Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 9:32 pm
Anybody else wanna post the link? 
Page 3 of 5
Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 9:41 pm
Holy shit, i never new, so does anyone know the real story yet?
Posted: Mon May 16, 2005 11:15 pm
Thanks Namaste. I survived.Namaste wrote:Boyd- cops at the Red fuckin' suck. Sorry to hear of your troubles.
One time I was driving to the the Mayor's place (RIP) to give him some beer as a "thank you" for letting me take photos, and right infront of his trailor a cop pulled me over for supposidly "weaving/no seat belt/incomplete stop at stop sign." After writting me a big ass ticket he asked if the beer was for the old man- and I told him no...the cop left, and the Mayor was rewarded with beer as promised. I miss that guy.
You got beer for that guy...Rodney Tucker, whom I didn't know but gleaned his name from this site... to take photos? That's a good methodology. He was always out by his firepit. Do you have any pics to post?
Posted: Tue May 17, 2005 1:53 am
I do need to qualify this statement. Using K-9s is not an infringement upon a recognized right so long as the initial stop is not itself an unreasonable infringement. So, if you get pulled over speeding, they can K-9 your vehicle. Using the K-9 at the safety checkpoints and DUI checkpoints is also more than likely reasonable.Spragwa wrote:Oh and Alan Evil, the Supreme Court recently ruled that using K-9s is not an infringement upon a recognized right.
Posted: Tue May 17, 2005 2:43 am
Hold up....so the use of the K-9 needs to be predicated on some legal justificaiton, e.g., you have a traffic violation, a broken light let's say, then that is a trigger into a new bracket of assessment, kinda like the old seat belt law? In other words, clean as a whistle means zero hassel?Spragwa wrote:I do need to qualify this statement. Using K-9s is not an infringement upon a recognized right so long as the initial stop is not itself an unreasonable infringement. So, if you get pulled over speeding, they can K-9 your vehicle. Using the K-9 at the safety checkpoints and DUI checkpoints is also more than likely reasonable.Spragwa wrote:Oh and Alan Evil, the Supreme Court recently ruled that using K-9s is not an infringement upon a recognized right.
Posted: Tue May 17, 2005 3:57 am
Why isn't a roadblock an unreasonable infringment?
Posted: Tue May 17, 2005 4:44 am
Seems if you combine those two there isn't anybody you can't stop.
Posted: Tue May 17, 2005 10:08 am
A roadblock is not an unreasonable infringement because the public is notified in advance. There are certain rules that law enforcement agencies must follow to conduct them. For example, are you ever surprised that there's a "safety check" outside of the Nada tunnel?
Posted: Tue May 17, 2005 2:31 pm
Boyd- or anybody- how do you post photos on here? I'll post some of the Mayor if you still want.
Posted: Tue May 17, 2005 3:34 pm
I think you have to link to an off-site source withNamaste wrote:Boyd- or anybody- how do you post photos on here? I'll post some of the Mayor if you still want.
...on their way to Grays Arch
