101–106 of 106 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Very true. I am still awaiting the day this is extrapolated to gun rights and watch the hypocrisies rain.
> I am still awaiting the day this is extrapolated to gun rights and watch the hypocrisies rain. Are you saying that all gun owners are also supporters of civil forfeiture?... Or have I misunderstood?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
First, the drivers aren't even Romani. Second, the NY Times has used the phrase, quite often. Granted, with a quick Google I couldn't find a more recent NYT reference than 2008, so maybe they changed their mind. Pulitzer Prize winning columnist William Safire, perhaps best known as a long-time syndicated political columnist for the New York Times and the author of "On Language" in the New York Times Magazine, a colum…
>First, the drivers aren't even Romani. This makes your argument worse, not better. The term "gypsy cab" derives from a racist stereotype of the Romani[1]. How can a term with a racist etymology not be racist? Imagine any group of people appropriating traditionally-derogatory ethnic slurs for another group to describe themselves. How is that okay? As for the Pullitzer Prize winner, that article is from 1986, more tha…
Because you don't agree with Safire, who stated quite clearly:
Egyptians, from whose name the word gypsy
erroneously originated, are usually unaware
of the etymology and are not offended.
(Gypsy cab, which uses both syllables,
stresses the ''wandering'' meaning of gypsy,
which is descriptive and not derogatory.)
“When I use a word,’ Humpty Dumpty said in
rather a scornful tone, ‘it means just what
I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.’
You: The city is stealing my car without probable cause in an attempt to extort money from me. City DA: No they're not. What's your recourse here? Call the FBI or federal prosecutor and report an organized crime syndicate being run by corrupt law enforcement professionals? Because... isn't that what this is? Is there any onus, or even incentive, for them to listen and investigate? Is the only way to redress the probl…
> City DA: No they're not.
> What's your recourse here?
File a civil lawsuit for the violation of Constitutional rights, to wit, the right against being deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process.
Report to the State and federal government for potential public civil and criminal action by those governments against the local government/officials involved.
Work to organize members of the public for political action against the responsible local government/officials.
Etc.
> Concepts like this one, as well as things like civil asset forfeiture, are so clearly in direct violation of the Constitution
Civil asset forfeiture in general is not in direct violation of the Constitution. There may be a valid argument that some of the ways it is currently employed are in violation of the Constitution, though even that is a weaker case than that some of the ways it is employed are just bad policy.
> We still have laws (Constitutional and common), and Peabody, Minnesota doesn't have the right to do things like put all the gay residents to death by legislative fiat & judicial compliance; If you found this occurring, you wouldn't need to file a lawsuit alleging that a constitutional overreach has been committed and demanding merely that the policy cease to be in effect. Instead, you would get some overriding authority, like the state police or the FBI, to run in with SWAT teams and arrest and prosecute every last person peripherally attached to the Peabody legislature or judiciary or law enforcement. For murder.
Or, not. Law enforcement agencies have the power to enforce the laws, but they generally have no obligation to enforce them, and quite often real and significant violations are fought with civil lawsuits by those affected rather than direct intervention and criminal prosecution by enforcement agencies. Even in cases where the general problem is one that enforcement agencies are interested in -- the civil rights movement provides numerous examples, where all kinds of serious violations by local and state officials were addressed, some by higher (particularly federal) law enforcement action, some by private civil lawsuits, some by political mobilizing and action, and many by combinations of those methods.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Based on your racist and derogatory statements, I have to wonder if you're involved in the taxi industry. The fact is, taxi lobbies are just protection rackets. I don't like Uber at all due to the way they treat their customers and drivers, but ridesharing is the future and the taxi mob is desperate to stop them from growing. If that means paying off the local law enforcement and city officials to illegally and uncon…
Wait, I don't understand. Because this person used a term that you describe as a racist and derogatory term, you are claiming the entire taxi industry is racist? As I asked elsewhere, how is this term racist and derogatory?
When did I ever say that? I said the taxi industry is a protection racket. The person I replied to is spouting racist commentary.
You: The city is stealing my car without probable cause in an attempt to extort money from me. City DA: No they're not. What's your recourse here? Call the FBI or federal prosecutor and report an organized crime syndicate being run by corrupt law enforcement professionals? Because... isn't that what this is? Is there any onus, or even incentive, for them to listen and investigate? Is the only way to redress the probl…
> You: The city is stealing my car without probable cause in an attempt to extort money from me. > City DA: No they're not. > What's your recourse here? File a civil lawsuit for the violation of Constitutional rights, to wit, the right against being deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process. Report to the State and federal government for potential public civil and criminal action by those governments…