Good Sam Club Open Roads Forum: General RVing Issues: Trouble with California
Open Roads Forum Already a member? Login here.   If not, Register Today!  |  Help

Newest  |  Active  |  Popular  |  RVing FAQ Forum Rules  |  Forum Posting Help and Support  |  Contact  

Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in General RVing Issues

Open Roads Forum  >  General RVing Issues

 > Trouble with California

Reply to Topic  |  Subscribe  |  Print Page  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 29  
Prev  |  Next
Yosemite Sam1

Under the pines.

Senior Member

Joined: 03/28/2018

View Profile



Good Sam RV Club Member

Offline
Posted: 01/20/20 03:41pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

am1958 wrote:

Yosemite Sam1 wrote:

am1958 wrote:

Actually, upon reflection, someone should close this thread before Sam does himself a critical injury...


The risk of injury is only to the brains. And it that regard, you are well safe.[emoticon]


Finally, your failure to address the question at hand while making a potentially accurate and thus funny comment demonstrates that you concede...

What's sad is that that it took a British citizen to explain to you your rights under American law. Don't feel bad, I rarely meet people that know their rights here which is unbelievably sad... I left my country to come to the freedom your Constitution and Bill of Rights afford you only to find that so few of you seem to care to maintain those freedoms.

What's happening in Virginia right now is a great example... If you really pay attention it's an argument for an Electoral College in every state.

[Edit] Oops, you edited your last post... Too late...[/Edit]


All irrelevant, stay on topic!

am1958

SE Michigan

Senior Member

Joined: 04/10/2014

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 01/20/20 03:50pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Yosemite Sam1 wrote:

All irrelevant, stay on topic!


Thank you

Goodnight

[image]

Turtle n Peeps

California

Senior Member

Joined: 06/23/2008

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 01/20/20 07:28pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Alan_Hepburn wrote:

You certainly have the right to refuse a search, but then they also have the right to tell you to turn around and go back the way you came...


Did you watch the video I posted before you wrote this?


~ Too many freaks & not enough circuses ~


"Life is not tried ~ it is merely survived ~ if you're standing
outside the fire"

"The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly."- Abraham Lincoln


JRscooby

Indepmo

Senior Member

Joined: 06/10/2019

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 01/21/20 05:07am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

This post likely will be deleted for political reason, but a short study of history. I understand the idea the few travelers should be willing to give up their privacy for the good of the ag industry.
A while back Snowden released proof the government was recording phone calls and reading e-mails. In the discussions behind that "If you are doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide" was the stated policy of one political party. If you follow that idea, then somebody that says "No. You need a warrant to search my house/office/whatever" than any judge appointed/confirmed by that party might think "He doesn't want LEO in, must be hiding something." This could turn the "No!" into probable cause.

am1958

SE Michigan

Senior Member

Joined: 04/10/2014

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 01/21/20 07:05am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Quote:

In short (and as summed up in a footnote), police cannot use someone's constitutionally-protected right to refuse a search as probable cause to justify a search. The ruling is reversed and remanded and the police are now in the same position they were before they performed the warrantless search: looking at someone they want to arrest but without the probable cause to do so. And now it's so much worse because the officer knows Barker was in possession of a controlled substance but can't do anything about it. With the evidence suppressed, the single possession charge resulting from this arrest no longer exists.

These rights weren't granted to citizens just so the government could use any exercise of them against those availing themselves of these protections. They were supposed to safeguard citizens against governmental overreach and abuse of its powers, but default mode seems to be that only the guilty assert their rights. This mindset is so perverse -- and so pervasive -- that it has to be beaten back one court decision at a time. Law enforcement officers treat assertions of rights as, at best, an annoyance and at worst, tacit admissions of guilt. To operate under such a twisted interpretation displays an almost incomprehensible level of privilege -- where government agents are owed whatever they request and any failure to cooperate is treated with suspicion.


https://www.techdirt.com/articles/201505........snt-inherently-suspicious-behavior.shtml

So, no. Refusal to permit a warrantless search does not equal probable cause. However, the officer way deem it so but when it comes to court any charges stemming from the illegal search should be dismissed by the court or upon appeal.

Yosemite Sam1

Under the pines.

Senior Member

Joined: 03/28/2018

View Profile



Good Sam RV Club Member

Offline
Posted: 01/21/20 08:19am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

am1958 wrote:


So, no. Refusal to permit a warrantless search does not equal probable cause. However, the officer way deem it so but when it comes to court any charges stemming from the illegal search should be dismissed by the court or upon appeal.


Seriously, you want to play lawyer now and speculate on the court decision when you don't even know the difference between "search warrant" (used to look for evidence of illegal activity or crime) and administrative inspection?

Your display and pretend-knowledge of law makes me weep -- well, laugh-out-loud mostly.

am1958

SE Michigan

Senior Member

Joined: 04/10/2014

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 01/21/20 08:44am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Err... the whole point of what I have been saying has been based on just that while you have been equating the two...

Strangely, you invoke no emotion in me... You are like lint or a bottle cap... *

* Name the movie without the use of google... [image]

Yosemite Sam1

Under the pines.

Senior Member

Joined: 03/28/2018

View Profile



Good Sam RV Club Member

Offline
Posted: 01/21/20 10:05am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Turtle n Peeps wrote:

Alan_Hepburn wrote:

You certainly have the right to refuse a search, but then they also have the right to tell you to turn around and go back the way you came...


Did you watch the video I posted before you wrote this?


Why, what did you see something that we don't at the end of the video? The inspector and the LEO was telling the a**hole couple to turn-around and go back to Arizona.

Do you think they got their way? The LEO even warned them.

* This post was edited 01/21/20 10:12am by Yosemite Sam1 *

Turtle n Peeps

California

Senior Member

Joined: 06/23/2008

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 01/21/20 10:30am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Yosemite Sam1 wrote:

Turtle n Peeps wrote:

Alan_Hepburn wrote:

You certainly have the right to refuse a search, but then they also have the right to tell you to turn around and go back the way you came...


Did you watch the video I posted before you wrote this?


Why, what did you see something that we don't at the end of the video? The inspector and the LEO was telling the a**hole couple to turn-around and go back to Arizona.

Do you think they got their way? The LEO even warned them.


LOL, aaaaaaa because there is a part 2 and part 3 to the video. There is even a followup where they called up inspector Duffey. I even went to the trouble of posting the links for people like you who have a hard time navigating around the computer.

The question is why do you call people that uphold their right a**holes?

I do think it's funny about the dryer lint. LOL Ya, I added the "dryer" part, but it's still funny! [emoticon]

PS: you might give this to your lawyer brother. LOL

westernrvparkowner

montana

Senior Member

Joined: 11/29/2008

View Profile



Posted: 01/21/20 10:39am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

JRscooby wrote:

This post likely will be deleted for political reason, but a short study of history. I understand the idea the few travelers should be willing to give up their privacy for the good of the ag industry.
A while back Snowden released proof the government was recording phone calls and reading e-mails. In the discussions behind that "If you are doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide" was the stated policy of one political party. If you follow that idea, then somebody that says "No. You need a warrant to search my house/office/whatever" than any judge appointed/confirmed by that party might think "He doesn't want LEO in, must be hiding something." This could turn the "No!" into probable cause.
I personally like the idea that someone is watching my every move. That way, when I get the feeling my life is boring all I have to do is think about the poor sap that drew my name as a surveillance target.

Reply to Topic  |  Subscribe  |  Print Page  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 29  
Prev  |  Next

Open Roads Forum  >  General RVing Issues

 > Trouble with California
Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in General RVing Issues


New posts No new posts
Closed, new posts Closed, no new posts
Moved, new posts Moved, no new posts

Adjust text size:




© 2020 CWI, Inc. © 2020 Good Sam Enterprises, LLC. All Rights Reserved.