🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4qlcdc$nn7@magus.cs.utah.edu>,
Greg Alt <galt@spades.cs.utah.edu> wrote:
>In article <4qjodj$o19@news.ais.net> kevin@bobray.kray.com writes:
>>Do you belong there? Unless you have notified the right people you do NOT.
>
>And here I thought Stalinism was dead.  Unless I am infringing on
>someone else's rights, I belong wherever the hell I am at the moment.
> 
>>I have spent time at my girlfriends apartment many towns away. Yes,
>>the police questioned me as to why I was there one night. They noticed
>>that I "belonged" elsewhere. Providing proper identification and
>>reason they moved on their way. Did I like this? YES. 
>
>Good thing your pocket wasn't picked earlier that day...  I suppose
>when the police took you to the station and did a body cavity search
>you'd be telling them that you appreciate their thoroughness in
>protecting you.
>
>>Who is to say
>>that I go on a business trip and someone holds hostage my girlfriend
>>while I am gone? Would I want someone to step in and check a potential
>>bad situation? YES. Did they question her when they questioned me?  YES.
>
>In order to find out if you are holding her hostage, they could take 
>her aside and just ask her.  No need to ID either of you or demand
>that you justify yourself if there is no evidence of anyone doing
>anything wrong.
>
>>You *DO* have to carry ID over the age of 18 in the US. Not doing so
>><could> end you up in jail. And you *DO* have to report to the
>>authorities when you move (again, see above). 

No, you DO NOT have to carry an ID if you are over the age of 18 in the 
US.  Only certain states (Oregon is one, I beleive) have laws like that.


>
>There are a few levels to this question.  It is true that in practice
>if you don't dress the right way or have the right color skin, gender,
>age, whatever that police will arrest you if you are caught in public
>without your papers.  On the other hand, this is unconstitutional, and
>the police are breaking the law when they do this.  On another level,
>there is the question of whether or not it is a good thing for society
>to be this way.  During the cold war, everyone in the U.S. seemed to
>think this sort of thing was horrible and we were proud that our
>country was not a totalitarian police state.  I remember very clearly
>seeing a TV news show in the late 80's after Czechoslovakia opened up.
>There was shock and disgust when they were shown a secret police
>spy station where police could look at monitors attached to hidden
>cameras around the city's streets.  Recently I read about police in
>many U.S. cities are mounting hidden cameras and watching people on the
>street.  Instead of shock and disgust, or even an acknowledgement of
>the implications, this was reported as a neat new idea for curbing crime.
>
>If you really believe that order is much more important that freedom,
>I suggest you take a look at nations that have gone down that road
>in the past.  The promise is order, but the result is greater disorder
>than is possible by any other means.  
>
>btw, if you are a male in the U.S. and between the ages of 18 and 26,
>failure to tell the government your current address within 30? days
>of moving is a felony carrying a prison term of up to 5 years in
>prison.  Most people ignore this law, and unless you are a pacifist
>speaking out against the Selective Service, there is essentially no
>chance of being imprisoned for this.  As Yakov Smirnov used to say,
>"What a country!" 
>
>Greg