When I was a youngster I had RC cars, boats and planes. I got to aircraft last in the lineage and didn't get an RC plane until I was about 13. I had a few friends that were avid fliers and one that was a competition RC helicopter pilot who was nationally ranked. When my parents bought me my first RC plane I immediately read the rules of operation that were available at the time because my friends had told me what some of them were, but also told me where to find the FAA rules. Fly over your own property (or someone's large field that you got permission from, or an abandoned airport that was designated for RC flight), fly below 400 feet, stay 3 miles or more from airports were the three main rules. AFAIK, until idiots started violating these rules (mostly because they never bothered to find out what they were) those rules were still in place and governing the operation of RC air vehicles.
Now these nimrods have ruined RC aircraft for everyone because they never bothered to find out what the FAA rules were for operating such craft. I see YouTube video of people flying over active streets, other people's property, well above 400 feet and even in public places like parks. Those were all no-no's that would get the cops on you and possibly get you charged with a felony when I was a kid, and we avoided doing that not only to keep our parents from having to get us at the police station, but because it was the best way to keep doing something we loved doing.
So my question is, when did everyone decide that they could do whatever they want wherever they want thinking there were no consequences? I'm 43 and I see people my age and older doing some of this stupid stuff and it blows my mind. Are people really that unaware to think that there aren't rules and regulations for these devices? They've existed for longer than I've been alive so I just don't get why no one knows or bothered to ask about them and now everyone gets the shaft. It's sad that my children won't be able to do the fun things that I used to do, all while playing within the rules. The new rules are almost certainly require RC pilots to have full FAA pilot licenses in order to operate them. That's just outrageous, and it's because of ignorant, selfish assholes that did whatever they pleased and spoiled a hobby for everyone.
It seems like the only way you can truly make yourself unoffshoreable is to acquire your own local customers by running your own business.
1. Sounds good on paper
2. Depends on where you (want to) live
3. Nothing says that the market for your product or services won't change and you're back where you started
The "Hands Up" app ( http://www.handsuptheapp.com/ ) has just been released and is designed to deal with these issues. It's quite clever and records the your interaction with the police as usual, but also:
- Turns the screen blank but keeps recording;
- Automatically uploads geotagged video segments to Dropbox every few seconds, preserving the recording even if it's erased or the phone is destroyed; and,
- Sends a text message to your emergency contact notifying them of the recording's existence.
Does it also check the consent laws for the jurisdiction you're recording in via that GPS tag? If not, you may want to do that before you become John Q. Public with a cop cam.
Bad advice. In some states that's not true at all. Illinois and Massachusetts in particular. You can be as noble as you like, but if you're actually breaking the law where you live you will be cited. There is no guarantee to the privileges of society being the same from one jurisdiction to the next. Go look up the laws for your state before getting on your high horse.
Just know that you have every right to film the cops in public and if they try to stop you, they are in the wrong.
Bad advice. In some states that's not true at all. Illinois and Massachusetts in particular. You can be as noble as you like, but if you're actually breaking the law where you live you will be cited. There is no guarantee to the privileges of society being the same from one jurisdiction to the next. Go look up the laws for your state before getting on your high horse.
All-party consent (rather than one-party consent) for recording has always been a stupid fucking brain-dead policy, but the proliferation of cameras means we ought to be making getting those laws repealed a high priority.
Tell that to Illinois and Massachusetts. Then work on the other 16 or so states that have effed up consent laws for recording interactions.
Where I'm from if you backtalk a cop, they take you to jail (if you're lucky they don't beat you for "resisting arrest" too). They make up some charges after-the-fact. Or maybe there are no charges and they let you go after 48 hours of sharing a cell with crackheads. Either way, the lesson is "don't backtalk."
It's disorderly conduct. It's not a bullshit charge. All my LEO friends have told me, do not argue with a cop. It's pointless and will get you charged with a misdemeanor disorderly conduct violation. Argue with a judge or a lawyer, but not a cop. Besides, in most states you are required to obey any lawful order given to you by a cop, whether you believe you're in the right or not it's just dumb to argue with a cop unless you are a lawyer or a judge, or happen to be standing next to one. But, if an officer tells you to stop recording in a state where it is perfectly legal, quote the statute (or have a copy handy) in a calm way and do back off a little to allow the officer to gain control of the situation that you are recording. Don't argue with the cop!
Phone tapping vs recording a public officer exercising public duties in a public space? IANAL but I don't think they're quite the same. I mean, you could pull out maritime law too but I think it's hardly relevant.
Actually, in some states they are the same thing. It's about recording interactions of any kind. In Virginia where I live, only one party to a conversation is required to know the conversation is being recorded. That means if I am talking to you on the phone or in person I can record the conversation without your knowledge, legally, as I know it's being recorded. You can also put cameras in or on buildings without any notice in my state. Some states all parties have to consent and is why telephone support folks are required to disclose that calls are being recorded and why businesses are required to post notices at their front doors that there are recording devices active on the premises.. Then there's Illinois and Massachusetts where you're not allowed to record any interaction without complete consent from everyone being recorded, even in public! Note that the notice on the door serves as consent if you choose to enter any structure with recording devices with the posted notice.
And I'm sorry to the good police who feel all butt hurt over this, but too damned bad.
Yep. If you want us to trust all of you, start weeding out your own bad apples so we don't have to deal with them to begin with! We'll start trusting you when you show us you deserve it. Isn't that how that's supposed to go? There isn't any instant trust relationship.
I mean, look -- there were a bunch of recent stories with suspects getting killed or beate...n
Well, I think ONE thing is pretty clear.
Don't RUN from the cops. The one common denominator from most of the recently publicized cop shootings of citizens, is that the citizen generally ran from the officer.
But one thing to do for sure...don't act like an ass, if you are (and you should) exerting your rights, do so in a calm, non-threatening fashion. Don't shout. Don't curse, use clear concise language. The "Am I free to go" statement is a very simple and very powerful thing to say and get an answer to.
If you don't give them a reason to beat you...99.999% of the time they are not..
Bad example. He actually resisted arrest and comes from a country where the police are far more corrupt than they are in the U.S. so he had some fear. Although, he did not speak English (how I don't know since English has been taught in India schools for over a century), he also did not submit and tried to get away from the cops. Now, the cop reaction was excessive--throwing the man down hard to a concrete slab and breaking a vertebrae or two--the man did resist arrest. It could have been handled a lot better.
maybe put your hands up right high so that they think you are taller than you are. I've heard that helps, sometimes.
Hell, NO! If anything lay flat on the ground and lace your hands behind your head. You are far less likely to get shot by a standing officer if you drop to the ground and submit. Leave no doubt about your intentions to surrender to an armed opponent.
And if they DO arrest you....just face it, you are going to jail...don't resist, doing so give the cops a LOT of leeway in how they manhandle you.
Everything you said was spot on, and jives with everything my LEO friends have told me. I would add that arguing with a cop is futile, even in civil tones. Argue with a judge, not a cop! Arguing with a cop is disorderly conduct and you may get hit with that even if you are otherwise in the right. And yes, always obey instructions from a police officer, even if you may be in the right. Here's why I was told this. If you are coming upon a situation that is tense for any reason and you disobey a police officer you are considerably more likely to get cited. If you've been a party to a situation, even as a witness, wait your turn to speak or when commanded to do something other than wait to speak, tell the officer why you are there and then get far enough away to make the officer more comfortable until he/she is ready to get your statement. Where I live they can't ask me to stop recording a public interation, but they can ask me to move along. Just means I get clear of the immediate area and keep recording. Most of the time you can give cops the benefit of the doubt in a situation that you have not seen play out entirely, and obeying a direct order from a police officer is never a bad idea. In most states it's the law anyway and is punishable with a disorderly conduct like charge.
The problem is that even if only 1% of the cops are directly corrupt, the other 99% of cops who fail to report them -- and that number apparently really is damn close to 99% -- are indirectly corrupt too.
Being "indirectly corrupt" makes about as much sense as being "indirectly pregnant". There's no such thing. If you are an honest cop then you should be pointing out corruption in your ranks. It's your duty to your community to do so! If not, then you're not an honest cop and are just a different kind of corrupt.
So, you're saying black people need white people's help, because they can't help themselves? You are saying that black people can't excel without white people helping them. Do you realize how fucking racist that is?
Ok, so far the only one being racist is you. If you weren't racist you would know that using color references when speaking about people is dehumanizing and factually delusional given modern understanding of the human race. You also completely miss the historical mistreatment of minorities in a population by majorities and that is the real issue as to why minority ethnic groups need society's help, not just one part of society, but all of it! Why? Because of idiots like you that cling to 19th century and earlier ideas about ignorant classifications of PEOPLE that are all of the same race, HUMAN!
Now, go read something current on human biology and do something charitable for someone less fortunate than you so you can catch up with a 21st century outlook on humanity.
Tamir Rice "waved around" precisely nothing, and "refused to drop" precisely nothing. He was in fact shot to death before he would have even had a chance to do anything remotely resembling that!
When an officer of the law (which implies "officer of the law-courts") tells you to do something you, as a citizen under the law, must comply.
If you do not comply, then the officer has the right and obligation to clear you from the area by whatever means necessary.
Tell that to Rosa Parks.
More like tell that to Rodney King, for a more contemporary example. And no, the officer of the law is not an "officer of the law-courts". That's a bailiff or in some states the sheriffs that deliver subpoenas and other court documents. Those are the only instances where cops are servants of the court. The rest of the cops are servants of the Attorney General of the state whose job it is to prosecute criminals. Cops and AGs work for the state. Courts are run by judges, not Attorneys General, and are part of the judiciary NOT LAW ENFORCEMENT. Law enforcement is part of the Executive branch of government and is why the Governor of a state can pardon criminals. AGs report to the Governor's office, not the courts.
Thing is, a cop can take you in for any reason for something like 24-48 hours even without a formal charge. You will be taken in handcuffs, you will be fingerprinted, you will get a DNA swab taken, you will be strip-searched, you will be forced to spread your cheeks and cough in front of a cop... then they let you go after 24 hours with no charges and a have a nice day. All that just because you pissed off a cop and there's no legal recourse.
You may beat the wrap, but you won't beat the ride. All the humiliation is just a bonus for them to 'get ya' because you didn't bow down in a humble enough fashion.
Umm, I think you've watched too much TV with your description of outcomes. You can be handcuffed and held in police custody Once at the station, if no formal charges have been made, they can make you empty your pockets and take off your shoes and belt and any exterior garments like jackets, etc. They can put you in a holding cell or interrogation room and ask you questions, but you DO NOT have to answer if you are not charged with anything and you are required to be immediately released or they have to charge you and allow you to make a phone call.
They don't strip search you without probable cause, nor do they take DNA unless you've been charged with a felony (in most states). They also cannot book you (take fingerprints) unless you are formally charged. I live in a college town where drunk people get arrested all the time. They don't get strip searched, nor DNA swabbed, but they do get booked and jailed. You have to be charged with something for the police to do anything but hold you in custody. Usually, the call to a lawyer ends that hold without charge within minutes, btw.
The BS you see cops do on most TV shows is NOT LEGAL and will end a cop's career in no time flat if they try to pull off something we see on TV. One call to a lawyer and/or the press and it's all over for the police if you were held without being charged. I'm not going to say that this doesn't happen at all, but when it does the police are more often than not on the losing end if the person being arrested without charge has half a brain.
Okay, try this. Go get a gun and walk into a police station.
Good luck.
Where I live, we do this all the time. In fact, we open carry and concealed carry into there every other Thursday for the meeting of our local gun rights organization. This is 5 miles from Washington D.C.
Agreed, and I don't like guns that much. There's absolutely nothing wrong with carrying a firearm into a police station. Now, if it's drawn that's a completley different story, but open carry and concealed carry with a permit is perfectly acceptable. Now, you usually have to check the firearm at the door if you are going to visit someone being held or sometimes just to get into the secure area of the station, but the officers usually do also in that case.
The idea that groups have rights is simply the mistake of the far left wing, and their "Group Politics", and a big reason why Civil Rights Movement has failed.
As a long time Democrat and coming from a staunchly, fiscal conservative Democratic family I can say unequivocally that the idea that individuals have no rights and only groups do is NOT a "far left wing" idea. The left is not the group that is making corporations (a group of people that work for a legal document that creates a non-entity and gives it tax status) "people" and forcing Christian religious dogma and doctrine on the citizens of the United States. I'm sorry, but your view of the "far left wing" in the United States is sadly misinformed.
I have rights, society doesn't. Society is built to protect the rights of the individuals. This is the part of "Liberty and Justice for all". The defense of liberty is the primary function of government. Justice is how that liberty is protected.
1. Everyone in a society governed by democratically elected representatives has rights (privileges, actually [see George Carlin])
2. Groups have rights and is why we have laws that protect minorities and other disenfranchised groups of people (think Native Americans, ethnic groups, etc.)
3. Society is built to protect the rights of that society, not just the individual
4. "Liberty and Justice for all" is a line from the Pledge of Allegiance, not the Constitution and is therefore NOT part of how we as a society are governed. It's dogma at best, propaganda at worst
5. The primary function of government is governing, that's why it's called government
6. Liberty is protected by force. Period. Whether that be force of arms or the force of the vote, but it's protected by force and force alone.
7. Justice protects the innocent and prosecutes the guilty and has little or nothing to do with liberty unless the law enforcement part of a government is wholly and completely corrupt (see Ferguson, Missouri; Baltimore; Maryland, et al). In that case there is not justice and no liberty.
Anything less, is simply a step towards tyranny.
Not really since your underpinnings are not properly formed. Basically, I don't think your idea of tyranny is the same as that defined by history or the dictionary, let alone current events. Sounds like you want to call anything you don't agree with as tyranny or persecution and I'm sorry, that's just not the way it works. Tyranny is when a group or entire society is being made to suffer by a single, authoritarian individual or group. That's just not happening in the United States, unless you're talking about the billionaires and mega-corporations that practically own our government right now. That's bordering on oligarchy and not democracy and will only lead to tyranny down the road, but that's because society as a whole will suffer, not just a minority nor an individual.
On topic. Check your local laws before you pipe up to a cop while you are recording his/her activities. The laws vary from state to state, but Illinois and Massachusetts are currently the only states where you are not allowed to record a police officer under any circumstance. There are over a dozen states where consent of all parties to a recording have to be received before you can record, and 39 states where, as long as the activity is going on in public or in full view of the public, you can record whatever you want.
It's best you check the laws where you live and PRINT OUT THOSE LAWS and have them handy if you are going to make a habit or passing fancy out of recording police officers while they perform their duty. Otherwise, have a lawyer next to you. One other thing to keep in mind is that even if it is legal for you to record, local cops can put you in their cross hairs forever if you piss them off. I'm not saying they will do anything illegal, but they can legally make your life miserable if they so choose. Do one little thing wr
You're right, which is why most of the commenters here are wanting the religious exemption revoked entirely, not just one religion's exemption; ALL OF THEM!
You realize that the tax-exemption does render unto Caesar and God what is theirs, right? The minute that you revoke tax-exempt status for these Churches, they can always start a PAC? They can also start to preach politics from the pulpit. Right now their tax-exempt status is a a balance and check.
Either you live in an alternate reality or you just haven't been paying attention to U.S. politics for the last 50 years or so. Religion has been influencing politics very directly since the Dixiecrat era and the Southern Strategy. Here's a video of a church pastor telling his parishioners how to vote just recently.
So, wanna tell me about that "balance and check" again?
Who defines what is charitable work? Is saving souls not charitable?
I don't know, can they prove that they were saved? Remember, in the Laws of Man that we all must ALSO FOLLOW, it's not what you believe, it's what you can prove. A charitable organization can point to tangible results of its work and prove it is doing something to help others, a religious one cannot. There's your justification, and the lack thereof.
Slashdot Mirror
When I was a youngster I had RC cars, boats and planes. I got to aircraft last in the lineage and didn't get an RC plane until I was about 13. I had a few friends that were avid fliers and one that was a competition RC helicopter pilot who was nationally ranked. When my parents bought me my first RC plane I immediately read the rules of operation that were available at the time because my friends had told me what some of them were, but also told me where to find the FAA rules. Fly over your own property (or someone's large field that you got permission from, or an abandoned airport that was designated for RC flight), fly below 400 feet, stay 3 miles or more from airports were the three main rules. AFAIK, until idiots started violating these rules (mostly because they never bothered to find out what they were) those rules were still in place and governing the operation of RC air vehicles.
Now these nimrods have ruined RC aircraft for everyone because they never bothered to find out what the FAA rules were for operating such craft. I see YouTube video of people flying over active streets, other people's property, well above 400 feet and even in public places like parks. Those were all no-no's that would get the cops on you and possibly get you charged with a felony when I was a kid, and we avoided doing that not only to keep our parents from having to get us at the police station, but because it was the best way to keep doing something we loved doing.
So my question is, when did everyone decide that they could do whatever they want wherever they want thinking there were no consequences? I'm 43 and I see people my age and older doing some of this stupid stuff and it blows my mind. Are people really that unaware to think that there aren't rules and regulations for these devices? They've existed for longer than I've been alive so I just don't get why no one knows or bothered to ask about them and now everyone gets the shaft. It's sad that my children won't be able to do the fun things that I used to do, all while playing within the rules. The new rules are almost certainly require RC pilots to have full FAA pilot licenses in order to operate them. That's just outrageous, and it's because of ignorant, selfish assholes that did whatever they pleased and spoiled a hobby for everyone.
Oh, and get off my effing lawn!
It seems like the only way you can truly make yourself unoffshoreable is to acquire your own local customers by running your own business.
1. Sounds good on paper
2. Depends on where you (want to) live
3. Nothing says that the market for your product or services won't change and you're back where you started
Just an FYI on BAE. They have research and production facilities in the United States. They bought a bunch of old IBM buildings in Manassas, VA for one. Also, off-shoring to the UK is about the same cost to an employer as a U.S. hire as far as pay and fringes go, but then you have the cost of remote employee interactions.
The "Hands Up" app ( http://www.handsuptheapp.com/ ) has just been released and is designed to deal with these issues. It's quite clever and records the your interaction with the police as usual, but also: - Turns the screen blank but keeps recording; - Automatically uploads geotagged video segments to Dropbox every few seconds, preserving the recording even if it's erased or the phone is destroyed; and, - Sends a text message to your emergency contact notifying them of the recording's existence.
Does it also check the consent laws for the jurisdiction you're recording in via that GPS tag? If not, you may want to do that before you become John Q. Public with a cop cam.
Depends on the jurisdiction (state) you're in. Check your local laws before trying anything.
Ok broken record time:
Bad advice. In some states that's not true at all. Illinois and Massachusetts in particular. You can be as noble as you like, but if you're actually breaking the law where you live you will be cited. There is no guarantee to the privileges of society being the same from one jurisdiction to the next. Go look up the laws for your state before getting on your high horse.
Just know that you have every right to film the cops in public and if they try to stop you, they are in the wrong.
Bad advice. In some states that's not true at all. Illinois and Massachusetts in particular. You can be as noble as you like, but if you're actually breaking the law where you live you will be cited. There is no guarantee to the privileges of society being the same from one jurisdiction to the next. Go look up the laws for your state before getting on your high horse.
All-party consent (rather than one-party consent) for recording has always been a stupid fucking brain-dead policy, but the proliferation of cameras means we ought to be making getting those laws repealed a high priority.
Tell that to Illinois and Massachusetts. Then work on the other 16 or so states that have effed up consent laws for recording interactions.
Where I'm from if you backtalk a cop, they take you to jail (if you're lucky they don't beat you for "resisting arrest" too). They make up some charges after-the-fact. Or maybe there are no charges and they let you go after 48 hours of sharing a cell with crackheads. Either way, the lesson is "don't backtalk."
It's disorderly conduct. It's not a bullshit charge. All my LEO friends have told me, do not argue with a cop. It's pointless and will get you charged with a misdemeanor disorderly conduct violation. Argue with a judge or a lawyer, but not a cop. Besides, in most states you are required to obey any lawful order given to you by a cop, whether you believe you're in the right or not it's just dumb to argue with a cop unless you are a lawyer or a judge, or happen to be standing next to one. But, if an officer tells you to stop recording in a state where it is perfectly legal, quote the statute (or have a copy handy) in a calm way and do back off a little to allow the officer to gain control of the situation that you are recording. Don't argue with the cop!
Phone tapping vs recording a public officer exercising public duties in a public space? IANAL but I don't think they're quite the same. I mean, you could pull out maritime law too but I think it's hardly relevant.
Actually, in some states they are the same thing. It's about recording interactions of any kind. In Virginia where I live, only one party to a conversation is required to know the conversation is being recorded. That means if I am talking to you on the phone or in person I can record the conversation without your knowledge, legally, as I know it's being recorded. You can also put cameras in or on buildings without any notice in my state. Some states all parties have to consent and is why telephone support folks are required to disclose that calls are being recorded and why businesses are required to post notices at their front doors that there are recording devices active on the premises.. Then there's Illinois and Massachusetts where you're not allowed to record any interaction without complete consent from everyone being recorded, even in public! Note that the notice on the door serves as consent if you choose to enter any structure with recording devices with the posted notice.
And I'm sorry to the good police who feel all butt hurt over this, but too damned bad.
Yep. If you want us to trust all of you, start weeding out your own bad apples so we don't have to deal with them to begin with! We'll start trusting you when you show us you deserve it. Isn't that how that's supposed to go? There isn't any instant trust relationship.
Well, I think ONE thing is pretty clear.
Don't RUN from the cops. The one common denominator from most of the recently publicized cop shootings of citizens, is that the citizen generally ran from the officer.
But one thing to do for sure...don't act like an ass, if you are (and you should) exerting your rights, do so in a calm, non-threatening fashion. Don't shout. Don't curse, use clear concise language. The "Am I free to go" statement is a very simple and very powerful thing to say and get an answer to.
If you don't give them a reason to beat you...99.999% of the time they are not..
Tell that to poor Mr. Sureshbhai Patel: http://www.al.com/news/index.s...
Bad example. He actually resisted arrest and comes from a country where the police are far more corrupt than they are in the U.S. so he had some fear. Although, he did not speak English (how I don't know since English has been taught in India schools for over a century), he also did not submit and tried to get away from the cops. Now, the cop reaction was excessive--throwing the man down hard to a concrete slab and breaking a vertebrae or two--the man did resist arrest. It could have been handled a lot better.
maybe put your hands up right high so that they think you are taller than you are. I've heard that helps, sometimes.
Hell, NO! If anything lay flat on the ground and lace your hands behind your head. You are far less likely to get shot by a standing officer if you drop to the ground and submit. Leave no doubt about your intentions to surrender to an armed opponent.
And if they DO arrest you....just face it, you are going to jail...don't resist, doing so give the cops a LOT of leeway in how they manhandle you.
Everything you said was spot on, and jives with everything my LEO friends have told me. I would add that arguing with a cop is futile, even in civil tones. Argue with a judge, not a cop! Arguing with a cop is disorderly conduct and you may get hit with that even if you are otherwise in the right. And yes, always obey instructions from a police officer, even if you may be in the right. Here's why I was told this. If you are coming upon a situation that is tense for any reason and you disobey a police officer you are considerably more likely to get cited. If you've been a party to a situation, even as a witness, wait your turn to speak or when commanded to do something other than wait to speak, tell the officer why you are there and then get far enough away to make the officer more comfortable until he/she is ready to get your statement. Where I live they can't ask me to stop recording a public interation, but they can ask me to move along. Just means I get clear of the immediate area and keep recording. Most of the time you can give cops the benefit of the doubt in a situation that you have not seen play out entirely, and obeying a direct order from a police officer is never a bad idea. In most states it's the law anyway and is punishable with a disorderly conduct like charge.
The problem is that even if only 1% of the cops are directly corrupt, the other 99% of cops who fail to report them -- and that number apparently really is damn close to 99% -- are indirectly corrupt too.
Being "indirectly corrupt" makes about as much sense as being "indirectly pregnant". There's no such thing. If you are an honest cop then you should be pointing out corruption in your ranks. It's your duty to your community to do so! If not, then you're not an honest cop and are just a different kind of corrupt.
So, you're saying black people need white people's help, because they can't help themselves? You are saying that black people can't excel without white people helping them. Do you realize how fucking racist that is?
Ok, so far the only one being racist is you. If you weren't racist you would know that using color references when speaking about people is dehumanizing and factually delusional given modern understanding of the human race. You also completely miss the historical mistreatment of minorities in a population by majorities and that is the real issue as to why minority ethnic groups need society's help, not just one part of society, but all of it! Why? Because of idiots like you that cling to 19th century and earlier ideas about ignorant classifications of PEOPLE that are all of the same race, HUMAN! Now, go read something current on human biology and do something charitable for someone less fortunate than you so you can catch up with a 21st century outlook on humanity.
You are continuing to blatantly lie.
Tamir Rice "waved around" precisely nothing, and "refused to drop" precisely nothing. He was in fact shot to death before he would have even had a chance to do anything remotely resembling that!
And thankfully there is video to prove that. ;)
When an officer of the law (which implies "officer of the law-courts") tells you to do something you, as a citizen under the law, must comply.
If you do not comply, then the officer has the right and obligation to clear you from the area by whatever means necessary.
Tell that to Rosa Parks.
More like tell that to Rodney King, for a more contemporary example. And no, the officer of the law is not an "officer of the law-courts". That's a bailiff or in some states the sheriffs that deliver subpoenas and other court documents. Those are the only instances where cops are servants of the court. The rest of the cops are servants of the Attorney General of the state whose job it is to prosecute criminals. Cops and AGs work for the state. Courts are run by judges, not Attorneys General, and are part of the judiciary NOT LAW ENFORCEMENT. Law enforcement is part of the Executive branch of government and is why the Governor of a state can pardon criminals. AGs report to the Governor's office, not the courts.
Thing is, a cop can take you in for any reason for something like 24-48 hours even without a formal charge. You will be taken in handcuffs, you will be fingerprinted, you will get a DNA swab taken, you will be strip-searched, you will be forced to spread your cheeks and cough in front of a cop... then they let you go after 24 hours with no charges and a have a nice day. All that just because you pissed off a cop and there's no legal recourse.
You may beat the wrap, but you won't beat the ride. All the humiliation is just a bonus for them to 'get ya' because you didn't bow down in a humble enough fashion.
Umm, I think you've watched too much TV with your description of outcomes. You can be handcuffed and held in police custody Once at the station, if no formal charges have been made, they can make you empty your pockets and take off your shoes and belt and any exterior garments like jackets, etc. They can put you in a holding cell or interrogation room and ask you questions, but you DO NOT have to answer if you are not charged with anything and you are required to be immediately released or they have to charge you and allow you to make a phone call.
They don't strip search you without probable cause, nor do they take DNA unless you've been charged with a felony (in most states). They also cannot book you (take fingerprints) unless you are formally charged. I live in a college town where drunk people get arrested all the time. They don't get strip searched, nor DNA swabbed, but they do get booked and jailed. You have to be charged with something for the police to do anything but hold you in custody. Usually, the call to a lawyer ends that hold without charge within minutes, btw.
The BS you see cops do on most TV shows is NOT LEGAL and will end a cop's career in no time flat if they try to pull off something we see on TV. One call to a lawyer and/or the press and it's all over for the police if you were held without being charged. I'm not going to say that this doesn't happen at all, but when it does the police are more often than not on the losing end if the person being arrested without charge has half a brain.
Okay, try this. Go get a gun and walk into a police station.
Good luck.
Where I live, we do this all the time. In fact, we open carry and concealed carry into there every other Thursday for the meeting of our local gun rights organization. This is 5 miles from Washington D.C.
Agreed, and I don't like guns that much. There's absolutely nothing wrong with carrying a firearm into a police station. Now, if it's drawn that's a completley different story, but open carry and concealed carry with a permit is perfectly acceptable. Now, you usually have to check the firearm at the door if you are going to visit someone being held or sometimes just to get into the secure area of the station, but the officers usually do also in that case.
The idea that groups have rights is simply the mistake of the far left wing, and their "Group Politics", and a big reason why Civil Rights Movement has failed.
As a long time Democrat and coming from a staunchly, fiscal conservative Democratic family I can say unequivocally that the idea that individuals have no rights and only groups do is NOT a "far left wing" idea. The left is not the group that is making corporations (a group of people that work for a legal document that creates a non-entity and gives it tax status) "people" and forcing Christian religious dogma and doctrine on the citizens of the United States. I'm sorry, but your view of the "far left wing" in the United States is sadly misinformed.
I have rights, society doesn't. Society is built to protect the rights of the individuals. This is the part of "Liberty and Justice for all". The defense of liberty is the primary function of government. Justice is how that liberty is protected.
1. Everyone in a society governed by democratically elected representatives has rights (privileges, actually [see George Carlin])
2. Groups have rights and is why we have laws that protect minorities and other disenfranchised groups of people (think Native Americans, ethnic groups, etc.)
3. Society is built to protect the rights of that society, not just the individual
4. "Liberty and Justice for all" is a line from the Pledge of Allegiance, not the Constitution and is therefore NOT part of how we as a society are governed. It's dogma at best, propaganda at worst
5. The primary function of government is governing, that's why it's called government
6. Liberty is protected by force. Period. Whether that be force of arms or the force of the vote, but it's protected by force and force alone.
7. Justice protects the innocent and prosecutes the guilty and has little or nothing to do with liberty unless the law enforcement part of a government is wholly and completely corrupt (see Ferguson, Missouri; Baltimore; Maryland, et al). In that case there is not justice and no liberty.
Anything less, is simply a step towards tyranny.
Not really since your underpinnings are not properly formed. Basically, I don't think your idea of tyranny is the same as that defined by history or the dictionary, let alone current events. Sounds like you want to call anything you don't agree with as tyranny or persecution and I'm sorry, that's just not the way it works. Tyranny is when a group or entire society is being made to suffer by a single, authoritarian individual or group. That's just not happening in the United States, unless you're talking about the billionaires and mega-corporations that practically own our government right now. That's bordering on oligarchy and not democracy and will only lead to tyranny down the road, but that's because society as a whole will suffer, not just a minority nor an individual.
On topic. Check your local laws before you pipe up to a cop while you are recording his/her activities. The laws vary from state to state, but Illinois and Massachusetts are currently the only states where you are not allowed to record a police officer under any circumstance. There are over a dozen states where consent of all parties to a recording have to be received before you can record, and 39 states where, as long as the activity is going on in public or in full view of the public, you can record whatever you want.
It's best you check the laws where you live and PRINT OUT THOSE LAWS and have them handy if you are going to make a habit or passing fancy out of recording police officers while they perform their duty. Otherwise, have a lawyer next to you. One other thing to keep in mind is that even if it is legal for you to record, local cops can put you in their cross hairs forever if you piss them off. I'm not saying they will do anything illegal, but they can legally make your life miserable if they so choose. Do one little thing wr
You're right, which is why most of the commenters here are wanting the religious exemption revoked entirely, not just one religion's exemption; ALL OF THEM!
You realize that the tax-exemption does render unto Caesar and God what is theirs, right? The minute that you revoke tax-exempt status for these Churches, they can always start a PAC? They can also start to preach politics from the pulpit. Right now their tax-exempt status is a a balance and check.
Either you live in an alternate reality or you just haven't been paying attention to U.S. politics for the last 50 years or so. Religion has been influencing politics very directly since the Dixiecrat era and the Southern Strategy. Here's a video of a church pastor telling his parishioners how to vote just recently. So, wanna tell me about that "balance and check" again?
Who defines what is charitable work? Is saving souls not charitable?
I don't know, can they prove that they were saved? Remember, in the Laws of Man that we all must ALSO FOLLOW, it's not what you believe, it's what you can prove. A charitable organization can point to tangible results of its work and prove it is doing something to help others, a religious one cannot. There's your justification, and the lack thereof.
It's pretty obvious you need some mandatory sensitivity training.
So do most American church goers. Your point?