No, it violates my rights as a person
yes, they are clearly constitutional
Into the Night (12-13-2019)
you know 9/11 was an inside job led by cheney to bolster the military industrial complex, right?
You are so caught up in NEEDING to be correct, that you aren't able to comprehend that my presentation was a challenge to DTY's comment of "NO VICTIM / NO CRIME".
So instead of discussing what he believes, you instead just want to sit in a corner, stick your fingers in your ears, and constantly repeat "NEENER-NEENER-NEENER"
OH-WAIT; do you really believe that as long as there's no victim, then there's no crime??
Because if that's your stance, then there's no reason for stop signs, stop lights, speed limit laws, among a multitude of things.
SEDITION: incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.
The assumption is that road checks are about stopping drivers instead of revenue. What does check lanes accomplish? It is a good use of taxpayer's money? Is it an efficient and reasonable way to cut crime. Does it work and where are the stats?
We know that it is impinging of people's rights to improper stop and seizure. We have a right to go along with our lives without dealing with police power being shoved in our faces. You stop me, you should have a reason not just taking a flyer.
Into the Night (12-13-2019)
And you still can't do anything but emote, more's the pity.
If you truly believe that no victim means no crime, then why are you trying to promote that I'm wrong??
If no one is hurt, then who's the victim and why would it be a crime.
I honestly don't expect you to provide anything in the way of common sense of a reply and instead am enjoying watching you floundering in confusion.
SEDITION: incitement of resistance to or insurrection against lawful authority.
Bookmarks