|
Post by m52nickerson on Mar 24, 2009 7:01:58 GMT -5
Now, how about responding to the rest of my post, and not just to the first few lines? What do you what me to respond to? Those are thinks that you saw, you were there not me. It still does not mean that a majority of police are corupt.
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Mar 24, 2009 7:06:29 GMT -5
Or to stop you from gtting to a concert, or if you're sitting down in a park. Or if they feel like it. After all, if the cops tell you to move, even if that order breaks your constitutional right to freedom of assembly, you move, because the police are the law. They can and did at the RNC. You move because it is the law to obay the orders of a police officer. If it violates your rights that is something for the courts to decide. .....or someone like you who oviously knows dick about the laws here, and has never had any dealing with the police in the United States. Yes grabbing someone is extreme prejudice, I forgot that you were there!
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Mar 24, 2009 7:09:19 GMT -5
And now an argument ad liberal medium. Needless to say, this is crap. Care to point out how it is crap. How many people get arrested in the US everyday, have you looked that up? Out of those how many are tasered, or even get charged with resisting arrest? If you have not done any research what are you basing your arguments on?
|
|
|
Post by schizophonic on Mar 25, 2009 1:23:14 GMT -5
As much as you would like to a taser is still not considered a deadly weapon. There is no truly, non deadly weapons. Even a single punch can lead to death. Of course, there's the question of how lethal a weapon is, and whether the lethality poses any real threat. Ever try and produce an actual argument that doesn't rely on blind authoritarianism? It doesn't. The argument that any trigger happy idiot can become a cop really isn't true. The notion that you need more skills to stay employed in fast food is also not really true. You may not like the Police, but distortion of the acceptance will not make your argument more valid. And really, I'm on your side. I believe the cops should have higher standards than the average Joe because they make life and death decisions. And the job itself draws a lot of idiots and yahoos. It's scary when those yahoos don't have to live up to higher standards. But if you had to have more skills to flip burgers, nobody would bother with the jobs in the first place. And if anyone with a hardon for power could be a cop, we'd actually be in a lot worse shape. I also hate the idiot mentality that cops are supposed to stick up for their own, right or wrong. The Police around here sill stonewall ANY investigation on principle alone, even when said investigation's end result would be to vindicate the Police involved and/or their actions. That's just dumb. That's "smack you in the head with a steel shovel" dumb. But again, let's not go out and start painting everything with a broad brush and wide strokes.
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Mar 25, 2009 6:51:25 GMT -5
As much as you would like to a taser is still not considered a deadly weapon. There is no truly, non deadly weapons. Even a single punch can lead to death. Of course, there's the question of how lethal a weapon is, and whether the lethality poses any real threat. I understand that. The an officer is given a weapon like a taser and instructed how and when to use it, that is what they have to go by. Do I think there should be a safer alternative, yes.
|
|
|
Post by ausador on Mar 26, 2009 17:36:08 GMT -5
Sorry but I actually find the way this thread has turned to be pretty comical; so apparently all police officers in the U.S. are jackbooted stormtroopers? Weird, I've been arrested 16 times and have never been abused by an officer.
I have been both drunk and under the influence of drugs when arrested and have to confess to being quite an ass towards the police while they were taking me into custody. No police officer has ever physically abused me, not even when I wiped my hands on one detectives tie after being fingerprinted.
The 'abusive, overbearing, hysterical if questioned' police officer is an internet meme, sure it happens but it is a one out of hundreds of thousands thing. m52nickerson is correct in saying that you should as the law in this country stands simply comply with the officers orders. If you do not comply you can be charged and or restrained/arrested, argueing with a police officer is futile and at the worst it is possibly suicidal.
As an American who believes in the constitution and the protection of law afforded by it you should comply with the officers orders and then contest those orders in the court in front of a judge. You will not and cannot win any argument with the police, to even attempt to argue with a police officer is foolhardy and simply stupid, you will always lose.
Hence all the videos that are shown now making it seem as though we live in a police state, the common thread of them all is always 'failure to comply', I'm sorry but you just don't have a choice as to whether to comply with a police officers orders or not. You must comply. If officers repeatedly overstep their bounds then they will be slapped down by the courts, the district attorneys, and their own chain of command, not by you, if you attempt it you will be the one slapped down.
Use the system we were given by the constitution to enforce fairness and rule of law. It has been used before and suceeded, did the MLK protestors argue and fight with the police when they were arrested? No, they won their war by being passive and allowing themselves to be led away, it wasn't until they were before a judge that they won. Throwing rocks and firebombs, fighting with the police, and otherwise resisting them is just plain stupid, they are soldiers following orders from higher up.
The place to contest them is in court and only in court can you hope to win.
|
|
|
Post by perv on Mar 28, 2009 2:29:24 GMT -5
All this might-makes-right thinking is starting to look downright pathological. If I may paraphrase, you're saying the police have absolute hegemony on the street, cannot be reasoned with and may kill you if you try, ergo they are not jackbooted stormtroopers.
You also point out that they're just following orders, which of course is completely different from what jackbooted stormtroopers do.
However I can't argue with your experience. I'm inclined to think you were lucky though. It's also quite likely that the quality of police varies geographically. The cops where I live don't have a very good reputation.
|
|
|
Post by ltfred on Mar 28, 2009 2:59:16 GMT -5
You move because it is the law to obay the orders of a police officer. If it violates your rights that is something for the courts to decide. If a police order violates your rights, that order is illegal and can be happily ignored without breaking the law. If the cops try to enforce that non-law, exercise your right of self-defense and then charge them with assault, at which point the court will decide to award you a couple of thousand dollars. Cops don't get to arrest whoever they want whenever they want, only when they have reasonable suspicion of the commission of a crime. If they arrest at any other time they are committing a grave crime. The police are not the law: the law is the law. And do I really have to explain why America's media is far from liberal?
|
|
|
Post by JonathanE on Mar 28, 2009 7:01:40 GMT -5
Yessirree, I want one a' them there pain ray-guns.
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Mar 29, 2009 9:06:07 GMT -5
If a police order violates your rights, that order is illegal and can be happily ignored without breaking the law. If the cops try to enforce that non-law, exercise your right of self-defense and then charge them with assault, at which point the court will decide to award you a couple of thousand dollars. Cops don't get to arrest whoever they want whenever they want, only when they have reasonable suspicion of the commission of a crime. If they arrest at any other time they are committing a grave crime. The police are not the law: the law is the law. And do I really have to explain why America's media is far from liberal? Fred your failure to understand the US legal system is understandable. No matter what a police officer tries to arrest you for, legal or illegal you do not have the right to resist. That's right fred if you are doing nothing wrong and an officer places you under arrest for a bogus charge and you resist arrest you will get out of the bogus charge, but most likely still get convicted of resisting arrest. So basically police do get to arrest who they want. If they arrest someone without justification there is a good bet that officers career is over.
|
|
|
Post by schizophonic on Mar 29, 2009 10:08:41 GMT -5
I understand that. The an officer is given a weapon like a taser and instructed how and when to use it, that is what they have to go by. Do I think there should be a safer alternative, yes. It also has to do with the protocols of the PD, which worries me. Bratt PD uses a procedure that allows Tasing someone as a first resort. So it's standard procedure. Worse, it appears they adopted it from STATE policy. That's scary. We've been trying to change it for a couple of years, after they tased a couple of groups of non-violent protesters into compliance, including one guy who said he'd go along. I partially don't blame them, seeing as how they've been taught "tase early, tase often," but when the cops are defending the civilian outrage by trying to play an "us against them" mentality? Yeah. Tasers are fine, but the idea of their use and the way they are used are often completely out of sync.
|
|
|
Post by m52nickerson on Mar 29, 2009 11:05:02 GMT -5
Tasers defiantly should not be a first resort.
|
|
|
Post by antichrist on Mar 29, 2009 11:32:55 GMT -5
Tasers defiantly should not be a first resort. Well the RCMP have now decided that multiple tasering is a-Okay as far as they're concerned. Even though multiple tasering is what kills people. Or hits directly to the chest, which again is okay.
|
|
|
Post by schizophonic on Mar 29, 2009 16:11:51 GMT -5
Tasers defiantly should not be a first resort. Well the RCMP have now decided that multiple tasering is a-Okay as far as they're concerned. Even though multiple tasering is what kills people. Or hits directly to the chest, which again is okay. This is part of the big picture, too. Tasers have been heralded as sort of a wonder-drug cure-all. In this area, a lot of activist groups were pushing for the Police to have LTL alternatives. Now, these same people are protesting the cops because Tazers are being misused. Well, they got what they wished for. We rushed Tazers into the PD, there was no oversight or scrutiny, and now they're using them "incorrectly." I only use the quotes because Vermont tends to go overboard on protesting. I'd bet ten percent are legit claims. That's not to pretend that those ten percent should be ignored, it's just explaining why I'm skeptical. The point is, people wanted Tazers, now the same people don't. Why? Because they didn't think it through.
|
|
|
Post by dasfuchs on Apr 1, 2009 21:14:49 GMT -5
No he did not deserve to die, that is not what the cops were trying to do. If you start throwing furniture and then pick up anything any look like you are going to go after someone you deserve to get tased. Don't act like an ass. Perhaps they should have let this guy assault someone, or get a hit in on one of them so that cop could go home from doing his job with a staple in his head. Well isn't that good for you. Make sure you never call them if you need them. That's their JOB. What they get PAID to do. When people need help, they come. To serve and protect. Now, the problem is that doesn't give them the right to abuse their authority, but most of them do. Just as in any other profession, police officers should not automatically be put on a pedestal just because of their job title. It doesn't make them good people. I have a female co-worker named Jan, she is 48 and has 3 kids. Her oldest child is 23. His name is Danny and he has Autism, Downs Syndrome, and OCD. After the other, slightly younger kids were born, Jan's husband, a police officer, DUMPED her for another woman, and left her to raise the 3 kids by herself. Another co-worker of mine, a woman in her 50s named Nancy, has a son that is a police officer. He just dumped his wife for another woman, took the kids with him, and won't let Nancy see her grandkids because she doesn't like what he did. And are you honestly denying that the majority of police officers pursued the career because they have a fetish for expressing authority over people who can't question them? Police officers lie in court constantly, whenever it protects themselves, their departments, or helps the state's case. Seriously, just look at the Los Angeles Police Department for an obvious example. Oh, you bet, marital issues are a direct link to proving cops are fuckers, innit? Same as you don't like people being put on pedestals, I don't like an entire fucking profession put down because you have a stick crammed so far up your ass that it scratches your brain. I've had bad instances with being harassed and arrested falsely by cops, and i've also had times where they've been there to help me and even possibly save my life. By your standards everyone in the world is a shitbag because someone in their profession was a shitbag
|
|