XPost: or.politics, talk.politics.guns, az.politics   
   From: meso@mer.ica   
      
   On 5/2/2014 2:21 PM, RD Sandman wrote:   
   > Mayan Stonebird wrote in news:lk0tte$9jb$3@dont-email.me:   
   >   
   >> On 5/2/2014 1:31 PM, RD Sandman wrote:   
   >>> Mayan Stonebird wrote in news:lk0p1i$6ho$1@dont-   
   > email.me:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On 5/2/2014 12:34 PM, RD Sandman wrote:   
   >>>>> GOP_Decline_and_Fall wrote in   
   >>>>> news:b8o7m956diup0tq4hqoru5soaf10h155ht@4ax.com:   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2014 12:06:22 -0500, RD Sandman   
   >>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> GOP_Decline_and_Fall wrote in   
   >>>>>>> news:qkh7m9dlvhbua4ea45sg4rj35kd9rif9qd@4ax.com:   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>> On Fri, 02 May 2014 10:39:17 -0500, RD Sandman   
   >>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>> GOP_Decline_and_Fall wrote in   
   >>>>>>>>> news:mlp5m95066vuhm090qnhc7pnagev83pap5@4ax.com:   
   >>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 01 May 2014 18:17:05 -0500, RD Sandman   
   >>>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>> GOP_Decline_and_Fall wrote in   
   >>>>>>>>>>> news:mkj5m9tdgf5bv3ngpc5onhjev4fq355klf@4ax.com:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 01 May 2014 16:33:40 -0500, RD Sandman   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> GOP_Decline_and_Fall wrote in   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> news:gnc5m9tvp8vb6jkbkuoio1kl7ekdc7hjde@4ax.com:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 01 May 2014 13:02:17 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 01 May 2014 08:33:53 -0700, GOP_Decline_and_Fall   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 01 May 2014 07:56:16 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 01 May 2014 07:35:21 -0700, GOP_Decline_and_Fall   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, 01 May 2014 06:46:15 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 30 Apr 2014 18:53:44 +0000 (UTC), Baxter   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Democratic Representative Steven Horsford says people   
   >>> are   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> living in fear, under the constant presence of armed   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> militia groups.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [chuckle]   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, we're all petrified.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Armed gangs roaming the streets might not bother you   
   > but   
   >>> it   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does bother Bunkerville residents who want their town   
   >>> back.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LOL   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Did they take a vote?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> They certainly didn't take a vote in these creatures   
   >>> crawling   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> out of the woodwork and invading their community did   
   > they?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But you're OK with feds stopping and searching on lonely   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> highways miles from he border, right?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>> If there is reasonable suspicion of course.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> Just what do you consider "reasonable suspicion"? Driving a   
   >>> car   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>> while hispanic?   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Of course not.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> profiling is only allowed at the actual international border.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> The article you cited below states differently.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Border search exception   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Despite federal law allowing certain federal agents to   
   > conduct   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> suspicionless search and seizures within 100 miles of the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> border,[5] the Supreme Court has clearly and repeatedly   
   >>> confirmed   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> that the border search exception applies only at   
   > international   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> borders and their functional equivalent (such as   
   > international   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> airports).[4]   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers, U.S.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Immigration and Customs Enforcement Special Agents, and U.S.   
   >>>>> Coast   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Guard officers (E4 grade and above) who are all customs   
   >>> officers   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> (those tasked with enforcing Title 19 of the United States   
   >>> Code)   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, are permitted   
   > to   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> search travelers and their belongings at the American border   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> without probable cause or a warrant.[6]   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Pursuant to this authority, customs officers may generally   
   >>> stop   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> and   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> search the property of any traveler entering or exiting the   
   >>>>> United   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> States at random, or even based largely on ethnic profiles.   
   > [7]   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, addressing a challenge   
   > to   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Customs' authority to search electronic files in United   
   > States   
   >>> v.   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Ickes, held that there is no First Amendment exception to the   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> border search doctrine for expressive materials .[11] The   
   > Court   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> based its finding in part on the demands of protecting the   
   >>> nation   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> from terrorist threats that may cross the American border in   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> expressive materials.[12] in its analysis, the Court stated:   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> The border search doctrine is justified by the   
   >>> longstanding   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> right   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> of the sovereign to protect itself. Particularly in today's   
   >>>>> world,   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> national security interests may require uncovering terrorist   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> communications, which are inherently “expressive.” Following   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Ickes's logic would create a sanctuary at the border for all   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> expressive material-even for terrorist plans. This would   
   >>>>> undermine   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> the compelling reasons that lie at the very heart of the   
   > border   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> search doctrine."[   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> The Supreme Court expressly did not rule what level of   
   >>> suspicion   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> would be necessary for a strip, body-cavity, or involuntary   
   > x-   
   >>> ray   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> search,[21] though they did say that the only two standards   
   > for   
   >>>>>>>>>>>> Fourth Amendment purposes short of a warrant were "reasonable   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   
|