Page 19 of 20 FirstFirst ... 917181920 LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 198

Thread: ‘I just kept asking: Why am I being arrested for sitting in my aunt’s driveway?’

  1. #181
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: ‘I just kept asking: Why am I being arrested for sitting in my aunt’s driveway?’

    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    Funny. One would think that you would slink away in embarrassment when you are wrong, but you never do.
    I pointed out what we were dealing with. Which was not your absurd juvenile curfew code from Boise, but with Curfew under a state of Declared Emergency.
    Then there should be a written document about this. Please do provide.

    I do not need to provide anything to point that what he provided was not what was being spoken about.


    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    And it should be very embarrassing for you not to realize what was being spoken about in the first place, which was the common and generally accept definition as provided. "a regulation requiring people to remain indoors."

    Which these sources all agree.
    [...]
    None of which are law or part of any "Declared Emergency". It has often been shown that legal definitions can vary from those in dictionaries. With regards to what the police can do, only the legal definition is applicable, which is why such things are defined in laws.
    You obviously are not paying attention.
    I never said they were any part of a Declared Emergency.
    So pay attention to what is being said. I mean damn, it was very clear, so clear that you truncated the portion which says exactly what they were. That is dishonesty on your part.
    So again.
    What was provided was the common and generally accept definition, "a regulation requiring people to remain indoors."


    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    Again dispersing to where? They were already where they were dispersing to.
    No they weren't.
    Do you not think things through?
    If the police tell them to get inside and they instead sit there and try to argue, they have failed to disperse.
    So prove they were allowed to be where they weren't.
    The fact that they were arrested pretty much says they weren't.
    So show otherwise.


    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    So police never make the wrong charges?
    Irrelvent. And no one has provided any information, evidence or law that the police were in the wrong.


    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    an aside, it's kinda of kewl to watch the avatars of Excon and Dezaad go back and forth. Almost makes you wonder if they're some kind of MPD person.
    His wanting to use the same cat was pretty uncouth.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  2. #182
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: ‘I just kept asking: Why am I being arrested for sitting in my aunt’s driveway?’

    He should have been asking, "Why am I sitting in a car in the driveway smoking when it's well after curfew?".

  3. #183
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: ‘I just kept asking: Why am I being arrested for sitting in my aunt’s driveway?’

    Quote Originally Posted by Dezaad View Post
    You are like a gift that keeps on giving.

    Said the gift that keeps giving.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dezaad View Post
    I made it very clear that the reason I was giving the juvenile curfew definition was for two reasons: One, because I couldn't yet find an emergency curfew definition. And two, more importantly because I believe that definition is more properly the one that should be called a 'common' definition. It is the one that would be most likely to be used to understand what curfew means by the vast majority of people because that is the one people grow up understanding as a matter of the course of adolescence.
    iLOL
    And you were wrong. Just admit it.
    I also see that you do not understand that a curfew put in place under a state of emergency to quell looting, rioting and damage that covers everybody inducing adults, is different in purpose scope and reason than that for juveniles.

    That is your fail. And one you should be embarrassed by. Not making excuses for.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dezaad View Post
    I am the first one to have given the Dictionary.com definition, and no, it doesn't agree with your idea about what curfew means. Another of the definitions gives both notions.
    Said the one who obviously didn't understand what they read, or is purposely lying.
    The first two definitions given show you are not telling the truth.

    Curfew
    [kur-fyoo]

    noun
    1. an order establishing a specific time in the evening after which certain regulations apply, especially that no civilians or other specified group of unauthorized persons may be outdoors or that places of public assembly must be closed.
    2. a regulation requiring a person to be home at a certain prescribed time, as imposed by a parent on a child.
    Curfew | Define Curfew at Dictionary.com


    Quote Originally Posted by Dezaad View Post
    I think part of your delightfulness is that you often show a failure to comprehend what you are reading.
    Says the one who was just shown not to understand the definition they read. Priceless.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dezaad View Post
    It is YOU that lacks understanding. This is for the following reasons. You fail to have imagination and pragmatic intuitiveness about what might be. This seems to cause you to lock in on your first idea about a thing, which looks to be whatever it is that you were hoping a thing to be. You then fail to leave yourself open to whatever you find, and become blinded by early confirmation bias. After all this, almost as ridiculous as a court jester, you foolishly become condescending.
    ****ing hilarious. You are in the wrong and yet refuse to recognize it.
    You can not transfer our failings onto me.


    Quote Originally Posted by Dezaad View Post
    I think it is funny that you think the failure to disperse and the emergency curfew are likely not intertwined. Are you going to entertain us with more unwarranted condescension about that, too?
    I think it is funny that you try to deflect with nonsense.
    Especially as I never said any such thing.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  4. #184
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: ‘I just kept asking: Why am I being arrested for sitting in my aunt’s driveway?’

    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    I found other definitions. San Diego has a youth curfew, and it specifically states "at home" not inside. It includes the sidewalk immediately adjacent to the residence.

    Did you find the specific curfew order for Ferguson? What it actually says?

    Without it we are engaged in pure speculation.

    I find it odd it isn't ANYWHERE on the internet that I can find.


    Juvenile curfews are not the subject.


    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    "Generally" is not a term of law anywhere.
    ANd?
    Are you confused?
    I was not referring to any law but the generally know definition that you apparently didn't know.
    So stop trying to squirm.


    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    Its written down somewhere what the specifics are. Dezaad will probably find it.
    Let's hope he does.


    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    Until then you're just playing the semantic games you always do.
    I am not playing any semantics game.
    What is meant by Curfew is generally known. The provided and common definition shows that. All you did is show you did not know it.



    Quote Originally Posted by What if...? View Post
    Excon actually obsessively replies. He can't NOT. Experimentally verified.

    And apparently What if...? can't help but openly attack with lies.
    Figures.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  5. #185
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,571
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: ‘I just kept asking: Why am I being arrested for sitting in my aunt’s driveway?’

    Quote Originally Posted by Dezaad View Post
    I don't get it. I really do not see where you think that they knew they were breaking the law. I would have thought it was perfectly fine for me to be at any residence and that it was perfectly fine to be anywhere on the property. If I thought I wasn't breaking the law, I still might be cautious about needlessly drawing attention. So I would sit in my car. When the press asked me, I might say "I didn't want to seem as if we were loitering". These are not rabble rousing people. The guy maintains a business. He probably wasn't allowed to smoke in his aunt's house, he didn't want to stand around and draw needless attention, so he makes the choice for them to sit in the car instead of stand on the porch. This is a respectful, deferential course of action. It is the simplest explanation.

    No one has been able to show any legal definition example where the law requires you to be at your own home, inside. No one has been able to turn up Missouri's state of emergency law. At the point where the police began their harassment, they had NO idea whether the guy and the other people were at their own home. There have been many examples of curfew having the legal definition of simply being out of public places and these people were. It is highly likely at this point that we will find that these people were in fact NOT disobeying the law.

    Anyway, we are getting closer. Here is the actual executive order signed by the governor. I believe we will either find the Missouri definition of 'curfew' by looking up the relevant cited laws, or that the superintendent of the state patrol will have been given the authority to define the relevant parameters of the curfew. I don't have time at the moment to pursue the leads.

    Executive Order 14-08 | Governor Jay Nixon

    Executive Order 14-08
    HomeNewsExecutive Orders
    
    WHEREAS, the events occurring in the City of Ferguson, Missouri have created conditions of distress for the citizens and businesses of that community; and

    WHEREAS, our citizens must have the right to peacefully assemble and protest; and

    WHEREAS, the rule of law must be maintained in the City of Ferguson for the protection of the citizens and businesses of that community; and

    WHEREAS, the Missouri State Highway Patrol, with the assistance and cooperation of the St. Louis County Police Department, has been patrolling in the City of Ferguson over the past week; and

    WHEREAS, the conditions necessary to declare the existence of an emergency pursuant to Chapter 44, RSMo, have been found to exist; and

    WHEREAS, an invocation of the provisions of Sections 44.010 through 44.130, RSMo, is necessary to ensure the safety and welfare of the citizens of the City of Ferguson.

    NOW, THEREFORE, I, JEREMIAH W. (JAY) NIXON, GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and Laws of the state of Missouri, including Sections 44.010 through 44.130, RSMo, do hereby declare that a State of Emergency exists in the state of Missouri.

    I do hereby direct the Missouri State Highway Patrol, through its Superintendent, to command all operations necessary to ensure public safety and protect civil rights in the City of Ferguson and, as necessary, surrounding areas during the period of this emergency.

    I further order that such other local law enforcement agencies, as deemed necessary by the Superintendent of the Missouri State Highway Patrol to maintain order in the City of Ferguson, shall assist the Missouri State Highway Patrol when requested by the Superintendent and such law enforcement agencies, when operating in the City of Ferguson, shall cooperate with all operational directives of the Missouri State Highway Patrol.

    I further order the imposition of a curfew in the City of Ferguson under such terms and conditions deemed necessary and appropriate by the Superintendent of the Missouri State Highway Patrol.

    This order shall be terminated upon execution of a subsequent Executive Order.

    IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and caused to be affixed the Great Seal of the State of Missouri, in the City of Jefferson, on this 16th day of August, 2014.
    Did you see my Post #178? I am pretty sure the adult version of a temporary curfew would read much the same. And we all know that ignorance of the law is no excuse. Most especially when the law breaker takes measures to avoid drawing attention to himself that he is knowingly breaking the law.
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  6. #186
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,010

    Re: ‘I just kept asking: Why am I being arrested for sitting in my aunt’s driveway?’

    You obviously are not paying attention.
    I never said they were any part of a Declared Emergency.

    Then what is this?:
    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    Funny. One would think that you would slink away in embarrassment when you are wrong, but you never do.
    I pointed out what we were dealing with. Which was not your absurd juvenile curfew code from Boise, but with Curfew under a state of Declared Emergency.

    So pay attention to what is being said. I mean damn, it was very clear, so clear that you truncated the portion which says exactly what they were. That is dishonesty on your part.
    So again.
    What was provided was the common and generally accept definition, "a regulation requiring people to remain indoors."
    "Common and generally accepted" is not law. Laws are written. A governor can not just go on TV and say "Hey I'm declaring a state of emergency. Oh and with that I'm imposing a curfew." Sure he can go on TV and summarize what he is doing. He has to issue a written executive order on these things. They lay out what he is doing. We've already shown that there is no one singular legal definition of a "curfew". In order to have the weight of the law there has to be a law behind it to give it weight. Where is this law?


    No they weren't.
    Do you not think things through?
    If the police tell them to get inside and they instead sit there and try to argue, they have failed to disperse.
    So prove they were allowed to be where they weren't.
    The fact that they were arrested pretty much says they weren't.
    So show otherwise.
    Already have. They were staying at the aunt's house. You are not thinking it through. The curfew was in place and they were where they were staying. It would be a safe assumption that the aunt doesn't allow smoking in the house since they went outside to smoke. Now why they couldn't choose the back yard is beyond me. Somehow I doubt that the police would bother searching back yards. So unless there is something that specifically states that under this particular curfew that no one is allowed outside at all, which we have shown by several other laws such is not always the case, then there is nothing to show that they were in the wrong for being on the property where they were residing for the night. The fact that they were arrested means nothing as being falsely arrested is not an unheard of occurrence, and depending upon one's point of view could be considered an all too common occurrence.


    Irrelvent. And no one has provided any information, evidence or law that the police were in the wrong.
    In order for them to be in the right there has to be a law that allows them to do what they did. Otherwise they are violating the freedom of assembly and their personal liberties. Freedom of assembly, BTW is part of the 1st Amendment. All I am asking for is the written word that specifically states what actions the police are allowed to arrest people for under this curfew.
    Bi, Poly, Switch. I'm not indecisive, I'm greedy!

  7. #187
    Sage
    Dezaad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Last Seen
    06-28-15 @ 10:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    5,058
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: ‘I just kept asking: Why am I being arrested for sitting in my aunt’s driveway?’

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl View Post
    Most curfew laws regarding teens would not restrict a person being outside in their parent's yard but nothing is said about being outside in another relative's yard.

    The St. Louis statute involving teen curfew says this:

    Curfew for juveniles.


    It shall be unlawful for any juvenile to be or remain in or upon the streets, alleys, rights-of-way or similar places within the City of St. Louis at night during the period ending at 5:00 a.m. and beginning at 11:59 p.m. on Friday and Saturday Night and at 11:00 p.m. on all other nights, except as provided in this chapter.
    (Ord. 63784 § 3, 1996.)

    15.110.030 Exemptions to curfew restrictions.

    A. When accompanied by parent of such juvenile; when accompanied by a person over the age of twenty-one authorized by a parent.

    B. When juvenile is on the sidewalk of a place where such juvenile resides, or on the sidewalk of either next door neighbor not communicating an objection to the police.

    C. When returning home, by a direct route from (and within one hour after the termination of) a school or city sponsored activity, or an activity of a religious or other association, or place of employment.

    I would imagine a general curfew such as in the case of the Ferguson riots would be much the same except it would require adults to be at their own home.
    I didn't see this post, so I will address it now that you have pointed it out to me.

    According to your quote, juveniles are not required to be at their own home. Where do you get that adults be required to?
    You can never be safe from a government that can keep you completely safe from each other and the world. You must choose.

  8. #188
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,571
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: ‘I just kept asking: Why am I being arrested for sitting in my aunt’s driveway?’

    Quote Originally Posted by Dezaad View Post
    I didn't see this post, so I will address it now that you have pointed it out to me.

    According to your quote, juveniles are not required to be at their own home. Where do you get that adults be required to?
    Try reading the last line of my post please.
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  9. #189
    Sage
    Dezaad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Last Seen
    06-28-15 @ 10:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    5,058
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: ‘I just kept asking: Why am I being arrested for sitting in my aunt’s driveway?’

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl View Post
    Try reading the last line of my post please.

    I am asking you why you think that adults would be required to be at their own home under a general curfew. It has been shown that several states have defined general curfews as NOT requiring people to be at their own homes. It has never been shown that they do define general curfews as requiring people to be at their own homes. Although no one has been able to find Missouri's specific definition, it is a big jump to claim that it would be likely to include such a definition when the opposite has been shown for other states.
    You can never be safe from a government that can keep you completely safe from each other and the world. You must choose.

  10. #190
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: ‘I just kept asking: Why am I being arrested for sitting in my aunt’s driveway?’

    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    Then what is this?:
    What?
    You were already told that is me pointing out that the subjects are different.
    What is not to understand about that?


    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    "Common and generally accepted" is not law.

    And again. That is what I referred to. Not the law. Learn to pay attention to what a person is saying.
    It will serve you well.
    If you can not distinguish between a legal argument and a non-legal argument, something is wrong.



    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    We've already shown that there is no one singular legal definition of a "curfew".
    No you actually haven't.
    What has been show is irrelevant as it does not pertain to the State or was not applicable (juvenile curfew).

    On the other hand, I have shown what the generally accepted and understood definition is.


    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    In order to have the weight of the law there has to be a law behind it to give it weight. Where is this law?
    Exactly. Where is it? That onus is on you to support your argument.

    I was speaking to the generally known definition, as I keep pointing out, and apparently you keep ignoring. Not a law.
    And I supported my position.
    You have not.


    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    Already have. They were staying at the aunt's house. You are not thinking it through. The curfew was in place and they were where they were staying. It would be a safe assumption that the aunt doesn't allow smoking in the house since they went outside to smoke. Now why they couldn't choose the back yard is beyond me. Somehow I doubt that the police would bother searching back yards. So unless there is something that specifically states that under this particular curfew that no one is allowed outside at all, which we have shown by several other laws such is not always the case, then there is nothing to show that they were in the wrong for being on the property where they were residing for the night. The fact that they were arrested means nothing as being falsely arrested is not an unheard of occurrence, and depending upon one's point of view could be considered an all too common occurrence.
    Wrong.
    You are not thinking things through at all.
    They were charged.
    Show the charge was wrong. You can't. You can't because you do not know the law and can not provide the law.

    And the fact that juvenile curfew keeps getting brought up just shows that there is no understanding at how significantly different the two are.

    Children are not full citizens and are under the supervision of their parents. So of course when they are on a supervising adults property they are considered under supervision.
    Which is not the same as adult Curfews.




    Quote Originally Posted by maquiscat View Post
    In order for them to be in the right there has to be a law that allows them to do what they did. Otherwise they are violating the freedom of assembly and their personal liberties. Freedom of assembly, BTW is part of the 1st Amendment. All I am asking for is the written word that specifically states what actions the police are allowed to arrest people for under this curfew.
    This, as provided by another, is what the Governor declared.
    If you want to have a legal discussion try starting by researching this.
    I further order the imposition of a curfew in the City of Ferguson under such terms and conditions deemed necessary and appropriate by the Superintendent of the Missouri State Highway Patrol.
    The Superintendent of the Missouri State Highway Patrol is who determines what terms and conditions are necessary and appropriate.
    And likely will do so under counsel to effect the temporary Curfew imposed by the Governor.

    And no one arguing this has yet been able to show if the state has it's own definition for such.

    So until such time, any argument you make is irrelevant.

    While the police do make mistakes they don't go around purposely making mistakes.
    And as it stands, these folks were arrested for not dispersing.
    You think that was wrong? Show it to be so.
    As it stands I am going to bet that you can't.

    All you have is a dislike. That is all.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

Page 19 of 20 FirstFirst ... 917181920 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •