Soju
-
Content Count
2,258 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4 -
Feedback
0%
Posts posted by Soju
-
-
I'm still confused about what part of the law says that probable cause means you no longer need a warrant. I thought it meant that without probable cause, they couldn't even get issued a warrant. But I'll just chalk that up to another one of those pesky amendments that get in the way so isn't followed.
-
Yep, the NYC
kangarootraffic courts (if you want to call them courts) are run this way because it is a for profit business for the city. There is no presumption of innocence. They don't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt anything. You are not entitled to supporting evidence. No evidence is even needed to prove guilt. Due process be damned. The judge works for the same people as the prosecutor. In fact they don't even hold any valid jurisdiction. Welcome to legal land. You don't even get one Mickey Mouse hat. -
It isn't all about you vlad. It was it (IMO) relevant to the thread.
Also... ease up on the ellipsis' please... 251 times in 24 posts is more than excessive... I suppose not all were ellipsis'... as some had 2.. or 4 periods instead....
-
NJ gun laws are like a game of monopoly. Sometimes through chance, you go directly to jail and someone else gets to take your property.
-
I'm sure there was more probable cause than a gun case to get a warrant. The title to this thread is misleading. A gun case itself doesn't constitute PC. Add lying and you may have something.
This guy is no kind of poster child. Transporting firearms in unlocked or unsecured cases in an area you can reach in a vehicle will get you arrested in most states.
Most states? You sure? Not all states are Jersey stupid.
-
Actually I added that you missed the point. And it is cool.
But I digress.
Just some fun trivia:
Which country has the largest incarceration rate of their population? I mean, because of course the notion that the US has become/is becoming a police state is ridiculous right? So it can't be the US.
Well the answer is in fact the US. And it isn't even close.
Why do I bring this up? Well, because this thread was started about an event that had a number of people arrested for marijuana, and the war on drugs is certainly the reason for our insane incarceration rate...which leads to ruin lives, prison over crowding, the early release of actual violent criminals (to make room for the drug offenders), for profit prisons, debt, amongst other things. But you know, we must enforce these laws.
-
Law school ruins some of the best minds!
Indeed it does! But there are only 1 or maybe 2 states that allow someone to be a lawyer without a law degree, so if someone is calling themselves a lawyer and only has an engineering degree, look out!
-
I am not saying the cops were right or wrong... but obviously he lied... they obviously saw the guns and were concerned why a lawful citizen would lie..
To avoid a warrantless search. Oops! It happened anyways.
-
Point
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
Vlad's head
-
I know you would love that but it was a serious question.
-
again.. the problem is your morals.. my morals.. your neighbors morals.. are ALL different..
there is NO standard..
Which is why they should be judged.........................................
-
I am telling you..
you think it is awesome when a cop bucks the system stands up and says "I will not enforce that gun law because its not what I believe in.. and it is wrong"
but you forget that there are other cops out there that have views that are completely opposite... and their discretion could be awful....
I didn't forget anything. I am not, as you have also spoken against, saying cops can make up their own laws. If their only discretion is to enforce the law or not, how awful can it be, and what would change anything now? It isn't like police can't already make good or bad decisions. I find it sad you don't think they should be able to make good ones though.
yeah I think all laws are enforced evenly... again you make ridiculous comments..
I obviously do not think that....
I'm aware but your opposition to things doesn't make sense otherwise.
and if you don't think majority rules.. I dont know what to tell you...
elections elect officials...
officials are elected on what they sell to the people..
the people that the majority vote into office then make laws...
so... the voting majority is driving the boat..
Well really the politicians are. As we have all seen, they often don't follow what their constituents want. Yet you still think they are the only ones who should make change....
-
Common sense is open to interpretation. I hear a lot of people on here just spouting out that is F'd up and that is F'd up. Everyone can say send a unit or two to confirm an active shooting......... Well what if it was an active shooting and those 2 units were ambushed by someone looking to cause havoc. Now you have 2 to 4 cops dead b/c someone thinks they have a better way. Was my answer sarcastic, yes however my SOP makes as much sense as others ideas.
At what point did they realize they weren't being ambushed by a squad of Ramboesque commandos, before or after people were forced from their homes and they had deployed snipers to the roofs?
-
what ridiculous is that you think that the police should ultimately decide what to enforce and what not to enforce...
"yeah the speed limit is 45.. but its called a limit for a reason... from now on around these parts im pulling over and ticketing all cars going anything over 44 because I think it is best"
"yeah that gun might be legal.. but it doesnt really look like it.. that brake might be a flash hider.. im gonna have to bring you in to check on this.."
What is ridiculous it that you keep making up hypotheticals and attributing them to my opinion when they are your scenarios. Not mine. You have stated you don't think laws should be based on morality, but rather majority rules, so it is no wonder you don't want police exercising judgment of their own morality to decide not to enforce unjust laws.
I do NOT want a state where police arbitrarily decide how to enforce the law.. sorry..
What do you think happens now? Police have some magic wand and all laws are enforced the same everywhere without any judgment involved? If you live in fantasy land, then I am jealous. I live in reality where things aren't always fair, and are often 'arbitrary'. I'd like a postcard please.
I feel like I can't get across to you the danger of that to me...
A police officer may make a really great call.. one that I totally agree with... well the other half of the country may totally disagree...
Yep, it is called the real world. Welcome and nice to meet you.
-
ill try to explain it..
you take snippets of what I said and string them together and then make a little catch comment... in an effort to diminish what I am telling you..
and there is NO way to change laws other than at the state and federal level.. the way that our nation works YOU cannot make a law.. I can not make a law..
I understand what you are saying, and I think it is a piss poor attitude to have. And I am telling you, that despite your disagreement with things, you are wrong. You seem to be upset when politicians make crappy laws, but then turn around and say they should be enforced and upheld when all that is required to make them moot, is to not enforce them, and to nullify them via juries. That is the way our nations works too.
so the ONLY way to fix it.. is to elect those that can...
unfortunately.. in present time.. "we" are outnumbered..
Ridiculous notion.
you live in a state that is hostile to your values.. and a nation that does not see it like you...
when I say nation.. I mean nation as a whole... the voting majority...
you can rant and rave on a forum all day long.. but guess what it has accomplished?
nothing...
Your understanding of a Constitutional Republic, as opposed to a true democracy is weak. This isn't the majority rules.
the peace is a state created by law and order...
law says you can not run down the street shooting guns at cars... they enforce the law thus keeping the peace
splitting hairs maybe.. but sure.. enforce law.. keep the peace..
You created the thread title, please take your own advice. We don't live in some fantasy land where only good things happen by enforcing these wonderful laws. By your own admission there are unjust laws you wish changed. Kind of puts a wrinkle in your whole; enforcing laws=peace assertion, that certainly doesn't always hold true.
-
I don't think morally disagreeing with a law is grounds to break it.. therefore I do not believe not believing is a law is reason to not find guilt...
I think that is both depressing and sad. If morality should play no role in laws what role should they play? The role of absolute power?
-
your tone is not one of discussion or conversation... it is one of disrespect.. and mockery... so really this will go nowhere...
it is the job of the people to elect a government that represents them and the values that they hold....
the problem is.. in general.. the values of our nation are values of entitlement... apathy... sloth.. so nothing happens... people elect the person they think will net them the most.. as opposed to the individual that may do what is "right"....
the job of the police is to enforce law.. period.. that is their job...
not to make up laws..
not to change them...
I do not trust politicians because I understand how they get there... promise the world to those that wish to do nothing...
I find it both impressive that you are able to know my tone based on text, and that though you don't trust politicians you still somehow think they should be the only ones to change laws. By your own admission things won't change the way you want them to and you don't support change in any other method. That my friend, is an exercise in futility. It is also mind boggling.
-
I disagree to an extentSo it isn't our job. It isn't the police's job. And you don't trust politicians. Excellent attitude. Things will surely change!
-
Anybody have better ideas???
You use common sense rather than making sarcastic suggestions because you have a differing opinion?
-
I appreciate that and understand it... But I don't agree with it....
I think if a law is so poor that a jury can find you guilty but still not convict you... Then that says a lot about the law... And it should probably not be a law..
You do realize that using jury nullification in that case is by far the best way to prove that the law should be changed don't you? Finding someone guilty of a law you think is unjust is the worse thing a jury can do.
-
And a lawyer with an engineering degree can come in handy
As opposed to a lawyer with a law degree?
-
There is a difference between posting a news article and talking about it... And making threads singling out entire groups of people and complaining about them...
You mean like you did in this thread? Tell me this isn't the pot calling the kettle black. This stuff is just too good.
-
There is a big difference between sending a unit or two to go investigate, and sending swat units, evacuating and blocking off the area, and posting snipers on the roofs of neighbors houses. Unless the report was that Rambo was taking over the neighborhood, I have a feeling there was just a bit of an overreaction.
-
I respect the law.. because I was raised to.. that does not mean I always agree with it...
if tomorrow PA outlawed my guns.. I would move.. just like I did from NJ..
I do not support law that I believe to be unconstitutional..
And if that was federal law? Would you move out of the country?
I think jury nullification is dangerous because the will of a small segment of people at one moment in time may not represent the greatest good to the nation.. IMO
The notion of a "greater good" is far more dangerous than jury nullification. What is the greater good if it isn't for the good of individuals?
A visible gun case is probable cause for a search? Only in NJ.
in Firearm Hobby / Sport Discussion
Posted
Which is quite absurd if you think about it. I mean, arbitrarily defining who can and cannot carry is absurd enough, but how crazy is it that they further define what you can or cannot carry? Today, you can carry those hollowpoints. But after you retire tomorrow, you can still carry, but you must use different ammunition...