To Protect and to Serve II

#7,401
#7,401
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
Hardly.
Click to expand...
Some out there need recorded, but I've watched plenty where the cops were doing nothing, and the person recording we're trying to make a scene on video. I know there are some Yahoo cops, but there's also some Yahoo people also.
 
#7,402
#7,402
joevol33 said:
Some out there need recorded, but I've watched plenty where the cops were doing nothing, and the person recording we're trying to make a scene on video. I know there are some Yahoo cops, but there's also some Yahoo people also.
Click to expand...
Always record every interaction with the cops. Never rely on their body cam footage, as we’ve seen they’ve been known to mysteriously cut off at the most critical time. People are people, a silly costume and a politicians scribble doesn’t change that.
 
#7,403
#7,403
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
Always record every interaction with the cops. Never rely on their body cam footage, as we’ve seen they’ve been known to mysteriously cut off at the most critical time. People are people, a silly costume and politicians scribble doesn’t change that.
Click to expand...
I get your point, and agree. I'm just saying that I'm not gonna go provoke a cop for likes on a video. I've seen those, and just think they're silly.
 
#7,404
#7,404
joevol33 said:
I get your point, and agree. I'm just saying that I'm not gonna go provoke a cop for likes on a video. I've seen those, and just think they're silly.
Click to expand...
Yeah, there are tons of those videos and I agree. It's hard to tell from this one. However, once they say he's not being detained and he walks off, they follow him. That makes it a little suspicious. They should have just left him alone at that point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: joevol33
#7,408
#7,408
davethevol said:
Click to expand...


Holy crap... The nerve of those officers to act as though they’re some kind of victims all because the (from all accounts outstanding) young man they pulled over, yanked out on the streets, handcuffed, and then fabricated a reason to violate his rights and search the car didn’t like what was happening to him. That is literally incomprehensible to me.

And then to sit there and bad mouth his mom like she’s some lying POS. What fantasy world are these imbeciles living in?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasputin_Vol and DEFENDTHISHOUSE
#7,409
#7,409
Also... Best quote from that video is at the end where the guy says there’s a difference in lawful policing and good policing.

And though not one bit of that incident was good policing, I’d argue that after the initial stop none of it even lawful. We didn’t make it a minute into the video before they started breaking law. They had absolutely zero reason to pull that kid out of the car and put him through all that. There’s absolutely no doubt that they planned on searching that car the minute they saw who was driving it.
 
#7,410
#7,410
Cdywolfe said:
Also... Best quote from that video is at the end where the guy says there’s a difference in lawful policing and good policing.
Click to expand...

And that is exactly what the cops and their defenders use whenever the cops find themselves in a ridiculous situation. They will say that their actions were "legal".
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cdywolfe
#7,411
#7,411
You want true constitutional policing? The cops should only protect life and property, that’s it. Everything else is an extortion racket.
 
#7,414
#7,414
lawgator1 said:
Define your terms.

If a person is driving while smoking pot and stoned, is arresting him not protecting lives?
Click to expand...
No. That’s called pre crime, counselor.

But of course since a simple plant is deemed illegal, partaking of that plant is a crime. Yay freedom!

Actual crimes have victims.
 
#7,418
#7,418
lawgator1 said:
That's absurd.
Click to expand...
No, it’s your superstition that’s absurd.
You believe that the alcohol content of someone’s blood should be a crime. I’m saying when the drunk driver actually commits a crime, you know, damages life or property, that’s his crime. The makeup of his blood has nothing to do with it.
 
#7,420
#7,420
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
No, it’s your superstition that’s absurd.
You believe that the alcohol content of someone’s blood should be a crime. I’m saying when the drunk driver actually commits a crime, you know, damages life or property, that’s his crime. The makeup of his blood has nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...
You’re on a island with that one friend
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, YankeeVol and RockyTop85
#7,421
#7,421
hndog609 said:
Here's more on the case.

Henry County Sheriff: Smell of pot escalated traffic stop in viral video

At best I find the explanation unsatisfying after watching the video. I might have missed it but I don't recall the smell of weed being brought up. If it wasn't then citing that as a reason after the fact seems...well a different kind of smell.
Click to expand...

If he smelled marijuana, he would have put her in cuffs too, so she couldn’t go toss it in the woods or eat it or shoot him with the gun that police assume is present when they smell marijuana. He definitely wouldn’t have been sending her back to the car repeatedly.

That said, the passenger was wrong. Most states and courts would hold that he was under an obligation to identify himself. By refusing to do so, he just made the officer suspect that he had warrants.

Her running around, refusing requests to return to the vehicle etc. was foolish and dangerous and probably a crime. A lot of officers would have felt threatened in that situation and been a lot more aggressive, like the younger guy that showed up and almost immediately took her to the ground.

I don’t watch these videos very often because they put out a lot of misinformation when they overdo it on what their rights are (which is almost always) and I end up thinking “is this really necessary?” Both sides almost always look like idiots in the end.

Also, the article says dude damaged their police cruiser by kicking it. Which is another common theme among these “hold my beer and watch this” type videos. The people trying to test the officer’s restraint almost always end up losing their cool before the officer does.

Was it worth arresting them for? Probably not. Was it worth getting arrested for? Definitely not. Just be calm, respectful, and professional, treat people like human beings, and don’t sweat the small stuff and life is a lot more enjoyable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
#7,422
#7,422
RockyTop85 said:
If he smelled marijuana, he would have put her in cuffs too, so she couldn’t go toss it in the woods or eat it or shoot him with the gun that police assume is present when they smell marijuana. He definitely wouldn’t have been sending her back to the car repeatedly.

That said, the passenger was wrong. Most states and courts would hold that he was under an obligation to identify himself. By refusing to do so, he just made the officer suspect that he had warrants.

Her running around, refusing requests to return to the vehicle etc. was foolish and dangerous and probably a crime. A lot of officers would have felt threatened in that situation and been a lot more aggressive, like the younger guy that showed up and almost immediately took her to the ground.

I don’t watch these videos very often because they put out a lot of misinformation when they overdo it on what their rights are (which is almost always) and I end up thinking “is this really necessary?” Both sides almost always look like idiots in the end.

Also, the article says dude damaged their police cruiser by kicking it. Which is another common theme among these “hold my beer and watch this” type videos. The people trying to test the officer’s restraint almost always end up losing their cool before the officer does.

Was it worth arresting them for? Probably not. Was it worth getting arrested for? Definitely not. Just be calm, respectful, and professional, treat people like human beings, and don’t sweat the small stuff and life is a lot more enjoyable.
Click to expand...

Always be submissive and compliant. 👍
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasputin_Vol
#7,423
#7,423
VolFaninFla said:
Always be submissive and compliant. 👍
Click to expand...

If you don’t know or care enough about your rights to know what they are and how and when to assert them, like these people? That’s your best bet. Also, because it’s pretty close to what your rights actually are.
 
#7,425
#7,425
RockyTop85 said:
If he smelled marijuana, he would have put her in cuffs too, so she couldn’t go toss it in the woods or eat it or shoot him with the gun that police assume is present when they smell marijuana. He definitely wouldn’t have been sending her back to the car repeatedly.

That said, the passenger was wrong. Most states and courts would hold that he was under an obligation to identify himself. By refusing to do so, he just made the officer suspect that he had warrants.

Her running around, refusing requests to return to the vehicle etc. was foolish and dangerous and probably a crime. A lot of officers would have felt threatened in that situation and been a lot more aggressive, like the younger guy that showed up and almost immediately took her to the ground.

I don’t watch these videos very often because they put out a lot of misinformation when they overdo it on what their rights are (which is almost always) and I end up thinking “is this really necessary?” Both sides almost always look like idiots in the end.

Also, the article says dude damaged their police cruiser by kicking it. Which is another common theme among these “hold my beer and watch this” type videos. The people trying to test the officer’s restraint almost always end up losing their cool before the officer does.

Was it worth arresting them for? Probably not. Was it worth getting arrested for? Definitely not. Just be calm, respectful, and professional, treat people like human beings, and don’t sweat the small stuff and life is a lot more enjoyable.
Click to expand...
Many states have said that their is no obligation to identify yourself unless you are suspected of a crime, and that being a passenger in a vehicle in which the driver has been pulled over for a driving infraction does not require the passengers to identify themselves. I know it’s different in each state.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top