What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
See the new YouTube feature trailer for Dragon Age: Origins view!
youtube.com/DragonAge - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
239 Comments
- Cancerkitty, on 06/12/2009, -10/+161If they're going to allow cops to torture suspects, why even both with a trial and other facades of justice? Let's just let them shoot people in the street. If nothing else, it'll be cheaper.
- wjappe, on 06/13/2009, -4/+129Tazers, secret prisons, no habeas corpus, active military on US soil, secretive government actions, militarized police, excessive force, etc? Sounds just like some third world country with a ruthless dictator, send in mission impossible.
- charlie6969, on 06/13/2009, -4/+85Tasers; the new billy club.
Ain't progress grand? - AmyVernon, on 06/12/2009, -3/+73wtf? However, this could be overturned in higher courts, because in NY, the Supreme Court is like the Circuit Court is everywhere else. There are two levels above the Supreme Court in NY - the appeals division and then the Court of Appeals.
- zoziw, on 06/13/2009, -6/+69Let's see...court order...have a judge throw him in jail until he decides to give the sample.
Not rocket science and not cruel and unusual punishment. - CamperBob, on 06/13/2009, -0/+57Traditionally, you'd be locked up for contempt of court until you agreed to provide a sample.
- tgc1, on 06/13/2009, -1/+58The part that just boggles the mind here is that these are SUSPECTS not convicted criminals. Even so, I think this just wreaks of the police state mentality. Keep in mind, suspect means you could be dragged in on a frivolous "disorderly conduct" charge and be compelled to surrender your DNA. And just so you know, disorderly conduct covers ANYTHING and EVERYTHING they could ever want to haul your ass in for. If you so much as spit on the floor, you could be charged with that one. "Pick up that can citizen..." should ring a bell.
We're just a few steps away from being made to wear shock collars and have mandatory RFID implants. Don't think it'll happen? Then you HAVEN'T BEEN PAYING ANY ***** ATTENTION. - inactive, on 06/13/2009, -1/+48I thought cops were supposed to be the good guys? Why do I find myself rooting for the "crimininals" these days?
- TheSkunkMonkey, on 06/13/2009, -5/+50I've said it before and I will say it again and again until people figure this out:
I fear my local police more than I fear any terrorist. - BeShirtHappy, on 06/12/2009, -7/+51Wth, is wrong with people anymore?!
- Ineedanap, on 06/13/2009, -1/+41It's called cruel and unusual punishment. Contempt and lockup until you surrender the required materials is the correct way to go about this.
- LuisCypher, on 06/13/2009, -0/+40As a teenager I use to read science fiction novels about distopian societies in the future.
The scene portrayed in the article would have fit nicely in many of them. In fact many recent events , changes in law and society would.
Remember they were introduced as a "non-lethal alternative of last resort" to a balistic weapon.
They are no longer used as an alternative, or as a last resort and practice has shown they are not non-lethal
Tazers have become a tool of compliance and torture. They are tools that are not being used reponsibly or in the manner that they were intended.Tazers should be removed from the hands of police until proper safeguards , procedures and penalties are put in place.
When I was a kid I would see a cop and wave, I see one in my rear view mirror now and ... - skipvt, on 06/13/2009, -0/+38Seriously? Well for starters how about NOT resort to some nazi-assed gestapo ***** thuggery.
- 4answer2, on 06/13/2009, -1/+38Papers, please!
- xSubmerged, on 06/12/2009, -4/+40wtf. This makes no sense. Does the DNA sample have to be voluntary in order to be used? Even so, what good is a voluntary sample when the means to get it was through torture
Why didn't they just forcefully take a sample? - ncgmac, on 06/13/2009, -0/+34And this is what is so scary. We seem to keep forgetting innocent until proven guilty. This guy is not convicted yet. While he maybe guilty, until he is convicted he is not. It may seem "liberal" to say so. However, people seem to forget that any of us could end up on the other side of the law. I'm not talking theft, I'm talking politics, free speech etc. Then what happens when they "Force you" to confess your words, or "Ford you" to renounce them.
Rights for the accused were put there to protect everyone and avoid crap like we are seeing today. Truly scary. - Minarchian, on 06/13/2009, -0/+26There's something called the 5th Amendment. I don't give a ***** what some jackbooted judge says. We are supposed to be protected from being forced into giving evidence to be used against us through torture.
- inactive, on 06/13/2009, -1/+25I'd give my dna sample all over the cop's face.
gnnnughhhh! - LenBaird, on 06/13/2009, -0/+23They will say it was a coincidence from a pre-existing condition, like they have already done with other taser deaths.
- ncgmac, on 06/13/2009, -0/+23Wrong. Most of us who love freedom understand its costs. It's truly better to be free and risk a terrorist attack than to give up our freedoms for government "protection." Consider this, what is safer, 4 sky marshalls with guns at 30K feet, or 200 pissed off passengers. Ask the shoe bomber which one he would have preferred. He'll probably say the sky marshalls since they would have protected him from the passengers that beat the crap out of him before tying him up.
- blankoboy, on 06/13/2009, -0/+22Has it been so gradual that Americans don't see what has happened to their country? The nation has gone to hell. Imagine if you were to have been in a coma from 2001-2009 and just woke up. You would want to pack your bags and leave the US asap (if they still let you).
- cr4ft, on 06/13/2009, -1/+23come on guys that's not torture, it's just "enhanced high-voltage low-amperage pulsating generation"
- cHAosjiHAd, on 06/13/2009, -0/+22"I am the LAW!"
- buckrogers1965, on 06/13/2009, -0/+20Just because you match doesn't mean you are guilty. Most evidence is only useful in ruling out a suspect, not in positively identifying the guilty person. Finger prints match more than one person. Bullet matching will have false positives. Yes, even DNA tests match more than one person in the general population.
Besides, whatever happened to the right not to incriminate yourself? Oh right, the constitution is so old. - StonerThomas, on 06/13/2009, -0/+21The pre-existing condition of course, was standing in front of a cop with a taser.
- cr0c0dile76, on 06/13/2009, -0/+20Presumption of innocence?
- DangerCollie, on 06/13/2009, -1/+20Most likely but the fact that a judge...any judge...didn't throw out evidence obtained this way is shocking all by itself. I mean seriously, what were they thinking?
- thelastbushman, on 06/13/2009, -0/+17I think you're missing the point there buddy
- eLp619, on 06/13/2009, -0/+16tor⋅ture
–noun
1. the act of inflicting excruciating pain, as punishment or revenge, as a means of getting a confession or information, or for sheer cruelty.
How can this just be done but un-punished? - mybad4990, on 06/13/2009, -0/+16Wait, you're complaining about a police state and your solution is to send in Tom Cruise?
....we're *****. - moxley, on 06/13/2009, -0/+16You are really ***** stupid if you don;t see what's wrong with this.
This is unamerican and wrong, the state cannot do that kind of ***** to people - and certainly not without due process.
This is prior to any trial, on presumption only...
Wake the ***** up, doucebag...because basically you're saying that if I think you raped my dog, I can then torture you into giving me a DNA sample. - SpeedSteamBoat, on 06/13/2009, -1/+16There are no good guys. There's just a lot of people trying to get on with their lives in a police state.
- motivatedguy, on 06/13/2009, -2/+17The population of the U.S. is too busy with the, "lifestyle obsession". Flat screen T.V.'s, iPhones, XBOX vs. PS3, Shiny new cars, etc. Meanwhile, our government is slowly taking away our freedoms. Freedoms that men and women of every color and creed bled and died for.
There are a lot of people on this website that laugh at them; But the people that are stocking up their firearms have the right idea. The right to bear arms was put in the Constitution to protect us from our government, not from each other. - harpoonhank420, on 06/13/2009, -0/+14if ur were arrested and forced to give DNA by taster would you be rooting for them after?
- drunkenoaf, on 06/13/2009, -1/+14I bet guns for the public will remain legal, yet tazers won't.
- NeddieSeagoon, on 06/13/2009, -0/+12You're supposed to use a phone book so the beating doesn't leave a visible mark.
- Nerys, on 06/13/2009, -2/+14you FEAR. you wonder am I speeding? are my lights on? am I swerving? are my "papers" in order.
you FEAR.
if that does not bother people ..... we are truly already lost. - Contradictions, on 06/13/2009, -0/+12Tasers are less-lethal weapons. They are not non-lethal because anytime a taser is used there is a chance death could occur. It should not be used to get evidence.
- m0ng00se68, on 06/13/2009, -1/+13You have an aptitude toward being a cop.
- Nerys, on 06/13/2009, -0/+11Except what happens when your DNA sample mysteriously gets split into two parts and the other part BECOMES there "collected" sample from the house.
You don't think thats possible? what delusional state of mind do you live in? Planting of evidence is COMMON PLACE when they really want someone badly.
Just like CRIMINALS the cops get "blinders" on. they get so convinced that they MUST have the right guy so frustrated that they lack the evidence that they JUSTIFY there actions.
They think WE KNOW he is the perp who committed the crime so its not really bad for us to PLANT evidence since we KNOW he is the one and we are just getting another scumbag off the street.
Wait till your the one they are CONVINCED is the bad guy.
Would you want to GIVE THEM a sample of your DNA to prove your innocence not knowing if they will corrupt the evidence and use your own sample to frame you for the crime.
How do you prove your innocence then?
THIS IS WHY your not supposed to HAVE to prove your innocence THIS IS WHY your supposed to be innocent till proven guilty
THIS IS WHY YOUR NOT SUPPOSED TO BE COMPELLED TO TESTIFY AGAINST YOURSELF.
Consider RANDOM DUI check points. they PROFIT from these massively. ruining some out of state strangers life is NOT high on there list of things that will bother there concision.
so they "rig" the breath test to give a false positive.
YOU ARE NOW GUILTY. End of Discussion. You have lost you will get a DUI you will lose your license you WILL pay thousands in FINES.
Wait you say thats when we go get a blood sample and it vindicates me.
NO thats when the blood sample gets "lost" or is "bad" or inadmissable for any number of other reasons.
NOW its too late to get another blood sample the next day the supposed "alcohol" is all gone.
so now your stuck with the BREATH TEST that was rigged but you can't prove it.
THAT is why compulsory tests are WRONG.
I would accept a compulsory blood test before I would accept a compulsory breath test.
although its still ripe for corruption its a lot harder to FALSIFY a blood test than it is to falsify a breath test.
IE you can COMPARE the blood sample with your own blood to verify it came from you.
How do you verify the breath test?
anytime you GIVE something to law enforcement there is opportunity for that information to be used IMPROPERLY against you. Rigged against you.
IF THEY THINK you really are guilty many WILL manufacturer the evidence against you to convict you. THEY THINK they are doing good. TO THEM you are VERMIN and they are just doing what needs to be done to CONVICT what they KNOW to be a bad person.
THIS is why you have rights to begin with. THIS IS WHY there is the 5th amendment. THIS IS WHY your innocent until proven guilty. - prisoner24601, on 06/13/2009, -0/+11Cops have, for a very long time, had the right to draw blood (for DUI testing as an example) from an uncooperative suspect. In those cases they potentially had to use physical force to restrain the suspect and then get a sample. As disturbing as that image is, I understand why THAT sometimes happens and can accept it.
THIS, on the other hand, is a truly horrific and repulsive development. Having your blood drawn against your will would be unnerving, but authorities inflicting pain to make you *choose* to do what they want you to is truly dehumanizing. It is akin to "breaking horses" in the sense that a more powerful will than yours destroys your ability to decide what you will do. I truly fear for our society.
This is vile. This is offense to human dignity. This devalues us all. - m3arvk, on 06/13/2009, -0/+11The constitution is just a piece of paper...but don't forget that "they hate us for our freedom!".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wmc60JmaLbE
/s - SpruceCaboose, on 06/13/2009, -0/+11I am with CamperBob and ineedanap on this one. You do not need to physically force a detained suspect to give DNA. Contempt and jail until they provide it would be sufficient. If you wanted more extreme, solitary confinement would work.
Tasers are meant to save lives by giving police an alternative to lethal force when presented with a dangerous situation. A detained suspect in a jail refusing to give DNA is not exactly a dangerous situation anymore. - sildude, on 06/13/2009, -0/+11Unless of course you're making a pun on the whole DNA thing. In which case you're awesome!
- withoutfear, on 06/13/2009, -3/+14Criminals behind badges.
- itsthemechanic, on 06/13/2009, -0/+11I lol'd
- localzuk, on 06/13/2009, -2/+12Pretty shocking that a court thinks torture is acceptable.
Hope this gets taken to higher courts. - spritom, on 06/13/2009, -1/+11In other news, Faraday Cage Underwear sales are up!
- IgorUnchained, on 06/13/2009, -0/+10Most apologists would recognize these things as wrong if they saw it on the History channel from a long gone dictator or if Hugo Chavez was doing this. Instead, they make excuses for these actions because it hasnt happened to them or their family yet.
How is this issue not covered by the 4th Amendment? -
Show 51 - 100 of 243 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is