Detained because of "the Constitution"

[GreyGeek]

Inside the Constitution Free Zone, any  area within 100 miles of any US border or International Airport, you can be stopped and subjected to a interrogation and a warrantless search.  They'll even tell you it's a "Constitutional stop" because Congress,  the  courts and SCOTUS  have  approved it.  Just the same way they've approved the infringement of that which shall not be infringed.

Here is one person's experience:


Now, if you think that you can talk with police because  "I haven't done anything wrong and I tell the truth" then you should watch this video, by a lawyer and a cop:

[ProtoPatriot]

Yes, very good advice from that lawyer and officer.

Saying congress, SCOTUS, the president, governor, state legislature, etc. can determine when and where the Constitution is applied is ridiculous.

That's basically saying the children get to make the rules of the house.

People need to remember the Constitution is rules for government, not rules for the people. The government doesn't get to decide the rules it follows, we the people decide those rules...and those rules are not to be altered or skirted by the elected. There's reason why amendments go to the people for a vote.

Also, the Constitution was written plain and clear for such things as we are facing today...so all would know the limits of the government so they may fight them back and assert their rights. Some rights were specifically picked for safe guarding in order to safe guard the ways to protect all other rights.


"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Well, that means all these attacks on protesters and the secret service given power to decide how people protest is a complete violation... all these laws passed infringing on free speech, etc. "NO LAW" is pretty damn clear.

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

(as was ratified by the states and documented/authenticated by Thomas Jefferson when he was secretary of state...it was congress that added the other 2 commas then placed in the national archives, thus illegally changing it as that is not what the states, nor the people approved)

Well, an infringement is anything that prohibits, limits, restricts, increases difficulty, etc. Well that is pretty cut and clear...that means all armament laws are a violation of our rights. There is absolutely no problem with people having objects. The problems of murder (infringement on someone else's right to life) and vandalism (infringement on someone else's right to property) is already addressed, punish it when it occurs (until after the crime is committed there is no crime)...then leave it to the people to take care of preventing such things on their own by such means as arming themselves by any means they deem fit.

Also, once someone has been convicted of a crime, they receive their sentence. Then once that person completes their sentence and released from incarceration, they are no longer criminals, they return to being completely innocent and ALL rights are returned to them as they have finished the allotted sentence/punishment society gave them for their crimes. This lifetime punishment crap needs to stop, there is no reason for it and it is wrong on so many levels.

[wusker]

Also, once someone has been convicted of a crime, they receive their sentence. Then once that person completes their sentence and released from incarceration, they are no longer criminals, they return to being completely innocent and ALL rights are returned to them as they have finished the allotted sentence/punishment society gave them for their crimes. This lifetime punishment crap needs to stop, there is no reason for it and it is wrong on so many levels.

For misdemeanors and some felonys I would agree, but any felon that has been convicted of anything violent or with the use of any weapon loses that privelege in our society.

[NENick]

Anyone ever notice that these Border patrol agents always look about as smart as a someone who is going to retire from a fast food drive thru?

[ProtoPatriot]

For misdemeanors and some felonys I would agree, but any felon that has been convicted of anything violent or with the use of any weapon loses that privelege in our society.

So, someone does something out of stupidity, they to be punished for the rest of their lives? No, we have no business doing such a thing.

All rights are held by the individual and are not subject to the whims, emotions, etc. of society or another individual. Once punishment is over, it's done. If they are out in public at all, then they return to innocent status with all rights...hence why it's called being "set free". No probation or the like. The only time we as a society can permanently take rights away from an individual is through execution.

This is the only right and moral way...doing otherwise is abhorrent to a free people and freedom itself.

It's called human rights, not "rights we feel comfortable with someone having"...that would be called a privilege, not a right.

Society, governments, groups, etc. have no rights...the perceived rights are just the accumulation of the individuals involved...but rights remain with the individual no matter what.

Also, remember "treat other's as you would like to be treated"...would you like to be punished for your entire life for something stupid you did when you were 18 and are now 30? or 40? or 60? or 80?

This applies to all crimes, there cannot be a double standard.

All individuals are responsible for their own actions...if someone is such a threat that they can never be trusted with 100% of their rights ever again, then execute them.

Also, if they decide to commit another crime, isn't that where self-defense and being armed comes in? Put a bullet in their head and solve the problem once and for all.

[wusker]

Okay so if this is true then at this moment are you fine with a convicted child sex offender getting his degree (on the tax dollar BTW) serving his lengthy sentence, being released and in that token he can then be your daughters pre-school teacher?
Not on my watch brother.

[SS_N_NE]

So, someone does something out of stupidity, they to be punished for the rest of their lives? No, we have no business doing such a thing.

There is ignorance of the law. Stupid disregard of the law. And, plain disregard for the law.  If someone makes the conscience effort to circumvent a law then they have accepted the penalty. It is pretty well known that there are penalty and various degree set to deter certain behavior.
After a point (choice to ignore serious penalty or repeat offenders) it is necessary to remove unsocial persons from society so social people can live without being prey.
Idealology is interesting but does not ensure individual conflict from predators. It should be simple enough to "live and let live" but not everyone agrees to play the same.

[ProtoPatriot]

Okay so if this is true then at this moment are you fine with a convicted child sex offender getting his degree (on the tax dollar BTW) serving his lengthy sentence, being released and in that token he can then be your daughters pre-school teacher?
Not on my watch brother.

Job field is a privilege, not a right. Rights have no requirements, you are born with them. Privileges can have requirements.

A job is privilege because it is subject to another. They are paying you, you do what they say (within reason of course).

You as parent of the right to choose who teaches your children....but that has no business being placed into a law, because what you choose will not necessarily be what I choose.

There should be no education, no TVs, no exercise equipment, etc. in prisons.

Prison should be brutal and disgusting. This whole crap of niceties in prison is a major problem...extremely disgusting.

Once released, it is up to the individual not to commit the actions ever again...they cannot be forced not to. No law can change this. No law can deter this. People don't do things because it's against the law...if that was the case, murder/assault/theft would be non-existent. They must CHOOSE to not do things.


People need to come to terms that somethings they are powerless over...even when in large numbers.

There is ignorance of the law. Stupid disregard of the law. And, plain disregard for the law.  If someone makes the conscience effort to circumvent a law then they have accepted the penalty. It is pretty well known that there are penalty and various degree set to deter certain behavior.
After a point (choice to ignore serious penalty or repeat offenders) it is necessary to remove unsocial persons from society so social people can live without being prey.
Idealology is interesting but does not ensure individual conflict from predators. It should be simple enough to "live and let live" but not everyone agrees to play the same.

And most laws have no business even existing at all.

The safety of the individual is the concern of only the individual. The safety of the children are the concern of only their family/guardians and the child.

Also, when a predator (which is a misnomer because human beings are predators by nature), they have the right of self-defense (even children have this right)....it is up to them to do it, no one else can...nor is it anyone else's responsibility.

There should be no safety nets.

You cannot regulate yourself into prosperity or safety...or anything...that thought is what drives socialism/collectivism and leads more problems than not having the laws/regulations at all.

What is good for the group is rarely good for the individual, but what is good for the individual is good for the group in a majority of cases.