Posted on 02/19/2009 10:11:28 AM PST by cashion
Hooray for the Red, White and Blue! Seig Heil with a Smile!
Finally, a court supports enacted law!
Now TEXAS needs to implement the SAME law! THIS SESSION!!!
Sorry. Those sort of Property rights died with the “Civil Rights” Act of 1964, as well as the “Fair” Housing Act.
Cool legal standard in New Mexico!
ACHTUNG: NO ONE owns a TRUE title to land anymore. The GOVT just lets us use it. To REALLY own land in its ENTIRITY, one must have an ALLODIAL Deed or Title, NOT a cheap Warranty Deed.
Nope - not since the 1964 “Civil Rights” and “Fair” Housing Acts.
Or are my rights enumerated in the forth amendment gone as well as the second? If my vehicle is on private property, do I automatically loose the right to not be subject to unreasonable search and seizure?
So by entering private property, do I loose all my rights, or just some?
If I don't like it, don't work there?
What about mail. If I have personal mail in my lunch box at work, does my boss have a right to read it? It's on private property? There may be something in it that is relevant to my ability to perform my job, or a potential threat to others?
Rights are an all or nothing proposition. I either have them or I don't. You don't get to pick and choose someone else's rights because they are on your property.
If you don't want people exercising their God given rights on your property, don't let them on your property. Because you do have the right to tell them to stay off, or leave your property if you don't like what they are doing.
But that's your choice. Respect their rights, or exercise yours by not letting them on your property.
Simple.
This is so simple it really boggles my mind why people can't grasp the obvious.
God given rights are mine weather I'm on private property or not. All of them, not just some.
The property owner has the right to refuse to allow anyone access to their property, or direct them to leave their property, for any reason they see fit. Any reason.
These are simple concepts, and if followed, there is no conflict.
Interesting, but not the way I remember it. Do you know anywhere this might be documented? The NRA probably endorsed Carson over his primary opponent, but endorsing Carson over Coburn doesn't seem likely.
/s
You've got many posts to peruse before you get to other comments I've already made on this thread concerning this situation. If you don't like what people keep in their personal vehicles that happen to be parked on your property, don't provide a parking lot.
As to the argument regarding safety, it comes down to basic laws of supply and demand. Jobs are getting more and more scarce, if you want one then you have the option of making the sacrifice in regards to your safety or they will give the job to someone else who is willing to make it.
Actually, as the argument currently stands in Oklahoma, an individual need not entertain that idea of sacrifice. The law stands as originally passed.
You don't have a right to drive on the public roads without a proper driver's license and insurance. That's been the law since forever. It's not a case of "papers please" because that involves asking a person going about his ordinary business, no question of privilege of driving on the public roads involved. It's the law everywhere, including in Texas (how do you think they bust the drunks and habitual violators for driving w/o a license or driving on a suspended license?) You don't like that, take the bus.
An LEO can ask for license & insurance. You produce them, fine, that ends the questioning and he can't search. You refuse, you'll get arrested for driving without a license. If nobody's available to drive your car away, your car can be searched. Moral: produce your license.
They can ask if they can search your car, but if you say no, they have to let you go or get a warrant. And they can't get a warrant without swearing to probable cause before a magistrate. If you're smart you'll say "No thank you, officer." It's amazing how people will give permission to search. I don't know what they're thinking, especially if the car is full of contraband (although in that case they could call on the drug sniffing dog -- but as I said before, they're not allowed to stall for time while waiting for the dog).
The cases talk about the "three levels of officer/citizen encounters": casual encounter, level one - an officer can ask to speak to you 'just because', and he can ask for your license if you're driving. Kicker: you don't HAVE to speak to him although you do have to show your license. You can say, "Sorry, officer, I don't have time to talk right now." And he can't hold you in talk unless he has level two -- articulable suspicion - not a mere 'hunch' but a tangible, visible reason that he can articulate i.e. explain. It's usually stuff like a car driving slowly through the parking lot of a closed business at 2 a.m., somebody approaching the car, and something changing hands. That's a Terry level circumstance worthy of further inquiry. If, when the officer approaches, the individual flees, the car peels rubber getting away and refuses to stop when the officer turns on his blue lights, and as the car speeds away the officer sees a plastic bag containing a chunky off-white substance fly out of the window, THEN you have probable cause - level three.
As far as the gun rights issue, I can refer you to a very recent case in this jurisdiction: State v. Jones, 289 Ga. App. 176 (2008). The court rejected the officer's argument that he could seize any firearm he saw in plain view in the passenger compartment of a vehicle, and that the presence of a firearm gave him probable cause to search. Here's the money quote:
On its face, as noted by Jones, this policy justifies the search of any vehicle occupied by hunters or sport shooters with their firearms, or any pickup truck with a rifle or shotgun on the rear window rack. This is precisely the danger of “carte blanche authority to ‘secure’ all weapons during a routine traffic stop,” noted by the special concurrence in Megesi, supra, 277 Ga. App. at 860.
So no, an officer can't do that in GA.
You went rather far afield from a random checkpoint.
“The GOVT just lets us use it.”
Totally off-topic:
Isn’t the same true with cars?
I have a “Certificate of Title” for my car. Is this the actual Title or simply a document certifying that a Title exists (somewhere)?
“The NRA probably endorsed Carson over his primary opponent, but endorsing Carson over Coburn doesn’t seem likely.”
Why?
The NRA has a habit of downgrading the 2A ratings of pro-gun politicians who won’t vote for their anti-gun compromises (and vice-versa). One example here in Texas: in the 2006 mid-term election, NRA endorsed Shane Sklar (D) over Ron Paul (R), a GOA A+ rated incumbent.
LOL. You can’t tell what’s in their vehicle anyway. So it’s a mute point.
Correct. I'd want all my employees packing, especially if I was in retail. I'd feel much safer that way.
He's probably just going to come back later with an AK-47 and blow your whole unarmed crew away anyway.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.