scoutfsu

    My very first thought when I heard this was in TN. 

  Lol, isn't the legal system  scam grand?

found this one too:  http://www.wate.com/story/22770235/dui-checkpoint-video-youtube   Prominent Nashville criminal defense attorney Rob McKinney viewed the video. He told Nashville's News 2 the driver knew his rights well. "I think it was a smart young man who wanted to prove a point that he knew his constitutional rights and he wanted to show how things are on the streets," McKinney said. When asked if the Constitutional rights of the driver were violated, McKinney said, "Not from what I saw there." McKinney said the driver's Constitutional rights in the video were not violated since officers have a right to ask drivers for their identification. Plus, being detained is also within the officer's legal rights if it's for an investigative purposes. As for the K9 unit, the officer can only enter the vehicle if the K9 officer detects an alert like drugs. However, McKinney said it's tough to tell in the video if the dog actually detected something or if the handler manipulated to dog to do so. Regardless, McKinney feels the video gives a motorists an idea what their rights are.

Google hit this:  http://www.nbcnews.com/id/52405696/ns/local_news-nashville_tn/#.Udge32391OY     The videotaped stop has thousands of people posting their opinions online, so Channel 4 News invited legal expert David Raybin to view the video and comment. Raybin said it's a textbook case of what not to do if you're stopped. "This guy is immediately becoming confrontational and non-compliant with the officer, for no reason. So the officer is allowed to escalate this a little further," Raybin said. Raybin said the officer is within his rights to ask the driver to roll down the window, because that is how he can tell if the driver is intoxicated. Raybin said you don't have the same rights when you're in a vehicle, and the courts do allow a brief detention. He added the officer is justified in asking the driver to get out of the vehicle because he's been non-compliant. Channel 4 asked Raybin what he would do if he were defending that driver in court. "You could make an argument that maybe this officer was overreacting to the way this person was responding to him, but it would be a really close call. I think the tie in this case would go to the officer." Raybin said.

Runco, no offense man.....welcome to the late 90's, 2000's.

  But......but every founding father quoting constitutional scholar on the internet says they were.....you're like, blowing my mind man...     eta: wording

Dan, you missed a key word in that sentence.

I little bit of common respect would have worked wonders for both of these people.   If that were my kid, we'd be having a long talk about things.

  Movement was canceled.  And roger, that was in Arghandab.  Speaking of that overly large base in ole Kandahar.....

A little early since I'll be out and about spreading the good word and won't be able to post for a bit. Enjoy the 4th and remember those before us.

Right up there with rampant, overzealous political correctness......religious fundamentalism is going to kill this world.

  It's not shocking at all if you stop to really think about it.  People in this thread already hit some of the high points.   Trial costs food costs housing costs paying them a wage for their work in the prison - or- the added costs of keeping them in solitary confinement paying the staff etc, etc, etc     Part of it has been a perversion of our legal system that keeps cases alive/appealed for decades

What is really sad now?

  Copperhead, I was in Mosul back in the day while the Christian Iraqis and everyone else were busy killing each other in the most horrible ways over God.

  Because they're a bunch of fundamentalist fucking savages??  We just watched Syrians, the same people that our Gov't is trying to help, saw the heads off of two people....all the while screaming Allah Akbar.  Yay for religion.

    Lol, you see the flip side to that right?

That's very true and a product of having a volunteer military.  Overall, if you want to retain your core competencies and leadership, then you need to be prepared to compensate them.  Part of that compensation is forking over money for when they have families.  Sure, it can be abused but that's less common than stories would have you believe.

    That's what we need, more rules Mike :cool:   I hear they're for our own good.   But I see this thread turning theological now.  This should be entertaining.

Wait, now I'm confused.  In Amerika 2.0 in order to be tolerant, you must be intolerant of people and their choices.  Or is it: in Amerika2.0 in order to be tolerant we have to be intolerant to the people being intolerant of others??   So: tolerance = intolerant of others Or: tolerance = intolerant of others being intolerant of others?   Man, how far down the rabbit hole do we go? :ugh:     It'd be kinda cool if everyone would just mind their own business and let people do what they want to legally do behind their own doors.  The problems start when people want to be loud and proud and force their views on others.

The problem is that it is a complex question with a complex answer and an uncertain solution.  I fatfingered the key above, but depending on the variant (A,B,C), cost estimates range from $300 million to $122 million PER PLANE.  To me, that is an unacceptable number because I don't believe it will stay static or go down.  Like most cost estimates given by the .gov/defense contractors, they are rarely accurate.   On the other hand, due to constant use over the past decade, a lot of our airframes are weakened or near/at/past the end of their life cycles.  We NEED newer planes, whether they be Gen4+, 4++, or 5.  I just don't think the F35 is the Droid we are searching for.    But my knowledge is a passing knowledge.  There are far smarter people than me talking about these things.   You guys want to see a sweet Gen 4++ fighter, check out the SU35.  The Aussie LTC I work with was talking about it the other day.

I'll be they have trouble collecting from the winning bidder.  A lot of people troll GB and over bid on items.  Then it literally takes 3-4 wks to sort things out and get GB to take action.

Just imagine if they weren't paying $400+ million per aircraft for their pie in the sky F35...

I don't remember what they all were.  I remember looking back when google started playing games with their gun searches.   And FWIW, I actually agree with you here. 

And the hundred or so companies that they own?

I doubt you'll find anyone here that will attack you for your decision.  But are you going to at least be consistent and boycott all of the companies associated with YouTube (that Google owns)??