It does if I do it too often or get caught. The trade-off I have to mentally weigh whenever I post is if I think I’ll get caught and if it will be worth it if I do.
FYI:
Ken White of Popehat fame has a post about this case too.
Supreme Court Conjures Corrorboration of Anonymous Tip Out of Thin Air To Justify Traffic Stop
Then let me ask you this: your willingness to be honest about your willingness to lie is perplexing to me. I’ve previously said that I thought many posters here agreed with you, and I’ll say so again. But I also think no other poster would forthrightly acknowledge his willingness to post false information to advance the cause – he’d simply do it, and feign ignorance or mistake when exposed.
Why, if you’re willing to calculatedly lie to advance the cause, are you also willing to admit this plan in the conversation we’re having?
Because ultimately, I think what we say here will have little to no effect on US politics at large, so I can say whatever crazy thing and it won’t come back to bite me in terms of real laws or people getting elected.
I also have a personally visceral reaction to playing political games and lying, and would prefer that people are more honest even if we get some uncomfortable truths. If someone’s racist, then just come out and say it and defend it, don’t hide and lie about it when we all know you are, its a weasely way of talking that I don’t like.
I think it would be better for the board if people were more honest, as I think testing your beliefs against opposing views is helpful. We all have objectionable beliefs, it would be nice to know if so and so is the zoophile or so and so has no problems with exorcisms. You’re all strangers on a board to me, I shouldn’t care what you think of me. And if how I post can have some small effect on others to be more honest, so much the better.
Also, despite knowing what great heights lies can get someone, some people seems to base their entire careers on it, to me its just too much effort to keep it up. Meanwhile, I’d have to hold back what I really believe and want to say, sometimes for years, in order to worm my way into the core of this board. And for what? The adulation of strangers? No, its just too much trouble and I would go crazy trying to contain myself. Better to be who I am, I think, and get real supporters rather than lie. I’m not looking to make friends, and god knows I haven’t made any here, so I might as well use this board as I do to blow off steam and say things I can’t say to people face to face (because I’m punchable in real life)
There are things I believe the world should be. Honest is one of those things, even if its bad. Of course so long as its ok to lie, I’ll take advantage of that where I can, but if I could push a button to make people incapable of lying or deception, I would, without thinking about it, without caring that some would be hurt, because I believe it would be for the best.
Why do you think some of your posts bug me a lot? I say to you many times to stop playing games. Sometimes I see you as presenting an honest devil’s advocate, sometimes not. I’d rather you just say to me what you really think
I really don’t see how this is a substantial change from existing law.
What I post here is always either my honest communication of what I think, or it’s something I signal as being a devil’s advocate position – either by saying the words “devil’s advocate,” or by couching things as a thought experiment or hypothetical, or some other rhetorical device indicating the use of hypotheticals.
Abdicating the culpability of an “anonymous” tipster who may or may not be sincere in their claims?
What culpability?
In the past, the police had to corroborate the tip with other information not readily available to the general public, or make direct observation themselves. Now they do not.
I think, but I’m not sure, that your general stance when taking the devil’s advocate position is also for us to consider the usually debunked or invalid conservative’s side. You’d do better to argue more liberal positions with your tactic, because people see you as, like Scalia’s case, putting philosophy before logic. That may be just because the board skews liberal, but trying doing more and more forceful liberal DA positions if you want more honest responses
No, you said the search of car requirements, not pat downs. Terry has been extended to automobiles, see Michigan v. Long.