Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-16-2013, 03:25 PM
 
1,614 posts, read 2,067,945 times
Reputation: 804

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
What happened here? A defendant exercised his rights. The state didn't like it and the courts ruled that yes this is his right.

We do not need a court to agree that we have rights, we just do. States were "incorporated" into the same restrictions well before 1964.
Do you understand what incorporation is? How it applies to the bill of rights, what it has to do with the 14th amendment, etc.

Your last few posts do not display an understanding of incorporation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-16-2013, 03:33 PM
 
79,908 posts, read 44,064,775 times
Reputation: 17204
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombocom View Post
Do you understand what incorporation is? How it applies to the bill of rights, what it has to do with the 14th amendment, etc.

Your last few posts do not display an understanding of incorporation.
As of yet you have not disputed a single word I have said.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2013, 03:37 PM
 
Location: Houston, Tx
8,227 posts, read 11,123,183 times
Reputation: 8198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glitch View Post
Only a craven coward and wannabe fascist would ever use the phrase "if you are innocent, then you have nothing to hide." It is the innocent the Fifth Amendment is designed to protect.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2013, 03:49 PM
 
1,614 posts, read 2,067,945 times
Reputation: 804
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
As of yet you have not disputed a single word I have said.
So you agree with me that prior to 1964 the privilege against self incrimination part of the 5th amendment had not been incorporated against the states?

I linked the very case to you, and by your response, it would appear you didn't understand it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2013, 04:42 PM
 
5,150 posts, read 7,739,877 times
Reputation: 1443
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombocom View Post
So you agree with me that prior to 1964 the privilege against self incrimination part of the 5th amendment had not been incorporated against the states?

I linked the very case to you, and by your response, it would appear you didn't understand it.
He's disputing that there is no 1964 privilege therefore your question cannot be answered. It is conclusionary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2013, 04:47 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
78,866 posts, read 46,504,056 times
Reputation: 18520
Quote:
Originally Posted by GCharlotte View Post
I've been thinking about this with the NSA taps and now the thread on cops being allowed to seize your cellphone at the scene of an accident to see if you were texting. A lot of this is 4th Amendment stuff but what about the 5th?

I'm not talking about getting rid of the entire 5th, just the witness against yourself part. If you aren't guilty then what's there to hide? If you are guilty then if we take out the section in bold below it should help move cases through the system.

Maybe the reason to keep it is not due to guilt or not but in cases where evidence can be used against you as an inference to build a case where there isn't any hard evidence.

But besides that, what do you have to hide? Shouldn't we be looking at ways to make police and prosecutor's jobs easier?

Or maybe just disallow the non-direct use. Just hand over your cell phone and decrypt your hard drives and let your devices rat you out.

What do you think? And as a refresher I'm including the 4th below.


Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Amendment V
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.


Because, you are a free person with liberty, until you get caught.
Remember, it is not illegal, until you get caught doing it.
Freedom!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2013, 05:04 PM
 
5,150 posts, read 7,739,877 times
Reputation: 1443
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombocom View Post
Do you understand what incorporation is? How it applies to the bill of rights, what it has to do with the 14th amendment, etc.

Your last few posts do not display an understanding of incorporation.
Don't ask what someone knows or doesn't know or point to some vague webpage. You're avoiding defending your hypothesis.

You're about 100 years off. Just because the Court didn't put their stamp on something until 1964 does not mean the right did not exist.

The man was arrested in 1959 and faced the state court about 16 or so months later. When it got to the Supreme Court many years later the Court did not rule that going forward incorporation would be done. If they did they would have created new law and could not have found this dude not guilty.

The guy raised his rights in 1959 and the Supreme Court agreed with him in 1964. That has no bearing on incorporation or at lease how it is outlined in the case since you are only asking questions and not providing answers.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2013, 05:54 PM
 
79,908 posts, read 44,064,775 times
Reputation: 17204
Quote:
Originally Posted by zombocom View Post
So you agree with me that prior to 1964 the privilege against self incrimination part of the 5th amendment had not been incorporated against the states?
No.

Quote:
I linked the very case to you, and by your response, it would appear you didn't understand it.
I think you simply refuse to address my points.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2013, 05:55 PM
 
79,908 posts, read 44,064,775 times
Reputation: 17204
Quote:
Originally Posted by GCharlotte View Post
He's disputing that there is no 1964 privilege therefore your question cannot be answered. It is conclusionary.
No, there is BUT it didn't happen because of the court ruling. It's like stating we actually didn't have the right to own guns until the recent court rulings agreeing that we did.

Upon reading your reply above, I see you understand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-16-2013, 05:58 PM
 
5,150 posts, read 7,739,877 times
Reputation: 1443
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
No, there is BUT it didn't happen because of the court ruling. It's like stating we actually didn't have the right to own guns until the recent court rulings agreeing that we did.

Upon reading your reply above, I see you understand.
Let's get down to the brass. The 5th didn't exist until I started this thread
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:54 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top