This judge now understands as we do: laws are so convoluted no one understands

U.S. Magistrate Judge John Facciola of the District of Columbia said in his ruling that courts are divided about whether the Fourth Amendment requires the government to show probable cause to obtain cell site data. He said he reviewed 87 opinions on the subject and found they were "impossible to reconcile."

Read more: http://www.nationallawjournal.com/l...Up-Showdown-Over-Cellphone-Data#ixzz2yhU4btJY


We need to eliminate RAS, reasonable grounds, etc. They are mythical creatures made up by gov't officials for no reason other than to deprive the people of their rights.

nightmare said:

no. They are consequences of the very words of the fourth amendment.

Click to expand...

ras ≠ pc.

marshaul said:

ras ≠ pc.

Click to expand...

True. They do have in common of being terms and rationalizations invented by courts.

sudden valley gunner said:

True. They do have in common of being terms and rationalizations invented by courts.

Click to expand...

That was Nightmare's point; "probable cause" is found in the 4th Amendment.

RAS is a fabrication made out of whole cloth, however.

marshaul said:

That was Nightmare's point; "probable cause" is found in the 4th Amendment.

RAS is a fabrication made out of whole cloth, however.

Click to expand...

Ah yes, I misspoke. PC has been greatly reduced to practically nothing by the rationalizations of the statist courts.\

Courts have held that being nervous is suspicious and thus probable cause to search.

Hi Folks

Relying on Florida v Royer, 460 U.S. 491 (1983) the court explained that although police have the right to approach individuals and ask questions, the individual has no obligation to respond. The person may decline to answer and simply go on his or her way, and the refusal to respond,alone, does not provide a legitimate basis for an investigative stop...
The court then determined that flight may simply be an exercise of this right to " go on one's way," and , thus, could not constitute reasonable suspicion justifying a Terry stop. { 183 Ill 2nd} at 312...........

While " reasonable suspicion" is a less demanding standard than probable cause and requires a showing considerable less than preponderance of the evidence, the Fourth Amendment requires at least a minimal level of objective justification for making the stop... The Officer must be able to articulate more than an " inchoate and unparticularized suspicion or "hunch" of criminal activity.. Terry,supra.

Regards

CCJ

The legal way around reasonable suspicion is to simply, ask if your free to go, if yes, go, if no, remain silent and request an attorney..

Remaining silent and requesting an attorney is not an admittance of any wrong doing... You simply throw the Constitution at their feet and let them react...

And please note, the pen is mightier then the sword.

My .02

Regards

CCJ

Don't forget who can afford a lot more pens than you.

davidmcbeth said:

SNIP...We need to eliminate RAS, reasonable grounds, etc. They are mythical creatures made up by gov't officials for no reason other than to deprive the people of their rights.

Click to expand...

You can't control an armed citizenry, so you simply lower the bar and muddy the waters to make everyone a criminal.
These tactics are not meant to promote safety, they are about control over us mere citizens.