True. They said “officials may strip-search people arrested for any offense, however minor, before admitting them to jails even if the officials have no reason to suspect the presence of contraband.”
When Worlds Collide!
One day only!
Occupy Wall Street May Day Shut Down
Marxist idealism runs head on with Gestapo Police tactics.
Reserve your seats early!
Fine, not exactly the same but still nitpicking at its finest particularly because strip searches and the SCOTUS decision are not the point of the OP or my post.
I used that example to show someone who paid their fine was arrested anyway. I noted the strip searching part so it would remind people of what the recent case was and that it was not some obscure happening.
Other than the word “almost”, yes they are. An infraction gives them the ability to arrest you, and an arrest means you can go to jail. So any infraction can result in a strip search.
The only difference is that saying it that way makes it sound worse. But if that’s enough to get you to be ashamed of your position, you might want to rethink it.
Not pedantry. Sloppiness, either intentional or otherwise on your part. The triggering of the search is being booked into jail, not the offense, which is what your post implied. And the action is as much to protect the people in jail, including the new person, as anything else. No one reading your post without being familiar with the case would know that.
Then you should have stopped right there, instead of expanding into another area where you made a factually incorrect statement.
When I opened the thread, I really was expecting the reference to brownshirt tactics being the vandalism that occurred last night in San Francisco, where protesters were breaking car windows, mashed up some businesses, and attacked a police station.