To Protect and to Serve II

#5,826
#5,826
volbeast33 said:
I’m not arguing right or wrong but I will never understand why people want to fight back over minor issues like this.....you never win.... if you think you are wronged.... fight it legally after the fact.
Click to expand...

this case I agree with your stance. but if the cop lays hands on me, he gets asked once if I am under arrest or being detained, or else.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#5,829
#5,829
volbeast33 said:
I’m not arguing right or wrong but I will never understand why people want to fight back over minor issues like this.....you never win.... if you think you are wronged.... fight it legally after the fact.
Click to expand...

The common defense in here for cops is that it's a high pressure, tense situation and it's hard to make the perfect decision in the heat of the moment.

Can we offer that to civilians too?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#5,830
#5,830
MercyPercy said:
The common defense in here for cops is that it's a high pressure, tense situation and it's hard to make the perfect decision in the heat of the moment.

Can we offer that to civilians too?
Click to expand...

Sure if you want too.... I know when I was younger I ran from the police.... when they finally caught me.....drug me out of the car..... guns drawn....I kept my hands against the car and didn’t budge....it was all yes sir and no sir till it was over. I couldn’t imagine attempting to go about it the way most of these other citizens do.
 
#5,832
#5,832
MercyPercy said:
The common defense in here for cops is that it's a high pressure, tense situation and it's hard to make the perfect decision in the heat of the moment.

Can we offer that to civilians too?
Click to expand...

Had discussion at work about this. If we had buildings falling down every other day and the ASCE said, "Yeah, we have a few bad apples as civil engineers", would that be acceptable?
 
#5,833
#5,833
BearCat204 said:
People are really ballsy and think they are still online. The way things are, just makes sense to just keep your mouth shut and hands to yourself and bring it to court. Doesn't really matter who's wrong or right when you are laying on the ground dead.
Click to expand...

Well in this case, she'll probably be rich, not dead. Tax payer is the only one that loses.
 
#5,834
#5,834
Rasputin_Vol said:
Had discussion at work about this. If we had buildings falling down every other day and the ASCE said, "Yeah, we have a few bad apples as civil engineers", would that be acceptable?
Click to expand...

What is the answer? Nobody trusts the police to police themselves.....if a jury finds them not guilty then that jury is blinded by the badge....I’m sure if we bring in federal to police them then people will claim they are protecting the state.....what do you feel should be done?
 
#5,836
#5,836
LouderVol said:
nope. not worried about losing a fist fight. doesn't mean I am going to let someone do something to me I don't want them to.
Click to expand...

I understand what you’re saying but these ain’t Mensa candidates you’d be encountering. They don’t care who’s right or wrong in the heat of the moment, they will beat the **** out of you to achieve “compliance”. That’s how they’re trained and that’s what they’ll do.
 
#5,837
#5,837
LouderVol said:
nope. not worried about losing a fist fight. doesn't mean I am going to let someone do something to me I don't want them to.
Click to expand...

As soon as you strike an officer you lose. It isn't right but it's just the way it is and I don't see that changing.
 
#5,838
#5,838
DancingOutlaw said:
I understand what you’re saying but these ain’t Mensa candidates you’d be encountering. They don’t care who’s right or wrong in the heat of the moment, they will beat the **** out of you to achieve “compliance”. That’s how they’re trained and that’s what they’ll do.
Click to expand...

like I said if they are arresting me or whatever I am going along with it. not looking to start fights.
 
#5,839
#5,839
LouderVol said:
nope. not worried about losing a fist fight. doesn't mean I am going to let someone do something to me I don't want them to.
Click to expand...

Not exactly like you have a choice. They can literally pummel you into submission and all they have to do is say you were "resisting arrest", whatever that means. If need be they'll have 2 or 3 of their buddies hold you down while they administrator the beating. Otoh, if you so much as lay a pinky finger on him you're charged with assaulting a police officer.
 
#5,842
#5,842
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
kgw.com | Video shows police hitting homeless man as he says 'I am not resisting'
Click to expand...

This man is so obviously mentally ill and in the midst of a crisis. Instead of showing compassion and kindness, this piece of human s**t chose to continually slug the man in the head and face. There’s a special place in hell people for like that.

And again... That’s so odd that with 99% of cops being good that you had such a large collection of bad ones in one place. What are the odds?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#5,843
#5,843
Also... When are we gonna learn that tasking neanderthals with defusing situations involving the mentally ill is generally a terrible idea?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#5,846
#5,846
Supreme Court asked to shield Calif. deputy who killed 13-year-old carrying pellet gun

This can certainly open up the possibility of a slew of police shootings.


This week, the U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to shield the deputy from being sued by the parents of the boy on the grounds that no law "squarely governs" this situation and would have alerted the officer that shooting the teenager on the sidewalk amounted to the use of "excessive force."
Joined by several California law enforcement groups, Sonoma County's lawyers are urging the justices to "support the common sense proposition that officers need not wait for a gun to actually be leveled or pointed at them before responding with deadly force to protect themselves and the public."
 
#5,847
#5,847
VolFaninFla said:
Supreme Court asked to shield Calif. deputy who killed 13-year-old carrying pellet gun

This can certainly open up the possibility of a slew of police shootings.


This week, the U.S. Supreme Court is being asked to shield the deputy from being sued by the parents of the boy on the grounds that no law "squarely governs" this situation and would have alerted the officer that shooting the teenager on the sidewalk amounted to the use of "excessive force."
Joined by several California law enforcement groups, Sonoma County's lawyers are urging the justices to "support the common sense proposition that officers need not wait for a gun to actually be leveled or pointed at them before responding with deadly force to protect themselves and the public."
Click to expand...

There you have it folks... this is the kind of logic we are up against.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#5,850
#5,850
And why were they approached by the cop? Murder? Theft? Pedo or rape? No, open container...

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYQac758acw[/youtube]
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top