• There has been a recent cluster of spammers accessing BARFer accounts and posting spam. To safeguard your account, please consider changing your password. It would be even better to take the additional step of enabling 2 Factor Authentication (2FA) on your BARF account. Read more here.

Cop pulls guy on biker. Pt. II - He could get 16 years in the slammer

Brown81 said:
Well, using your "logic", then a law against recording people will be useless because no one would ever break it anyway!

Fuck it, dump the constitution, we can all just trust a bunch of nameless government officals to stay honest!



And, I'll get you that list just as soon as you give me a list of people who have been wrongfully recorded. And, you can't use this cop for the list! I want everyone on that damn list!!



But seriously, you can start here:

http://www.spiritus-temporis.com/usa-patriot-act/alleged-abuses-under-the-usa-patriot-act.html
Click to expand...

Wow great find... Didn't know we had so many "terrorists" already...
 
Brown81 said:
Here's the thing man, you are saying you are afraid of a police state in one breath (I am afraid right there with you man), and in the next breath you are defending the Patriot Act.

Can you not understand that the Patriot Act is the closest thing to a police state we have ever seen in this country? Really? I mean REALLY?
Click to expand...

Dude, I'm neither defending or attacking the Patriot Act. I'm just asking for a little supporting information from those claiming it's the second coming of Statlinist Russia and that people are being salted away under its authority. That's all. Just asking for a fact or two to support the opinions.

And I never said anything about being afraid of a police state. I have zero fear of a police state developing in the United States because it ain't gonna happen. And if we ever did begin to really move down that path, the people who would stop it wouldn't be the left wing paranoids who find conspiracy around every corner. If we relied on those idiots to get anything done other than criticizing others, we'd really be fucked.
 
Archimedes said:
Dude, I'm neither defending or attacking the Patriot Act. I'm just asking for a little supporting information from those claiming it's the second coming of Statlinist Russia and that people are being salted away under its authority. That's all. Just asking for a fact or two to support the opinions.
....
Click to expand...
Everyone is a bit hyperbolic. "ALL rights" and other statements are a bit over the top.

There are things in the Patriot Act that attempted to cure some ills in our security system. That is fine. I am not sure they were cured, but that is another issue. There were other, very vague, very onerous powers given to law enforcement. Many of those have been struct down in court or have been altered to meet Constitutional requirements. You can start at Wikipedia to see the legal history.

I know of an incident where parts of the Patriot Act were used in an inappropriate manner: An ex-marine and ex-leo, who was arrested, in his house, by Sheriffs and a SWAT team with exaggerated force, because of something he said unrelated to terrorism that was recorded on an answering machine. Since he was a known owner of weapons, the Sheriffs used provisions in the Patriot Act to invade his house without warning.

We certainly have wandered from the initial privacy/freedom-of-informaiton issue, have we not? Or have we wandered?
 
clutchslip said:
Everyone is a bit hyperbolic. "ALL rights" and other statements are a bit over the top.

There are things in the Patriot Act that attempted to cure some ills in our security system. That is fine. I am not sure they were cured, but that is another issue. There were other, very vague, very onerous powers given to law enforcement. Many of those have been struct down in court or have been altered to meet Constitutional requirements. You can start at Wikipedia to see the legal history.

I know of an incident where parts of the Patriot Act were used in an inappropriate manner: An ex-marine and ex-leo, who was arrested, in his house, by Sheriffs and a SWAT team with exaggerated force, because of something he said unrelated to terrorism that was recorded on an answering machine. Since he was a known owner of weapons, the Sheriffs used provisions in the Patriot Act to invade his house without warning.

We certainly have wandered from the initial privacy/freedom-of-informaiton issue, have we not? Or have we wandered?
Click to expand...

I assume you mean invaded his house under the sneak and peek warrant, rather than without warning. There is no requirement to give anyone warning. The only change in the situation you describe is the ability for law enforcement to delay the warrant process. But they still have the same burden of proof later to get the warrant and use any information against the accused. All it does is speed up the process, it doesn't change the law about search, seizure or admissability in court.

And no, IMO, we haven't wandered perceptibly, either legally or in reality. The legal changes aren't that significant and, even if they were, one has to assume 'all law enforcement is corrupt and out to control us' in order to have any real concern here. Honestly, all the Patriot Act debaters are colored more by their biases than by the issues that are really in play. Even the people who were pro-Patriot Act and are directly involved in law enforcement will tell you that it hasn't changed that much. The right wing tards who say it's been such a raving success overstate the conviction rate and the left wing tards who say we're being manipulated overstate the impact of the law. Nothing new. The radical extremes in this country do that to just about every important issue in this country. Best to just ignore them, because neither really has any control over the long term direction of this country or our daily lives unless we choose to let them.

EDIT: And clutchslip, the comment you made about the Courts striking down provisions as unconstitutional is another reason why I don't lose any sleep over the Patriot Act. There are mechanisms in place, such as the Courts, to address and cure these ills. Fucking great country we live in, ain't it?
 
Last edited:
Archimedes said:
Dude, I'm neither defending or attacking the Patriot Act. I'm just asking for a little supporting information from those claiming it's the second coming of Statlinist Russia and that people are being salted away under its authority. That's all. Just asking for a fact or two to support the opinions.

And I never said anything about being afraid of a police state. I have zero fear of a police state developing in the United States because it ain't gonna happen. And if we ever did begin to really move down that path, the people who would stop it wouldn't be the left wing paranoids who find conspiracy around every corner. If we relied on those idiots to get anything done other than criticizing others, we'd really be fucked.
Click to expand...

WOW, DUDE.


I am really disappointed in your response here. :(
 
Brown81 said:
WOW, DUDE.


I am really disappointed in your response here. :(
Click to expand...

I'm not so surprised, he just doesn't wanna be wrong so he is for whatever that makes him sound like he was right... I guess that's what he mean's by "thinking independent", you know you can just say whatever the fuck makes you sound like you have a purpose. :rolleyes

"Not scared of a police state because it won't happen." So he would be scared if it would?

Whatever... dude never even took any stance on the issue besides "No one knows what they are talking about and they should stop and that all our opinions are useless."

I rather talk to my 12 year old little brother at least he can carry on a rational argument that isn't just insulting people.
 
Archimedes said:
I assume you mean invaded his house under the sneak and peek warrant, rather than without warning. There is no requirement to give anyone warning. The only change in the situation you describe is the ability for law enforcement to delay the warrant process. But they still have the same burden of proof later to get the warrant and use any information against the accused. All it does is speed up the process, it doesn't change the law about search, seizure or admissability in court.

And no, IMO, we haven't wandered perceptibly, either legally or in reality. The legal changes aren't that significant and, even if they were, one has to assume 'all law enforcement is corrupt and out to control us' in order to have any real concern here. Honestly, all the Patriot Act debaters are colored more by their biases than by the issues that are really in play. Even the people who were pro-Patriot Act and are directly involved in law enforcement will tell you that it hasn't changed that much. The right wing tards who say it's been such a raving success overstate the conviction rate and the left wing tards who say we're being manipulated overstate the impact of the law. Nothing new. The radical extremes in this country do that to just about every important issue in this country. Best to just ignore them, because neither really has any control over the long term direction of this country or our daily lives unless we choose to let them.

EDIT: And clutchslip, the comment you made about the Courts striking down provisions as unconstitutional is another reason why I don't lose any sleep over the Patriot Act. There are mechanisms in place, such as the Courts, to address and cure these ills. Fucking great country we live in, ain't it?
Click to expand...

You are correct that not all law enforcement is corrupt. However it is well known that power corrupts people. That's why our system is built on checks and balances, to try to prevent corruption.

We live in a democracy. In order for it to work citizens have to get involved. That is how it works. You can't just trust the mechanisms in place to do their job. The courts don't pick and choose the laws they review. They review legal matters that are brought before them.

If people don't voice their opinions, have discussions, and organize together then the system would fall apart. You don't have to agree with them, but that's what it is all about.
 
Archimedes said:
I assume you mean invaded his house under the sneak and peek warrant, rather than without warning. There is no requirement to give anyone warning. The only change in the situation you describe is the ability for law enforcement to delay the warrant process. But they still have the same burden of proof later to get the warrant and use any information against the accused. All it does is speed up the process, it doesn't change the law about search, seizure or admissability in court.
.........the comment you made about the Courts striking down provisions as unconstitutional is another reason why I don't lose any sleep over the Patriot Act. There are mechanisms in place, such as the Courts, to address and cure these ills. Fucking great country we live in, ain't it?
Click to expand...
That is correct on the sneak and peek. You made a much more rational argument in this post, buddy.

I agree with it being a great country with its three divisions system of government. But, please remember that system only works if people take the time and put out the effort to maintain it's integrity. Someone had to sue the Federal Government to get those questionable areas changed. Or someone was arrested using them. Then an attorney objected on U.S. Constitutional grounds.

Freedom does not mean a free lunch.
 
Maryland's Attorney General weighs in:
Recording police likely OK, attorney general says

Marylanders appear to have the right to record interactions with police officers with devices such as video cameras and mobile phones, according to an opinion by the state attorney general's office. The advisory letter was issued as several people face or have been threatened with criminal charges for taping police.

It's unlikely that most interactions with police could be considered private, as some law enforcement agencies have interpreted the state's wiretapping act, wrote Assistant Attorney General Robert McDonald. The conclusion is based on prior rulings and opinions of courts in other states.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland is representing a motorcyclist facing criminal charges in Harford County, one of at least two people who are being prosecuted there for recording police. State police raided the home of Anthony Graber in April after he posted a video of a traffic stop that he recorded with a helmet-mounted camera.

[...]

The advisory letter from the attorney general's office, dated July 7, was requested by Democratic and Republican state lawmakers, who asked if police were twisting the law and whether a legislative remedy was necessary. The opinion does not carry the weight of law but is meant to guide judges and state agencies.

The opinion "makes the point that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy when a police officer arrests a citizen, which makes it perfectly legal for a citizen to videotape or have an oral record of the arrest," said Del. Samuel I. Rosenberg, a Baltimore Democrat. "We want to know whether we have to change the law, and the answer seems to be no, we do not."​
 
DataDan said:
Maryland's Attorney General weighs in:
....It's unlikely that most interactions with police could be considered private, as some law enforcement agencies have interpreted the state's wiretapping act, wrote Assistant Attorney General Robert McDonald. The conclusion is based on prior rulings and opinions of courts in other states.
....The opinion "makes the point that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy when a police officer arrests a citizen, which makes it perfectly legal for a citizen to videotape or have an oral record of the arrest,...
Click to expand...
That's what I'm talkin' about. :cool
 
clutchslip said:
That's what I'm talkin' about. :cool
Click to expand...

What about the people that came in and took the guy's computers and cameras. Absolutely nothing will happen to those fear mongering assholes. I just hope more people record those cops from now on.
 
Var said:
What about the people that came in and took the guy's computers and cameras. Absolutely nothing will happen to those fear mongering assholes. I just hope more people record those cops from now on.
Click to expand...
Depends on whether he, and/or others, think that there is a case against them. Illegal seizure and all that nice constitutional stuff. :)
 
clutchslip said:
Depends on whether he, and/or others think that there is a case against them. Illegal seizure and all that nice constitutional stuff. :)
Click to expand...

The guy was already nice enough not to sue the PD for the officer pulling out his gun, and they thanked him by trying to throw him in prison. Let's hope the victim doesn't make the same mistake twice.
 
Var said:
What about the people that came in and took the guy's computers and cameras. Absolutely nothing will happen to those fear mongering assholes. I just hope more people record those cops from now on.
Click to expand...

they'll probably get a job with the MCSO.


On a lulzier note, so far around 80% of the time powers given under the patriot act have been used it has had nothing to do with terrorism, mostly just the WAR ON DRUGS(lol). Fear mongering politicians once again get more powers to subjugate us with if need be. :party
 
clutchslip said:
That is correct on the sneak and peek. You made a much more rational argument in this post, buddy.

I agree with it being a great country with its three divisions system of government. But, please remember that system only works if people take the time and put out the effort to maintain it's integrity. Someone had to sue the Federal Government to get those questionable areas changed. Or someone was arrested using them. Then an attorney objected on U.S. Constitutional grounds.

Freedom does not mean a free lunch.
Click to expand...

Of course! And that is how it should be, and how it has been for 200 years :party
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top