To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / *17691 (-20)
  Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
 
(...) If I broke into your home and stole your stereo, but you had no other evidence than your in-home video surveillance system, wouldn't you at least want me to be questioned? (...) Okay, what if I broke into your house, stole your stereo, and was (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
 
(...) Would guns truly have made a beneficial difference? Or would it have made the students seem like armed combatants who deserved whatever they got? I expect that it would depend on how the press chose to spin it, but at the very least it would (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace)
 
(...) I don't agree. Why not clean up your own neighbourhood first? Scott A (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace)
 
(...) This is news to me. Do you have a reference? Scott A (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Why start with Iraq? - (Re: Iraq, Dictators, and Peace)
 
(...) There will be a UK parliamentary debate tomorrow. Blair will give MPs 3 hours to read his "dossier" on SH and then expect them to reach an opinion and debate it... crazy. Scott A (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
 
(...) Yes, we up here have, as of today anyway, 5 'official' parties-- Progressive Conservative Liberal New Democratic Party Bloc Quebecuois Alliance (a la Reform) And what's going to continue to happen up here in Canada is that the Liberals are (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
 
(...) And I am in the unique position of agreeing wholeheartedly with Chris. There was a wee bit of a ruckus in LA a while back, and a granny watching the news footage of the looting and pillaging saw her grandson doing said mischief. She reported (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
 
(...) OK, so did you just use those two as examples of the hundreds, or is that all you've got? I'm not trying to be trite about this, but I think you could find more than two civil rights abuses in a year on any given year since you've been alive. (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
 
(...) The Medical Students in Florida who turned out to: - not be able to be connected in any way to anything nefarious - in fact, didn't run the toll booth as originally reported The Isamic leader arrested in Portland because his luggage showed (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
 
(...) see also: (URL) article is about forking and revolutionary change within the open source context, but it applies to all systems... high barriers to entry imply more likeliehood of revolution rather than gradual change... and the duopoly of (...) (22 years ago, 23-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
 
(...) Good. Chris (22 years ago, 22-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Those stupid liberal judges are at it again!
 
(...) Wow, wouldn't *that* be interesting? (22 years ago, 22-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
 
(...) But in this case the girl has no physical wounds. This suggests to me that the other woman may not have felt the girl was in any danger. It seems to me that this case goes further than just a child battery charge and giving aid to a criminal. (...) (22 years ago, 22-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Ashcroft named as top defendant in civil suit
 
Agents acting under Ashcroft, as Atty. general, are his responsibility. He's the man in charge -- he's the one that knows or is obligated to know what is going on under his command. -- Hop-Frog (22 years ago, 22-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Ashcroft named as top defendant in civil suit
 
(...) statute: TITLE 42, CHAPTER 21, SUBCHAPTER I, Sec. 1983. Sec. 1983. - Civil action for deprivation of rights Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of (...) (22 years ago, 22-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
 
(...) Yeah, really. It's hard to imagine how they could possibly know that the sister knows anything useful. I mean, do they have video footage of her seeing her sister do things? Not likely... Also, I believe in the right to remain silent -- to (...) (22 years ago, 22-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Ashcroft named as top defendant in civil suit
 
(...) I didn't get from the article what the specific and direct role played by Ashcroft was. Is he only guilty for setting a cavalier tone within the federal law enforcement machine, or was it something more clear cut? Chris (22 years ago, 22-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Ashcroft named as top defendant in civil suit
 
I found this interesting: (URL) see how far it gets. I expect he'll be removed from the suit, after all, can't have our government officials held personally liable for what they do, now can we? (22 years ago, 22-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
 
(...) Really? Do you generally think that aiding criminals should have no penalty? There may be issues surrounding this that I haven't thought through, but on first blush, it doesn't seem like a bad general policy to me. I would certainly intervene (...) (22 years ago, 22-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
 
  Re: Is this an overreaction and a violation of rights?
 
(...) Like what? Am I missing a bigger trend? (...) Um...what could be more damning than video footage? What on Earth _would_ you consider reasonable evidence? I haven't heard anything inappropriate about the handling of this case from the article (...) (22 years ago, 22-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)


Next Page:  5 more | 10 more | 20 more

Redisplay Messages:  All | Compact

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR