-
FredJ commented on the blog post Sink, Florida, Sink!
And what has constitutionality got to do with the event recording of a multi-county law enforcement organization? They can only make arrests if a crime has occurred. Obviously the idea is to keep abreast of political events so that if a crime or terrorist event happens they aren’t caught completely with their pants down.
Otherwise, after a crime, they get called “Deaf, dumb and blind” by all the posturing pundits and politicians. This way they have suspects. Or maybe they can arrest the perps for conspiracy or for attempted murder and prevent the crime.
A more reasonable objection would simply be that the whole effort is likely to be something of a big waste of the taxpayers money. The incidence of politically-motivated crime in Central Florida being rather low. Although by pooling the costs, the counties might save money. Surely they’ll claim that.
And their record-keeping can’t even have a “Chilling effect” unless it’s widely publicized. Like by this blog.
In any event, it isn’t a violation of the Constitution.
-
FredJ commented on the blog post Who Thinks This About The Law of War?
Actually, the rules don’t change. Your behavior might change, but the text of agreements is not altered.
The laws of military occupation are complex, but they include the occupier’s obligation to keeping law and order, and to suppress insurrections.
I suppose the assumption is that if your military has lost the war, the war is over. There is also, though, the importance of a formal surrender.
-
FredJ commented on the blog post Who Thinks This About The Law of War?
Rules for targets?
Actually yes, a legal combatant must wear a uniform. Otherwise there is no right of surrender, for example. Someone caught carrying a weapon out of uniform in a combat zone can be shot on sight, or even after capture, as a spy.
This is also to enable the other side to distinguish civilians from soldiers.
