It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Court Rules Burning Pot Smell Does Not Justify Police Entry

page: 7
29
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Cop's excuse for the illegal search: "I had a whiff of marijuana when I first opened up the..."

www.jonesreport.com...




posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 11:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by souls
just by the fact that it comes from the white house is enough to dismiss it as unreliable. to many chances of suppression of real numbers, and real facts.


Let me guess you did not read it did you? It is easy to say what you did but as I said earlier I doubted most would read it because it disputes some of the disinformation made by advocates.


At least I did take time to watch the Google video titled Grass, not that I believed what they said but I did enjoy the segments with all the nekid girls


I do believe you were the one that posted that weren't YOu? Not that it is my business but have you read t/c lately?


[edit on 3/11/2007 by shots]



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 11:57 AM
link   
I think most of you guys are forgetting, that the decisions by the Justices WEREN'T one in which they wanted to hinder the police's jobs. Justices are there to make decisions based on the constitutionality of the situation and that's all - their opinions aren't SUPPOSED to get in the way of the decision.

True, more druggies might get away, but if that's the price we pay to secure our constitution, then very well be it.

I see this as a step forward in ensuring that our constitution isn't a "guideline" but rather the supreme law of the land.



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 12:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Matt_Mulder
Waow, the U.S. are going easy on drugs...haha. Keep aware, cause someday they'll send cops to check if your cooking is not too burnt !


Sometimes i wish they would! I'd still have a couple more cooking pots if they did!



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 12:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by simonmagus
Cop's excuse for the illegal search: "I had a whiff of marijuana when I first opened up the..."

www.jonesreport.com...





yep that's exactly what it is about. the police state abusing the power, militarize them, make them think "civilians" are sheep, or like i read somewhere "sheeple". "blah, they are just sheep, what is he gonna do, sue me!?" you don't need to smoke to be a "sheep", they can just as easily do it to you to. now think about it if they did it at your house and they found what is inside the middle drawer, by the bed. "I had a whiff of Marijuana when I first opened up the --"
to Utah



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by simonmagus
Cop's excuse for the illegal search: "I had a whiff of marijuana when I first opened up the..."


There ya go!

UNconstitutional

That is all that matters. ALL.



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by souls
just by the fact that it comes from the white house is enough to dismiss it as unreliable. to many chances of suppression of real numbers, and real facts.


Let me guess you did not read it did you? It is easy to say what you did but as I said earlier I doubted most would read it because it disputes some of the disinformation made by advocates.


At least I did take time to watch the Google video titled Grass, not that I believed what they said but I did enjoy the segments with all the nekid girls


I do believe you were the one that posted that weren't YOu? Not that it is my business but have you read t/c lately?


[edit on 3/11/2007 by shots]


yeah i read it, i did take a look at it. i considered it. you do not smoke, so you do not the know what really happens away from cameras. what we saw above is a perfect example of how laws can be bent for their own gain. coppers change details, they change facts. they are the ones that have their hands first in the jar. they take all the cookies and don't get caught. then when it gets to the courts and the D.A. the coppers have already established their case. and your out. yeah seems like a good way to get people who actually have guns, who are seriously committing crimes. but when they catch those guys, they use the excuse of smelling bud, but there is none. they get convicted for other crimes, not possession of marijuana. and if you had neither of both? what then? just shows you that they rather exploit the rights of some to catch others. that is where the information you provided, i cannot believe. an unreliable source and a corrupt system of enforcement. seems unconstitutional does in it? and t/c? what is t/c?



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
You roll your own cigarettes. A cop stops you for a traffic violation and sees a stub in your ashtray. It looks just like a roach.

Probable cause?


Of course not. Cops aren't allowed to stop you if they see you smoking something, because it is impossible to determine by sight alone that what you are smoking is illegal. They have always had to at least smell it in order to have probable cause, but this is no different than seeing, as someone's power of smell can be bad/off, or just "wanting" to smell something illegal. So either smoking should be made illegal in cars (would like to see them try that one), or they will have to have REAL probable cause to search you. IE drunken/bizarre behavior, a criminal record/warrants, reckless driving, or actual drugs in plain view.

If the police truly want to crack down on drugs, they should not be wasting their time with traffic stops because people *might be* smoking a joint. Why not put more security on the borders, create more drug task units to build actual cases against the big time smugglers and dealers, and build evidence against growhouses/meth labs (which is easy to do without needing to smell something)?

[edit on 11-3-2007 by Shoktek]



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by souls
and t/c? what is t/c?


You do not know what t/c is now that is rich you stated you had read and understood them when you first joined

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Or if you prefer you can find a copy on the bottom of this page 3rd from the left.

I also notice your profile states you are or at least you claim you are in San Diego yet you are using terms like copper not something an americzan normally uses kind of makes one wonder if you are just trolling to be honest.

Also your supporting the links that others post from Alex Jones also makes some of what you say suspect because Alex Jones is known to li or so some claim.

When you watched the video did you see or hear something out of the ordinary that makes the viedo very suspect? I did actually, I saw two immediately



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots

Originally posted by souls
and t/c? what is t/c?


You do not know what t/c is now that is rich you stated you had read and understood them when you first joined

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Or if you prefer you can find a copy on the bottom of this page 3rd from the left.

I also notice your profile states you are or at least you claim you are in San Diego yet you are using terms like copper not something an americzan normally uses kind of makes one wonder if you are just trolling to be honest.

Also your supporting the links that others post from Alex Jones also makes some of what you say suspect because Alex Jones is known to li or so some claim.

When you watched the video did you see or hear something out of the ordinary that makes the viedo very suspect? I did actually, I saw two immediately



man ohh man, i applaud you. you got me. im beat. ohh man, ohh man what am i gonna do. ohh god. ohh god ohh my god. ohh jesus christ! to be honest i know what terms and conditions are, and i knew when you used t/c what you meant. it was obvious you where trying to take it down this route. anyway, the reason i applied that video, was because it has a good handle on the history of marijuana, or at least if you want to say one view point. some of the posters where distorting the history so i though i might deny some of their ignorance. honestly though, i thought everyone here would be mature enough to view the video, and take it for what it is. i did not think people would try to use it as an excuse to bring to thread off topic and attack me, my location, and my use of words. yeah i say copper, so what? i use other words to describe them as well? what is the big deal. and if you really doubt im in san diego, why do you think i would want to hide something like that. there is no reason for me to be hiding. in fact, i'll give you my google earth coordinates if you want. call the cops and tell them you saw my house on google earth and you thought you smelled weed. then they can come in and bust me. ohh yeah so what is it that you saw wrong, don't leave me in suspense.



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by souls
yeah so what is it that you saw wrong, don't leave me in suspense.


I did not attack you in anyway I want to make tht clear.

It is so obvious most can see both items. Unless of course you have a closed mind. Alex Jones as I mentioned is known to lie or fabricate things



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 02:16 PM
link   
I have started to not care if pot is legal or not, I will smoke what ever plant I want regardless.

Concerning this ruling, now I can keep my windows open I guess...



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots
Alex Jones as I mentioned is known to lie or fabricate things


we ALL are...not necessarily on purpose (which is what i call LYING) but we certainly all do lie to ourselves without even realizing it....for various reasons.

Nevertheless, this does not prevent us from searching for the truth about anything...especially about ourselves.




posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 04:14 PM
link   
Let me throw this out there for everyone to "chew on"...

"A smell is subjective and personal in it's appearance"

Anyone can attest that someone in a group has smelled somthing that no one else seems to pick up on. We give quite a bit of free-range w/other's sense of smell, because we've all not noticed a smell that others have before.

Scents then can be used as an "excuse" by overzealous LEO's (law enforcement officers) that are "profiling" to gain entry, searches or whathave you in an attempt to find "any other incriminating evidence" even if it's not drug-related.

Scent is just to subjective my friends, the power of smell can be used to violate our right to privacy.



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 06:33 PM
link   
The answer to the drug war is simple. TAKE THE MONEY OUT OF THE DRUGS, AND THE VIOLENCE WILL STOP. All one has to do to verify this is to look at the history of prohibition. Once booze was legalized, all the mob and gang violence centered around illegal booze practically ceased.

Duh, it doesnt take a genius to figure out why they remain illegal in the first place, although there are many different reasons each backed by many powerful interests.

1 The government sells drugs. dont think so? go back and review what happened in iran-contra debacle. Dig a bit deeper and you will find that the illegal drug trade is the main reason our economy is still above water.

2 Police and law enforcement lobby -- just think of how many cops would actually be needed if there where no drug laws to enforce. just try thinking Mayburry and Andy Taylor because much of the violence cited in needing such a police force would have stopped.

3 prison industry -- Did you know that you can purchase publicly traded stock in prison industries?

Various other industries also have a vested interest in leaving existing drug laws they way they are, and infact were likely the reasons for these laws creation to begin with.

examples-- Did you know that one acre of hemp(does not require much if any water for growth, nor pesticides, and is nitrogen fixing) would produce as much paper as 3 ACRES!! of old growth forest? Thanks to the logging and paper industry

Hemp will produce a superior fabric to cotton and is much cheaper and easeier to grow. see above. growing hemp is a great deal less destructive to the environment than growing cotton is. Thank the textile and cotton industry.

hemp is truly the only plant which is able to produce a large amount of seed oil needed to curb oil and gas consumption. Bio-fuels are the future and industrial hemp will have to become legal and exploited in the near future.

This list can go on and on. I for one feel the police state that is america growing day by day, and I believe the state of utah has finally gotten something right. Dont forget that you are to be secure in your own home and papers, and without laws like this one passed in utah, what would stop the police state from simply knocking door to door in a large dragnet type operation.



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 06:41 PM
link   
further proof of what i stated above can be seen in the recent article about the safest places in the world to raise a child or to live. The US rated very poorly in almost all categories, in fact the US rated close to the worst of all industrialized nations. The Netherlands, which has legalized almost all drug use, rated #1 in both best place to live, and the best place to raise a child.



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Southcty
examples-- Did you know that one acre of hemp(does not require much if any water for growth, nor pesticides, and is nitrogen fixing) would produce as much paper as 3 ACRES!! of old growth forest? Thanks to the logging and paper industry

Hemp will produce a superior fabric to cotton and is much cheaper and easeier to grow. see above. growing hemp is a great deal less destructive to the environment than growing cotton is. Thank the textile and cotton industry.




Ah yes another attempt to throw the topic off.....



spoken like someone who supports pot. But that is not the topic of the thrad we are discussing the ruling made by the court.



[edit on 3/11/2007 by shots]



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 07:18 PM
link   
So is this topic about legalization, search and seizure, or police corruption?

If this ruling prevents more instances of police lying, and using an unverifiable excuse to invade someone's home to search for other criminal behavior then I think this ruling is the right thing. We can't just have police making stuff up, even if it means larger arrests.

If police are going to use this evidence to sniff out small amounts of marijuana, while doing nothing about the larger "drug war" that is actually consuming lives, then the issue should be about legalization of pot to allow the police to focus on real drugs, and leave the small stuff alone.

If this is about police smelling a bit of pot, then rummaging through an otherwise innocent person's home to find nothing but a small amount of marijuana, while disrupting the lives of everyone in the home, then this is a search and seizure issue, and we can't have this happening either.



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 07:18 PM
link   
you need to read the entire post. I no longer smoke and I am not necessarily pro pot. but i am definitely not for the growing police state that is the US and I am for sure against a bigger govt. I am also against violence and that would include all its causes and this would include the intrusive tactics of the police.



posted on Mar, 11 2007 @ 07:38 PM
link   
This thread has a lot of people admitting to the use of cannabis.
The IP addresses can be traced.
To the home address of the computer used to make these admissions.

The Admin, if I'm not mistaken, has a responsibility to report these claims
to the proper authorities, and make the IP addresses known.

This thread was started to discuss the viabiality of a police officer determining a search, due to an odor.

Thank you, to the users that admitted usage, on this thread.

I truly hope the Admin. does it's job.

Lex



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join