There is no such thing in this state as a clear-cut right to resist arrest. There have been some notable case exceptions: police4aqi.wordpress.com/2012/06/24/pa-woman-is-allowed-to-resist-unlawful-arrest-2-2/
- Thread starter Veer_G
- Start date
There is no such thing in this state as a clear-cut right to resist arrest. There have been some notable case exceptions: police4aqi.wordpress.com/2012/06/24/pa-woman-is-allowed-to-resist-unlawful-arrest-2-2/
Too many rewinds on this movie with this douche bag crowd.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acdABwYJqks
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acdABwYJqks
Uhm, that didn't happen. It's a Movie.........
[video]http://i.imgur.com/LtH1TmB.gifv[/video]
Your point being?
I showed the video to my wife and the first thing she said was in our day (50's), we were taught to respect the Police. If that young lady had that training from home she would have had her father come collect her and been on here way. SHE chose to escalate the situation based upon her upbringing or lack thereof, and the rest is history. I can look at that video objectively and not bring in all the other current Police-Public situations and say, that girl got off easily. She should have got pepper sprayed or tasered. I hate to say it, but if that would have been a full sized boy, I think the results would have been a lot different.
The cop that approached her and initiated contact unsolicited is the one that escalated the situation. Mind your own goddam business unless you see a crime or someone reports a crime.
They were approached as a well being check because they appeared passed out in a car. Whether a cop was called there or observed it themselves in normal patrol, if it's ignored, that's a problem.
I can tell you that if I witness that and ignore it, im on a fast track to losing my job for failure to act. If that's your kid, it turns out it was a medical issue, they die and then you find out a public servant ignored what he saw and it could have been prevented, you'd change your tune.
Girlfriend, I sure hope the judge finds this link:
https://flipagram.com/lhuysman
She's 18 goin' on 45 year old crack ho.
https://flipagram.com/lhuysman
She's 18 goin' on 45 year old crack ho.
Where did ShartShits762 disappear to?
I miss him/her/it already.
I miss him/her/it already.
[IMG2=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","src":"https:\/\/pbs.twimg.com\/media\/CSStvyKVAAAczcg.jpg"}[/IMG2]
You're a mean, sick mofo Veer. Lol
In a previous post you stated that you have been frequenting other forums that believe the officer is at fault.
Dude your supposed to be trolling them, but I think you have Stockholm syndrome and have been brain washed by them.
So your sitting on a park bench, slumped over. From 20 ft away I can't tell if you are alive or dead. Sleeping or passed out. Drunk or on meth. And I walk over and ask you if you are ok. That then gives you the right to attack me because i started it. How about if I am have a badge and a uniform.
You are responsible for your actions and no one else.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/07/1...iates-crashes-into-house-authorities-say.html
Guess any cops who may have crossed this driver's path said "nothing to see here"...
Guess any cops who may have crossed this driver's path said "nothing to see here"...
#1 I only frequent this forum, and my motorcycle forums, I dont think I ever said I frequent any goddam thing except strip clubs and that was before there was an internet, so I think you are mis remembering. I only seen this story here on this site. You are a cop, why would you walk over to anyone that is not commiting a crime? As a civilian if you do that and get attacked and you feel like you are gonna get your ass kicked by that girl you should either run or defend yourself. As a cop its none of your dam business what people are doing unless they are commiting a crime, two different scenarios, one is an armed agent of the state the other is a fellow citizen.
Its funny how you think people are responsible for their actions yet you feel compelled to wake them up when they are taking a power nap, or passed out. How do you connect that?
Its funny how you think people are responsible for their actions yet you feel compelled to wake them up when they are taking a power nap, or passed out. How do you connect that?
Last edited:
Your 3rd post in this thread implies you have talked to others about this and other similar incidences. That you some how have your finger on the pulse of the public.
As for checking on someone who is slumped over it is called human compassion. I believe there are some college students right now on trial for having the level of compassion you posses and leaving a fellow student at the bottom of some stairs while he was taking a "power nap"
Do me and the rest of us a favor and when you leave your dwelling such as it may be. Don a hat that has "ArmyJerry" on the front so the rest of us know that you in particular require no assistance EVER.
Last edited:
"Mind your own goddam business unless you see a crime or someone reports a crime."
Jerry herein lies the divide between what it would seem your expectation for how a police officer should perform his/her job, and what we are actually tasked with. We don't just respond to crime after it has happened but if time or chance permits we really should be trying to catch it in the act.
This isn't anything as bold or futuristic like Tom Cruise in Minority Report but just plain old inquisitiveness.
Let's take impaired driving for instance seeing as it has some relation to the event that started this thread.
Your framework-wait until you see a crime or one is reported
In today's example lets say rather than driving around being inquisitive I sit parked under a tree doing Soduko puzzles until the radio broadcasts a serious MVI 2 miles away. I drive over and look what it is, Ms. Sleepy head dozed off at the wheel, crossed the center line and went head on into another vehicle killing the occupants. I fill out my accident report, throw a space blanket over the dead bodies and then drive over the the house of the people killed and do a next of kin notification to whats left of the family of the deceased-these are especially pleasant during the holiday season.
This is what is known as reactive policing-dealing with stuff after it has happened. Some departments are so busy or short staffed this model is the only one that is followed. Sometimes it's because cops are lazy and don't want to, or are afraid to go looking.
Option B, Proactive policing. I am driving around and see a running vehicle with what looks like occupants but slumped in their seats. I go over and have a look-hey a bunch of youth females all with eyes closed slumped back in the seats of a running vehicle with the headlights on and its 2:00 a.m. Nothing too crazy yet, I mean I've napped in a car at 2:00 a.m., of course that was parked, lights off, motor off in a rest stop on the interstate. So hopefully nothing is amiss but just to quickly confirm I knock on the side glass and attempt to rouse the occupants and just really check on them.
Remember when we drive a car on public roads it not just about our personal choices and freedoms, because we share the roads with other people who don't get a say if we decide to drive in manner that places them in danger. If i get drunk and get behind the wheel I am rolling the dice for everyone else who gets close to me and my car.
So, back to knocking on the window there are a few options here:
-Driver wakes up, is fine-have a nice night sorry to wake you I'm outta here and back to patrolling again
-Driver is in some sort of medical distress and requires help
-Driver is intoxicated/ability otherwise impaired and should not continue to drive.
I'm not sure what deprivation of one's liberty is caused by tapping on the window of a car, or how oppressive it is to ask someone if they are okay (my words not yours)
When it comes to operating a vehicle on public roads it is the cops goddam business because (and i hope this isn't too much of a leap) people want to be as safe as possible from impaired drivers and have given cops the common law duty and responsibility to try to reduce the number of drunks on the road. We sure won't stop them all but we should try to find a few.
You want to drive around on your property, on a private road that no one else is on, with shot glasses of tequila lined up on the dash, samurai swords taped to the steering wheel doing 100 mph on a figure 8 track-fill your boots. Go out on a public road and society has placed rules on all of our individual conduct. It's not too much to ask that when we drive, our primary activity and focus is on...well....driving
Jerry herein lies the divide between what it would seem your expectation for how a police officer should perform his/her job, and what we are actually tasked with. We don't just respond to crime after it has happened but if time or chance permits we really should be trying to catch it in the act.
This isn't anything as bold or futuristic like Tom Cruise in Minority Report but just plain old inquisitiveness.
Let's take impaired driving for instance seeing as it has some relation to the event that started this thread.
Your framework-wait until you see a crime or one is reported
In today's example lets say rather than driving around being inquisitive I sit parked under a tree doing Soduko puzzles until the radio broadcasts a serious MVI 2 miles away. I drive over and look what it is, Ms. Sleepy head dozed off at the wheel, crossed the center line and went head on into another vehicle killing the occupants. I fill out my accident report, throw a space blanket over the dead bodies and then drive over the the house of the people killed and do a next of kin notification to whats left of the family of the deceased-these are especially pleasant during the holiday season.
This is what is known as reactive policing-dealing with stuff after it has happened. Some departments are so busy or short staffed this model is the only one that is followed. Sometimes it's because cops are lazy and don't want to, or are afraid to go looking.
Option B, Proactive policing. I am driving around and see a running vehicle with what looks like occupants but slumped in their seats. I go over and have a look-hey a bunch of youth females all with eyes closed slumped back in the seats of a running vehicle with the headlights on and its 2:00 a.m. Nothing too crazy yet, I mean I've napped in a car at 2:00 a.m., of course that was parked, lights off, motor off in a rest stop on the interstate. So hopefully nothing is amiss but just to quickly confirm I knock on the side glass and attempt to rouse the occupants and just really check on them.
Remember when we drive a car on public roads it not just about our personal choices and freedoms, because we share the roads with other people who don't get a say if we decide to drive in manner that places them in danger. If i get drunk and get behind the wheel I am rolling the dice for everyone else who gets close to me and my car.
So, back to knocking on the window there are a few options here:
-Driver wakes up, is fine-have a nice night sorry to wake you I'm outta here and back to patrolling again
-Driver is in some sort of medical distress and requires help
-Driver is intoxicated/ability otherwise impaired and should not continue to drive.
I'm not sure what deprivation of one's liberty is caused by tapping on the window of a car, or how oppressive it is to ask someone if they are okay (my words not yours)
When it comes to operating a vehicle on public roads it is the cops goddam business because (and i hope this isn't too much of a leap) people want to be as safe as possible from impaired drivers and have given cops the common law duty and responsibility to try to reduce the number of drunks on the road. We sure won't stop them all but we should try to find a few.
You want to drive around on your property, on a private road that no one else is on, with shot glasses of tequila lined up on the dash, samurai swords taped to the steering wheel doing 100 mph on a figure 8 track-fill your boots. Go out on a public road and society has placed rules on all of our individual conduct. It's not too much to ask that when we drive, our primary activity and focus is on...well....driving
AJ, You know how I feel about personal liberty and non interference by authorities, but in this case I have to agree. As someone above said, whet if that individual was having a heart attack? To me, seeing somone slumped over the weel, at night, in a public parking lot, warrants at least an inquiry. It happend to me a couple years ago. I was driving home late at night and got sleep so pulled into a closed gas station to catch a couple minutes sleep, Cop just happened by and saw me. He didnt know me or my vehicle, parked in a public place so he walked over and asked if i were alright. I told him why I stopped and he said "Stay as long as you need, thanks for being responsible, have a good night." and drove away.
Sorry Mike I was busy taking your girl to a fancy restraunt called Sizzlers. How my dick taste?
Good for you and that is my exact point. Had she just said she needed some rest it would have been over. I also have been there Maggot. How the hell more blatant does it have to be that she kept escalating the situation.
She should have just kept driving her drunk or cracked out ass on the road til she got somewhere she wanted to be or killed someone instead of chancing a cop would come fk with her while she was napping. Lesson learned. And Mags, the 4th amendment is pretty explicit. My larger point here, the reaction of you guys when jackass bitches go off like this crack ho is the reaction that urns people against you and the police. You acn quibble with me all you want but you are losing support and militaristic tactics and "Proactive" (Intrusive) policing is the cause of it. You are viewed as armed agents of the government by a large and growing population and your tactics of the last 17 years will do you all in. I dont speak ill of cops on FB or around my friends and family, and not even here, if you think I am a cop basher you are immature and probably should not have a badge or a gun.I am sharing my observations based on a lot of what I read here and a bit on FB and regular news.
I dont think anyone realizes how many calls come in each day from travellers with cell phones reporting "A driver slumped over the wheel".
Should the police just ignore that and not respond to the call? Perhaps tell the caller to mind their own business?
This is Pavlik Morozov
or his statue anyway. I lived near this statue in Moscow.
Pavlik is a Stalin myth. He was a boy that turned in his own parents for violating the rules of collectivism.
His parents were sent to their deaths and his fellow villagers beat him to death when they learned what he did.
He is the myth of the perfect Soviet Child.
I was horrified by the thought of a child informing on his parents to the govt.
The way people call on their cell phones to report shit on the highway we have become a nation of Pavlik Morozovs.
The police could spend their entire day responding to cell phone reports.
Should the police just ignore that and not respond to the call? Perhaps tell the caller to mind their own business?
This is Pavlik Morozov
or his statue anyway. I lived near this statue in Moscow.
Pavlik is a Stalin myth. He was a boy that turned in his own parents for violating the rules of collectivism.
His parents were sent to their deaths and his fellow villagers beat him to death when they learned what he did.
He is the myth of the perfect Soviet Child.
I was horrified by the thought of a child informing on his parents to the govt.
The way people call on their cell phones to report shit on the highway we have become a nation of Pavlik Morozovs.
The police could spend their entire day responding to cell phone reports.
Jerry,
For sure, I hope the guys talking about using spray or a CEW on her for tossing the bong, or just her overall unsavoury and downright obnoxious behaviour are just having an inside voice moment. It's hard to see the dynamics of the struggle on a body cam but the bruises on her forearms are pretty typical stuff when you are trying to hang on to flailing arms. Agree that if it was me and I sprayed her or lit her up with a Taser for that then it would be indefensible on my part and I would be doing a slow roast for an internal, civil and criminal charges. And it further torpedoes the reputation of my profession and sets up my fellow officers for an attack by someone enraged by this.
I've dealt with nasty brats like her and I'm only human and just as prone as anyone to get mad. But I have to keep a lid on it or risk losing my job,house,pension and self respect. If she mule kicked me I have to do a few things, stop anymore kicks by controlling her feet and not letting her have another opportunity to kick me. Will I get mad for a minute, you bet but I'd better keep it in check. Is she going to be placed in a prone position and maybe have a leg strap, probably. If she's in cuffs can I hit her or spray her just because she pissed me off-no way.
Force is used to control a suspect, effect an arrest and to defend myself or others from harm. It's not a tool to punish, that's the courts job regardless what I think about thier efficacy.
Cel phone cameras await the day I lose my cool and nobody will give a damn about all the previous times I kept calm and professional in face of complete knobs. Not complaining about the injustice or hardship I accept it as part of the job and nobody said it would be easy.
For sure, I hope the guys talking about using spray or a CEW on her for tossing the bong, or just her overall unsavoury and downright obnoxious behaviour are just having an inside voice moment. It's hard to see the dynamics of the struggle on a body cam but the bruises on her forearms are pretty typical stuff when you are trying to hang on to flailing arms. Agree that if it was me and I sprayed her or lit her up with a Taser for that then it would be indefensible on my part and I would be doing a slow roast for an internal, civil and criminal charges. And it further torpedoes the reputation of my profession and sets up my fellow officers for an attack by someone enraged by this.
I've dealt with nasty brats like her and I'm only human and just as prone as anyone to get mad. But I have to keep a lid on it or risk losing my job,house,pension and self respect. If she mule kicked me I have to do a few things, stop anymore kicks by controlling her feet and not letting her have another opportunity to kick me. Will I get mad for a minute, you bet but I'd better keep it in check. Is she going to be placed in a prone position and maybe have a leg strap, probably. If she's in cuffs can I hit her or spray her just because she pissed me off-no way.
Force is used to control a suspect, effect an arrest and to defend myself or others from harm. It's not a tool to punish, that's the courts job regardless what I think about thier efficacy.
Cel phone cameras await the day I lose my cool and nobody will give a damn about all the previous times I kept calm and professional in face of complete knobs. Not complaining about the injustice or hardship I accept it as part of the job and nobody said it would be easy.
Last edited:
I don't think that we're acceding to a greater police stranglehold on civil liberties if we expect and allow them to satisfy their curiosity in this instance or one like it.
Three young people were asleep, or, more likely, passed out in a car in summer with a running engine at 0230 in a well-lit convenience store parking lot. Keeping warm wasn't a factor, and from personal experience I can tell you that most late nights in mid-summer in the Burlington area make for decent sleeping weather. There just wasn't anything there that didn't scream hincty to the cops. Let's say that they did nothing, and five minutes later little Logan decided to try to cart their asses off. What then? What if she had been impaired enough to T-bone some poor unfortunate? Without interaction, there would have been no assessment. Watch the videos on her Flipagram page. Smoking weed and drinking before, while, and after driving doesn't seem to be anything new to her. I'd much rather that the cops be proactive in such a situation where there's RAS for interaction, but at the same time they need to follow guidelines with some rigidity. That's where oversight and supervision come in, and it's everyone's business to keep them honest.
Three young people were asleep, or, more likely, passed out in a car in summer with a running engine at 0230 in a well-lit convenience store parking lot. Keeping warm wasn't a factor, and from personal experience I can tell you that most late nights in mid-summer in the Burlington area make for decent sleeping weather. There just wasn't anything there that didn't scream hincty to the cops. Let's say that they did nothing, and five minutes later little Logan decided to try to cart their asses off. What then? What if she had been impaired enough to T-bone some poor unfortunate? Without interaction, there would have been no assessment. Watch the videos on her Flipagram page. Smoking weed and drinking before, while, and after driving doesn't seem to be anything new to her. I'd much rather that the cops be proactive in such a situation where there's RAS for interaction, but at the same time they need to follow guidelines with some rigidity. That's where oversight and supervision come in, and it's everyone's business to keep them honest.
I also always try and play the worst scenario "what if" game. In this case, if I do nothing, then the driver could possibly crash killing themselves or someone else. I choose to take action (as they did in this case) and a possible drunk driver goes to jail. Let the courts decide if I'm right or if the driver was right. This officer had good probable cause to investigate why the driver and passengers were asleep. Probable cause is all that was needed then her stupid ass escalated it.
ya know, I hear what you guys are saying but understand, Joe or Jane public are also thinking "what if" and "worst case" scenario when they have unsolicited interactions with armed agents of the state that they do not wish to be having. Like it or not and believe it or not, public perception of Law Enforcement and Government and the Public's relation to such has changed and is continuing to change quickly, and not in your favor. The post 9/11 militarization to the barney fife departments has opened a lot of eyes and what they see scares them more than the threat by aluah akbar fkrs. You guys are fighting an insurgency for the mind and favor of the public, you should act accordingly.
Okay I can understand that and to some extent agree but keep in mind that if you were to talk with the rank and file of LE you would find that you and they are much closer in mind than you think, especially in regards to Constitutional matters.
To some extent what is happening is an effort to divide and conquer. Separate "Us" from "Them" whomever "Us" and "Them" are and each becomes easier to beat in turn.
Agree , it is an effort on the part of the enemies of our country and our constitution but some are playing into their hands and becoming unwitting accomplices, Many of my fellow riders are cops and you are correct. This is why its imperative that you guy understand you are in an war of insurgency and you are losing and losing faster and faster every day because you dont seems to react in a way that is needed to counter the other sides tactics.
academies do not get time to teach much Constitution. With everything else going on and budgets what they are they try to cover the most dangerous things and kind of operate on an understanding that the required education curriculum has provided a basic knowledge in Constitution.
Consider that most trainers at Academy may have been to school at some point prior to 1990 perhaps.
There is a big difference in Civics as taught pre 1990 and post 1990.
You have an apple thinking he is training an apple when in fact the seats are filled with oranges and they do not have the experience the apple is thinking they share.
Ask kids to day why there is a second amendment, ask if the first amendment guarantees safe spaces, ask what the limits of the 4th are...likely the only thing they will tell you is that the document is obviously outdated as evidence of the third.
Frequently young people express a Close the Door Behind Me in regards to gun ownership. "Okay for us to have" but "They can not be trusted with it". This goes up my ass and I love having those conversations because it is a fundamental failure to understand why and what brought about our Constitution.
Its not the result of ignorance on the part of the person that states it, its by design on the part of those that hate our Country.
Consider that most trainers at Academy may have been to school at some point prior to 1990 perhaps.
There is a big difference in Civics as taught pre 1990 and post 1990.
You have an apple thinking he is training an apple when in fact the seats are filled with oranges and they do not have the experience the apple is thinking they share.
Ask kids to day why there is a second amendment, ask if the first amendment guarantees safe spaces, ask what the limits of the 4th are...likely the only thing they will tell you is that the document is obviously outdated as evidence of the third.
Frequently young people express a Close the Door Behind Me in regards to gun ownership. "Okay for us to have" but "They can not be trusted with it". This goes up my ass and I love having those conversations because it is a fundamental failure to understand why and what brought about our Constitution.
Its not the result of ignorance on the part of the person that states it, its by design on the part of those that hate our Country.
ok. So let's assume that you're not totally anti cop as your posts sound. Let's also assume that you're put in charge of a police department and assume that you're willing to belt up and hit the streets.
Since you appear to have all the answers, what would you have done on a dispatch run of the unconscious people in a running vehicle? And how do you and your infinite wisdom suggest your police force change to start winning this "war"?
I just opened a bag of popcorn. This should be good.
That "close the door behind me" attitude might be because they think themselves to be the very most special of the special snowflakes. It doesn't inculcate a healthy respect for the populace. Attitudes have changed, but the basic tenets of the Constitution still apply, no matter how uncomfortable that may make some kids feel or how much they crave an overly authoritarian regime.
Its a lack of understanding "Hey that could be me".
all youth have it, its healthy as long as their actions only affect them.
Its a hazard when recklessness affects others.
What I learned from my time as a cop: no one wanted us around until they needed us, then they wanted us there immediately. No one wanted us to do anything that affected them, until they were the victim of that "hands off" mentality, then they wanted us to do everything in our power and a lot of things that were beyond it.
Despite Chicago's failed and broken politics, the cops could still maintain some level of order, until "stop and frisk" ended and the cops got screwed for proactive policing. I talk to CPD officers regularly, who all say the same thing: " we just drive on past all the gangbangers now, and come back for the murders " or some variation of that. Whereas they used to solve simple problems to prevent bigger problems, now they do what some of y'all are advocating: just drive on by. The violence in recent years up here isn't an accident. Nothing has changed in those neighborhoods but the "hands off" approach to policing.
Despite Chicago's failed and broken politics, the cops could still maintain some level of order, until "stop and frisk" ended and the cops got screwed for proactive policing. I talk to CPD officers regularly, who all say the same thing: " we just drive on past all the gangbangers now, and come back for the murders " or some variation of that. Whereas they used to solve simple problems to prevent bigger problems, now they do what some of y'all are advocating: just drive on by. The violence in recent years up here isn't an accident. Nothing has changed in those neighborhoods but the "hands off" approach to policing.
Slash I am 100% pro Constitution and Pro BOR, that makes me technically anti policing, but not anti cop. As far as your schtick about belting up, I have been an oil worker since I left the Army 30 years ago, belting up is nothing special, quite, cushy and safe actually, so drop the woe is me I have a tough Job act, being a cop is quite safe. Now to your hypothetical question. I would have drove by and made sure there wasn't any gunfire, or other apparent felonies going on and kept on driving if there weren't.
Yeah, it's only at no. 15 on the list. I guess they should go logging in their down time to even up the odds for you?
http://time.com/4326676/dangerous-jobs-america/
If you meet a cop off duty and ask him what he does for a living, most of them will typically say "I'm in sanitation" or something along those lines. There's a lot of parallels between the two professions.
Policing is a necessary component of capitalism.
Without policing we stay home with a subsistence living protecting our family and property.
With policing we "hire" the govt as collective security to "protect" your shit while you are away at the oil field.
The problem occurs when the agents of govt forget who it is they work for and why they were given the job.
Sure its scary when a cop with authority forgets that.
Its worse when our elected officials make that mistake.
The fish rots from the head down. We tried to apply a cure at the top but time will tell if it can cure the heavy rot below. This "establishment" cancer will not go easy.
Without policing we stay home with a subsistence living protecting our family and property.
With policing we "hire" the govt as collective security to "protect" your shit while you are away at the oil field.
The problem occurs when the agents of govt forget who it is they work for and why they were given the job.
Sure its scary when a cop with authority forgets that.
Its worse when our elected officials make that mistake.
The fish rots from the head down. We tried to apply a cure at the top but time will tell if it can cure the heavy rot below. This "establishment" cancer will not go easy.
I couldn't agree more. But therein lies the wrinkle: do you want the police to protect your property? Or to show up and take a report after the burglary? We stopped property crime, and in some cases violent crime, by investigating people's behavior BEFORE a crime had been reported. Any cop, anywhere, can give you specific instances of simple investigative interactions leading to disproportionate results up to and including the solving or prevention of murder.
I never lost lost sight of who paid my check, and felt it was my job to be proactive. If society speaks and says that they no longer support that approach, then they are saying they just want he police to show afterwards and do some paperwork. I'd have spent a LOT less time on the carpet if I'd done the minimum required and just "driven on by".
that would help VeerG, maybe the risk would even out with the heroic claims
I just about fucking give up. Fuck me running.
That is only one possible scenario, and based on what youve been taught it has to be.
I go even deeper than Jerry, I am 100% Declaration of Independence. Like Jerry I am anti excess policing not anti cop. As I said in another thread, on Nanny State, Too many cops is as bad or worse than not enough. How do we solve that?
If criminals knew that EVERY citizen was trained in self defense and use of a fire arm before they left high school, and expected to have one and be able to defend themselves, what do you think that would do o the home invasion, mugging, car jacking rate? It should plummet. Parasites prefer to prey on the weak and vulnerable. Even granny in the wheelchair can pull the trigger. Require it. If the citizen chooses not to use it, their problem.
So even from the right/conservative side, and the cops who think 'more policing' is the answer, youre creating weaker citizens and proliferating the nanny state. Strong, independent people founded and settled this country. The settlers didnt have a squad car around the corner...they took care of business.
So lets take a non toxic subject, former mayor Blumbag's shot at making 1,000,000 oz slurpies illegal. Of course all that shit is bad for you and needs to be curtailed, but my reading of the Constitution says they have every right to sell it. So do you violate the intent of the C and ban it (so it will go underground and create a criminal class you can now put in jail) or do you use plan 'B' and educate people to make their own wise decisions. They did it with tobacco and use plummeted.
Education or Enforcement. Think about it.
We need both but lets through more weight on education. Arent better educated better trained cops generally
better' cops. Tat holds true of the citizen as well.
And this is right on. Coppers are doing what the politicians what them to do. Those same politicians are hanging the coppers out to dry right this very moment, after they militarized and armed the shit out of every government agency and told them to keep the public in line. All while they shed crocodile tears every time a cop gets shot or a Joe Public Cop interaction results in a "he was such a good boy" death. If I was you guys I would enforce the law to the T with the politicians instead of a wink wink, especially Sheriffs who hold a huge amount of power in most states, more than any other agency, federal, state or local..
VeerG, you never give up, you are like a persistent little Lyme disease riddled deer tick buried deep in there,
Holy Moly, I used to log up in Montana and in Virginia. Had no idea I was in the most dangerous profession. I loved it.
We knew you was rugged, Maggot, but my God, that rugged?
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QgaRd4d8hOY" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
Similar threads
