seperate issues, they all seem pretty mundane. One case here, and one case there, we all argue over who is right, who is left, what our opinions are, but we never seem to agree that something larger, and more insidious, may be going on here. Eric AKA freako104 was the one who got me thinking about starting this thread. Before somebody comes in screaming about a 'Government conspiracy', or the 'New World Order', please hear me out. If we don't agree on something, and I'm sure we won't, let it pass. We don't, at least I don't, want a revolution. What I want is those in power...including the courts...to recognize the slow erosion of the bill of rights. Those 8 things I've listed above are just those I remembered discussing here off the top of my head. I'm sure that the last few rights are in jeopardy as well, but they can be watched for. What we have going on here, IMO, is both ends being played against the middle. The moderates almost never act until it's too late, and the fanatics have already won the day. It's happened many times in the past, and I can see it happening now. I have but one question...what are you going to do to stop, or reverse, this trend?

Bill of Rights...
 
well since you account me for being the idea for this thread mate I will give it my go(as best as I can)

1. search and seizure: I like it to be done with a warrant and probable cause. I will leave the plain view doctrine in as I feel if it is in plain view it is there.
2.self incrimination: 5th amendment stays. I said that one too. but I ask to be forgiven for hypocrisy when I am a little more suspicious of those not answering.
3.owning property: its yours. the smoking ban is total bullshit to me. In public its different. on your property well thats yours.
4.gun ownership: I believe in having the proper training and respect for any weapon.
5.Pc speech: freedom of speech.
6.religion in the state: I believe in a separation of church and state.
7.media bias: I feel that there is but the media is a human invention and thus will have subjective perspectives.I would rather it be objective. As far as the libel cases: I feel it is too easy to sue anyone. In this case I feel the same. Unless you are personally insulted(or your group or whatever) shut the fuck up.
8. The 2000 election: take whatever cause is needed that all votes count and it is done legally. no technicalities. and no bitching my vote didnt count.



now Gato what post of mine made you think that?
 
Ways to change society:

Vote
Know what the Constitution & the Bill of Rights actually say
Own a gun
Own property
Know your Congress people
When something is incorrect, right it or go to the people who can

and probably the single most important thing every individual can do to maintain a functioning & mostly fair society-PAY ATTENTION & use your voice.
 
Gonz may I ask about the owning a gun? what if you do not want to for whatever reason(mine is my family)
 
freako104 said:
Gonz may I ask about the owning a gun? what if you do not want to for whatever reason(mine is my family)
Click to expand...


Is a cop's job to stop crime or to investigate crime?
 
of course. Police are dispatched but hand off to detectives/investigators if the crime has already been committed. They, in turn, investigate the crime scene. Patrol officers are on the street to protect us and stop crimes in progress when possible.
 
290,000,000 citizens in the USA. If 10% are police officers (obviously high estimate) they have almost no chance of catching criminals in the act.

Police officers jobs are to investigate petty crimes & if possible stop it in progress. When the petty crime becomes a patterned felony is when we bring in the detectives.

100,000,000 armed civilians creates fewer crimes.
 
Gonz said:
290,000,000 citizens in the USA. If 10% are police officers (obviously high estimate) they have almost no chance of catching criminals in the act.

Police officers jobs are to investigate petty crimes & if possible stop it in progress. When the petty crime becomes a patterned felony is when we bring in the detectives.

100,000,000 armed civilians creates fewer crimes.
Click to expand...


I think it would just make them more violent...:eh:
 
freako104 said:
well they do both but stop crime is more the basis of the job
Click to expand...

Really?
Police Patrol Officers
http://icpac.indiana.edu/careers/career_profiles/100414.xml.print
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Snapshot
Job Description

Summary: Police patrol officers serve the public, protecting lives and property.

Police patrol officers respond to public complaints and requests. They may take pictures of a crime scene, unless a special unit is there to do it. They draw diagrams of crime and accident scenes. They arrest people who commit certain offenses. They watch traffic and give tickets to people who break motor vehicle laws.

When people report a crime, police officers investigate what happened, and look for the person or group responsible. They patrol areas on foot, horseback, bicycle, motorcycle, car or airplane. Police officers respond to domestic arguments to help to solve a problem, or to arrest an aggressor. They go to traffic accident scenes to discover and report what happened. They re-route traffic for many kinds of emergencies. They help give first aid to accident victims and call for emergency support.

Depending on the department, officers may do many things to help prevent crime. For example, some officers help different citizen groups organize in ways to prevent crime in their community. Some local governments place officers in the schools to maintain order. They may talk to community groups about safety issues and what police officers do.

Police officers always log their activities and write reports. They serve as witnesses and describe evidence in court proceedings.


Work Activities
Patrol areas on foot, horse, bike, or vehicle.
Evaluate requests for service to determine how to respond.
Arrest people who break laws.
Monitor traffic to make sure motorists obey laws.
Write citations or tickets for drivers who violate traffic laws.
Investigate traffic accidents to determine which drivers were at fault.
Photograph or draw diagrams of crime or accident scenes.
Interview witnesses to gather more information.
Give first aid to people who are injured.
Review facts to determine if criminal acts were committed.
Prepare reports about accidents and arrests.
Direct traffic flow and re-route traffic in case of emergencies.
Testify in court to present evidence.
General Activities
Document and record information.
Get information needed to do the job.
Work with the public.
Communicate with people from outside the organization.
Assist others.
Operate vehicles or mechanized equipment.
Communicate with supervisors, peers, or subordinates.
Resolve conflicts and negotiate with others.
Establish and maintain relationships.
Identify objects, actions, and events.
Monitor events, materials, and surroundings.
Perform activities that use the whole body.
Explain the meaning of information to others.
Analyze data or information.
Update and use job-related knowledge.
Evaluate information against standards.
Judge the value of objects, services, or people.
Make decisions and solve problems.
Coordinate the work and activities of others.
Perform administrative tasks.
Click to expand...
 
freako104 said:
well since you account me for being the idea for this thread mate I will give it my go(as best as I can)

1. search and seizure: I like it to be done with a warrant and probable cause. I will leave the plain view doctrine in as I feel if it is in plain view it is there.
2.self incrimination: 5th amendment stays. I said that one too. but I ask to be forgiven for hypocrisy when I am a little more suspicious of those not answering.
3.owning property: its yours. the smoking ban is total bullshit to me. In public its different. on your property well thats yours.
4.gun ownership: I believe in having the proper training and respect for any weapon.
5.Pc speech: freedom of speech.
6.religion in the state: I believe in a separation of church and state.
7.media bias: I feel that there is but the media is a human invention and thus will have subjective perspectives.I would rather it be objective. As far as the libel cases: I feel it is too easy to sue anyone. In this case I feel the same. Unless you are personally insulted(or your group or whatever) shut the fuck up.
8. The 2000 election: take whatever cause is needed that all votes count and it is done legally. no technicalities. and no bitching my vote didnt count.



now Gato what post of mine made you think that?
Click to expand...

Before I answer your question, I'll go over what you responded, point by point...

1. Total agreement
2. Total agreement with caveat...If that person is a public official, does that mean that they are more guilty for taking the fifth?
3. Private ownership, whether open to the public or not, is still private.;)
4. Total agreement...
5. Total disagreement...PC is not free speech. PC is more akin to mind control. If you don't like what somebody says, then you claim that they are insensitive, and rally people to your side. It happens every day. If someone is offended by what you said, then someone is offended by what you said. Too bad for them, they should get over it, but it doesn't happen anymore. Criminals are now victims because their civil rights have somehow been violated...Causes which were once worthy have become talking points on how to get your way by claiming bias when their way isn't seen as the bastion of hope and peace that it used to stand for. All because of PC, and PC's version of Free Speech.
6. Religion and the state (not in the state) Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...What, exactly does that mean? Many have defined it as there can be no religious symbolism, statements, or practice by the state, nor shall the state fund any of the above. It doesn't say that at all. It says that the state cannot establish a religion...and that the state cannot stop people from exercising their religious beliefs. That's all it says.
7. Media Bias/Libel. I threw that in because the trust in the press has been slipping of late because of the scandals and lies told by certain journalists. If you can't trust the press, then how can the press be declared free? They're job is to print the facts, and to print the truth of what's going on. They've taken a beating of late because of bias on both sides of the issues at hand. They've been accused of initiating news stories rather than just reporting news, and, the most brutal crime of all, sensationalizing the news in order to get the attention of the public. It used to be that the press followed certain guidelines when publishing a story, and they were Who, What, Where, When, and How. Now they increasingly use Why. They no longer tell us what we need to know, and focus only on what they want us to know.
8. Every citizen in the US over the age of 18, and without any prior federal convictions, has a right to vote. How many of us actually do? Even Ms Ann Thrope excuses herself from voting because she doesn't like her choices. If she doesn't like those choices, she can always pencil a candidate in. It's legal. Will she? That's another story. We are offered up bland, boring, tepid candidates, and are expected to become apathetic, thus keeping the problems we have in this country going. We can make a change, but only if we don't let our 2-party system dictate to us who is, and isn't worthy of the job of elected official. Fanatics of each party have taken over, and we, the people, let them.

Now...to answer your question...What brought this about was your consistency in most posts about rights and the free exercise thereof.
 
Squiggy said:
stop. Detectives investigate.
Click to expand...


If a police officers job is to stop crime, why do so many crimes happen? If you are robbed, then why can't you sue the police department for not doing it's job? I smell an ulterior motive in this one, Squiggy...:p
 
Gato_Solo said:
Before I answer your question, I'll go over what you responded, point by point...

1. Total agreement
2. Total agreement with caveat...If that person is a public official, does that mean that they are more guilty for taking the fifth?
3. Private ownership, whether open to the public or not, is still private.;)
4. Total agreement...
5. Total disagreement...PC is not free speech. PC is more akin to mind control. If you don't like what somebody says, then you claim that they are insensitive, and rally people to your side. It happens every day. If someone is offended by what you said, then someone is offended by what you said. Too bad for them, they should get over it, but it doesn't happen anymore. Criminals are now victims because their civil rights have somehow been violated...Causes which were once worthy have become talking points on how to get your way by claiming bias when their way isn't seen as the bastion of hope and peace that it used to stand for. All because of PC, and PC's version of Free Speech.
6. Religion and the state (not in the state) Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...What, exactly does that mean? Many have defined it as there can be no religious symbolism, statements, or practice by the state, nor shall the state fund any of the above. It doesn't say that at all. It says that the state cannot establish a religion...and that the state cannot stop people from exercising their religious beliefs. That's all it says.
7. Media Bias/Libel. I threw that in because the trust in the press has been slipping of late because of the scandals and lies told by certain journalists. If you can't trust the press, then how can the press be declared free? They're job is to print the facts, and to print the truth of what's going on. They've taken a beating of late because of bias on both sides of the issues at hand. They've been accused of initiating news stories rather than just reporting news, and, the most brutal crime of all, sensationalizing the news in order to get the attention of the public. It used to be that the press followed certain guidelines when publishing a story, and they were Who, What, Where, When, and How. Now they increasingly use Why. They no longer tell us what we need to know, and focus only on what they want us to know.
8. Every citizen in the US over the age of 18, and without any prior federal convictions, has a right to vote. How many of us actually do? Even Ms Ann Thrope excuses herself from voting because she doesn't like her choices. If she doesn't like those choices, she can always pencil a candidate in. It's legal. Will she? That's another story. We are offered up bland, boring, tepid candidates, and are expected to become apathetic, thus keeping the problems we have in this country going. We can make a change, but only if we don't let our 2-party system dictate to us who is, and isn't worthy of the job of elected official. Fanatics of each party have taken over, and we, the people, let them.

Now...to answer your question...What brought this about was your consistency in most posts about rights and the free exercise thereof.
Click to expand...








allright. but I do have a few questions.
#3. Isnt privately owned property preivate but public owned property not owned at all? I am confused on that account.
#6. You quote the first amendment word for word. but where do you stand on it?
#7. I agree but didnt they always talk about the why? just now more recently I see the why more than anything else
#5. Now while I think PC speech is bull, I do wonder where do you draw the line in free speech? its gone way too far. something you say can and usually does offend someone somewhere(happens to me a lot and I try not to offend).
 
freako104 said:
allright. but I do have a few questions.
#3. Isnt privately owned property preivate but public owned property not owned at all? I am confused on that account.
#6. You quote the first amendment word for word. but where do you stand on it?
#7. I agree but didnt they always talk about the why? just now more recently I see the why more than anything else
#5. Now while I think PC speech is bull, I do wonder where do you draw the line in free speech? its gone way too far. something you say can and usually does offend someone somewhere(happens to me a lot and I try not to offend).
Click to expand...

Quick and easy...

3. Public property is areas that are controlled by the government. Private property is controlled by private citizens/corporations. The lines are steadily blurring because of 2 things going on right now...the criminalization of tobacco, and the willingness of the public to let it happen. Keep watching...obesity is the next villian on the horizon for health reasons, and I can sense another 'Enron' coming as well...

5. I draw the line a free speech when your talk directly costs lives and/or livlihood through false representation (lies and innuendo).

6. By limiting the exercise of religion in public places, hasn't the Supreme Court violated that same amendment?

7. Nope. They used to let people decide for themselves...now they want to decide for you. They print what they feel you deserve to know, and hide things that the do not want you to know...
 
#3. thanks I was confused on that.

#5. I agree wholeheartedly. there is a difference between free and control(I got that from what you said). I also limit if it leads to violence(will)

#6. yes they are in a way. they are advocating atheism in that sense. I stand by the idea of having them out but it is limiting the exercise and again endorsing an anti religion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top