Lakewood Ohio 4th of July Police State

Discussion in 'Politics' started by SiicKxShoTz, Jul 2, 2013.

  1. Boom.

     
  2. Like I said, batshit crazy
     
  3.  
    Cool, so in about 290 years the govt can same the same thing, so stop your bitching.
     
  4. It was the government who did it originally?

    What's your argument here? If they did it before they can do it again so don't complain about it?

    Ignorance is some scary shit.
     
  5.  
    You know what else is govt property, courts, white house, etc. you gonna say they cant legally search you before entering?  We already know you are not a  lawyer, and all of these opinions of yours are full of emotional beliefs and your "apparent" (I certainly could be wrong) hatred of the current system.  If you would like to see some legal basis from the fourth amendment:
     
    Smith Vs Maryland: 
    1. a person "has exhibited an actual (subjective) expectation of privacy"; (outcome does not apply to out in a park)\t
    2. society is prepared to recognize that this expectation is (objectively) reasonable.
     
    The court has also ruled:
    Similarly, "open fields" such as pastures, open water, and woods may be searched without a warrant, on the ground that conduct occurring therein would have no reasonable expectation of privacy.
     
  6. #26 mandrin13, Jul 5, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Jul 5, 2013
     
    Dont get pissy because I pointed out your hypocrisy, you are the one who said something along the lines of , but they took my land, and then bashed the govt.  Apparently its only a problem when it doesnt benefit you.
     
  7. #27 Deleted member 95373, Jul 5, 2013
    Last edited: Jul 5, 2013
    It's not getting pissy, I'm just telling you your statements were ignorant. I never said it wasn't a problem to begin with, I simply said that it's not something I'm concerned with.

    My point is the land they acquired and do upkeep on, they do it with my money, so for you to claim it as "THEIR" land which they are entitled to do what they please with is fallacious. Really if you follow my argument it goes like this, the government stole land from a native people, then stole my money to make it look nice, then told me what to do while I'm on it, claiming it was theirs, it's my assertion that it's not theirs.

    Also mind explaining in detail where my hypocrisy lies? I'm upset that the government is taking something that is not theirs and determining what happens on it, how is that opposed to the fact that the government took land from natives and then told them what to do on it?
     
  8. Just more proof the the terrorists have won.
     

Share This Page