|
 koods
Ribbit
 
Registered: 05/26/11
Posts: 106,910
Loc: Maryland/DC Burbs
Last seen: 41 minutes, 23 seconds
|
 Re: Checkpoint refusals. . .  [Re: Prisoner#1]
#17886705 - 03/01/13 02:31 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
What are the exigent circumstances in these immigration stops? Did a little Mexican jump in your back windows, is there a lady giving birth in the seat, is your bag of weed sitting on the front seat?
--------------------
NotSheekle said
“if I believed she was 16 I would become unattracted to her”
|
 Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: Checkpoint refusals. . . [Re: Prisoner#1]
#17886717 - 03/01/13 02:33 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
k00laid said:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
really? exigent circumstances... as I stated, it covers a lot of gound
exigent circumstances allows them to break down your door.
the door being locked or unlocked has nothing to do with the legality of the entry.
quit trying to obfuscate the argument with this nonsense
Quote:
k00laid said:
no. the door being locked is entirely unrelated to the legality of entering the home.
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
if the door was unlocked it's not illegal
|
k00laid
NEMO
Registered: 05/03/10
Posts: 19,636
Last seen: 8 months, 20 days
|
Re: Checkpoint refusals. . . [Re: Prisoner#1]
#17886776 - 03/01/13 02:45 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
if the door was unlocked it's not illegal
this is incorrect.
the door being locked or unlocked is entirely irrelevant to whether or not the entry is legal.
--------------------
AMU - AMU Q & A - MyVideo Teks!
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: Checkpoint refusals. . . [Re: k00laid]
#17886784 - 03/01/13 02:46 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
k00laid said:
their job is against the law.
Whenever the word "law" appears in one of your posts, hilarity ensues.
Since when has it been against the law to be a border patrolman/cop/homeland security type?
Edit: I see someone beat me to it, yet I'll leave this post here since you clearly have little idea what is legal and illegal.
--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
Edited by luvdemshrooms (03/01/13 02:48 PM)
|
k00laid
NEMO
Registered: 05/03/10
Posts: 19,636
Last seen: 8 months, 20 days
|
|
if you would read the thread instead of personally attacking me, you would know i admitted to phrasing it wrong.
--------------------
AMU - AMU Q & A - MyVideo Teks!
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: Checkpoint refusals. . . [Re: k00laid]
#17886802 - 03/01/13 02:49 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
You could read my edit.
I attacked nothing yet your lack of knowledge of the law would be an easy target.
--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
k00laid
NEMO
Registered: 05/03/10
Posts: 19,636
Last seen: 8 months, 20 days
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
I attacked nothing yet your lack of knowledge of the law would be an easy target.
except im totally right.
and pris is totally wrong.
--------------------
AMU - AMU Q & A - MyVideo Teks!
|
Shins
Fun guy
Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: Checkpoint refusals. . . [Re: Herbologist]
#17886856 - 03/01/13 02:58 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Herbologist said:
pretty cool that he has the balls to do that. but theyre just trying to do their job... fyi i only watched like the first
minute
fuck that, they are blatantly violating the 4th amendment.
|
luvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
|
Re: Checkpoint refusals. . . [Re: k00laid]
#17886866 - 03/01/13 03:00 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
k00laid said:
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
I attacked nothing yet your lack of knowledge of the law would be an easy target.
except im totally right.
and pris is totally wrong.
Of course you are.
Of course.
--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers
|
Shins
Fun guy
Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: Checkpoint refusals. . . [Re: jammin]
#17886902 - 03/01/13 03:06 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
jammin said:
to be more specific about DUI checkpoints, here's the US Supreme Court Case that proved its constitutionality.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michigan_Dept._of_State_Police_v._Sitz
that proves that the SCOTUS is corrupt, not that its constitutional.
|
k00laid
NEMO
Registered: 05/03/10
Posts: 19,636
Last seen: 8 months, 20 days
|
Re: Checkpoint refusals. . . [Re: Shins]
#17886904 - 03/01/13 03:06 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
i like you shins  :flower:
--------------------
AMU - AMU Q & A - MyVideo Teks!
|
Shins
Fun guy
Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: Checkpoint refusals. . . [Re: Prisoner#1]
#17886905 - 03/01/13 03:07 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
koods said:
While sVs is right that a car is not a home, in terms of the expectation of privacy, or reasonableness of searches, opening a car door without consent is pretty fucking analogous to opening a front door to a house.
if the door was unlocked it's not illegal
BS
read the 4th amendment.
|
k00laid
NEMO
Registered: 05/03/10
Posts: 19,636
Last seen: 8 months, 20 days
|
Re: Checkpoint refusals. . . [Re: Shins]
#17886910 - 03/01/13 03:08 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
k00laid said:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
really? exigent circumstances... as I stated, it covers a lot of gound
exigent circumstances allows them to break down your door.
the door being locked or unlocked has nothing to do with the legality of the entry.
quit trying to obfuscate the argument with this nonsense
Quote:
k00laid said:
no. the door being locked is entirely unrelated to the legality of entering the home.
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
if the door was unlocked it's not illegal
Quote:
k00laid said:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
if the door was unlocked it's not illegal
this is incorrect.
the door being locked or unlocked is entirely irrelevant to whether or not the entry is legal.
Quote:
Shins said:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
Quote:
koods said:
While sVs is right that a car is not a home, in terms of the expectation of privacy, or reasonableness of searches, opening a car door without consent is pretty fucking analogous to opening a front door to a house.
if the door was unlocked it's not illegal
BS
read the 4th amendment.
he stopped responding to me.
i guess that means i lost. 
--------------------
AMU - AMU Q & A - MyVideo Teks!
|
ThisIsKitty
Man Whore
Registered: 10/17/12
Posts: 726
Loc: 
Last seen: 11 years, 24 days
|
Re: Checkpoint refusals. . . [Re: trampis]
#17886916 - 03/01/13 03:09 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Fuck off and let the cop do his job. Stoners like this are annoying as fuck.
--------------------
Boobies vagina chicken wings and HYDROCODONE
|
Shins
Fun guy
Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
|
Quote:
luvdemshrooms said:
Since when has it been against the law to be a border patrolman/cop/homeland security type?
since when does mexico start up to 100 miles inland of the border?
why are border guards operating up to 100 miles inland violating people's 4th amendment?
|
Shins
Fun guy
Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: Checkpoint refusals. . . [Re: ThisIsKitty]
#17886935 - 03/01/13 03:13 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
ThisIsKitty said:
Fuck off and let the cop do his job. Stoners like this are annoying as fuck.
systematically violating people 4th amendment 100 miles inland from the border all day long every day is not the job of border security.
their job is to enforce the law, not systematically violate it.
ignoramuses like this are destroying america.
|
Prisoner#1
Even Dumber ThanAdvertized!
Registered: 01/22/03
Posts: 193,665
Loc: Pvt. Pubfag NutSuck
|
Re: Checkpoint refusals. . . [Re: k00laid]
#17886937 - 03/01/13 03:13 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
k00laid said:
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
if the door was unlocked it's not illegal
this is incorrect.
the door being locked or unlocked is entirely irrelevant to whether or not the entry is legal.
once more "exigent circumstances"
|
k00laid
NEMO
Registered: 05/03/10
Posts: 19,636
Last seen: 8 months, 20 days
|
Re: Checkpoint refusals. . . [Re: Prisoner#1]
#17886947 - 03/01/13 03:15 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
the door being unlocked is not an exigent circumstance.
--------------------
AMU - AMU Q & A - MyVideo Teks!
|
Shins
Fun guy
Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: Checkpoint refusals. . . [Re: Prisoner#1]
#17886951 - 03/01/13 03:16 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Prisoner#1 said:
once more "exigent circumstances"
an unlocked door alone does not constitute "exigent circumstances" nor does it justify violating the 4th amendment.
there is no excuse to this blatant and systematic violation of your constitutional rights.
people should be outraged, not fumbling to make excuses, how unamerican.
|
Shins
Fun guy
Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: Checkpoint refusals. . . [Re: Shins]
#17886967 - 03/01/13 03:18 PM (11 years, 1 month ago) |
|
|
if you like those kinds of videos, check out this guy's youtube channel
http://www.youtube.com/user/RP4409?feature=chclk
they cover checkpoints a lot and some of those clips in the compilation are from this guy.
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Shop: Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Bulk Cannabis Seeds, Feminized Cannabis Seeds, High THC Strains
Edit 
Reply 
1 2 3 all )
Alicedee25
blissedout
Banez
trendal
MOTH
TheFakeSunRa
TwoGuys
P-O