Banning cell phones while drivng.

Banning cell phones while driving.


The Police Chiefs of BC want to have a 100% ban on the use of cell phones use while driving. This means that even hands free devices will also be banned.

People are in favor of only the hands free devices being used. But if the police want to ban cell phones 100%, then maybe talking to passengers should also be banned. Maybe listening to the radio or maybe just changing the radio station, should also be banned.

Sure accidents are caused by idiots. We prefer to call acts of nature like this Darwinism. Where the idiots manage to kill themselves over time, leading to a more smart population of this planet. Yes I do know these idiots who text message while driving do manage to kill others. But since there is no real long term jail penalty for being stupid.......

But lets get to another point in distracted while driving.
Have a look in to a police car. Look at all the electronics. Radar guns and laptop computer. Two way radios. And Looky here, Cell Phones. Imagine when the police will have to pull over to use all these devices.
Huh? You mean the police are totally exempt from this 'Safety' initiative? Maybe then the police will have to ride in pairs to be able to use the electronics? Not going to happen. Budget restraints and all that.
The police are Professional drivers? Sure the police have dangerous driving training. And so do I. And many others I know. Can we have exemptions too?
Maybe drive-thrus need to be banned so people do not eat while driving.



In some countries they now have cameras recording peoples license plates at un-manned checkpoints. Just in case...
In England they even have special in police car cameras to have proper court evidence of a driver talking on a cell phone or other illegal act. The RCMP don't like cameras. Go to YouTube to see that fact.


----------------------------------------------------

You may be hearing commercials as of late that go something like. "200 children/workers were killed/injured in some year/years, so we need to make a law against what people are doing to protect these people that have been killed/injured."
So the real statistics? It could be like 1 person killed and 199 injured. Quit putting out fake statistics to sway public opinion, OK?

Online passwords for job application

Online passwords for job application.

So a town in the States(and probably others), was requesting(mandating) that job applicants reveal their user name and passwords to their subscribed social networking sites(and any forum as well). This is 100% illegal.
For one thing is that the user account agreements on those sites require that you protect your passwords from others. And another thing is that with your passwords, someone can really screw up or post fraudulent info on the site or even delete all your data.

"Freedom of Communication"

Why are people so stupid as to succumb to crimes like this? Oh, right. See the post about the 5 monkeys.


An excerpt.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10269770-38.html
Bozeman, which is about 100 miles north of Yellowstone National Park, found itself in the international spotlight this week when the local media reported that the city government's background check included evaluating job candidates' suitability based on their social-networking site postings. The city had been doing so for a few years.

The background check form stated: "Please list any and all current personal or business websites, web pages or memberships on any Internet-based chat rooms, social clubs or forums, to include, but not limited to: Facebook, Google, Yahoo, YouTube.com, MySpace, etc."

Groups, including the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a digital rights organization, derided the practice.

"I think it's indefensibly invasive and likely illegal as a violation of the First Amendment rights of job applicants," EFF attorney Kevin Bankston told CNET News earlier this week. "Essentially, they're conditioning your application for employment on your waiving your First Amendment rights...and risking the security of your information by requiring you to share your password with them...Where does it stop? How about a photocopy of your diary?"

The original story.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10268282-38.html?tag=mncol;txt

Police want Free access to all your Internet traffic

Police want Free access to all your Internet traffic.


http://www.ottawacitizen.com/Technology/Feds+give+cops+Internet+snooping+powers/1706191/story.html

OTTAWA — Police will be given new powers to eavesdrop on Internet-based communications as part of a contentious government bill, to be announced Thursday, which Public Safety Minister Peter Van Loan has said is needed to modernize surveillance laws crafted during "the era of the rotary phone."

The proposed legislation would force Internet service providers to allow law enforcement to tap into their systems to obtain information about users and their digital conversations.

Police have lobbied for a new law for almost 10 years, saying that they need to access "Internet safe havens" for gangsters, sexual predators and terrorists.......................

So the Police use the excuse(even emotional excuses) of looking for criminals to make stupid people think that monitoring and 'storing' peoples Internet communications is a good thing. What it comes down to is the police will show up at your ISP without a warrant(maybe they will call a Judge to 'request' one) and then look over all your emails and instant messages and downloads and places you visited online. What crime did you commit? None. Maybe you ticked off some officer on the street. Maybe you Blogged online about corruption in our judicial and legal system. Maybe your neighbor is stealing your wireless Internet signal and surfing the rudest websites imaginable(By the way. Calling the offending sites ISP can get that offending site taken down. Oh so simple).

Federal Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddard recently warned that forcing ISPs to surrender information "is a serious step forward toward mass surveillance" that violates the rights of Canadians.

The police want your ISP to store everyones data for possibly years, so that if the Police ever decide you need investigating.... Well theres your search on 'how fireworks are made' or theres the boobie site you like to visit. Or maybe even maybe someone using your computer searched for something that would make the Police very interested in you, even though there is no proof of the IP address's computer operator.



And a very important note.
This type of allowed police activity does allow them to snoop on website traffic of Civil Liberties websites. Or even opposing political parties.
Or have you not noticed what happens in Iran and China, as well as other closed door countries like Canada.



Conviction by suspicion. It's the Canadian way.





Support the BC Civil Liberties Association. They can't restore your rights all by themselves.
http://www.bccla.org

More on this news from Michael Geist's law blog.

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/4069/125/
.....the bill requires all ISPs to surrender customer name, address, IP address, and email address information upon request without court oversight.


----------------------------------------

In case you ever wondered about the amount of cameras that watch vehicles on a 24/7 basis? And they do have zoom lenses. The public also only gets the still image, while Government/Police get live moving pictures on some cameras. This is just a small public accessible example of how many cameras are out there.
http://images.drivebc.ca/bchighwaycam/pub/html/www/index.html

http://vancouver.ca/engsvcs/streets/roadwork/

5 monkeys

5 monkeys

Or human conditioning to allow what should not be allowed.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=US&v=KZeiSKnhOBc



Teach your children history and what has become of our society. Only then can we overcome Fascist oppression. It may be your child one day like in the end of this video.

There are those that think that just because an action has been committed for many years, that the action must be legal or justifiable or right. When in truth, is that the action is still illegal according to the Law, Civil Rights and The Constitution.

Movie theater Searches

Movie theater Searches.

Hey guess what? You can make an easy 'ten thousand dollars' off of a movie theater that illegally searches your bag, purse or person.
How?
Well, for a theater to search your stuff, they need to have a sign clearly posted that they search bags.
And the theater people are not allowed to put their hands in your bag. It is supposed to be a system where you open your bag and they look in and you continue on.
But there is also the issue of accusing you of a crime without evidence of a crime going to be, or having been committed. Oh and there is also the right of 'Freedom of Association'. Meaning that you can not be called a criminal suspect(and get searched), just because you are hanging out with or are near actual criminal suspects.

Search For Movie Piracy Equipment Was Invasion of Privacy

http://torrentfreak.com/search-for-movie-piracy-equipment-was-invasion-of-privacy-090531/

A Canadian court has ordered a cinema to pay $10,000 damages after staff searched a family’s bags looking for camming equipment, but ended up breaching their privacy.

Last week a judge ruled that the staff did indeed breach the privacy of the family and ordered the cinema to pay $10,000 CAD ($9,000 USD). Signs at the point of ticket purchase must clearly state that there is a bag search in place and staff must not put their hands inside people’s bags. Cinema Guzzo failed on both counts,




Support the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association.
http://www.bccla.org
Too many people have forgotten what rights are and the powers that be, like it that way.

Slow down law

Slow down law.

http://www2.news.gov.bc.ca/news_releases_2005-2009/2009PSSG0041-000675.htm
What the law is, is a new way to make money. Well actually it is supposed to protect roadside emergency workers. Pay the fine early and save many dollars. Pay later and be forced to pay a higher amount. Is that fair? Wouldn't it be easier to just make a 40 day deadline on the charge, unless contested to court? The fine, including a 15 per cent victim surcharge(lets note that you have not injured any people, so who actually gets this money? Does all the money go to actual victims or just to the police to fund RoadBlocks? We already have full Provincial medical coverage here.), is $148 if paid within 30 days or $173 thereafter.

Yet the police still refuse to put up warning signs(at a proper warning distance) and traffic slowdown zones for their RoadBlocks. Who's the danger here? You are just driving along and you go around a curve in the road and BAM.... Traffic is stopped dead by a RoadBlock. Drivers were given no warning of a scheduled road blockage. If regular road workers had no signage, Workmans compensation would fine the workers. But for some strange reason, BC Workmans compensation denies any control over the RCMP. How can a RoadBlock be considered an emergency? Accuse thousands of people per 24 hours, of a crime that they have not or will not commit.
And why do some officers have a phobia against wearing reflective safety vests? Oh right. Drivers can't see an officer so easily in his brown sweater.
BC Workmans compensation can get you some stickers for work. 'Think Safety first and profit later'.


Don't get me wrong. It is a good idea to slow down when 'actual emergency' vehicles are on the side of the road. But lets make an exemption for enforcement personal who will setup some type of enforcement on the side of the road and then with out warning signs on the road, will just run out in to traffic to wave drivers to the side of the road for whatever the 'special of the day' is. And if they try to wave you in to a business's parking lot? Thats trespassing. So don't do it.
If they were to turn on actual emergency lights.... Would they then be enforcing the new speed law? Entrapment rings a bell here. There is no emergency, yet they treat the area like an emergency zone. I wonder what the Judges have been ordered to do in this case? Hmmmmmm.
Which brings an interesting note from Washington State. Officers will drive cars in pairs and then when one officer is stopped on the side of the road, another officer will look for speeders or those that don't move over in the zone. And that cycle repeats. Easy money. Whoops. I mean safety.


Now heres the interesting bit on the speeds that you are to adhere to when passing actual emergency vehicles on the side of the road with lights on.
Beginning June 1, drivers must slow to 70 km/h on highways where the speed limit is 80 km/h or higher,
and to 40 km/h where the limit is below 80 km/h, when approaching a stopped emergency vehicle that has its lights flashing. If there is another lane going in the same direction, drivers must also move into that lane if it is safe to do so.
I can see a danger in the below 80Km/h speed restriction section. Slowing to 40Km/h in a 70km/h zone is dangerous. Thats how multiple rear end collisions happen. Maybe you just came over a crest in the hill, or a curve in the road and see the lights and then nail your brakes to drop to the 40Km/h speed. Then the car behind you has to hit their brakes harder, and so on. How about a 60Km/h speed instead of 40Km/h. And then in zones 60Km/h and under, a speed of 50Km/h.


But then again. We the people have no real say in what our glorious Government or law enforcement personal do. Otherwise officers who assault or kill people would be put in a medium security prison for their crimes. And be jailed longer than a month as well.
And a Government who constantly continues to violate our Constitution would be jailed as well. A law or action is not valid if it violates the constitution. And Judges being threatened with demotion for 'not' allowing those injustices is a crime.


An interesting article. Probably wouldn't be created and published by a Canadian news source.
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Insurance/InsureYourCar/Worst-states-for-drivers.aspx



A quote from Benjamin Franklin:::
They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Drug Testing In Schools

Drug testing in schools.

Raise your hand if you think that it is legal to randomly or compulsory test school kids for drug use?

Okay, those that raised your hands. Please proceed to jail to be strip searched(raped) and have various bodily fluids removed to test for drug use.
All others please enjoy your constitutional and civil rights and continue to fight for them from birth.

The law states that there needs to be evidence of a crime to treat people as criminal suspects and if there is enough evidence to pursue further(to court), then an arrest is made and a drug test taken. Remember arrest. Instead of detain the suspect for many hours until the suspect relents to the officer's trumped up charge without court enforceable evidence.
The current system is to treat everyone as a criminal suspect until proved innocent by an officer(or teacher???!!!!!) and not a Judge in an actual court of law.

Heres a simple link showing that schools(In the States and in Canada as well for those that think it never happens here) make students do drug tests for the Band or Chess Club(extracurricular activities).
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-injunction7-2009may07,0,3405672.story
There is no evidence that illicit substances are used to enhance a student's flute playing, Northern California judge writes.



To treat everyone as guilty until proved innocent(by an officer) is a crime. And people must fight the system to restore our Constitution.

Teachers can 'never' strip search students, or even 'pat down' students looking for some lost(stolen) item without a police officer in attendance and the students parents and court admissible evidence of criminal activity by the student.
Also note that an officer can not just stop you on the street(or other location) and force a search of your person or property(backpack or even car) or force you to identify yourself, without evidence(or justifiable cause) against you, of a crime having been or in the process of being committed.

Also note that in some places there is 'Saturday Detention'. Noting that the school can not subject you to detention outside of regular school days/hours. Lunch time detention is an issue if you have no food. To starve you over lunch detention is a crime. Pretending to pass out during said starvation, so an ambulance is called, will allow the punishment methods to get in to the media.

If a student shows up for school drunk? Police are to be called to arrest the student for underage alcohol consumption.
If a student shows up 'high'? Once again, Police are to be called for the students consumption of a prohibited substance(but whatever the marijuana law might be now for quantity). But students should not show up for school if stoned anyways.

Random drug tests. Are they legal? NO. They are not legal. Once again, where is the evidence of crime?

Police dogs being brought in to the school to sniff lockers or students????? Where is the evidence to allow such an action to be made against 'all students' in the first place.

Going to the big dance in the school gym. And then they make everyone blow in to the Breathalyzer. Or worse yet. The school makes 'certain' people blow in to the Breathalyzer.
Where is the evidence of being drunk? If you refuse? Well then no entry. And then you should call up the B.C. Civil Liberties Association and ask them to help you sue your school, for violating your rights and freedoms. Some schools are nothing but prisons, by the way some Principals run them.
That one week of learning the Constitution in Grade 6 sure is helping you out now(sarcasm).
And if you blow in to the Breathalyzer anyways to get in? Sue the school anyways for violating your rights and add some extra money on for pain and suffering(social embarrassment caused by the school if you could not enter due to refusing to blow).
And always make sure the Breathalyzer has a fresh blowpipe. You would not want the school or police violating health codes, by using the same tip that other people have used.
And if your un-informed, government suppressed Parents object to you standing up for your rights????? There are safe havens for abused children to go to. Physical and Verbal and Emotional abuse are the same thing. Being yelled at for standing up for your rights is abuse and there is help out there for you.


And as a final note...... When subject to a 100% legal at the time, urine test. Only a nurse should be watching you pee in to the cup. For women that means no male looking at you squat and pee and for males, you can substitute a male nurse or male doctor if needed. At least medical staff are not subject to suspicion of enjoying watch people pee... Remembering a Male former RCMP officer from Revelstoke(?) who was milking his urethra(urine tract problem) at a urinal somewhere with a camera(RCMP camera at that) and it taking pictures. He did have a medical condition, but thats what stalls are for.




Please support the BC Civil Liberties Association.
http://www.bccla.org