Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: The British way of thinking
Warrants in the US have to specify what they are looking for . So unless it's in plain sight they have to specify what they want and just can't look for any possible crime.
3832 publicly visible posts • joined 4 Apr 2007
"Unless they have some evidence that I'm committing a crime, they have no right to rifle through my private things."
Yes, they do have that right. Always have. The question is, how does that extend consistently to the digital domain?
Not in the US. Unless you arrest some right then and there you need a warrant to go through my stuff. Even then the validity of the warrant. You don't like the 5th amendment . Now you want to toss out the 4th amendment . While you are at it lets toss out the 8th amendment . First off you are getting US law wrong then you substitute your opinion as fact . When people explain this to you you get mad and say no is explaining to you and just down voting you . On top of the the values that are expressed in the 5th and 4th amendment is some thing most reasonable folks want in civilized world. I mean what wrong with making the government give you due process and getting a warrant ? whats wrong with banning forced confessions and self incrimination ? The thing is you can not pick and choose who gets what rights. No has a the right to deny rights to any one with out first being convicted of some thing.
"Can you imagine this hypothetical situation, the police will probably clone the disks, this guy will walk away bacause of the 5th amendement. A couple of months down the line, one of the agencies will crack the code and find the some disturbing images and will be able to do nothing about it........And you don't find that sad." Under what theory of the law would they not be able to charge the person. I'm going to go out on a limb and saw that you do not live in the US. If you do you have a sever ignorance of American law .
Lets stick with the porn theory . There is a charge in the federal and most local statues that makes posing obscene porn illegal. What is obscene porn ? It's defined by the local community. So just because it's legal in one area does not mean it will be legal some were else in the United States . Oh and people seem to have this twisted notion that only perverts look at porn. So even if it's legal you are pervert and must be kept away from kids . Look at the GOP and these so called family values.
Look up the McMartin trial.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMartin_preschool_trial.
All some has to do is make a complaint and the cops will haul you in for questioning . Even anonymous complaints will be investigated by child protection services. You have cases of kids being ripped out of homes for 30 days only for a judge to say it's unfounded . If you have to many complaints even if the all are unfounded they will take you kids away to air on the safe side. That kind of stuff shows up on an enhanced background check .
No over turning a convection is not the same . Being found not guilty means that's the end of it . I don't know how I can make this any more clear . A conviction that is over turned can be appealed . If there is an appeal the next judge can sit aside the previous judges ruling . If that happens the person goes back to jail . Now do you see how over turning a convection is not the same as being found not guilty. There is a difference between a conviction overturned and set a side . overturned means the conviction is gone and if the DA does not appeal the process is done and over . when a conviction is set a side it means that verdict is nullified and a new trial is ordered . In this case it was over turned and the judge feels like there is no chance that the DA an win an appeal so he set the guy free right away .
"> The reason for holding is to see if the DA plans to appeal
They're not holding him, "the court ruled that he should be released from jail immediately."
I don't if you misunderstood what I was saying or intentional adding thing that are not there My entire response was a into answer of why a person would be held in jail after there conviction has been overturned and not specially about this case so I'm well aware that he was let go .
What they are talking about is over turning a conviction, That is not the same as being found innocent . The reason for holding is to see if the DA plans to appeal. Depending on what the charge is you may or may not be granted bail. But usually winning your appeal does not take weeks or months to be freed but matter of days .
If your "example guy" was that far out of whack, why was he out in public, sans chaperon?
Because California does not have the money to house people like him or to help people like him out .
"They pulled over a known drug dealer, the dealer pulled a gun, and the cops shot him. The interviewee's comment was "Why did they have to kill him? He was only trying to earn a living!". The mind boggles ..."
Not even close. If you are not ape shit insane and pull on cop you deserve to die . I'm not one pf those folks that thinks cops should shoot some in the leg and arm. Most folks who work with the mental ill share my views on cop.
Jake if you live in California you should know that it's extremely hard for people to get help fro mt he state for mental illness.Often times it's not till the person is arrested before the state even looks at them . You have an easier time getting welfare an food stamps then getting help for mental illness if you do not have private insurance .
Jake were in my statement did I say that ? How can you even think that's what I meant? What said is cops and mental illness do not mix well. The end results winds up bad for the person . Cops are not trained to deal with people who have mental illness . Often times when a mentally ill person does not respond to what the cops tell them to do , they don't think gee it's not there fault. Lets try some thing different . No you don't comply we will use force. Don't understand whats going and struggles we will use more force .I've seen it with my own two eyes. This guy was off and when the cop told him to come here he did not. The guy kept on arguing with him self . The cop tasred him .
I stand by my statement. Please do tell me how you read that I said people with mental illness should not be in public ?
Digging up the street is not a big deal in the US. Both come cast an ATT have with the done digging up the streets . The phone company doing more often than cable . To expand DSL services they had to dig up the road here too. Adding remote COs so people could get DSL .Watching those free channels over the net will burn through you data cap.
Rep. Allen West (R-FL) has been active on Twitter today, and this afternoon he notified his followers that he opposes the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) while implying that SOPA is somehow supported by or the fault of President Obama.
Wow are you sure you wantto give Obama credit for this. Great for his re election campaign
If it's so stupid then why has three congressmen back out of this bill.
From the LA TIMES
"
Three co-sponsors of the SOPA and PIPA antipiracy bills have publicly withdrawn their support as Wikipedia and thousands of other websites blacked out their pages Wednesday to protest the legislation.
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) withdrew as a co-sponsor of the Protect IP Act in the Senate, while Reps. Lee Terry (R-Neb.) and Ben Quayle (R-Ariz.) said they were pulling their names from the companion House bill, the Stop Online Piracy Act. Opponents of the legislation, led by large Internet companies, say its broad definitions could lead to censorship of online content and force some websites to shut down."
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2012/01/sopa-blackout-sopa-and-pipa-lose-three-co-sponsors-in-congress.html