Posted by MikeT23 on 9/1/2014 1:01:00 PM (view original):
This appears to be a standard BL argument.

Everyone says:  Yes, police officers should behave properly.   But don't count on it.  If they make a reasonable request, like "Get out of the road" or "Show me some identification", just do it.

BL says:  But he was within his rights to refuse.

Everyone:  Yes, he sure was.  However, getting shot or tasered when you're within your rights is still a bad thing.   Comply with a simple request and avoid a confrontation.

BL:  Yeah but the police officer didn't have to do that.

Everyone:  Correct, he did not.   But, by simply showing some ID, the whole situation is diffused.

BL:  Yeah but he was within his rights to refuse.

And the thread goes another 30 pages with everyone repeating themselves.

Good point. 'Nuff said.

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 1:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 12:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 12:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 11:16:00 AM (view original):
So that's what you want, total compliance with all police requests, right or wrong. Interesting.

Yes - compliance. They are police officers and good citizens that are doing nothing wrong comply. Its not like they asked Minnesota man to hop on one leg, pat his head with one hand, and rub his belly with the other. They simply asked him to show ID and he escalated the situation to the point the officers tased and arrested him. It was all avoidable had he complied in the first place. He would have been home with his kids.

And what if they had asked him to hop on one leg? Or take off his clothes? Or promise to follow the laws of Islam?

He should just comply right? And then deal with it in court? Because, obviously, refusing to comply will lead to the cops tasing and arresting him, since they aren't capable of discretion. Any refusal is met with force since, you know, they're cops and they can't control themselves.

Comply. Get out of the situation and hire an attorney. It would be front page news.

Bullshit. Cops need to do a better job.

You're one ******* stubborn person, aren't you?

Nobody is arguing that the officer in question is in the right.  But the reality here (something you seem to have trouble understanding or accepting) is that by NOT complying at the time the (illegal/unreasonable/whatever) request is made, you're inviting a shitload of trouble, possibly bodily harm.

Why would you bring that upon yourself?

The time to "fight" is after the fact, with a complaint, a lawyer, a lawsuit, etc.

If the cop IS out of control, he's likely to face and deal with the consequences of his actions.  You win, he loses.  You don't get hurt.

Is that such a difficult concept for you to understand?

Apparently it is.

Posted by tecwrg on 9/1/2014 1:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 1:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 12:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 12:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 11:16:00 AM (view original):
So that's what you want, total compliance with all police requests, right or wrong. Interesting.

Yes - compliance. They are police officers and good citizens that are doing nothing wrong comply. Its not like they asked Minnesota man to hop on one leg, pat his head with one hand, and rub his belly with the other. They simply asked him to show ID and he escalated the situation to the point the officers tased and arrested him. It was all avoidable had he complied in the first place. He would have been home with his kids.

And what if they had asked him to hop on one leg? Or take off his clothes? Or promise to follow the laws of Islam?

He should just comply right? And then deal with it in court? Because, obviously, refusing to comply will lead to the cops tasing and arresting him, since they aren't capable of discretion. Any refusal is met with force since, you know, they're cops and they can't control themselves.

Comply. Get out of the situation and hire an attorney. It would be front page news.

Bullshit. Cops need to do a better job.

You're one ******* stubborn person, aren't you?

Nobody is arguing that the officer in question is in the right.  But the reality here (something you seem to have trouble understanding or accepting) is that by NOT complying at the time the (illegal/unreasonable/whatever) request is made, you're inviting a shitload of trouble, possibly bodily harm.

Why would you bring that upon yourself?

The time to "fight" is after the fact, with a complaint, a lawyer, a lawsuit, etc.

If the cop IS out of control, he's likely to face and deal with the consequences of his actions.  You win, he loses.  You don't get hurt.

Is that such a difficult concept for you to understand?

Are you retarded? Of course I understand that. My entire point is that that shouldn't be acceptable. Police need to be held accountable.

Instead of us saying, "dude shouldn't have done that," we should be saying, "the police shouldn't have done that."

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 1:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/1/2014 1:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 1:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 12:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 12:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 11:16:00 AM (view original):
So that's what you want, total compliance with all police requests, right or wrong. Interesting.

Yes - compliance. They are police officers and good citizens that are doing nothing wrong comply. Its not like they asked Minnesota man to hop on one leg, pat his head with one hand, and rub his belly with the other. They simply asked him to show ID and he escalated the situation to the point the officers tased and arrested him. It was all avoidable had he complied in the first place. He would have been home with his kids.

And what if they had asked him to hop on one leg? Or take off his clothes? Or promise to follow the laws of Islam?

He should just comply right? And then deal with it in court? Because, obviously, refusing to comply will lead to the cops tasing and arresting him, since they aren't capable of discretion. Any refusal is met with force since, you know, they're cops and they can't control themselves.

Comply. Get out of the situation and hire an attorney. It would be front page news.

Bullshit. Cops need to do a better job.

You're one ******* stubborn person, aren't you?

Nobody is arguing that the officer in question is in the right.  But the reality here (something you seem to have trouble understanding or accepting) is that by NOT complying at the time the (illegal/unreasonable/whatever) request is made, you're inviting a shitload of trouble, possibly bodily harm.

Why would you bring that upon yourself?

The time to "fight" is after the fact, with a complaint, a lawyer, a lawsuit, etc.

If the cop IS out of control, he's likely to face and deal with the consequences of his actions.  You win, he loses.  You don't get hurt.

Is that such a difficult concept for you to understand?

Are you retarded? Of course I understand that. My entire point is that that shouldn't be acceptable. Police need to be held accountable.

Instead of us saying, "dude shouldn't have done that," we should be saying, "the police shouldn't have done that."

I think I speak for us all when I say its not an either/or thing in our opinion. We are saying BOTH "dude shouldn't have done that" AND "the police shouldn't have done that."

There is accountabilty - The cop that waved his gun into the crowd and told them he would f*ing kill them was fired. That was unacceptable - We can all agree. I would think firing the guy would be holding him accountable for his actions? Did you want him hanged? Stoned to death? Geez.

If Michael brown was killed in cold blood then Darren Wilson will go to jail. Isn't that being held accountable?

None of that takes back the tasing Minnesota Man got or the 6 bullets Michael Brown succumbed to. Both these men could have helped their situation with better decisions on THEIR part.

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 1:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/1/2014 1:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 1:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 12:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 12:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 11:16:00 AM (view original):
So that's what you want, total compliance with all police requests, right or wrong. Interesting.

Yes - compliance. They are police officers and good citizens that are doing nothing wrong comply. Its not like they asked Minnesota man to hop on one leg, pat his head with one hand, and rub his belly with the other. They simply asked him to show ID and he escalated the situation to the point the officers tased and arrested him. It was all avoidable had he complied in the first place. He would have been home with his kids.

And what if they had asked him to hop on one leg? Or take off his clothes? Or promise to follow the laws of Islam?

He should just comply right? And then deal with it in court? Because, obviously, refusing to comply will lead to the cops tasing and arresting him, since they aren't capable of discretion. Any refusal is met with force since, you know, they're cops and they can't control themselves.

Comply. Get out of the situation and hire an attorney. It would be front page news.

Bullshit. Cops need to do a better job.

You're one ******* stubborn person, aren't you?

Nobody is arguing that the officer in question is in the right.  But the reality here (something you seem to have trouble understanding or accepting) is that by NOT complying at the time the (illegal/unreasonable/whatever) request is made, you're inviting a shitload of trouble, possibly bodily harm.

Why would you bring that upon yourself?

The time to "fight" is after the fact, with a complaint, a lawyer, a lawsuit, etc.

If the cop IS out of control, he's likely to face and deal with the consequences of his actions.  You win, he loses.  You don't get hurt.

Is that such a difficult concept for you to understand?

Are you retarded? Of course I understand that. My entire point is that that shouldn't be acceptable. Police need to be held accountable.

Instead of us saying, "dude shouldn't have done that," we should be saying, "the police shouldn't have done that."

I believe you're the one who may be retarded if you think that anybody is saying the the police should not be held accountable.

Maybe we should have a show of hands for those who think the police should have carte blanche when dealing with the general public.

I assume, after no one raises their hands, that we can then begin to argue if the general public can help/hurt itself when dealing with the police.

Man, this thread was fun 10 pages ago

Thanks BL

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 2:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 1:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/1/2014 1:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 1:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 12:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 12:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 11:16:00 AM (view original):
So that's what you want, total compliance with all police requests, right or wrong. Interesting.

Yes - compliance. They are police officers and good citizens that are doing nothing wrong comply. Its not like they asked Minnesota man to hop on one leg, pat his head with one hand, and rub his belly with the other. They simply asked him to show ID and he escalated the situation to the point the officers tased and arrested him. It was all avoidable had he complied in the first place. He would have been home with his kids.

And what if they had asked him to hop on one leg? Or take off his clothes? Or promise to follow the laws of Islam?

He should just comply right? And then deal with it in court? Because, obviously, refusing to comply will lead to the cops tasing and arresting him, since they aren't capable of discretion. Any refusal is met with force since, you know, they're cops and they can't control themselves.

Comply. Get out of the situation and hire an attorney. It would be front page news.

Bullshit. Cops need to do a better job.

You're one ******* stubborn person, aren't you?

Nobody is arguing that the officer in question is in the right.  But the reality here (something you seem to have trouble understanding or accepting) is that by NOT complying at the time the (illegal/unreasonable/whatever) request is made, you're inviting a shitload of trouble, possibly bodily harm.

Why would you bring that upon yourself?

The time to "fight" is after the fact, with a complaint, a lawyer, a lawsuit, etc.

If the cop IS out of control, he's likely to face and deal with the consequences of his actions.  You win, he loses.  You don't get hurt.

Is that such a difficult concept for you to understand?

Are you retarded? Of course I understand that. My entire point is that that shouldn't be acceptable. Police need to be held accountable.

Instead of us saying, "dude shouldn't have done that," we should be saying, "the police shouldn't have done that."

I think I speak for us all when I say its not an either/or thing in our opinion. We are saying BOTH "dude shouldn't have done that" AND "the police shouldn't have done that."

There is accountabilty - The cop that waved his gun into the crowd and told them he would f*ing kill them was fired. That was unacceptable - We can all agree. I would think firing the guy would be holding him accountable for his actions? Did you want him hanged? Stoned to death? Geez.

If Michael brown was killed in cold blood then Darren Wilson will go to jail. Isn't that being held accountable?

None of that takes back the tasing Minnesota Man got or the 6 bullets Michael Brown succumbed to. Both these men could have helped their situation with better decisions on THEIR part.

You know, you're probably right. I'm sure if I go back a few pages, to where Taint originally brought up the story of the guy in Minnesota, I'll see a bunch of posts from you and tec talking about how wrong the police were and how messed up the entire situations is. I definitely won't see you and him blaming the guy who got arrested.

Again, obviously this guy's day would have been better had he just produced his ID. But that's beside the point. He shouldn't have to. The punishment for legally exercising your rights shouldn't be arrest.

Us saying, "yeah, well, what did he expect," is total bullshit. He should have expected to be able to go on about his day without being arrested.

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 5:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 2:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 1:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/1/2014 1:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 1:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 12:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 12:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 11:16:00 AM (view original):
So that's what you want, total compliance with all police requests, right or wrong. Interesting.

Yes - compliance. They are police officers and good citizens that are doing nothing wrong comply. Its not like they asked Minnesota man to hop on one leg, pat his head with one hand, and rub his belly with the other. They simply asked him to show ID and he escalated the situation to the point the officers tased and arrested him. It was all avoidable had he complied in the first place. He would have been home with his kids.

And what if they had asked him to hop on one leg? Or take off his clothes? Or promise to follow the laws of Islam?

He should just comply right? And then deal with it in court? Because, obviously, refusing to comply will lead to the cops tasing and arresting him, since they aren't capable of discretion. Any refusal is met with force since, you know, they're cops and they can't control themselves.

Comply. Get out of the situation and hire an attorney. It would be front page news.

Bullshit. Cops need to do a better job.

You're one ******* stubborn person, aren't you?

Nobody is arguing that the officer in question is in the right.  But the reality here (something you seem to have trouble understanding or accepting) is that by NOT complying at the time the (illegal/unreasonable/whatever) request is made, you're inviting a shitload of trouble, possibly bodily harm.

Why would you bring that upon yourself?

The time to "fight" is after the fact, with a complaint, a lawyer, a lawsuit, etc.

If the cop IS out of control, he's likely to face and deal with the consequences of his actions.  You win, he loses.  You don't get hurt.

Is that such a difficult concept for you to understand?

Are you retarded? Of course I understand that. My entire point is that that shouldn't be acceptable. Police need to be held accountable.

Instead of us saying, "dude shouldn't have done that," we should be saying, "the police shouldn't have done that."

I think I speak for us all when I say its not an either/or thing in our opinion. We are saying BOTH "dude shouldn't have done that" AND "the police shouldn't have done that."

There is accountabilty - The cop that waved his gun into the crowd and told them he would f*ing kill them was fired. That was unacceptable - We can all agree. I would think firing the guy would be holding him accountable for his actions? Did you want him hanged? Stoned to death? Geez.

If Michael brown was killed in cold blood then Darren Wilson will go to jail. Isn't that being held accountable?

None of that takes back the tasing Minnesota Man got or the 6 bullets Michael Brown succumbed to. Both these men could have helped their situation with better decisions on THEIR part.

You know, you're probably right. I'm sure if I go back a few pages, to where Taint originally brought up the story of the guy in Minnesota, I'll see a bunch of posts from you and tec talking about how wrong the police were and how messed up the entire situations is. I definitely won't see you and him blaming the guy who got arrested.

Again, obviously this guy's day would have been better had he just produced his ID. But that's beside the point. He shouldn't have to. The punishment for legally exercising your rights shouldn't be arrest.

Us saying, "yeah, well, what did he expect," is total bullshit. He should have expected to be able to go on about his day without being arrested.

He was arrested for trespassing and disorderly conduct. NOT for legally exercising his rights. The way he handled the situation sealed the deal. I watched the video... My advice - It's best to not pretend you know the cops job better than they do... And to not call them racist.

LOL.    Zapped, cuffed and hauled off just so you can exercise your right to not produce identification.    Big win for knowing your rights.  Big win. 

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 5:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 5:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 2:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 1:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/1/2014 1:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 1:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 12:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 12:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 11:16:00 AM (view original):
So that's what you want, total compliance with all police requests, right or wrong. Interesting.

Yes - compliance. They are police officers and good citizens that are doing nothing wrong comply. Its not like they asked Minnesota man to hop on one leg, pat his head with one hand, and rub his belly with the other. They simply asked him to show ID and he escalated the situation to the point the officers tased and arrested him. It was all avoidable had he complied in the first place. He would have been home with his kids.

And what if they had asked him to hop on one leg? Or take off his clothes? Or promise to follow the laws of Islam?

He should just comply right? And then deal with it in court? Because, obviously, refusing to comply will lead to the cops tasing and arresting him, since they aren't capable of discretion. Any refusal is met with force since, you know, they're cops and they can't control themselves.

Comply. Get out of the situation and hire an attorney. It would be front page news.

Bullshit. Cops need to do a better job.

You're one ******* stubborn person, aren't you?

Nobody is arguing that the officer in question is in the right.  But the reality here (something you seem to have trouble understanding or accepting) is that by NOT complying at the time the (illegal/unreasonable/whatever) request is made, you're inviting a shitload of trouble, possibly bodily harm.

Why would you bring that upon yourself?

The time to "fight" is after the fact, with a complaint, a lawyer, a lawsuit, etc.

If the cop IS out of control, he's likely to face and deal with the consequences of his actions.  You win, he loses.  You don't get hurt.

Is that such a difficult concept for you to understand?

Are you retarded? Of course I understand that. My entire point is that that shouldn't be acceptable. Police need to be held accountable.

Instead of us saying, "dude shouldn't have done that," we should be saying, "the police shouldn't have done that."

I think I speak for us all when I say its not an either/or thing in our opinion. We are saying BOTH "dude shouldn't have done that" AND "the police shouldn't have done that."

There is accountabilty - The cop that waved his gun into the crowd and told them he would f*ing kill them was fired. That was unacceptable - We can all agree. I would think firing the guy would be holding him accountable for his actions? Did you want him hanged? Stoned to death? Geez.

If Michael brown was killed in cold blood then Darren Wilson will go to jail. Isn't that being held accountable?

None of that takes back the tasing Minnesota Man got or the 6 bullets Michael Brown succumbed to. Both these men could have helped their situation with better decisions on THEIR part.

You know, you're probably right. I'm sure if I go back a few pages, to where Taint originally brought up the story of the guy in Minnesota, I'll see a bunch of posts from you and tec talking about how wrong the police were and how messed up the entire situations is. I definitely won't see you and him blaming the guy who got arrested.

Again, obviously this guy's day would have been better had he just produced his ID. But that's beside the point. He shouldn't have to. The punishment for legally exercising your rights shouldn't be arrest.

Us saying, "yeah, well, what did he expect," is total bullshit. He should have expected to be able to go on about his day without being arrested.

He was arrested for trespassing and disorderly conduct. NOT for legally exercising his rights. The way he handled the situation sealed the deal. I watched the video... My advice - It's best to not pretend you know the cops job better than they do... And to not call them racist.

So your argument is, what, that he still would have been arrested had he shown his ID?

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 7:08:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 5:42:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 5:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 2:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 1:26:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tecwrg on 9/1/2014 1:12:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 1:01:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 12:55:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 12:53:00 PM (view original):

Posted by moy23 on 9/1/2014 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/1/2014 11:16:00 AM (view original):
So that's what you want, total compliance with all police requests, right or wrong. Interesting.

Yes - compliance. They are police officers and good citizens that are doing nothing wrong comply. Its not like they asked Minnesota man to hop on one leg, pat his head with one hand, and rub his belly with the other. They simply asked him to show ID and he escalated the situation to the point the officers tased and arrested him. It was all avoidable had he complied in the first place. He would have been home with his kids.

And what if they had asked him to hop on one leg? Or take off his clothes? Or promise to follow the laws of Islam?

He should just comply right? And then deal with it in court? Because, obviously, refusing to comply will lead to the cops tasing and arresting him, since they aren't capable of discretion. Any refusal is met with force since, you know, they're cops and they can't control themselves.

Comply. Get out of the situation and hire an attorney. It would be front page news.

Bullshit. Cops need to do a better job.

You're one ******* stubborn person, aren't you?

Nobody is arguing that the officer in question is in the right.  But the reality here (something you seem to have trouble understanding or accepting) is that by NOT complying at the time the (illegal/unreasonable/whatever) request is made, you're inviting a shitload of trouble, possibly bodily harm.

Why would you bring that upon yourself?

The time to "fight" is after the fact, with a complaint, a lawyer, a lawsuit, etc.

If the cop IS out of control, he's likely to face and deal with the consequences of his actions.  You win, he loses.  You don't get hurt.

Is that such a difficult concept for you to understand?

Are you retarded? Of course I understand that. My entire point is that that shouldn't be acceptable. Police need to be held accountable.

Instead of us saying, "dude shouldn't have done that," we should be saying, "the police shouldn't have done that."

I think I speak for us all when I say its not an either/or thing in our opinion. We are saying BOTH "dude shouldn't have done that" AND "the police shouldn't have done that."

There is accountabilty - The cop that waved his gun into the crowd and told them he would f*ing kill them was fired. That was unacceptable - We can all agree. I would think firing the guy would be holding him accountable for his actions? Did you want him hanged? Stoned to death? Geez.

If Michael brown was killed in cold blood then Darren Wilson will go to jail. Isn't that being held accountable?

None of that takes back the tasing Minnesota Man got or the 6 bullets Michael Brown succumbed to. Both these men could have helped their situation with better decisions on THEIR part.

You know, you're probably right. I'm sure if I go back a few pages, to where Taint originally brought up the story of the guy in Minnesota, I'll see a bunch of posts from you and tec talking about how wrong the police were and how messed up the entire situations is. I definitely won't see you and him blaming the guy who got arrested.

Again, obviously this guy's day would have been better had he just produced his ID. But that's beside the point. He shouldn't have to. The punishment for legally exercising your rights shouldn't be arrest.

Us saying, "yeah, well, what did he expect," is total bullshit. He should have expected to be able to go on about his day without being arrested.

He was arrested for trespassing and disorderly conduct. NOT for legally exercising his rights. The way he handled the situation sealed the deal. I watched the video... My advice - It's best to not pretend you know the cops job better than they do... And to not call them racist.

So your argument is, what, that he still would have been arrested had he shown his ID?

Maybe, maybe not. He certainly wouldn't have been arrested for disorderly conduct or failure to cooperate. Maybe still for trespassing. He might have gotten off the trespassing charge had he just showed his ID and told the police he was waiting for his kids rather than telling them 'I know my rights'.