Kennedy

What was your source? They don't always all use the same measure. But the canuck has a point. http://www.exchange-rates.org/history/CAD/USD/T US dollars have been worth less than Canadian dollars since new years, except for four days in late January. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Not surprising really. People in that neck of the woods are expected to take care of themselves and be competent to take care of their employer's interests. That includes physical fitness and skills beyond "what you're paid to do." If you want to be impressed, see what their security guard types can do, let alone police or military. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Officers are taught how to handle possible mental cases. Read this quote from the article: The officers were trying to take him into custody for transport to a mental health facility. He was NOT being arrested on criminal charges. For anyone who didn't bother reading the article, try doing so next time. For anyone not familiar with Florida and the baker act, [url" http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Florida+baker+act"]I suggest you google it, as I did.[/url] If any of that had anything to do with the incident we're discussing, I might bother responding. However, as it bears no relation to the facts in this case, there's no point. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Don't bother him with the facts; he's already made up his mind. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Arresting a person is one way of "dealing with the situation". Sometimes no amount of talking is going to accomplish anything, and there are many other considerations which may preclude discussing things for twenty minutes, even if it would get something done. When an arrest is justified and an officer chooses to make a custodial arrest, the suspect is legally required to comply with the officer. When a suspect resists of fails to comply with lawful instruction, use of force may be necessary. Do you dispute any of that? No, it isn't, any more than using a baton or a punch is deadly force. If you need help understanding use of force levels, ask. Statements like that just show ignorance. Using a firearm or an edged weapon us deadly force. Anything else depends on how it is used because it is not in and of itself inherently deadly force. Suspects have died from batons, pepper spray, closed-fist punches, hand cuffs, and TASERs. None of those things are automatically deadly force. Well, "how it seems" to you is not how it is. Nationally, officers make an arrest in less than two percent of interactions with the public. Again, by researching your topic or asking someone who knows more, you can avoid making yourself look ridiculous. Also, officers "dealing with things" instead of making arrests has led to problems and changes in law. Too many officer used to "deal with it" on domestic violence calls. Too many officers used to "deal with it" when they came across drunk drivers. Etc, etc, etc. Policing is an activity where no matter what you do, you're going to piss off a lot of people. That's just life. Not many if them thought fighting a bouncer to stay in the club was worth killing or dying for, right? If you've taken that many to the curb, then surely you've seen them suddenly go berserk and fight a lot harder if they see an officer outside, right? The plain facts are that the officers had a reason to take him into custody, he refused, and they used a level of force justified by law, courts, and their departmental policy. Unfortunately, the person died. But since he may still have died if they used batons, or hands, or pepperspray, or any other methof of control, I don't see why you're pissing and moaning. Would you be happier if another control choice led to his death? Would you be happier if they talked to him and let him go and he hurt himself or someone else? witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Eh, whateva. What's the difference? Who cares? [/sarcasm] witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

In North Carolina, depending on the severity of your action and the disruption it causes, it could be disorderly conduct. Also, in all but two or three counties it is illegal to use profanity on public property or right of way in the hearing of three or more people (speaker and officer can be counted, so it only takes one bystander). Doesn't mean you have to be charged, but continued behavior after the officer arrives, or aiming such language at an officer, especially after being given the chance to leave, could raise the chance of citation or arrest. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Don't bother him with the facts; he's already made up his mind. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Well, if it's as much of a fact as you say, then people probably already know. I don't see any riots in the street, do you? Either folks don't believe that it's a fact, or they don't care. Complacency is something most people are very good at. If you're waiting for complacency to go away, then just keep an eye on the rising debt, America's crashing credit, and the inability of average folks to pay for food and power (don't worry, they've got the bling and the playstation either way). witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Given the MANTRA of your judicial system is INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN guilty, yes I think they should not be shown. Arrest records and criminal charges are public records unless sealed by court order. The only difference now is that the internet makes it easier to locate and browse those public records. I'd be more concerned if records were sealed from the public. What's that old quote about sunlight? As for innocent until proven guilty, these pictures have no bearing on that. The system is still (mostly) holding up it's end of the bargain. If some fuckwit in the general public thinks an arrest is equal to being guilty, well then (A) he's a fuckwit and (B) that's not the system's fault and there's nothing the system can do about it. In NC there is a tabloid published by a private company each week with pictures of recent arrestees and assorted related garbage. Apparently, they've grown! http://www.slammernews.com/ witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

I don't do embarrassing photos. Actually, I just don't do embarassed. I understand there are some entertaining photos taken by whomever was still sober enough to hold a camera at the roaming boogie in Dublin a few years ago. I know for a fact there at some good ones from CrossJeys FreezeFest in 2002, but damnit I won the beer Olympics and pulled a free biplane jump the next day, so whatever happened and whatever made it to film, I will not be embarassed. Ended up with a monkey claw long sleeve tee, too. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

I was thinking the same thing. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

This seems unreasonable to me (if drivers are not being given a choice). Courts have mixed rulings about searching and seizing electronic devices during detention or arrest without a warrant. I don't see how it would be legal for MSP officers to take mobile devices and download them against owners' wishes unless they were arrested or there was a search warrant. Thoughts? Viable legal defense of the practice? I'd hate to stand up in court and try to justify it to a judge. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

I don't feel one way or the other. I have read case law and opinions of professionals. You think I'm wrong? Go ahead. Provide the direct quote from a federal judge stating that judges have a conflict if interest when hearing cases involving the US government. Don't just name the case. Give us a quote. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

What? Again you know more than a Feral Judge. "complete debunking" of what book? So, as you see, your nonsense has been handled in court many times, with the same conclusion. The judge in LTC Sullivan vs USA was wrong. Since he wasn't even ruling on tax law, it didn't really matter, but he was wrong as a matter of law. Simple fact is ,Kennedy, sure these feral judges are guaranteed a certain income. Thing is if they please the powers they can move up a knotch and have an even greater income. And that's how things work isn't it? Tow the line boy and we'll give you a promotion. I say fuck all that! By Jesus' decree I am God !! There can be no promotions and certainly no government shoud expect me to pay tribute to them. I am a Free Man. I am required to pay tribute to no man. God is my Father and I am his Son. He who is ALL OF THE AGES requires that I disregard the laws of man and abide strictly by His law, regardless of earthly or human consequence. God the Father has forbid me to pay income tax. "Render unto Ceaser what is Ceasers'" , He says. Knowing full well that nothing really belongs to Ceaser! All belongs to the Creator, the Divine Architect. Ceaser owns nothing so pay him what he is due. The Great Architect who designed this earth may be due some tribute. Live a good life and I'm certain he will call the books square. Peace, Jim Brown And now we've established what kind of crazy you are, and that you are incapable of reading the bible with any more accuracy than the tax code. Maybe if you're lucky you can share a cell with other tax evasion convicts and you can reinforce eachother's insanity. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Like I give a fuck what you think about me or my credibility? Not bloody likely! You're the one who thinks courts can't hear criminal cases or cases where any part of the government is a party. I'm not in the habit of quoting judges who are wrong about one topic while ruling correctly on the issue at hand. If you want to quote him, that's your issue, and you'll look even more ridiculous than you already do (and that's saying something). The judge was wrong. If you want to know what the federal judiciary has said about the 16th amendment, look up ruling related to said amendment, not a pretrial motion to dismiss a request for injunction concerning the war powers act. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

(1) the 16th amendment was ratified and is part of the constitution. Anyone who wants to check can look into The Law That Never Was, the complete debunking of the book, and the author's conviction of fraud. (2) The poll question is not based on truth, and so a moot point. (3) The judges are paid whether they rule for or against the government. Their bottom line is unaffected. The government, whose bottom line might be affected if your delusions were reality, would simply find other ways to increase income. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

OK Kennedy, you know more than a federal judge. You are right and it must be I who is so very wrong. True on both counts. I'm glad we've established that at last. If you have any doubts, look into The Law That Never Was, the debunking of the book, and the author's conviction on charges of fraud. The 16th was ratified, and is a valid portion o the constitution of the USA. Ludicrous? Yes. Troll? Probably. Are you? OK, so you found one exerpt from one case not related to tax law. Considering your posts in this thread, I think it would be inappropriate for you claim judges are always correct, don't you? In this case, the judge was wrong. If you want to see judges who actually ruled on tax law based on reasoned consideration of evidence, there are volumes of books in your local law library. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Define "minority neighborhood". witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

British Tourists Shot in FL Britons Killed in FL as Part of Gang Initiation? Poll: So the fault lies with... witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Per the clear intent of the framers, and the ninth and tenth amendments, that is everything not enumerated and specifically delegated to the feds. Now that we've covered that, do you disagree that by his logic, the Feds could do everything I listed? witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Then the best of your knowledg is sorely lacking. The words on the parchment haven't changed. But the effective text of the constitution has changed. "The constitution" is a law. Or set of laws, if you prefer. If I were to read you the law related to carrying a firearm, would you want me to read the text as it is in effect today? Or would you rather hear the original version, plus all the edits, revisions, deleted sections? Why take issue with reading the law as is? Why insist on reading parts that no longer apply? Did they say their purpose was a history lesson? Or did someone say that they were concerned that the government wasn't following the constitution as it applies today? Or are you putting on a cheap stunt in calling their actions a cheap stunt, just because you don't agree with them? witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

I don't know anything about Fried, but he doesn't sound like much of a libertarian in the article. By his logic, what can't the federal government do? If they can force the purchase of health insurance, what stops them forcing the purchase of anything else? If regulating interstate commerce and the common welfare allow feds to force purchase by otherwise idle citizens, then what is the point of the rest of the constitution and the other amendments? -You must purchase firearms. It provides for the common defense. -You must exercise one hour a day under the watch of local commissars. It promotes better health. -You must purchase health insurance. It provides access to health care. -You must have two physicals, a vision, and two dental checks each year. It provides for the common welfare. Etc, etc, etc. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

You are correct in challenging his logic. He makes an unsupportable statement. However additional facts are available which show his conclusion to be correct, regardless of how he reached it. (I'm not going to put in the cites, I'm on my phone. This has been hashed out here on dz.com and can also be checked elsewhere) Mexican cartels and the assorted other bandidos use grenades, RPGs, full-auto machine guns, and various other military hardware. This equipment comes from two main sources: (A) it comes from the Mexican military through theft or purchase and (B) it is smuggled in from other countries - not the USA. The only civilian legal arm used with any real frequency is the .50 cal rifle. Think about it. These people specialize in procuring, protecting, and making a profit on items that are illegal in their country of origin, their country of destination, and in Mexico. Firearms are also illegal in Mexico. With that in mind, do you think they settle for lesser firearms, or go for top notch? Finally, you shouldn't assume the unlisted arms were never traced to their origin. The number used to reach the ridiculous 90% figure are weapons reported to the BATFE. There's no point in reporting a Mexican Army rifle to an American agency for tracing. Mexican diplomats have stated that only guns likely to have come from the USA are reported for tracing by BATFE. Mexico is capable of tracking their own internally, and may liase with other countries the same way they do with us. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*

Muff beat me to it, but I wanted to ask the question very clearly. Why is it that so many seem to think that either the government must do it or no one will? By your own example you imply that the government must take care of everything or it will all go to hell in a handbasket. witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1*