Left can't read well nor do they understand Constitution

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 22:01:24 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"charles krin" wrote in message
.. .

Chuckle...Colin didn't say that...he said that usually a summons to
appear before a federal magistrate was issued for minor problems...and
if the problem wasn't minor, then the offender was held pending arrest
by either the FBI or the US Marshals.


Well, if they're being held, they've been arrested. That's what "arrest"
means!

Wrong. For instance - any arrest creates a permanent NCIC entry for
the arrestee. An arrest also requires that the subject be charged
with an offense.


"It's not American foreign policy, or the plight of the
Palestinians, or America's longstanding support for Israel.
A group of people with money and weaponry have simply
decided that we, as a civilization, are unfit to live, and
want, eventally, to exterminate us."
'Christian Century' magazine

"Colin Campbell" (remove underscore) wrote in
message ...

Wrong. For instance - any arrest creates a permanent NCIC entry for
the arrestee. An arrest also requires that the subject be charged
with an offense.


Look up the damn word.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Colin Campbell" (remove underscore) wrote
in
message ...

Wrong. For instance - any arrest creates a permanent NCIC entry for
the arrestee. An arrest also requires that the subject be charged
with an offense.


Look up the damn word.



Where? The legal definition is what is being used in this thread, or so I
thought. What is the LEGAL defintion of the word, as applied to military
personnel?

In article . net,on Sat,
17 Jan 2004 07:03:25 GMT,
LawsonE attempted to say.....

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
ink.net...

"Colin Campbell" (remove underscore) wrote
in
message ...

Wrong. For instance - any arrest creates a permanent NCIC entry for
the arrestee. An arrest also requires that the subject be charged
with an offense.


Look up the damn word.



Where? The legal definition is what is being used in this thread, or so I
thought. What is the LEGAL defintion of the word, as applied to military
personnel?


Check the army reg pertianing to MP operations.
Should be a 190-* series regulation IIRC


--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

On Sat, 17 Jan 2004 03:58:51 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll"
wrote:


"Colin Campbell" (remove underscore) wrote in
message ...

Wrong. For instance - any arrest creates a permanent NCIC entry for
the arrestee. An arrest also requires that the subject be charged
with an offense.


Look up the damn word.

I am not playing your game.

Since when does your dictionary trump my real world experience and
training?



"It's not American foreign policy, or the plight of the
Palestinians, or America's longstanding support for Israel.
A group of people with money and weaponry have simply
decided that we, as a civilization, are unfit to live, and
want, eventally, to exterminate us."
'Christian Century' magazine

From: "Steven P. McNicoll"
Date: 1/16/2004 4:01 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id: .net


"charles krin" wrote in message
.. .

Chuckle...Colin didn't say that...he said that usually a summons to
appear before a federal magistrate was issued for minor problems...and
if the problem wasn't minor, then the offender was held pending arrest
by either the FBI or the US Marshals.


Well, if they're being held, they've been arrested. That's what "arrest"
means!


It is possible to handcuff someone, put them in a vehicle and transport them to
the station without arrest. It's called detention. Detaining an individual for
questioning or identification while awaiting charges for example.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

On Fri, 16 Jan 2004 22:01:24 GMT, "Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:


"charles krin" wrote in message
.. .

Chuckle...Colin didn't say that...he said that usually a summons to
appear before a federal magistrate was issued for minor problems...and
if the problem wasn't minor, then the offender was held pending arrest
by either the FBI or the US Marshals.


Well, if they're being held, they've been arrested. That's what "arrest"
means!

Not really. You can "detain" an individual for several reasons that do
not rise to the level of "arrest". Protective custody, investigative
interrogation, etc.

Al Minyard

In article et,
says...

"The Raven" wrote in message
...

Here's a hypothetical. Foreign teenager caught at nuclear storage facility
doing nothing more than shooting rats at the facility rubbish dump (not a
specifically "secure" area). What's going to happen to him/her?


Well, according to Colin Campbell, who spent a year pulling 'Military Police
Duty Officer' 3-4x a month at Ft Lewis not long ago and got to be an expert
on jurisdictional issues, he won't be arrested. I guess that leaves
"nothing" or "he/she will be shot" as the only alternatives.


I can see you arn't reading what he wrote, or refuse to acknoledge it.

--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

"Tank Fixer" wrote in message
k.net...

I can see you arn't reading what he wrote, or refuse to acknoledge it.


No you can't.

Well, according to Colin Campbell, who spent a year pulling 'Military Police
Duty Officer' 3-4x a month at Ft Lewis not long ago and got to be an expert
on jurisdictional issues, he won't be arrested. I guess that leaves
"nothing" or "he/she will be shot" as the only alternatives.

I think that Mr. Campbell mentioned the word "detained." Perhaps the
MPs would choose to detain the kid rather than shoot him.

all the best -- Dan Ford
email:

see the Warbird's Forum at www.warbirdforum.com
and the Piper Cub Forum at www.pipercubforum.com