To Protect and to Serve II

#76
#76
Grand Vol said:
And therein lies the problem. It's easy to put a person on jury duty where a lawyer presents a case and proves beyond a doubt a person is guilty.

Slightly different situation where ordinary citizens are placed into a role of making determinations on life and what could be construed as "excessive." And you still would end up with biased opinions in the end.

I'd actually say a panel of maybe a couple of (neutral) lawyers, perhaps a retired LEO (or a suitable SME) and fill it out with a couple of citizens.
Click to expand...

I'd be ok with that. Although, the truly egregious would be plainly obvious, the Kelly Thomas beating for example. Those officers are still on duty.
 
#77
#77
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
I'd be ok with that. Although, the truly egregious would be plainly obvious, the Kelly Thomas beating for example. Those officers are still on duty.
Click to expand...

True, but again, you'd end up with a whole slew of complaints which would take a lot of time to go through. Do the officers still work while the complaint process is ongoing?
 
#79
#79
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
What about those like me, who don't believe in the political process? Am I subject to the whims of others? Whims that greatly affect my life? I want to live in peace, I harm no one, I defraud no one. Yet, I'm robbed daily. If I don't follow some completely arbitrary law, I can be kidnapped, and if I resist this kidnapping, I'll be murdered as an end result of your political process.

What you're implying is mob rule. I hope you realize that.
Click to expand...

I'm implying the exact opposite. I support rule by law not by the whims of men.

If you don't want to work within the system I also support your God given right to revolt.
 
#81
#81
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
It's not vague lol
If there is no victim, there is no crime.
Click to expand...

What about prostitution? Isn't that a "victimless" crime? And yet how many young girls are taken into that particular vice each and every year and kept there? I'm not talking about professional escorts, but your run of the mill street hooker that a pimp feeds drugs (yet another victimless crime) and keeps her in that job.

Yes, the term is vague. And whether or not you agree, there needs to be clear cut guidance on the matter. I mean, technically, bank fraud is a victimless crime since the people's money is insured, so should they go free?

DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
The war on drugs is simply a war on people. Vices are not crimes.
Click to expand...

Again, mixed opinions.
 
#82
#82
hog88 said:
I'm implying the exact opposite. I support rule by law not by the whims of men.

If you don't want to work within the system I also support your God given right to revolt.
Click to expand...

Hog, the rule by law is the whims of men. There is only one way to truly define what a crime is, that's damage to persons or property. Anything more than that becomes a power grab. Vices are not crimes.
 
#83
#83
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
Depending on the severity I would say.
Click to expand...

The clear cut ones sure, relieved until the panel rules or the case goes to court.

But you can ask any of the cops on here how many excessive force complaints are registered by the general public. And how many turn out to be utter BS.
 
#84
#84
Grand Vol said:
What about prostitution? Isn't that a "victimless" crime? And yet how many young girls are taken into that particular vice each and every year and kept there? I'm not talking about professional escorts, but your run of the mill street hooker that a pimp feeds drugs (yet another victimless crime) and keeps her in that job.

Yes, the term is vague. And whether or not you agree, there needs to be clear cut guidance on the matter. I mean, technically, bank fraud is a victimless crime since the people's money is insured, so should they go free?



Again, mixed opinions.
Click to expand...

It's simple, the first thing to ask in each case is, who is the property owner? Were their rights as a property owner violated by an aggressor? Then go from there.

As far as prostitution is concerned, I have no problem with it. But, when the pimp becomes violent to the person or property of the sex seller, that becomes a crime. Not prostitution or being a pimp mind you, but the actions of the pimp by using force to make her stay under his "guidance" for lack of a better word lol

Bank fraud? Theft is theft, doesn't matter if the money is insured, that would damage the insurance company. So they would be a victim.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#85
#85
Grand Vol said:
The clear cut ones sure, relieved until the panel rules or the case goes to court.

But you can ask any of the cops on here how many excessive force complaints are registered by the general public. And how many turn out to be utter BS.
Click to expand...

If it's utter bs, I'm sure it will be proven to be. After all, we are working within the system here. As I'm so fond of hearing, the system makes mistakes.

You'd also have to take the officers track record into account, as well as the person making the complaint.
 
#86
#86
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
Why? Who said they were criminals? They haven't been to court yet.
Click to expand...

Bc in a profession like police where force is a common occurrence there has to be a gray area or the police will not be able to do their jobs.... Ok accusations by individuals accused of a crime.
 
#87
#87
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
Bank fraud? Theft is theft, doesn't matter if the money is insured, that would damage the insurance company. So they would be a victim.
Click to expand...

I was actually referring to the government insuring the money.

And I know how much you'd love to say the government was a victim.

C'mon, say it once.
 
#88
#88
Grand Vol said:
I was actually referring to the government insuring the money.

And I know how much you'd love to say the government was a victim.

C'mon, say it once.
Click to expand...

I can't. The government doesn't have any money of its own. So the original crime would be taxation.
 
#90
#90
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
If it's utter bs, I'm sure it will be proven to be. After all, we are working within the system here. As I'm so fond of hearing, the system makes mistakes.

You'd also have to take the officers track record into account, as well as the person making the complaint.
Click to expand...

So let's go back to the handcuffing analogy I made a few posts ago. If a person decided to rub their wrists raw or twist their hands to create bruises as if the cuffs were applied to forcefully, who's side is right or wrong? You go into a he said/she said situation where there is no clear "victim" of excessive force.

Obviously body cams/car cams are a huge tool in helping in this regard and clear cut instances of excessive force (such as Charleston) should be dealt with within the judicial system. But again, you have to realize just how many times excessive force is cried when it is nowhere near that level. And while we have a definition of "objective reasonableness" what's objective and reasonable to me certainly won't be to others. Just poke through the previous thread to see some examples of how some see any use of force as unreasonable.
 
#92
#92
Grand Vol said:
So let's go back to the handcuffing analogy I made a few posts ago. If a person decided to rub their wrists raw or twist their hands to create bruises as if the cuffs were applied to forcefully, who's side is right or wrong? You go into a he said/she said situation where there is no clear "victim" of excessive force.

Obviously body cams/car cams are a huge tool in helping in this regard and clear cut instances of excessive force (such as Charleston) should be dealt with within the judicial system. But again, you have to realize just how many times excessive force is cried when it is nowhere near that level. And while we have a definition of "objective reasonableness" what's objective and reasonable to me certainly won't be to others. Just poke through the previous thread to see some examples of how some see any use of force as unreasonable.
Click to expand...

Then perhaps we should leave the review board to the truly egregious? I realize some people come up with some truly frivolous claims, that's the natural result of preventive policing.
If we just eliminate the drug war, I would bet everything I have that crime would plummet.

I love the fact that filming the cops has become so mainstream. Now, if we can just get filming politicians into the mainstream, we'd be golden. Lol
 
#93
#93
Grand Vol said:
Just try it on for size.



Just say it. You know you want to.
Click to expand...

Just for kicks I looked up the fdic and found this nugget lol

"FDIC insurance is backed by the full faith and credit of the United States government. Since the FDIC was established in 1933, no depositor has lost a penny of FDIC-insured funds."

https://www.fdic.gov/deposit/deposits/

I'll admit to this, the government would have a claim as victim If we ignore where they initially stole the money from the citizenry. Happy?
 
Last edited:
#94
#94
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
Then perhaps we should leave the review board to the truly egregious? I realize some people come up with some truly frivolous claims, that's the natural result of preventive policing.
If we just eliminate the drug war, I would bet everything I have that crime would plummet.

I love the fact that filming the cops has become so mainstream. Now, if we can just get filming politicians into the mainstream, we'd be golden. Lol
Click to expand...

Basically, you understand where I'm coming from in the original point that "harm" is too vague. I think the grand jury hearing of serious offenses can work, though not everyone will agree with the decision(s) that are made. Which is the main problem and people are going to get crazy when they don't like the decision.
 
#95
#95
Grand Vol said:
Basically, you understand where I'm coming from in the original point that "harm" is too vague. I think the grand jury hearing of serious offenses can work, though not everyone will agree with the decision(s) that are made. Which is the main problem and people are going to get crazy when they don't like the decision.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I understand. Trying to fix the current system within the confines of the current system is impossible. As I opened with, you can't fix government with government. I do think the solutions I came up with, as well as your add in's would "help" greatly though.

The only true solution is privatization IMO.

What did you think of my incentive program? Lol
 
#96
#96
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
The only true solution is privatization IMO.
Click to expand...

Completely disagree.

DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
What did you think of my incentive program? Lol
Click to expand...

I think LEOs do a lot more help than they will ever get credit for. Just this morning I saw a Trooper on the side of I240 helping someone change their tire. They obviously could have said "screw it, not my problem" but got out in the 34 degree rain and tossed the driver back into the car to do it themselves. Small acts like that aren't necessary, but are one of the countless acts day to day they perform that never get noticed.
 
#97
#97
Grand Vol said:
Completely disagree.



I think LEOs do a lot more help than they will ever get credit for. Just this morning I saw a Trooper on the side of I240 helping someone change their tire. They obviously could have said "screw it, not my problem" but got out in the 34 degree rain and tossed the driver back into the car to do it themselves. Small acts like that aren't necessary, but are one of the countless acts day to day they perform that never get noticed.
Click to expand...

They also go a long way towards public perception. Most folks when they see a cop, the initial reaction is panic and fear. Me personally, I feel as if I'm about to be captured.
But, I know how to deal with cops, assert your rights and have a command presence and most tend to leave you alone.

Eventually this country will have to come to a point that a complete overhaul of the criminal code will happen. That will be a dangerous time as the government will be losing a large chunk of revenue. They will have to make up for it somehow. Ahem taxation...
 
#98
#98
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
They also go a long way towards public perception. Most folks when they see a cop, the initial reaction is panic and fear. Me personally, I feel as if I'm about to be captured.
But, I know how to deal with cops, assert your rights and have a command presence and most tend to leave you alone.

Eventually this country will have to come to a point that a complete overhaul of the criminal code will happen. That will be a dangerous time as the government will be losing a large chunk of revenue. They will have to make up for it somehow. Ahem taxation...
Click to expand...

No...
 
#100
#100
DEFENDTHISHOUSE said:
If you polled 100 people and asked them, how do you feel when a cop gets behind you in traffic. I'm sure you'd see some interesting results.
Click to expand...

I don't give one single F.

It's only annoying when other drivers are afraid to even do the speed limit or back up behind a cop.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top