were my rights violated today???

Originally posted by smirkley
I recall being (wrongfully) accused for stealing something, by an adult while in high school,..

Back against the wall,... and being told to empty my pockets,...

I looked him in the eye and told him it will cost him $100 for me to do this,.. as a fee for my inconvenience. (that was big money to me then)

[edit on 22-11-2004 by smirkley]

i SHOULD have said: "that will be $100 for my inconvenience Mr. Q..."

i know what he will say after this: "Three-days detention"

i loved your post

Originally posted by ThEeNd
well if you went to a private school your rights were violated, but! if you go to a catholic , or private school you give up you right when you enter the school the school has the right to search you and your stuff. it sucks, but thats the price you pay to recieve a better education.

i go to a private catholic school...

that is a double whammy...

SkyChief, I'll be more than happy to answer your question as to why I should NOT simply allow a cop to search my car without probable cause or a search warrant - BECAUSE GOOD PEOPLE DIED TO SECURE THE RIGHTS GIVEN TO US BY GOD AND PROTECTED BY THE CONSTITUTION!

I'll not agree to a search simply for his convenience. As a matter of fact, this is one former cop who'll do nothing for their convenience, other than, if pulled over, stop my car with it at an angle where he has a better view of the driver side, turn my wheels sharply to the right, turn the engine off and turn the enterior light on. That is simply to give him a better feeling of security. After that, if he wants to search my car, he'd better have the knowledge that my car is actually the state's vehicle (You can tell if it is the state's property and not your if you have placed a license plate on it). If he doesn't know that, were doing it the constitutional way all the way, baby! Yeah!

As far as a child is concerned, as long asa you are not of age and still under the custody of your parents and the state, your rights are limited at school. Sorry.

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne

As far as a child is concerned, as long asa you are not of age and still under the custody of your parents and the state, your rights are limited at school. Sorry.

thanks but i am not a child

I think the main 2 things here would be your age and where you live, I only know of the Manx Laws and the British Laws... and as much as I know; he had the right to search you as he did, but not any further than he did, as long as your are under the age of 18, if you are over 18 you can call it invasion of privacy and refuse his search, and sue him if he does it by force.

You aren't? Are you under 18? Were you on a school bus? Are you Jethro Bodiun?

If you are under 18, you are a child, in general terms. Custodial language isn't worried about whether or not your sprouting fascial fuzz or realizing that Mr. Happy is dual purpose!

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
You aren't? Are you under 18? Were you on a school bus? Are you Jethro Bodiun?

If you are under 18, you are a child, in general terms. Custodial language isn't worried about whether or not your sprouting fascial fuzz or realizing that Mr. Happy is dual purpose!

i know

i liked that mr. happy joke

Yeah, Robin Williams came up with good stuff from time to time.

Those school contracts aren't worth the paper their printed on, it is a crime against the state to assault somebody, to touch someone without their consent is assault... If you refuse to be searched and you are susequently searched against your will you have been assaulted...pure and simple...

The situation is moot if stolen goods are found on your person as reasonable force is allowed to be used in the case of citizens arrest...a police officer is entitled to search you if you are under arrest or he has probable cause to beleive you have committed an offence.

Your parents cannot sign away your rights, they are not their rights to give...

Originally posted by Flange Gasket
Those school contracts aren't worth the paper their printed on, it is a crime against the state to assault somebody, to touch someone without their consent is assault... If you refuse to be searched and you are susequently searched against your will you have been assaulted...pure and simple...

The situation is moot if stolen goods are found on your person as reasonable force is allowed to be used in the case of citizens arrest...a police officer is entitled to search you if you are under arrest or he has probable cause to beleive you have committed an offence.

Your parents cannot sign away your rights, they are not their rights to give...

amen amen i say to you

Sorry, as long as you are in the custody of the adults, you are nothing but a mere slave, chattel property, and mostly, an expensive liability thatwe didn't think fully through before having you.

You want your rights violated, pal? You want to be a total subserviant slave? Get married! Until then shut your pie hole; you've got it made!!!!

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Sorry, as long as you are in the custody of the adults, you are nothing but a mere slave, chattel property, and mostly, an expensive liability thatwe didn't think fully through before having you.

You want your rights violated, pal? You want to be a total subserviant slave? Get married! Until then shut your pie hole; you've got it made!!!!

me???

please show some respect for your master...

anyway, getting married will make you a slave to the "butch" of the relationship...

you ARE right, but there is a good point and that is:

everyone should have the same rights has everyone else (or something like this)...

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
SkyChief, I'll be more than happy to answer your question as to why I should NOT simply allow a cop to search my car without probable cause or a search warrant - BECAUSE GOOD PEOPLE DIED TO SECURE THE RIGHTS GIVEN TO US BY GOD AND PROTECTED BY THE CONSTITUTION!

I'll not agree to a search simply for his convenience. As a matter of fact, this is one former cop who'll do nothing for their convenience, other than, if pulled over, stop my car with it at an angle where he has a better view of the driver side, turn my wheels sharply to the right, turn the engine off and turn the enterior light on. That is simply to give him a better feeling of security. After that, if he wants to search my car, he'd better have the knowledge that my car is actually the state's vehicle (You can tell if it is the state's property and not your if you have placed a license plate on it). If he doesn't know that, were doing it the constitutional way all the way, baby! Yeah!

As far as a child is concerned, as long asa you are not of age and still under the custody of your parents and the state, your rights are limited at school. Sorry.

You are right. I guess I went off on a rant there and didn't really think my post through. I'm definitley against letting anyone search your property without probable cause and a warrant. I do know that thousands have died to protect those rights so I should have made my point a little clearer. I guess what I was trying to say is that it always angers me when I see these instances of people putting up such a fight when they are pulled over. Sure it can be a major inconvience and frustrating if you feel you haven't done anything but you just need to keep your cool and get through the situation as quickly and calmly as possible. If you feel that you were wronged that's why we have the courts to sort out these problems. The side of a busy highway is not the time to argue with the officer as it will not get you anything. The problem is that when you are pulled over you have no idea if anything else is going on in the area. A silver honda Accord has just robbed a bank and fled the scene and guess what you happen to be driving a silver Accord. There is a good chance you are gonna be pulled over and maybe even be approched with guns partly drawn but do you blame them. The thing is though, if you cooperate then you are on your way shortly but if you act like an ass and put up an argument it just prolongs your and their agony. I'm not saying to just simply role over and let them do what they want but for Gods sake don't make the situation way worse than it needs to be.

I understand your point, Chief, but allow me to make a view points in reference to constitutional PEACE officers and police state POLICE officers.

A peace officer, as a cop should be, does not make contact with the citizenry on a lesser crime unless there is a warrant by another citizen against that citizen, with an affixed affidavit, and the warrant signed by a judge. They are not there to make us walk the line and be good little boys and girls. They are not there to stop me while I am travelling and ask to see my papers, snoop around my car and breathe into their hat at roadside spotchecks. I don't care if I'm unlucky enough to be one of the every third car or if they are unconstitutionally making contact with every car, they are still in the wrong.

The highway patrol is a game of revenue, plain and simple. When you are pulled over and ticketed for doing 78 in a 65 zone with light traffic around you, you know as well as I do that you are no threat to life and property, but you do have a wallet, and you will be digging into it because the officer cited you with a midameanor offense. Want to take it to court? Go ahead. You'll lose, obviously. Were you not speeding but got the ticket? Go ahead, take it to the judge - as if he wants to turn down the revenue you represent.

Understand, I am not throwing rocks at the cops; they are doing their job as trained. Understand, however, they are not given all the information they should have, as most of those guys, being good people, would not feel comfortable in shafting their fellow citizens.

Here is something that most citizens do not know, something that makes the above constitutional argument invalid.
WEre you travelling in your private means of conveyance, the UCC (Uniformed Traffic Code) would noty apply to you. You'd be a citizen who was simply excercising your right to travel. AS it is a right, you need no license.
License, Black's Law Dictionary: The permission by competent authority to do an act, which, without such permission, would be illegal, a tort, a trespassor otherwise not allowable.
Excerising a right obviously needs no license.

So why is "driving" a privilege? Because it is a commercial term, not a constitutional one. When you buy your brand new automobile, one of the first things you do is get it registered, like a good little servant, right? You purchase the tag and proudly bolt it unto the bumber of your shiny new ride. You've done two things when you bought and hung that tag. First, you gave the state your car, and they in turn redifined it. It is now a "motor vehicle". Motor vehicles must be "operated" IAW the UCC. Therefore, the second thing you did was entered their jurisdiction, and made yourself accountable to the UCC. Since it is now their motor vehicle, and it is their UCC, if you transgress you must pay the fine.

Have a good day, fellow servants. Don't gripe about them taking your rights anymore since you willingly give them up all day long!

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
I understand your point, Chief, but allow me to make a view points in reference to constitutional PEACE officers and police state POLICE officers....(The rest of the quote has been edited as it violates the lengthy quote policy.

very good point

anyway, is the fact that the bus driver would not let us out of the bus (im assuming) while there was no teacher on the bus, legal???

thanks...




[edit on 26-11-2004 by Thomas Crowne]

Originally posted by Flange Gasket
Those school contracts aren't worth the paper their printed on, it is a crime against the state to assault somebody, to touch someone without their consent is assault... If you refuse to be searched and you are susequently searched against your will you have been assaulted...pure and simple...

Very True.
Here in the UK, I'd say it would be an assault for someone to search your person without your consent.
Only a policeman can search you, and even they can't ask you to take more than your outer layer of clothing off without arresting you.

However, sometimes it may be preferable to consent to a search by a teacher than the hassle of waiting for the police etc.

This is illegal. IT could possibly be an act of subjecation (discrimination). It's definiately a violation of the 4th ammendment, he does not have the ability to execute that.

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Since it is now their motor vehicle, and it is their UCC, if you transgress you must pay the fine.

Have a good day, fellow servants. Don't gripe about them taking your rights anymore since you willingly give them up all day long!

does that mean your car isn't registered...?

Quote edited as it violates ATS statutes.

[edit on 26-11-2004 by Thomas Crowne]

No, my car is registered. You must abide by such statutes in order to access a military post or base as it is properly seated federal land.

[edit on 26-11-2004 by Thomas Crowne]

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
No, my car is registered. You must abide by such statutes in order to access a military post or base as it is properly seated federal land.

[edit on 26-11-2004 by Thomas Crowne]

otherwise, for say a normal joe like me...i could let my license expire, return my tags and drive my car without any registration and not get into trouble? like lets say you were still a police officer, and you saw me driving with no tags and pulled me over and i didnt have any registration or license, you'd have let me go?