Big Brother sucks!

Personally, I think this state has bigger things to worry about.

We already have redlight and speeding cameras in our city. It has generated lots of money and I would bet has decreased the rate of accidents. Although for whatever reason, the government has said that it hasn't generated quite as much as they thought it would.

 

One of the major problems though is with people who drive for a living. I've heard many stories of these type of people getting many many tickets amounting to huge fines.

While I am scared that we are losing too many personal freedoms ("Thanks" Republicans!), I also feel that if you are doing nothing illegal (have nothing to hide), then it shouldn't matter if police photograph your vehicle to see if you're speeding.

 

As you know, we now take fingerprints and photographs of all visa holders attempting to enter the US. Sometimes, these people express their displeasure with having to be "subjected" to these procedures. We tell them, 1) if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear; and/or 2) if you don't like it, you don't have to come to the US.

 

Interestingly enough, I have had more people tell me that they support the "registration" system than have expressed displeasure therewith.

While I am scared that we are losing too many personal freedoms ("Thanks" Republicans!), I also feel that if you are doing nothing illegal (have nothing to hide), then it shouldn't matter if police photograph your vehicle to see if you're speeding.

 

As you know, we now take fingerprints and photographs of all visa holders attempting to enter the US. Sometimes, these people express their displeasure with having to be "subjected" to these procedures. We tell them, 1) if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear; and/or 2) if you don't like it, you don't have to come to the US.

 

Interestingly enough, I have had more people tell me that they support the "registration" system than have expressed displeasure therewith.

If you are innocent you have no need for your miranda rights, no fear from any search and seizure, no need for habeas corpus, no need for an attorney . . .

If you are innocent you have no need for your miranda rights, no fear from any search and seizure, no need for habeas corpus, no need for an attorney . . .

I think that the "innocent convict" premise is way overblown!

 

What percentage of incarcerated individuals do you believe are not gulity of the crime for which they were sentenced? I'd say 1/100 of 1%, if that many.

I think that the "innocent convict" premise is way overblown!

 

What percentage of incarcerated individuals do you believe are not gulity of the crime for which they were sentenced? I'd say 1/100 of 1%, if that many.

What I disagree with is the premise that if you are innocent, you do not need any of your rights. If you are innocent, why object to the police searching your home, if you are innocent why object to the police photographing you 24/7? If you are innocent why object to the police pulling you over and asking you why you are in a certain neighborhood?

Interestingly enough, I have had more people tell me that they support the "registration" system than have expressed displeasure therewith.

Not me. I know more people that are against a National ID card.

What I disagree with is the premise that if you are innocent, you do not need any of your rights. If you are innocent, why object to the police searching your home, if you are innocent why object to the police photographing you 24/7? If you are innocent why object to the police pulling you over and asking you why you are in a certain neighborhood?

I agree. I have been pulled over in the past (I had longish hair and a beard) because I "fit the profile", and it sucks.

 

But, it seems to me that the one's complaining the loudest about things like being photographed speeding are those that have been busted by these systems.

 

I think that these systems do more good than harm, and are implemented to protect law-abiding society.

 

What bothers me more is when a murderer, rapist, drug dealer, etc. gets off on a "technicality" (like not having his Miranda Rights read to him), when you know he's as guilty as sin. (i.e. OJ Simpson)

Not me. I know more people that are against a National ID card.

And I know people who won't use a Dominicks or Jewel "super savers card" because they don't want "Big Brother" knowing what groceries they purchase!

 

PARANOIA!!!

And I know people who won't use a Dominicks or Jewel "super savers card" because they don't want "Big Brother" knowing what groceries they purchase!

 

PARANOIA!!!

It's not paranoia. It's freedom.

And I know people who won't use a Dominicks or Jewel "super savers card" because they don't want "Big Brother" knowing what groceries they purchase!

 

PARANOIA!!!

It's not paranoia. It's freedom.

I agree, to a point.

 

I compare the National ID debate to gun control.

 

Who are the people most worried about potentially losing their rights to own handguns? Probably people who intend to use their handguns for illegal purposes.

 

If you are a law-abiding, upstanding, tax paying citizen, why would you worry about having to register for a national ID card?

I agree. I have been pulled over in the past (I had longish hair and a beard) because I "fit the profile", and it sucks.

 

But, it seems to me that the one's complaining the loudest about things like being photographed speeding are those that have been busted by these systems.

 

I think that these systems do more good than harm, and are implemented to protect law-abiding society.

 

What bothers me more is when a murderer, rapist, drug dealer, etc. gets off on a "technicality" (like not having his Miranda Rights read to him), when you know he's as guilty as sin. (i.e. OJ Simpson)

The underlying premise of our legal system is innocent until proven guilty. Mexico operates on the Naploeonic code of guilty until proven innocent. Once you've seen what happens when the accused have no rights, you'll never argue innocent until proven guilty.

 

I believe it is better that an occassional criminal is set free than on occassional innocent person is locked up. I do not believe many people are wrongly convicted, and that is because we have defense attorneys who take US law seriously.

 

Mark Furhman framed a guilty man. Imagine of a Mark Fuhrman was investigating you and you were innocent. Unless criminals are allowed free when the police screw up, one bad cop can really wreck a lot of lives.

AMARILLO, Texas, March 18 (UPI) -- The 45 Tulia residents wrongly convicted in a Texas Panhandle drug roundup five years ago may get another $1 million in settlement money.

 

The city of Amarillo, one of nearly 30 cities and counties in the regional drug task force, settled last week for $5 million and the remainding governments may settle for $1 million, according to sources quoted Thursday by the Amarillo Globe-News.

 

Attorneys involved in the federal lawsuit filed by the victims of the bungled investigation would not confirm the settlement, but said talks have been under way with the remaining cities and counties.

 

"We are continuing to negotiate, and we hope we can reach a settlement," said Jeff Blackburn, an attorney for some of the plaintiffs.

 

The 45 Tulia residents, mostly black, were arrested on drug charges in the small town based on the investigation of Tom Coleman, an undercover officer who worked for the task force.

 

Coleman's work was later discredited and the convictions overturned. He faces a trial on perjury charges this summer.

The underlying premise of our legal system is innocent until proven guilty. Mexico operates on the Naploeonic code of guilty until proven innocent.  Once you've seen what happens when the accused have no rights, you'll never argue innocent until proven guilty.

 

I believe it is better that an occassional criminal is set free than on occassional innocent person is locked up. I do not believe many people are wrongly convicted, and that is because we have defense attorneys who take US law seriously.

 

Mark Furhman framed a guilty man. Imagine of a Mark Fuhrman was investigating you and you were innocent. Unless criminals are allowed free when the police screw up, one bad cop can really wreck a lot of lives.

Then you must also not believe in the death penalty?

 

Just trying to throw another argument lol.

 

A lot of times, Tex, these "innocent" men aren't as innocent as it seems. For example, look at the Rodney King situation. He probably didn't need to be beaten to the extent that he was, but, subsequently, he has shown himself to be a "total scumbag".He is constantly in trouble with the law and has been arrested on several occasions.

 

With very, very, very few exceptions, no 100% innocent people are imprisoned in the US.

Then you must also not believe in the death penalty?

 

Just trying to throw another argument lol.

 

I DO believe in the Death Penalty. Death is the ultimate deterrant!

I DO believe in the Death Penalty. Death is the ultimate deterrant!

That was supposed to be more specifically aimed at TexSox but hey you're for it, good for you.

 

Of course you're dead wrong but that's not the point.

Who are the people most worried about potentially losing their rights to own handguns? Probably people who intend to use their handguns for illegal purposes.

 

If you are a law-abiding, upstanding, tax paying citizen, why would you worry about having to register for a national ID card?

I disagree. I worry about losing my rights to carry and own a handgun and don't intend to use it illegally. I think it's the exact opposite. When you regulate something, you only regulate the law abiding citizes.

I disagree. I worry about losing my rights to carry and own a handgun and don't intend to use it illegally. I think it's the exact opposite. When you regulate something, you only regulate the law abiding citizes.

Alright I have got to ask, what do you have a handgun for and what can you do with it that is legal?

 

Do the world a favour dig a hole 6 feet deep and bary the gun in there.

That was supposed to be more specifically aimed at TexSox but hey you're for it, good for you.

 

Of course you're dead wrong but that's not the point.

How am I wrong?

 

If Mr. X kills somebody, and is executed, can he kill again? I don't think so!

Alright I have got to ask, what do you have a handgun for and what can you do with it that is legal?

 

Do the world a favour dig a hole 6 feet deep and bary the gun in there.

I don't own a hangun. I don't even own a long gun, but I do believe the 2nd Amendment guarantees me the right to own one to protect my family if need be.

How am I wrong?

 

If Mr. X kills somebody, and is executed, can he kill again? I don't think so!

Personally, I'm 100% against the death penalty because there is always the possibility of an innocent man being executed. To me that is one of the worst things I could ever think of.

 

I also believe in second chance and there are certainly cases where a second chance is due.

The ding dong that voted to only use them for catching speeders...