Slowbalt

This is hilarious! Thanks for posting this up!

THIS

I am pretty sure we established that about 3 pages ago, haha.

I think that is probably what would happen as well but why should this matter? Shouldn't rules be rules? Why should I be able to wear a hat because I believe that a specific book is true? Seems kind of strange doesn't it?

We need moar guns and less people

I agree with this. It is painfully obvious that there are no hats allowed in court. I wonder if a person wearing a yarmulke would have received any different of treatment though? Also for the previous statement about why someone didn't stop him at the door, usually the bailiff is the one who handles those matters and hats can be worn inside the building, just not inside the courtroom itself.

My point is that dress is culturally relative and can be changed at anytime. We perpetuate it by not caring about it or questioning it. Dress certainly impacts peoples perception of the wearer, no doubt but should it matter to the degree in this video? I do not think so. I do not believe that police officers wear uniforms because they respect the public, far from it. Police officers wear uniforms to show cohesiveness as well as to show authority. There have been many psychological studies done on police uniforms and they are a good read. If you raise a child and instill specific values, that child will generally adopt those values. Now extrapolate that out to a society that instills values constantly to its people. From the day I was born until I die I am constantly being told what I should or should not value. Who is telling you this information (Church, Government, Employer, Media) and who benefits? Shouldn't we be constantly challenging the status quo to ensure we are doing the best we can?

Wasn't the guy being arrested in the middle of court a bit more disrupting than the hat on his head? I mean really.....come on. Depends on how you define "proper". We wouldn't have this thread if this situation never happened. I can't completely agree with the first part so I am not really sure of how to answer this but the style of dress doesn't seem to have anything to do with supposed equality of justice(if such a thing exists) What people chose to wear (or not wear) really doesn't concern me. Our rights deserve respect but the institutions do not. My right to wear a hat is arguably more "natural" or "proper" than an institutions "right" to make me remove it. I still don't get what clothing choices have to do with justice. I agree that Pete knew or at least had an idea of what was going to happen when he refused to take his hat off. He chose to resist and was punished for it. Why should wearing a hat matter in a court of law?

I can't wait for the Droid Bionic! Hands down one of the best new phones coming out soon. You can go to VZW.com and get exact pricing on what you are looking for in a plan. I have the Droid 1 and I can say that it is the best phone I have ever had. The Iphone 4 look really good to0 but I prefer Android.

Submission to the system is what is expected and in this case demanded. I am not arguing the facts of the matter. The court has a no hats policy, the gentleman was wearing a hat and refused to remove it this is pretty clear. I am saying that it a stupid rule to begin with. As a tax payer I ask why we are wasting money on this? It seems to me that people do not question things enough. Just because things are the way they are, doesn't mean that's the way they ought to be. Is there any reason why one ought to remove their hat in court? This is a place of alleged justice, not church.

I agree that is it mostly a respect thing but unless a hat is covering the face (mask) I do not think the safety argument really applies here. I have never seen a person in a store or bank being asked to take off their hat. I have however seen people asked to take off masks (around Halloween). I could not imagine an officer asking someone to stand naked in a courtroom but IF they did and I did not, than I would be arrested. My point is that I must comply with any request while on the premises and this is not necessarily to degrade me but to show that I am submissive to the system . In addition, many people are not there voluntarily and many of these people are also innocent and trying to realize their rights.

This goes to show how messed up the system is. Why do we put up with it?

I have a hard time understanding how all the conservatives on this forum are pro free market but anti personal freedoms? Seems kind of strange to me. I would expect to be accosted if I refused to remove my hat in court but why is this? This seems to be another way of the system intimidating the average person. While you are in this building you must abide by any requests or else. Personally I do not wear hats and if I did, I would simply remove it to avoid this type of inevitable situation but why should I have to?

Well said. Interesting find around these parts.

If you are on the old connect or premium plans that included data you can activate a smartphone, or any phone really onto the secondary line without changing your plan. You would still have to pay for the data plan either 15 or 30 depending on which one you wanted.

What you are detained for is not always what they cite when they arrest you. The police can arrest you for just about anything, it is up to you to prove you didn't do it in court. You can be walking down the street, minding your business and a cop could arrest you and take you to jail. If there was no evidence of you doing anything illegal you would not be economically punished but your time will have been wasted. This is especially true on a Saturday night when there is no judge until Monday. This is quite extreme of an example and probably does not happen very often but it could be done.

You are fine Paul. Go to court and and be polite and plead not guilty and they can't touch you. I agree that it is rude that cops can be dicks but being polite to them is not backing down or taking it from the man, it is your escape plan. It does you ABSOLUTELY NO GOOD to be rude to the police officers, you have to trust me on this. If you are polite, know your rights, and do/say as little as possible it will only help you out later. If a cop wants to take you to jail, you are going to jail. It is much much better to retain your freedom and fight another day....in court.

I didn't say going to court will avoid being trampled, just that it is the only choice that you have besides just forking over money. You have to go to court to get an equipment violation out of a speeding ticket or some other moving violation. You have to remember paying the ticket is not the only cost involved as you have to consider insurance rate hikes as well. If the officer doesn't show, it never happened and this is probably the best situation you can work out. Lastly, no points speeding tickets are a joke anyway because insurance companies can still raise rates by looking at driving records and not just the amount of points.

Yet another story of cops making money for the government. Granted there are a lot of "good" cops out there doing an honest job but too many people who were bullied or have the need to control others go into law enforcement. I have been pulled over countless times for not having front plates but only in my Eclipse. I can speed past cops with no front plate and tinted windows in my Cobalt without a second look. Police profile and have quotas they are expected to meet. I do find it interesting that many people who claim to understand "freedom" see no issue with being forced to carry identification cards and wear seatbelts. Words of advice for being pulled over: Never admit ANYTHING. Be polite but do not be afraid or intimidated by the officer. Be as unmemorable as possible. Take plenty of notes ASAP even stuff about what the weather was like, landmark, what you were wearing, etc for court. ALWAYS go to court!!!!! This is YOUR RIGHT and the ONLY way to not be completely trampled by the system.

You just repeated back what I said but then claim I don't understand it...... I agree that industrialization is leading to a more westernized culture, and that that is not the traditional culture of these locations. That was not my point though. A s they industrialize and westernize they will consume more and resources are limited while corporate profit is expected to be infinitely increasing, this is a problem. We are already running out of resources as it is.

I am not doubting your work history, I am doubting your worldview. I am not entirely sure what your point about potential civil rights outcomes has to do with THE FACT that they are becoming more industrialized and therefor using more resources. I do like chomski but I don't see eye to eye with him on everything, like technology for example. For the betterment of the minds on this forum it would be helpfull to read Jared Diamonds book "Guns, Germs, and Steel", next I would read "a peoples history of the united states" by howard zinn. I would then move to the documentaries "food inc" and "the corporation". Then you may begin to have an undersatnding of the "real world"

While true that computers are made by corporations and they do use electricity, I can't exactly attack them with a stick I picked up from the ground, ya know. The internet is the only place where we have free communication and the easiest way to spread information and ideas, so yes, that is why I use it. As far as electricity goes we can produce it sustainably, it is just less expensive for the corporations to use coal. I have been indoctrinated by American culture and I am slowly working on weaning myself off it. You have to start somewhere, right? What are you doing to help? As far as quality of life goes 1 in 2 men will get cancer in the US and 1 in 3 woman. Cancer in Japan is less than 1% and they don't live in the "medieval" times. You all are stating that corporations own and control everything so just get over it. I am saying there are other ways of living. The scariest thing about this society is that people are brainwashed into thinking it is good for them.

There is more than just the price involved for competion. This was my point to you so thanks for demonstrating your understanding, you receive a gold star. I understand that unions are not all roses and chocolate but have you ever worked for a meat packer? Ever seen someones arm cut off because the company removed the guard on the machine? What if the person couldn't sue? Again, I will state that unions are not needed everywhere and for every job and there certainly are corrupt ones out there, but they do perform a helpful function for the worker. It should be the workers choice, if the union isn't serving them, they should get rid of it. Your seemingly limited view on the "real world" is astounding, haha. As I stated before we need to manufacture some things. We do not need corporations in the image of coca cola, citibank, morgan stanley, etc. American life and culture is UNSUSTAINABLE. I am not sure if you grasp exactly what this means but as China and India become more like us, this puts a HUGE stress on natural resources. Who owns these? Not you and I but the corporations. I am not exactly advocating living in tree houses but surely growing your own food or a cooperative, using less and buying less "stuff", working towards transfer of power from corporations to the people, etc. If we begin to take a look at the big picture, we find that there are other countries out there that do not have food and clean water but we fight over zhu zhu pets.....

I have no clue why you always jump to conclusions. First off, just because something is cheaper does not mean that more people will choose it over something that is more expensive. If that were the case everyone on this forum would be driving geo metros and I certainly don't see that happening anytime soon. There are other dimensions to consider such as quality, safety, etc. What I was referring to is if we actually need more manufacturing in the first place. If we WANT to bring back more manufacturing. If we are to get into an arms race of manufacturing with China and/or India, I do not see us as the victor. Labor is way cheaper in other parts of the world. Also, you have glossed over the point about union vs non union competition in the US. They compete together in the same marketplace somewhat tenaciously. Unions have a place in society but I do not think they are needed everywhere or even most places. My final point in this is do we want corporations to get larger? Personally, I would like to see corporations as we know them wiped out. Sure they ultimately provide cheap stuff but at what cost?

That's what I was thinking but what about competition between unionized and non unionized? Surely every manufacturing industry in the US can't be unionized can they? Verizon and ATT both compete and one is unionized and one is not. I don't know if I agree with unions being eliminated or banned unless the employees came to some agreement about it. I know some people that have been helped and feel positively towards their union but some people find their union to be burdensome and even corrupt at times. I think it would depend on the situation. Getting rid of unions may produce cheaper labor for companies so they can compete easier with foreign companies but is that necessarily what we want?