To Protect and to Serve II

#5,534
#5,534
Any of you guys seen this?

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxLtuL29GLM[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mITrIIOb6Oc[/youtube]
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#5,535
#5,535
Look how they use any BS law to their advantage. Profane language in front of his wife is "vulgar language in public"? Gimme a break.

This isn't just about the police. Every government agency will use any law they can and bend it to their advantage. Question every law, even ones that seem to be no-brainers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#5,536
#5,536
n_huffhines said:
Look how they use any BS law to their advantage. Profane language in front of his wife is "vulgar language in public"? Gimme a break.

This isn't just about the police. Every government agency will use any law they can and bend it to their advantage. Question every law, even ones that seem to be no-brainers.
Click to expand...

We don't agree often, but I agree with you 100% here.
 
#5,538
#5,538
GreyWolf1129 said:
The indiscriminate shooting of wildlife just because "it was in the way" never sat well with me.

You plan to eat it, shoot it. Otherwise, if it's not a threat, why would you mess with it?

Maybe that's just me. I've had to dispatch many a wounded deer at Deer -vs- Vehicle accidents.

I never took any pleasure in it.
Click to expand...

Couldn’t agree more. Needlessly killing a wild animal is cruel and I was raised to respect wild life. If you hunt it kill it cleanly and quickly, don’t let it suffer. If you’re not gonna eat it don’t hunt it.
 
#5,540
#5,540
NorthDallas40 said:
Couldn’t agree more. Needlessly killing a wild animal is cruel and I was raised to respect wild life. If you hunt it kill it cleanly and quickly, don’t let it suffer. If you’re not gonna eat it don’t hunt it.
Click to expand...

You're welcome to come kill and eat all the groundhogs you want.
 
#5,543
#5,543
Matt2496 said:
Any of you guys seen this?

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxLtuL29GLM[/youtube]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mITrIIOb6Oc[/youtube]
Click to expand...

On the one hand, obviously, these photographers were being provocative by photographing in front of the Y-12 entrance.

On the other hand, the guy that was in plain clothes actually carried on a decent human conversation and didn't see a need to use command presence to just have a normal interaction with these guys without escalating the situation.

Seems like when you give these guys a uniform and a gun, they feel like a super hero or something and feel like they need the to public to respekt dey authoritay...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#5,544
#5,544
Rasputin_Vol said:
On the one hand, obviously, these photographers were being provocative by photographing in front of the Y-12 entrance.

On the other hand, the guy that was in plain clothes actually carried on a decent human conversation and didn't see a need to use command presence to just have a normal interaction with these guys without escalating the situation.

Seems like when you give these guys a uniform and a gun, they feel like a super hero or something and feel like they need the to public to respekt dey authoritay...
Click to expand...

I’m going to agree on what I would think your stance would be on this.
I’m not sure there should have been a conversation at all. They weren’t in a restricted area (that I could see) and weren’t doing any illegal (that I noticed). Taking pictures in a public place in front of historical sites should result in a “meh” response from the police.
 
#5,545
#5,545
Orangeslice13 said:
I’m going to agree on what I would think your stance would be on this.
I’m not sure there should have been a conversation at all. They weren’t in a restricted area (that I could see) and weren’t doing any illegal (that I noticed). Taking pictures in a public place in front of historical sites should result in a “meh” response from the police.
Click to expand...

Again, they were being provocative... so even I would have expected some type of response. But it goes back to what I've said time and time again. What you and I would call a "meh" situation is quickly turned into a trumped up "vulgar, profane and indecent language" charge and a ridiculous exchange on the side of the road.
 
#5,548
#5,548
#5,549
#5,549
I'm listening to the podcast Criminology. Season 1 covers the Zodiac killer. Season 2 covers the Golden State killer. In BOTH cases, authorities confused reports from witnesses that the killer was a black man. When the Zodiac infamously killed the cab driver, a cop stopped the Zodiac on foot and asked him if he witnessed the murder and then moved on because he was mistakenly looking for a black man. Never caught the Zodiac.
 
#5,550
#5,550
n_huffhines said:
I'm listening to the podcast Criminology. Season 1 covers the Zodiac killer. Season 2 covers the Golden State killer. In BOTH cases, authorities confused reports from witnesses that the killer was a black man. When the Zodiac infamously killed the cab driver, a cop stopped the Zodiac on foot and asked him if he witnessed the murder and then moved on because he was mistakenly looking for a black man. Never caught the Zodiac.
Click to expand...

"The three witnesses watched the suspect from approximately 60 feet away as he wiped down the cab with a cloth after killing Stine. They called the police and described a white male, 25 to 30 years old, 5'8" to 5'9", stocky build, reddish-brown hair worn in a crew cut, heavy-rimmed glasses and dark clothing. They last saw him casually walking north on Cherry Street. Unfortunately, the police dispatcher mistakingly described the suspect as being a black male adult. As a result, when patrol officers Donald Fouke and Eric Zelms minutes later observed a white man walking east on Jackson Street, he was never stopped and questioned."

So your point is?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top