Wolverine 10,360 Posted June 13, 2005 Report Share Posted June 13, 2005 you forgot the third group.. that which represents 99.999999999999999999999999999999999999% criminals. Yeah, but I still expect the ACLU to file a lawsuit and drive it to the Supreme Court as an infringement of civil rights both for honest citizens and for profiling reasons whether by race or criminal conviction. The Court will render an opinion consistent with its' composition and the perceived good of society whether it violates the Consistution or not. Wolverine Quote Link to post Share on other sites
k_dawg 0 Posted June 13, 2005 Report Share Posted June 13, 2005 FUCK the "aclu". They take no "official position" on the 2nd amendment. the ACLU *IS* the enemy Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Wolverine 10,360 Posted June 13, 2005 Report Share Posted June 13, 2005 FUCK the "aclu". They take no "official position" on the 2nd amendment. the ACLU *IS* the enemy Somebody better tell Smiley. He is a member of this forum and carries a card. He sees the issue differently than most of us. I appreciate someone who is legitimately looking out for our civil rights but the ACLU is notorious for taking on the most bizarre stuff that is counter-productive to the best interest of our nation and people. They are always on the extreme end of the spectrum in their quest to ensure civil rights and liberty. It seems like they are hell bent on destroying the foundation of what America was built upon. Most conservatives despise the ACLU and evangelical Christians would like to bury the organizations once and for all. My biggest concern today is that the Courts have gone rogue. They no longer interpret the Constitution and law but actually legislate law it through their opinions. This was not the intent from the beginning. Congress was to make law and the courts enforce it. The balance of power has been upset so that the Supreme Court has become the Supreme ruling council. But hey, we could be in Russia or China. Wolverine Quote Link to post Share on other sites
G O B 3,516 Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 Our courts are based on English common law. They have damned little to do with justice,and much to do with maintaining the upper class . They also are diametrically opposed to the Roman concept of "the law is the same in all of rome". Our law is interpreted as the sum of whatever lunatic ravings have been decreed in that State/regional court system. The law is whatever the court says it is. It takes a 2/3 majority of the states to ammend the constitution, or 5 unelected supreme court justices to shit can it. G O B Quote Link to post Share on other sites
acetomatoco 0 Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 How is this law supposed to affect Terrorists or Illegal Aliens? I've read it and it does not say everybody has to get one. Scroll down to the last 2 paragraphs that I've highlighted in green followed by my explanation. TITLE II--IMPROVED SECURITY FOR DRIVERS' LICENSES AND PERSONAL IDENTIFICATION CARDS SEC. 201. DEFINITIONS. In this title, the following definitions apply: (1) DRIVER'S LICENSE- The term `driver's license' means a motor vehicle operator's license, as defined in section 30301 of title 49, United States Code. (2) IDENTIFICATION CARD- The term `identification card' means a personal identification card, as defined in section 1028(d) of title 18, United States Code, issued by a State. (3) MOVED DOWN to SEC.202 (a) (1) for ease of reading,ACE (4) SECRETARY- The term `Secretary' means the Secretary of Homeland Security. (5) STATE- The term `State' means a State of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, and any other territory or possession of the United States. SEC. 202. MINIMUM DOCUMENT REQUIREMENTS AND ISSUANCE STANDARDS FOR FEDERAL RECOGNITION. (a) Minimum Standards for Federal Use- (1) IN GENERAL- Beginning 3 years after the date of the enactment of this division, a Federal agency may not accept, for any official purpose, a driver's license or identification card issued by a State to any person unless the State is meeting the requirements of this section. Definition moved from above,ACE (3) OFFICIAL PURPOSE- The term `official purpose' includes but is not limited to accessing Federal facilities, boarding federally regulated commercial aircraft, entering nuclear power plants, and any other purposes that the Secretary shall determine. This new I.D. program only applies to people who want a Drivers License / I.D. Card or want to do something that is listed in the definition of OFFICIAL PURPOSE. People can still get around without driving or flying. Many people who have lost their priviledge to drive,still get around. If they do not need to go to a Federal facility,power plant or any other purpose or function that the Secretary shall determine then they don't need it either. These people can still get around,work for cash or some other creative arrangement,and never get this new I.D. WTF ACE Quote Link to post Share on other sites
k_dawg 0 Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 the primary reason for the bill, is due to states like California giving official state ID's to illegal immigrants. Once you have a "legit" ID, it is very easy to function in our society, as an accepted member of that society. Can one get along without an ID? Sure. But at least then if stopped, the police knows you are a criminal fugative. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
G O B 3,516 Posted June 14, 2005 Report Share Posted June 14, 2005 "board a federally regulated commercial aircraft" AND EVEN WORSE "any other purposes that the secretary shall determine" Like own a gun, drive your car on a federally funded highway--there is no end to the erosion of our freedoms and the dictatorial powers handed blindly to un-elected buracrats. Does anyone remember "as determined by the secretary to have no sporting purpose"? Life, Liberty and the persuit of happiness. Liberty is the freedom to go wherever you want without armed people stopping you and demanding to see your papers, and deciding if you can go there or not The sheep in this country are throwing our freedoms away with both hands. A sobriety check point would have had George Washingtom raising an army. G O B Quote Link to post Share on other sites
acetomatoco 0 Posted June 21, 2005 Report Share Posted June 21, 2005 How ironic that last week as Saiga forum members were discussing this topic my son was experiencing the beginning of this new law in Washington D.C. My son,his girlfriend,her mother and her Aunt went to some type of Goverment parking lot and were all asked to show I.D. My son and his girlfriend had their I.D. but her mother and Aunt did not. They did not think they needed their I.D. for anything that day and left it at home. They were told that only people with I.D. could enter the parking area and people without I.D. could not enter. My son and his girlfriend parked the car and had to rejoin the other 2 at the parking lot entrance. The 4 of them then did their sightseeing and returned to the parking lot. Again the 2 without I.D. had to wait at the entrance while my son and his girlfriend got the car and picked them up as they exited the parking lot. Incredible! Good thing it wasn't raining or really cold outside. What are they going to do when an adult shows up with a car full of young children? Leave the kids at the gate alone? I hope not. We haven't heard the last of this yet. Ace Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Bvamp 604 Posted June 21, 2005 Report Share Posted June 21, 2005 well, back a few years ago after being mugged in florida and left for dead, and then NOT told that the state would pay for my hospital bill (Ever reset your own cheek bone? lemme tell ya, it HURTS), I was left with zero money and no ID whatsoever. Further, on that note, being as i wasnt informed the state would pay the bill, i refused medical treatment, and in doing so, apparantly I wasnt "in the clear" in the cop's eyes, and they basically let my case just drop. said something about drugs or whatever. give me a break. I did however get to tell the tv show cops to get thier cameras the fuck away from me, and met some of the nice police officers you see from st petersburg florida on that stupid show....love getting screwed by people i tell ya. I must have it stamped on my forehead "screw me AND my rights". ANYWAY ---- what I did was call up the travel agent who I booked the flight with, they called the airline, explained what happened, faxed the airline the police report, etc, and got me an earlier flight home. I get to the airport, and yehp, no ID, get on the plane. everybody knew who I was. it was pretty damn cool. they even sat me with a doctor for both legs of the flight. on my layover in raleigh, I had a beer at the airport bar, and when asked for ID, I told the guy i had been robbed and didnt have ID. dude KNEW MY NAME!!! hahaha and asked me to spell my real first name. even this guy knew who I was. I get home, and a week or two later when I stopped seeing red, I went to the DMV to get a new license. well, aPPARANTLY i didnt have enough POINTS to prove I was me. I was one point short. I had only my birth certificate and a bank bill, and needed one other thing, which I didnt have. so i went and found a PO i knew upstairs and brought them down to the desk and they vouched who I was and showed them my file. got my ID. NOW the way it works here, is you only need 1/2 the proof to get your ID. I guess it was along the logic of people like me that if i HADNT have known someone in the building that knew the DMV people, i DEFINATELY wouldnt have gotten my ID back. now, I wouldnt have that problem. So I can see it from the perspective of requiring a great amount of PROOF of who the hell you are to get ID. even here, they dropped the number of proofs you need down since my escapade to the point where even *I* dont believe its enough. what im saying is, seeing how its so damned easy to GET ID now, I really dont blame the gov. for that measure. its going to cause people grief that didnt DO anything though, and that isnt how its supposed to be in america. I see the logic to it all, but when in order to protect the people, the people are punished, it is a fouled law, and is unconstitutional. but like i say all the time on here, you are guilty until proven innocent, and you are only innocent if you have money to back you up. this is the same with all aspects of american life and american rights nowadays. the terrorists win if this keeps up. this is EXACTLY what those assholes wanted. and low and behold, they are getting it. Im not too happy about it, myself. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Doerdie 0 Posted June 22, 2005 Report Share Posted June 22, 2005 Yall have a National ID card...called a Social Security Card. Next time your asked for it change one number and see what happens...lol. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Gaddis 1,689 Posted June 22, 2005 Report Share Posted June 22, 2005 Incredible! Good thing it wasn't raining or really cold outside. What are they going to do when an adult shows up with a car full of young children? Leave the kids at the gate alone? I hope not. We haven't heard the last of this yet. Ace <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm sure the Washington D.C. chapter of Neverland Ranch that Michael's thinking about opening would be happy to take them in. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.