Minnesota

[Sean Mooney 2,099]

8 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

You're going to have to provide proof of this then.

Have you not read the news or anything from either side related to this event over the past week?

The long and short of it is:

- We have the 4th amendment. The 4th amendment has an automobile exception. That exception allows a federal agent to search a car without a warrant if there is probable cause for evidence of a crime of if they believe there is contraband- like Good having a bunch of Somalians under a blanket in the car. But they didn't have that.

- ICE has more ability to forcibly search within 100 miles of the US border (for obvious reasons I would hope) but even still- that requires probable cause of something. 

 

[Hardcore troubadour 16,245]

Hey Mooney, stick to the alphabet and times tables. The law ain’t your thing. 

[easilyscan 1,117]

15 hours ago, TimHauck said:

Were there actually specific targets of DHS in this particular neighborhood?  If not, it’s a stretch IMO to call that an “investigation,” although I know the sheep would say DHS is performing an “investigation” 24/7

I recall that they 'were' looking for someone specific in that particular neighborhood. It may have been a different thread, but I even asked if anyone knew if they caught the targeted perp. 

[Sean Mooney 2,099]

3 minutes ago, Gladiators said:

Sorry EG, turns out you're wrong.  We have a teacher on the board who can educate you on the law.

Notably I didn't question the law. I questioned whether those charges would stick under a defense of some kind. EG would readily admit- I'd hope- the prosecutor has to make their case...and I'm saying with the ability for people to drive around her, with her being friendly towards the ICE agent (irregardless of what her partner was saying) and other ICE agents trying to breach her vehicle without cause (at least from anything they've said to this point) it's a harder case to make. Not to mention it ends with her shot 3 times from point blank range....and I know that isn't supposed to play into a jury's verdict but people are human and it will to some degree.

But I know that is actually more nuanced than "This be good....This be bad" and you are a simpleton....so of course you missed that. 

[Strike 6,148]

6 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Have you not read the news or anything from either side related to this event over the past week?

The long and short of it is:

- We have the 4th amendment. The 4th amendment has an automobile exception. That exception allows a federal agent to search a car without a warrant if there is probable cause for evidence of a crime of if they believe there is contraband- like Good having a bunch of Somalians under a blanket in the car. But they didn't have that.

- ICE has more ability to forcibly search within 100 miles of the US border (for obvious reasons I would hope) but even still- that requires probable cause of something. 

 

Wrong.

[Sean Mooney 2,099]

5 minutes ago, Strike said:

Wrong.

Prove it. Show me the things that prove individual pieces of what I said incorrect and we can discuss

[Gladiators 2,046]

2 hours ago, Sean Mooney said:

1.) What was the charge?

2.) What reasonable suspicion did they have about her?

3.) Why do you lie?

 

1 hour ago, Hawkeye21 said:

Obstruction then fleeing.  Both illegal.

 

39 minutes ago, Engorgeous George said:

I'd only be guessing but I would say the charge would have been impeding, interfering with, or obstructing federal law enforcement.  Their reasonable suspicion was their direct observation of the crime occuring in their presence.  As for me, though your third question was not directed to me, I lie to obtain percieved advantage in life, that advantage could be social or financial.

 

36 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

I'm not moving goalposts...I'm saying she wouldn't have been charged with anything. Good try to end the discussion though

 

You're saying she wouldn't have been charged.  Career prosecutor disagrees.  I'll side with the career prosecutor over the teacher who reaches his conclusions based on what he read in the news.

[Strike 6,148]

Mooney is Joe Pesci in this scene, and the rest of us are Fred Gwynn:

 

[Sean Mooney 2,099]

1 minute ago, Gladiators said:

 

 

 

 

You're saying she wouldn't have been charged.  Career prosecutor disagrees.  I'll side with the career prosecutor over the teacher who reaches his conclusions based on what he read in the news.

Yeah you left out the quote where I said the charges wouldn't have held up under any kind of defense. But it's what you do. 

1 minute ago, Strike said:

Mooney is Joe Pesci in this scene, and the rest of us are Fred Gwynn:

 

Again- show your proof of individual things where I am wrong and we can discuss. 

[Strike 6,148]

Just now, Sean Mooney said:

Yeah you left out the quote where I said the charges wouldn't have held up under any kind of defense. But it's what you do. 

Again- show your proof of individual things where I am wrong and we can discuss. 

The SINGLE question at issue is whether they had the right to open her car door.  Clearly they did since they were going to arrest her.  What are they supposed to do, just sit there until she gets out voluntarily and then arrest her?  To your specific question, they had probable cause.  You're wrong suggesting they didn't.  They were well past the probable cause portion of the investigation by that point.  

[Gladiators 2,046]

Just now, Sean Mooney said:

Yeah you left out the quote where I said the charges wouldn't have held up under any kind of defense. But it's what you do. 

Whether the charges are upheld is irrelevant.  They are not prosecutors.  I'd ask you to stick to teaching, but I'm beginning to think I'd rather you not.

[Sean Mooney 2,099]

3 minutes ago, Strike said:

The SINGLE question at issue is whether they had the right to open her car door.  Clearly they did since they were going to arrest her.  What are they supposed to do, just sit there until she gets out voluntarily and then arrest her?  To your specific question, they had probable cause.  You're wrong suggesting they didn't.  They were well past the probable cause portion of the investigation by that point.  

They don't have the right to answer her car door. That's the singular answer for the reasons I suggested. You have yet now on time 3 to provide anything counter to that. 

Just now, Gladiators said:

Whether the charges are upheld is irrelevant.  They are not prosecutors.  I'd ask you to stick to teaching, but I'm beginning to think I'd rather you not.

You are an unserious poster incapable of having an intelligent discussion. I will keep that in mind for future reference. 

[Strike 6,148]

2 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

They don't have the right to answer her car door. That's the singular answer for the reasons I suggested. You have yet now on time 3 to provide anything counter to that. 

 

You keep repeating this.  Are you suggesting they weren't going to arrest her?  If so, you're wrong.  If you're not suggesting that, are you suggesting they don't have the right to remove her from her car to arrest her?  If so, you're wrong.  If you're not suggesting that, are you suggesting they can remove her but not by opening the door?  If so, you're retarded.

The My Cousin Vinny scene I posted is so perfect in trying to reason with you.  If your next post isn't "I'm wrong", then we will hold you in contempt of the Geek Club.

[Fireballer 2,714]

18 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Notably I didn't question the law. I questioned whether those charges would stick under a defense of some kind. EG would readily admit- I'd hope- the prosecutor has to make their case...and I'm saying with the ability for people to drive around her, with her being friendly towards the ICE agent (irregardless of what her partner was saying) and other ICE agents trying to breach her vehicle without cause (at least from anything they've said to this point) it's a harder case to make. Not to mention it ends with her shot 3 times from point blank range....and I know that isn't supposed to play into a jury's verdict but people are human and it will to some degree.

But I know that is actually more nuanced than "This be good....This be bad" and you are a simpleton....so of course you missed that. 

Off topic… would you use your red pen to circle the word “irregardless ” if a student used it in a paper?

[Sean Mooney 2,099]

4 minutes ago, Strike said:

You keep repeating this.  Are you suggesting they weren't going to arrest her?  If so, you're wrong.  If you're not suggesting that, are you suggesting they don't have the right to remove her from her car to arrest her?  If so, you're wrong.  If you're not suggesting that, are you suggesting they can remove her but not by opening the door?  If so, you're retarded.

The My Cousin Vinny scene I posted is so perfect in trying to reason with you.  If your next post isn't "I'm wrong", then we will hold you in contempt of the Geek Club.

So you have nothing is what you are saying? Got it

3 minutes ago, Fireballer said:

Off topic… would you use your red pen to circle the word “irregardless ” if a student used it in a paper?

No...it's a word in every dictionary. It's marked as non-standard because the argument is it implies a double negative. I just think it sounds funny versus regardless. 

[Gladiators 2,046]

2 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

They don't have the right to answer her car door. That's the singular answer for the reasons I suggested. You have yet now on time 3 to provide anything counter to that. 

You are an unserious poster incapable of having an intelligent discussion. I will keep that in mind for future reference. 

It's okay to admit you were wrong Mooney.  It happens to all of us.  But when you keep digging yourself deeper into a hole and then state others are incapable of having an intelligent disucssion, it makes you look stupid.

[Reality 3,178]

This is embarrassing.

[Strike 6,148]

7 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

So you have nothing is what you are saying? Got it

No...it's a word in every dictionary. It's marked as non-standard because the argument is it implies a double negative. I just think it sounds funny versus regardless. 

Now I know you're just trolling.  I should have recognized that sooner.  My bad.

[Sean Mooney 2,099]

5 minutes ago, Reality said:

This is embarrassing.

More or less embarrassing than fake quitting a message board and having to come back when no one gives a sh!t about you leaving?

And to be clear before you whine- this wasn't me "following you around"....you threw the first shot 

[Sean Mooney 2,099]

1 minute ago, Strike said:

Now I know you're just trolling.  I should have recognized that sooner.  My bad.

So nothing?

Good to know. It's amazing how the minute you are asked for evidence to support counter claims in any discussion you scurry away

[Reality 3,178]

1 minute ago, Sean Mooney said:

More or less embarrassing than fake quitting a message board and having to come back when no one gives a sh!t about you leaving?

And to be clear before you whine- this wasn't me "following you around"....you threw the first shot 

So, it looks like you've emptied most of the rounds in your stupidity chambers. Irregardless, have you tried holding your breath and stomping your feet yet?

[Gladiators 2,046]

56 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Based off the law. 

 

54 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

You're going to have to provide proof of this then.

 

43 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

Have you not read the news or anything from either side related to this event over the past week?

The long and short of it is:

- We have the 4th amendment. The 4th amendment has an automobile exception. That exception allows a federal agent to search a car without a warrant if there is probable cause for evidence of a crime of if they believe there is contraband- like Good having a bunch of Somalians under a blanket in the car. But they didn't have that.

- ICE has more ability to forcibly search within 100 miles of the US border (for obvious reasons I would hope) but even still- that requires probable cause of something. 

 

Mooney demands evidence! 

[Hardcore troubadour 16,245]

Today started off so good for Mooney. Maybe use your lifeline to call Gutter and Hack? 

[BrahmaBulls 1,019]

6 minutes ago, Reality said:

So, it looks like you've emptied most of the rounds in your stupidity chambers. Irregardless, have you tried holding your breath and stomping your feet yet?

He will throw an eraser at you.  Well if he ever leaves his moms basement

[Sean Mooney 2,099]

7 minutes ago, Reality said:

So, it looks like you've emptied most of the rounds in your stupidity chambers. Irregardless, have you tried holding your breath and stomping your feet yet?

You are essentially if Forrest Gump was a try hard and super unlikable. 

[Sean Mooney 2,099]

You know you've done well when the gaggle of idiots activate their Wonder Twins power and yell "Form of, a dumpster fire" to try and come at ya. 

[Hardcore troubadour 16,245]

Just now, Sean Mooney said:

You know you've done well when the gaggle of idiots activate their Wonder Twins power and yell "Form of, a dumpster fire" to try and come at ya. 

Yes. You’re winning here. Can’t keep up with your brilliant legal mind. 

[Hardcore troubadour 16,245]

Schumer suggests sending the NYPD to Minnesota to stand up to ICE. This is the top Democrat in the country. 

[dogcows 1,441]

Was this all a pretext for invoking the insurrection act?

[Hawkeye21 2,471]

Once an officer tells you to get out of your vehicle because they are going to detain or arrest you, they legally can forcefully remove you.  They can detain or arrest you for obstruction, alluding, resisting, battery, traffic infractions and not providing your ID, insurance or registration along a number of other reasons. 

Mooney, I recommend you do more research on this or you might find yourself getting arrested because you think you're in the right when you are actually in the wrong.  Don't be like the crazy sovereign citizens.

[Engorgeous George 2,375]

1 hour ago, Gladiators said:

It's okay to admit you were wrong Mooney.  It happens to all of us.  But when you keep digging yourself deeper into a hole and then state others are incapable of having an intelligent disucssion, it makes you look stupid.

Gramps use to tell me that when I find myself in a hole I should stop shoveling.

[Strike 6,148]

4 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

Once an officer tells you to get out of your vehicle because they are going to detain or arrest you, they legally can forcefully remove you.  They can detain or arrest you for obstruction, alluding, resisting, battery, traffic infractions and not providing your ID, insurance or registration along a number of other reasons. 

Mooney, I recommend you do more research on this or you might find yourself getting arrested because you think you're in the right when you are actually in the wrong.  Don't be like the crazy sovereign citizens.

It seems so obvious, doesn't it?

[Mark Davis 443]

3 hours ago, Hawkeye21 said:

I've never considered conservatives to be the type to riot and burn cities down.  The left has gone so far left that I'm starting to sound like a far right goon.  It's terrible and that's why I voted for Trump, as much as I despised it.

You're kind of like me.  I voted for Bill Clinton and Al Gore, never GWB.  Now my views are deemed to the right, although I'm not near right enough I'd fit in what the Republican party in my state is.  I really haven't changed other than being OK with gay marriage, yet somehow I'm now more right in the scope of things because I think this looney idea that you can impede law enforcement and stir up unrest is wrong and dangerous.  I don't know when it became ok for local leaders to just say "we won't comply" with federal laws and more so then to just assume the federal authorities would and should back down to them.

[easilyscan 1,117]

27 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Schumer suggests sending the NYPD to Minnesota to stand up to ICE. This is the top Democrat in the country. 

WOW!

Just when you think someone like him couldn't embarrass himself more, he lowers the bar.

[Hardcore troubadour 16,245]

26 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Was this all a pretext for invoking the insurrection act?

Yes. Trump flooded Minnesota with Somalis with the hope they would run a massive fraud scheme. 

[Engorgeous George 2,375]

3 minutes ago, Hawkeye21 said:

Once an officer tells you to get out of your vehicle because they are going to detain or arrest you, they legally can forcefully remove you.  They can detain or arrest you for obstruction, alluding, resisting, battery, traffic infractions and not providing your ID, insurance or registration along a number of other reasons. 

Mooney, I recommend you do more research on this or you might find yourself getting arrested because you think you're in the right when you are actually in the wrong.  Don't be like the crazy sovereign citizens.

I love those nuts.  They base their arguments, their position, on the U.C.C., the uniform Commercial Code, primarily.  They are always shocked and offended when they find themselves behind bars.

[Strike 6,148]

Just now, Mark Davis said:

You're kind of like me.  I voted for Bill Clinton and Al Gore, never GWB.  Now my views are deemed to the right, although I'm not near right enough I'd fit in what the Republican party in my state is.  I really haven't changed other than being OK with gay marriage, yet somehow I'm now more right in the scope of things because I think this looney idea that you can impede law enforcement and stir up unrest is wrong and dangerous.  I don't know when it became ok for local leaders to just say "we won't comply" with federal laws and more so then to just assume the federal authorities would and should back down to them.

It's only OK because Trump is President.  If Biden was President and Texas resisted his initiatives, those same Dems would be calling it an INSURRECTION and demanding his immediate arrest and detention without bond due to the irreversible harm he was doing to the country.

[Hawkeye21 2,471]

4 minutes ago, Strike said:

It seems so obvious, doesn't it?

Not only is it obvious, it's actually the law.  It can be looked up.  You can read about it or watch any of the thousands of body cam videos on YouTube that will show you real examples.  There are too many ignorant people that think they are right.

[Hardcore troubadour 16,245]

Harvey Mucklebust. RIP. 

[dogcows 1,441]

I know there is a lot of quibbling about the particulars of the law. I want to move beyond that.

I have seen far more troublesome people handled FAR better by law enforcement. I really think the behavior towards Ms. Good was over-the-top and unnecessary. And it led to a death.

And it appears to be a pattern. Just yesterday I saw video of ICE agents leaving, and chucking out tear gas grenades on their way out. Like... they're leaving, there is no reason to do that whatsoever. In another video, they tell a woman to "go home" and she says "I have to go to an appointment" and they ignore her and start to yell at her, then cut her out of her car and drag her down the street? They are out of control.

The training does NOT match what they are being asked to do, and it's leading to unnecessary tragic outcomes. This ICE operation is harming people for no good reason.