utahluge
join:2004-10-14
Draper, UT | reply to birdfeedr
Re: Global Crossing & Hurricane Electric looked other way ??
Depends on where you film from. Obviously your not going to be in the same room. Plus, just film the house number and then snail-mail a CD to the police department. Be anonymous. |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
 ·Cox HSI
 ·magicjack.com
| reply to birdfeedr
said by birdfeedr  :Hand the police a video tape of your tenants hosting sex with children? Sounds like you created a video of kiddie-porn. And gave the evidence to police. Not too smart, in my view. There are cases where well-intentioned people bought dope, called the police to give it to them, and report who the seller was. The caller went to jail for buying and possessing dope.
The last thing I would do is visit kid porn sites so I could video tape them as evidence. Not unless I was part of a watchdog group recognized by the police.
Mark |
|
birdfeedr
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
 ·Verizon FIOS
| reply to utahluge
said by utahluge :said by Rob :If you own a home, and you lease it out, and multiple people inform you that the people leasing your home are using it host sex with children, you wouldn't do anything about it? Uhhh, ever heard of a video camera? You would get a lot further with handing over a video tape to the police. At the very least it would keep you out of jail. Hand the police a video tape of your tenants hosting sex with children? Sounds like you created a video of kiddie-porn. And gave the evidence to police.
Not too smart, in my view.
C'mon people, surely you're not all as dense you seem to be. There's lots of ways to get authorities involved without getting caught in the middle. Hell, call your local TV station. They'd love stories on "kiddie porn right under your noses. Film at 11."
Call the local equivalent of DCYF. There's plenty of ways to allege something without coming right out and saying it. Talk blonde with big hair and a Cranston accent.
Ok, that last part is a Rhode Island euphemism. Ya gotta be there.  |
|
kruser
Premium
join:2002-06-01
Saint Louis, MO
clubs:
 ·AT&T Southwest
| reply to emptywig
said by emptywig :said by MyDogHsFleas :This is actually false. Tenants have considerable rights, depending on the state/city they live in. In many cases you cannot evict tenants because you have "investigated" and you believe they are doing something illegal, especially if they have a lease. In many cases you can't even evict them if they are convicted of a crime. To do so invites a large lawsuit. The lease says person won't engage in illegal activity on the property (network). They do. They're gone. If they want to argue, well then here are the police to arrest them for the illegal activity. The child-porn hosts can sue when they get out of prison. wig Who are you to say the activity was illegal? Are you the police? No, I did not think so.
I am a tenant in a fairly large apartment complex and it is usually quiet and peaceful.
However, a year or two back a female moved in and she was obviously dealing drugs from her apartment or she was a crack whore. Not sure but anyhow, about a week or two after she moved in the traffic in and out of the place picked up highly. We went from maybe four cars per hour to 20 cars per hour. The extra 16 cars were all traffic for her apartment. They were white and black males mostly and would stay for under 5 minutes while some would stay for longer and eventually a few would stay for days.
It was then that I said something as the guys coming over were badly dressed and looked like they had been up for days.
So the manager made note of my complaint and watched the traffic and verified that I was correct. She could not do anything however but the police were called and they started tracking the vehicles that came and went. This took about two months and they finally busted someone going in or out of her apartment and that bust activated the clause like yours that says you cannot use the apartment for illegal activities. Once that took place then the complex sent her a certified letter stating she had 30 days to vacate. She did but I've seen many that did not and the sheriff had to come in and throw them out.
So if you are really a landlord then you are doing illegal actions but I suspect you are not a landlord.
You sound like the guy down here that says he will throw you out if you put up a satellite dish on his property even though it is your area. The federal government gives you the right as a tenant to put up a dish so long as it is an exclusive use area of your rented apartment. So if you have say a balcony exclusive to you that faces south then you can put a dish on it regardless of what the lease papers say. It's called the OTARD law.
Sorry to be off topic here but this guy needs to learn in my book. |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| reply to hottboiinnc
And mainstream media never ever questions the actions of the police. I guess even MWW/ChildS won't make the media question the police. |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| reply to jhboricua
said by jhboricua :If the evidence is there, why would the authorities ignore it? They don't have to care unless the mass media PR will fire the police chief. Unless there an ambulance is being requested the chances of them showing up is related to how many hours since the last donut break.
NYC, 20 minutes to show upto a high hobo who broke through a front window of a store and was bleeding, ambulance crew couldn't do anything because of weapons check guidelines.
NYC, 45 minutes to show up to 2 thugs against a taxi driver who wouldn't pay. Taxi driver got fucked up and bleeding eventually, but not robbed. Taxi driver drove away injured before cops showed up (30 mins from starting point).
NYC, 25 minutes, neighbor having extended family party turned ugly after too much tequila.
NYC, 10 minutes, ex-employee takes a Uzi to a Radioshack and then goes shooting at rush hour lines of people waiting for buses.
Othercases, 911 wants a 20 minute phone interview while there is a gangfight going on before they will send someone, yes, they said they will only send someone after I give them a testimony. This wasn't NYC but a suburb.
Time for the cops to held legally responsible for not showing up, or time for Texas self defense rights/Texas gun laws nationally. You don't mess with random people since you know you will get shot by grandma.
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws and cops that never show up will have them.
Unless its MWW/ChildS or a corpse, they will take their sweet time in showing up. Ambulances and fire dept are 10x faster. |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| reply to Rob
said by Rob :I doubt it very much. I bet you'd be the first one there, with a shotgun, a baseball bat, and ready to kick some ass. I should come tell you that my neighbors who I hate have a child brothel in their house. I'll love to see the carnage you do and the cops storming the house while your killing the occupants of that house. :-D perfect way to get rid of the neighbors, and to give a sob story about a lone rampaging psychopath attacking the neighborhood to the local TV newsvans
You responsibility is to tell the cops, and thats it. If the cops don't want to do anything about it. Tough luck. »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_···immunity
Even if the cops take 3 hours to show up to a group of serial killers executing your entire extended family during thanksgiving, there is nothing you can do (but since this is your residence, you can take a shotgun and deal with it yourself »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castle_Doctrine this doesn't apply to property you rent out, or backbone/consumer ISPs). |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| reply to Skippy25
said by Skippy25 :During that investigation the ISP's should be looked at as well to see if they were turning a blind eye to it. Not that I believe ISP's should be anything more than a dumbpipe, but if they are fully aware that they are being utilized for illegal activities, then they SHOULD be required to take the proper steps to aide authorities or brought to justice for not doing so. Would the city water company be held responsible for providing city water to a chemical manufacturer that does environmental pollution into their backlot if some hippies told the city water company that the chemical manufacturer is using the water for illegal purposes? |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| reply to knightmb
It depends on state. On some, by just filing meaningless appeals you can extend it to 6 months before the eviction crew comes. In others, there is no due process, 1 day after the rent is due you file papers, 2-3 days later illegal occupation notice is served, and eviction crew can come whenever they want (when confirmation that the illegal occupation notice was served). The eviction date itself is never told to the occupant. So from 1 day late on the rent, by the end of the month you can have a new tenent in there. BTW, all you belongings go on the street. |
|
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY
| reply to emptywig
said by emptywig :The lease says person won't engage in illegal activity on the property (network). They do. They're gone. If they want to argue, well then here are the police to arrest them for the illegal activity. But the police aren't here. Only a court can make the declaration the illegal activity was done for the purpose of the lease, not you. McColo has excellent grounds to sue if they are innocent (probably not). |
|
RickNY
Premium
join:2000-11-02
Manorville, NY
1 edit | reply to emptywig
said by emptywig :The idea that you MUST wait for law enforcement is ridiculous. If I am a landlord and someone notifies me(or I become aware in whatever manner) that one of my tenants is engaging in illegal activity on my property, then I am ABSOLUTELY obligated to investigate such activity and I am well within my rights to throw the f**k out anyone whom I find to be engaged in such. If you tried that in New York, not only will a judge restore possession of the premises back to the tenant, but you as the landlord, would then be accountable for treble damages to the tenant for any losses he/she may incur as a result of an eviction that was done without a court order.
For what its worth, it takes anywhere from 3-6 months to evict someone in New York -- with the shorter cases involving tenants that have already vacated the premises (in which case the landlord still needs to receive the eviction order before he can make the property available for renting to a new tenant).
With that being said, I know a few people that act as landlords of their property.. Its very hard to get good tenants, and if you end up stuck with a real scumbag in your property, you could end up losing quite a bit of money.. |
|
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
·Comcast
| reply to amigo_boy
True, but the question is now the populist won, what policies (for lack of better term) is he going to enact to shape our society in a way that makes the population know that they have a constitutional role in the governing process. I think we're both trying to obtain alot of the same goals. You write well; it gives plenty of credence to your position. Continue non-repentant with your positions. It gives the opposition food for thought. Whether or not they digest it is yet to be seen. I enjoyed the discussion.
--
"For duty and humanity!"
- Moe Larry and Curly (MEN IN BLACK, 1934)...These are the guys we have in Congress |
|
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| reply to Matt
said by Matt :said by KrK :said by DVOOR8 :The providers did the right thing, and pulled the service once they were shown proof of wrongdoing. This is where I think the problem lies. I think they ignored evidence/proof of wrongdoing right up until public scrutiny and publicity meant they had to act. I completely agree. Unfortunately this happens all too often. well if it didnt happen then every local TV station wouldnt need their "I-Team". just sad that it takes the threat of the media beaming it nationwide via satellite to get action.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| reply to S_engineer
said by S_engineer :Idealistically, your aspirations for this country are commendable. Realistically....well...*sigh* That could be true. But, historically, a big-bang approach to shocking a "palsied" public (the founders' terminology) into stoic, rugged individualists balancing their self-interest with a "common good" hasn't been very realistic either. When a republic reaches the point (I believe) ours has, it's usually ripe for a demagogic populist.
Mark |
|
dentman42
join:2001-10-02
Columbus, OH
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to S_engineer
said by S_engineer :and some people want any excuse to diminish the 2nd ammendment right, or at least their skewed interpretation of it. So if you're a landlord throwing people out on the street because of a false allegation, or an allegation that did not go through the proper channels, be prepared for a full contingent of lawyers to be talking about your case. And when your getting thrown out of your house because of a bogus judgement, what will you be able to do???? Nothing, because you've gotten rid of your 2nd ammendment right. And soon after, there goes the first ammendment rights followed by the other 8 (for starters). |
|
S_engineer
join:2007-05-16
Chicago, IL
·Comcast
| reply to amigo_boy
I wouldn't mind the big band approach in the context of finding out the true magnitude of the problems that we face. Each "band-member" will probably bring his/her own horrific baggage. This could help us to avoid the band-aid approach we seem to be taking now, and enact substantively changes proactively rather than seeing the system break as a whole.
Civic duty is an obligation, but it should not be mandated. This usually happens when people become adults. I believe Maslow was correct with his hierarchy of needs, but unfortunately Maslow isn't being properly taught in the classroom. Furthermore, what happens when you reach the top (this is the point when your giving back) and the cushion that provided your kindness gets wiped out?
And just how do you teach obligations to the Jerry Springer/Maury Povich generation ?
Idealistically, your aspirations for this country are commendable. Realistically....well...*sigh*
I'll continue to do my part
--
"For duty and humanity!"
- Moe Larry and Curly (MEN IN BLACK, 1934)...These are the guys we have in Congress |
|
jay_rm
join:2002-04-12
Netville
 ·Fox Valley Internet
·ViaTalk
| reply to DVOOR8
said by DVOOR8 :...nor launch my own investigation for publicity which is what this was. Bingo - we have a winner !
--
3500/512 5.7 GHz Motorola Canopy Wireless; FoxValley.net
'It looks just like a Telefunken U47 !' |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| reply to hottboiinnc
said by hottboiinnc :but that does not mean E-Mail. I agree. But, I didn't say email. What I said is, if the EFF is going to sue telcos (when the law specifically grants telcos immunity when participating with the executive branch), why wouldn't they sue spammers when we already have a Supreme Court ruling from 1970 which *screams* applicability to the electronic age?
It would certainly have much more practical and tangible effect than nebulous damages of my email being *lawfully* snooped.
Mark |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
1 edit | reply to S_engineer
said by S_engineer :The question seems to me is in a era where we want everything right now, are we as tough as they were? If we're not, we're in trouble! It sounds like you might be advocating a big-bang approach. The system will eventually melt down, and that's when people will be confronted with reality, forced into a crash-course in civic virtue (making choices based upon the "common good" rather than private interest).
That's one way. Some progressives argue that there are ways to re-instill a form of civic republicanism in the populace. From neighborhood watch groups that are empowered to do more than merely hide behind the curtain as they call 911, to "workplace democracy."
The latter is interesting to me because the Founders believed in civic republicanism. An ideology which was based upon ever-expanding frontiers. Where every citizen had the (compelled) duty to participate in government for the common good, and their participation was backed by the independence to retreat to his lands and be self-sufficient, needing no government.
By the standards of civic republicanism we've become the equivalent of share croppers. Working a 9-5 job with no ownership interest. No frontiers that we can retreat to.
The idea of workplace democracy would be to give individuals greater ownership and responsibility in their otherwise "at will" jobs. Intrusive upon business. But, more cooperative than the antagonistic relationship of labor unions versus "get what you can" management.
The idea being, there may be ways to reinstill elements behind civic virtue (individual emphasis on common good as a means to satisfy their own self-interest) without going all the way to an abrupt meltdown with a society that is "palsied" (from the founders viewpoint).
Civic republicanism is actually an interesting mix (or contradiction) of socialism and libertarianism. An interesting play between the liberties of the individual being foremost, but an emphasis upon the individual's dependence upon a virtuous government to recognize and protect those liberties. And, closing the circle, the individual's duty to ensure a virtuous government; and a government beind defined as one which compels individuals to participate and be virtuous.
Mark |
|
hottboiinnc
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH | reply to amigo_boy
but that does not mean E-Mail. Postal mail and email are two different things. And as we seen here before from one other state not too long ago it is a persons right to send SPAM in one state. Right to free speech. |
|
