Mississippi town figures out

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I find the WBC the most morally reprehensible, disgusting, just atrocious POS group that's out there. There's a special place in hell for those people.

But I have to agree with AJ.

Me too. And I am sure that is why you so strongly support Americans 2nd Amendment rights. Am I carrying a loaded gun and I am sure you agree it is my choice to do so. May not be popular, but it IS our right. Right?

Well, I don't think this is the worst group of nutters out there, but they certainly are not nice folks and their actions definitely reprehensible. However, you and AJ are right; vigilante style retribution is not the answer although I am not surprised by those who think that it is.

Another supporter of the 2nd Amendment!

Those damn Kansas drivers, always up to no good.

Slim, being a veteran of the justice system, you should know the difference between collusion and following the letter of the law as you put it. I will assume that you are being facetious about the law being followed here.

Slim, you should familiarize yourself with the first amendment of the constitution.

Refer to to the post above slim, your understanding of the constitution and legal system in general seems to be warped. Collusion is not legal, nor is depriving people of their first amendment rights.

I guess that would depend on whether the person was getting a brazilian or not

2nd Amendment supporters everywhere! Good to see for a change.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Supporting (or not supporting) the second amendment is one thing. Having guns on the brain, as you appear to do, is quite another.

[slim 1,514]

Supporting (or not supporting) the second amendment is one thing. Having guns on the brain, as you appear to do, is quite another.

Or, making a good point about how some folks only support certain rights.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Or, ignoring what anyone says because he likes the sound of his own voice. Figuratively speaking.

[The Dude 206]

I'm not the legal expert you are, but I'm pretty sure when you pass laws like bans on texting while driving, you open yourself up to allowing the police to do things like search your car for a cell phone because you refuse to hand it over.

Same applies in cases where the police are allowed to hold you - without charge - for an amount of time necessary to conduct an investigation. That's what happened in Mississippi, isn't it?

No, you don't open yourself up to police searches like that. As far as I know, the fourth amendment is still current and prevents unreasonable search and seizures. The police aren't allowed to just hold onto you. They can detain you for a short period of time on suspicion of committing a crime. In the absence of any proof or charges, they have to release you. Nobody wants to face an unlawful detention civil rights lawsuits, they tend to pay really well.

So you have no problem with some rights being taken away but not all?

By your very argument, the cops in Mississippi did the right thing then. They held some "suspects" in custody for a while until after they determined them to not be a risk to public safety. That's perfectly legal. It's also what you've supported since cops can't possibly know what someone's done until after they conduct a thorough investigation.

Yes, they can detain people on suspision of having commited a crime. But that is a finite timeperiod, and It varies by the offense. When you have issues of public safety at hand, with a violent crime having been commited, it's better to err on the side of caution. What allegedly happened in Mississippi was nothing of the sort, the police there acted improperly and should face the the consequences.

So some rights are greater than others, huh?

Who determines that? You? Me? SCOTUS?

Slim, sorry, I don't feel comfortable with violent criminals maintaining their right to bear arms. So you would be in favor of criminals being granted their unconditional rights back to them? You would be in favor of allowing pedophiles to teach at schools, or former rapists to stalk their former victims, or irresponsible gun owners who get drunk and pop off a few shots? Yeah, sorry, but the good citizens of ths country don't think so. If I had my way, you felons would be sent off to a penal colony. The SCOTUS unfortunately disagrees with me on that point, but does feel that you criminals should be deprived of some rights as they relate to others safety.

Like I said, I'm not the legal expert you are but I'm pretty sure you need some evidence before you make charges. Where's yours?

Do you even know what Mississippi is, The Dude? From this post, i would say no, you don't.

Slim, I know where Mississippi is, i've been there several times. I have even lived in the south for 5 years. You ever been to the south?

[slim 1,514]

No, you don't open yourself up to police searches like that. As far as I know, the fourth amendment is still current and prevents unreasonable search and seizures. The police aren't allowed to just hold onto you. They can detain you for a short period of time on suspicion of committing a crime. In the absence of any proof or charges, they have to release you. Nobody wants to face an unlawful detention civil rights lawsuits, they tend to pay really well.

So how is that any different than what happeend in Mississippi?

Yes, they can detain people on suspision of having commited a crime. But that is a finite timeperiod, and It varies by the offense. When you have issues of public safety at hand, with a violent crime having been commited, it's better to err on the side of caution. What allegedly happened in Mississippi was nothing of the sort, the police there acted improperly and should face the the consequences.

What crime was suspected in Mississippi? (I dont' think it was collusion, by the way.)

Slim, sorry, I don't feel comfortable with violent criminals maintaining their right to bear arms. So you would be in favor of criminals being granted their unconditional rights back to them?

So you're saying a dude that got into a bar fight once in college shouldn't be able to own a gun the rest of his life?

You would be in favor of allowing pedophiles to teach at schools, or former rapists to stalk their former victims, or irresponsible gun owners who get drunk and pop off a few shots?

Who would hire a pedophile to teach at school? Who would allow their former rapist to continue to stalk them? When irresponsible gun-owning drunks sober up, are they still irresponsible?

Yeah, sorry, but the good citizens of ths country don't think so. If I had my way, you felons would be sent off to a penal colony. The SCOTUS unfortunately disagrees with me on that point, but does feel that you criminals should be deprived of some rights as they relate to others safety.

I think you felons should be dealt with quickly and severely and then you should return to your normal lives.

Slim, I know where Mississippi is, i've been there several times. I have even lived in the south for 5 years. You ever been to the south?

I've been there once or twice. Does that make me as much of an expert on what happened as you?

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

People in Mississippi have a long history of oppressing people's constitutional rights so it is no surprise they are remarkably good at it. And, as usual, they find a way to do so "within the law" Police have no obligation to tow vehicles from priavte property and they are within the constitution to question people regarding a crime and can hold them for up to 48 hours without charges.

That said, the people outraged about this are outraged based on infringement "constitutional rights" but are the same people that repeatedly ignore other constitutional rights. They are as equally predictable as Mississippi rednecks.

The people staging these protests are digraceful wacko nutjobs. But I support their right to be disgraceful wacko nutjobs and demostrate such to all in public. when your opponents do completely stupid things...let them.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

People in Mississippi have a long history of oppressing people's constitutional rights so it is no surprise they are remarkably good at it. And, as usual, they find a way to do so "within the law" Police have no obligation to tow vehicles from priavte property and they are within the constitution to question people regarding a crime and can hold them for up to 48 hours without charges.

That said, the people outraged about this are outraged based on infringement "constitutional rights" but are the same people that repeatedly ignore other constitutional rights. They are as equally predictable as Mississippi rednecks.

The people staging these protests are digraceful wacko nutjobs. But I support their right to be disgraceful wacko nutjobs and demostrate such to all in public. when your opponents do completely stupid things...let them.

I love this reasoning. Divide and conquer, eh?

You should restrict yourself to speaking for yourself, rather than for others. After all, it's what you do best

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

People rarely can answer anything intelligible when caught in the own hypocrisy. Most will run off and leave hoping it is soon forgotten. One or two will respond unintelligibly. You take an untenable position and it will always come back to bite you.

Edited April 27, 2011 by Gary and Alla

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

People rarely can answer anything intelligible when caught in the own hypocrisy. Most will run off and leave hoping it is soon forgotten. One or two will respond unintelligibly. You take an untenable position and it will always come back to bite you.

Aye, and some will even talk in the third person to defend their ridiculous, unsubstantiated conclusions, which only have a basis in their own head.

See how easy it is? I can do it too.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Some people can reason with logical thought processes. Others just copy what people do. Some lead, most follow. Nothing new.

Some people respect the constitution, others just use it as a convenient excuse when it fits their purpose.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Some people say things for effect and then pretend to have changed their minds, rather than admit that they got carried away to begin with.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

It is easy to tell the followers, they often mimic words and phrases.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It certainly is easy to identify narcissists because everything is about them.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Where are all your 1st and 2nd Amendment loving friends? Where are all the "pro-choice" people?

This thread was sounding like a DAR convention until someone mentioned the 2nd Amendment.

Edited April 27, 2011 by Gary and Alla