So the fact that the Mexican government is corrupt and horrid is an excuse to treat latinos in the US badly, since "well it would be worse for them in Mexico"?
Erich Mancow Muller - Hmm, white guy. Mark Steyn - Hmm, white guy. Glenn Beck - Hmm, white guy. Craig Ferguson - could you get any whiter?
I wonder why they would want to slam the door in the faces of latinos? Why you get shit like Glenn Beck going off on a racist rant the other day about the "illegals" being the reason the new Spider-Man is a half-black, half-latino kid?
Your comment just makes me laugh. GOP/Conservatives use "illegal immigration" as a cover for their racism, nothing more.
Secondly, the GOP has zero policies that are aimed at Latinos (unless they are also lawbreakers). Immigration law is universally applied to all races and nationalities.
You've obviously never been to a Tea Party rally, or been driving in a car late night somewhere with a latino friend to get pulled over by a white cop in Tex-ASS.
GOP doesn't give a shit about "illegal" Canadians, or Chinese, or other demographics. You can see it in their rhetoric. It's about "close the border (with Mexico), we have too many Mexicans, all these Mexicans are sending money out of the country, all these Mexicans are driving down wages and stealing jobs from Amurrikkans, all these Mexicans mean I have to put up with Spanish radio stations and press 1 for English, damn these Mexicans."
In that time money could be saved to eventually go through that process.
Tell that to someone currently living in a country where the average yearly wage is about $200.
You got lucky. American immigration policy has been run by the racist fringe for far too long. The quotas on who can come, from where, the various payment schemes are ALL designed to ensure that more Euros/WASP's move to the US than anyone else.
Open the quotas. Stop setting up these ridiculously racist quotas where essentially unlimited immigration is allowed from European countries (whose limits are set so high that 10% of their population would have to move in a single year to hit it) while deliberately choking off quotas from the nations where people want to come to the US to seek jobs, but happen to not be white-skinned enough.
Wanting to control our population numbers is NOT RACIST
Wanting to make people leave because of the color of their skin, or because their family still has members who primarily speak spanish rather than english, is what exactly?
Wanting to impose controls on how many bodies we let into the country is NOT RACIST
Wanting to base those controls on making sure we bring in more people from "white" countries instead of "brown" countries is what, exactly?
Dont you think as a sovereign nation, we have the right to say who can and cannot come here?
Does that somehow absolve us of the duty and responsibility to have immigration policies that aren't made by catering to the "get them fuckin mexicans outta here cuz I'm tired of seeing taco trucks and pressing 2 for english" racist lunatic fringe?
We dont have a vast frontier anymore, we dont need nor want a flood of unskilled dregs added to our society
Intriguing. Why is it that you are mad at "unskilled dregs"? People tend to gain skills as they work. We still need carpenters. We still need plumbers. We still need electricians. There are a lot of latinos going into these SKILLED professions that whites have decided are "beneath them" lately. There are a lot of latinos going to college in the USA right now, are they "unskilled dregs"?
The poem at her feet is old, outdated and DOES NOT APPLY TO THE MODERN WORLD.
Then we should melt the statue down and sell the copper for scrap, too. I for one find it humorous when you right wing racist loonies always want to talk about "american exceptionalism" and "land of opportunity" and then want to shut the door to anyone who isn't sufficiently pallid of complexion.
I fucking hate people who think that if desired, the whole world could move to the US.
And I fucking hate assholes like you who think that just because someone's skin isn't the same color as yours, or because English isn't their primary language, they shouldn't have a fair chance at immigrating to the US.
Funny you never hear about Democrats being asked by a musician to stop using their music.
Actually, yes you do. Most famously, Sam Moore asked the Obama campaign not to use the song "Hold on, I'm coming" at rallies. There was threat of a lawsuit if the campaign didn't desist.
The larger part is that most of these songs have lyrics and intentions to protest against common GOP policies and political positions. Having the refrain ripped off to further GOP election chances is spitting on the artist and the meaning of the lyrics themselves.
I'm sure that if he were still alive, the sculptor who crafted the Statue of Liberty would be aghast at the racist GOP's stance towards immigrant latinos today, and Emma Lazarus would be likewise horrified at the racist anti-immigrant sentiment stirred up by people who regularly plaster the face of the Statue of Liberty on their campaign posters while ignoring the meaning of the poem sitting at her feet.
You try to own anything close to military grade. Really. Try to purchase a Humvee and outfit it with military weaponry and armor plating. Try to purchase or make grenades or incendiary tossers of any sort.
Watch how fast the FBI or SWAT are on your ass hauling you in.
The "right to own guns" long ago ceased to be the right for the citizenry to be even remotely on par with the military. And that's by design. If the citizenry were on par with the military, then those violently racist Tea Party retards shouting "we came unarmed, this time" might actually be able to cause a serious bloodbath.
It's funny, whenever someone suggests this sort of thing, they usually get modded down.
And yet the judge basically took the DVD-CCA's side and copy-pasted it into his ruling word for word. He ignored basically every argument Kaleidescape put forth. That's rare in court. Not only that, but the judge has done a major about-face since the last ruling in 2007. What changed in the intervening time? How do you go from a judge ruling that Kaleidescape had made good faith efforts to ensure their products were compliant, and were in fact compliant, to what came out today if money didn't change hands somewhere?
We haven't believed in the right of gun ownership since George Washington sent in the troops to quell the Whiskey Rebellion.
Really, the only way you're ever going to have a revolution is if you have the military on your side. Otherwise, those in power will think nothing of sending in tanks and helicopters for strafing runs as a start.
Just wait. One of these days, the National Mall or some other location in the US will make Tiananmen Square look like nothing. Fuck if the Oakland PD haven't done a good job of doing shit like it already - or did you think that the asshole using a whole bottle of pepper spray on a group of people sitting nonviolently on the ground was unplanned?
You obviously don't understand how the supply chain works.
If Gamestop sells a NEW copy of a game at $60, then they may make $5-6 "profit" on it. The wholesale prices on the brand new games in the box sent to the stores are HIGH.
This is why you will NEVER, EVER, EVER AGAIN see a single-purpose store that sells nothing but brand new in the box games and systems. You won't. Think about it - when's the last time you saw a Software Etc? Oh yeah they started selling used games before they went under. How about Babbage's? Oops, gone under. The margins simply will not and probably will not ever support a "new only" software storefront business model any more.
Instead, you have Best Buy, you have Target, you have Walmart, and you have the rinky-dink "electronics" sections of other department stores where they staff minimum wage employees 2-3 to a store, or if they get up to 4-5 then they have someone minding the REALLY high ticket items like plasma TV's and $2000 cameras.
That is the reality. Margins on brand new games SUCK. The fact that Gamestop will manage to have new releases and launch parties when Crap of Dookie: Modern Warfare 4: Beating A Dead Horse comes out next year is because the USED game market subsidizes getting the brand new copies into the store. And that's the complete truth of the matter.
Not only that I have to defend Gamestop a little here - I know several people who work at Gamestop, and three of them are store managers.
Here's how it works according to the fucktard who wrote the article: "The remaining $31.99? Pure profit..."
Now, here's how it works in reality: - On that one game, Gamestop got $31.99 in profit. That profit went back into the sales figures for the store to pay for new inventory and to pay the wages of the workers and the rent to the property owner (Gamestops are in malls or strip malls, they never own a standalone storefront building on corporate-owned land). - On several other games, Gamestop plunked down $20-25 in either store credit or cash payout. Those games sat at the $45 price point for a while. Then the $40 price point. Then $35. Then $30. Then $25. Then $20. Somewhere between $25 and $20, the "pure profit" that the fucktard article-writer assumes turned into a loss. - On even more games, Gamestop plunked down maybe $10-15. The same thing happened. Maybe they managed to sell it at $20-25, maybe they sold it at less.
The short version is, sure, on that ONE used title Gamestop got a net $31.99 profit. Maybe that was enough to pay for one worker for roughly 2 and a half hours worth of time if they're at the standard $12/hour. On a number of other titles, Gamestop barely broke even, or even lost money when the game fell into "crap it's old, get it out of here, chuck it in the $5-10 bargain bin" range. Because that WILL happen to some titles, even if Gamestop shelled out $20-25 for it when it was new.
There's a Gamestop near my location that was posting sales numbers in the top 100 Gamestop stores for most of Christmas. They just got word anyways that they are getting shut down in February. Apparently Gamestop decided rent in the area isn't enough to justify keeping the store open, even with fantastic sales on both the new and used end.
So before you vilify Gamestop, think about that. A lot of the people working those stores are actual gamers. A lot of the people working those stores are trying to make ends meet. And the dirtiest secret of all... the "profits" for an operating Gamestop store are nowhere near CLOSE to what Asshat McDouchebag writing for ShitHardware, a crappy blog site with a broken registration system, came up with by pulling numbers out of his lying ass.
After all it's not like Zynga hasn't been caught ripping off games before.
Oh wait. Mafia Wars vs Mob Wars? Cafe World vs Restaurant City? Farmville and Farm Town?
Oh and don't forget there's an "expansion for Frontierville" coming soon that's blatantly ripping off Oregon Trail, but they changed the name to "Pioneer Trail"...
They do what they feel like doing at the time, and let the courts sort out the legality of it.
FTFY. Also, keep in mind that in most jurisdictions, the cops are buddy-buddy with the judges and the prosecutors, which leads to a "I'm sure they had good reason" mentality when their actions are challenged and a "fuck you I'm taking the word of the cop" mentality when a witness or defendant's statement contradicts the cop's statement.
What's wrong with cops lying to or misleading suspects?
Aside from the fact that it is KNOWN to make innocent people plead guilty? Aside from the fact that it makes the already dirty cops look that much closer to using forged evidence?
It's a valid tactic...
And if you had this thing called a "conscience" you'd realize it should NOT be valid. Period.
I'm not saying innocent people haven't been railroaded, many have, but reality doesn't permit police (especially in crime-ridden cities) to be knights in shining armor. Crime is an ugly thing, why would trying to solve it be much prettier?
Every time I hear someone like you I want to throw up. What was it our justice system used to be about? Didn't Thomas Jefferson say he would rather a dozen guilty men go free than see one innocent man convicted? When did we abandon our principles?
If I look half asleep and I am driving all over the place, it's not unfounded to allege that I might very well be drunk.
It's a fucking long stretch from that to "if you use a password protected space, you must be doing something illegal that needs to be searched for." For all the judge knows, hubby password protected that space so that the kids don't see the juicy little home sex videos mommy and daddy made, or the records of him webchatting with the online girlfriend his wife doesn't know about. Neither of which are illegal.
Again, I am saying, why not just do less illegal stuff, to begin with?
And as pointed out by others on this thread, and in the video linked earlier titled "Don't Talk to Cops" by both a lawyer and a police detective, the problem is that US law is so byzantine that you could be violating the law this minute and not even realize it. It's not a question of "why not do less illegal stuff", it's a question of how do you protect yourself?
And unless you think I'm joking, consider the case of a police officer coming round to your house because he wants to "ask you some questions." Maybe he claims it's about a neighbor's domestic disturbance. Maybe there was a noise complaint that your dog was barking too loud late at night. Could be any number of things. You let him inside to "talk." Courts in some jurisdictions have ruled that by opening the door and letting him pass the threshold, you just consented to him searching your house for anything he might find suspicious.
Or say you get pulled over by one of the famous Texas "you got a taillight out bud *nightstickcrashbreaknoise*" Badged Highwaymen. You get out of your car but leave it unlocked, or do you lock it and hold on to the keys? In the first case, some courts have ruled that by leaving it unlocked you consented to it being searched!
The point again is: once you start waiving your rights, you wind up giving up others. And it keeps going and going and going. You think you're "cooperating with the police" and that they will like you and not charge you with anything and treat you nice because of it? Bullshit - the police are the initial arm of "evidence gathering" for prosecutors, a set of conscienceless, amoral assholes who see all citizens as nothing more than a potential conviction notch in their belts.
As naive as it may sound, why not just do less illegal stuff?
Who says they are doing illegal stuff? The government's alleging it, but in the ordinary course of events, the 5th Amendment is supposed to protect us against being required to give evidence against ourselves. We are supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
And yet, the cops can get away with feeding people information, planting information, and pulling every dirty trick they can come up with to try to get a conviction, innocent or not. The US history books are replete with innocent people railroaded by a corrupt system. The evidence in the Troy Davis case, where police intimidated and coached witnesses and doctored evidence, shows that an innocent man was put to death just recently by the corrupt system.
I'm not advocating doing illegal stuff, but I am suggesting that you probably want to keep your affairs under wraps anyways, even if fully legal. The moment you start waiving one of your rights, courts start ruling you also waived others.
Nobody ever points out that democrat-appointed judges blocked the repeal of slavery for decades
And fucktards like you forget that the Dixiecrat judges left the Democrat Party in the 1960s and were welcomed into the modern racist GOP with open arms.
Saying that "Republicans" today are what they were over 50 years ago is a plain lie.
Slashdot Mirror
but it was arrived at democratically
Ahh, yes, "Democracy", the art of two wolves giving a sheep the choice of being barbecued or spit-roasted for dinner.
So the fact that the Mexican government is corrupt and horrid is an excuse to treat latinos in the US badly, since "well it would be worse for them in Mexico"?
And you CAN'T see how that's racist? Just... wow.
Erich Mancow Muller - Hmm, white guy.
Mark Steyn - Hmm, white guy.
Glenn Beck - Hmm, white guy.
Craig Ferguson - could you get any whiter?
I wonder why they would want to slam the door in the faces of latinos? Why you get shit like Glenn Beck going off on a racist rant the other day about the "illegals" being the reason the new Spider-Man is a half-black, half-latino kid?
Your comment just makes me laugh. GOP/Conservatives use "illegal immigration" as a cover for their racism, nothing more.
So you're admitting that the problems the GOP have with latinos are:
- skin color
- they speak a different language and don't conform to WASP culture
And this is somehow not racist?
Secondly, the GOP has zero policies that are aimed at Latinos (unless they are also lawbreakers). Immigration law is universally applied to all races and nationalities.
You've obviously never been to a Tea Party rally, or been driving in a car late night somewhere with a latino friend to get pulled over by a white cop in Tex-ASS.
GOP doesn't give a shit about "illegal" Canadians, or Chinese, or other demographics. You can see it in their rhetoric. It's about "close the border (with Mexico), we have too many Mexicans, all these Mexicans are sending money out of the country, all these Mexicans are driving down wages and stealing jobs from Amurrikkans, all these Mexicans mean I have to put up with Spanish radio stations and press 1 for English, damn these Mexicans."
No you didn't.
The Racist Repubs don't give a damn if a latino is legal or illegal. All they care is they're seeing someone with brown skin in "their country."
In that time money could be saved to eventually go through that process.
Tell that to someone currently living in a country where the average yearly wage is about $200.
You got lucky. American immigration policy has been run by the racist fringe for far too long. The quotas on who can come, from where, the various payment schemes are ALL designed to ensure that more Euros/WASP's move to the US than anyone else.
Open the quotas. Stop setting up these ridiculously racist quotas where essentially unlimited immigration is allowed from European countries (whose limits are set so high that 10% of their population would have to move in a single year to hit it) while deliberately choking off quotas from the nations where people want to come to the US to seek jobs, but happen to not be white-skinned enough.
Wanting to control our population numbers is NOT RACIST
Wanting to make people leave because of the color of their skin, or because their family still has members who primarily speak spanish rather than english, is what exactly?
Wanting to impose controls on how many bodies we let into the country is NOT RACIST
Wanting to base those controls on making sure we bring in more people from "white" countries instead of "brown" countries is what, exactly?
Dont you think as a sovereign nation, we have the right to say who can and cannot come here?
Does that somehow absolve us of the duty and responsibility to have immigration policies that aren't made by catering to the "get them fuckin mexicans outta here cuz I'm tired of seeing taco trucks and pressing 2 for english" racist lunatic fringe?
We dont have a vast frontier anymore, we dont need nor want a flood of unskilled dregs added to our society
Intriguing. Why is it that you are mad at "unskilled dregs"? People tend to gain skills as they work. We still need carpenters. We still need plumbers. We still need electricians. There are a lot of latinos going into these SKILLED professions that whites have decided are "beneath them" lately. There are a lot of latinos going to college in the USA right now, are they "unskilled dregs"?
The poem at her feet is old, outdated and DOES NOT APPLY TO THE MODERN WORLD.
Then we should melt the statue down and sell the copper for scrap, too. I for one find it humorous when you right wing racist loonies always want to talk about "american exceptionalism" and "land of opportunity" and then want to shut the door to anyone who isn't sufficiently pallid of complexion.
I fucking hate people who think that if desired, the whole world could move to the US.
And I fucking hate assholes like you who think that just because someone's skin isn't the same color as yours, or because English isn't their primary language, they shouldn't have a fair chance at immigrating to the US.
I'm thinking "Na na na na, hey hey hey..."
Funny you never hear about Democrats being asked by a musician to stop using their music.
Actually, yes you do. Most famously, Sam Moore asked the Obama campaign not to use the song "Hold on, I'm coming" at rallies. There was threat of a lawsuit if the campaign didn't desist.
The larger part is that most of these songs have lyrics and intentions to protest against common GOP policies and political positions. Having the refrain ripped off to further GOP election chances is spitting on the artist and the meaning of the lyrics themselves.
I'm sure that if he were still alive, the sculptor who crafted the Statue of Liberty would be aghast at the racist GOP's stance towards immigrant latinos today, and Emma Lazarus would be likewise horrified at the racist anti-immigrant sentiment stirred up by people who regularly plaster the face of the Statue of Liberty on their campaign posters while ignoring the meaning of the poem sitting at her feet.
Oh that's just pure bullshit.
You try to own anything close to military grade. Really. Try to purchase a Humvee and outfit it with military weaponry and armor plating. Try to purchase or make grenades or incendiary tossers of any sort.
Watch how fast the FBI or SWAT are on your ass hauling you in.
The "right to own guns" long ago ceased to be the right for the citizenry to be even remotely on par with the military. And that's by design. If the citizenry were on par with the military, then those violently racist Tea Party retards shouting "we came unarmed, this time" might actually be able to cause a serious bloodbath.
It's funny, whenever someone suggests this sort of thing, they usually get modded down.
And yet the judge basically took the DVD-CCA's side and copy-pasted it into his ruling word for word. He ignored basically every argument Kaleidescape put forth. That's rare in court. Not only that, but the judge has done a major about-face since the last ruling in 2007. What changed in the intervening time? How do you go from a judge ruling that Kaleidescape had made good faith efforts to ensure their products were compliant, and were in fact compliant, to what came out today if money didn't change hands somewhere?
We haven't believed in the right of gun ownership since George Washington sent in the troops to quell the Whiskey Rebellion.
Really, the only way you're ever going to have a revolution is if you have the military on your side. Otherwise, those in power will think nothing of sending in tanks and helicopters for strafing runs as a start.
Just wait. One of these days, the National Mall or some other location in the US will make Tiananmen Square look like nothing. Fuck if the Oakland PD haven't done a good job of doing shit like it already - or did you think that the asshole using a whole bottle of pepper spray on a group of people sitting nonviolently on the ground was unplanned?
"Em-poor-er" is what the Republicans want to make the non-ultra-wealthy.
You obviously don't understand how the supply chain works.
If Gamestop sells a NEW copy of a game at $60, then they may make $5-6 "profit" on it. The wholesale prices on the brand new games in the box sent to the stores are HIGH.
This is why you will NEVER, EVER, EVER AGAIN see a single-purpose store that sells nothing but brand new in the box games and systems. You won't. Think about it - when's the last time you saw a Software Etc? Oh yeah they started selling used games before they went under. How about Babbage's? Oops, gone under. The margins simply will not and probably will not ever support a "new only" software storefront business model any more.
Instead, you have Best Buy, you have Target, you have Walmart, and you have the rinky-dink "electronics" sections of other department stores where they staff minimum wage employees 2-3 to a store, or if they get up to 4-5 then they have someone minding the REALLY high ticket items like plasma TV's and $2000 cameras.
That is the reality. Margins on brand new games SUCK. The fact that Gamestop will manage to have new releases and launch parties when Crap of Dookie: Modern Warfare 4: Beating A Dead Horse comes out next year is because the USED game market subsidizes getting the brand new copies into the store. And that's the complete truth of the matter.
Not only that I have to defend Gamestop a little here - I know several people who work at Gamestop, and three of them are store managers.
Here's how it works according to the fucktard who wrote the article: "The remaining $31.99? Pure profit..."
Now, here's how it works in reality:
- On that one game, Gamestop got $31.99 in profit. That profit went back into the sales figures for the store to pay for new inventory and to pay the wages of the workers and the rent to the property owner (Gamestops are in malls or strip malls, they never own a standalone storefront building on corporate-owned land).
- On several other games, Gamestop plunked down $20-25 in either store credit or cash payout. Those games sat at the $45 price point for a while. Then the $40 price point. Then $35. Then $30. Then $25. Then $20. Somewhere between $25 and $20, the "pure profit" that the fucktard article-writer assumes turned into a loss.
- On even more games, Gamestop plunked down maybe $10-15. The same thing happened. Maybe they managed to sell it at $20-25, maybe they sold it at less.
The short version is, sure, on that ONE used title Gamestop got a net $31.99 profit. Maybe that was enough to pay for one worker for roughly 2 and a half hours worth of time if they're at the standard $12/hour. On a number of other titles, Gamestop barely broke even, or even lost money when the game fell into "crap it's old, get it out of here, chuck it in the $5-10 bargain bin" range. Because that WILL happen to some titles, even if Gamestop shelled out $20-25 for it when it was new.
There's a Gamestop near my location that was posting sales numbers in the top 100 Gamestop stores for most of Christmas. They just got word anyways that they are getting shut down in February. Apparently Gamestop decided rent in the area isn't enough to justify keeping the store open, even with fantastic sales on both the new and used end.
So before you vilify Gamestop, think about that. A lot of the people working those stores are actual gamers. A lot of the people working those stores are trying to make ends meet. And the dirtiest secret of all... the "profits" for an operating Gamestop store are nowhere near CLOSE to what Asshat McDouchebag writing for ShitHardware, a crappy blog site with a broken registration system, came up with by pulling numbers out of his lying ass.
After all it's not like Zynga hasn't been caught ripping off games before.
Oh wait.
Mafia Wars vs Mob Wars?
Cafe World vs Restaurant City?
Farmville and Farm Town?
Oh and don't forget there's an "expansion for Frontierville" coming soon that's blatantly ripping off Oregon Trail, but they changed the name to "Pioneer Trail"...
They do what they feel like doing at the time, and let the courts sort out the legality of it.
FTFY. Also, keep in mind that in most jurisdictions, the cops are buddy-buddy with the judges and the prosecutors, which leads to a "I'm sure they had good reason" mentality when their actions are challenged and a "fuck you I'm taking the word of the cop" mentality when a witness or defendant's statement contradicts the cop's statement.
What's wrong with cops lying to or misleading suspects?
Aside from the fact that it is KNOWN to make innocent people plead guilty? Aside from the fact that it makes the already dirty cops look that much closer to using forged evidence?
It's a valid tactic...
And if you had this thing called a "conscience" you'd realize it should NOT be valid. Period.
I'm not saying innocent people haven't been railroaded, many have, but reality doesn't permit police (especially in crime-ridden cities) to be knights in shining armor. Crime is an ugly thing, why would trying to solve it be much prettier?
Every time I hear someone like you I want to throw up. What was it our justice system used to be about? Didn't Thomas Jefferson say he would rather a dozen guilty men go free than see one innocent man convicted? When did we abandon our principles?
If I look half asleep and I am driving all over the place, it's not unfounded to allege that I might very well be drunk.
It's a fucking long stretch from that to "if you use a password protected space, you must be doing something illegal that needs to be searched for." For all the judge knows, hubby password protected that space so that the kids don't see the juicy little home sex videos mommy and daddy made, or the records of him webchatting with the online girlfriend his wife doesn't know about. Neither of which are illegal.
Again, I am saying, why not just do less illegal stuff, to begin with?
And as pointed out by others on this thread, and in the video linked earlier titled "Don't Talk to Cops" by both a lawyer and a police detective, the problem is that US law is so byzantine that you could be violating the law this minute and not even realize it. It's not a question of "why not do less illegal stuff", it's a question of how do you protect yourself?
You are not required to tell the truth during a police investigation,
And oddly enough, the Assholes In Blue aren't forbidden to lie to you either. They get a lot of false, coerced confessions that way.
Pay no attention to the Koch behind the curtain...
And unless you think I'm joking, consider the case of a police officer coming round to your house because he wants to "ask you some questions." Maybe he claims it's about a neighbor's domestic disturbance. Maybe there was a noise complaint that your dog was barking too loud late at night. Could be any number of things. You let him inside to "talk." Courts in some jurisdictions have ruled that by opening the door and letting him pass the threshold, you just consented to him searching your house for anything he might find suspicious.
Or say you get pulled over by one of the famous Texas "you got a taillight out bud *nightstickcrashbreaknoise*" Badged Highwaymen. You get out of your car but leave it unlocked, or do you lock it and hold on to the keys? In the first case, some courts have ruled that by leaving it unlocked you consented to it being searched!
The point again is: once you start waiving your rights, you wind up giving up others. And it keeps going and going and going. You think you're "cooperating with the police" and that they will like you and not charge you with anything and treat you nice because of it? Bullshit - the police are the initial arm of "evidence gathering" for prosecutors, a set of conscienceless, amoral assholes who see all citizens as nothing more than a potential conviction notch in their belts.
As naive as it may sound, why not just do less illegal stuff?
Who says they are doing illegal stuff? The government's alleging it, but in the ordinary course of events, the 5th Amendment is supposed to protect us against being required to give evidence against ourselves. We are supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
And yet, the cops can get away with feeding people information, planting information, and pulling every dirty trick they can come up with to try to get a conviction, innocent or not. The US history books are replete with innocent people railroaded by a corrupt system. The evidence in the Troy Davis case, where police intimidated and coached witnesses and doctored evidence, shows that an innocent man was put to death just recently by the corrupt system.
I'm not advocating doing illegal stuff, but I am suggesting that you probably want to keep your affairs under wraps anyways, even if fully legal. The moment you start waiving one of your rights, courts start ruling you also waived others.
Nobody ever points out that democrat-appointed judges blocked the repeal of slavery for decades
And fucktards like you forget that the Dixiecrat judges left the Democrat Party in the 1960s and were welcomed into the modern racist GOP with open arms.
Saying that "Republicans" today are what they were over 50 years ago is a plain lie.