ITT: Cam gets destroyed like always.

So boring.

Actually, that never happened. You didn't even make an argument.

I wonder if it's possible to get high off of hemp paper

Hemp only has 3% the THC as the average cannabis plant, and in the case of the United States ridiculous laws require it to be .3% You'd feel completely awful long before you ever got any kind of a high.

Guess what? People have children. Not having them in seat belts will result in them dying. That's why those laws exist. I know it better than you do because all you do is cherry pick it and have no understanding interpretations from the Constitution made by the courts. Actually, their thoughts ARE relevant because how can somebody determine if their life is in danger without thinking? Reaching for something can lead a person to think a gun is going to be pulled and thus puling out your weapon to anticipate a possible gun is what you do. They did have probable cause because not wearing a seat belt IS probable cause that a crime is being committed. Seat belt laws are not illegal because they are laws and passed legally; it's a direct contradiction that a law is illegal. Anything that's stated in a state's code/law book is illegal and if it's not in it then it's perfectly legal

Those quotes for one have no relation to a seat belt law and secondly, the Constitution is the law, not what Jefferson says

Continue to make incoherent response due to your botched lobotomy and low Halo Wars K/D, homo sapein

Not wearing a seatbelt doesn't cause deaths, accidents do. You're still able to die in them regardless. You don't hinder responsible people because bad people exist, otherwise everyone right now should always wear a big plastic bubble. What, you don't make your children do that?! YOU MONSTER! It's obvious you're the only one not understanding the Constitution as you're supporting clear violations of it. You may want to read it several hundred times more. You can determine your life is in danger if you actually see it is being threatened. Someone turning around to grab something is no threat to your life, if you see them turn around with a weapon and have them tell you they're going to harm you it is. At that point the man had every right to defend himself against the police. You absolutely do NOT point a firearm at someone that has done nothing wrong. I would not only lose my job as an armed guard had I done something that stupid, but I would have been fined and jailed as these cops should be. They had no probable cause, not wearing a seat belt is none of their business. Not all laws are legal, seat belt laws are proof of that. No one has the authority to infringe upon free people. Natural rights and freedoms trump any criminal law that never had the authority to exist. Again, read the Bill of Rights which recognize this.

Quote from: Camnator on October 07, 2014, 05:43:15 PM

But taxation IS theft.

Deontic morality is a joke. If you can empirically show me that no taxation would be consequentially superior to the current paradigm then fair enough, but until then taxation remains justified.

Quote

And what's wrong with a free-market?

Nothing, the market is actually quite amazing. The point is people who hold it up as an end in itself are stupid. (Again, deontic morality). If the market was consequentially devastating, nobody could seriously advocate it.

Quote

The State is the reason it's a mess right now by stifling competition which prevents any real advances. (this only applies to an informed society)

I don't disagree.

ook right before 1913. There are plenty of examples as to how taxation has harmed us. It's destroyed our economy, finances tyrants, pays for and encourages phony wars to spread fear and increase taxes even further and the insane amount of waste and almost no benefit that comes with it. It deprives people of money they desperately need and is criminal. Taking something that isn't yours is theft, you can't get more basic than that.

We're supposed to shape the market, not the government which often times makes it worse.

But taxation IS theft. And what's wrong with a free-market? The State is the reason it's a mess right now by stifling competition which prevents any real advances. (this only applies to an informed society)

HAHA! I just saw those pictures in the other thread. I freaking love those. Who keeps editing them? Is it Kyuun still? I wonder if he ever realized it's not me.

You can stay mad

Seat belt laws don't infringe on anything. In fact, not wearing a seat belt and dying infringes on the right to life. You're telling ME to refer to the Constitution? That's hilarious because I know it far better, and it's interpretations, better than you ever will. They actually did have authority to draw their weapons because they thought the man was reaching for a gun and said he was getting his ticket after reaching. And a traffic stop is probable cause; probable cause is the concept of having enough evidence to make a case for arrest. Not wearing a seat belt is illegal and the observation of a person not wearing it is probable cause to perform a traffic stop

I absolutely will. The problem is not enough people are outraged which is why these thugs keep getting away with murder.

They infringe upon our freedoms to do with our own bodies whatever we so choose. You have every right to take your own life and the government has no authority to prevent you. you obviously don't know much at all about the Constitution. I know the Constitution very well. They had no authority to threaten the man's family with their firearms. The man was NOT a threat, and that is the only time you can draw to defend yourself. Their thoughts are irrelevant. They had no probable cause of any crime. Seat belt laws are illegal and do not apply to free people.

"The policy of the American government is to leave their citizens free, neither restraining nor aiding them in their pursuits."

"A free people claim their rights as derived from the laws of nature, and not as the gift of their chief magistrate."
-Thomas Jefferson

Equally annoying.

Not wearing a seatbelt is a crime. Stop trying to cherry pick laws and what not. If it's true that the law in that place says people have to exit a car then the guy was not following directions, or the law, and also was reaching in the back of a car for something, so of course cops will draw their weapons. A traffic stop IS a probable cause and is a law violation; that lady is stupid

*waits for cam's crying*

No, it's not. The crime is the unjust law infringing upon freedoms. You absolutely SHOULD ignore unjust laws. He had no obligation to listen to criminals. Refer to the furth and fifth amendment to the Bill of Rights. They had no authority to draw their firearms and in doing so threatened his life which is a serious crime. The man clearly said he was getting his ticket. A traffic stop is probable cause of nothing, especially when the stop was phony. I have not cried in a long time. The only stupid people that day were the police. Seat belt laws are nothing more than a form of theft to generate revenue for the state.

All your "Cops" news threads would be merged into one giant thread, with a title of your choice. From then on in, any news you plan to post related to the subject of police would have to go in that thread.

I would need someone else to edit the titles? Or I could? If I can that sounds great.

It's actually 5 <.<

Perhaps a meta-thread would work well, and I don't mean the spam that was in the flood a little bit ago but a hub thread of sorts. Then you can post new articles in it without making too many OPs.

Alternatively you could spread them out a little more, Septy is somewhat correct in that things move slowly on here. I'm not saying button up by any means but we might need to find a balance >.>

We only just escaped Meta's Economics 101 here lol.

Actually I only see two. (TSA are not police)

I'm not sure what a "meta-thread" is, but I'm open to the idea.

Edit - No, it's 3.

I'm glad I never have to work again.

Problem is that what you think is just or unjust does not coincide with the reality of what virtually the entire community of legal experts think.

Can I get some examples? Many experts agree with me, and so did the framers of my country.

I've already showed how the data is unreliable and doesn't take many things into account. You trust everything the government says?

Quote from: Camnator on October 07, 2014, 04:17:12 PM

NOM? Never heard of it, but Norml is one of the best sources.

Factually incorrect.

Not at all.

Then what do you call this thread?

Spreading information on a crime.