You wrote “You have every right to leave the premises with your bag and security cannot go through your bags as this violates the 4th amendment prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure”.
This is clearly BS.
So where did I get you wrong fucko?
[quote]orion wrote:
You wrote “You have every right to leave the premises with your bag and security cannot go through your bags as this violates the 4th amendment prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure”.
This is clearly BS.
So where did I get you wrong fucko?
[/quote]
What is your argument, orion? USNS posts something to support your (and my) prior posts and you insist on arguing with him. I think you are simply looking for a fight with whomever will take it.
[quote]tedro wrote:
orion wrote:
You wrote “You have every right to leave the premises with your bag and security cannot go through your bags as this violates the 4th amendment prohibition against unreasonable search and seizure”.
This is clearly BS.
So where did I get you wrong fucko?
What is your argument, orion? USNS posts something to support your (and my) prior posts and you insist on arguing with him. I think you are simply looking for a fight with whomever will take it.
[/quote]
Look, he started with the assumption that a lot of people have no idea what the law is and YET POST AS IF THEY DID and then spouts off on erroneous legal idea after the other.
That is kind of strange.
When do we start throwing poo at each other… now? Or is it… NOW… hmmm keep me posted I don’t want to miss out.
[quote]Arc_1mpuls3 wrote:
When do we start throwing poo at each other… now? Or is it… NOW… hmmm keep me posted I don’t want to miss out.[/quote]
“If you have any poo, fling it now.”
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
What an asshole. He went looking for trouble and he found it. [/quote]
Zap is right. In Bush’s America, exercising your civil rights means you’re looking for trouble.
Thanks for clearing that up for us Zap.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
What an asshole. He went looking for trouble and he found it.
Yeah, how dare he defend his rights!
In case you didn’t know, the guy in the shop has no right to search a customer’s bag. Michael just happen to be one of those people who hold their privacy dear and know their constitutional rights.
That you would gladly let somebody other than the police search you (even on their own property) is no reason for calling the victim here an asshole. And if you have no issues being trapped by the staff in a store just goes to show how little you know about your rights.
He’s taking this to court, and his chances of winning are somewhere in the 90% range.
As to the cop arresting him for refusing to show an ID, that’s also a violation and there are Supreme Courts cases to support that.
I’d be curious about Nephorm’s take on this.[/quote]
Businesses are privately owned and so are their parking lots. Business owners/managers/people placed in responsibility by the owners do have the right to inspect what ever they deem suspicious for whatever reason they feel necessary. They can randomly inspect bags too. Had all of this occurred on a public street it would be a different story.
[quote]texasguy1 wrote:
lixy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
What an asshole. He went looking for trouble and he found it.
Yeah, how dare he defend his rights!
In case you didn’t know, the guy in the shop has no right to search a customer’s bag. Michael just happen to be one of those people who hold their privacy dear and know their constitutional rights.
That you would gladly let somebody other than the police search you (even on their own property) is no reason for calling the victim here an asshole. And if you have no issues being trapped by the staff in a store just goes to show how little you know about your rights.
He’s taking this to court, and his chances of winning are somewhere in the 90% range.
As to the cop arresting him for refusing to show an ID, that’s also a violation and there are Supreme Courts cases to support that.
I’d be curious about Nephorm’s take on this.
Businesses are privately owned and so are their parking lots. Business owners/managers/people placed in responsibility by the owners do have the right to inspect what ever they deem suspicious for whatever reason they feel necessary. They can randomly inspect bags too. Had all of this occurred on a public street it would be a different story. [/quote]
FYI:
http://www.omeda.org/fastfacts/1800.htm
especially:
(D) The officer, agent, or employee of the library, museum, or archival institution, or the merchant or his employee or agent acting under division (A) or (B) of this section shall not search the person, search or seize any property belonging to the person detained without the person’s consent, or use undue restraint upon the person detained.
[quote]orion wrote:
texasguy1 wrote:
lixy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
What an asshole. He went looking for trouble and he found it.
Yeah, how dare he defend his rights!
In case you didn’t know, the guy in the shop has no right to search a customer’s bag. Michael just happen to be one of those people who hold their privacy dear and know their constitutional rights.
That you would gladly let somebody other than the police search you (even on their own property) is no reason for calling the victim here an asshole. And if you have no issues being trapped by the staff in a store just goes to show how little you know about your rights.
He’s taking this to court, and his chances of winning are somewhere in the 90% range.
As to the cop arresting him for refusing to show an ID, that’s also a violation and there are Supreme Courts cases to support that.
I’d be curious about Nephorm’s take on this.
Businesses are privately owned and so are their parking lots. Business owners/managers/people placed in responsibility by the owners do have the right to inspect what ever they deem suspicious for whatever reason they feel necessary. They can randomly inspect bags too. Had all of this occurred on a public street it would be a different story.
FYI:
http://www.omeda.org/fastfacts/1800.htm
especially:
(D) The officer, agent, or employee of the library, museum, or archival institution, or the merchant or his employee or agent acting under division (A) or (B) of this section shall not search the person, search or seize any property belonging to the person detained without the person’s consent, or use undue restraint upon the person detained.
[/quote]
That is a nice copy and paste job. Here is another excerpt from your source:
What can the merchant, his employee, or agent do? Detain a person within or without a mercantile establishment for the purpose of recovering the article he believes has been taken or in order to cause the arrest of such person.
[quote]texasguy1 wrote:
orion wrote:
texasguy1 wrote:
lixy wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
What an asshole. He went looking for trouble and he found it.
Yeah, how dare he defend his rights!
In case you didn’t know, the guy in the shop has no right to search a customer’s bag. Michael just happen to be one of those people who hold their privacy dear and know their constitutional rights.
That you would gladly let somebody other than the police search you (even on their own property) is no reason for calling the victim here an asshole. And if you have no issues being trapped by the staff in a store just goes to show how little you know about your rights.
He’s taking this to court, and his chances of winning are somewhere in the 90% range.
As to the cop arresting him for refusing to show an ID, that’s also a violation and there are Supreme Courts cases to support that.
I’d be curious about Nephorm’s take on this.
Businesses are privately owned and so are their parking lots. Business owners/managers/people placed in responsibility by the owners do have the right to inspect what ever they deem suspicious for whatever reason they feel necessary. They can randomly inspect bags too. Had all of this occurred on a public street it would be a different story.
FYI:
http://www.omeda.org/fastfacts/1800.htm
especially:
(D) The officer, agent, or employee of the library, museum, or archival institution, or the merchant or his employee or agent acting under division (A) or (B) of this section shall not search the person, search or seize any property belonging to the person detained without the person’s consent, or use undue restraint upon the person detained.
That is a nice copy and paste job. Here is another excerpt from your source:
What can the merchant, his employee, or agent do? Detain a person within or without a mercantile establishment for the purpose of recovering the article he believes has been taken or in order to cause the arrest of such person.[/quote]
Of course he can, if he has probable cause to believe something was stolen.
(A) A merchant, or his employee or agent, who has probable cause to believe that items offered for sale by a mercantile establishment have been unlawfully taken by a person, may, for the purposes set forth in division (C) of this section, detain the person in a reasonable manner for a reasonable length of time within the mercantile establishment or its immediate vicinity.
That is a far cry from:
" what ever they deem suspicious for whatever reason they feel necessary. They can randomly inspect bags too".