madhatter wrote:or driving home drunk LAST NIGHT? are those admissions of guilt and thus actionable offenses?...reckless endangerment and DUI respectively...
I would think so. Why not?
what was their BAC? was their assessment of whether they were drunk or not accurate? if they said they sat in the parking lot til sober then drove would that be evidence that they really did that? a whole lot of what gets said on the internet is completely inaccurate, never happened or is pure fantasy... who decides?
What if the person is caught on the road and refuses to blow and won't cooperate. Just let them go?
I'd say a person's assertion is even stronger than an officer's independent observations.
madhatter wrote:or driving home drunk LAST NIGHT? are those admissions of guilt and thus actionable offenses?...reckless endangerment and DUI respectively...
I would think so. Why not?
what was their BAC? was their assessment of whether they were drunk or not accurate? if they said they sat in the parking lot til sober then drove would that be evidence that they really did that? a whole lot of what gets said on the internet is completely inaccurate, never happened or is pure fantasy... who decides?
What if the person is caught on the road and refuses to blow and won't cooperate. there is a specific law pertaining to that Just let them go?
I'd say a person's assertion is even stronger than an officer's independent observations.
you are changing the argument is the posted "evidence"
mach es sehr schnell
'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
madhatter wrote:or driving home drunk LAST NIGHT? are those admissions of guilt and thus actionable offenses?...reckless endangerment and DUI respectively...
I would think so. Why not?
what was their BAC? was their assessment of whether they were drunk or not accurate? if they said they sat in the parking lot til sober then drove would that be evidence that they really did that? a whole lot of what gets said on the internet is completely inaccurate, never happened or is pure fantasy... who decides?
What if the person is caught on the road and refuses to blow and won't cooperate. there is a specific law pertaining to that Just let them go?
I'd say a person's assertion is even stronger than an officer's independent observations.
you are changing the argument is the posted "evidence"
Yes. Recent news media has covered numerous stories where people are arrested as a result of posts on social media linking them to a crime.
XtremeJibber2001 wrote:
I would think so. Why not?
what was their BAC? was their assessment of whether they were drunk or not accurate? if they said they sat in the parking lot til sober then drove would that be evidence that they really did that? a whole lot of what gets said on the internet is completely inaccurate, never happened or is pure fantasy... who decides?
What if the person is caught on the road and refuses to blow and won't cooperate. there is a specific law pertaining to that Just let them go?
I'd say a person's assertion is even stronger than an officer's independent observations.
you are changing the argument is the posted "evidence"
Yes. Recent news media has covered numerous stories where people are arrested as a result of posts on social media linking them to a crime.
not solely based on their post... add'l evidence is obtained usually contraband, stolen items, etc ya know, hard evidence... if you keep changing the argument it's hard to have a constructive dialogue...my point was and still is you could NEVER get a conviction where the only evidence was a person said" man I was so hammered driving home last nite I shoulda called a cab"...
mach es sehr schnell
'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
CNN alters photo to make the shooter look white. I believe they did this on purpose. If they in fact did this on purpose it is the kind of thing that p1sses me off.
madhatter wrote:not solely based on their post... add'l evidence is obtained usually contraband, stolen items, etc ya know, hard evidence... if you keep changing the argument it's hard to have a constructive dialogue...my point was and still is you could NEVER get a conviction where the only evidence was a person said" man I was so hammered driving home last nite I shoulda called a cab"...
I haven't found any legal precedence so I'm inclined to say this isn't happening to the extent mass media gets a-hold of it. I won't go so far as saying it could never happen because I think it will.
madhatter wrote:not solely based on their post... add'l evidence is obtained usually contraband, stolen items, etc ya know, hard evidence... if you keep changing the argument it's hard to have a constructive dialogue...my point was and still is you could NEVER get a conviction where the only evidence was a person said" man I was so hammered driving home last nite I shoulda called a cab"...
I haven't found any legal precedence so I'm inclined to say this isn't happening to the extent mass media gets a-hold of it. I won't go so far as saying it could never happen because I think it will.
That would never even make it to court unless it was a hit & run situation and the only way to prove after the fact that there was a DUI was the person's own statement.
Of course, a lawyer would never allow their client to say this so it's a moot point to argue.
Beware of fools & trolls here, they lurk everywhere.
funny how comedians seem to resonate w left wingers as valid sources of news, commentary and editorial despite them being nothing more than comical... colbert, stewart etc are only news to idiots that don;t know better, everyone else including stewart himself knows its SATIRE....this jeffries is even less than that and is pure comedy... if that "nailed" a very serious issue for you, you got problems w reality...though I guess in all honesty the original video post tells you he "nailed it" so maybe you didn;t actually come to that conclusion on your own but just parroted it because you were told so...
mach es sehr schnell
'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
deadheadskier wrote:I'm sure you're very fast at getting your gun out of your safe and loading it madthugger. wow yer gettin' more creative w your cute little nicknames...good job braindeadskier...
post wasn't directed at you
why would I bother to keep it in a safe you moron?...its already loaded and ready to go should the need arise, otherwise it just sits there like any other inanimate object and does absolutely nothing.... I suppose you imagine I actually have Au and Ag buried in my backyard too huh? down by the wooley swamp...
I didn't realize I wasn't supposed to watch the video, but no worries I didn't anyway....I can only imagine what you think reality is like cuz it certainly isn't anything you imagine here online....
Lucias Clay --out...
mach es sehr schnell
'exponential reciprocation'- The practice of always giving back more than you take....
deadheadskier wrote:I'm sure you're very fast at getting your gun out of your safe and loading it madthugger. wow yer gettin' more creative w your cute little nicknames...good job braindeadskier...
post wasn't directed at you
why would I bother to keep it in a safe you moron?...its already loaded and ready to go should the need arise, otherwise it just sits there like any other inanimate object and does absolutely nothing.....
Spoken just like your homeboys on the Southside, Madthugger! I'd imagine some of that gold of yours is in your teeth.
deadheadskier wrote:I'm sure you're very fast at getting your gun out of your safe and loading it madthugger.
So your logic tree is
Guns are dangerous
Therefore you are liable if they aren't kept in a safe
If you keep them in a safe they aren't useful
Therefore you shouldn't have guns for self defense.
