Forum Overview :: Operation: Hammer Time
 
Oh, well, when you put it that way, you're even more full of shit. by I need clarification 05/12/2003, 5:00pm PDT
Lizard_King wrote:

I need clarification wrote:


And if the right to counsel can't be suspended at will by the very government authorities that right is intended to protect citizens against, then we've done it a great service by demonstrating it against two high school students.


There are plenty of serious cases of government abuse of power that are material in the nature of the offense. This is just a small ideological blip on the radar, and much ado about nothing.


You're right, I'm being way too vigilant. If only I could just "know" somehow which (or whose) rights it's okay to trample over, and which are completely sancrosanct. I wonder what would have happened if those two high school students legally owned firearms. Would they have been confiscated? I HOPE NOT!! Because even if they are a threat to the president so great they must be investigated by the Secret Service, the threat to the 2nd Amendment is far greater.

Lizard_King wrote:

The Secret Service is bound to be fodder for your brand of hysteria by the very nature of their occupation. They have no choice but to pursue almost every warning they get, simply because without investigation it is impossible to differentiate the harmless shit talkers (ie you) from the genuinely, materially dangerous types(Lee Harvey Oswald).


Or, presumably, you. Or maybe you could be the final arbiter of who is a harmless shit talker and who is a genuine threat, who deserves which rights, where those rights should be a applied and when they're just annoying impediments to important law enforcement work, and whether we should have any rights at all during a continuous "war on terrorism."

Lizard_King wrote:

When they actually start ignoring habeas corpus and killing wallet wielders in the streets, I'll be concerned. Until then, the Secret Service are small fry in comparison to the FBI and the cops, and unlike those two it is questionable whether they would be able to fulfill their responsibilities without some degree of informality.


"Informality?"

Ha ha.

In the words of John McEnroe, you cannot be serious! Anyway, you're arguing both sides right now, so I'll pick one for you - if a threat is important enough that the Secret Service has to send two of its allegedly finest out to interview the suspects, it's important enough they be allowed access to counsel. It's not a matter of convenience or expediency, it's a matter of pretty much the basis for our entire legal system. Or maybe you think there's a better way to do it?

And I would never use a word like "freaky". Fag.


Whatever - semantics. You're all in favor of profiling, and yet if the Secret Service had actually profiled JUST A LITTLE BIT in this case, they would have saved themselves a lot of time and maybe trampled over the constitution a little less.
PREVIOUS NEXT REPLY QUOTE
 
Secret Service to students: "We own you. You don't get any rights." by Senor Barborito 05/12/2003, 8:34am PDT NEW
    Re: Secret Service to students: "We own you. You don't get any rights." by foogla 05/12/2003, 9:30am PDT NEW
        Re: Secret Service to students: "We own you. You don't get any rights." by Moab 05/12/2003, 10:02am PDT NEW
            Well, shit, you're keepin it real, EVERYTHING IS A-OK. by Chairman Mao 05/12/2003, 10:11am PDT NEW
                BUSH IS HITLER! by Moab 05/12/2003, 10:50am PDT NEW
                    Godwin, you suck... er, lose. NT by Chairman Mao 05/12/2003, 1:31pm PDT NEW
                        Closer to Maimon. by Moab 05/12/2003, 2:46pm PDT NEW
                            So many strawmen, so little time. At least it keeps you in shape, champ! NT by Chairman Mao 05/12/2003, 2:49pm PDT NEW
                                Re: So many strawmen, so little time. At least it keeps you in shape, champ! by Moab 05/12/2003, 3:07pm PDT NEW
                                    Re: So many strawmen, so little time. At least it keeps you in shape, champ! by foogla 05/12/2003, 3:53pm PDT NEW
                                        Addendum by Chairman Mao 05/12/2003, 3:57pm PDT NEW
                                            Re: Addendum by Moab 05/12/2003, 8:10pm PDT NEW
                                                Yes. NT by Chairman Mao 05/12/2003, 8:12pm PDT NEW
                                                    Re: Yes. by Moab 05/12/2003, 8:44pm PDT NEW
                                                        Failure to recognize sarcasm is a serious probelm in this forum by MM 05/12/2003, 8:52pm PDT NEW
                                                        You're still writing? by Chairman Mao 05/12/2003, 8:55pm PDT NEW
                                                            My brother used to have that problem. by Moab 05/12/2003, 9:01pm PDT NEW
                                                                I am timeless. You are stupid. by Chairman Mao 05/12/2003, 9:03pm PDT NEW
                                                            Fuck it, you win by Moab 05/12/2003, 9:06pm PDT NEW
                                                                Good game, yo. NT by Chairman Mao 05/12/2003, 9:07pm PDT NEW
                                                                    YOU WIN! PERFECT. -nt- by Street Fighter II announcer 05/12/2003, 9:48pm PDT NEW
            Your 20/20 hindsight is astounding NT by MM 05/12/2003, 10:51am PDT NEW
                Explain. by Moab 05/12/2003, 10:51am PDT NEW
                    No. NT by Zen Master 05/12/2003, 11:05am PDT NEW
                        So like, just in general then. Cool, thanks. NT by Moab 05/12/2003, 11:08am PDT NEW
                Flexes. Victory Dance. Humps Chun Li. NT by Chairman Mao 05/12/2003, 9:59pm PDT NEW
                    How the fuck??!? by Chairman Mao 05/12/2003, 9:59pm PDT NEW
                        YOU LOSE. NT by Street Fighter II announcer 05/12/2003, 10:09pm PDT NEW
                        :) NT by Moab 05/12/2003, 10:20pm PDT NEW
                        Are you SURE, of do you just think so? by Entropy Stew 05/17/2003, 3:03am PDT NEW
                            Re: Are you SURE, of do you just think so? by Moab 05/17/2003, 4:46pm PDT NEW
                                I don't think my code accounts for human choice properly NT by Entropy Stew 05/17/2003, 8:15pm PDT NEW
    Re: Secret Service to students: "We own you. You don't get any rights." by Lizard_King 05/12/2003, 10:44am PDT NEW
        Re: Secret Service to students: "We own you. You don't get any rights." by MM 05/12/2003, 10:50am PDT NEW
            What're you trying to say about Doctor Who? NT by Lizard_King 05/12/2003, 12:14pm PDT NEW
            Re: Secret Service to students: "We own you. You don't get any rights." by contrite Robin Williams 05/12/2003, 3:13pm PDT NEW
                Re: Secret Service to students: "We own you. You don't get any rights." by MM 05/12/2003, 8:54pm PDT NEW
        You're totally right. No, wait, I meant you're full of shit. by I need clarification 05/12/2003, 3:54pm PDT NEW
            Re: You're totally right. No, wait, I meant you're full of shit. by Lizard_King 05/12/2003, 4:10pm PDT NEW
                Oh, well, when you put it that way, you're even more full of shit. by I need clarification 05/12/2003, 5:00pm PDT NEW
                    Please stop being retarded. by laudablepuss 05/12/2003, 6:25pm PDT NEW
                        Yes, exactly. by Senor Barborito 05/12/2003, 6:33pm PDT NEW
        Re: Secret Service to students: "We own you. You don't get any rights." by Lufteufel 05/12/2003, 5:30pm PDT NEW
            Re: Secret Service to students: "We own you. You don't get any rights." by Lizard_King 05/12/2003, 9:46pm PDT NEW
 
powered by pointy