On Tour In America & It's A Police State. No Doubt About It.

reply to post by Brotherman


Yes, getting a judge to accept a pea agreement is usually just a formality. But in this case, the judge obviously saw a problem with the agreement. I don't know what that problem was, it could have been too much time or too little time. Or it may have been outside the sentencing guidelines and subject to being overturned on appeal. Or it could have been one of a dozen other reasons. If the plea is not accepted, the case is not determined. Unless there is a new plea agreement that is accepted by the judge, it goes back to trial and new evidence can be introduced as long as they meet the evidentiary rules for that court.

If you were a terrorist with half a brain, you wouldn't go to all the obvious places anymore anyways; if it's damage and chaos you want, you'd pick a mall (no security there yet, it would discourage shopping), or a college campus or any number of large office buildings.

All the 'see something, say something' paranoia is because word is out that there's a few handful of suitcase sized nukes in the US already, they don't know where they are, and they think they can find them by stereotyping anyone wearing a turban, paying cash, and looking nervous.

Sooner or later they'll be a real terrorist attack or another false flag and they'll take out a few blocks of some city near you and then the security noose will be tightened even more.

We'd all be better off without the Wall St. section of NYC and D.C. anyways. Set 'em adrift, secede them, whatever! Begone, Evil Kingdoms!

reply to post by Doc Gator


"Bonilla pleaded guilty Dec. 1, 2010, to third-degree murder and aggravated assault. He was sentenced to 20 to 43 years.

But last September, Charles overturned Bonilla's guilty plea, vacated his sentence and ordered he stand trial. In his ruling, Charles stated that he overturned Bonilla's guilty plea because his former defense attorney had misrepresented to him what sentence he would receive if he pleaded guilty."

Source

I wasnt under the impression judges could do that, Ive been a victim of over zealous officers of the law in this same town and have also had a pretty shady dealing with the court when pleading not guilty. I was not aware that a judge can just say you know what I dont think his guilty plea is good enough. I do not condone what the guy in this story did however I am not talking about his crimes I am speaking only of the legal process.


maybe you can explain this a bit better for me.

Originally posted by nightstalker78
reply to post by MRuss

 

Stop whining.That's all I'm getting from your post.It's not that big of a deal to me.There is a reason why there's so much security.It is not 1920 anymore.The world has changed and so has America.Really,if you don't like it either do one of two things.Find another job or move to another country.Also,do you really expect security not to be tight in our nations capital?REALLY?

edit on 10-4-2012 by nightstalker78 because: (no reason given)

Yeah...1920 was a hell of a lot more dangerous than 2012 is.

With any kind of luck you get tossed into the concentration camp on the first round, pal.

Those who can see these things for what they really are know that the police are being used to be the personal bodyguards of the bourgeoisie. The police act as a barrier to protect the rich from the poor, for the most part, although the rich that are being protected are the actual criminals. The police need to be protecting US, the regular citizens, from the politicians and corporate bourgeoisie, because they have done far more damage to us than we have done to them. Far, far worse. Like 1000 times worse.

Originally posted by nightstalker78
reply to post by MRuss

 

Stop whining.That's all I'm getting from your post.It's not that big of a deal to me.There is a reason why there's so much security.It is not 1920 anymore.The world has changed and so has America.Really,if you don't like it either do one of two things.Find another job or move to another country.Also,do you really expect security not to be tight in our nations capital?REALLY?

edit on 10-4-2012 by nightstalker78 because: (no reason given)

I couldn't even read the rest of the thread w/o replying... wow welcome to the gulag! Did you really just buy into, believe it completely, and spew the excrement that TPTB wanted you to?

The only folks that all the "measures" are protecting are the top 1% so that they can retain, or regain, control.

Nothing else. Open your eyes.

Derek

Originally posted by Brotherman
reply to post by Doc Gator

 

"Bonilla pleaded guilty Dec. 1, 2010, to third-degree murder and aggravated assault. He was sentenced to 20 to 43 years.

But last September, Charles overturned Bonilla's guilty plea, vacated his sentence and ordered he stand trial. In his ruling, Charles stated that he overturned Bonilla's guilty plea because his former defense attorney had misrepresented to him what sentence he would receive if he pleaded guilty."

Source

I wasnt under the impression judges could do that, Ive been a victim of over zealous officers of the law in this same town and have also had a pretty shady dealing with the court when pleading not guilty. I was not aware that a judge can just say you know what I dont think his guilty plea is good enough. I do not condone what the guy in this story did however I am not talking about his crimes I am speaking only of the legal process.


maybe you can explain this a bit better for me.

edit on 10-4-2012 by Brotherman because: (no reason given)

My guess is that it was an Appellate judge who did this. It's a pretty poorly written article.

The entire function of an Appellate Court is precisely to overturn or hold up previously established rulings.

With all the crazy gun laws America has, I for one would be glad for the extra security, if I ever visited.

Pretty sure I remember seeing images of security scanners at American schools prior 11 September.

Originally posted by Hawking
No problems out here in West Texas. People seem to do what they want, when they want.

I've been pulled over a couple times here and the cops are reasonable and fair when they could have really nailed me (may just be because I'm white though).


My advice: Get out of places like DC, NY, LA, SF, etc.

Same here. I'm in the D/FW area, and besides having to deal with a lot of people who don't get what the hell I'm talking about, they tolerate me and allow me to speak my mind. Doesn't mean I might not be getting an ass kicking eventually though, . Oh well

Originally posted by Brotherman
reply to post by Doc Gator

 

"Bonilla pleaded guilty Dec. 1, 2010, to third-degree murder and aggravated assault. He was sentenced to 20 to 43 years.

But last September, Charles overturned Bonilla's guilty plea, vacated his sentence and ordered he stand trial. In his ruling, Charles stated that he overturned Bonilla's guilty plea because his former defense attorney had misrepresented to him what sentence he would receive if he pleaded guilty."

Source

I wasnt under the impression judges could do that, Ive been a victim of over zealous officers of the law in this same town and have also had a pretty shady dealing with the court when pleading not guilty. I was not aware that a judge can just say you know what I dont think his guilty plea is good enough. I do not condone what the guy in this story did however I am not talking about his crimes I am speaking only of the legal process.


maybe you can explain this a bit better for me.

edit on 10-4-2012 by Brotherman because: (no reason given)

I'm speculating on this, but it looks like the judge felt that Bonilla's attorney low balled the amount of time that he would get in return for a guilty plea. My guess is that the attorney told him something like: "you will probably get 5 to 10 and be out in 7". So, he pleads guilty. When he shows up for sentencing, the judge gives him 20 to 43 which is probably the sentencing guideline for that particular crime. Now, I'm sure that Mr Bonilla is upset and says: "WTF that's not the agreement that I made". The judge vacates the plea (makes it like it never happened) and the case goes to trial.

In this case, the judge is acting in Mr Bonilla's best interests by allowing him to "remove" his plea because he didn't understand that he could get 20 to 43 years if he plead guilty.

Would you rather live free and die in a terrorist attack or live a long life devoid of freedom? I think a lot of Americans need to really ponder this question.

I think you need to ponder what "devoid of freedom" means. So many Americans are now spoiled to the point of incredulity. For them, freedom means "do whatever I want, whenever I want, no one better try to stop me." People don't give a damn to help their country - they just want their "freedoms." While in other countries, they decide the type of HAIRCUT you should have. You don't KNOW "lack of freedom."

As long as you stay within the bounds of the law, you can do pretty much any thing you please. Again - security measures at airports and national monuments, while annoying and quite possibly overdone, is in NO WAY a "police state." This entire thread is a huge pile of misinformation and fear-mongering.

Originally posted by Trublbrwing
reply to post by MRuss

 

Thank you for your inside perspective, and please, pay no attention to the hillbillies since they won't be getting on board until they come for the guns.

Uh, we hillbillies are on board and have been for awhile now. From where we stand we see that there has been a dramatic shift. The same people who cried and whined about GW Bush violating the freedoms of foreigners are the people today who are all too eager to hand America's freedoms over at the drop of a hat. Notice where these police states are starting... the USA's largest cities. Not a whole lot of hillbillies living in NYC. Conversely, not a whole lot of police state activity in Maybury RFD (yet).

yes america is becoming a police state and sadly some people cant run a proper police state cause some are actually good but if you guys cant even visit national icons or memorials anymore than that is sad.

Amerika- Rammstien:
youtu.be...

Originally posted by fleabit

Would you rather live free and die in a terrorist attack or live a long life devoid of freedom? I think a lot of Americans need to really ponder this question.

I think you need to ponder what "devoid of freedom" means. So many Americans are now spoiled to the point of incredulity. For them, freedom means "do whatever I want, whenever I want, no one better try to stop me." People don't give a damn to help their country - they just want their "freedoms." While in other countries, they decide the type of HAIRCUT you should have. You don't KNOW "lack of freedom."

Given enough time I'm sure everyone on this forum will be well acquainted with what a "lack of freedom" means. Heck maybe in a matter of months the government will be telling me I have to purchase health insurance or risk fines and when I don't pay the fines then what? Jail? So much for choice huh?

As long as you stay within the bounds of the law, you can do pretty much any thing you please.

... and those bounds just keep getting wider don't they ...

reply to post by fleabit


We all decide for ourselves what our perception of freedom is. When other people attempt to define those boundaries they have already infringed on our freedom and liberty.

Would you rather live free and die in a terrorist attack or live a long life devoid of freedom? I think a lot of Americans need to really ponder this question.

Well forgetting 9/11 because the jury is still out on that one can anyone here name just one friend or friend of a freind that was killed by an outside terrorist ................. come on just one ................. wot not one.

Now ask yourself how many of you have cancer or will have cancer or know of someone dieing of cancer.

The USA is spending 1000X more fighting these invisible terrorist than it is spending on cancer and millions die each year but i'm sure if you keep up killing muslims as they sleep in their beds that sooner or later you will get a few terrorists on US soil.

Terrorists no but you sure have a lot of terrocrats wanting to feel you balls or rub tits all over the USA at gun point and wonder why so few people from Europe come and visit you anymore.

Win a green flag, you must be frigging joking.

Originally posted by shadoseer
reply to post by pshea38

 

How would any of you feel if the tide was turned and another country, say China, came here and bombed the snot out of us killing innocent people, because there was some natural resource they wanted to get their hands on? We spend more then most of the rest of the world combined on our military, imprison a larger percentage of our people than China and have a lower standard of living than many others yet we like to say we are world leaders???

Hold that thought.

What makes you so sure that terrorists with box cutters initiated the now infamous battle of manhatten in 2001? What makes you so sure that your leaders did not buy off the real attackers by agreeing to thier back room demands, and then blame a convenient group as it was convenient to create a diversion that avoided a full scale REAL war with a country that had just demonstrated its resolve? The 9/11 truth movement was in my opinion a disinformation program crafted to create a false debate between those who bought the official story, and those who cry inside job. Anything but the truth.

I am not denying that the attack was used to restrict liberties and instill what is fast becoming a police state, however the source of it was possibly justification for such measures.

archive.newsmax.com...

reply to post by fleabit


I think all the laws are half the problem. Let's take the seat-belt law for example. Why is it a crime if I don't wear a seat-belt? I'm not harming anyone but myself (unless I go flying through someone's windshield). I consider crimes to be murder, robbery, assault, rape etc.

What about the government telling us what light bulbs we can buy? Haircuts are not immune either. "Everyone now needs to get the same haircut so we can easily identify foreigners who may be potential terrorist suspects"

When the government is free to do what they please without any outcry from the citizens the oppression will only get worse.

Going through scanner and security is not the definition of a police state. If you're basing your observations solely on a state that experienced a huge terrorist attack on 911 then I think that you're just being simplistic.

I would strongly encourage you to research the definition of police state.

Originally posted by MrSandman
Would you rather live free and die in a terrorist attack or live a long life devoid of freedom? I think a lot of Americans need to really ponder this question.

Personally, I'd rather live free.

A long life devoid of freedom just sounds like Hell.

Sure I'd be "safe", but at what cost?

Ponder this question, who really are the terrorists?