Beware in Texas: You can be stopped for license plate frame

[pirana 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

In many states open and notorious cohabitation is still against the law.

What is "notorious cohabitation?"

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

• Quote

Share this post

---

Link to post

Share on other sites

[pirana 0]

I wouldn't be worried about the slippery slope. Cops will pull over whoever they want no matter what. I've known a couple officers (including my stepdad) and it is far easier for them to just make something up, like you did not come to a complete stop, or you crossed the yellow line a couple miles back, or whatever. They do not need this law to pull over whoever they want.

" . . . the lust for power can be just as completely satisfied by suggesting people into loving their servitude as by flogging them and kicking them into obedience." -- Aldous Huxley

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

No, no, no, I'm not saying a vehicle has rights to privacy, I'm saying a person occupying that vehicle does. An unoccupied vehicle probably does have rights to privacy, but very limited. An occupied vehicle has limited rights to privacy, and that is teh issue: What is PC to generate an intrusion into privacy, also, how far can they go?

You have no right of privacy in a public place. I know that's been proven in case law, but I don't have a cite for it.

Quote

I'm not sure what you mean by appeals agaimnst those cases, as the appeal statute has passed by 40 years. Do you mean cases that cited Terry v Ohio or Chimel? BTW, Terry V Ohio isn't a vehicle search precedent, but an officer safety precedent, as you said, is for officer safety. An officer could stop you with just Reasonable Suspicion walking down the sidewalk, which is how they stopped Terry; he was walking back and forth casing a store. So this isn;t a vehicle-related case.

Both Terry and Chimel cite that an office can conduct a search of the person (Terry) and near vicinity of the person (Chimel) in order to ensure officer safety. Those are the cases you would need to fight to overturn.

Quote

Rightfully? Statute is nothing compared to case law, so that is to be determined. Again, Terry has nothing to do with this case, Terry is not a vehicle case and only requires RS versus PC with a vehicle stop. And Chimel doesn;t have to do with a vehicel stop either, just a search subsequesnt to stop. I threw in Chimel to to establish what can be done AFTER a stop, but not to determine the validity of the stop.

Other way around - statute trumps case law as far as the police are concerned - and even then, they have Terry and Chimel to back them up if/when it goes to court. Again, those are the cases that would have to be overturned.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

a lot of older cops, may tend to become 'hardened' to the job.

It's not just the older cops who lie on the stand to keep the state's case intact, unless the definition of "older" is "past his rookie year." And, sorry, it's not just to put away kids' drug dealers and baby-rapers; it's to support any prosecution.
You're a moral guy. You know right from wrong. You know lawful from unlawful. You start making that kind of moral compromise, you're flirting with a deal with the devil.

The ordinary citizen is held to the following standard: the law is the law, and if you break it, you get prosecuted.
Perjury is a felony in every state in the country. I don't see any exemptions in the perjury statutes for police officers. Perjury by a police officer on the witness stand in a court of law is a form of official corruption. I wish I could get more people to recognize that.

Quote

Folks might 'think' a little bit before condemning cops.

And of course, I'm sure you realize I wasn't condemning cops. I was just pointing out the harsh reality that lying on the stand in court - yes, I mean perjury - is one of the tools in their toolbox.

___________________________________

No sir, I was not 'pointing a finger' at you. You make a very good point and one that can't be denied. It is a fact that there are cops who commit perjury. I'd have to live in a bubble to try to deny that one.
To sum it up, I appreciate what you have said and find that I agree with all you've said. There's good and bad, to some degree, in everything and everyone. It's how we deal with it that makes us what we are.


Chuck

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

I believe that this law took effect last year, and I have to say that it's the dumbest thing I've ever heard of.

I don't think it's dumb for a cop to be able to read what State a license plate is from, so they can trace it.

However, if it's used as an excuse to abuse people for other reasons, then that will need to be slapped down in court.

Simple solution: Remove the license plate frame, and remove the cop's excuse!

________________________________

Well said!


Chuck

That's way too simple and easy for the whiny-ass crowd that feels strongly about the need to use their cutsie saying license plate frame.

______________________________________

You bet!


Chuck

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

I've had two cases where officers swore in reports that they had defendant do and fail the battery of SFST (Standardized Field Sobriety Test). My clients denied having performed ANY SFST. Conveniently, no scene video existed. Client stated that no testing was ever done because he refused. (He followed my pre arrest advice to the T.)

Your client is lying, cops never lie! They are honorable people.

Quote

I proved one officer to be lying by getting his squad car generated computer records into evidence. They showed that he was only on the scene for a few minutes; way too short a time period to have administered any such tests. (Not Guilty) So YES, officers can and do LIE.

The computer lied; cops don’t lie, they are honorable people.

Quote

OK, back to the rant. Drug prohibition in this country is costing billions due to the aforementioned easing up of Constitutional restraints on cops. I speak from my own personal experience as a criminal defense lawyer in Houston, Harris County, Texas when I complain about this kind of enforcement.

War on drugs, war on terror….. Wars of convenience so we can be at war. These are both unwinnable wars designed to divert funds and attention from the thieving Republican Party. BTW, I think we all know that most of these wars derive from the right.

Quote

Aside from the fact that I think the "Drug War" is a failure (It's now a war against people who use drugs.)

Jesus is good, drugs are immoral, unless you’re Limbaugh and you have a little Oxycontin problem.

Quote

My message here is that, due to this and similar reductions in our rights against "unreasonable" searches and seizures, MORE people are going to jail; people who don't need to be in jail. Money is being diverted away from a good system of EDUCATION due to the PRISON BUDGET. They are working on MORE ways to get into your HOME without a warrant also. (Thankfully, the smell of pot emitting from your doorway is not yet a reason for them to bust in.)

That’s OK, corporations, which prisons are wholly corporate owner in America now, can run these prisons fro profit, so yet another positive comes from those evil drug users. ß That is sarcasm.

Quote

Prohibition should have taught us a lesson.

I’ve said this forever. This is the Republican agenda at its best.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

But we dont have to carry our 'papers'... but the police will give us a 'presenter'... we then have a few days to show up at a police station to show them our licence/registration etc.. Not quite like 1984 as it 1st appears.

It's not about the registration, it's about another reason to deprive privacy.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Right on. What is needed is a ruling that summary offenses (those that can be tried without indictment) do not entitle the police to go on a fishing expedition with a warrantless search.

If I recall correctly, for those types of offenses you can refuse to sign the ticket and they (used to?) have to get a supervisor come and sign for you. We did that in high school once when a small-town cop was having a bad day and wanted to write 20 of us jaywalking tickets. The supervisor came and told him to take a break and apologized to us.

If the cop NOTICES something or smells alchohol... then they should be required to have audio and video of the stop. If they SEE drugs or smell them... they should have to have taped evidence and maybe another officer on scene. Maybe that'd help a bit?

You're not in high school anymore! I don;t know your age, but things change daily in regard to basic protections and treatment allowable.

As for not signing, the cop can arrest you or he can just write, "Served" and that suffices to the ticket. Go to court to fight it and the judge will look at you as uncooperative. I had this happen once where I was willing to sign, but teh cop wrote, "Served" so when I went to court I established that I didn;t refuse to sign.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

If I recall correctly, for those types of offenses you can refuse to sign the ticket and they (used to?) have to get a supervisor come and sign for you. We did that in high school once when a small-town cop was having a bad day and wanted to write 20 of us jaywalking tickets. The supervisor came and told him to take a break and apologized to us.

If the cop NOTICES something or smells alchohol... then they should be required to have audio and video of the stop. If they SEE drugs or smell them... they should have to have taped evidence and maybe another officer on scene. Maybe that'd help a bit?

Trent

They should be, but when they don't want the jury to see certain things they turn it off. (Like them NOT doing SFST)

Don't sign the ticket you go to jail.

TX legislature passed laws protecting citizens against BS cops but governor Rick Perry vetoed them. Remember that when you vote. Again, see my rant on my web site (lawyerwebb sig line) The details are there.

______________________

No, suppress evidence? Cops and now judges are honorable people, they don't suppress evidence. (joke)

I audio taped the cops at a traffic stop and subsequent ticket, fought it and tried to admit the tape..... cop screamed, "NOT RELEVANT" and the judge agreed. Cops and judges are honorable people, they don't lie.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Wackos? Keep your personal attacks to yourself.

Was I talking to you? And for anyone who's ONLY against this license plate thing... it stands. The problem isn't the law about the frame... it appears to be people's trust of law enforcement.

Quote

I have stated that dirty cops, most of them have a degree of this, can just lie, as is their nature. So I have already covered this.

There are law enforcement officers on this very forum. How about you keep your PA's to yourself?

See how fun it is to play sensitive?

Quote

Again, read the thread, this is the framework of a slippery slope.

Did this slippery slope start when cops were invented? Or how about when any vehicle laws were made? Or or or, how about when they made us REGISTER our cars (the fascists!) Or did the license plate frame thing start the sloping slip 'n slide?

Quote

Was I talking to you? And for anyone who's ONLY against this license plate thing... it stands. The problem isn't the law about the frame... it appears to be people's trust of law enforcement.

Yes, you wrote that all people who think the license plate law is a bad thing are wackos. That’s like me writing all people who are Republicans are maggots and then saying I didn’t call you a maggot just because you are coincidentally a Repub.

Quote

There are law enforcement officers on this very forum. How about you keep your PA's to yourself?

See how fun it is to play sensitive?

Most of them have a degree of this, versus calling them all corrupt “wackos” is a far cry from each other. Furthermore you are not a cop, so you cannot speak for them.

Quote

Did this slippery slope start when cops were invented? Or how about when any vehicle laws were made? Or or or, how about when they made us REGISTER our cars (the fascists!) Or did the license plate frame thing start the sloping slip 'n slide?

This passage is barely worth responding to, but I will. The slippery slope is a term that suggest that
whatever the issue is, standalone, it can lead to other legislation of it’s not nipped in the bud. Slippery
slope: metaphor meaning things pick up speed if they get pushed down the slope.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

I have stated that dirty cops, most of them have a degree of this, can just lie, as is their nature. So I have already covered this.

Again, read the thread, this is the framework of a slippery slope.

______________________________________

I just have one question. Where is your proof to substiantiate the idea that 'most' cops are dirty and "can just lie"? As was mentioned, we have law enforcement officers who post here. Are you saying they are dirty and liars? You made a rash statement and I'd like to see your proof! You're going to find 'dirty' and 'liars' in any phase of our society. Why just cops? I hope, you never get in a situation where you need a cop! That cop, might just be a 'poster' here!


Chuck

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

But a police officer, by definition, is a professional witness (since arrests must be supported in court by officers’ testimony in order to make out the state’s case).

Enter….. photo radar.

Quote

and very often, that means “massaging” the truth.

Not at all the same as lying….

Quote

I always had the best success in court against rookie cops. Why? Not because they “screwed up” in the classical sense, but because they were the MOST honest! – and the honest-to-God truth sometimes puts the nail in the coffin on the prosecution’s case.

Now you’re going to tell me prosecutors lie? OMG, my life is shattered. That’s ok, if a cop or prosecutor lies, no evidence, if they lie and are not caught, they get to throw an innocent guy into jail. If a defendant lies he goes to jail… I’ve got to go buy me some American flags, I’ll be back later.

This:

Quote

I don’t think most cops are, at their core, dirty or essentially dishonest; no more or less than the general population.

And then this:

Quote

So it’s not too hard to recognize when the cop is lying on the stand. And, unfortunately, it happens a lot – maybe not about everything that occurred, but when it comes to a key element - the cop knows what to say, and what not to say, and avoiding getting the state’s case blown out usually takes priority over being absolutely faithful to “the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth”.

I appreciate the diplomacy, but you’ve just supported my contention.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

I've known good cops as well as the not so good to the down-right dirty.

F your wife is aware of any bad cops by way of their actions and she doesn’t report it, she is an dirty. Special relationship.

Quote

I think, a lot of older cops, may tend to become 'hardened' to the job. they are sick and tired of law breakers getting off or 'probation'. They bust their collective butts, trying to protect the public they swore to protect, only to get it thrown-out on a 'technicality'.

Is this a justification to lie and be dishonorable?

Quote

They write tickets for speeding to 'good' citizens with the hope, they may have prevented the person from killing themselves.

And then let their friends go, or let influential people go while citing some poor slob….. It’s outta gas man.

Quote

They just plain, put-up with a lot of shit. Over the years, they may 'stretch' the truth or just flat lie, trying to get some baby raper or some low-life drug pusher who dealt dope, mainly to school kids. off the streets.

What of they lie to get their cop buddy off the hook for a shooting, killing, vehicle accident, etc? Happen ALL the time; the rationalizations don’t get anymore fun for those who are screwed. By you posting the worst of the worst scenarios I think we see your agenda.

Quote

There's not a single living person who has't cheated or lied to some degree.

Absolutely true, but the difference is that I’m not sworn to uphold the law and the …… truth.

Quote

We expect cops to be 'perfect' while we let ourselves slide. It's been this way since the first badge was pinned on and I don't guess, it'll ever change. Folks might 'think' a little bit before condemning cops.

I expect cops to be honest as their contract requires, a far cry from perfect. I have no problem being far more critical of a cop.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

a lot of older cops, may tend to become 'hardened' to the job.

It's not just the older cops who lie on the stand to keep the state's case intact, unless the definition of "older" is "past his rookie year." And, sorry, it's not just to put away kids' drug dealers and baby-rapers; it's to support any prosecution.
You're a moral guy. You know right from wrong. You know lawful from unlawful. You start making that kind of moral compromise, you're flirting with a deal with the devil.

The ordinary citizen is held to the following standard: the law is the law, and if you break it, you get prosecuted.
Perjury is a felony in every state in the country. I don't see any exemptions in the perjury statutes for police officers. Perjury by a police officer on the witness stand in a court of law is a form of official corruption. I wish I could get more people to recognize that.

Quote

Folks might 'think' a little bit before condemning cops.

And of course, I'm sure you realize I wasn't condemning cops. I was just pointing out the harsh reality that lying on the stand in court - yes, I mean perjury - is one of the tools in their toolbox.

KInda funny how you start out diplomatically, but then your true feelings shine thru. I agree with you.

A cop lying doesn't not equal a citizen lying. Cops lie = no evidence / citizen lies = prison.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

What are the legitimate positives in driving over the speed limit or playing loud music in public? Why shouldn't all those people be arrested, or at least searched? Heck, they're probably committing other crimes.

None. Which is why a person can, and should be ticketed for those things. But not searched. If however, in the process of getting ticketed for those things, evidence of other crimes is found, then they probably will get searched and get the book for that too.

I like being elemental too, but then you have to look at what they call the, "Totality of the circumstances." That's where you realize, as the author of this thread stated, you have pretext stops wher ethe cops have reason (PC) to pull you over and find such evidence. In the business it is a fishing expedition.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

been this way since the first badge was pinned on and I don't guess, it'll ever change. Folks might 'think' a little bit before condemning cops.

My rant is more against the machine. Most cops are good. Joe Skydiver is usually pretty safe with his license plate frame. Most people are. If you just happen to slow down or stop in a drug locale that's being watched, you'll see what I'm ranting about, though.

I've been profile stopped several times. Something about my good looks made the officer believe that this cat isn't hauling dope or driving drunk, so I escaped the full monty shake down.

I especially like the warning I got today as I was tooling down Memorial Drive on my bike (My speedo said 55 in a 50) when a cop pulls along side me and gives me a loud speaker blast to slow it down from sixty.
So, in short, it's not all the fault of cops. The law makers who create new crimes and stiffen penalties for malum prohibitum type offenses and the appellate courts who give invasive and unreasonable statutes and police practices the stamp of legality are the biggest cogs in the wheel.

Policy makers will some day realize that prisons and jails are for the most dangerous of society; that a good system of education is more important than spending a few billion a year keeping citizens locked up for their bad habits; that the prohibition of those offenses costs more and does more harm than regulation and control.

__________________

Quote

So, in short, it's not all the fault of cops. The law makers who create new crimes and stiffen penalties for malum prohibitum type offenses and the appellate courts who give invasive and unreasonable statutes and police practices the stamp of legality are the biggest cogs in the wheel.

This is exactly true. This should be the theme of this thread. It's easy for a young male to hate cops becuase he interfaces with them, but as he grows older he should realize that it's courts that let this cop rob people, assault people, shoot peoplke, kill people. The courts do this due to the symbiotic relationship between cops and judges; prosecutors get to play too.

So now it's teh fault of judges, right? Sure, but who appoints these judges? Could it be the representative whoa re elceted by ty
he people? Yepper. It comes full circle and when a conservative crys about a legal process gone to hell due to some dirty cop or lying judge, prosecutor, I laugh. I know they usually can't put it together, even when I help them to understand, but it is teh people of America who appoint these maniacs in uniform and robe. It would be different if the people elected reasonable people, but they don't; they elect conservative maniacs then wonder why we have 1:136 Americans in jail.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

In many states open and notorious cohabitation is still against the law.

What is "notorious cohabitation?"

It is teh right wing's way of saying that you are shacking up with a GF. Pathetic, huh? Misdemeanor in some states.

Antimiscegenation: Marrying a person of another race. 1968 Loving V Virginia - sentenced to 1 year for going to DC to marry, returned to Virginia and sentenced - allowed to promise to leave for 25 years in exchange for suspended sentence. Don;t believe me, go look it up.

• Quote

Share this post

---

Link to post

Share on other sites

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

I wouldn't be worried about the slippery slope. Cops will pull over whoever they want no matter what. I've known a couple officers (including my stepdad) and it is far easier for them to just make something up, like you did not come to a complete stop, or you crossed the yellow line a couple miles back, or whatever. They do not need this law to pull over whoever they want.

True, but as I said, they could actually shake the vehicle as it sat in a parking lot, not moving. It really pushes PC more than moving violations.

BTW, are you saying your step-dad has told you he lied about a PC stop? You're shattering my vision of America.... stop..... ahhhhhh

[rasmack 0]

Dude. Chill.

HF #682, Team Dirty Sanchez #227
“I simply hate, detest, loathe, despise, and abhor redundancy.”
- Not quite Oscar Wilde...

[masterrig 1]

Quote

Quote

I've known good cops as well as the not so good to the down-right dirty.

F your wife is aware of any bad cops by way of their actions and she doesn’t report it, she is an dirty. Special relationship.

Quote

I think, a lot of older cops, may tend to become 'hardened' to the job. they are sick and tired of law breakers getting off or 'probation'. They bust their collective butts, trying to protect the public they swore to protect, only to get it thrown-out on a 'technicality'.

Is this a justification to lie and be dishonorable?

Quote

They write tickets for speeding to 'good' citizens with the hope, they may have prevented the person from killing themselves.

And then let their friends go, or let influential people go while citing some poor slob….. It’s outta gas man.

Quote

They just plain, put-up with a lot of shit. Over the years, they may 'stretch' the truth or just flat lie, trying to get some baby raper or some low-life drug pusher who dealt dope, mainly to school kids. off the streets.

What of they lie to get their cop buddy off the hook for a shooting, killing, vehicle accident, etc? Happen ALL the time; the rationalizations don’t get anymore fun for those who are screwed. By you posting the worst of the worst scenarios I think we see your agenda.

Quote

There's not a single living person who has't cheated or lied to some degree.

Absolutely true, but the difference is that I’m not sworn to uphold the law and the …… truth.

Quote

We expect cops to be 'perfect' while we let ourselves slide. It's been this way since the first badge was pinned on and I don't guess, it'll ever change. Folks might 'think' a little bit before condemning cops.

I expect cops to be honest as their contract requires, a far cry from perfect. I have no problem being far more critical of a cop.

____________________________________

Wow! With logic like yours, I'm just at a loss for words!


Chuck

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

You have no right of privacy in a public place. I know that's been proven in case law, but I don't have a cite for it.

Walking down the sidewalk, yes. But your car and you in your car have some rights to privacy / protections against unreasonable search. So I disagree with you.

Quote

Both Terry and Chimel cite that an office can conduct a search of the person (Terry) and near vicinity of the person (Chimel) in order to ensure officer safety. Those are the cases you would need to fight to overturn.

OK, but Terry, as have introduced into this argument, has nothing to do with a vehicle stop. BTW, Terry isn’t really a search, but an outer garment, “pat” of the person.

Quote

Other way around - statute trumps case law as far as the police are concerned - and even then, they have Terry and Chimel to back them up if/when it goes to court. Again, those are the cases that would have to be overturned.

Oh, so your can be prosecuted for an abortion? Oh wait, even tho it is statute in most states, you CANNOT be successfully prosecuted for a 1st or 2nd term abortion via case law. Flatly, you’re wrong, appellate decision has supremacy over statute.

As far as police are concerned? It’s all the same. Fuck, help me please, I’m getting a headache here. You claim that statute trumps, which is wrong, then you claim that Terry and Chimel can back them up. Why would a lesser, in your ideas, entity have to back them up? If statute is king over precedent, then they don’t need precedent as a “back-up.”

See, these cases that are heard by appellate courts up to and including the US Sup Ct render what are called, “Bright line rules.” It is considered likely that most cops, who can barely butter their bread in many cases, cannot read a 300-page decision, so they extrapolate a bright line rendering that cops can understand. They usually contain 3 or 4 small words, so as not to confuse the cop. With the exception of Miranda, where the rights are lengthy but simple, “Terry pat and frisk,” “Chimel bubble” and others represent these extensive US Sup Ct and other appellate court decisions.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

No sir, I was not 'pointing a finger' at you. You make a very good point and one that can't be denied. It is a fact that there are cops who commit perjury. I'd have to live in a bubble to try to deny that one
To sum it up, I appreciate what you have said and find that I agree with all you've said. There's good and bad, to some degree, in everything and everyone. It's how we deal with it that makes us what we are.

With all respect, it’s kind of like mixing it all together into one g=big average that excuses dirty cop’s behavior. Again, if a cop lies and is caught, he loses the evidence. If he lies and is not caught, an innocent guy goes to prison or is executed. If a citizen lies and is caught, he goes to prison. A cop’s lie is wryly more egregious than a citizen’s lie.

Can anyone tell me why Grand Jury testimony is FOREVER sealed? Hmmmmmm, could it be that the prosecutor lied his or her ass off and that if released it would identify the corrupt court system?

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Dude. Chill.

Dude, thanks for the input.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I've known good cops as well as the not so good to the down-right dirty.

F your wife is aware of any bad cops by way of their actions and she doesn’t report it, she is an dirty. Special relationship.

Quote

I think, a lot of older cops, may tend to become 'hardened' to the job. they are sick and tired of law breakers getting off or 'probation'. They bust their collective butts, trying to protect the public they swore to protect, only to get it thrown-out on a 'technicality'.

Is this a justification to lie and be dishonorable?

Quote

They write tickets for speeding to 'good' citizens with the hope, they may have prevented the person from killing themselves.

And then let their friends go, or let influential people go while citing some poor slob….. It’s outta gas man.

Quote

They just plain, put-up with a lot of shit. Over the years, they may 'stretch' the truth or just flat lie, trying to get some baby raper or some low-life drug pusher who dealt dope, mainly to school kids. off the streets.

What of they lie to get their cop buddy off the hook for a shooting, killing, vehicle accident, etc? Happen ALL the time; the rationalizations don’t get anymore fun for those who are screwed. By you posting the worst of the worst scenarios I think we see your agenda.

Quote

There's not a single living person who has't cheated or lied to some degree.

Absolutely true, but the difference is that I’m not sworn to uphold the law and the …… truth.

Quote

We expect cops to be 'perfect' while we let ourselves slide. It's been this way since the first badge was pinned on and I don't guess, it'll ever change. Folks might 'think' a little bit before condemning cops.

I expect cops to be honest as their contract requires, a far cry from perfect. I have no problem being far more critical of a cop.

____________________________________

Wow! With logic like yours, I'm just at a loss for words!


Chuck

Instead of attacking my logic, attack the assertions..... I don;t think it will happen.

[Trent 0]

You clearly have something to say seeing as how you feel the need to respond to every post in a thread. The only problem is that you could have just said that you think most cops are corrupt and been done with it.

Quote

You're not in high school anymore! I don;t know your age, but things change daily in regard to basic protections and treatment allowable.

As for not signing, the cop can arrest you or he can just write, "Served" and that suffices to the ticket.

No, I'm not in high school and laws DO change. They also change from city to city. In the city that I was "jaywalking", at the time, that was the policy on not signing.

Quote

you wrote that all people who think the license plate law is a bad thing are wackos.

That's actually not what I wrote, and it was further clarified in a later post. Deal with it.

Quote

That’s like me writing all people who are Republicans are maggots and then saying I didn’t call you a maggot just because you are coincidentally a Repub.

So it's similar to you calling cops corrupt when you're talking to someone who's married to a cop? Or when there are cops responding to you? Or is it like when you try to pin the "corruption conspiracy" on conservatives? Is that what you mean? Gimme a break.

Quote

Furthermore you are not a cop, so you cannot speak for them.

I can speak up for people I know when I know what some dude on the internet says is crap. You'd do well to take your own advice here. Are you a cop? Is that how you "know" they're all so corrupt? Thought not.

Quote

The slippery slope is a term that suggest that
whatever the issue is, standalone, it can lead to...

Thanks. I know what a slippery slope is. That's why it's so funny that you're all about it here. The problem with using the "slippery slope" argument is that you're speculating on what will happen given what is happening now. To turn around and say that the slippery slope started HERE, is being naive. I can prove to you that if there were no cops, there would be no cop corruption, can't I?

Let's not forget we're talking about a license plate frame here. Don't want to get pulled over? Don't use one. Think you're having your rights violated since you can't have a frame?? Nuts. Why don't people bitch about their right to have a taillight out? As long as one's working, people know you're stopping! Why not bitch about the fact that you can't paint "Police" on your car... I mean... free speech and all...

Nevermind, easier just to assume all cops are corrupt and that it's the fascist conservatives' fault.

Oh, hello again!