Wow. Why is this thread still alive?!

[einhander]

Sleeve, you quote historical quotes like a bearded imam referencing Hadith. Think for yourself, man.

It's isn't over reach, it's government protecting citizens.

And the "what if a bomb goes off while carried on a person" is not a straw man argument.

[mrsleeve]

Govt Overreach no matter the realm or scope is still overreach and is NOT ACCEPTABLE.

Unfortunately most people dont see it for what it is you included

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants. -William Pitt

[einhander]

has little to do with Jeffersonian paradise it has more to do with the ability to live the way you see fit and make your own life into your own "Paradise" with out the govt getting all up in your shit, with out a really good reason

Getting blown up while you sip a latte is a pretty good reason.

Growing some weed and choosing physician assisted suicide are not good reasons.

Think about how they are different.

[mrsleeve]

has little to do with Jeffersonian paradise it has more to do with the ability to live the way you see fit and make your own life into your own "Paradise" with out the govt getting all up in your shit, with out a really good reason

[einhander]

Point of thread- some of us live in a make believe Jeffersonian paradise. Others live in reality.

[ParsedOut]

So you'd scare everyone and then sue.

Anyway, you didn't answer my question. Do you not see any reasonableness in searching customers?

Yes, yes and no. So there.

[Exodus_2pt0]

Oh I thought we were talking about your relative being searched at school and its relativness to the fourth amendment. That didnt work out to well your you (based on case law) so now its an all out police are bad thread. That video you posted is totally a fourth amendment violation. Got it. A=B B=C A=C

You should really read through the entire thread....

I think I've reached a point where we will all just have to agree to disagree. As demonstrated in this thread, I can see where there are always going to be issues in handling such a sensitive and tense situation. There are so many different possibilities that your are always going to have someone thinking you either did too much, or did too little.

That said, I stand by the opinion that the kids should not have been physically searched without first contacting parents for permission. Everything else, given the situation I can understand.

It is not an all out police are bad thread either. You aren't even trying to understand the point attempting to be made here.


I will try one more time.

You keep mentioning case law setting the standard. So lets make this easy to grasp.

Every time you waive your right against unreasonable search, you make it that much easier for it to happen in the future. So the government gets more comfortable waiving that right for you, and before you know it they are kicking in your door because someone heard from a friend that you might possibly be growing pot. Then even when they don't find anything, and you are dead for attempting to protect your family from a home invasion, some asshat will say that you must have done something to deserve it...

Snowball effect, so yea, A can equal C if you connect the dots.

I get it... If someone has a cautious outlook on the current state, then we must be irrational. Check.


And with that, I give up. As I said a few pages ago when I intended not to return to this thread, we will have to agree to disagree. Ok? No hard feelings.

[LSM3]

I will not feed trolls. I will not feed trolls. I will not feed trolls.

Edit: fuck it. I have re-read your post multiple times and still don't really understand it.

My post was more pointed at the "Starbucks example" more than the original topic.

Choosing to insult me and dismiss rather than put any real thought into this conversation just shows your arrogance. I'm not being unreasonable here. If more people did not accept the slow erosion of our personal freedoms, then maybe those in power would be more careful to act.

Oh I thought we were talking about your relative being searched at school and its relativness to the fourth amendment. That didnt work out to well your you (based on case law) so now its an all out police are bad thread. That video you posted is totally a fourth amendment violation. Got it. A=B B=C A=C

[mrsleeve]

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground. - Thomas Jefferson

The price of freedom is eternal vigilance - Thomas Jefferson

When wrongs are pressed because it is believed they will be borne, resistance becomes morality. - Thomas Jefferson

[Exodus_2pt0]

I will not feed trolls. I will not feed trolls. I will not feed trolls.

Edit: fuck it. I have re-read your post multiple times and still don't really understand it.

My post was more pointed at the "Starbucks example" more than the original topic.

Choosing to insult me and dismiss rather than put any real thought into this conversation just shows your arrogance. I'm not being unreasonable here. If more people did not accept the slow erosion of our personal freedoms, then maybe those in power would be more careful to act.

[LSM3]

So when police search students at a school after a bomb threat they will shoot homeless campers? Jesus christ man I wish I could reason the way you do. It would make my life SO much easier.

[Exodus_2pt0]

Or this.

http://www.democracynow.org/2014/4/1/the_bounty_police_force_albuquerque_officers

Are you even the slightest bit mad yet?

[Exodus_2pt0]

So you'd scare everyone and then sue.

Yes. Because it is the willful waiving of our rights that allow for the murder of innocent civilians by the police.

Similar to this a few years ago.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/25/jose-guerena-arizona-_n_867020.html

This is why you must stand up for even the most basic of rights. Because you give an inch, you lose a mile. Yes, different scenario, but maybe if people cared a little more about their personal freedoms then we wouldn't have gotten to this point of no return.

This thread is officially derailed.

[einhander]

Straw man argument? Right...because there are absolutely no parallels in the scenarios. Only difference, one is a public school and one is a private business. The concept of personal liberties shouldn't be subject to your geographic location (within the United States of America), but since the courts have decided to draw that line I guess it's ok. They do have our best interests at heart right? I'd like to think so, but I don't buy it hook line and sinker like most.

It's subject to context, as it has been since the country was founded.

[einhander]

So you'd scare everyone and then sue.

Anyway, you didn't answer my question. Do you not see any reasonableness in searching customers?