Agreed, several times I've seen a cop from a mile back go 20mph+ to tailgate me (at an illegal following distance). They are above the law, and the law only applies to citizens.
In my state, police are completely exempted from speed limits.
You have the state govt's confused with the federal. Federal govt can only do what is authorized in the constitution, no more. States are only bound by their constitution (and by the bill of rights via 14ths incorporation).
You need to read what Madison wrote in his veto of a public works bill. Or maybe you need to read who Madison was...
Well its not criminal as they control washington and make the rules up as they go along.
His stat was not correct, it was 89%. Here's the source http://archive.mrc.org/biasbasics/biasbasics3.asp
"In April 1996, the Freedom Forum published a report by Chicago Tribune writer Elaine Povich titled, “Partners and Adversaries: The Contentious Connection Between Congress and the Media.” Buried in Appendix D was the real news for those concerned about media bias: Based on the 139 Washington bureau chiefs and congressional correspondents who returned the Freedom Forum questionnaire, the Washington-based reporters — by an incredible margin of nine-to-one — overwhelmingly cast their presidential ballots in 1992 for Democrat Bill Clinton over Republican incumbent George Bush."
- 89 percent of Washington-based reporters said they voted for Bill Clinton in 1992. Only seven percent voted for George Bush, with two percent choosing Ross Perot.
- Asked “How would you characterize your political orientation?” 61 percent said “liberal” or “liberal to moderate.” Only nine percent labeled themselves “conservative” or “moderate to conservative.”
- Fifty-nine percent dismissed the Republican’s 1994 Contract with America “an election-year campaign ploy.” Just three percent considered it “a serious reform proposal.”
Too much incorrect to tackle all of it, but the last thing you said is the most incorrect. You cannot consent to give away any right.
Agreed, it doesn't fit any of the description of the banned displays.
Back up cameras / displays do fit.
Seems california legislatures are for killing kids. http://autos.aol.com/article/back-up-cameras-law/
No. The Constitution is exactly that, a constitution. It is a base governing document that lays out the form of government and various rights and responsibilities. It is silent on many things. It says nothing about how much money Social Security is getting next year, or the Marines, or if section 205 of the Patriot Act even exists.
Wrong on all counts. Parent post was right. Source: James Madison, father of the Constitution. http://www.constitution.org/jm/18170303_veto.htm
Guns were a right from 1791 onwards, yet police weren't in every city until the 1900s.
Guns were largely unregulated until the NFA of 1934 and more tightly regulated in the GCA of 1968, and even more so in recent years. About the only deregulation was the sunset of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. But if you follow the interpretations (from letters to the BATFE), regulation has become much more strict in the last 30 years. Heck a shoe-string is considered a NFA machinegun now. http://www.everydaynodaysoff.com/2010/01/25/shoestring-machine-gun/
Yet as that right becomes increasingly regulated (a right is not unlimited according to SCOTUS), police have become more militarized. Though you are right, if accidentally, that we should expect them to become more so
That's just not true, this study says safety inspections will save somewhere between 100-200 lives in PA
How about punishing people for crimes they do commit instead of making rules against behavior that may lead to harm? IE nanny state.
If the punishment for harming someone in an automobile accident were high enough... Just a few months ago some lady was driving too fast at night in downpouring conditions. A lane change in front of her caused her to slam on her brakes. Driver behind her slammed into her, the truck behind that hit them both and went off a bridge. Driver in critical condition. The person at fault had no charges filed, despite her reckless behavior that left a CDL driver in a coma.
Yet if I drive 65 in a 55 I'll get a ticket in my state, and nobody was harmed.
And you believe that? After all the lies regarding the existence of PRISM? Try googling "SOD NSA parallel construction"
Very likely IMO they caught him using PRISM or other illegal techniques and put together this fake ID as a front to protect the true source. If you read the pdf of the court filings, it says not all information is presented, just enough for probable cause. SOD/Local police have lied to the courts about the source of information in the past, why would they stop?
"But part of the deal for getting this data is that the DEA and others should cover up the information's source by setting up a fake investigation trail – a process known as "parallel construction". For example, the police could say the arrest was made during a routine traffic stop or on the word of an informant.
"It's just like laundering money you work it backwards to make it clean," said Finn Selander, a DEA agent from 1991 to 2008.
One federal prosecutor told how he was dealing with a drug case in Florida when a DEA agent lied about the source of information that led to an arrest, saying it had come from an informant. When pressed, the agent admitted the data had come from SOD.
"I was pissed," the prosecutor said. "Lying about where the information came from is a bad start if you're trying to comply with the law because it can lead to all kinds of problems with discovery and candor to the court." He later dropped the case.
Law enforcement agents said that the practice was not uncommon in drug cases. Often a suspect will plead guilty and there's no need to examine evidence in court, but in some cases where the defendant has fought their corner, legal actions have been dropped rather than expose SOD to public scrutiny."
Just look at Hank from Breaking Bad. Sure he's a fictional character, but he's exactly how most agents are. These DEA people are psychopaths bent on ruining the lives of normal people who use drugs (seeing all the online activity post-SR bust tells me a lot of the people who use drugs are just avg people). They demonize them, despise and have contempt for the drug user, all while sitting around drinking adult beverages. I hear about how drugs ruin people's lives... Not nearly as often as govt does.
You believe any of that? You are naive. Google "NSA SOD parallel construction." NSA lied about prism until one of their agents blew the whistle.