Your right to remain silent is OVER!!!!

[DJEvelEd]

WASHINGTON - US citizens do not enjoy a constitutional right to refuse to reveal their identity when requested by police.
In what may become a major boost to US law enforcement and antiterrorism efforts, the US Supreme Court Monday upheld a Nevada law that makes it a criminal offense for anyone suspected of wrongdoing to refuse to identify himself to police.

Civil libertarians see the decision as a significant setback. And it remains unclear to what extent it may open the door to the issuing of national identification cards or widespread identity operations keyed to terrorist profiling at bus terminals, train stations, sports stadiums, and on city streets



What if you mumble? What if you can't speak? What if you cough while you give your name? What if you don't have a license?

THE TERRORISTS WON EVERYONE!!!! THE TERRORISTS WON!!!

2 - NIL!!!




http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0622/p01s01-usju.html






Thanks Katylina, Monsterone, you make the shittiest sigs.
<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=djeveled">
SPONSORED BY: "THE F’CESTOF C’SAR" BY ’SOP c464 B.C.
HAS ANYONE SEEN MY GAPING ANUS?


This message was edited by DJEvelEd on 6-21-04 @ 4:10 PM

[Furtherman]

You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say... or maybe don't say... can and will be used against you in a court of law....

<IMG SRC="http://www.chaoticconcepts.com/randomizer/random.php?uid=7">
...with thanks to JustJon

[Tall_James]

This poor kid doesn't stand a chance...

<img src="http://thehennings.com/images/brc/mute.jpg"width=450>


<img src=http://home.comcast.net/~jamesgpatton/patton.jpg>
Avoiding household responsibilites...one post at a time
[center]The Best Blog You're Not Reading (http://cheeseeatingbird.blogspot.com)

[Tazz]

I had had no clue you didn't have to anyway. Considering that they would find out your name when they looked at your license, who the F really cares.

Or, just avoid getting into situations that involve the police, and this wouldn't affect you at all.

<img src=http://tazz1376.homestead.com/files/homersig.gif>

[DJEvelEd]

Jose Padilla is a likely piece o' shit BUT doesn't it bother anyone that as an American citizen, he is being held indefinitely.

A friend of mine was questioned once by police and he didn't say a word to them. They held him for 3 days because he didn't give a name and "remained silent". Will there be a situation someday when people exercise their "right to remain silent" and are held indefinitely by police for questioning?


Or, just avoid getting into situations that involve the police, and this wouldn't affect you at all.


More police involvement in our lives seems likely and unavoidable.

Thanks Katylina, Monsterone, you make the shittiest sigs.
<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=djeveled">
SPONSORED BY: "THE F’CESTOF C’SAR" BY ’SOP c464 B.C.
HAS ANYONE SEEN MY GAPING ANUS?

This message was edited by DJEvelEd on 6-21-04 @ 5:37 PM

[Hottub]

Sorry Ed, this is a moot point. It has been proven for the last 10 years, nobody can remain silent when...









http://abc.abcnews.go.com/primetime/nypdblue/images/gallery/nypd_Franzquestioning.jpg



This guy is beating the balls of of you!!

<img src="http://siebert.home.att.net/beachsig.jpg" border=0 align=right>
"Ahh, Beer. The cause of, and answer to all of life's problems"
Big A.S.S.#22127

[Mike Teacher]

Ya know I was just thinking this is really bad news for the mute people of america.

<IMG SRC="http://members.aol.com/miketeachr/void21">

[Se7en]

Ya know I was just thinking this is really bad news for the mute people of america.

Fuck 'em. Who are they going to complain too?

How this decision is interpreted depends upon what implications this will have on civil liberties. If they limit it only to giving a name, then this may not change too much.

I would like to say, however, that the title of this thread is misleading - the right to remain silent refers only to the 5th amendment right of self-incrimination. In an OVERWHELMING majority of cases, simply supplying a name (or even a SSN) wouldn't come anywhere close to incriminating yourself of a crime - even if you're actively wanted by the police on suspicion of that crime.

The only real implication I see would be in terrorist cases. If the police asked an Arab gentleman for his name, and the reply was "Osama bin Laden", then there may be a problem. Your ass may have just bought a ticket to Gitmo.

<center><img border="0" src="http://se7enrfnet.homestead.com/files/7_sig.gif" width="300" height="100">
<br>
<br>
Don't blame me....I voted for Kodos.
I look forward to an orderly election that will eliminate the need for a violent bloodbath. </center>

[HBox]

I'm more concerned with today's other ruling.

http://www.myimgs.com/random/hbox/sig

[Tall_James]

I'm more concerned with today's other ruling.

Is that the one that has to do with ducks driving?


<img src=http://home.comcast.net/~jamesgpatton/patton.jpg>
Avoiding household responsibilites...one post at a time
[center]The Best Blog You're Not Reading (http://cheeseeatingbird.blogspot.com)

[HBox]

Is that the one that has to do with ducks driving?

YES! I spent years training ducks to drive, and now they BAN IT!?!?! WTF! I'm RUINED!!!!!

Actually, I'm pissed at the one that says people can only sue HMO's through federal court. Yeah, it's a great idea to make it more difficult and expensive for sick people to sue HMO's for denying services.

http://www.myimgs.com/random/hbox/sig

[FMJeff]

Is that the one that has to do with ducks driving?

YES! I spent years training ducks to drive, and now they BAN IT!?!?! WTF! I'm RUINED!!!!!

Actually, I'm pissed at the one that says people can only sue HMO's through federal court. Yeah, it's a great idea to make it more difficult and expensive for sick people to sue HMO's for denying services.

http://www.myimgs.com/random/hbox/sig


I am not too concerned with this as to what it may lead to...i don't see the problem...cop has a problem and he asks you who you are, just tell him...done deal....

<center><img src="http://thereisnogod.faithweb.com/images/fmjeff.gif">
<br>
It made my heart sing.

[monsterone]

Since police may only request the name of someone they find suspicious


which is anyone they pull over. beyond the bounds of the constitution and thus illegal.

<center><img border=1 src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=monsterone01"><br></center>

<center>

<font color="blue" size="1"> Now even though I went to college and dropped out of school quick
I always had a Ph.D.: a Pretty Huge Dick </font>


<font color="white">moe & horde king, come back soon</font>


</center>
[color=White]

[TheMojoPin]

This bugs me because it seems to imply that we now need to have ID on us even if we're just walking the street. A cop isn't just going to ask for your identity when you're in your car, and prior to this if a cop asked who you are if they stopped you on the street, you were NOT obligated to identify yourself.

This isn't an issue I have with the cops themselves, just more that this seems like a pretty big step to having something like "national identity cards" that we need to have on us at all times...and that's fuckin' creepy and wrong and a complete invasion of my personal privacy.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

[Billy Staples]

what happened to 'probable cause' and the 4th amendments right to privacy?

especially for us who have a knack for getting pulled over!!!

[Tall_James]

Actually, I'm pissed at the one that says people can only sue HMO's through federal court. Yeah, it's a great idea to make it more difficult and expensive for sick people to sue HMO's for denying services.

Agreed, that is fucking stupid. Even more stupid than the duck ban.

BTW - I had these great bumper stickers printed up:

MADD - Mothers Against Drunk Ducks


<img src=http://home.comcast.net/~jamesgpatton/patton.jpg>
Avoiding household responsibilites...one post at a time
[center]The Best Blog You're Not Reading (http://cheeseeatingbird.blogspot.com)

[Se7en]

The real issue people are having with the ID thing is that many people think that the police are not going to use ruling as a tool to harass minorities. That will probably happen on some level, but I don't think it'll be as widespread or prevalent as some people fear. And again, it depends upon what constitutes a sufficient ID - is telling the officer your name sufficient, or do you actually have to produce something like a photographic ID?

I'm more concerned with today's other ruling.

Actually, I'm pissed at the one that says people can only sue HMO's through federal court. Yeah, it's a great idea to make it more difficult and expensive for sick people to sue HMO's for denying services.


I can't say I favor that one myself. I'm waiting for someone to say that the ruling is good because it sticks it to the trial lawyers who are bleeding the system dry, but frankly, I've been working on and writing disability legislation for the past 6 months and I know first hand how organizations like HMOs will just flat out deny necessary treatment for no other reason than to save minor costs. Hindering plaintiffs from being able to sue their asses isn't exactly the kind of precedent I want to see the Court begin to lay down.

<center><img border="0" src="http://se7enrfnet.homestead.com/files/7_sig.gif" width="300" height="100">
<br>
<br>
Don't blame me....I voted for Kodos.
I look forward to an orderly election that will eliminate the need for a violent bloodbath. </center>

[TheMojoPin]

And again, it depends upon what constitutes a sufficient ID - is telling the officer your name sufficient, or do you actually have to produce something like a photographic ID?

Exactly.

If I'm not driving a car, or doing something that constitutes having an ID, why should I have an ID on me in the first place? I live within walking distance to tons of stores and restaurants around me, so if I have cash, I'll just take that and my keys and I'm off. I shouldn't HAVE to carry an ID on me at all times, and this ruling could be taken as a push in that direction, IF the only way I can supposedly "confirm" who I am is with a valid ID.

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

[ChrisTheCop]

More police involvement in our lives seems likely and unavoidable

So my return was prophesised?
fyi- we've always had a right to ask you your name, address, and reasons to be somewhere. It's called the common law of inquiry. If we dont believe you, we can ask for ID. If you dont have it, we can ascertain your identity via alternate means (anywhere from a friend vouching for you, to fingerprinting you). Theres nothing new here. But yes, as someone mentioned above, avoiding situations which would lead to police contact is always a good idea.

<img src="http://rfcop.50megs.com/images/jersey_rich-fluffernutter_sigpic.gif">jersernutter productions

[HBox]

Just to show how shitty insurance companies are, my sister had to have emergency surgery right away a few years ago. But our insurance company requires that before any hospital stay or procedure that we have to notify insurance at least 24 hours in advance. So when its time to pay the bill the insurance company refuses. This was a very expensive surgery, over $100,000. So when the bill comes, we are furious. After an angry letter from us, the hospital and the surgeon, they decide to pay everything except $2,000. For what reason they decided not to cover $2,000 I have NO idea. Then we got a lawyer involved, and they payed the whole thing, like they were supposed to do in the first place. And we don't even have an HMO! We have PPO.

Which is why I am so afraid of tort reform. I don't see how anyone deserves tens of millions for botched surgery or refused coverage from insurance, but if we put limits too low, it will be in the insurance company's interest to deny service because the service will be more expensive than the maximum penalty!

http://www.myimgs.com/random/hbox/sig

[TheMojoPin]

Hey, Chris!

Good to see you back on the board!

Did you get another promotion keeping you away again?

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=TheMojoPin">
1979 << December boys got it BAD >> "You can tell some lies about the good times we've had, but I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."