Get Pulled Over-Get Your Phones Content Checked!!!! NO WARRANT

The joke is on them.

I have no cell phone.

reply to post by InshaAllah

whenever you get pulled over pull out your batterie or your sim card and everythang will be fine. or dont put anything illegal over text or whatever and you should be fine.

Or, how about you dont do anything illegal in the first place.

That way, you absolutely wont have anything "illegal" to put over text.

reply to post by lbndhr

I'm going to put police, state and federal #'s in my contacts, thank you for the heads up.

This will do very little.

Everything the officer did in the article was completely legal.

You could have had the number for President Obama's cell phone in there. It wouldnt matter because everything was completely legal.

reply to post by Swills

From the looks of it Nattoli was growing and selling marijuana, which in California, who isn't? I wonder if he was an MMJ patient or just a regular street dealer. The gun that was found in his vehicle was totally legal, his major mistake was not keeping it in the trunk. Now when SWAT raided his house they found a cache of weapons, but they fail to say what these weapons were and if they were illegal.

Unfortunately, you are taking your assumption that it was medical marijuana as fact.

If he was charged with possession of marijuana for sale then it was most likely not medicinal marijuana because they could not charge him if he had a perscription. Just like the oxycontin and morphine sulfate he was caught with.

So, if he is in possession of illegal substances it is also illegal for him to possess ANY firearm as well.

You answered your own question.

reply to post by cybro

I don't trust the police that they are just looking for some connection to drugs or weapons. They are fishing for anything that can be used to generate revenue.

What? What are you talking about? Care to elaborate on that one?

I don't know what that could possibly be but I wouldn't put it past them to make something up and say it was on your cell phone.

What? Didnt the article say they did a search warrant on his house and found exactly what they were looking for because they saw it on his phone first?

Same way as they throw a bag of chalk into a car and say it's drugs so they can confiscate the vehicle.

So they throw a bag of chalk in the vehicle. They confiscate the vehicle and search the rest of it. You were completely innocent so they find nothing else. Maybe they even seize the vehicle under the guise that it was used in drug trafficing. The whole thing goes to court and the "chalk" is found out to be chalk because in court you need the supposed drug to be tested and confirmed to be whatever drug the police suspect it to be. So, because it is chalk the whole thing is thrown out and the vehicle returned to the owner.

What a complete waste of time. If the police were going to make the whole thing up why not just make the whole thing up and plant drugs later? Why throw chalk in the vehicle? This story doesnt add up.

The police are out of control, they can do whatever they want so if they are going to treat everyone like a criminal people have to start thinking like one to stay ahead of them.

Really? After all of that, this is your advice? The police are doing wrong so everyone start thinking like a criminal?

How about hold the police accountable to their actions? SOMETHING other than everyone start thinking and acting like a criminal. SOMETHING.

reply to post by Bob Sholtz

sure, there are ways to get around this by hiding your phone or breaking it, etc. my point is WE SHOULDN'T BE SUBJECT TO THIS AT ALL!

it's illegal and wrong. it violates your rights to privacy, unlawful searches, and seizure of property. you can put up with it and deal with it, or you can say "go F*** yourself".

So let me get this straight.

You are angry because the police are using totally legal means of searching criminal's cell phones, locating evidence of crime and charging those criminals with a crime.

Something seems amiss in your argument.

reply to post by AllUrChips


California allows this and it was upheld by their supreme court.

This issue is coming up in other states, where some already have legislation preventing the warrantless searches.

This is heading to the Supreme Court (along with the issue of police placing tracking devices on cars without a warrant) to determine the constitutional legality.

If we use history as our guide, the 4th amendment will be expanded to include the car tracking and cell phone viewing.

You are angry because the police are using totally legal means of searching criminal's cell phones, locating evidence of crime and charging those criminals with a crime.

if tomorrow, california decides that police officers can kill anyone they want without reason with no repercussions, it would be completely legal, would it not? after all, some of those they kill will be criminals.

would you still support this completely "legal" law? hell no.

legality does not determine the morality of an action. the action here is the invasion of privacy without a search warrant and probable cause. that is wrong and illegal.

not everyone is a criminal, and just because i like privacy doesn't mean i've committed any illegal actions. innocent until proven guilty is so pesky, don't you think?

Originally posted by areyouserious2010
reply to post by InshaAllah

 

whenever you get pulled over pull out your batterie or your sim card and everythang will be fine. or dont put anything illegal over text or whatever and you should be fine.

Or, how about you dont do anything illegal in the first place.

That way, you absolutely wont have anything "illegal" to put over text.

I think its about the principle, not being clear. WHERES YOU WARRANT?

Originally posted by areyouserious2010
reply to post by Swills

 

From the looks of it Nattoli was growing and selling marijuana, which in California, who isn't? I wonder if he was an MMJ patient or just a regular street dealer. The gun that was found in his vehicle was totally legal, his major mistake was not keeping it in the trunk. Now when SWAT raided his house they found a cache of weapons, but they fail to say what these weapons were and if they were illegal.

Unfortunately, you are taking your assumption that it was medical marijuana as fact.

If he was charged with possession of marijuana for sale then it was most likely not medicinal marijuana because they could not charge him if he had a perscription. Just like the oxycontin and morphine sulfate he was caught with.

So, if he is in possession of illegal substances it is also illegal for him to possess ANY firearm as well.

You answered your own question.

Actually if you read my post correctly I stated "I wonder" if he was a MMJ user being that he lived in Cali but I never said it was a fact. I did however post the facts below from other website about his case.

Wait, so if he had legal firearms but was in possession of illegal drugs, those legal firearms become illegal because of the illegal drugs? What? I'm no lawyer nor am I a drug dealing, firearm touting dealer, but either way, if that's the case I never knew that.

From reading the website, Nottoli was pulled over for speeding. The officer suspected he was under the influence of stimulants. Nottoli license was expired. From this the officer wanted the car impounded, from which he would be able to legally search the car to perform an "inventory". From this search the gun was discovered and his cell phone was searched. From searching the cell phone the officers noticed the pictures of a mask wearing gunman. No drugs were found from searching the car.

Reid Nottoli was pulled over on December 6, 2009 just before 2am as he was taking a female friend home. Santa Cruz County Deputy Sheriff Steven Ryan said Nottoli's silver Acura TL had been speeding on Highway 1. After speaking with Nottoli on the side of the road, Ryan suspected the 25-year-old was under the influence of a stimulant drug. His license was also expired, so Ryan said he would impound the vehicle. Nottoli asked if his car could stay parked on the side of the road, which was not heavily traveled and out of the way. Ryan refused so that he could conduct an "inventory" search prior to the towing. Ryan testified that Nottoli's driving was not impaired, and Nottoli was not arrested for driving under the influence. As he rifled through the belongings in the car, Ryan found a fully legal Glock 20 pistol with a Guncrafter Industries 50 GI conversion that should have been stored in the trunk of the vehicle. He also noticed Nottoli's Blackberry Curve which, after it was turned on, displayed a photograph of a mask-wearing man holding two AR-15 rifles akimbo. Such rifles could have been legally possessed if owned before California's assault weapons ban took effect. The photograph could also have been taken in another state, but Ryan took it was evidence of possible "gun-related crimes."

Sheriff Ryan later testified that Nottoli was not driving erratically, nor was he arrested for driving under the influence. But the case took a turn that has brought up major privacy concerns when Sheriff Ryan searched Nottoli’s vehicle. The Deputy found: “A fully legal Glock 20 pistol with a Guncrafter Industries 50 GI conversion that should have been stored in the trunk of the vehicle. He also noticed Nottoli’s Blackberry Curve which, after it was turned on, displayed a photograph of a mask-wearing man holding two AR-15 rifles akimbo.”

So from the illegal search of the phone (depending) SWAT raided his house because of a picutre and that's when they discovered the drugs, grow equipment, money, and cache of firearms. So a picture can get you raided. The article states it is legal to own those weapons if you owned them prior to Cali's assault weapons ban, or they picture could have been taken in another state, or he could have found it on the web, liked it, and kept it on his phone. Basically a picture allowed SWAT to raid his house because the officer searched his phone.

That's bull#, through and through. And now the young man is dead, from what I cannot find because they won't release the details, but from this case they're gonna user the appeal to allow all Cali cops to be allowed to search cell phones from a simple traffic stop? More bull#.

Originally posted by areyouserious2010
reply to post by Swills

 

From the looks of it Nattoli was growing and selling marijuana, which in California, who isn't? I wonder if he was an MMJ patient or just a regular street dealer. The gun that was found in his vehicle was totally legal, his major mistake was not keeping it in the trunk. Now when SWAT raided his house they found a cache of weapons, but they fail to say what these weapons were and if they were illegal.

Unfortunately, you are taking your assumption that it was medical marijuana as fact.

If he was charged with possession of marijuana for sale then it was most likely not medicinal marijuana because they could not charge him if he had a perscription. Just like the oxycontin and morphine sulfate he was caught with.

So, if he is in possession of illegal substances it is also illegal for him to possess ANY firearm as well.

You answered your own question.

There is no "prescription" for medical Marijuana.
This is stated by people who have not bothered to even read the law they condem. ( I hear cops say this all the time.)

You get a simple doctor's recomendation, which could be a note on a pad signed by your dr. that states MMJ COULD help you.
you can grow your own, and legally sell surplus to your local co-op.
yes it's very much legal and even on craigslist for christ sake.

In CA, possession of under 1 ounce is a very minor infraction, less than a misdemeanor, and you can't even be taken into custody for it.
Grow equipment is 100% legal and is only mentioned to make the story seem scary to the sheeple who live in non MMJ legal states.
You cant be charged with it so why mention it otherwise?


Cops hate guns in civilian hands here in CA. and will jump to charge anyone they encounter with one if they can
They hate competition.

this story is all propaganda.




I'll add The whole Dr recomendation/MMJ thing is a joke.
anyone can get a Dr.'s recomendation. by telling a few lies.
which is ironic, because the laws prohibiting MMJ are based on lies too.

funny how things work.

Well I'm glad some of you feel "Safer" knowing they got a drug pusher off the street. God, don't you guys get it? How the heck do these drugs get to be so pervasive and get to every corner of the country while our top gov't officials are on the case? Can you tell me that? They really don't mind getting the corruption off the street, that is Anytown street, but the major corruption where it all starts never gets touched. I'd like to know who is letting all these drugs get into the country if we are supposedly at war with drugs. It's a farce and searches have been justified time and time again in the name of security.

Sure no one objects to a search ending in the discovery of a cache of guns at someone's house if the person was an everyday Joe, but cops and ex-military like to collect guns for fun. What about searches that don't find anything? "Sorry for your inconvenience." And we're happy with that. Just go about the rest of my day. Maybe tell friends and loved ones about my crazy incident. Now I've a story to tell to make my life interesting.

One thing they are looking for are people who have the power for descent. They are looking for those who don't fit the mold and live life out of the ordinary.

And by the way, the cops don't determine the law. They only make actions out of suspicion that someone is breaking the law. So before law is actually discovered to have been broken, meaning court proceedings, all your stuff is searched through. And even if they didn't find anything related to the original reason to search through your stuff, if they find other things unrelated, they will seize it and you if necessary. Moral of the story is do nothing bad, have nothing bad in your possession or around you, and get ready, because then later you won't be allowed to think anything bad. And by bad, I mean extraordinary or out of normalcy.

Hi everyone. This is Janet, AKA your big sister.

We have notis the terrorises er everywhere, so we put the masheens on teh streets an' teh pedos @ yur local airpewt can come to yer house cus we gots to be protected!

Love always,

Janet

reply to post by Domo1


Yeah i figured you would think this was OK.I hope they go thru your life with a fine toothed comb.Everything from the quote of the article that you posted as good reason for the Nazis to go looking around their stuff I and hopefully any real American would give to rats ass about.I sleep at night knowing for every one poor soul they harass 2000 get away with it.

i must say i do not agree with this law, but i am from the u.k. so it is none of my business, but if it were introduced in the u.k. i would disagree with it, maybe it already has and i am unaware of it.

but there is a solution like others have said, do not put anything on it. when i go out i only take the things i need, alot of people carry around everything all the time, to give them less to be nosey about simply carry only what is needed, there are many times i go out and all i have is my house keys. no money, no documents, no phone, nothing.

i understand that is not practical for everybody, but if you can, take the minimal out with you and only store what you need on your phone. that way wether your stopped by criminals or the law, your not going to be very interesting.

reply to post by lifeform11


I'd read that in the UK, the government wants to approve what is taught to home schooled children. You can't just teach what you feel is appropriate. They can actually go into your home and take a look around while demanding to see what is being taught. I think they want to do the same here in America if they don't already.

reply to post by TheMatrixusesYou


it would not surprise me at all, infact i reckon if we took all the laws from both countries and applied them to a single country we would have no freedom left at all.

thats interesting do you have any more confirmed sources for this

Anyone supporting this in any way needs to get smacked in the face until their brainwashing is undone, and then go and read the !%@$ing bill of rights.

WHEN will people stop allowing these things to happen? WHEN will they stand up and reject this utter tyranny?

reply to post by admiralbiggles


Whoops my bad! Looks like when I'd heard the info, it was fine, but has since been updated and what I said needed a bit of a search to prove. I googled "home schooling in the UK" and a few sites popped up. One explained that the parents can do pretty much what they want and then said:

"In other words, there are no rules for how families go about their home educating in the UK. It's up to each family to ensure that their children receive appropriate education, which will vary from child to child. Although the previous government attempted to introduce bills that would require registration and compulsory visits (at great financial cost to the tax-payer, and a terrible infringements of parental and childrne's right) the bill has now been abandoned entirely. You can find the latest information about home education and the law on the Freedom to Grow website."

So this disproves my previous statement.