Only in the good old USA part 2

[The Kraken]

Didn't know that cable TV and Hustler magazine were some of the things listed in the bill of rights.

 

[pt40fathoms]

It sure is refreshing to know that some constants in the world remain unchanged, for example;

No matter how effective a policy and practice is in deterring crime, the left wing crowd will find fault and claim that it violates the poor criminals rights.

No matter how heinous the crime, the criminal is also a poor victim of policies that denied him or her of a nurturing environment.

Any person who actively engages in activities that put criminals in a place or situation that, although not harmful to their person, can and will make them regret being caught committing the criminal act they committed. Is clearly violating SOME right of the criminal, who is after all only a victim of societies wrongs upon their person at some time in the past.

And finally.

The victim of crime is not any concern of the left wing, as they are most likely asking for it by being a productive member of society, having property, and not sharing what they have.

Yes sir Bob, it sure is refreshing to see that some constants in this world can be relied on to never change.

 

[Robert Phillips]

It sure is refreshing to know that some constants in the world remain unchanged, for example;

No matter how effective a policy and practice is in deterring crime, the left wing crowd will find fault and claim that it violates the poor criminals rights.

No matter how heinous the crime, the criminal is also a poor victim of policies that denied him or her of a nurturing environment.

Any person who actively engages in activities that put criminals in a place or situation that, although not harmful to their person, can and will make them regret being caught committing the criminal act they committed. Is clearly violating SOME right of the criminal, who is after all only a victim of societies wrongs upon their person at some time in the past.

And finally.

The victim of crime is not any concern of the left wing, as they are most likely asking for it by being a productive member of society, having property, and not sharing what they have.

Yes sir Bob, it sure is refreshing to see that some constants in this world can be relied on to never change.

Where in this post did you see anyone defending "SOME right of the criminal?" You might want to keep your politics out of the discussion, as it comes near to violating the TOS.
I cannot for, for the life of me, see how you could infer any of your statements from what was posted here except to state your political agenda.

 

[pt40fathoms]

Where in this post did you see anyone defending "SOME right of the criminal?" You might want to keep your politics out of the discussion, as it comes near to violating the TOS.
I cannot for, for the life of me, see how you could infer any of your statements from what was posted here except to state your political agenda.

Well, how about your first post on this subject for starters.

He also has no regard for the Constitutional rights of the American people. In his eyes everyone is breaking the law, he just needs a chance to catch them. If you are a fan of his you are no fan of the Bill of Rights.
Good luck to you and your buddy Sheriff Joe!

You called the criminals "American people", and although you most likely are correct about their nationality, I find it telling that you chose to avoid the term "criminal". We all know that by using the term "American people" you were also including the criminals he is in charge of, so why try and hide it?

Wrapping yourself in the constitution is your way of re-enforcing your political agenda here, now isn't it.

 

[pt40fathoms]

Didn't know that cable TV and Hustler magazine were some of the things listed in the bill of rights.

It's in the fine print, you have to look at it only on Wednesdays, during a full moon, only on months that have 31 days in it, and on that day only if a full solar eclipse is right over head. Other wise you can't see it.

Sheesh, you must have been sleeping during that lecture in civics class.

 

[Robert Phillips]

Well, how about your first post on this subject for starters.



You called the criminals "American people", and although you most likely are correct about their nationality, I find it telling that you chose to avoid the term "criminal". We all know that by using the term "American people" you were also including the criminals he is in charge of, so why try and hide it?

Wrapping yourself in the constitution is your way of re-enforcing your political agenda here, now isn't it.

No, you are completely wrong, Sir. That is all you inferring your own agenda from my statement. I was not reffering to criminals, that is why I did not say criminals. I said American people because I was reffering to the American people. Read my next post where I explain what American people I was reffering to. These would be any persons driving their vehicle through Maricopa County AZ on their way to Anywhere USA, being pulled over with no probable cause, and detained while their vehicles are searched illegally.
You were stating your political views, while I was stating facts about this persons political views.

Your last sentence was a nice try, but you're barking up the wrong tree.

Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.

 

[The Kraken]

There are three viewpoints of probable cause:

Viewpoint #1 - that of the arresting officer
Viewpoint #2 - that of the person being arrested or detianed
Viewpoint #3 - that of the judicial system that determines whether or not the arresting officer did, in fact, have "probable cause" to make the arrest or initiate the search.

I dare say that viewpoints numbers 1 and 2 will vary considerable due to a certain amount of predisposition inherent in each party.

Number three is the one that counts.

What percentage of criminals plead guilty?

 

[Robert Phillips]

There are three viewpoints of probable cause:

Viewpoint #1 - that of the arresting officer
Viewpoint #2 - that of the person being arrested or detianed
Viewpoint #3 - that of the judicial system that determines whether or not the arresting officer did, in fact, have "probable cause" to make the arrest or initiate the search.

I dare say that viewpoints numbers 1 and 2 will vary considerable due to a certain amount of predisposition inherent in each party.

Number three is the one that counts.

What percentage of criminals plead guilty?

The point that you are failing to see is that he wants to pull over EVERY VEHICLE that drives into his county. Not random searches, TOTAL searches. His idea was to set up checpoints on every read leading into Maricopa County and cunduct searches of every vehicle that entered. Do you see where I get my concern? I am sure most rational people would find this disturbing. Patting the guy on the back just for the jail issues is kind of like saying "What about all the good things Hilter did?"

 

[pt40fathoms]

I said American people because I was reffering to the American people. Read my next post where I explain what American people I was reffering to. These would be any persons driving their vehicle through Maricopa County AZ on their way to Anywhere USA, being pulled over with no probable cause, and detained while their vehicles are searched illegally.
You were stating your political views, while I was stating facts about this persons political views.

Interesting, however yours is the only source of information about this I have seen. Granted I have not taken the time to search this subject out. If your claim is correct, then you are right in pointing out the flaws in this persons beliefs with regards to actions he "would" take outside of his noted prison notoriety. However, sense we were talking exclusively about how he treats prisoners, I’m sure you can see how I made the connection of what you were saying and that very same subject matter. If this connection is indeed in error, I apologize.

Perhaps you could start another thread titled “Things wrong with Sheriff Joe Arpaio”.

I like what he is doing with regards to the prisoners, and he is not violating any rights by doing so or he would have been shut down long ago. As for any other claims of what he is thinking of doing, or would do if he had the chance. I’ll reserve any comments on that subject until he is quoted as saying what you claim he is rumored to be considering.

 

[cdiver2]

No, you are completely wrong, Sir. That is all you inferring your own agenda from my statement. I was not reffering to criminals, that is why I did not say criminals. I said American people because I was reffering to the American people. Read my next post where I explain what American people I was reffering to. These would be any persons driving their vehicle through Maricopa County AZ on their way to Anywhere USA, being pulled over with no probable cause, and detained while their vehicles are searched illegally.
You were stating your political views, while I was stating facts about this persons political views.

Your last sentence was a nice try, but you're barking up the wrong tree.

Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.

You keep talking about cars being stopped and searched without cause, there was nothing about this in my post. If you know more about this sheriff then please post, let us all know.