Wash. legislator to introduce DNA testing bill
TACOMA, Wash. -- Rep. Mark Miloscia, D-Federal Way, says he plans to introduce a bill in the 2009 Legislature that will put the state on the same page with the federal government on the subject of DNA testing.
Your right to be secure in your person and your papers includes your DNA. The police may take "non-intimate" body samples from you. These include samples of hair, fingernail or toenail scrapings, and some external body swabs.
However, you cannot refuse to be fingerprinted because it is considered non intimate. Unfortunately we have a long line of prescient set out before now that eviscerates your ability to refuse fingerprinting.
Additionally because of Terry v. Ohio you can be frisked without arrest.
Fingerprints and frisking literally exist on the edge of personal and public space. Personally I argue that subpoena /should/ be required as in order to do either, but that is another subject entirely.
Obtaining DNA is about as intimate as you can get, thus requiring a subpoena to protect against unreasonable search and seizure by the fourth amendment.
Additionally it sets a prescient that can be used to further eviscerate our fourth amendment rights to privacy.
In an age where you are more likely to be jailed then you are to have a crime committed against you (thank you, drug war), this is another nail in the coffin of civil liberties. The creation of a database of citizen's DNA who haven't actually been convicted of crimes opens a door to far greater abuses.
Take for instance that now you can be required to give your fingerprints to the state if you lost your id, putting your thumb print on file for the state/federal government....
Those who fight against Real ID should be the same ones who are queasy right now.
Showing posts with label constitution. Show all posts
Showing posts with label constitution. Show all posts
Monday, December 29, 2008
Saturday, December 27, 2008
U.S. Military Preparing for Domestic Disturbances
U.S. Military Preparing for Domestic Disturbances
A new report from the U.S. Army War College discusses the use of American troops to quell civil unrest brought about by a worsening economic crisis.
More reports of preparations for martial law.
Why do I keep posting these?
Because the reason for the constitution and habeas corpus (which would be suspended during martial law) was so that the government didn't just go around detaining those who disagreed with it.
Because a government needs to adhere to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. Because taxes imposed need to have the consent of the people so as not to enslave them through debt. Because of the benefits of trial by jury, as during martial law there is no difference between judge, jury, and executioner.
Because freedom does not mean the ability to choose between a variety of breakfast cereals.
To quote from USConstitution.net martial law is defined as:
In strict dictionary terms, martial law is the suspension of civil authority and the imposition of military authority. When we say a region or country is "under martial law," we mean to say that the military is in control of the area, that it acts as the police, as the courts, as the legislature. The degree of control might vary - a nation may have... Read more a civilian legislature but have the courts administered by the military. Or the legislature and courts may operate under civilian control with a military ruler. In each case, martial law is in effect, even if it is not called "martial law."
Article 1, Section 9 states, "The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." Habeas corpus is a concept of law, in which a person may not be held by the government without a valid reason for being held. A writ of habeas corpus can be issued by a court upon a government agency (such as a police force or the military). Such a writ compels the agency to produce the individual to the court, and to convince the court that the person is being reasonably held. The suspension of habeas corpus allows an agency to hold a person without a charge. Suspension of habeas corpus is often equated with martial law.
A new report from the U.S. Army War College discusses the use of American troops to quell civil unrest brought about by a worsening economic crisis.
More reports of preparations for martial law.
Why do I keep posting these?
Because the reason for the constitution and habeas corpus (which would be suspended during martial law) was so that the government didn't just go around detaining those who disagreed with it.
Because a government needs to adhere to laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. Because taxes imposed need to have the consent of the people so as not to enslave them through debt. Because of the benefits of trial by jury, as during martial law there is no difference between judge, jury, and executioner.
Because freedom does not mean the ability to choose between a variety of breakfast cereals.
To quote from USConstitution.net martial law is defined as:
In strict dictionary terms, martial law is the suspension of civil authority and the imposition of military authority. When we say a region or country is "under martial law," we mean to say that the military is in control of the area, that it acts as the police, as the courts, as the legislature. The degree of control might vary - a nation may have... Read more a civilian legislature but have the courts administered by the military. Or the legislature and courts may operate under civilian control with a military ruler. In each case, martial law is in effect, even if it is not called "martial law."
Article 1, Section 9 states, "The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it." Habeas corpus is a concept of law, in which a person may not be held by the government without a valid reason for being held. A writ of habeas corpus can be issued by a court upon a government agency (such as a police force or the military). Such a writ compels the agency to produce the individual to the court, and to convince the court that the person is being reasonably held. The suspension of habeas corpus allows an agency to hold a person without a charge. Suspension of habeas corpus is often equated with martial law.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Rule by corporations is called a what, a Plutocracy? Corportocracy? Corrupt?
Bush attempts to nullify an entire branch of government
They state this better than I can. It kinda makes me ill.
Olbermann states it well: in Europe they vigorously regulate everything and ensure that things are safe before they hit the market. Here, we don't regulate them before hand so much as sue after they're defective: i.e. in Europe you have to prove that it's safe, in America you have to prove that it's not.
Since we do /not/ have strict regulations before something goes out (better than some countries, however Regan reduced the size of the FDA by 2/3s), the way that we have a check on corporations is through the ability to pursuit legal action.
Before you start whining about frivolous lawsuits, remember that this is the third check on our government. This country is unique in that a lone person on the streets may stand before the courts and their government and say "Hey, that's not right," and the courts can look at their case and say "Yeah, you're right, that's /not/ right."
You, citizen, have power. It's not a perfect system, but there are a heck of a lot worse.
They state this better than I can. It kinda makes me ill.
Olbermann states it well: in Europe they vigorously regulate everything and ensure that things are safe before they hit the market. Here, we don't regulate them before hand so much as sue after they're defective: i.e. in Europe you have to prove that it's safe, in America you have to prove that it's not.
Since we do /not/ have strict regulations before something goes out (better than some countries, however Regan reduced the size of the FDA by 2/3s), the way that we have a check on corporations is through the ability to pursuit legal action.
Before you start whining about frivolous lawsuits, remember that this is the third check on our government. This country is unique in that a lone person on the streets may stand before the courts and their government and say "Hey, that's not right," and the courts can look at their case and say "Yeah, you're right, that's /not/ right."
You, citizen, have power. It's not a perfect system, but there are a heck of a lot worse.
Churches should stay out of politics or be TAXED.
Prop 8 Sponsors Want to Nix 18,000 Gay Marriages
The sponsors of Proposition 8 are asking the California Supreme Court to nullify the marriages of the estimated 18,000 same-sex couples who exchanged vows before voters last month approved the ballot initiative"
Look, sorry you fascists, but that's simply impossible.
1.) It's called a Grandfather clause and that means you can't just make something illegal or void something with an ex post facto law.
2.) Prop 8 has zero legal standing. It was a Constitutional Amendment passed as a proposition by simple majority without ever having gone through the state legislative bodies. Even in the legislature you need to have a two thirds majority to pass.
3.) You do not have the required "compelling justification" for the nullification of 18,000 marriages, especially when it would cost the state millions
4.) Stick it, assholes.
The sponsors of Proposition 8 are asking the California Supreme Court to nullify the marriages of the estimated 18,000 same-sex couples who exchanged vows before voters last month approved the ballot initiative"
Look, sorry you fascists, but that's simply impossible.
1.) It's called a Grandfather clause and that means you can't just make something illegal or void something with an ex post facto law.
2.) Prop 8 has zero legal standing. It was a Constitutional Amendment passed as a proposition by simple majority without ever having gone through the state legislative bodies. Even in the legislature you need to have a two thirds majority to pass.
3.) You do not have the required "compelling justification" for the nullification of 18,000 marriages, especially when it would cost the state millions
4.) Stick it, assholes.
Friday, December 12, 2008
Or, Milwaukee could print it's own money... one of the two.
Milwaukee neighborhoods could print own money
"Residents from the Milwaukee neighborhoods of Riverwest and East Side are scheduled to meet Wednesday to discuss printing their own money. The idea is that the local cash could be used at neighborhood stores and businesses, thus encouraging local spending. The result, supporters hope, would be a bustling local economy, even as the rest of the nation deals with a recession."
Well... okay... a little unconstitutional but I suppose that doesn't matter anymore since the Federal Reserve isn't constitutional either.
...Fascinating. I am genuinely unsure of what to make of this.
"Residents from the Milwaukee neighborhoods of Riverwest and East Side are scheduled to meet Wednesday to discuss printing their own money. The idea is that the local cash could be used at neighborhood stores and businesses, thus encouraging local spending. The result, supporters hope, would be a bustling local economy, even as the rest of the nation deals with a recession."
Well... okay... a little unconstitutional but I suppose that doesn't matter anymore since the Federal Reserve isn't constitutional either.
...Fascinating. I am genuinely unsure of what to make of this.
Sunday, December 7, 2008
What the heck is a Fourth Amendment? Against the car citizen.
Court Upholds Conviction From Illegal Traffic Stop
"The California Supreme Court on Monday reinstated the drug conviction of a man based on evidence found during an illegal traffic stop, in a case that had brought the issue of passenger rights before the nation's highest court. ..."
California Supreme Court: Cops can use evidence found in illegal traffic stops
Yes... This will end well.
"The California Supreme Court on Monday reinstated the drug conviction of a man based on evidence found during an illegal traffic stop, in a case that had brought the issue of passenger rights before the nation's highest court. ..."
California Supreme Court: Cops can use evidence found in illegal traffic stops
Yes... This will end well.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)