Possible election postponement

[HaemishM]

But see, in our world, under the laws we have written, the man is not obliged to give out his ID if he doesn't want to, UNLESS HE IS CHARGED.

As per the article:

Authorities can ask folks for their IDs but people are not necessarily required to show them in a lot of situations. "This is one of them," says ACLU spokesman Doug Honig. "The justification they were citing doesn't apply to Ian."

They can ask, he can say no. They didn't like him saying no, so they intimidated him by tossing out terrorist theories and lecturing him on 9/11. Had they been a bit less belligerent, this wouldn't be an issue.

And if he'd been arrested under a terrorism investigation, the Patriot Act says he can be detained as long as they want, with no charges filed, and he can't do a goddamn thing about it.

You think that's right? I'll be a happy motherfucker when they turn your furry ass into a pincushion for being a total gibbering malfunctioning sexual deviant.

[daveNYC]

In OUR world, if the police REALLY arrested you without good reason, it would get thrown out, they'd get punished, and you'd get compensated.

In whose world again?

[Dark Vengeance]

Had they been a bit less belligerent, this wouldn't be an issue.

Sounded to me from the piece (the one the kid wrote himself) that he felt violated and unfairly persecuted the moment the cops knocked on his fucking door. His paranoia seemed to be that the police were going to start some sort of secret file on him, and that *heaven forbid* they do a background check on him.

Yknow, with his name, they may have been able to verify his status as a student...maybe even confirm that he was in a photography class. They also could have checked if he was on a terror watch list, had any outstanding arrest warrants, parking tickets, etc. Moreover, they could have confirmed his status as an American citizen, or verified the status of his Visa in the event that he was not a citizen.

I seem to recall a story about a pair of Middle Eastern guys going to flight school back around 2000-2001 or so. Some folks thought it was odd that they expected to be trained to fly commercial jets right off the bat, and that one of the students was noticably disinterested in any instruction related to take-off or landing.

As it turned out, nobody did much of anything....the two Middle Eastern guys, though doing something suspcious, weren't doing anything illegal. That is, until they helped hijack some commercial flights and fly them into the WTC on 9/11. IIRC, at least one had an expired visa, and both were on terrorist watch lists.

Bring the noise.
Cheers.............

[Dark Vengeance]

By the way, I'd just like to add that even though Bruce appears to agree with me, I think some of the stuff he is spewing is moronic, even by his standards.

Bring the noise.
Cheers...............

[SirBruce]

Right.  His freedom of movement was restricted.  Exactly the opposite of what you said.  I was referring to the use of language in Orwell's state, not its judicial structure.  As in "you are free to walk but we will arrest you if you do" which constitutes "freedom" in both Orwell-land and SirBruce-land.

No, you're the one who is confused.  The police are "free" to arrest you ANY time already.  It's just that much of the time, it would be illegal for them to do so.  Nevertheless, were you to resist, you'd probably still get arrested, or worse, shot.

In EverywhereIntelligentLand, "freedom of movement" means that generally speaking the government doesn't stop you going to another non-government place without cause.  Checking your ID doesn't stop you.  Neither does arresting you, temporarily, because you don't show your ID.  Never letting you go there, or arresting you and not letting you go after establishing your ID, would be resticting your freedom of movement.

Bruce

[SirBruce]

But see, in our world, under the laws we have written, the man is not obliged to give out his ID if he doesn't want to, UNLESS HE IS CHARGED.

Yes, that's one legal opinion.  What's your point?  Whether or not he was legally obliged to give his ID isn't the issue... the issue is whether or not the police were justified in asking for his ID, and investigating him further when he refused.

They can ask, he can say no. They didn't like him saying no, so they intimidated him by tossing out terrorist theories and lecturing him on 9/11. Had they been a bit less belligerent, this wouldn't be an issue.

He was being belligerent, as his own testimony describes.  As for them "intimidating" him, yes, they did.  Guess what?  That's legal.  They can even lie to him.  They could tell him all sorts of shit to get him to cooperate.  That doesn't mean they could then DO it if he still refused, or if they did it, that they wouldn't get punished for an illegal action.

This is why you should have a lawyer... because they can deal with this, instead of you, and they know your rights better than you do.
 

And if he'd been arrested under a terrorism investigation, the Patriot Act says he can be detained as long as they want, with no charges filed, and he can't do a goddamn thing about it.

And this is a false liberal myth.

Bruce

[SirBruce]

By the way, I'd just like to add that even though Bruce appears to agree with me, I think some of the stuff he is spewing is moronic, even by his standards.

Bring the noise.
Cheers...............

Ditto.

Bruce

[Rasix]

Ahh, going back to your old form. Bravo.  

Good to know things don't change much.

[schild]

But every day I hope that Bruce has changed his avatar. He looks like a fucking serial killer.

[Riggswolfe]

And if he'd been arrested under a terrorism investigation, the Patriot Act says he can be detained as long as they want, with no charges filed, and he can't do a goddamn thing about it.

And this is a false liberal myth.

Bruce

Spoken like a person who has never read the Patriot act. Please stop buying what you are told and investigate for yourself.

[Ironwood]

Hi there.  Eurofag with no right to comment on American politics here !  Just thought I'd nip in to this thread to say what a sterling job Dark Vengeance, Dark Dryad and Sir Bruce are doing being complete and total fucking morons.

Good job guys, things will get to the police state soon and then you can sit back and relax with a smug feeling of a job well done.

I particularly love the irony of the argument - i'f you want to fight the cops, just lawyer up'.  That almost beats the irony of DV and Bruce calling EACH OTHER morons.

Stunning stuff.

[DarkDryad]

Some of you want the government to be a security blanket.

I stopped needing a security blanket a long time ago.

Now you only need new sheets eh bed-wetter.

[SirBruce]

And if he'd been arrested under a terrorism investigation, the Patriot Act says he can be detained as long as they want, with no charges filed, and he can't do a goddamn thing about it.

And this is a false liberal myth.

Bruce

Spoken like a person who has never read the Patriot act. Please stop buying what you are told and investigate for yourself.

I have.  Please feel free to cite the section you think says what you think it says, along with an explanation as to how this was or was not modified by the recent Supreme Court ruling.  Hint: Check out section 412(a).

Bruce

[DarkDryad]

But see, in our world, under the laws we have written, the man is not obliged to give out his ID if he doesn't want to, UNLESS HE IS CHARGED.

As per the article:

Authorities can ask folks for their IDs but people are not necessarily required to show them in a lot of situations. "This is one of them," says ACLU spokesman Doug Honig. "The justification they were citing doesn't apply to Ian."

Except the law says different hammy.

"When officers investigating a reported crime request identification or information, every one commits an offence who, without reasonable excuse, fails or refuses to comply with a demand made to him by a peace officer under this section."

And strangely enough that is legal. I also give you a Terry stop...

"We merely hold today that where a police officer observes unusual conduct which leads him reasonably to conclude in light of his experience that criminal activity may be afoot and that the persons with whom he is dealing may be armed and presently dangerous, where in the course of investigating this behavior he identifies himself as a policeman and makes reasonable inquiries, and where nothing in the initial stages of the encounter serves to dispel his reasonable fear for his own or others' safety, he is entitled for the protection of himself and others in the area to conduct a carefully limited search of the outer clothing of such persons in an attempt to discover weapons which might be used to assault him."

Both laws have been in existance well before 9/11, Bush, Homeland Security, etc etc so dont even try and blame them for it.

[SirBruce]

Well, the ACLU is just quibbling about whether or not the request was indeed "reasonable" in the situation described; e.g. someone photographing a bridge with a tripod camera, by themselves, taking notes, when said bridge is a suspected terrorist target.

My point was simply that the police were also free to lie to him in order to get him to cooperate.

Bruce

[DarkDryad]

Hi there.  Eurofag with no right to comment on American politics here !  Just thought I'd nip in to this thread to say what a sterling job Dark Vengeance, Dark Dryad and Sir Bruce are doing being complete and total fucking morons.

Good job guys, things will get to the police state soon and then you can sit back and relax with a smug feeling of a job well done.

I particularly love the irony of the argument - i'f you want to fight the cops, just lawyer up'.  That almost beats the irony of DV and Bruce calling EACH OTHER morons.

Stunning stuff.

No Eurofag we simply know what the law says while people who feel put upon by such an oppressive society do nothing about it but bitch and moan. My points is simply if you dont abide by our current laws then get stuffed if you do nothing to change them. All clear now? Hope so.

[Dark Vengeance]

Just thought I'd nip in to this thread to say what a sterling job Dark Vengeance, Dark Dryad and Sir Bruce are doing being complete and total fucking morons.

Yeah, I'm obviously way off base thinking that ANYONE was being reasonable in thinking that a guy photographing a bridge for an hour, in the rain, using high-end equipment, and making notes looked suspicious. Oh, and let's recall this was the third time he had shown up to take pictures there in about a month. They must all be racists, who only called it in because he was a darkie.

The guy was too stupid to know when to leave well enough alone. After the cops leave his house, he decides to snap pictures of them walking to their cars. When the guard at the locks is walking away, he again snaps pictures of them. He interrupts the agent multiple times to say "yeah I know about 9/11" when shutting the hell up would have been the play of the day. When the special agent is walking to his car, he marches right up after him to ask for a business card.

Does he have a right to do those things? Absolutely. But it was fucking stupid. Act like a dick, piss off the authorities, and they are going to fuck with you as much as they can within the law. That's just common sense.

First of all, he acts as if nobody had any reason or right to even question his activity, or scrutinize it beyond "oh, well Im a photography student, heres my notes....you don't know what these notes mean, so here let me translate them into laymans terms for you. See? Perfectly harmless".

Second, the automatic assumption (not a rare one among some minorities either) is that he is being singled out simply because of race. I'd think it was a bit odd for anyone to be doing that, at least enough to ask "whatcha doin?". Fuck, when describing the 2nd incident, as soon as SPD arrives with Homeland secuirty, he says he had "a flashback to Rodney King". He even concedes the point that he "just wanted someone to say it to [his] face"...and nothing else even seems to enter his mind.

Third, he reacts to the authorities as if they are a single faceless entity. By the time the security guard approaches him, he's taking a "here comes the harrassment again" attitude, when the guard wasn't even involved in the first incident (a month earlier), nor was the kid questioned at the scene. He acts with shock and dismay that uniformed police officers carry guns, that a security guard would have a german shepherd, that someone would flash a badge, that federal agents happen to be wearing black suits, or that police officers/security guards would take an authoritative tone.

Fourth, he takes an attitude and gets very emotional, doing some shit that would be sure to piss the cops off....such asking why "non-brown tourists" weren't being investigated (maybe because nobody called about them)....even twice pointing out a man with an easel and canvas (because, yknow, a guy painting a picture is really the same, right?). Now this is AFTER he has already voluntarily given them his ID....he continues to argue, argue, and argue some more, just for the sake of doing so. Look kid, you ALREADY gave them your ID, STFU, let them finish, get the hell out of there, then get the police report and call a lawyer if you think they're doing something illegal.

On multiple occasions, his own actions added fuel to the fire. Even after he concedes that he understands that they need to investigate all calls, he goes on to demand "some real accountability". He just can't leave it alone and walk away, which prompts THE ENTIRE CONFRONTATION WITH THE SPECIAL AGENT.

Had he simply politely refused to show ID, took whatever consequences came of that, and then hired a lawyer to sue the SPD, I'd say he was right on the money. But he didn't. He acted like a moron, and turned a reasonable "whatcha doin?" into a giant fucking production. Well within his rights, but fucking stupid nonetheless.

But yeah, this guy did everything right, and authorities are all evil racists, and I'm a moron for having any opinion to the contrary, right?

Bring the noise.
Cheers............

[DarkDryad]

Thank you

[Daeven]

Good job guys, things will get to the police state soon and then you can sit back and relax with a smug feeling of a job well done.

Hyperbole much? I'll tell you what. I'll give the above opinoin credence the day Mr. Asshat (Michael Moore) gets arrested for Subversion or Violating the Standards and Civil Code of the Party. Until then, um, yeah thanks for playing.

[Anonymous]

I think that Jon Stewart would get arrested way before Michael Moore.  Moore succeeds only in making the left look stupid.  Stewart makes everyone he lampoons look stupid.

As to whether the photographer was out of line or not, eh.  The attitude of DD and DV call to mind a Heinlein quote.  In fact, here's THREE that I feel apply.

"In a mature society, 'civil servant' is semantically equal to 'civil master.'"

"Secrecy is the beginning of tyranny."

"You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don't ever count on having both at once."

How they apply is an exercise left to the reader.

[Arcadian Del Sol]

This thread has gotten terribly off the track. Can we get back to the actual topic?

Soulflame are teh stupid.

[stray]

Moore succeeds only in making the left look stupid.

This thread is rife with conspiracy theories and villianization. I'm not sure why Moore is somehow any different.

[Paelos]

Moore succeeds only in making the left look stupid.

This thread is rife with conspiracy theories and villianization. I'm not sure why Moore is somehow any different.

Because our theories are free and net us nothing.

[Anonymous]

The real topic is, "We need Bush and company out of office four years ago."

[Paelos]

I'd be happy with Cheney dropping off the ticket due to "health problems" which is not an unreal possibility. With him gone, I'm a little more secure in the administration.

[Anonymous]

If Bush would ditch Cheney and Ashcroft, tell the religious right to go fuck itself, and embrace financial conservatism, I still wouldn't vote for him.  I'm not very appreciative of silver spoon in mouth life long failures that have leaned on image consultants to get where they are.

Edit:  I'm no fan of Kerry either, for some of the same reasons.

[Paelos]

If Bush would ditch Cheney and Ashcroft, tell the religious right to go fuck itself, and embrace financial conservatism, I still wouldn't vote for him.  I'm not very appreciative of silver spoon in mouth life long failures that have leaned on image consultants to get where they are.

Edit:  I'm no fan of Kerry either, for some of the same reasons.

Newsflash, poor people don't run for the country's highest office. I don't think you are ever going a choice that's not between two rich jackasses. Or do you prefer the self-made rich jackass? The guy who pulled his way up by his bootstraps to the nation's capital? Smart hillbillies don't make it that far.





Except Carter...

[Sky]

Don't forget Donny Rumsfeld while we're rooting out the evildoers in the administration.

[angry.bob]

Bush narrowly taking the electoral college thanks to extremely narrow wins in Florida and Ohio.

Forget Ohio, Bush is fucked here. The economy is completely in the shitter and job adds in the paper are down to about half a page during the week. Northern Ohio at least, is a sea of Kerry bumper stickers and yard signs. I've never, ever seen presidential election crap out as early or as thick as I've seen it now. And there isn't even a whisper of support for Bush. Even the snake-charming, speaks-in-tongues Baptists at work are voting against Bush. Not necessarily for Kerry, they just want bush to be gone.

Couldn't tell you about Columbus though, it's full of idiot hillbilly Jesus freaks who moved there from shitholes Ozark states during the 90's because jobs were plentiful.

[Flashman]

Bush narrowly taking the electoral college thanks to extremely narrow wins in Florida and Ohio.

Forget Ohio, Bush is fucked here. .

More like tied...

The state of Ohio remains a key battleground in the 2004 United States presidential election, according to a poll by Zogby Interactive published in the Wall Street Journal Online. 48.6 per cent of respondents would vote for prospective Democratic nominee John Kerry, while 47.9 per cent would support Republican incumbent George W. Bush.
Source: Zogby Interactive / The Wall Street Journal Online Methodology: Online interviews to 1,321 Ohio voters, conducted from Jul. 6 to Jul. 10, 2004. Margin of error is 2.7 per cent.

[geldonyetich]

The Wall Street Journal should probably stop conducting their surveys at the local country club.

[SirBruce]

It's a Zogby poll, you moron.  Only the most respected and accurate poll of them all.

Hey Riggswolfe, found that section of the Patriot Act yet?  No?  Anyone else?  Don't you feel stupid that you bought into a liberal lie again?

Bruce

[angry.bob]

The state of Ohio remains a key battleground in the 2004 United States presidential election, according to a poll by Zogby Interactive published in the Wall Street Journal Online[/b]

Yes, well I can see how something as secure and hijinx-proof as an internet poll is bound to be way more accurate than the observations of someone actually living in the area who's involved in not only politics but several non-partisan community and religious groups that span a wide variety of economic, social, and poliical ranges.

Zogby Interactive's webpoll can say whatever the hell it wants, but anyone expecting an even 40% support for Bush here in North Ohio is in for a rude awakening. I might be wrong though because webpolls are nearly as accurate as everything else on the intarweb.

[SirBruce]

It's amazing to see what mental hoops people will force themselves to jump through to marginalize something that doesn't mesh with their personal world view.

The poll was of Ohio voters, so there's a good chance most of them live in the area.  Yes, it was an Internet poll... conducted with scientific methodology by Zogby, the most respected of all pollsters.  They conducted online interviews of 1,321 voters... I don't see any evidence of some massive Internet hijinx there.

Your level of personal experience is pretty much irrelevant.  If you were that "plugged in" so that you always knew the pulse of Ohio, the political establishment would be paying you for your expert advice and analysis.  And even of those that proclaim to do that professionally are frequently wrong.  Wherever did you get your amazing psychic infallibility?

If you don't believe Zogby, here's a non-online poll by Rasmussen from June that puts it at Bush 46, Kerry 42, margin of error 4%:
http://www.cpod.ubc.ca/polls/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewItem&itemID=3380

Hell, even you know you're so full of shit that you're already trying to backpedal out of it by claiming you only speak for NORTHERN Ohio.  That way if you're wrong, hey, it must have been Southern Ohio that broke heavily for Bush, right?

Bruce

[angry.bob]

It's a Zogby poll, you moron. Only the most respected and accurate poll of them all.

Says who? You? I call bullshit. Prove they're the most respected and accurate pollsters. Lets see some numbers. Because quite frankly, my personal poll had more participants and I'll lay money down that it covered a wider voter base than Zogby's did. In fact, lets make a bet. If I can show that in the simple course of talking with people at work, school, clubs, church, and organizations I got a more accurate poll and with more people than Zogby, you never ever come here or Corpnews again. Ever.

It's amazing to see what mental hoops people will force themselves to jump through to marginalize something that doesn't mesh with their personal world view.

Yes, scepticism of an internet poll is a pretty big "mental hoop". There's not even a need to explain why putting any faith in an internet poll makes you a total fucking tool.

The poll was of Ohio voters

Veried that they actually lived in Ohio how? Oh, there was a checkbox. Tamper proof! Given that the GOP has set up "Republicans for Nader" to burgle votes from Kerry, I don't see why fudging something like a stupid internet poll so their tool followers can use it in internet arguements. Republican actions reek of last minute despiration.

And even of those that proclaim to do that professionally are frequently wrong.

So then why would I believe anything that any of them say, including polls. After all, polls are as full of shit as anything else. Even more reason to go with my own personal experience.

Wherever did you get your amazing psychic infallibility?

By involving myself in a lifestyle that's not primarily geared around tracking subscriptions to online games and posting trolls on message boards where I'm universally hated to the point where I get banned and have to wait for the admin to restart the message board and forget to reban me so I can post again. Despair Bruce, your lifestyle is sad. Have you even ever touched a girl who isn't a floorwhore at E3?

Hell, even you know you're so full of shit that you're already trying to backpedal out of it by claiming you only speak for NORTHERN Ohio.  That way if you're wrong, hey, it must have been Southern Ohio that broke heavily for Bush, right?

No shitfag, it's not "backpedaling", it's "adding a qualifier". I live in Northern Ohio, and I'm involved in things that go on in Northern Ohio. I said Northern Ohio in my first post too you fucking asshole. Who knows what's going on in places like Cincinnati, which is really just North Kentucky, or Columbus, which is so full of immigrated religious fanatics from shithole hillbilliy states that the freeways are lined with churches with neon lights. Last time I drove on I70 it looked like Vegas - but Vegas for Jesus. People south of Stark county could be voting for a space alien and I wouldn't have a clue.