100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Supreme Court Upholds Arizona Law Penalizing Businesses For | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
yes but it's not just profiling that's the problem constitutionally. the real problem will be enforcing proof of citizenship. when i jog with my very hispanic looking best buddy, neither of us has our wallet in our back pocket. hey, we don't even have back pokets. if your jogging down the street, you shouldn't be hassled over it. but if your applying for a job, food stamps, getting a speeding ticket or anything to do with breaking the law, they should have the right to ask you if your here legally. asking for id is far and away from the requirement to carry id. applying for a job, food stamps, id is part of the process but nobody is required to apply for such things. a driver's license is proof that you've passed the requirements to drive a car. of course if there is probable cause that a crime has been committed one may be asked to identify him/herself but nothing in any statute in america requires a person to even apply for an id. maybe so, but when a cop asks who you are, you have to prove it. there have been times when the police have taken me to the jail for fingerprinting to see who i was because i didn't have my DL with me. yall seem to think the laws are just black and white, when they are not. if they think you might be wanted for something, they can hold in jail till they prove it one way or the other. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yes but it's not just profiling that's the problem constitutionally. the real problem will be enforcing proof of citizenship. when i jog with my very hispanic looking best buddy, neither of us has our wallet in our back pocket. hey, we don't even have back pokets. if your jogging down the street, you shouldn't be hassled over it. but if your applying for a job, food stamps, getting a speeding ticket or anything to do with breaking the law, they should have the right to ask you if your here legally. asking for id is far and away from the requirement to carry id. applying for a job, food stamps, id is part of the process but nobody is required to apply for such things. a driver's license is proof that you've passed the requirements to drive a car. of course if there is probable cause that a crime has been committed one may be asked to identify him/herself but nothing in any statute in america requires a person to even apply for an id. maybe so, but when a cop asks who you are, you have to prove it. there have been times when the police have taken me to the jail for fingerprinting to see who i was because i didn't have my DL with me. yall seem to think the laws are just black and white, when they are not. if they think you might be wanted for something, they can hold in jail till they prove it one way or the other. nope. have to prove nothing. if you were driving without your dl then you committed a crime. and no they cannot hold you in jail "till they prove it one way or the other." habeas corpus you see. prove one way or the other??? we must prove innocence now??? uh uh. not in america. fact is, legislation for a national id has failed every time because of the reality of constitutional challenges. once i've given a cop my name i need say nothing further. if he has probable cause that i committed a crime, yes, i can be detained or arrested. if not, and he cannot show fear for his safety, he cannot even search me or my posessions looking for id. fourth amendment you see. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yes but it's not just profiling that's the problem constitutionally. the real problem will be enforcing proof of citizenship. when i jog with my very hispanic looking best buddy, neither of us has our wallet in our back pocket. hey, we don't even have back pokets. if your jogging down the street, you shouldn't be hassled over it. but if your applying for a job, food stamps, getting a speeding ticket or anything to do with breaking the law, they should have the right to ask you if your here legally. asking for id is far and away from the requirement to carry id. applying for a job, food stamps, id is part of the process but nobody is required to apply for such things. a driver's license is proof that you've passed the requirements to drive a car. of course if there is probable cause that a crime has been committed one may be asked to identify him/herself but nothing in any statute in america requires a person to even apply for an id. maybe so, but when a cop asks who you are, you have to prove it. there have been times when the police have taken me to the jail for fingerprinting to see who i was because i didn't have my DL with me. yall seem to think the laws are just black and white, when they are not. if they think you might be wanted for something, they can hold in jail till they prove it one way or the other. nope. have to prove nothing. if you were driving without your dl then you committed a crime. and no they cannot hold you in jail "till they prove it one way or the other." habeas corpus you see. prove one way or the other??? we must prove innocence now??? uh uh. not in america. fact is, legislation for a national id has failed every time because of the reality of constitutional challenges. once i've given a cop my name i need say nothing further. if he has probable cause that i committed a crime, yes, i can be detained or arrested. if not, and he cannot show fear for his safety, he cannot even search me or my posessions looking for id. fourth amendment you see. it is at the cops discretion... probable cause can mean a few things... you people always think that we have all these rights, and the police are our friends that make sure we get these rights, your wrong. cops are just the people that enforce the laws, they can hold you for anything, up to 48 hours just to check you out. look it up, it's written in the statutes... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
jrbogie
on
Fri 05/27/11 09:08 AM
|
|
no, you made the claim. you look it up. when you make a claim you inherit the burden of proof. you claim that a statute exists that gives police the power to hold someone for 48 hrs for any reason without a charge. so prove that the statute exists.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
no, you made the claim. you look it up. when you make a claim you inherit the burden of proof. you clain that a statute exists that gives police the power to hold someone for 48 hrs for any reason without a charge. so prove that the statute exists. i'm not into the proving game, think whatever you want. if your interested, you can look it up, if not, then don't. doesn't matter to me either way. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
k. can't compell you to play the proving game. just affording you the opportunity to substantiate your claim. nuff said.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
jrbogie
on
Fri 05/27/11 09:23 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
k. can't compell you to play the proving game. just affording you the opportunity to substantiate your claim. nuff said. thank you, but i have been through this before with others on here. i just don't do that anymore. nothing personal, but you can look it just like i can, if your interested to do so |
|
|
|
|
