I want to help

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on May, 2 2006 @ 07:04 AM
link   
Stay out there, stay vocal, write emails and keep up the good fight. It is what I try to do.

Want a good HAHA??

I just got slammed on another thread for tagging and building up points....Said that they now know what I do with my time instead of police work...LMAO





posted on May, 2 2006 @ 10:35 PM
link   
Lol poor guy.. At least you're doing what's right..

What do you think about this?

Do you know where it came from(i do, i was just wondering if you knew off the top of your head)?

SEC. 802. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM.

(a) DOMESTIC TERRORISM DEFINED- Section 2331 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) in paragraph (1)(B)(iii), by striking `by assassination or kidnapping' and inserting `by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping';

(2) in paragraph (3), by striking `and';

(3) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; and'; and

(4) by adding at the end the following:

`(5) the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that--

`(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;

`(B) appear to be intended--

`(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

`(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

`(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and

`(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.'.

(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Section 3077(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`(1) `act of terrorism' means an act of domestic or international terrorism as defined in section 2331;'.



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 10:37 PM
link   
and then you have...

SEC. 806. ASSETS OF TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS.

Section 981(a)(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting at the end the following:

`(G) All assets, foreign or domestic--

`(i) of any individual, entity, or organization engaged in planning or perpetrating any act of domestic or international terrorism (as defined in section 2331) against the United States, citizens or residents of the United States, or their property, and all assets, foreign or domestic, affording any person a source of influence over any such entity or organization;

`(ii) acquired or maintained by any person with the intent and for the purpose of supporting, planning, conducting, or concealing an act of domestic or international terrorism (as defined in section 2331) against the United States, citizens or residents of the United States, or their property; or

`(iii) derived from, involved in, or used or intended to be used to commit any act of domestic or international terrorism (as defined in section 2331) against the United States, citizens or residents of the United States, or their property.'.



So, if i speed (which is considered a state crime) I can be charged with terrorism and my car seized because it was used in the commission of domestic terrorism.

I love this country. I need to get dual citizenship so i have somewhere to fall back on heh.





[edit on 2-5-2006 by tsensel]



posted on May, 2 2006 @ 11:46 PM
link   
Police_Officer, something was mentioned earlier in this post concerning firearms. As a PO, where do you stand as far as private citizens owning firearms? Do you have a problem with it or do you think that there should be gun laws which bar private citizens from owning firearms? And what about felons who are pardoned for their crimes and then obtaining the restoration of their rights and be again allowed to own and buy firearms? From what I have read this has happened although I do not have the statistics of how often.



posted on May, 3 2006 @ 10:06 PM
link   
Thanks tsensel, I am looking that up, but what you have posted looks about right. So be careful out there speeding. LOL...You can drop my name if you want to..LOL

tracer...I am 100% in favor of the private ownership of firarms, with a valid criminal check/background.
I do believe however that there are those who have no business owning or possessing firearms as per their past behavior. Yet that is never a judgement call, should always be based on THEIR past behavior. Time people stood up and took responsibility for their actions.

If a felon is pardoned, it is my opinion that they still committed the act. So they have still exhibited the behavior that precludes ownership and should be banned. I have seen a lot of pardons and most are political in nature having little to do with complete rehabilitation.

Again this is just my opinion.




posted on May, 4 2006 @ 06:18 AM
link   
OK.tsensel..I'll bite..

It is the US code, specifically that concerning recent additions to the "language" involving terror??

What do you all think about the Mexican decision legalizing drugs??



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 01:36 PM
link   
The drug that I think they shouldn't legalize in no matter what amount is heroin. Give it a few years and we will have a bunch of illegals that are junkies telling us we need more methadone clinics. The bill also states that they are going to stiffen penalties for trafficking. Does that mean they will actually do something for once?



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 01:50 PM
link   
I don't see it.
They really are doing a lot. It is just that the problem is so very much bigger than anything we can throw at it.

Now with Mexico legalizing hard drugs, for all intents and purposes of this conversation, the job here will be that much harder.

I agree that Heroin is VERY VERY destructive, so is crack and also Meth.

But we have tried policing, didn't work, what next??



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 03:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by police_officer339
OK.tsensel..I'll bite..

It is the US code, specifically that concerning recent additions to the "language" involving terror??

What do you all think about the Mexican decision legalizing drugs??



Its the patriot act! =p

The second patriot act which wasnt passed says that if you're considered a terrorist. You can be given a 3 judge tribunal with no representation and then if they order so, they can put you to death.... And dont even have to tell anyone they executed you....

I don't have any feelings about the legalization of drugs at the moment. There is something they aren't telling us. I'm just not sure what it is at this point in time. Once i find out what that is, I'll start to build an opinion.

I think we could take a lesson off mexico in regards to their voting practices.

Meanwhile house passed a bill yesterday concerning price gauging... The problem is, the bill was introduced the day prior and even one of the reps. admitted "many of my constitutiants have NOT had time to read any of the bill".

If they don't know what it does.. Why did they pass it? It could be a bill that is designed to put RFID/GPS trackers in all of our cars and monitor our gas usage. Then they can arrest us for going over our consumption quota.. Or some happy horse crap like that.





[edit on 4-5-2006 by tsensel]



posted on May, 4 2006 @ 11:05 PM
link   
Well I certainly do not agree with a tribunal...too full of possible misuse

I agree also that there is a lot of something going on there in Mex. that we do not know about.

As for the legislature, do you think they ever read what they are passing?
I sincerely doubt it





new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join