Iowa police comparing logbooks against Pilot Rewards Cards?

"Nation" was/is the correct term...we are a "nation" comprised of 50 states and several "protectorates".

I thank you for that.

This amendment is still being challenged...the challenge is legit, the fact that several of the 36 states required at the time (there were only 48 in 1909)...several of the states changed the ratification bills wording thereby not ratifying the bill "as written"...however the Supreme Court has twice now contorted the filings and proof of the false and fraudulent ratification and turned it around to make the challenger of the bill get accused of the same that he/they are filing false and fraudulent documents....it is still in appeals at the 7th District...two more levels of appeal one in the 7th District and the final at the US Supreme Court. (Google "Bill Benson")

This 16th Amendment does not take away any power from any State but gives more taxing authority to the Federal Government without the required apportionment to population on each State. The States never lost any power to tax residents of their individual State, but increased the tax liability to each individual to both Federal and State along with various areas that have a "local" or "municipal" tax requirement. Prior to the 16th Amendment, only property owners and Corporate groups paid to the Federal Government based on population apportionment. What the States lost in the 16th, was the power to directly control/own property...about the same time the USFS and the BLM became the "purveyors" of all unimproved and non-populated lands. Most of which was taken from the various Native American territories, mostly in the Western regions (West of the Mississippi River)...I am sure you probably know more about this issue than I do! I would apologize for that...but I wasn't around at the time so it is not my responsibility!

The 17th Amendment did not "take power" from the State, but gave the people a broader "say" or "direct representation" by popular vote as a representative "of the people" not of "the State Legislature". At the time, it was obvious that the different political parties were usurping Federal Representative power through an indirect disproportionate population by party registration...still going on today, it is called "Gerrymandering"...!

While the intent of the 17th was to return power by vote to the people and away from the State Legislature, the States found a way around the law to maintain party control of the districts within their States. In so doing, establishing what we see today in States like CA and WA (and others) where specific zones or regions of greater population control the outcome of elections statewide.

These two amendments are not the reason we are seeing our Nation become a Federalist Government! It is the fact that legislators and Courts are contorting laws to fit their Progressive agenda! And through these entities, local and State Law Enforcement agencies are assuming authority that they aren't given by rule of law. When they do, the courts allow and support this unauthorized/unwarranted search and seizure today in the "interest of national security" and at the same time denying each individual their Constitutionally given rights and protection under law!

 

It has been said before and it bears repeating...They can ask for anything they want to ask for but you don't have to give it to them!

Years ago cops were pretty much OK and if they found a problem they would usually let you "fix" it and go on about your business.
These new age paramilitary punks that pass as cops now are just interested in one thing and that's "getting you!" They don't care if it a ########### offence or if it's a honest mistake or anything else they just want to nail you!

COPS ARE NOT YOUR FRIEND!

Make'em work for it! You are required to show them your license, Medical card, Registration and truck/trailer/load paperwork and your log book!
That's all!

If they ask for anything more...Tell them NO! Be respectful and courteous and professional, But tell them no!
If you are dumb enough to have reciepts floating around in your truck that contradict what you have logged, You're to stupid to be in charge of an 80,000 pound truck!

Keep your #### straight and above all.....NEVER, EVER trust a cop!

 

I think this gets to the root of the problem. The law, and constitution, are written (This varies from countries such as the UK where the constitution is unwritten, and subject to manipulation by politicians.), and should therefore be written in stone, unimpeachable and beyond argument. However, the truth is that agenda-laden politicians and lawyers seek to twist what should be a very simple set of rules into a parody of what their authors intended.

A good example of this is the second amendment. On the face of it, it simply states that it is the right of the citizenry to keep and bear arms. I used to listen to, and often participate in, the debates on Sirius Patriot, and therefore had a full blast of Libs screaming non-stop that the 2nd meant nothing of the sort, and all members of the NRA should be lined up against a wall and shot.

Most of their arguments against the 2nd hinged upon clever (to them) plays upon words, or claims that what was written in 1791 has no bearing on a modern USA.

 

I have no problem politely answering politely asked questions given by an LEO trying to perform his duties. He's got a job to do just like I do. Nor do I have any issues with one checking my required documents.
However, asking me to prove anything is crossing the line. Tantamount to calling me a liar to my face, and that is what offends me.
Would said LEO mind if I asked him to show me proof that he who he says he is? Whether or not he is actually on duty? Prove that he isn't to fatigued to perform his duties?
Yes, I can ask, but I think his attitude would deteroriate very quickly were I to do so, for the very same reasons.
Again, it's not that I have anything to hide, nor is it that I have anything against someone trying to do their sworn duty. No, it's that I object to someone overstepping the bounds of their authority, violating my right to privacy and the automatic disrespect that such acts engender.
I'm not the most eloquent speaker so perhaps I'm not getting my point across. Hopefully someone can understand what I'm trying to say and not take offense when none is intended.

 

It comes down to what Injun was saying. You have responsibilities, and you have rights. Your responsibilities should not undermine your rights. People like me, who have lived all of our lives in countries where rights are a thing of the past, if they ever existed at all, don't understand the distinction very easily.

When this thread kicked off, I thought I was reading the ramblings of a few fly-by-nights who considered it their right to do as they pleased, and #### anyone who tried to stop them. I was clearly wrong. It has interested me, and taught me, that the LEO who is not satisfied with my sworn statement of truth (my log book) is already hostile to me, and is very definitely not my friend. In fact, my only reason for insisting that receipts etc should be shown is the fact that they corroborate my evidence, and I thought that they were already required by law. This is certainly not as clear-cut as I originally thought it was.

Looks like I might have to do a bit of reassessment in my dealings with law enforcement. In my first post on this thread, I hoped that I wasn't being hopelessly naive. Time has told that I was exactly that; way to trusting of a system that seeks to preserve itself and it's power at my expense. Thanks to you all for opening my eyes, particularly Injun.

 

Mr. Dionysus, I believe we could learn quite a lot from each other.

 

Ms. Injun, I look forward to the opportunity.

 

None of this changes the fact the people have spoken (elected) those in Govt. Those people must be happy, they elect them time and time again. You disagree with the folks who elected said officials, and thats YOUR problem. BTW The US Govt. as far as I know isn't trying to buy nukes to use on US soil~Terrorists on the other hand..... You fear the Govt, I'll fear the Terrorists. If you fear the Govt.~ Its your opinion, see below for opinions.

 

Dionysus,
Please don't take my posts here as an endorsement to be rude or unfriendly to an LEO for no reason. The vast majority of them are hard working dedicated individuals that do show respect to a person until given an indication to act otherwise.
Just as with truckers, it's the few that are uncivilized that cast a pall on the rest of the group

 

Just thought of something pretty nasty.

If an exhaustive list of supporting documents is drawn up and enshrined in law, then we are likely going to see some pretty flaky prosecutions coming when a driver is unable to produce (for example) a receipt that a cop "believes" ought to exist, based, perhaps, on fuel consumption.

This has the potential to become as petty as any cop wants it to become, which pretty well leaves us where we started; at the short end of the horn. Oh, well. At least we are comfortable there. It's not like we haven't been there for years.