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.
First they came for the illegals. I was no illegal, so I did not complain.
Next they came for the homosexuals. I was not homosexual, so I did not complain.
Next they came for me. There was nobody left to complain. So they took me.
A bit abbreviated, but folks, if the gov't can take one, they will take all.
Don't give them the power. You will regret it later.
Great paraphrasing and YOU GET the POINT! Too bad that those blinded by hate are willing to , inch by inch, give up their freedoms.
This is SO typical of Repugs...seeing how things affect the future, seeing repercussions, understanding how what happens NOW affects the future....that's all way too deep for these spoiled childern...
Probable cause doesnt need to be presented until 48 hours later. BINGO!! Which you are now admitting I was correct, while arguing I was wrong.
Dam, give the bs a rest.. Your non stop arguing for the sake of arguing is ridiculous..
Probable Cause is a standard required for arrest. Reasonable Suspicion is a standard for stopping and executing an investigation of suspected criminal activity. If, during an investigation, evidence of a crime would present a Probable Cause arrest. A mere hunch, is not a Reasonable Suspicion. I can understand why you would want to give it a rest, you are obviously not too clear on the distinction.
You were absolutely, positively, completely 100% WRONG. No one may be lawfully detained without at least reasonable suspicion. The fact that police have been granted up to 48 hours (Scalia wanted it to be 24 hours, btw) to present that suspicion before a magistrate is a concession to the volumes of paperwork that an overburdened justice system has to deal with and nothing more. You are once again purveying HOT AIR from a basis of NO material understanding of the issue.
Oh please.. It isnt until an initial arraignment trial that it is determined if there is "reasonable suspicion" to hold you. If you go to the arraignment and the judge determines there isnt probable cause or reasonable suspicion to hold you, you have no legal recourse to sue the cop for false arrest because you were not arrested, you were being legally detained.
Probable Cause is a standard required for arrest. Reasonable Suspicion is a standard for stopping and executing an investigation of suspected criminal activity. If, during an investigation, evidence of a crime would present a Probable Cause arrest. A mere hunch, is not a Reasonable Suspicion. I can understand why you would want to give it a rest, you are obviously not too clear on the distinction.
A police officer does not need to present probably cause until pre arraignment trial, which takes place within 48 hours of a detainment. You are not officially under arrest until this trial, you are simply being "detained"...
First they came for the illegals. I was yelling, "I'm no illegal", so I did not complain.
Next they came for the illegal homosexuals. I was not homosexual, so I did not complain.
Next they came for illegal alien me. There was nobody left to complain. So they took me.
A bit abbreviated, but folks, if the gov't can take one illegal alien, they will take all.
You will thank them later.
Quote:
Originally Posted by teach1234
First step to a police state.
First they came for the illegals. I was no illegal, so I did not complain.
Next they came for the homosexuals. I was not homosexual, so I did not complain.
Next they came for me. There was nobody left to complain. So they took me.
A bit abbreviated, but folks, if the gov't can take one, they will take all.
Don't give them the power. You will regret it later.
Question: Whats the odds of two posters, coming up with the EXACT same bs?
Answer: Very good if they are liberals, because they repeate the same talking points read from the same liberal sites as if they were original thoughts..
A police officer does not need to present probably cause until pre arraignment trial, which takes place within 48 hours of a detainment. You are not officially under arrest until this trial, you are simply being "detained"...
Your link confirms I'm correct.. can remove them from the scene and hold them (in jail) for 24 hours or until I get a warrant issued for the charges.
A police can take 2 steps 1) obtain a warrant which establishes probable cause to hold an individual longer than 48 hours 2) take the person to a pre arraignment hearing within 48 hours which establishes probable cause to continue to hold the indiivdual..
Either way, there is a period of time which you can be held, without a court ordered probable cause without legal recorse, The cop states 24 hours, which might be true for some states, but the supreme court says a maximum of 48 hours.
Your link confirms I'm correct.. can remove them from the scene and hold them (in jail) for 24 hours or until I get a warrant issued for the charges.
A police can take 2 steps 1) obtain a warrant which establishes probable cause to hold an individual longer than 48 hours 2) take the person to a pre arraignment hearing within 48 hours which establishes probable cause to continue to hold the indiivdual..
Either way, there is a period of time which you can be held, without a court ordered probable cause without legal recorse, The cop states 24 hours, which might be true for some states, but the supreme court says a maximum of 48 hours.
From the scene of a crime, not just walk down the street, look at you, and then put you in the squad car to go downtown.
There is a difference, you know that right?
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.