Beerball Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 link Chief Justice Roberts's majority opinion said the application of the law in this instance was consistent with the limitations of the First and Fifth Amendments. However, he cautioned: "All this is not to say that any future applications of the material-support statute to speech or advocacy will survive First Amendment scrutiny."
Hossage Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 So if you unwittingly serve a terrorist a hamburger...
The Dean Posted June 21, 2010 Posted June 21, 2010 So if you unwittingly serve a terrorist a hamburger... I believe that would fall into this category: Those "more difficult cases" would have to be addressed if they arose in future
BB27 Posted June 22, 2010 Posted June 22, 2010 So if you unwittingly serve a terrorist a hamburger... Oh yeah, they are going to waste time prosecuting you for serving a hamburger. You are way caught up in the conspiracy theory! I don't want to offend you by accusing you of using drugs, or not paying your taxes . . . . . .
KD in CA Posted June 22, 2010 Posted June 22, 2010 So if you unwittingly serve a terrorist a hamburger... Serving a hamburger is "material support"? That would have to be one hungry terrorist!
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 22, 2010 Posted June 22, 2010 So if you unwittingly serve a terrorist a hamburger... WTF on that avatar....
The Dean Posted June 22, 2010 Posted June 22, 2010 WTF on that avatar.... I'm guessing a good picture of Rfeynman.
Hossage Posted June 22, 2010 Posted June 22, 2010 Its a manicorn, duh. http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http:/...ved=0CCoQ9QEwBg Manicorn.
Hossage Posted June 23, 2010 Posted June 23, 2010 Oh yeah, they are going to waste time prosecuting you for serving a hamburger. You are way caught up in the conspiracy theory! I don't want to offend you by accusing you of using drugs, or not paying your taxes . . . . . . You say this as if there would be no reason to put a limit on prosecutorial power under any circumstance. The way this is written, it is ripe for abuse. The reason for that is because the Patriot Act allows you to be arrested, indefinitely detained, tortured, extradited, and killed without a warrant or evidence on suspicion of terrorism. Read it carefully, and that is the bottom line. People have been arrested for providing very trivial amounts of support to terrorists under this law. So your unsupported assurance that I am a crazy conspiracy theorist and you are in posession of secret knowledge to the contrary that you will not provide seems unconvincing. I have a feeling you will call me something silly and argue with me and assume I am wrong. Read up to be sure. Edit: I have done drugs and I dont like to pay taxes. Big deal. Your opinion on the likelihood that I will be arrested is not important. Why would you even bring that up? Dont be a square, daddy-o.
BB27 Posted June 23, 2010 Posted June 23, 2010 You say this as if there would be no reason to put a limit on prosecutorial power under any circumstance. The way this is written, it is ripe for abuse. The reason for that is because the Patriot Act allows you to be arrested, indefinitely detained, tortured, extradited, and killed without a warrant or evidence on suspicion of terrorism. Read it carefully, and that is the bottom line. I have a feeling you will call me something silly and argue with me and assume I am wrong. Read up to be sure. I'm sorry, I just don't have the time, or the energy to explain how things really work in the real world. I would instead like to spend the little time I have on here to just use small one-liners to make fun of you. I apologize now if I accuse you of using drugs(you have admitted to extensive drug use), not paying your taxes, or of being a guest at the local, state or federal penal institute (you deny having ever been arrested, I would argue it is only a matter of time if it hasn't already happened). Thank You
Recommended Posts