Joe Biden is now POTUS

Supersav

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
I see that the article has been explained to you by me and another poster.

So, again, what would you want to change about the law?
Are you drunk? I can read lol.. I don't think police should be allowed to enter my property without a warrant. Biden and company are supporting the police who want to change that.
 

AllUniverse17

Rising Star
Registered
Are you drunk? I can read lol.. I don't think police should be allowed to enter my property without a warrant. Biden and company are supporting the police who want to change that.

Euh... the police can already do that under the current laws, if they have a reasonable cause to suspect a crime. Biden isn't trying to change anything, for like the 5th time.

Now, I agree with you that the danger of abuse is there, I respect that point of view. I also feel like lives can be lost if the police always had to wait for a warrant. Domestic violence calls are a perfect example of that. Not sure there's a perfect answer/balance here. As of today I can't say I've seen enough evidence to say those laws need to change.
 

Supersav

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Euh... the police can already do that under the current laws, if they have a reasonable cause to suspect a crime. Biden isn't trying to change anything, for like the 5th time.

Now, I agree with you that the danger of abuse is there, I respect that point of view. I also feel like lives can be lost if the police always had to wait for a warrant. Domestic violence calls are a perfect example of that. Not sure there's a perfect answer/balance here. As of today I can't say I've seen enough evidence to say those laws need to change.
again I ask so
Biden Administration Urges Supreme Court To Let Cops Enter Homes And Seize Guns Without A Warrant

is false?
 

AllUniverse17

Rising Star
Registered
again I ask so
Biden Administration Urges Supreme Court To Let Cops Enter Homes And Seize Guns Without A Warrant

is false?

Its not that the headline is false, its that those laws are not new laws, Biden asked the supreme court to uphold the current ruling.

Ive explained this to you already.

Now can you explain your ideas on how to strike the right balance?

For example, a cop gets a call from a neighbor about violence next door between a couple, the cop goes to the door and sees signs of violence in the house but the person at the door says everything is fine. Should the cop go inside to look for the victim?
 

Supersav

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
Its not that the headline is false, its that those laws are not new laws, Biden asked the supreme court to uphold the current ruling.

Ive explained this to you already.

Now can you explain your ideas on how to strike the right balance?

For example, a cop gets a call from a neighbor about violence next door between a couple, the cop goes to the door and sees signs of violence in the house but the person at the door says everything is fine. Should the cop go inside to look for the victim?
There is no balance. Black neighborhoods are already overpoliced. So giving more power to people who habitually abuse the power they already have when it comes to black people is foolish.

As for your example.. Police already can enter your apartment if
  • they need to enter in order to prevent someone inside from being seriously injured or killed, or
  • there is evidence in your home that relates to a serious offence, and they need to find that evidence right away or it might be lost or destroyed.
The police can also enter your home without a warrant or permission if they are in "hot pursuit" of someone whom they have the authority to arrest. For example, they would be in hot pursuit if they were chasing someone from the scene of a crime and they saw that person enter your home.
And the police can enter your home to look for evidence if:
  • they have reasonable grounds to believe there is evidence in your home, for example, drugs or weapons, and
  • they need to act immediately so that the evidence will not be lost or destroyed.
The police can also enter your home for any of the following reasons:
  • to give emergency aid to someone inside
  • to protect the life or safety of someone inside if they have a reasonable belief that a life-threatening emergency exists
  • to protect the life or safety of people in the home if someone heard a gunshot inside
  • to prevent something that may be about to happen, if they have a reasonable belief that their entry is necessary to stop it or to protect their safety or the safety of the public
  • to investigate a 911 telephone call
  • to help someone who has reported a domestic assault to remove their belongings safely
  • to protect people from injury if the police have reason to suspect that there is a drug laboratory in the house
  • to help animals in immediate distress because of injury, illness, abuse, or neglect
Under child welfare law, the police can enter your home without a warrant to remove a child if they have reasonable grounds to believe any of the following:
  • the child is neglected or abused and is "in need of protection"
  • the child is a "runaway" under the age of 16, who was in the care of a children's aid society, and whose health or safety might be at risk during the time needed to get a warrant
  • the child is under 12 years old and has done something that would be an offence if someone 12 or older had done it
The police cannot enter your home without a warrant just to investigate whether a child's mother or father is a good parent.
Your landlord also has the right to enter your home in an emergency. Landlords can ask a police officer to come with them.
Unless you have given the police notice not to enter your property, they can go onto your property to protect it from suspected criminal activity.

So again the point of my initial post is and was that Biden should not be urging the Supreme Court to let police enter and seize guns for no reason

EVEN IF ITS NOT ANYTHING NEW

considering the issues Black People have with police brutality and murder in this country. But if you look at his record in politics this is who he is and who you voted for LMAO
 

AllUniverse17

Rising Star
Registered
There is no balance. Black neighborhoods are already overpoliced. So giving more power to people who habitually abuse the power they already have when it comes to black people is foolish.

As for your example.. Police already can enter your apartment if
  • they need to enter in order to prevent someone inside from being seriously injured or killed, or
  • there is evidence in your home that relates to a serious offence, and they need to find that evidence right away or it might be lost or destroyed.
The police can also enter your home without a warrant or permission if they are in "hot pursuit" of someone whom they have the authority to arrest. For example, they would be in hot pursuit if they were chasing someone from the scene of a crime and they saw that person enter your home.
And the police can enter your home to look for evidence if:
  • they have reasonable grounds to believe there is evidence in your home, for example, drugs or weapons, and
  • they need to act immediately so that the evidence will not be lost or destroyed.
The police can also enter your home for any of the following reasons:
  • to give emergency aid to someone inside
  • to protect the life or safety of someone inside if they have a reasonable belief that a life-threatening emergency exists
  • to protect the life or safety of people in the home if someone heard a gunshot inside
  • to prevent something that may be about to happen, if they have a reasonable belief that their entry is necessary to stop it or to protect their safety or the safety of the public
  • to investigate a 911 telephone call
  • to help someone who has reported a domestic assault to remove their belongings safely
  • to protect people from injury if the police have reason to suspect that there is a drug laboratory in the house
  • to help animals in immediate distress because of injury, illness, abuse, or neglect
Under child welfare law, the police can enter your home without a warrant to remove a child if they have reasonable grounds to believe any of the following:
  • the child is neglected or abused and is "in need of protection"
  • the child is a "runaway" under the age of 16, who was in the care of a children's aid society, and whose health or safety might be at risk during the time needed to get a warrant
  • the child is under 12 years old and has done something that would be an offence if someone 12 or older had done it
The police cannot enter your home without a warrant just to investigate whether a child's mother or father is a good parent.
Your landlord also has the right to enter your home in an emergency. Landlords can ask a police officer to come with them.
Unless you have given the police notice not to enter your property, they can go onto your property to protect it from suspected criminal activity.

So again the point of my initial post is and was that Biden should not be urging the Supreme Court to let police enter and seize guns for no reason

EVEN IF ITS NOT ANYTHING NEW

considering the issues Black People have with police brutality and murder in this country. But if you look at his record in politics this is who he is and who you voted for LMAO

And yet... There has to be a balance.

So you want Biden to change the laws to what exactly?
 

Supersav

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
And yet... There has to be a balance.

So you want Biden to change the laws to what exactly?

I want biden to be the racist he's always been. Don't want nor expect him to do anything that will stop unarmed black men from being killed by police.

You voted for him..what to you want for ya vote?
 

AllUniverse17

Rising Star
Registered
I want biden to be the racist he's always been. Don't want nor expect him to do anything that will stop unarmed black men from being killed by police.

You voted for him..what to you want for ya vote?

Like I already said, as of today I dont see enough evidence to show that those specific laws need to change.
 

ghoststrike

Rising Star
Platinum Member
While you generalized all that, liberal Maryland voted for a two-term Republican governor. I can honestly say he has been a descent Governor. He definitely got props from me, when he was the rare republican that would call out Trump's bullshit.
The super, duper, extreme Libreral Maryland voted for Hogan. I live in DC, but Hogan is aight in my book. He aint' the typical Republican though unlike the idiots in the south. He actually uses logic when making a decision.

I voted for Republican Governor Hogan as well. He got a lot votes from voters that usually vote Democrat. His re-election wasn't close. He has the highest approval rating of any Governor and is the National Chair of the Governor's Association. I never voted for a candidate simply because they have a D or an R next to their name.
 
Last edited:

xxxbishopxxx

Rising Star
BGOL Investor
I voted for Republican Governor Hogan as well. He got a lot votes from voters that usually vote Democrat. His re-election wasn't close. He has the highest approval rating of an Governor and is the National Chair of the Governor's Association. I never voted for a candidate simply because they have a D or an R next to their name.
didn't vote for him the first time, but voted for him the second time. Other than the bullshit he pulled with the Maryland HBCUs, I have been pretty happy with him as governor.
 

ghoststrike

Rising Star
Platinum Member
didn't vote for him the first time, but voted for him the second time. Other than the bullshit he pulled with the Maryland HBCUs, I have been pretty happy with him as governor.

Same here and I didn't agree with him cancelling new development of the redline subway. Aside from my couple gripes, he's been decent overall.

He's soon signing the HBCU $557M settement Bill after vetoing a similar one last year. I was reading that it originated in 2006, quite a long time coming.
 
Last edited:

Tito_Jackson

Truth Teller
Registered
We met deported migrants at the border. Some say they're ready to cross again
210324164339-01-mexico-border-deported-migrants-exlarge-169.jpg

Carlos Cocoy, left, says he will try to cross the Rio Grande again. Returning to Guatemala, he says, isn't an option.

On the US side of the border, we've seen crowded conditions in detention facilities and large groups of migrants at bus stations after families have been released from custody. But here, on the Mexican side, the scene is dramatically different. Stories like Cocoy's -- and confusion over which migrant families are allowed to stay in the United States and which families get kicked out -- are becoming more common.
While officials are letting unaccompanied minors into the United States to make their case for asylum, and letting some families deemed vulnerable cross, too, the Biden administration has said most adults and families are being expelled under the pandemic public health restrictions that remain in place along the border.
Some of those who are sent to Mexico are likely trying to cross again -- one factor that could be making the numbers of migrants apprehended at the border shoot up.

 

darth frosty

Dark Lord of the Sith
BGOL Investor
This dude is sad and pathetic...and people PAID to have their wedding reception here :smh:


In a video obtained by TMZ, former president Donald Trump was filmed complaining about the man who replaced him in the White House during an appearance at a wedding reception at his Mar-a-Lago resort on Saturday night.

As TMZ reports, "Check out this video we got of the former President all tux'd up for a reception that went down Saturday night at Trump's fortress of solitude, Mar-a-Lago, where the former chief himself got on the mic at one point to say a few words for the happy couple, John and Megan Arrigo ... but this speech would have nothing to do with the couple... it's all about him."

In video Trump can be heard ranting about Joe Biden, Iran and the border situation to a crowd that politely laughs after he hijacked the reception proceedings.




Donald Trump Rails on Biden During Wedding Speech at Mar-a-Lago
 
Top