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.

 

The Supreme Court handed down a unanimous decision but, that's not good enough for Obama

page: 2
64
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 09:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Old American

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


So what would happen if a person walked outside and found the feds working on their car without a warrant?

According to the law they would have every right to use [non-lethal] force to protect their private property!

A few caps in the knee wont kill a man... there's my god damn loop hole in the law.

edit on 5-6-2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)


If I found someone intending to steal my property...it's a good thing I have Texas law to back me up. Not to mention that if you pull your weapon, and you aim for anything other than center mass, you could actually be imprisoned for reckless endangerment.

/TOA
edit on 5-6-2012 by The Old American because: (no reason given)


Well be careful with that and make sure it isnt a black kid or you will be called racist and thrown in jail. Just ask Zimmerman about that. The law seems to only work when Obama isn't involved.

But seriously. The problem with this mess is that the MSM is not going to inform the masses that this is going on so anyone that tries to tell the miss informed is going to get ignored because if people dont see it on the nightly news it didnt happen.




posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by FortAnthem


I wonder if this is a dry run for when the Court hands down its decision on Obamacare?

He may be testing the waters for an open act of defiance against the court in case they decide against his health care legislation. The Supreme Court is one of the last checks left in the system, if Obama can find a way to ignore their decisions and the public doesn't react too strongly, he could render them irrelevant, just like the Constitution.

He did promise to fundamentally change Amerika after all...



What you just said, worries me. The reason being is it fits obama. Whats bouncing around in my mind is, if obama does just what you laid out, then what will be in store for the coming election? obama doesn't come off to me as a gracious loser, so if the election doesn't seem to be going his way, then what? If he thumbs his nose at the highest court in the land then why would that change if the election doesn't seem to be going his way.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by FortAnthem


I wonder if this is a dry run for when the Court hands down its decision on Obamacare?

He may be testing the waters for an open act of defiance against the court in case they decide against his health care legislation. The Supreme Court is one of the last checks left in the system, if Obama can find a way to ignore their decisions and the public doesn't react too strongly, he could render them irrelevant, just like the Constitution.

He did promise to fundamentally change Amerika after all...
pretty much read my mind. this is getting way out of hand. i'm sick of seeing so many administrations, especially this one, wiping their @$$ with the constitution.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 10:10 AM
link   
This is one of those moments that make me feel extremely lucky that I don't reside in America. Great going Obama. Democracy at its best. /sarcasm



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 10:28 AM
link   
This is why I don't believe Obama is a Socialist, but rather a National Socialist. I'm just waiting for people to have to wear some type of marking, in replacement of the Star of David. This administration took all the evil the Bush administration was doing and amplified it by a factor of 10. Scary times we live in. But, hey, if he's "our guy", it's okay if he tramples on everyone's right...isn't that correct Dems?



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 10:35 AM
link   
I don't believe for a moment that the court did not know what they were doing when they didn't address this issue. When it suits them the court oversteps their bounds and addresses issues not at the heart of the case (like the campaign finance issue case that lead to Coporations being defined as indivduals.). If the court didn't address the GPS issue, you can bet they didn't want to. The Justice department is just using the path paved for them by the court and the mania we have been living in since 9/11.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 10:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3
This is why I don't believe Obama is a Socialist, but rather a National Socialist. I'm just waiting for people to have to wear some type of marking, in replacement of the Star of David. This administration took all the evil the Bush administration was doing and amplified it by a factor of 10. Scary times we live in. But, hey, if he's "our guy", it's okay if he tramples on everyone's right...isn't that correct Dems?


Yet another winner thread from the Obama obsessed fruitcakes among us. So far in this discussion about how one party is apealing a ruling from a court, (God forbid!), we have seen the thread morph into peoples opinions on Obamacare, the Zimmerman case, and of course the obligatory accusation of Obama being a Nazi, pretty pathetic.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 10:49 AM
link   
Here's John Wayne showin' how to tail a guy without using no wimpy lib'ral gps!

youtu.be...



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 10:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by FortAnthem


Talk about using some weaselly lawyer speak trying to wrangle their way around the clear ruling by the Supreme Court to get their way to further intrude upon the privacy of American citizens.


It wasn't a clear ruling. SCOTUS Blog has been pointing this out for a while now. The press made the ruling into a soundbite, but it didn't outright prohibit GPS trackers on cars, but rather prohibited a combination of circumstances.

Why Jones is still less of a pro-privacy decision than most thought (Conclusion slightly revised Jan. 31)
www.scotusblog.com...



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by stanats
 

Would you settle for Stalin? Mao? Any other dictator that completely ignores the will of the people and the country's highest court?



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 11:11 AM
link   
reply to post by stanats
 


I am pretty sure when talking about self defense laws regarding shooting someone the Zimmerman name might come up as relevant at the present time. Sorry if you didnt like it but I think it very relevant to the conversation at that point. And if you didn't catch the sarcasm in it you should re read it.

But either way this is just another slap in the face for the American People, The constitution and our Judicial System.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by FortAnthem


I wonder if this is a dry run for when the Court hands down its decision on Obamacare?

He may be testing the waters for an open act of defiance against the court in case they decide against his health care legislation. The Supreme Court is one of the last checks left in the system, if Obama can find a way to ignore their decisions and the public doesn't react too strongly, he could render them irrelevant, just like the Constitution.

He did promise to fundamentally change Amerika after all...


I believe you nailed it right there.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by SyphonX
This is all assuming that the authorities will even care if they are allowed to or not. The current "dragnet" is so absurd and terrifyingly large, that it has become it's own entity in the world. It will now govern itself and do as it sees fit, because why not.. is there a more powerful, more absurd, much larger terrifying phenomena that's going to stop it? No.

I do admire them for playing "make-believe, not-for-keepsies" games in court though.. it is at least imaginative and interesting.


Every person's phone is essentially a gps tracking device now, and can be listened to without a warrant. No one seems bothered by that idea.....

Obama bailed out GM which has their OnStar program. This not only allows anyone to pinpoint your location, but also can listen in to conversations, and even shut your car down at the push of a button....



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   
I have said it before and I will continue to say it.
Lawyers have ruined this country. In my opinion being a lawyer has become a sleazy profession unfortunately.

Baahhh...lawyers...I Spit in your general direction.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by havok
This is why the system is flawed.

Here is clear evidence of an administration that is over stepping its bounds.
Yet all we can do is write about it on a website.

Can we do more?

The question is...should we do more.


The admin oversteps its authority
scotus says no
appeals court checks
voila
This is called the system..its how it works..checks and balances.

what more needs to be done? the system seems like it is working fine...



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by randomname
first of all, a gps tracker doesn't tell you who is driving the car, so it is unreliable as evidence.

i also wonder what would happen if i clandestinely installed a gps tracker on obamas armored limo, since he see's nothing wrong with that.


edit on 4-6-2012 by randomname because: (no reason given)


Good point.

In a practical world, suppose one finds one of these devices attached to his own car. Clearly it's a foreign device, not part of the equipment you paid for, so what if one simply removes it and, rather than destroying it, simply returns it ti the owners by taking it down to the donut shop and reattaching it to any convenient vehicle with a light bar?

I mean, it's not YOUR property, so it would be wrong to keep it, and what's wrong with returning it to the rightful owners?

I wonder how long they would track "you" before realizing something wasn't just as they expected?



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   
I am noticing a subtle tone of aplogism coming from the Obama supporters in the room. Blaming the Supreme Court for the Obama Administrations extremely STUPID and SCARY statements is like blaming your chicken dinner for being so tasty and that's why you have to eat it.

The bottom line here is the Obama Administration could have taken a look at the Supreme Court statement and said while this isn't the clearest it's probably best to stop putting GPS on people's cars without warrants. Instead they blatantly crowed about a so called loophole and announced that they will continue to do this whether or not that's what the court's intent was.

This to me shows a basic lack of respect for not just the Supreme Court but also the American people it exists to protect from actions just such as this.

No amount of aplogism will change this. You can't point a finger at republicans and say well they did it too and make this go away. Afterall your party is supposed to be the morally superior party or at least that's what you guys tell us day in and day out on every thread under the sun.

So you can either face reality that your wonderboy, Obama, isn't nearly the straight shooting high integrity pinnacle of political society, Or you can keep apologizing for him as he slowly but surely strips our rights away.

Knowing democrats I'd say most likely you'll continue desperately trying to find any excuse for why what Obama is doing is somehow better than what an equivalent republican would do. THis is why while I'm not a card carrying member of either party i tend to respect Republicans much more. When Republican politicians act badly or do something shady REPUBLICANS are the first to admit it and lead the charge against the bad act or shady dealing. They don't just say well Democrats do worse stuff they instead say this isn't right ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING A REPUBLICAN DID IT IT NEEDS TO BE FIXED.

It's this fundamental difference in the supporters of the two parties that shocks me and makes me leery of anything to do with the democratic party time and time again.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 01:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by roguetechie

This to me shows a basic lack of respect for not just the Supreme Court but also the American people it exists to protect from actions just such as this.



As far as this particular case is concerned..patriot crap act allows warrantless wiretapping. This is nothing new, and its pretty obvious why if that is still in effect, why this would be considered unconstitutional...that train left the station many years ago.

As far as respecting the scotus...I stopped respecting them awhile back when they decided corporations are people and a host of other things were allowed for the total corporate takeover of the united states..courtesy of the scotus.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by roguetechie

It's this fundamental difference in the supporters of the two parties that shocks me and makes me leery of anything to do with the democratic party time and time again.




Absolutely right on the money.. And I might add to that in recent years when a Republican has been caught doing something shady or breaking the law they step aside, they resign and take whats coming to them. How many Dems have we seen lately hang around until someone forces them out. The Republican would be crucified for trying to hold their post but you have things like WienerGate and Fast and Furious and those guys stuck around and are still sticking around till the end. Even Bill Clinton never left office after being impeached. I know congress has to remove him. But a sliver of class would have made him step down. There is a difference in the respect level I give one direction and not the other and if your not completely party line loyal it is obvious.



posted on Jun, 5 2012 @ 01:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


So what would happen if a person walked outside and found the feds working on their car without a warrant?

According to the law they would have every right to use [non-lethal] force to protect their private property!

A few caps in the knee wont kill a man... there's my god damn loop hole in the law.

edit on 5-6-2012 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)


Citizen's arrest if your state allows it. Charge them with trespassing and conversion of property. If your state doesn't allow citizens arrest, detain them until lawful authorities arrive to take them into custody.

With no warrant and no "imminent threat" prior to their invasion to point to as justification, you have a case. A criminal case.

Before you "detain" them, make sure you search, disarm, and restrain them. Tell them it's for their own safety, and yours.



new topics

top topics



 
64
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join