User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 4/25/2002 12:55:56 PM EDT
[#1]
This pisses me off so much, I can hardly type.
OK, you guys: This was PROPOSED by [u]Republicans[/u] and carried through both houses almost UNANIMOUSLY - BOTH sides of the aisle voted for it. Do you STILL trust politicians? Politics: noun, from the latin [i]poly[/i] meaning "many" and "Ticks" - a small, disease-carrying bloodsucking parasite. Purge the Michigan Congress. Get rid of 'em ALL. Then do the same to D.C. It's PAST time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2002 12:59:47 PM EDT
[#2]
Quoted: ... That means the public, the press, and in some cases even the person accused of the crime, can't know why the police entered a home without permission. Sounds like an excuse to be able to fabricate a warrant after the evidence is siezed. LAPD Officer Raphael Perez taught us all about this method of policing 3 years ago - arrest/shoot a suspect, then fabricate evidence to support the arrest/shooting. It's a brave new world out there. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2002 1:07:02 PM EDT
[#3]
I've got to buy a fiddle.....is anyone else going to step up and tell me to write a letter to my congressman or to "vote"......
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2002 2:08:28 PM EDT
[#4]
"An officer executing a search is not required to give a copy of the affidavit to the person or leave a copy at the place from which the property was taken," according to Ferry's memo. This is old news: SCOTUS ruled long ago that Cops are not required to leave a copy of the search warrant affidavit from where property was seized, but we do leave a receipt for the items (drugs, recovered stolen property, etc.) we seized. We do present a front page copy of the search warrant with the judge's signature on it to who ever has control of the property, or we leave it if no one is there. The affidavit becomes a part of the court record. I'm not aware of the SCOTUS's position on courts having to, or not to make the affidavit available: That's not my gig. Jay [img]http://www.commspeed.net/jmurray/images/iroc-cop.gif[/img] |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2002 3:10:33 PM EDT
[#5]
You guys must have sleeping, then.
The first week of the month we got a new law here in Michigan which cleared guard commanders to use any level of force they desire to either disperse or arrest, at their option, with no civil or criminal penalty of any kind and mandatory attorney general defense of the immunity. Part of Michigan's anti-terror package which hit a little early. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2002 3:49:25 PM EDT
[#6]
It would appear that it is bastard shooting time in Michigan.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2002 3:54:12 PM EDT
[#7]
Too bad theres no market for politician pelts.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2002 3:55:23 PM EDT
[#8]
For the same reason there's not much market for skunk pelt.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2002 3:56:11 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted: Too bad theres no market for politician pelts. I'll have to remember that. Politician pelts. HaHa. |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2002 4:14:46 PM EDT
[#10]
Feed the Hogs!!!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2002 4:21:57 PM EDT
[#11]
Quoted: You guys must have sleeping, then. The first week of the month we got a new law here in Michigan which cleared guard commanders to use any level of force they desire to either disperse or arrest, at their option, with no civil or criminal penalty of any kind and mandatory attorney general defense of the immunity. Part of Michigan's anti-terror package which hit a little early. G%D D%^N! I Hate Living in Michigan! Every time I turn around it's something new. Can't wait to retire and move out west! I only wish I could afford to do it now!!!!! Tall Shadow |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2002 4:33:13 PM EDT
[#12]
MCL 32.579
"...That commanding officer shall determine the amount and kind of force to be used in preserving the peace and carrying out the orders of the governor. Except as provided in subsection (3), that commanding officer’s honest and reasonable judgment under the circumstances then existing, in the exercise of his or her duty, is full protection, civilly and criminally, for an act done in the line of duty, and a member of the organized militia in active service, active state service, or the service of the United States is not liable civilly or criminally for an act committed by him or her in the performance of his or her duty." |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/25/2002 4:41:32 PM EDT
[#13]
I wonder what would happen if they tried to search Ted Nugents house?
Hey Osprey, love the peace frog sig! [:D] |
|
|
|
Posted: 4/26/2002 11:20:37 AM EDT
[#14]
One may or may not like the warrant statute, but its not unconstitutional.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 4/26/2002 11:34:42 AM EDT
[#15]
but we do leave a receipt for the items (drugs, recovered stolen property, etc.) we seized. So, after pimp daddy drug dealer beats the rap, does he present his receipt to get his drugs back? I gotta believe there is at least one moron stupid enough to try. Eddie |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
