Those pesky facts....
Dems don't need them, why should we?
First Amendment WIN in federal court
- Thread starter esqappellate
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners of the Northeast
Member Benefits:
No ad networks! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
Dems don't need them, why should we?
The good SGT was desperately trying to keep his job. The order to move to Lawyers Mall without a permit was an illegal order. The arrest was unconstitutional. Doing nothing would have cost him his job (if the "bigwig" had so ordered). He was between a rock and a hard spot. If he jumped in any direction he was screwed.
Link please.
fabsroman
Ultimate Member
Here is the link. Scroll down to March 8, 2019
https://www.ola.state.md.us/Search/Report?keyword=&agencyId=&dateFrom=&dateTo=
I will also attach the pdf of the report just in case people want to avoid the link and scrolling.
Many thanx!
It seems that in reading the summary (Para. 4) there are still unresolved issues with the accounting for the money between Frosh and the OIG, which resulted in the inclusion of an "Auditor Comment." That does not appear to absolve the Frosh Bunco Operation of responsibility, IMO.
It seems that in reading the summary (Para. 4) there are still unresolved issues with the accounting for the money between Frosh and the OIG, which resulted in the inclusion of an "Auditor Comment." That does not appear to absolve the Frosh Bunco Operation of responsibility, IMO.
fabsroman
Ultimate Member
Yeah, but show me where it says $2.1 million was misappropriated or stolen? All it says is that they did a crappy job of following procurement procedures. It does not say that $2.1 million is missing. I would bet that several checks can be shown comprising the $2.1 million and it was not used by Frosh for personal purposes.
Actually, feel free to quote the section you are relying on so I can look it over a little closer. Since it is a public document, doing so should be fine.
Back to the 1st Amendment issue. Read this, I find it a little chilling. Just a little.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/17-1174_m5o1.pdf
From Slate.com
In Nieves v. Bartlett, a divided court ruled that individuals can’t sue police officers for retaliatory arrest if those officers had probable cause to arrest them for any crime, no matter how minor—and that’s true even if the real reason for the arrest was speech the officers didn’t like. In other words, if you are jaywalking in violation of a local ordinance, officers can arrest you without fear of liability even if they’re making the arrest only because you’re participating in a Black Lives Matter demonstration or wearing a “Make America Great Again” cap.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/18pdf/17-1174_m5o1.pdf
From Slate.com
In Nieves v. Bartlett, a divided court ruled that individuals can’t sue police officers for retaliatory arrest if those officers had probable cause to arrest them for any crime, no matter how minor—and that’s true even if the real reason for the arrest was speech the officers didn’t like. In other words, if you are jaywalking in violation of a local ordinance, officers can arrest you without fear of liability even if they’re making the arrest only because you’re participating in a Black Lives Matter demonstration or wearing a “Make America Great Again” cap.
fabsroman
Ultimate Member
As I have continuously said, there are so many laws that almost all of us can be put in prison if the authorities that be so choose.
One of the reasons, outside of just being polite, that you do not mouth off at an officer when you get pulled over. The officer can make you miserable if he/she does not like what comes out of your mouth.
esqappellate
President, MSI
- Feb 12, 2012
- 7,408
True that. Be smart out there!
PowPow
Where's the beef?
- Aug 22, 2018
- 497
I think there may be a difference between what he seems to be talking about (field interviews and interrogation) and general interaction. If your not a person of interest in a crime why agitate officers with silence?
- Aug 22, 2018
- 497
Just realized I combined the content of 2 posts into one and responded to this imaginary statement, my bad
Users who are viewing this thread
Forum statistics
Latest threads
-
MD DNR Outdoor Recreation Survey -- Outdoorsman Responses Needed
- Started by Derwood
- Replies: 1
-
-
-
-
-
-