max power Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 Right! You don't take away a man's rights until he has been CONVICTED of a crime. There is your right answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 Right! You don't take away a man's rights until he has been CONVICTED of a crime. There is your right answer. Then why do people sit in jail awaiting trial? 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4DAIVI PAI2K5 Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 Suspension is not a punishment. Arrest is not a punishment, it's a means of gaining control of a situation until you can figure out what is going on. I guess it doesn't make sense when compared to a DUI suspect who doesn't lose his license until convicted. Definitely a double standard.OVI are suspended, when the BMV 2255 form's Notice of Susp. is read by the officer after the subject test above .08 on a datamaster or intoxicalizer in the state of Ohio. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
max power Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 Then why do people sit in jail awaiting trial?Because their lawyers suck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smccrory Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 Then why do people sit in jail awaiting trial? Max Power was incorrect (or at least excessively general) in his statement. Rights end when someone has been CHARGED with a crime, at least temporarily, but then they must be released after processing, even if on bail to mitigate flight risk. In any case Scruit, the law is absolutely clear, as are the Magna Carta roots of our legal rights - due process is a critical part of any reasonably fair legal system. Without it, the gubment could snatch up anyone for any reason at any time and violate them indefinitely, and in fact any citizen could initiate that treatment almost anonymously. jbot's nuclear-powered sybian would love it, but I for one am glad due process applies equally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 Max Power was incorrect (or at least excessively general) in his statement. Rights end when someone has been CHARGED with a crime, at least temporarily, but then they must be released after processing, even if on bail to mitigate flight risk. In any case Scruit, the law is absolutely clear, as are the Magna Carta roots of our legal rights - due process is a critical part of any reasonably fair legal system. Without it, the gubment could snatch up anyone for any reason at any time and violate them indefinitely, and in fact any citizen could initiate that treatment almost anonymously. jbot's nuclear-powered sybian would love it, but I for one am glad due process applies equally. The law is ALSO clear that an ARREST for a disqualifying offense OR a restraining order are both grounds for a temporary suspension of the CHL/CCW in Florida and Ohio - I didn't write that law. People can be arrested prior to being charged and nobody has a beef with that concept. Same with the temporary CHL/CCW suspension. If a person is accused of assault and there is evidence to support that they can be arrested. That would otherwise be a violation of their rights, but is allowed by due process. If we are ok with them being arrested pending investigation then why not having their permit suspended pending investigation? I accept that there are often political motivations behind the issuance of a suspension (James Yeager). I also accept that people can lie to the police and get someone's permit suspended. You can also lie to get a restraining order for the same effect. You can lie to children's services and get your neighbor investigated. You can bash your head against a wall and get your brother investigated for assault. You can let someone who rear-ended you with no visible damage go, then smash up your own bumper to claim more compensation. There's ways to play any system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 Because their lawyers suck. Better call Saul. Or, people are arrested pending an investigation and the lawyer can't do dick about it until their detention limit rolls around. Or the person can be held on a bail amount that the lawyers can't do dick about. Lots of scenarios. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 OVI are suspended, when the BMV 2255 form's Notice of Susp. is read by the officer after the subject test above .08 on a datamaster or intoxicalizer in the state of Ohio. Fair enough. Never had an OVI so I don't know the process (not accusing you of having one). What about people who beat the charges? They've already been punished to a certain extent...? Flip side - what if they didn't suspend immediately and that same person OVI'd the next day...? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smccrory Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 IMHO you're getting to theoretical and tangential about this. You said that it would be reasonable to suspend Zimmy's CHL for a while, based on allegations that he used it in an another altercation. It turns out that there's absolutely no evidence that he had a gun ( I'd bet it was wisely in his locked truck). Now, you would have taken his constitutional right to armed self-defense away based on what appears to be a lying, bitter, to-be-ex-wife, leaving him exposed to the thousands of personal attacks people have made to him. I don't care how any of us feel about Mr. Zim - the fact is that he's still entitled to his right to self-protection and there are clear and present threats to his well-being that more than justify his need for it (not that there even needs to be according to constitutional law, but there you go). 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 IMHO you're getting to theoretical and tangential about this. You said that it would be reasonable to suspend Zimmy's CHL for a while, based on allegations that he used it in an another altercation. It turns out that there's absolutely no evidence that he had a gun ( I'd bet it was wisely in his locked truck). Now, you would have taken his constitutional right to armed self-defense away based on what appears to be a lying, bitter, to-be-ex-wife, leaving him exposed to the thousands of personal attacks people have made to him. I don't care how any of us feel about Mr. Zim - the fact is that he's still entitled to his right to self-protection and there are clear and present threats to his well-being that more than justify his need for it (not that there even needs to be according to constitutional law, but there you go). For the record I always through Z should have been acquitted, and TBH, should never have been charged in the first place. That trial wasn't even close. However... I said the law in Florida required the suspension until the situation was sorted out. As it happens it was sorted out quickly so any suspension should be lifted immediately. If you have two people saying they were threatened with a gun then some investigation has to take place. If they can arrest him temporarily then they can take his permit away temporarily - both would otherwise be an infringement on his rights. Are you saying it's OK to jail someone for 24h, just not take their permit away for 24h? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 It turns out that there's absolutely no evidence that he had a gun ( I'd bet it was wisely in his locked truck). Different news outlets are reporting different things on this. I wouldn't be so quick to make set-in-stone statements about what went on. Some places are saying there was a gun involved, some say he had his hand on his gun in it's holster - some say there was no gun, some say a gun was recovered but not used, some say no gun recovered. Details are still sketchy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbot Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 In any case Scruit, the law is absolutely clear, as are the Magna Carta roots of our legal rights - due process is a critical part of any reasonably fair legal system. Without it, the gubment could snatch up anyone for any reason at any time and violate them indefinitely, and in fact any citizen could initiate that treatment almost anonymously. jbot's nuclear-powered sybian would love it, but I for one am glad due process applies equally. what part of anything i've said ever would make you think i'm against due process? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4DAIVI PAI2K5 Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 (edited) Fair enough. Never had an OVI so I don't know the process (not accusing you of having one). What about people who beat the charges? They've already been punished to a certain extent...? Flip side - what if they didn't suspend immediately and that same person OVI'd the next day...?It's part of my job. First, driving isn't a right guaranteed by the Constitution. Second if you read the fine print on the paper when you sign for your license's it says you will submit to a test and blah blah blah. That is why refusing a test has a longer period of suspension when taking an failing a test. Also why you can ask for the judge during your first hearing ( has to be within 5 days) to have your license back. Third as I said in my previous post you are only read the notice of susp. portion of the BMV 2255 form after you have A) refused the test (see #2) or have tested over the legal limit. If a blood test is done and has to be sent out for results license are not susp. until results are back, you are issued a citation and given a court date. Edited September 10, 2013 by 4DAIVI PAI2K5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4DAIVI PAI2K5 Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 (edited) Error Edited September 10, 2013 by 4DAIVI PAI2K5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smccrory Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 what part of anything i've said ever would make you think i'm against due process?Your Sybian reference! ;-P Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted September 10, 2013 Report Share Posted September 10, 2013 First, driving isn't a right guaranteed by the Constitution. Because cars weren't invented back then... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4DAIVI PAI2K5 Posted September 11, 2013 Report Share Posted September 11, 2013 Because cars weren't invented back then... Neither was the internet so get off of it and save us all the headaches. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted September 11, 2013 Report Share Posted September 11, 2013 (edited) Neither was the internet so get off of it and save us all the headaches.You don't have a constitutional right to the internet.But then I don't consider the US constitution to be a flawless document of righteousness either...The Constitution also considers black people 3/5 of a person and prohibits the manufacture and sale of alcohol for human consumption... It can be amended, and should be amended over time. Many of the founding fathers intended for laws to expire after 20 years so every generation could be in charge of their own society... Edited September 11, 2013 by magley64 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbot Posted September 11, 2013 Report Share Posted September 11, 2013 You don't have a constitutional right to the internet.But then I don't consider the US constitution to be a flawless document of righteousness either...The Constitution also considers black people 3/5 of a person and prohibits the manufacture and sale of alcohol for human consumption... It can be amended, and should be amended over time. Many of the founding fathers intended for laws to expire after 20 years so every generation could be in charge of their own society...You flip flop more than Dear President doesi guess i can kinda see that, but I view the government as a body that is designed to maintain your bill of rights. that's why the government is there, it's taken on further roles in our society, but it's MAIN role is to maintain, and defend the constitution.I'm happy (for the most part) with how that is handled. Sure there are things i disagree with, but nothing to the point where i want to tell the US government to fuck off.He would if people would get their head out of the GOP's ass, and stand up for someone who stands up for the constitution.It's just sad when a man has no principles. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pokey Posted September 11, 2013 Report Share Posted September 11, 2013 He flip flops on any brief principles too. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted September 11, 2013 Report Share Posted September 11, 2013 You flip flop more than Dear President doesJust because the governments job is to defend the constitution, doesn't mean the constitution shouldn't change...It's just sad when a man has no principles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smashweights Posted September 11, 2013 Report Share Posted September 11, 2013 Anyone else think it's pretty shady that as part of the divorce, Zimmy's wife wants a life insurance policy taken out on ZIMMY and payable to her? Someone's banking on him getting whacked. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shittygsxr Posted September 11, 2013 Report Share Posted September 11, 2013 I'm gonna pour out some of my lean for my dead homie trevan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Butters Posted September 11, 2013 Report Share Posted September 11, 2013 Pourin out that Bootysweat as we speak... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4DAIVI PAI2K5 Posted September 11, 2013 Report Share Posted September 11, 2013 Speaking of Bootysweat anyone see that the twerking chick that caught herself on fire was a troll by Jimmy Kimmel? lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.