Er, how's the Fourth Amendment going with ICE raids?The phrase was “without reasonable suspicion.” Ergo, WARRANTLESS suspicion, assault rifle over his shoulder or not!
Nope. It only takes one to ensnare you, or me, or Joe Bloggs down the street. Now, it’s on YOU to get yourself out of the snare.
It’s not even the person, although one might be easily swayed into it by the extraordinary powers vested in them, but the words that allow it.
I’m talking about warrantless search, without reasonable suspicion of specific crime, then going on a fishing exhibition.
In America, I have 1A, Freedom of Speech, 4A, Security against unreasonable search and seizure, and 5A, No self incrimination (which reading my phone or listening to my voice memos might do).
I cherish those rights and feel bad you don’t have them in Britain. The State is becoming all encompassing and oppressive…to some.
It really isn't,you're choosing to make it about party politics,you seem unable to separate you're own bigotry from the discussion of the erosion of individuals rights and freedoms.
Theres hundreds of videos online of police knocking on people's doors cos someone was called a fat bastard or whatever,it's bollocks.
The fact you've not been visited obviously means it not happening doesn't it.
.
Theres hundreds of videos online of police knocking on people's doors cos someone was called a fat bastard or whatever,it's bollocks.
Cheers pal no offense takenHahah , so gullible. You fat bastard.
For someone I have never heard of, or interacted with, you’re awfully strident about my posts.So if we ALL start ignoring your shite, Will you fade away, or will you create a new username and crack on again?
I understand that, in many areas, technology is often running faster than the laws can keep up with, but words are just words.The online world has made the concept of freedom of speech a lot more complex, at the same time some people are trying to over simplify it for their own benefit, particularly certain individuals in the US (I don’t mean you there!).
No problem.That's a good post, but I won't digress into the constitutional differences of our respective countries, what I will confidently state is that this arsehole hasn't been unfairly treated.
That’s not the point, though, is it. We have a President who is trying to financially and reputationally harm his Enemies List by dragging them through the courts and costing them a fortune to defend themselves, while he uses taxpayer money and his phalanx of lawyers (inept though they may be!) to do it and his social media platform to denigrate and besmirch their good names. But, no harm, eh?!Of course, if we are caught in a snare, it is incumbent on ourselves to get out of the snare; but I will echo the ID card thread, if you have no wrongdoing to hide, it's easy enough to get out of the snare.
I’m not even asserting it’s being wrongly used, but that its existence is an existential threat to the freedoms we should all enjoy.You need to ask yourself how many other stories you have read about schedule 7 being used at all, nevermind gratuitously; then recognise who is being accused in this particular instance. Boy crying wolf springs to mind. Again, do a quick Google search; I'm no lawyer, but reading the fine print it's hard to discern any unlawful aspect, in this instance, of this sub-section being invoked.
Not yet, but the groundwork is being laid for when Labour implodes.I don't think the country has become an oppressive dystopia, even though people like Tommy Robinson want us to think it has.
And, who will be arrested and charged with battery?Rather like telling someone their wife is an ugly whore. I mean that's free speech, maybe opinion, but if you go there you'll likely get a punch in the gob.
We’ll see what the Courts have to say, but I’d say the entire Constitution is up for grabs when the President (and his minion) claims Plenary Authority, talks of the “enemy within,” and asserts we have ongoing “war” in some (always Blue!) cities!Er, how's the Fourth Amendment going with ICE raids?
Sounds good to me!The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Probably the perfect response, I’d say. Bravo.For someone I have never heard of, or interacted with, you’re awfully strident about my posts.
Why would I ever feel the need to leave because of you, or anyone? Isn’t that EXACTLY what I have been talking about?!
I have no need of a new username, Bridgy from West Didsbury, but please feel free to crawl back into your 1 message a week hole after ignoring all mine, if that’s your choice.
Offence.Cheers pal no offense taken
Offence.
There’s a couple of points I’d make about this. Firstly, anyone who wants to retain the distinctive nature of our language, I genuinely believe has a duty to be careful around this creeping Americanisation, which surely has to start with their own output.Offense.
Usual in American English. I only comment, not because I'm being a smart-arsed pedant, but because my own spelling, which used to be rock solid, has been unconsciously affected by American English on the one side — often without realising it, we're reading American English constantly, British journalists now use it without being particularly aware of the fact — and French (which I write in regularly) on the other.
Predictive text mate,it's a bit like Tommy Robinson a bit annoying but not that big a deal.Offence.
He’s definitely not that big!Predictive text mate,it's a bit like Tommy Robinson a bit annoying but not that big a deal.
All opinions are welcome, as it should be. However, if you are going to be a lurker, posting only once per week, then surely that post should be more considered and insightful than a petty squabble over nothing?Probably the perfect response, I’d say. Bravo.
I will try and get my weekly message ratio up, so we can converse without causing offence to you Blue from Chicago.
Freedom of speech - YesAnd, who will be arrested and charged with battery?
Violence cannot be the answer, which is why freedom of speech needs to be as absolute as our society can allow.