Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 12/22/2005 9:45:10 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/22/2005 9:56:59 AM EDT by elkmontarms]
I hope this is not a dupe... Bad stuff for Ohio members.. www.newsnet5.com/news/5580743/detail.html

Bill Would Allow Arrests For No Reason In Public Place
Citizens Would Also Have To Show ID

UPDATED: 7:22 pm EST December 19, 2005

CLEVELAND -- A bill on Gov. Bob Taft's desk right now is drawing a lot of criticism, NewsChannel5 reported.

One state representative said it resembles Gestapo-style tactics of government, and there could be changes coming on the streets of Ohio's small towns and big cities.

The Ohio Patriot Act has made it to the Taft's desk, and with the stroke of a pen, it would most likely become the toughest terrorism bill in the country. The lengthy piece of legislation would let police arrest people in public places who will not give their names, address and birth dates, even if they are not doing anything wrong.


WEWS reported it would also pave the way for everyone entering critical transportation sites such as, train stations, airports and bus stations to show ID.

"It brings us frighteningly close to a show me your papers society," said Carrie Davis of the ACLU, which opposes the Ohio Patriot Act.

There are many others who oppose the bill as well.


"The variety of people who opposed to this is not just a group of the usual suspects. We have people far right to the left opposing the bill who think it is a bad idea," said Al McGinty, NewsChannel5’s terrorism expert.

McGinty said he isn't sure the law would do what it's intended to do.

"I think anything we do to enhance security and give power to protect the public to police officers is a good idea," he said. "It is a good law in the wrong direction."

Gov. Bob Taft will make the ultimate decision on whether to sign the bill.

WEWS was told that Taft is expected to sign the bill into law, but legal experts expect that it will be challenged in courts.

Link Posted: 12/22/2005 9:48:13 AM EDT
and that is why I got the fuck out of Ohio... Place is a god damn police state.
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 9:48:47 AM EDT
It will never survive a court challenge.
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 9:50:29 AM EDT
Bill Would Allow Arrests For No Reason In Public Place


There has to be more to the story
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 9:51:29 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 9:55:35 AM EDT

Originally Posted By happycynic:
It will never survive a court challenge.



I use to think that way also until the US Supr. Court ruled this year we really don't own our land or homes any more if private business want's them.(ie. new eminent domain rules )

Link Posted: 12/22/2005 10:00:28 AM EDT

Originally Posted By sydney7629:
Bill Would Allow Arrests For No Reason In Public Place


There has to be more to the story



It is not for no reason. It makes refusing to identify yourself to police a crime.
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 10:05:33 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/22/2005 10:05:45 AM EDT by photoman]

Originally Posted By happycynic:
It will never survive a court challenge.



Yes it will, supreme court ruled within the last couple years here that you must provide ID to LE upond request even if you are doing nothing wrong.

Someone will remember the case and post it I'm sure. I don't remember the case name.
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 10:31:43 AM EDT
Welcome to the new Amerika........
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 10:40:03 AM EDT

Originally Posted By photoman:

Originally Posted By happycynic:
It will never survive a court challenge.



Yes it will, supreme court ruled within the last couple years here that you must provide ID to LE upond request even if you are doing nothing wrong.

Someone will remember the case and post it I'm sure. I don't remember the case name.



IIRC, in order to initiate the stop there has to be probable cause.
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 10:51:57 AM EDT

Originally Posted By happycynic:

Originally Posted By photoman:

Originally Posted By happycynic:
It will never survive a court challenge.



Yes it will, supreme court ruled within the last couple years here that you must provide ID to LE upond request even if you are doing nothing wrong.

Someone will remember the case and post it I'm sure. I don't remember the case name.



IIRC, in order to initiate the stop there has to be probable cause.



Probably cause is laughable.
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 10:52:29 AM EDT

Originally Posted By happycynic:

Originally Posted By photoman:

Originally Posted By happycynic:
It will never survive a court challenge.



Yes it will, supreme court ruled within the last couple years here that you must provide ID to LE upond request even if you are doing nothing wrong.

Someone will remember the case and post it I'm sure. I don't remember the case name.



IIRC, in order to initiate the stop there has to be probable cause.

link

Qestionable on the PC in my mind. But read it through it has some interesting stuff in it.
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 11:02:06 AM EDT

The lengthy piece of legislation would let police arrest people in public places who will not give their names, address and birth dates, even if they are not doing anything wrong.


- So the people aren't being arrested for just being in a public place, but instead refusing to provide ID. Nothing like accurate reporting and/or posting


Originally Posted By happycynic:
IIRC, in order to initiate the stop there has to be probable cause.

- No. P/C is required for an arrest.

Link Posted: 12/22/2005 11:09:32 AM EDT

Originally Posted By happycynic:

Originally Posted By photoman:

Originally Posted By happycynic:
It will never survive a court challenge.



Yes it will, supreme court ruled within the last couple years here that you must provide ID to LE upond request even if you are doing nothing wrong.

Someone will remember the case and post it I'm sure. I don't remember the case name.



IIRC, in order to initiate the stop there has to be probable cause.



Reasonable Articulable Suspicion (RAS) to stop.

If the police have Probable Cause then you are going to jail.
Link Posted: 12/22/2005 11:42:49 AM EDT
BTW Hiibel was in the wrong, hence the reason he went to jail.
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 6:52:57 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Q3131A:

Originally Posted By sydney7629:
Bill Would Allow Arrests For No Reason In Public Place


There has to be more to the story



It is not for no reason. It makes refusing to identify yourself to police a crime.



Thats INSANE!
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 6:55:18 AM EDT
Who said it years ago?
"The USSR will become more like the USA. The USA will become more like the USSR."

Pathetic.
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 7:08:34 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/26/2005 7:10:03 AM EDT by The_Macallan]

Originally Posted By Q3131A:

Originally Posted By sydney7629:
Bill Would Allow Arrests For No Reason In Public Place
There has to be more to the story

It is not for no reason. It makes refusing to identify yourself to police a crime.


But then why would police ever even ASK for one's name if they're "doing nothing wrong"?

I've been alive over 40 years and have NEVER been asked for my name from any LEO except when I've done something wrong (traffic stop) or have been a witness (called in suspicious activity in the neighborhood).


Has anyone here EVER been asked for your name by a LEO "for no reason at all"????



Link Posted: 12/26/2005 7:09:37 AM EDT
Sometimes it is a good thing that the ACLU exists to challenge things such as this I hope they get the courts to throw it out.


This quote is just plain disturbing:


"I think anything we do to enhance security and give power to protect the public to police officers is a good idea"


Link Posted: 12/26/2005 7:10:57 AM EDT

Originally Posted By LANCEMAN:
Sometimes it is a good thing that the ACLU exists to challenge things such as this


One step forward, ten steps back is not a good thing.

The ACLU have done FAR more harm to America than what little good they've done.
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 7:13:23 AM EDT


"I think anything we do to enhance security and give power to protect the public to police officers is a good idea"



Link Posted: 12/26/2005 7:14:44 AM EDT

Originally Posted By happycynic:
It will never survive a court challenge.



I thought the same thing about the campain finance reform act BTW,goes to show the US constitution aint worth the paper it is printed on anymore
And how much does anyone want to bet Akmed walking down the street with his explosive vest on doesnt get a second glance,yet the old lady in a walker will get the JBT smackdown.This facist shit makes me want to fucking puke
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 7:16:25 AM EDT

Originally Posted By colklink:

Originally Posted By happycynic:
It will never survive a court challenge.



I thought the same thing about the campain finance reform act BTW,goes to show the US constitution aint worth the paper it is printed on anymore
And how much does anyone want to bet Akmed walking down the street with his explosive vest on doesnt get a second glance,yet the old lady in a walker will get the JBT smackdown.This facist shit makes me want to fucking puke



Now, now. They don't profile the old, infirm, or racially diverse.
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 7:20:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By happycynic:
It will never survive a court challenge.



These days, it satnads a pretty good chance.
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 7:20:57 AM EDT

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
The ACLU have done FAR more harm to America than what little good they've done.



We used to have a world free of the ACLU, and we were not better off without them. I don't agree with some of the things they do, but in cases where legal muscle was needed to keep individual freedom alive (spare the 2nd Amendment), the ACLU has been extremely successful.

I don't think you know how much they've really accomplished, or else you're romanticizing the times before they had such power.
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 7:34:06 AM EDT

Originally Posted By swingset:

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:
The ACLU have done FAR more harm to America than what little good they've done.



We used to have a world free of the ACLU, and we were not better off without them. I don't agree with some of the things they do, but in cases where legal muscle was needed to keep individual freedom alive (spare the 2nd Amendment), the ACLU has been extremely successful.

I don't think you know how much they've really accomplished, or else you're romanticizing the times before they had such power.

The ACLU has been instrumental in intentionally working to demolish the culture of America - the one established for hundreds of years beginning with the Founding Fathers - not to mention their all-out effort for abortion-on-demand at-any-age.

But this is way off topic and should be in a thread of its own.


Link Posted: 12/26/2005 7:34:50 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 7:36:19 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NCPatrolAR:

The lengthy piece of legislation would let police arrest people in public places who will not give their names, address and birth dates, even if they are not doing anything wrong.


- So the people aren't being arrested for just being in a public place, but instead refusing to provide ID. Nothing like accurate reporting and/or posting



You feel refusal to show id, with no other crime committed, should be a crime?
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 7:57:13 AM EDT
This is from the Ohio Assembly website:

www.legislature.state.oh.us/analysis.cfm?ID=126_SB_009&hf=analyses126/s0009-ps-126.htm

- Prohibits a person who is in or near an airport, train station, port, or other critical transportation infrastructure site from refusing to show identification when requested by a law enforcement officer if the officer is requiring identification of all similarly situated people (if a person refuses to show identification under this provision, the officer may detain the person at the location or its immediate vicinity to determine the person's name, address, and date of birth, but the bill does not provide a criminal penalty for the refusal).

- Enacts the offense of "failure to disclose one's personal information," which prohibits a person who is in a public place from refusing to disclose the person's name, address, or date of birth, when requested by a law enforcement officer who reasonably suspects that either: (1) the person is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a criminal offense, or (2) the person witnessed an offense of violence that would constitute a felony under Ohio law, a felony offense that causes or results in, or creates a substantial risk of serious physical harm to another person or to property, any attempt, conspiracy, or complicity to commit any of those offenses; or any conduct reasonably indicating that any such offense or any such attempt, conspiracy, or complicity has been, is being, or is about to be committed.
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 8:01:37 AM EDT

Originally Posted By LANCEMAN:
This is from the Ohio Assembly website:

www.legislature.state.oh.us/analysis.cfm?ID=126_SB_009&hf=analyses126/s0009-ps-126.htm

- Prohibits a person who is in or near an airport, train station, port, or other critical transportation infrastructure site from refusing to show identification when requested by a law enforcement officer if the officer is requiring identification of all similarly situated people (if a person refuses to show identification under this provision, the officer may detain the person at the location or its immediate vicinity to determine the person's name, address, and date of birth, but the bill does not provide a criminal penalty for the refusal).

- Enacts the offense of "failure to disclose one's personal information," which prohibits a person who is in a public place from refusing to disclose the person's name, address, or date of birth, when requested by a law enforcement officer who reasonably suspects that either: (1) the person is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a criminal offense, or (2) the person witnessed an offense of violence that would constitute a felony under Ohio law, a felony offense that causes or results in, or creates a substantial risk of serious physical harm to another person or to property, any attempt, conspiracy, or complicity to commit any of those offenses; or any conduct reasonably indicating that any such offense or any such attempt, conspiracy, or complicity has been, is being, or is about to be committed.



*sighs* I love the "in or near" clause...I wonder what constitutes near?
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 8:07:57 AM EDT
God I hope this doesn't come to NH.

We have enough NAZI's here that we don't need to give them more power.

Too many imports drom Mass.
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 8:13:52 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/26/2005 8:15:35 AM EDT by jrzy]

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:

Originally Posted By Q3131A:

Originally Posted By sydney7629:
Bill Would Allow Arrests For No Reason In Public Place
There has to be more to the story

It is not for no reason. It makes refusing to identify yourself to police a crime.


But then why would police ever even ASK for one's name if they're "doing nothing wrong"?

I've been alive over 40 years and have NEVER been asked for my name from any LEO except when I've done something wrong (traffic stop) or have been a witness (called in suspicious activity in the neighborhood).


Has anyone here EVER been asked for your name by a LEO "for no reason at all"????






Yes when I was 18 home on leave from the Navy.
I was in a car with buddy and the driver who I didn't really know was pulled over.
The officer asked everyone in the car for their ID and when he got to me I asked what for?

He pulled me out of the car and made me put my hands on the trunk.
He searched me and asked me again what my name was, he had my wallet in his hand and again I asked what for and added I've done nothing wrong.
He said I didn't have to do anything and that he had a right to know who I was.

Turns out the guy driving was a professional burglar and the cop knew him to be a bad guy.
When he opened my wallet and saw my Military ID he looked at me and asked if I knew the guy driving.
I told him not really and I was friends with the guy sitting next to me.

They arrested the driver for an old warrant and told the others to walk home.
The officer told me and my friend to stay put, as the rest walked out of sight he told us to get into the patrol car.
He gave my buddy and I a ride home and told us to watch the company we keep.

The guy driving was arrested the following year for murder, he hired two others to break into home where he knew there was a Tiffany lamp worth 10 grand.
They pulled off the robbery and left the owner of the house tied up and gagged, the gag cut off his air supply and he died.

Seems the cop maybe stepped on my rights but maybe he was looking out for me too.
Mixed emotions on this one.

Link Posted: 12/26/2005 8:15:43 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/26/2005 8:24:56 AM EDT by ixy]
H.R.3162 (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001
Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT ACT) Act of 2001 (Received in the Senate)

SEC. 802. DEFINITION OF DOMESTIC TERRORISM.

(a) DOMESTIC TERRORISM DEFINED- Section 2331 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--

(1) in paragraph (1)(B)(iii), by striking `by assassination or kidnapping' and inserting `by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping';

(2) in paragraph (3), by striking `and';

(3) in paragraph (4), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; and'; and

(4) by adding at the end the following:

`(5) the term `domestic terrorism' means activities that--

`(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;

`(B) appear to be intended--

`(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

`(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

`(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and

`(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.'.

(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT- Section 3077(1) of title 18, United States Code, is amended to read as follows:

`(1) `act of terrorism' means an act of domestic or international terrorism as defined in section 2331;'.

welcome to the police state
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 8:23:06 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jrzy:

Seems the cop maybe stepped on my rights but maybe he was looking out for me too.
Mixed emotions on this one.




No question 99% of the LEO's in this country are good and honorable people,its what the 1% of bad ones that can do with a law like this that scares the hell out of me
To put it another way,think of this law on a national level with komrad hitlery klinton with her fat facist ass camped out at 1600 pennsivania ave,and all the God fearing Americans she could destroy with a law like this.Fucking scary
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 8:45:55 AM EDT

Originally Posted By colklink:

Originally Posted By jrzy:

Seems the cop maybe stepped on my rights but maybe he was looking out for me too.
Mixed emotions on this one.




No question 99% of the LEO's in this country are good and honorable people,its what the 1% of bad ones that can do with a law like this that scares the hell out of me
To put it another way,think of this law on a national level with komrad hitlery klinton with her fat facist ass camped out at 1600 pennsivania ave,and all the God fearing Americans she could destroy with a law like this.Fucking scary



Well when you put it that way it scares the shit out me and anyone else who has any sense at all
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 8:51:10 AM EDT

"I think anything we do to enhance security and give power to protect the public to police officers is a good idea,"


Link Posted: 12/26/2005 8:55:39 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NCPatrolAR:


Originally Posted By happycynic:
IIRC, in order to initiate the stop there has to be probable cause.

- No. P/C is required for an arrest.



No, a cop doesn't need PC to make an arrest.

He only needs to state it later.

That's idealism vs. realism.
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 8:58:52 AM EDT

Originally Posted By colklink:

Originally Posted By jrzy:

Seems the cop maybe stepped on my rights but maybe he was looking out for me too.
Mixed emotions on this one.




No question 99% of the LEO's in this country are good and honorable people,its what the 1% of bad ones that can do with a law like this that scares the hell out of me
To put it another way,think of this law on a national level with komrad hitlery klinton with her fat facist ass camped out at 1600 pennsivania ave,and all the God fearing Americans she could destroy with a law like this.Fucking scary



99% is HUGE stretch. There are many, many fine officers, but imho it doesn't come close to 99%. You think Detroit PD is even close to 99%. If it isn't, do you think any big city is close to that? And for small rural departments, does anyone here really want to be caught driving while black?
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 9:04:53 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Riotgun:
No, a cop doesn't need PC to make an arrest.

He only needs to state it later.

That's idealism vs. realism.

- And how much later does he need to state it? Since I work in reality, I know that P/C is actually needed the moment I place someone under arrest.
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 9:34:49 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 9:55:40 AM EDT

Originally Posted By squeezecockerp7m8:

Originally Posted By colklink:

Originally Posted By jrzy:

Seems the cop maybe stepped on my rights but maybe he was looking out for me too.
Mixed emotions on this one.




No question 99% of the LEO's in this country are good and honorable people,its what the 1% of bad ones that can do with a law like this that scares the hell out of me
To put it another way,think of this law on a national level with komrad hitlery klinton with her fat facist ass camped out at 1600 pennsivania ave,and all the God fearing Americans she could destroy with a law like this.Fucking scary





99% is HUGE stretch. There are many, many fine officers, but imho it doesn't come close to 99%. You think Detroit PD is even close to 99%. If it isn't, do you think any big city is close to that? And for small rural departments, does anyone here really want to be caught driving while black?



Am LEO and I can onlt attend to my department for realy silly things we are split about 85% cop lets you go 15% cop is an ass.....for other things less silly more controversial or arguemenative ideas(like gun control) we are split like 60% 40% so its no where near 99% I wish it was...I like my job but somedays my fellow JBT's stress me out more than the public.
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 9:58:19 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/26/2005 10:06:04 AM EDT by AR15fan]

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:

Originally Posted By Q3131A:

Originally Posted By sydney7629:
Bill Would Allow Arrests For No Reason In Public Place
There has to be more to the story

It is not for no reason. It makes refusing to identify yourself to police a crime.


But then why would police ever even ASK for one's name if they're "doing nothing wrong"?

I've been alive over 40 years and have NEVER been asked for my name from any LEO except when I've done something wrong (traffic stop) or have been a witness (called in suspicious activity in the neighborhood).


Has anyone here EVER been asked for your name by a LEO "for no reason at all"????






[tinfoilhat]Well this one time, when i was hanging out behind Best Buy. The cop was all like.. what are you doing here at 3am? Why are you dressed all, in black? Why are you holding a pry bar... But I wasnt doing nuthin. so i didnt even have to tell him my name.[/tinfoilhat]
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 10:02:28 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/26/2005 10:04:44 AM EDT by SPECTRE]
But....but......no LEO would ever do such a thing.....right ??


"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little
temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. ..."
Ben Franklin

Also see sigline below.
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 10:03:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By jrzy:

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:

Originally Posted By Q3131A:

Originally Posted By sydney7629:
Bill Would Allow Arrests For No Reason In Public Place
There has to be more to the story

It is not for no reason. It makes refusing to identify yourself to police a crime.


But then why would police ever even ASK for one's name if they're "doing nothing wrong"?

I've been alive over 40 years and have NEVER been asked for my name from any LEO except when I've done something wrong (traffic stop) or have been a witness (called in suspicious activity in the neighborhood).


Has anyone here EVER been asked for your name by a LEO "for no reason at all"????






Yes when I was 18 home on leave from the Navy.
I was in a car with buddy and the driver who I didn't really know was pulled over.
The officer asked everyone in the car for their ID and when he got to me I asked what for?




You are a witness to the violation the driver was stopped for. If the cop doesnt ID everyone in the car then come court day the driver can parade a group of friends into court who were not even there to testify on his behalf.

If you are going to write a cite or make an arrest always ID all the witnessess.
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 10:11:03 AM EDT
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 10:11:43 AM EDT
I was a passenger in a vehicle that went through a DUI checkpoint and was asked for my ID.....WTF?
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 10:19:43 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Garand_Shooter:
I was a passenger in a vehicle that went through a DUI checkpoint and was asked for my ID.....WTF?



When we have DUI check points I always get on the list to work them both me and my partner just to stop that kinda of thing...neither of us agree witha dui check point because of the nazi fasion are department conducts them in so we work them and act as a buffer.....
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 10:23:20 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/26/2005 10:27:32 AM EDT by NimmerMehr]

Originally Posted By The_Macallan:

Originally Posted By Q3131A:

Originally Posted By sydney7629:
Bill Would Allow Arrests For No Reason In Public Place
There has to be more to the story

It is not for no reason. It makes refusing to identify yourself to police a crime.


But then why would police ever even ASK for one's name if they're "doing nothing wrong"?

I've been alive over 40 years and have NEVER been asked for my name from any LEO except when I've done something wrong (traffic stop) or have been a witness (called in suspicious activity in the neighborhood).


Has anyone here EVER been asked for your name by a LEO "for no reason at all"????




About 10 times in the past 10 years, when I'm out for a walk at night (on the sidewalks). Bored cops I guess.

Only once, according to the police, was a crime reported in the area, so that stop made sense. The rest were just 'kids out after dark'.

Edit: dark being around midnight.
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 10:26:04 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NimmerMehr:
Bored cops I guess.

- Most would say this is the police being proactive. I have s tendency to get out with people I see walking around at late hours. Nothing about being bored......instead its about knowing who is up and moving around your area.
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 10:26:36 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 12/26/2005 10:33:39 AM EDT by Dave_A]

Originally Posted By sydney7629:
Bill Would Allow Arrests For No Reason In Public Place


There has to be more to the story



The correct line is:

'Bill would allow arrest for refusing to proide ID to a police officer'

Sorry guys, but the anonymous no-ID society is a thing of the past allready...

Besides, how can the .gov crack down on illegals, and all that other shit you keep demanding without the ability to ask for some ID?

You can't bank, write a check, get credit, or travel commercially without ID, so why should you expect to be able to refuse to identify yourself to police?

Unless you're one of those cash-only, proud customer of the First Bank of Serta morons who won't even show ID to vote, there's nothing to see here...

P.S. That was allways something that pissed me off when I was in college & working retail... Folks who were 35-40 years old, wondering why they had to actually have had (and maintained) a BANK ACCOUNT, CHECKS, or a CREDIT CARD, and some form of PHOTO ID to buy certain things... The 'Bank, what bank, I gots all my moneys right here' thing got old, real fast, along with the inability to comprehend the concept of state/federal identification...
Link Posted: 12/26/2005 10:29:07 AM EDT

Originally Posted By NCPatrolAR:
I have s tendency to get out with people I see walking around at late hours.



Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top