Thread: Call to Arms

Originally Posted by Jexla

Warrantless searches has to be the most fucked up thing a select committee has ever suggested in NZ history. We wouldn't do it to criminals, so why the fuck would we do it to those deemed fit and proper by the police themselves?

If you suspect someone of committing a crime get a fucking warrant like you have to with everyone else.

Actually warrantless searches have always been around and are conducted on criminals daily, and if you had any understanding about law enforcement you would know why they're very necessary and what their limitations are.

And where was "searches" mentioned? I recall seeing "inspections", which are two completely different things. You don't like the other side exaggerating so why do it yourself?

Originally Posted by Savage1

Actually warrantless searches have always been around and are conducted on criminals daily, and if you had any understanding about law enforcement you would know why they're very necessary and what their limitations are.

And where was "searches" mentioned? I recall seeing "inspections", which are two completely different things. You don't like the other side exaggerating so why do it yourself?

Search / inspect... sama sama

Inspect to see what is there. If it's not there, presumably there are grounds then to search for it.

Originally Posted by Savage1

Actually warrantless searches have always been around and are conducted on criminals daily, and if you had any understanding about law enforcement you would know why they're very necessary and what their limitations are.

And where was "searches" mentioned? I recall seeing "inspections", which are two completely different things. You don't like the other side exaggerating so why do it yourself?

You should be a politician next.

Originally Posted by Savage1

Actually warrantless searches have always been around and are conducted on criminals daily, and if you had any understanding about law enforcement you would know why they're very necessary and what their limitations are.

And where was "searches" mentioned? I recall seeing "inspections", which are two completely different things. You don't like the other side exaggerating so why do it yourself?

inspection = limited search

you already have us on facial recognition

New biometric photo technology will help police nab crims captured on CCTV | Stuff.co.nz

Exaggerations or lies?

The problem is @Savage1 whats next? once these changes don't work what will be the next phase of law changes. Maybe the police should be campaigning to deal with the apparent changes to our culture that have criminals arming themselves and acting violently toward the Police (if this is indeed getting worse)? Or is that just too hard? Easier just to have a go at firearm owners?

Originally Posted by 300CALMAN

inspection = limited search

you already have us on facial recognition

New biometric photo technology will help police nab crims captured on CCTV | Stuff.co.nz

Exaggerations or lies?

The problem is @Savage1 whats next? once these changes don't work what will be the next phase of law changes. Maybe the police should be campaigning to deal with the apparent changes to our culture that have criminals arming themselves and acting violently toward the Police (if this is indeed getting worse)? Or is that just too hard? Easier just to have a go at firearm owners?

Personally I think its just actually easier to appear to do something rather than actually do something.

Originally Posted by mikee

Personally I think its just actually easier to appear to do something rather than actually do something.

And cheaper, too. It's all part of the political smoke and mirrors. The Illusion of reality, or vice versa. It's what Cahill and co are doing.