ITT: We discuss controversial legal issues.

theacoustician said:
How about controversal lawyers? If you didn't see, Penny Arcade trumped Jack Thompson, a man so vile, National Institute on Media and the Family disowned him. This is the primary right wing group that tells parents its all video games fault that their kids suck, not their shitty parenting skills.

Summary:
-Jack offers $10k (donated to charity) for someone to make a video game killing game designers and industry people.
-Several people make mods to games to fit his description.
-Jack resends his offer. Claims it was "satire".
-Gabe and Tycho call him a douche for going back on his word and donate $10k of their own in his name.

Original story:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/news.php?date=2005-10-14

How they won:
http://www.penny-arcade.com/news.php?date=2005-10-17 (last two posts)
Click to expand...

Yeah, that whole thing had me cracking up since last Wednesday.
 
Drool-Boy said:
Speaking of donated sperm, I think Bills wife may be cheating on him...



[ig]http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_48/art03_48/0348_78covsto.jpg[/img]
Click to expand...
Thems some British lookin teef on her
 
fly said:
Almost as expensive as a good haircut for Bill
Click to expand...

Speaking of hair, I used to get mine cut by a girlfriend of mine at Toni & Guy. $65 a pop. Eventually I was like "I love you babe, but this shit is crazy. You're using plain old scissors to cut my hair and I'm not even getting a blowjob."
 
fly said:
Almost as expensive as a good haircut for Bill
Click to expand...

when bill made his deal with the devil he was cursed to have the dorkiest haircut ever known to mankind for all of eternity
 
There is a case before the supreme court now about if the police have a right to search a home if one occupant says yes and the other says no.

FUCK NO THEY SHOULDNT BE ABLE TO SEARCH.
 
fly said:
There is a case before the supreme court now about if the police have a right to search a home if one occupant says yes and the other says no.

FUCK NO THEY SHOULDNT BE ABLE TO SEARCH.
Click to expand...

Not sure how I feel about that. I can easily come up with situations where I would think the should be allowed if one occupent says yes.
 
ChikkenNoodul said:
I can't think of a single one.

It's not like it's THAT hard for police to get a warrant.
Click to expand...
Exactly.

Why not err on the side on of MY personal right, instead of the police... Its a sad day when a case like this goes to the Supreme Court
 
ChikkenNoodul said:
I can't think of a single one.

It's not like it's THAT hard for police to get a warrant.
Click to expand...



They dont even have to do that do they?
They can pull the "OMG I smell weed smoke!" routine and enter on probable cause, cant they?
 
Drool-Boy said:
Speaking of donated sperm, I think Bills wife may be cheating on him...



0348_78covsto.jpg
Click to expand...

As dismaying as this is, I think the person on the right is also a woman.

Think "middle aged bull dyke".
 
ChikkenNoodul said:
I can't think of a single one.

It's not like it's THAT hard for police to get a warrant.
Click to expand...
1. Husband kills kids, hides them in basement. No obvious reason to for police to enter otherwise (screaming, blood, etc.).
2. Cops come
3. Wife begs cops to come in, wanting him the hell out before she's next.
4. Husband says cops can't come in.

Would you wait for a warrant? Hell no. Did one occupant say they want the cops gone while the other said come in? Yep.
 
ChikkenNoodul said:
I can't think of a single one.

It's not like it's THAT hard for police to get a warrant.
Click to expand...

Abusive spouses/roommates. That alone is a fuckload of different scenarios all rolled into one.

Then there is the case of abusive parents.

Pretty much I can't think of a single reason why you would have difference of opinions where someone says yes and someone else says no that is valid. Other than people that just don't like the police coming in. At that point.... if it is really that big of a deal, you should have the person you live with well aware of this fact so that they never say yes unless you agree.

*Edit: I see theac beat me to it. :)
 
theacoustician said:
1. Husband kills kids, hides them in basement. No obvious reason to for police to enter otherwise (screaming, blood, etc.).
2. Cops come
3. Wife begs cops to come in, wanting him the hell out before she's next.
4. Husband says cops can't come in.

Would you wait for a warrant? Hell no. Did one occupant say they want the cops gone while the other said come in? Yep.
Click to expand...
iirc, there is some sort of imminent danger clause or something they can pull out at that time.
 
fly said:
iirc, there is some sort of imminent danger clause or something they can pull out at that time.
Click to expand...
Sure, but there's no proof. What if the woman is in hysterics because she just saw Jimmy's head on a pike in the basement? She can't communicate properly, but gives the cops enough info (BLOOD, BASEMENT) to find out what the hell is going on.
 
fly said:
iirc, there is some sort of imminent danger clause or something they can pull out at that time.
Click to expand...

So, in other words, what you are saying is that they shouldn't be able to search the place when one says yes and the other no, unless they feel it is necessary.... Couldn't they just then have a blanket "it is always necessary" in effect? No? Then how are they going to codify this?

But, more importantly, can you give me an instance where one person would say yes and another would say no?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back