Forum - View topicNEWS: Death Note Creator Arrested for Possessing a Knife
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
toomanyalts
Posts: 115 |
|
||
|
It should be noted that the Japanese laws regarding weapons come about when guns were starting to enter the country in mass numbers and the Samurais were on the verge of decimating themselves in duels using guns.
Basically Japan had extremly good reasons for the weapons laws put in place. Also you may actually want to look into gun control laws. Often times they have been neutered by NRA efforts to be worthless. Gun shops that knowlingly sell guns to criminals, straw buyers etc often take years to be shut down by the ATF. The gun dealer gets a slap on the wrist and can easily reopen the shop by getting another license in a relatives name. Also the NRA has stopped efforts to have gun shows do background checks on buyers. Criminals often get their guns from such shows. The NRA is also preventing efforts to ban people on FBI terrorist watch lists from buying guns. Yup the NRA wants terrorists to legally buy guns such as .50 calibur machine guns that can shot down airplanes and cause major damage to chemical plants and nuclear facilities. Damage that would result in thousands of lives lost. Gun control laws can be effective when they are allowed to be so. The NRA on the other hand doesn't want the people giving the guns to criminals to be punished. The NRA doesn't want people who don't report their stolen or lost guns to the police within a 24 period or other reasonable time period to be punished. The NRA doesn't want police to trace guns used in crimes to the gun dealers who sold the gun to determine if the gun dealer is not following the law in requiring background checks. About one percent of gun dealers have to been found to be responible for 90% of the guns used in crimes. Kinda odd the NRA doesn't want these dealers shut down eh? I suggest you double check the info on that guncite website. |
|||
|
|||
RedTail
 Posts: 176 |
|
||
A limited search of a vehicle can be initiated with only reasonable suspicion, but this can only be done when the officer has reason to believe the driver may have an weapon in the car and may intend to use it. In effect, this exception is governed by the same rules as a frisk, which means that the search is conducted for the safety of the officer. Other warantless vehicle search exceptions do exist, but they must be conducted with probable cause or following an arrest. I'm thinking that your standard of probable cause is too high. The lay definition is, "a crime was probably committed and that person probaby committed it." That's vague, but it's been further elaborated upon as meaning slightly less than a preponderance (or less than slightly 50% certain). If it's not that, then the defense attornies involved in your cases are totally inept for allowing you to get away with searching a vehicle on reasonable suspicion in all instances. |
|||
|
|||
Romuska
 Subscriber Posts: 802 |
|
||
Because he's famous and the cop's clearly an asshole. Getting arrested for something like that is just a cop trying to fill his quota. |
|||
|
|||
|
toomanyalts
Posts: 115 |
|
||
|
It should be noted the reason a cop asks if it is okay to search a vehicle is because often times a criminal will say okay. Then the cop uses the permission to do a legal search.
You have no idea how many potheads or other drug users have been caught with their goods in plain sight when they invited a police officer in their homes regarding some matter say a traffic ticket or a 9-11 call. Such as say a robbery of their home. These potheads often have their stuff on the coffee table where they then invite the officers to sit and talk. |
|||
|
|||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group