Angry scenes as hundreds of anti-Muslim protesters at 'March Against Sharia' rallies in 28 cities , page 2

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 09:33 PM

link

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: EternalShadow

Inland border checkpoints?

You mean DWI checkpoints? If so the US Supreme Court ruled they are lawful provided certain conditions, which are required, are met. If you are referring to border crossings they fall under the border search exception to he 4th amendment since it is not dealing with an individuals rights but the rights of a sovereign nation to screen people wishing to enter. If you are referring to checkpoints / border patrol stop away from the border the US Supreme Court ruled they must comply with the 4th amendment just as if they were all other law enforcement - reasonable suspicion to stop and probable cause to arrest / search.

Oh yeah? Where's the 4th Amendment when around the Fourth of July anyone "crossing" from Nevada or Arizona to California is FORCIBLY searched for illegal fireworks??

Probable cause is what?

Xcathdra

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 09:34 PM

link

originally posted by: EternalShadow

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: EternalShadow

Inland border checkpoints?

You mean DWI checkpoints? If so the US Supreme Court ruled they are lawful provided certain conditions, which are required, are met. If you are referring to border crossings they fall under the border search exception to he 4th amendment since it is not dealing with an individuals rights but the rights of a sovereign nation to screen people wishing to enter. If you are referring to checkpoints / border patrol stop away from the border the US Supreme Court ruled they must comply with the 4th amendment just as if they were all other law enforcement - reasonable suspicion to stop and probable cause to arrest / search.

Oh yeah? Where's the 4th Amendment when around the Fourth of July anyone "crossing" from Nevada or Arizona to California is FORCIBLY searched for illegal fireworks??

Probable cause is what?

Feel free to cite your source for that please. The only way they can be confiscated is if the person is lawfully stopped and is in violation of the law by their possession.

BubbaJoe

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 09:34 PM

link

originally posted by: Kalixi

originally posted by: mekhanics
a reply to: Violater1

Sharia Laws only applies to Believers. You dummy.

Interesting point you make. Major problem is if you grow up in a fundamental Muslim household in the US and are gay, or you want to leave Islam in favour of Atheism or another religion...

England has long had Sharia Law Courts run out of Mosques for close to a decade under the guise of facilitating divorce within the Islamic community. It's come to light that illegal punishments have been taken place such as whippings for drinking alcohol and premarital sex and a mock "stoning" for a teen accused of sodomy - he survived but it was used as a warning if he engaged in gay activities again. These punishments are completely unacceptable in a Modern Western society such as the UK but it still happens. You cannot have one law for Muslims that's in direct opposition to the overall countries laws. Thus where the problem of Sharia in Western societies lies.

Please supply a source for the existence of these Sharia Law courts.

BubbaJoe

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 09:42 PM

link

originally posted by: sled735
I don't understand why people are bothering to march for Sharia Law when it is not allowed in this country, per our constitution.

Can anyone answer this for me?

No one is marching for Sharia law, they are marching against hate.

EternalShadow

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 09:42 PM

link

This from 2016:

"We come in and out of California, and this is the first time they've ever asked us to open the trailer,” said Henry Haurand, a native of Salt Lake City who regularly comes through California.[/]

ifox40.com...

Like I said....a lack of knowing ones rights and exercising them effectively.

The net full of videos showing people exercising their right and being thrown into secondary inspection where they are FORCIBLY made to comply or risk seasure and arrest.

Yeah.... the whole guilty before innocence scenario..

That's constitutional??

edit on E30America/ChicagoSat, 10 Jun 2017 21:56:08 -05006pmSaturdayth09pm by EternalShadow because: add/correction

BubbaJoe

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 09:55 PM
link

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: EternalShadow

Inland border checkpoints?

You mean DWI checkpoints? If so the US Supreme Court ruled they are lawful provided certain conditions, which are required, are met. If you are referring to border crossings they fall under the border search exception to he 4th amendment since it is not dealing with an individuals rights but the rights of a sovereign nation to screen people wishing to enter. If you are referring to checkpoints / border patrol stop away from the border the US Supreme Court ruled they must comply with the 4th amendment just as if they were all other law enforcement - reasonable suspicion to stop and probable cause to arrest / search.

No driving from Denver to Santa Fe, north to south, was stopped and searched. Our Constitution is being eroded.

EternalShadow

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 09:57 PM
link

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: EternalShadow

Inland border checkpoints?

You mean DWI checkpoints? If so the US Supreme Court ruled they are lawful provided certain conditions, which are required, are met. If you are referring to border crossings they fall under the border search exception to he 4th amendment since it is not dealing with an individuals rights but the rights of a sovereign nation to screen people wishing to enter. If you are referring to checkpoints / border patrol stop away from the border the US Supreme Court ruled they must comply with the 4th amendment just as if they were all other law enforcement - reasonable suspicion to stop and probable cause to arrest / search.

No driving from Denver to Santa Fe, north to south, was stopped and searched. Our Constitution is being eroded.

Xcathdra

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 10:01 PM
link

originally posted by: EternalShadow
This from 2016:

"We come in and out of California, and this is the first time they've ever asked us to open the trailer,” said Henry Haurand, a native of Salt Lake City who regularly comes through California.[/]

ifox40.com...

Like I said....a lack of knowing ones rights and exercising them effectively.

This can go either way... If Law Enforcement asked them to search and they gave consent then the search is lawful. If they are asked if they have fruit or fireworks then action can be taken then as well.

If, on the other hand, they are told them their vehicle was going to be searched over their objections, with negative responses to having fruit or fireworks, then it would be unlawful. I am not entirely sure where CA gets the idea that a fruit checkpoint can be expanded into other areas.

If you are caught with fireworks you are cited and can face a fine. The courts would be a good place to start to challenge the validity of California Border Protection Stations when they are acting outside their mandate under the California Department of Food and Agriculture.

Xcathdra

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 10:01 PM
link

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: EternalShadow

Inland border checkpoints?

You mean DWI checkpoints? If so the US Supreme Court ruled they are lawful provided certain conditions, which are required, are met. If you are referring to border crossings they fall under the border search exception to he 4th amendment since it is not dealing with an individuals rights but the rights of a sovereign nation to screen people wishing to enter. If you are referring to checkpoints / border patrol stop away from the border the US Supreme Court ruled they must comply with the 4th amendment just as if they were all other law enforcement - reasonable suspicion to stop and probable cause to arrest / search.

No driving from Denver to Santa Fe, north to south, was stopped and searched. Our Constitution is being eroded.

How about adding some more info for proper context.

BubbaJoe

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 10:01 PM
link

originally posted by: EternalShadow
This from 2016:

"We come in and out of California, and this is the first time they've ever asked us to open the trailer,” said Henry Haurand, a native of Salt Lake City who regularly comes through California.[/]

ifox40.com...

Like I said....a lack of knowing ones rights and exercising them effectively.

The net full of videos showing people exercising their right and being thrown into secondary inspection where they are FORCIBLY made to comply or risk seasure and arrest.

Yeah.... the whole guilty before innocence scenario..

That's constitutional??

We all have rights, but traveling on a public highway, they be somewhat deminished.

Xcathdra

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 10:03 PM
link

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: EternalShadow
This from 2016:

"We come in and out of California, and this is the first time they've ever asked us to open the trailer,” said Henry Haurand, a native of Salt Lake City who regularly comes through California.[/]

ifox40.com...

Like I said....a lack of knowing ones rights and exercising them effectively.

The net full of videos showing people exercising their right and being thrown into secondary inspection where they are FORCIBLY made to comply or risk seasure and arrest.

Yeah.... the whole guilty before innocence scenario..

That's constitutional??

We all have rights, but traveling on a public highway, they be somewhat deminished.

Motor vehicles have a lesser protection than a persons house under the 4th.

BubbaJoe

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 10:03 PM
link

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: EternalShadow

Inland border checkpoints?

You mean DWI checkpoints? If so the US Supreme Court ruled they are lawful provided certain conditions, which are required, are met. If you are referring to border crossings they fall under the border search exception to he 4th amendment since it is not dealing with an individuals rights but the rights of a sovereign nation to screen people wishing to enter. If you are referring to checkpoints / border patrol stop away from the border the US Supreme Court ruled they must comply with the 4th amendment just as if they were all other law enforcement - reasonable suspicion to stop and probable cause to arrest / search.

No driving from Denver to Santa Fe, north to south, was stopped and searched. Our Constitution is being eroded.

How about adding some more info for proper context.

Rented RV, stopped and searched. How much more info do you need?

Xcathdra

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 10:06 PM
link

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: EternalShadow

Inland border checkpoints?

You mean DWI checkpoints? If so the US Supreme Court ruled they are lawful provided certain conditions, which are required, are met. If you are referring to border crossings they fall under the border search exception to he 4th amendment since it is not dealing with an individuals rights but the rights of a sovereign nation to screen people wishing to enter. If you are referring to checkpoints / border patrol stop away from the border the US Supreme Court ruled they must comply with the 4th amendment just as if they were all other law enforcement - reasonable suspicion to stop and probable cause to arrest / search.

No driving from Denver to Santa Fe, north to south, was stopped and searched. Our Constitution is being eroded.

How about adding some more info for proper context.

Rented RV, stopped and searched. How much more info do you need?

Why were you stopped and what was their reason they gave for the search? Was anyone arrested / cited?

BubbaJoe

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 10:07 PM
link

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: EternalShadow

Inland border checkpoints?

You mean DWI checkpoints? If so the US Supreme Court ruled they are lawful provided certain conditions, which are required, are met. If you are referring to border crossings they fall under the border search exception to he 4th amendment since it is not dealing with an individuals rights but the rights of a sovereign nation to screen people wishing to enter. If you are referring to checkpoints / border patrol stop away from the border the US Supreme Court ruled they must comply with the 4th amendment just as if they were all other law enforcement - reasonable suspicion to stop and probable cause to arrest / search.

No driving from Denver to Santa Fe, north to south, was stopped and searched. Our Constitution is being eroded.

How about adding some more info for proper context.

Rented RV, stopped and searched. How much more info do you need?

Why were you stopped and what was their reason they gave for the search? Was anyone arrested / cited?

Checkpoint, no we were free to go

BubbaJoe

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 10:10 PM
link

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: EternalShadow

Inland border checkpoints?

You mean DWI checkpoints? If so the US Supreme Court ruled they are lawful provided certain conditions, which are required, are met. If you are referring to border crossings they fall under the border search exception to he 4th amendment since it is not dealing with an individuals rights but the rights of a sovereign nation to screen people wishing to enter. If you are referring to checkpoints / border patrol stop away from the border the US Supreme Court ruled they must comply with the 4th amendment just as if they were all other law enforcement - reasonable suspicion to stop and probable cause to arrest / search.

No driving from Denver to Santa Fe, north to south, was stopped and searched. Our Constitution is being eroded.

How about adding some more info for proper context.

Rented RV, stopped and searched. How much more info do you need?

Why were you stopped and what was their reason they gave for the search? Was anyone arrested / cited?

Checkpoint, no we were free to go

Their reason was illegal aliens, this was in the 90's, thing that blew my mind, I was North to South, was anyone checking south to north?

Xcathdra

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 10:10 PM
link

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: EternalShadow

Inland border checkpoints?

You mean DWI checkpoints? If so the US Supreme Court ruled they are lawful provided certain conditions, which are required, are met. If you are referring to border crossings they fall under the border search exception to he 4th amendment since it is not dealing with an individuals rights but the rights of a sovereign nation to screen people wishing to enter. If you are referring to checkpoints / border patrol stop away from the border the US Supreme Court ruled they must comply with the 4th amendment just as if they were all other law enforcement - reasonable suspicion to stop and probable cause to arrest / search.

No driving from Denver to Santa Fe, north to south, was stopped and searched. Our Constitution is being eroded.

How about adding some more info for proper context.

Rented RV, stopped and searched. How much more info do you need?

Why were you stopped and what was their reason they gave for the search? Was anyone arrested / cited?

Checkpoint, no we were free to go

Not buying it. I have seen too many people scream their rights were violated when in actuality the person doesnt know the law. I have also seen people try to claim a law is unlawful and therefore doesnt apply to them. That bs doesnt work either.
edit on 10-6-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

EternalShadow

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 10:10 PM
link

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: EternalShadow
This from 2016:

"We come in and out of California, and this is the first time they've ever asked us to open the trailer,” said Henry Haurand, a native of Salt Lake City who regularly comes through California.

ifox40.com...

Like I said....a lack of knowing ones rights and exercising them effectively.

The net full of videos showing people exercising their right and being thrown into secondary inspection where they are FORCIBLY made to comply or risk seasure and arrest.

Yeah.... the whole guilty before innocence scenario..

That's constitutional??

We all have rights, but traveling on a public highway, they be somewhat deminished.

Motor vehicles have a lesser protection than a persons house under the 4th.

REALLY???? I don't recall the 4th specifically distinguishing the two.....hmmm

EternalShadow

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 10:14 PM
link

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: EternalShadow

Inland border checkpoints?

You mean DWI checkpoints? If so the US Supreme Court ruled they are lawful provided certain conditions, which are required, are met. If you are referring to border crossings they fall under the border search exception to he 4th amendment since it is not dealing with an individuals rights but the rights of a sovereign nation to screen people wishing to enter. If you are referring to checkpoints / border patrol stop away from the border the US Supreme Court ruled they must comply with the 4th amendment just as if they were all other law enforcement - reasonable suspicion to stop and probable cause to arrest / search.

No driving from Denver to Santa Fe, north to south, was stopped and searched. Our Constitution is being eroded.

How about adding some more info for proper context.

Rented RV, stopped and searched. How much more info do you need?

Why were you stopped and what was their reason they gave for the search? Was anyone arrested / cited?

Checkpoint, no we were free to go

Not buying it. I have seen too many people scream their rights were violated when in actuality the person doesnt know the law. I have also seen people try to claim a law is unlawful and therefore doesnt apply to them. That bs doesnt work either.

Actually it does. You are merely trying reinforce a policy and not law.

BubbaJoe

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 10:15 PM
link

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: EternalShadow

Inland border checkpoints?

You mean DWI checkpoints? If so the US Supreme Court ruled they are lawful provided certain conditions, which are required, are met. If you are referring to border crossings they fall under the border search exception to he 4th amendment since it is not dealing with an individuals rights but the rights of a sovereign nation to screen people wishing to enter. If you are referring to checkpoints / border patrol stop away from the border the US Supreme Court ruled they must comply with the 4th amendment just as if they were all other law enforcement - reasonable suspicion to stop and probable cause to arrest / search.

No driving from Denver to Santa Fe, north to south, was stopped and searched. Our Constitution is being eroded.

How about adding some more info for proper context.

Rented RV, stopped and searched. How much more info do you need?

Why were you stopped and what was their reason they gave for the search? Was anyone arrested / cited?

Checkpoint, no we were free to go

Not buying it. I have seen too many people scream their rights were violated when in actuality the person doesnt know the law. I have also seen people try to claim a law is unlawful and therefore doesnt apply to them. That bs doesnt work either.

I never claimed my rights were violated, you have a really good imagination, which tells me a whole lot about your personality, you need to seek some help.

Xcathdra

posted on Jun, 10 2017 @ 10:19 PM
link

originally posted by: EternalShadow

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: BubbaJoe

originally posted by: EternalShadow
This from 2016:

"We come in and out of California, and this is the first time they've ever asked us to open the trailer,” said Henry Haurand, a native of Salt Lake City who regularly comes through California.

ifox40.com...

Like I said....a lack of knowing ones rights and exercising them effectively.

The net full of videos showing people exercising their right and being thrown into secondary inspection where they are FORCIBLY made to comply or risk seasure and arrest.

Yeah.... the whole guilty before innocence scenario..

That's constitutional??

We all have rights, but traveling on a public highway, they be somewhat deminished.

Motor vehicles have a lesser protection than a persons house under the 4th.

REALLY???? I don't recall the 4th specifically distinguishing the two.....hmmm

I dont recall the 4th amendment specifically stating motor vehicles. Secondly driving is a privilege and not a right. The initial scotus ruling is Carrol vs. US, which created the exceptions. Motor homes are also an exception but only while in motion.

Reasonable suspicion is needed to perform a traffic stop. Absent the officer requesting and being granted consent to search, probable cause is needed IE - search incident to arrest, contraband in plain sight, etc.

with this said my apologies to the op for derailing the thread. If you want to start a new thread or work this topic into the op topic we can.