- Jul 1, 2011
- 27,739
- 21
When Coach ballbreaker lined them up for ID.
Or maybe she said *I'd know that dinky do if I saw it*.
Hell, I can't remember either. Senility must be contagious.
An Outrageous Warrant
- Thread starter benenglish
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
When Coach ballbreaker lined them up for ID.
Or maybe she said *I'd know that dinky do if I saw it*.
Hell, I can't remember either. Senility must be contagious.
Doesn't surprise me a bit.
After child porn was made illegal but before the commercial internet appeared, the U.S. Postal Service ran stings where they distributed child porn. They were, for quite a while, responsible for well over 90% of the magazines on that subject distributed in the U.S. I've seen estimates exceeding 98%.
Post-internet, things changed but federal LEOs eventually caught up and started distributing again. When the FBI took over Freedom Hosting they became the biggest distributor of child pornography in the world for a while. If they hadn't been such ham-fisted idiots with the malware they were distributing, they might still be.
I got it. I had forgotten that part. Senility sets in early in my family, it appears.
Reminds me of a police department I read about who suspected a guy of trafficking drugs, so they mailed him some.
After waiting a short time (because everyone opens their mail immediately) they swatted his house.
The package was still unopened, leading the police to claim that the guy WASN'T in a hurry to open it because he knew what was in it...unreal.
After waiting a short time (because everyone opens their mail immediately) they swatted his house.
The package was still unopened, leading the police to claim that the guy WASN'T in a hurry to open it because he knew what was in it...unreal.
Mexican_Hippie
TGT Addict
They're both kids who need to be disciplined by their parents.
If the guy was older I'd feel completely different.
If the guy was older I'd feel completely different.
2 pages late...
bolo do not attempt to apprehend cause this pri##=#k is armed and dangerous
I'm sure there is a better quality version ...
Hands Down the Funniest Scene from the movie Porky's - YouTube
First thing I've seen you post I disagree with, it does bother me when LEO break the laws to enforce them. I recognize the reality but just can't get behind the good guys doing the same things as the bad guys being a good thing. Your example of speeding in response to a 911 call is exactly the type of need that keeps me from being able to fall solidly on one side as I certainly see the justification in some situations. Unfortunately I think it generally undermines trust in the entire system, contributes to corruption and ultimately results in gems such as "Fast & Furious".
When Coach ballbreaker lined them up for ID.
Or maybe she said *I'd know that dinky do if I saw it*.
Hell, I can't remember either. Senility must be contagious.
Tejano Scott
TGT Addict
I'm not sure we disagree as much as you might think. I chose those two examples, speeding in response to a 911 call and having sex with a prostitute, specifically to highlight the problem with deciding how much is too much.
I have no problem with (safely) speeding to an emergency. I doubt anyone does.
OTOH, when I first heard that police in some jurisdictions have sexual contact with prostitutes (actually, strippers in most cases) in order to make better cases, I was taken aback. I believe that's excessive law-breaking in the pursuit of law enforcement.
Obviously, there are courts that disagree with me.
This case, though, went so much further that it struck me as ludicrous. Child porn was made illegal (It was once legal to distribute, sell, and own, in case anyone didn't realize that.) because it threw a roadblock in the way of adults who molested children, not to stop two kids from "playing doctor" (as we said back in my day) even if they borrowed Dad's Polaroid camera while they did it.
In this case, there was no molestation of a child by an adult. However, the police asked for and got a warrant to commit the crime of a group of adults molesting a child just to enforce laws that originated from a desire to prevent adults from molesting children.
The warrant, IOW, sanctioned moral, ethical, practical, and psychological damage to a child by adults, an act far more pernicious than the harm (arguably none) caused by the original, technical legal infraction.
The police wanted to commit the particular crime that these particular statutes proscribe.
In what Bizarro World is this OK?
I simply don't understand how someone, somewhere in the process, didn't stop and say "Uh, guys, this is messed up."
So on the range of allowable law-breaking by LEOs in order to enforce the law, I feel this went way, way too far, so far that I find it incredible that a judge actually signed off on it.
Remember I said there are deep issues here? So...Where's the line?
In my opinion -
- Speeding to an emergency = A-OK
- Buying drugs to arrest a dealer = OK
- Having sex with prostitutes to bust them = not OK
- Trafficking arms to cartels that will be used to commit multiple murders = Bloody Hell! Not OK!
- Trafficking cocaine by government agencies to fund puppet revolutions, considering the resultant mass murders to be "acceptable collateral damage" - Way less OK than the list up to now.
- Genocide = Not OK. Of course, according to the histories written by the winners it can be peachy keen.
Where on the spectrum from "speeding to save lives" to "assisting in genocide" should the justice system as a whole draw the line and say "It's a greater social evil to enforce the law by these mechanisms than to let the guilty go unpunished"?
At least one judge draws that line so far out into the land of evil that I was just gobsmacked when I read about it.
Last edited:
I hope the next genocide isn't based on penis size.
Depends on the standard required. I'm probably in trouble.
Thanks for taking the time to pen that Ben and you are correct, your thoughts very much reflect my view. I didn't reference this particular case as I thought you were pretty clear on that point with your other posts.
In an effort to stay somewhat on topic and actually contribute to the thread I agree this is a case where the "cure" is completely out of scale with the "illness" though the entire train of thought as an effective prosecution strategy is ludicrous. It's further exacerbated by the mindset that would legitimize such behavior with issuance of a warrant. "Bizarro World" strikes me as a reasonable description.
In an effort to stay somewhat on topic and actually contribute to the thread I agree this is a case where the "cure" is completely out of scale with the "illness" though the entire train of thought as an effective prosecution strategy is ludicrous. It's further exacerbated by the mindset that would legitimize such behavior with issuance of a warrant. "Bizarro World" strikes me as a reasonable description.
its 2 minors whats the big deal? its not like hes 25. also if its such a big deal dont let 15 year olds go to school with 17 year olds. You cant expect them to go to school together and not have problems with them doing anything even though they are both minors. If the ages were swapped it would have never been an issue.
