Cops give advice on how to handle traffic stops.
|
Tagged with : donuts and coffee, flashlv meltdown What are tags? |
i_am_jesus: {22} Through cross-examination at the hearing, Defendant showed that the officer actually had no training or experience as a police officer in the detection of burning marijuana. The officer testified that : (1) when attending the police academy, he had no courses or training in the detection of burning marijuana; (2) while at the police station in Clayton, he had no courses or training in connection with the detection of burning marijuana; and (3) other than in the four or five cases he had worked on and investigated, he had no formal training or schooling as a police officer with the detection of burning marijuana. The officer's only experience as a police officer with marijuana consisted of stops or arrests in which he was involved. When asked about each of the stops or arrests, he testified that, in each, he did not smell burning marijuana.
{23} Under questioning by the State, the officer testified that on one occasion in 1978, when he was ten years old he smelled burning marijuana. The officer also testified that approximately ten years before the hearing he smelled burning marijuana when he and fellow National Guard members were traveling to attend a drill, and one of the guardsman lit a pipe containing marijuana.
{24} At the close of the suppression hearing, the court said: "I think that if Officer Lobb had revealed the limit and limitations of his training and experience, then, we might be in a different status here, because, then, the independent magistrate could have evaluated that in terms of search warrant and probable cause."
http://www.supremecourt.nm.org/pastopinion/VIEW/99ca-128.html
any court decision means there is some level of precedence. Of course, another judge can just as easily disagree with that. But there is most certainly precedence.
Good find, I think I heard this once before somewhere.
{23} Under questioning by the State, the officer testified that on one occasion in 1978, when he was ten years old he smelled burning marijuana. The officer also testified that approximately ten years before the hearing he smelled burning marijuana when he and fellow National Guard members were traveling to attend a drill, and one of the guardsman lit a pipe containing marijuana.
{24} At the close of the suppression hearing, the court said: "I think that if Officer Lobb had revealed the limit and limitations of his training and experience, then, we might be in a different status here, because, then, the independent magistrate could have evaluated that in terms of search warrant and probable cause."
http://www.supremecourt.nm.org/pastopinion/VIEW/99ca-128.html
any court decision means there is some level of precedence. Of course, another judge can just as easily disagree with that. But there is most certainly precedence.
Good find, I think I heard this once before somewhere.
flashlv: That just means that you guys are intolerant. /shrug.
I agree that I'm exceptionally intolerant of intolerance.
I agree that I'm exceptionally intolerant of intolerance.
osirisothedead: No you didn't, not even close. A search is illegal without a warrant, an arrest, or consent. If a cop happens to see a gun through a window, that is not a search. It gives the cop probable cause to arrest you, hence the further search is legal.
Fail of epic proportions again, flash. Fail beyond all belief.
I never said that was a fail, you said it was illegal and you listed the reasons and left out that probable cause can lead to a legal search for everything else besides the illegal gun. Once again you show your ignorance.
Fail of epic proportions again, flash. Fail beyond all belief.
I never said that was a fail, you said it was illegal and you listed the reasons and left out that probable cause can lead to a legal search for everything else besides the illegal gun. Once again you show your ignorance.
osirisothedead: Hardly, little guy. In fact, I believe I said in the thread that you have the right to an opinion that's wrong.
Sorry 'little guy', I'll steal your insult, since you have them coming this weekend.
You curse anyone with a different opinion. When you are proven wrong, like the numerous times in this thread, you start insulting.
I'm not getting out of hand and no reason you should, but it's you. You have to bring up past things to justify your wrongness in this thread and deflect that wrongness.
Sorry 'little guy', I'll steal your insult, since you have them coming this weekend.
You curse anyone with a different opinion. When you are proven wrong, like the numerous times in this thread, you start insulting.
I'm not getting out of hand and no reason you should, but it's you. You have to bring up past things to justify your wrongness in this thread and deflect that wrongness.
untrustworthy: I agree that I'm exceptionally intolerant of intolerance.
You are intolerant of yourself then, remember Friday.
You are intolerant of yourself then, remember Friday.
flashlv: I never said that was a fail, you said it was illegal and you listed the reasons and left out that probable cause can lead to a legal search for everything else besides the illegal gun. Once again you show your ignorance.
You are indeed correct that I left "probable cause" out of my original post and I'll concede that point. I later added it to the list.
Now you may continue trolling on other minutia.
You are indeed correct that I left "probable cause" out of my original post and I'll concede that point. I later added it to the list.
Now you may continue trolling on other minutia.
osirisothedead: You are indeed correct that I left "probable cause" out of my original post and I'll concede that point. I later added it to the list.
Now you may continue trolling on other minutia.
And yet you still continue to insult me because you fucked up.
I have not trolled one time here dude.
Now you may continue trolling on other minutia.
And yet you still continue to insult me because you fucked up.
I have not trolled one time here dude.
capt kirk: Top ten reasons to stop the ACLU
From your link:
There were many reasons why we thought the ACLU needed to be countered, and they are numerous.
[image hidden]
From your link:
There were many reasons why we thought the ACLU needed to be countered, and they are numerous.
[image hidden]
... and that little punk should have been suspended for not standing during the Pledge of Allegiance. He was disturbing the classroom and being attention whore. He could have stood up and mumbled his own made up words and everything would be cool.
anaxibios: From your link:
There were many reasons why we thought the ACLU needed to be countered, and they are numerous.
christ man, what time is it in the alwaysdark?
There were many reasons why we thought the ACLU needed to be countered, and they are numerous.
christ man, what time is it in the alwaysdark?
BLLLLLLLAAAAARRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHHH
mimirtheodd: christ man, what time is it in the alwaysdark?
Too late, admitted. But I can't sleep, my GF is away, and this is too much fun. Also, it's summer now, and days are endless. Not much dark.
Here's another gem: the ACLU have made a name for theirself.
Here's a tip: when your IQ and your shoe size are jockeying for the lowest placement, perhaps you shouldn't be writing on the intarwebz without adult supervision.
Too late, admitted. But I can't sleep, my GF is away, and this is too much fun. Also, it's summer now, and days are endless. Not much dark.
Here's another gem: the ACLU have made a name for theirself.
Here's a tip: when your IQ and your shoe size are jockeying for the lowest placement, perhaps you shouldn't be writing on the intarwebz without adult supervision.
anaxibios: Too late, admitted. But I can't sleep, my GF is away, and this is too much fun. Also, it's summer now, and days are endless. Not much dark.
Here's another gem: the ACLU have made a name for theirself.
Here's a tip: when your IQ and your shoe size are jockeying for the lowest placement, perhaps you shouldn't be writing on the intarwebz without adult supervision.
Ehhhh... I have my problems with the ACLU. but I guess I'd better not admit to that.
Here's another gem: the ACLU have made a name for theirself.
Here's a tip: when your IQ and your shoe size are jockeying for the lowest placement, perhaps you shouldn't be writing on the intarwebz without adult supervision.
Ehhhh... I have my problems with the ACLU. but I guess I'd better not admit to that.
mimirtheodd: Ehhhh... I have my problems with the ACLU. but I guess I'd better not admit to that.
eh, i do too, and i'm a dues paying card carrying communazi aclu supporter.
having differences isn't the same as being a frothing cockbag with the IQ of beandip.
eh, i do too, and i'm a dues paying card carrying communazi aclu supporter.
having differences isn't the same as being a frothing cockbag with the IQ of beandip.
mimirtheodd: Ehhhh... I have my problems with the ACLU. but I guess I'd better not admit to that.
Look, I'll admit to not knowing enough about the subject; after all it's a strictly internal American affair. However, it seems to me as an outsider that they are consistent in defending all civil liberties for everybody.
But never mind - the gist here is that that screed was apparently written by someone who should be wearing a helmet indoors - some of those claims were so patently false even I could recognise it. I should hope critics of the ACLU could argue a little better than that.
Look, I'll admit to not knowing enough about the subject; after all it's a strictly internal American affair. However, it seems to me as an outsider that they are consistent in defending all civil liberties for everybody.
But never mind - the gist here is that that screed was apparently written by someone who should be wearing a helmet indoors - some of those claims were so patently false even I could recognise it. I should hope critics of the ACLU could argue a little better than that.
anaxibios: Look, I'll admit to not knowing enough about the subject; after all it's a strictly internal American affair. However, it seems to me as an outsider that they are consistent in defending all civil liberties for everybody.
But never mind - the gist here is that that screed was apparently written by someone who should be wearing a helmet indoors - some of those claims were so patently false even I could recognise it. I should hope critics of the ACLU could argue a little better than that.
And I'm sure they can.
And they don't defend all civil liberties: they're notoriously silent on the 2nd amendment. They defend it by saying they'll let the NRA defend that one, and I can almost accept that.
However, to say that the 2nd amendment somehow deserves less protection than the others somewhat galls me.
And lets not even discuss their ignorance of the 10th amendment.
But never mind - the gist here is that that screed was apparently written by someone who should be wearing a helmet indoors - some of those claims were so patently false even I could recognise it. I should hope critics of the ACLU could argue a little better than that.
And I'm sure they can.
And they don't defend all civil liberties: they're notoriously silent on the 2nd amendment. They defend it by saying they'll let the NRA defend that one, and I can almost accept that.
However, to say that the 2nd amendment somehow deserves less protection than the others somewhat galls me.
And lets not even discuss their ignorance of the 10th amendment.
anaxibios: Look, I'll admit to not knowing enough about the subject; after all it's a strictly internal American affair. However, it seems to me as an outsider that they are consistent in defending all civil liberties for everybody.
Precisely. It's why I love and hate them so much. The ACLU is very consistent in believing in freedom for all, so when they support fundie whackjob churches or the KKK I have to hold my nose.
Precisely. It's why I love and hate them so much. The ACLU is very consistent in believing in freedom for all, so when they support fundie whackjob churches or the KKK I have to hold my nose.
Goddamnit. Survivor is the dumbest, most drawn out show ever.
Id like the cops to rodney king the producers
Id like the cops to rodney king the producers
osirisothedead: Precisely. It's why I love and hate them so much. The ACLU is very consistent in believing in freedom for all, so when they support fundie whackjob churches or the KKK I have to hold my nose.
Believing in freedom of speech means you have to defend all speech, no matter how ugly or distasteful. If they only defended popular speech, they'd be hypocrites.
Believing in freedom of speech means you have to defend all speech, no matter how ugly or distasteful. If they only defended popular speech, they'd be hypocrites.
heap: eh, i do too, and i'm a dues paying card carrying communazi aclu supporter.
...writing this down in my "outed libs" book, damn them all
...writing this down in my "outed libs" book, damn them all
osirisothedead: Precisely. It's why I love and hate them so much. The ACLU is very consistent in believing in freedom for all, so when they support fundie whackjob churches or the KKK I have to hold my nose.
HA HA HA HA.... very consistent? That's why I dislike them so much.
So you hate them at some point, you must be a fascist.
HA HA HA HA.... very consistent? That's why I dislike them so much.
So you hate them at some point, you must be a fascist.
flashlv: HA HA HA HA.... very consistent? That's why I dislike them so much.
So you hate them at some point, you must be a fascist.
What? That didn't make any sense at all.
So you hate them at some point, you must be a fascist.
What? That didn't make any sense at all.
osirisothedead: What? That didn't make any sense at all.
It makes perfect sense, this is a game you play all the time.
You said you hated them. Earlier you said someone was a fascist for hating them.
osirisothedead: Anyone who hates the ACLU is either an idiot or a fascist. Which branch do you fall under?
osirisothedead: Precisely. It's why I love and hate them so much. The ACLU is very consistent in believing in freedom for all, so when they support fundie whackjob churches or the KKK I have to hold my nose.
Are you an idiot or a fascist?
OUCH!
It makes perfect sense, this is a game you play all the time.
You said you hated them. Earlier you said someone was a fascist for hating them.
osirisothedead: Anyone who hates the ACLU is either an idiot or a fascist. Which branch do you fall under?
osirisothedead: Precisely. It's why I love and hate them so much. The ACLU is very consistent in believing in freedom for all, so when they support fundie whackjob churches or the KKK I have to hold my nose.
Are you an idiot or a fascist?
OUCH!
mimirtheodd: And I'm sure they can.
And they don't defend all civil liberties: they're notoriously silent on the 2nd amendment. They defend it by saying they'll let the NRA defend that one, and I can almost accept that.
However, to say that the 2nd amendment somehow deserves less protection than the others somewhat galls me.
And lets not even discuss their ignorance of the 10th amendment.
As I said, I don't know enough about this. But I rather suspect that the 2nd amendment will never risk falling into obscurity, not least since the NRA exists more or less to make sure that nobody ever restricts access to firepower in any way whatsoever. It hardly needs any more defending, as far as I can see. Which particular 2nd amendment cases have they failed to take on?
osirisothedead: Precisely. It's why I love and hate them so much. The ACLU is very consistent in believing in freedom for all, so when they support fundie whackjob churches or the KKK I have to hold my nose.
That's my impression as well. They've even defended Fred Phelps, I gather - if you can do that, you're nothing if not committed.
And they don't defend all civil liberties: they're notoriously silent on the 2nd amendment. They defend it by saying they'll let the NRA defend that one, and I can almost accept that.
However, to say that the 2nd amendment somehow deserves less protection than the others somewhat galls me.
And lets not even discuss their ignorance of the 10th amendment.
As I said, I don't know enough about this. But I rather suspect that the 2nd amendment will never risk falling into obscurity, not least since the NRA exists more or less to make sure that nobody ever restricts access to firepower in any way whatsoever. It hardly needs any more defending, as far as I can see. Which particular 2nd amendment cases have they failed to take on?
osirisothedead: Precisely. It's why I love and hate them so much. The ACLU is very consistent in believing in freedom for all, so when they support fundie whackjob churches or the KKK I have to hold my nose.
That's my impression as well. They've even defended Fred Phelps, I gather - if you can do that, you're nothing if not committed.
flashlv: HA HA HA HA.... very consistent? That's why I dislike them so much.
So you hate them at some point, you must be a fascist.
What the hell does that even mean? None of this makes sense, even on sentence level.
So you hate them at some point, you must be a fascist.
What the hell does that even mean? None of this makes sense, even on sentence level.
flashlv: Are you an idiot or a fascist?
An idiot. They make me deal with my own prejudices. That's not such a bad thing in my opinion.
An idiot. They make me deal with my own prejudices. That's not such a bad thing in my opinion.
anaxibios: Which particular 2nd amendment cases have they failed to take on?
To my knowledge, they've never taken any 2nd amendment case. Granted, I may be wrong, but they're certainly not as staunch in its defense as they are the others (save the 10th).
The 10th essentially limits the power of the federal government in lieu of states rights.
To my knowledge, they've never taken any 2nd amendment case. Granted, I may be wrong, but they're certainly not as staunch in its defense as they are the others (save the 10th).
The 10th essentially limits the power of the federal government in lieu of states rights.
anaxibios: What the hell does that even mean? None of this makes sense, even on sentence level.
And before you say anything, no, it's not the language barrier. I can't make sense of it either.
And before you say anything, no, it's not the language barrier. I can't make sense of it either.
mimirtheodd: To my knowledge, they've never taken any 2nd amendment case. Granted, I may be wrong, but they're certainly not as staunch in its defense as they are the others (save the 10th).
The 10th essentially limits the power of the federal government in lieu of states rights.
Yes, but what 2nd amendment cases has there been? I may just not know, but it's my impression that your guns are in no real danger at all.
The 10th essentially limits the power of the federal government in lieu of states rights.
Yes, but what 2nd amendment cases has there been? I may just not know, but it's my impression that your guns are in no real danger at all.
mimirtheodd: To my knowledge, they've never taken any 2nd amendment case. Granted, I may be wrong, but they're certainly not as staunch in its defense as they are the others (save the 10th).
The ACLU agrees with a 1939 SCOTUS ruling regarding the 2nd amendment (US vs. Miller). I happen to disagree with the ACLU on that that particular issue, but it doesn't prevent me from being a card-carrying member.
The ACLU agrees with a 1939 SCOTUS ruling regarding the 2nd amendment (US vs. Miller). I happen to disagree with the ACLU on that that particular issue, but it doesn't prevent me from being a card-carrying member.
mimirtheodd: And before you say anything, no, it's not the language barrier. I can't make sense of it either.
I'm still reeling from the "very consistent? That's why I dislike them so much" bit.
I'm still reeling from the "very consistent? That's why I dislike them so much" bit.
anaxibios: Yes, but what 2nd amendment cases has there been? I may just not know, but it's my impression that your guns are in no real danger at all.
Plenty. There's one that was just heard at the Supreme Court level. Washington DC has a de facto gun ban for civilians. A security guard, who's allowed to carry a gun, could not have it at his house.
In Texas and many other states, there's not so much danger. Head up to NYC or Chicago or DC or LA or some of the other areas, and it's really being pushed.
Plenty. There's one that was just heard at the Supreme Court level. Washington DC has a de facto gun ban for civilians. A security guard, who's allowed to carry a gun, could not have it at his house.
In Texas and many other states, there's not so much danger. Head up to NYC or Chicago or DC or LA or some of the other areas, and it's really being pushed.
flash went awful quiet. Is he busy sniffing cop jockstrap someplace?
mimirtheodd: Plenty. There's one that was just heard at the Supreme Court level. Washington DC has a de facto gun ban for civilians. A security guard, who's allowed to carry a gun, could not have it at his house.
In Texas and many other states, there's not so much danger. Head up to NYC or Chicago or DC or LA or some of the other areas, and it's really being pushed.
Hm. So DC is unconstitutional? I just don't know enough about this.
Anyway, now it's off to bed, or I'll never get up tomorrow. Night all :)
In Texas and many other states, there's not so much danger. Head up to NYC or Chicago or DC or LA or some of the other areas, and it's really being pushed.
Hm. So DC is unconstitutional? I just don't know enough about this.
Anyway, now it's off to bed, or I'll never get up tomorrow. Night all :)
anaxibios: What the hell does that even mean? None of this makes sense, even on sentence level.
it's 3 sentences.
it's 3 sentences.
osirisothedead: An idiot. They make me deal with my own prejudices. That's not such a bad thing in my opinion.
So me not liking them is not okay, but you not liking them is okay.
I smell a hypocrite.
So me not liking them is not okay, but you not liking them is okay.
I smell a hypocrite.
flashlv: So me not liking them is not okay, but you not liking them is okay.
I smell a hypocrite.
You dislike them entirely. I dislike some of their decisions, yet I still remain a member and can understand their reasoning for their decisions and accept them. There's a huge different there, kiddo.
I smell a hypocrite.
You dislike them entirely. I dislike some of their decisions, yet I still remain a member and can understand their reasoning for their decisions and accept them. There's a huge different there, kiddo.
osirisothedead: flash went awful quiet. Is he busy sniffing cop jockstrap someplace?
Awe poor Osiris gets pwned and he has to insult me, not surprised, not surprised.
Awe poor Osiris gets pwned and he has to insult me, not surprised, not surprised.
flashlv: Awe poor Osiris gets pwned and he has to insult me, not surprised, not surprised.
I got pwned by you? Please. I don't see Satan on his way to work with ice skates.
I got pwned by you? Please. I don't see Satan on his way to work with ice skates.
osirisothedead: You dislike them entirely. I dislike some of their decisions, yet I still remain a member and can understand their reasoning for their decisions and accept them. There's a huge different there, kiddo.
I dislike them like you do.
Why the constant insults, it's a sign of defeat and that means you have been defeated.
I would never be a member because they are so inconsistent and agenda driven.
You sir are a hypocrite.
I dislike them like you do.
Why the constant insults, it's a sign of defeat and that means you have been defeated.
I would never be a member because they are so inconsistent and agenda driven.
You sir are a hypocrite.
osirisothedead: I got pwned by you? Please. I don't see Satan on his way to work with ice skates.
You said people were idiots who didn't like the aclu, you got owned by calling yourself an idiot and forgetting you said that earlier.
Oh and you owned yourself by insulting me for no reason.
You said people were idiots who didn't like the aclu, you got owned by calling yourself an idiot and forgetting you said that earlier.
Oh and you owned yourself by insulting me for no reason.
flashlv: I would never be a member because they are so inconsistent and agenda driven.
They are consistent, and their agenda is freedom and liberty for all (as long as whatever you're doing isn't infringing on the rights of someone else).
flashlv: You sir are a hypocrite.
Physician, heal thyself. We went over that a few days ago, too.
They are consistent, and their agenda is freedom and liberty for all (as long as whatever you're doing isn't infringing on the rights of someone else).
flashlv: You sir are a hypocrite.
Physician, heal thyself. We went over that a few days ago, too.
osirisothedead:
flash went awful quiet. Is he busy sniffing cop jockstrap someplace?
He was counting:
flashlv:
it's 3 sentences.
flash went awful quiet. Is he busy sniffing cop jockstrap someplace?
He was counting:
flashlv:
it's 3 sentences.
flashlv: You said people were idiots who didn't like the aclu, you got owned by calling yourself an idiot and forgetting you said that earlier.
Oh and you owned yourself by insulting me for no reason.
What makes you think I forgot? Heh. You think that I don't know my own faults? Introspection is something I partake in a lot.
Insulting you for no reason is just fun.
Oh and you owned yourself by insulting me for no reason.
What makes you think I forgot? Heh. You think that I don't know my own faults? Introspection is something I partake in a lot.
Insulting you for no reason is just fun.
osirisothedead: They are consistent, and their agenda is freedom and liberty for all (as long as whatever you're doing isn't infringing on the rights of someone else).
Physician, heal thyself. We went over that a few days ago, too.
For some reason you think it matters to say "physician heal thyself" as if you're not a hypocrite and that I am being one. Sorry you fail at this as well.
No that's not their agenda. Thats what you think it is, but yet they pick and choose their battles.
Physician, heal thyself. We went over that a few days ago, too.
For some reason you think it matters to say "physician heal thyself" as if you're not a hypocrite and that I am being one. Sorry you fail at this as well.
No that's not their agenda. Thats what you think it is, but yet they pick and choose their battles.
flashlv: No that's not their agenda. Thats what you think it is, but yet they pick and choose their battles.
Back up that claim.
Back up that claim.
starling: Guilty. Sorry 'bout that flashlv.
Oh c'mon, be fair. If it wasn't obvious that the jockstrap-sniffing comment wasn't an insult, I dunno what it was. :-P
Oh c'mon, be fair. If it wasn't obvious that the jockstrap-sniffing comment wasn't an insult, I dunno what it was. :-P
Here as well.
http://www.bloggernews.net/111949
The ACLU generally uses intimidation to achieve victories that even the courts won't provide. By intimidating local officials with the threat of the ACLU, many simply cave and give the ACLU what they want.
http://www.bloggernews.net/111949
The ACLU generally uses intimidation to achieve victories that even the courts won't provide. By intimidating local officials with the threat of the ACLU, many simply cave and give the ACLU what they want.
flashlv: http://blog.coincidencetheories.com/?p=186
here's a start.
Interesting site, bookmarked. The people making comments don't appear to agree with the site's insinuations for the most part, though.
here's a start.
Interesting site, bookmarked. The people making comments don't appear to agree with the site's insinuations for the most part, though.
I backed up the claim, now watch Osiris insults me again, leave or post meta or even ignore my link.
flashlv: Here as well.
http://www.bloggernews.net/111949
The ACLU generally uses intimidation to achieve victories that even the courts won't provide. By intimidating local officials with the threat of the ACLU, many simply cave and give the ACLU what they want.
That's not proof of anything, though. That's really just HURRR.
http://www.bloggernews.net/111949
The ACLU generally uses intimidation to achieve victories that even the courts won't provide. By intimidating local officials with the threat of the ACLU, many simply cave and give the ACLU what they want.
That's not proof of anything, though. That's really just HURRR.
osirisothedead: Interesting site, bookmarked. The people making comments don't appear to agree with the site's insinuations for the most part, though.
LOL, I called it.
backed up the claim, now watch Osiris insults me again, leave or post meta or even ignore my link.
You ignored it.
Not bookmarked, I googled, first site.
LOL, I called it.
backed up the claim, now watch Osiris insults me again, leave or post meta or even ignore my link.
You ignored it.
Not bookmarked, I googled, first site.
flashlv: I backed up the claim, now watch Osiris insults me again, leave or post meta or even ignore my link.
Or he could read your link and point out that even the commenters on the site disagree.
Or he could read your link and point out that even the commenters on the site disagree.
flashlv: I backed up the claim, now watch Osiris insults me again, leave or post meta or even ignore my link.
I'll bet you wish you'd refreshed before posting that comment right about now.
I'll bet you wish you'd refreshed before posting that comment right about now.
flashlv: LOL, I called it.
backed up the claim, now watch Osiris insults me again, leave or post meta or even ignore my link.
You ignored it.
Not bookmarked, I googled, first site.
Dude. That means HE bookmarked it.
backed up the claim, now watch Osiris insults me again, leave or post meta or even ignore my link.
You ignored it.
Not bookmarked, I googled, first site.
Dude. That means HE bookmarked it.
osirisothedead:
Oh c'mon, be fair.
bN: unfair and unbalanced
As for the ACLU, I like some of what they do but not everything, and I've no plans to join. (Not that anyone asked.)
Oh c'mon, be fair.
bN: unfair and unbalanced
As for the ACLU, I like some of what they do but not everything, and I've no plans to join. (Not that anyone asked.)
osirisothedead: That's not proof of anything, though. That's really just HURRR.
Again I win, I said he would ignore it and he did.
Osiris, for some reason you think only your opinion is the one that matters in this case, I supplied 2 links with people with different opinions. You choose to ignore them and I am not sure why.
Remember this is based on opinion anyway, you wanted me to site others who think the same thing. I did you ignore.
Awesome!
Again I win, I said he would ignore it and he did.
Osiris, for some reason you think only your opinion is the one that matters in this case, I supplied 2 links with people with different opinions. You choose to ignore them and I am not sure why.
Remember this is based on opinion anyway, you wanted me to site others who think the same thing. I did you ignore.
Awesome!
flashlv: You ignored it.
Not bookmarked, I googled, first site.
I bookmarked it. What are you talking about?
It's going to take a lot more reading than a single blog post for me to come up with an informed decision on whether the ACLU is avoiding smacking down Islamic-related prayer in schools or not.
Not bookmarked, I googled, first site.
I bookmarked it. What are you talking about?
It's going to take a lot more reading than a single blog post for me to come up with an informed decision on whether the ACLU is avoiding smacking down Islamic-related prayer in schools or not.
starling: bN: unfair and unbalanced
As for the ACLU, I like some of what they do but not everything, and I've no plans to join. (Not that anyone asked.)
According to Osiris, you are an idiot or a fascist, what are you? ;)
As for the ACLU, I like some of what they do but not everything, and I've no plans to join. (Not that anyone asked.)
According to Osiris, you are an idiot or a fascist, what are you? ;)
mimirtheodd: Or he could read your link and point out that even the commenters on the site disagree.
Who cares, it shows that I'm not the only one saying they pick and choose. It proves my point that they do. And other believe it.
Who cares, it shows that I'm not the only one saying they pick and choose. It proves my point that they do. And other believe it.
osirisothedead: I'll bet you wish you'd refreshed before posting that comment right about now.
Why?!
Why?!
flashlv: Remember this is based on opinion anyway, you wanted me to site others who think the same thing. I did you ignore.
Awesome!
I see. So because I am admittedly unfamiliar with this particular case, and have said I'd read more on the issue before forming an opinion, that's ignoring it in your opinion? Wow. Just... wow.
Awesome!
I see. So because I am admittedly unfamiliar with this particular case, and have said I'd read more on the issue before forming an opinion, that's ignoring it in your opinion? Wow. Just... wow.
flashlv: According to Osiris, you are an idiot or a fascist, what are you? ;)
Often an idiot, never knowingly a fascist.
Often an idiot, never knowingly a fascist.
osirisothedead: I bookmarked it. What are you talking about?
It's going to take a lot more reading than a single blog post for me to come up with an informed decision on whether the ACLU is avoiding smacking down Islamic-related prayer in schools or not.
Actually... just in the comments... here's the ACLU initial response:
Warning: PDF
It's going to take a lot more reading than a single blog post for me to come up with an informed decision on whether the ACLU is avoiding smacking down Islamic-related prayer in schools or not.
Actually... just in the comments... here's the ACLU initial response:
Warning: PDF
mimirtheodd: Actually... just in the comments... here's the ACLU initial response:
Warning: PDF
Oh, and note the date. March 14. This is very, very recent.
Warning: PDF
Oh, and note the date. March 14. This is very, very recent.
osirisothedead: I bookmarked it. What are you talking about?
It's going to take a lot more reading than a single blog post for me to come up with an informed decision on whether the ACLU is avoiding smacking down Islamic-related prayer in schools or not.
Nothing you read would convince you, your mind is already made up.
It's going to take a lot more reading than a single blog post for me to come up with an informed decision on whether the ACLU is avoiding smacking down Islamic-related prayer in schools or not.
Nothing you read would convince you, your mind is already made up.
osirisothedead: I see. So because I am admittedly unfamiliar with this particular case, and have said I'd read more on the issue before forming an opinion, that's ignoring it in your opinion? Wow. Just... wow.
You wanted a cite, I cited it and the first thing you say is that the site is wrong LOL.
You wanted a cite, I cited it and the first thing you say is that the site is wrong LOL.
mimirtheodd: Actually... just in the comments... here's the ACLU initial response:
Warning: PDF
Oh, cool. So the ACLU did take issue. Good.
Warning: PDF
Oh, cool. So the ACLU did take issue. Good.
flashlv: You wanted a cite, I cited it and the first thing you say is that the site is wrong LOL.
Where did I say the site was wrong?
Where did I say the site was wrong?
flashlv: You wanted a cite, I cited it and the first thing you say is that the site is wrong LOL.
No, he noted that many of the comments disagreed with the article. One went so far as to post a PDF of the letter the ACLU lawyers sent to the school.
No, he noted that many of the comments disagreed with the article. One went so far as to post a PDF of the letter the ACLU lawyers sent to the school.
osirisothedead: Oh, cool. So the ACLU did take issue. Good.
And given the recent nature of the case, it's likely that they're not even to the court proceedings stage yet.
And given the recent nature of the case, it's likely that they're not even to the court proceedings stage yet.
mimirtheodd: Actually... just in the comments... here's the ACLU initial response:
Warning: PDF
Funny, they get called out and they act. Like I said pick and choose, pick and choose.
Warning: PDF
Funny, they get called out and they act. Like I said pick and choose, pick and choose.
osirisothedead: Because I didn't do any of the things you're accusing me of. Nice try, though.
You actually did, wtf are you talking about?
You actually did, wtf are you talking about?
osirisothedead: Oh, cool. So the ACLU did take issue. Good.
AFTER they were called out, pick and choose, pick and choose.
AFTER they were called out, pick and choose, pick and choose.
Also they didn't do shit, they said 'keep them updated" means they didn't do SHIT.
flashlv: You actually did, wtf are you talking about?
You said I ignored the site. I did not. I read the article, many of the comments, the PDF Mimir posted, and also bookmarked the site. I don't believe that fits the definition of the word "ignore".
You said I ignored the site. I did not. I read the article, many of the comments, the PDF Mimir posted, and also bookmarked the site. I don't believe that fits the definition of the word "ignore".
flashlv: Funny, they get called out and they act. Like I said pick and choose, pick and choose.
Original article was posted on April 9. ACLU investigates, puts message out on March 14 saying "stop that, it's illegal".
I fail to see how this is picking and choosing.
Original article was posted on April 9. ACLU investigates, puts message out on March 14 saying "stop that, it's illegal".
I fail to see how this is picking and choosing.
flashlv: AFTER they were called out, pick and choose, pick and choose.
The ACLU acts on complaints a lot. They're not psychic, you know.
The ACLU acts on complaints a lot. They're not psychic, you know.
flashlv: Also they didn't do shit, they said 'keep them updated" means they didn't do SHIT.
In your all knowing, all seeing, legal doctorate opinion, what SHOULD they have done? Immediately taken them to court? Firebombed the school? Burned the local mosque?
Seriously. It takes a long time to build a case that will withstand a legal trial.
In your all knowing, all seeing, legal doctorate opinion, what SHOULD they have done? Immediately taken them to court? Firebombed the school? Burned the local mosque?
Seriously. It takes a long time to build a case that will withstand a legal trial.
osirisothedead: You said I ignored the site. I did not. I read the article, many of the comments, the PDF Mimir posted, and also bookmarked the site. I don't believe that fits the definition of the word "ignore".
Yes it does considering the ACLU did nothing but wrote a letter telling them to keep them aware.
They were called out and decided they better not.
If you think for some reason that is the ONLY one you are very mistaken.
http://www.pamibe.com/2004/11/28/just-say-no-to-the-aclu/
Yes it does considering the ACLU did nothing but wrote a letter telling them to keep them aware.
They were called out and decided they better not.
If you think for some reason that is the ONLY one you are very mistaken.
http://www.pamibe.com/2004/11/28/just-say-no-to-the-aclu/
mimirtheodd: Original article was posted on April 9. ACLU investigates, puts message out on March 14 saying "stop that, it's illegal".
I fail to see how this is picking and choosing.
Because they didn't do anything, read the end of the letter. Plus I supplied other links.
I fail to see how this is picking and choosing.
Because they didn't do anything, read the end of the letter. Plus I supplied other links.
flashlv: Yes it does considering the ACLU did nothing but wrote a letter telling them to keep them aware.
They were called out and decided they better not.
So should the ACLU go in there Janet Reno-style and murder everyone? Or should they wait to see what happens and take legal action if necessary?
They were called out and decided they better not.
So should the ACLU go in there Janet Reno-style and murder everyone? Or should they wait to see what happens and take legal action if necessary?
mimirtheodd: In your all knowing, all seeing, legal doctorate opinion, what SHOULD they have done? Immediately taken them to court? Firebombed the school? Burned the local mosque?
Seriously. It takes a long time to build a case that will withstand a legal trial.
No it doesn't. It took no time to pick up the case of the kids for the pledge.
Seriously. It takes a long time to build a case that will withstand a legal trial.
No it doesn't. It took no time to pick up the case of the kids for the pledge.
osirisothedead: The ACLU acts on complaints a lot. They're not psychic, you know.
They acted after they ignored it originally.
They acted after they ignored it originally.
flashlv: Because they didn't do anything, read the end of the letter. Plus I supplied other links.
If the school fixes their shit, what's the point of costly litigation? If they don't fix their shit, I'm sure the ACLU will be all over it.
If the school fixes their shit, what's the point of costly litigation? If they don't fix their shit, I'm sure the ACLU will be all over it.
osirisothedead: So should the ACLU go in there Janet Reno-style and murder everyone? Or should they wait to see what happens and take legal action if necessary?
They never wait any other time, they pick and choose what would get them the most press.
going to bed, good to see you knocked the kid stuff off osiris.
They never wait any other time, they pick and choose what would get them the most press.
going to bed, good to see you knocked the kid stuff off osiris.
osirisothedead: If the school fixes their shit, what's the point of costly litigation? If they don't fix their shit, I'm sure the ACLU will be all over it.
The school was going to fix the shit of the 8th grades getting suspended for sitting, the ACLU still went in, ouch you didn't know that.
The school was going to fix the shit of the 8th grades getting suspended for sitting, the ACLU still went in, ouch you didn't know that.
flashlv: They never wait any other time, they pick and choose what would get them the most press.
That's your opinion. It's not the case. The liberals get up in arms when the ACLU is perceived not to be acting as quickly as they should. When it's about Muslims, you folks on the conservative side do the same.
The process is slow, and your bias is what makes it appear that they're fast on liberal issues and slow on perceived conservative issues.
Have a good night, dream of cops. ;-)
That's your opinion. It's not the case. The liberals get up in arms when the ACLU is perceived not to be acting as quickly as they should. When it's about Muslims, you folks on the conservative side do the same.
The process is slow, and your bias is what makes it appear that they're fast on liberal issues and slow on perceived conservative issues.
Have a good night, dream of cops. ;-)
Huh. I missed "Don't be black."