So...it doesn't affect me, therefore it's okay to harass people who are different?
Which are different? The non party goers or the party goers.
It's not good to harass people, but is it wrong to enforce the law?
Couldn't someone out late possibly be breaking the law by drinking and driving? When I worked at the OSBI, I saw dispositions of cases all the time where a criminal was stopped for one thing and found to be violating all kinds of other laws. Driving under suspension and driving under the influence were commonly together.
Why yes, they could. Not unlike you could be breaking the law setting inside your house. So we now have the no knock law... Hows that workin for us?
I have seen the leo's put up a stop on I-35 in Johnson County Kansas. Yes siree, and if you tried to get off on an exit ramp, to bad, they had stops there as well. It was on a cold winter Friday night about 9:30, I think it was in the Shawnee Mission area. I was headed to Blaney's but after that stop I turned around and went back to Olathe to spend the night at home. I only saw that once but I really didn't spend that many weekends up there. Usually by Friday I was down at Grand Lake, now that's an area that gets a lot of so called safety checks.
Lol not my quote
One must sometimes excuse Clay.
what?
The people out late at night--for whatever reasons--are different from you, who doesn't stay out late. They're the ones getting asked for "papers, please," not you. So...because they organize their lives differently from you, it's okay to stop them and make them show their papers just because they're out late?
Nope. But "enforcing the law" should be based on some kind of, let's call it "individualized suspicion," not just "he was out late."
Sure. Couldn't someone out late possibly be coming home from a late shift, or going to the grocery, or visiting friends, or not breaking any law? Is being out late a crime, or even inherently suspicious, in and of itself?
I'm sure they were. How many cases did you see of people getting stopped and having to produce their traveling papers who weren't doing anything wrong? I'm going to go with roughly none, since those wouldn't have become "cases" in the first place.
You're old enough to remember how our politicians used to shame Communist countries about having to show their papers to travel; now, you seem to be cool with it because it only happens t "those" people.
Look at posts #53 and #54. You quoted the first line of the last paragraph of my post, but it ended up saying it was caojyn's post.
Did that happen because you are ambidextrous or something?
Similar threads
