05-06-2021, 03:51 PM
(05-06-2021, 03:48 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: And here we have the problem with anecdotal evidence. You have two people, both of whom are in a position to know about this topic through their occupations, who are making opposing claims based upon their experiences (or second-hand accounts). It's why policy shouldn't be guided by anecdote.
Very true and I agree. Especially when one of those using it has a history of fabricating statements, twisting words and flat out not knowing the law, such as having to exit a vehicle when instructed to do so by law enforcement.
You do notice that neither Fred nor his public defender even attempted to address issues such as a mandatory DNA database. Their whole argument is based on curtailing civil liberties to save lives, you'd think that would be right up their alley.
