"Red"
Graphic Designer
Your comments of course.
I thought Tony was always right.......
- Thread starter NJWashingGuy
- Start date
Your comments of course.
Tony Shelton
BS Detector, Esquire
You tell me Hal, that video of Derrel's above with the diabetic was right here.
They don't shoot for being drunk, they shoot for not obeying 10 conflicting commands yelled at the top of their lungs between profanities.
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Kiloman
New member
Tony i understand the video thats the way one agency handled it.Did you read my post when a diabetic driver was driving in circles in front of me when i was a cop i waited to figure out what was going on.I didnt do what the officers did in the video at all.I think that video is terrible and hope they all got there candy butts in trouble for abuse.I hate seeing these videos because people should look at leo as people who do good and not bad as the videos shows.I gave you example how i handled the diabetic,definatly not like those guys did.
junker1
Roundtable Host 2009
Did that last post really sound idiotic to you? boy you really have a lot more patience then i would in that situation. hey I'm on your side with the cops going overboard stuff. I am not against the fact that their has to be a police force, I am against the fact that there are overzealus officers that step on the constitutional rights of everyday citezens.
but heres where you and i differ on certain matters. with over 20 felony convitions and almost a dozen years behind the wall, I know when to take responsibility for my actions and not just try and pass em off as an oops.
"Red"
Graphic Designer
What are you saying here?
Tony Shelton
BS Detector, Esquire
Tony Shelton
BS Detector, Esquire
junker1
Roundtable Host 2009
Im saying that I knew dam well i was breaking the law and i accepted it, drunk or not . alcohol is no excuse for ignorance even if its your first time. trust me people get plenty of chances to do the right thing.
Tony Shelton
BS Detector, Esquire
Steven, some people get jolted to reality quickly, some don't. I think Derrel is talking about those people who haven't harmed anyone and aren't habitual drunk drivers
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
The Cleaner
Vetran Washer 30 Years Plus
This can go on forever, we all know that if your a LEO you are innocent until they can fix the crime scene or alter your thoughts by killing you. I understand that there has to be at least a fair percentage of good cops, but the amount of Bad ones cast a huge shadow !!
RGilliam
New member
yea I can hear em now "naw ill just drive home, if I get pulled over, theyre not going to do nothing anyways"
yay! DUI penalties are to strict! Next you'll be saying if a man convicted of having child porn on his computer you should let him go? Whos the victim in that crime? If he didnt take them, he was just looking. No harm No Foul!
You know harsh DUI penalties are a deterent. There has been so many people killed from them there is a no tolerance in most states. Its not like smoking pot. Or something minor like that. People are less likely to committe a crime if they know they will face a harsh penalty. So if that deterent keeps on person from drinking and drive and saves 1 life. Its worth it. I could understand if you guys were arguing the three strikes law. I guess someone people dont understand intill theyre life has been touched by a drunk driver.
yay! DUI penalties are to strict! Next you'll be saying if a man convicted of having child porn on his computer you should let him go? Whos the victim in that crime? If he didnt take them, he was just looking. No harm No Foul!
You know harsh DUI penalties are a deterent. There has been so many people killed from them there is a no tolerance in most states. Its not like smoking pot. Or something minor like that. People are less likely to committe a crime if they know they will face a harsh penalty. So if that deterent keeps on person from drinking and drive and saves 1 life. Its worth it. I could understand if you guys were arguing the three strikes law. I guess someone people dont understand intill theyre life has been touched by a drunk driver.
RGilliam
New member
http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_22102968?source=rss
Maybe this is why they have harsh penalties.
In fact, if you drink and drive (with a blood alcohol level over 80mg per 100ml) you are three times more likely to be involved in a crash than a sober driver. Take a look at the following facts and you may be amazed:
From http://www.alcoholalert.com/drinking-and-driving.html
Maybe this is why they have harsh penalties.
In fact, if you drink and drive (with a blood alcohol level over 80mg per 100ml) you are three times more likely to be involved in a crash than a sober driver. Take a look at the following facts and you may be amazed:
- Alcohol related crashes are the leading cause of death for young Americans, between the ages of 16 and 24 years old;
- For all Americans between 5 and 35 years of age, motor vehicle accidents are the number one cause of death. Over 50% of these accidents are caused by alcohol impaired drivers;
- One American life is lost every 20 minutes in alcohol related auto crashes;
- It is estimated that three out of every ten Americans will be involved in an alcohol related accident in his or her lifetime;
- Males (31%) were more than twice as likely as females (13%) to report driving after drinking. They also consume more alcohol before driving;
- Over 394,000 people have died in alcohol related accidents in the past 20 years;
- Presently over 17,000 people are killed each year in alcohol related accidents;
- 300+ people are killed each week in alcohol related accidents;
- 45+ people are killed each day in alcohol related accidents.
From http://www.alcoholalert.com/drinking-and-driving.html
Tony Shelton
BS Detector, Esquire
Looks like deterrent thing is working great!
Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk 2
Tony is a good friend, I thought he was nuts about the cop bashing. Off his Rocker as a matter of Fact, then I keep reading and seeing these videos.
It makes me Sick these are the people protecting us, yes I have to lump them into one pile. No one on that Pile said hey we got him, there was no need to kick this guy in the face.
Then the one Dog realized he was rigged with a pump. Opps, lets search the car to make excuses for our actions in stead of just saying we Messed up.
I called Tony last night and asked him to stop putting videos up, I personally think we need a separate site.
Seriously this stuff is so negative and I'll admit I have a different outlook on Police. The real issue is this is making it far worse for them to do there job.
I grew up close to a really bad area in South Chicago, the police wouldn't assist fire fighters I remember when I was younger because people took shots at them. White Cops did not go into certain Areas, the people controlled the streets and everyone knew it. My father was known and I remember being with my brother in and area we should not have been. Someone recognized him told the members who we where, they let us enter the store. Yes it was only a store we stopped to get a drink and sandwich. When I got home and told my mother the story my brother lost his Keys for 2 weeks. No one was going to call the cops over this harassment 20 years ago , when my mother caught a kid stealing from her store she followed him the next day from school. My mother went up knocked on the door a women answered, my mother explained that her son had stole a statue from her store. She said wait a minute, she went inside and you started to hear a belt smacking this kids AZZ. Just a few seconds later the women came to the door apologized handed my mother the statue and said if you even see him around your store you come here and tell me.
I told that story because I think if my mother had involved the police she was thinking maybe something better could turn out. The kid and the mother showed up at my mothers store the next day. The kid began balling while he was saying he was sorry, he just wanted to get his mother a nice mothers day gift and didn't have the money but stealing was wrong.
My mother looks down at me and says well I think we could work something out, my son is going to sweep the warehouse at 4pm tomorrow. I looked up and said I'am , she said I'll tell you what. If you come once a week for three weeks spend a few hours sweeping the warehouse you can earn the statue you wanted to get for your mom.
That kids Name is Ralph Dorsey , he is a lifetime friend I grew up with. A few years back I visited him in the same home he grew up in, mothers passed away now. We remember the good old days running around the neighborhood when you could let your kids play out front. Ralph tells the story about my mother a white lady crazy coming up and knocking right on the door. I had never thought of the impact this made on his life so much until today. I realized that after Ralph cleaned the warehouse and had been given a chance to earn the money to buy his mother a gift his life was changed. The statue still sits in a Kitchen window 35 years later you can see it from the street.
Tony Shelton
BS Detector, Esquire
The Israelites in the wilderness and the ones who later lived in the promised land were not a small group of people.
Most scholars believe they numbered between 1.5 and 2 million. That is up to 2 million people living together in a small confined space much like any given city in the United States today. Things are not that much different.
God gave them a guideline for dealing with the criminal element. While there were many religious laws they were to uphold, many of them were criminal laws to keep society free from being taken over by the criminal element just like our laws today.
One striking thing about these laws is that virtually none of them were "preventative" or "deterrents". In other words without any victim, there was no crime. There are only a couple of obvious exceptions. I know people are going to say that things changed in the New Testament, but the fact is the New Testament provides NO laws for the secular government and ALL the laws in the New Testament are directed towards the individual members of the Kingdom or the followers of Christ. So the only pattern we have to go by is the pattern set for government in the Old Testament. The founding fathers realized this and that is why the government of our nation was set up based on those laws and those principals.
We also forget that the founding fathers still used physical punishment, whippings, stockades, etc almost 4000 years after God first prescribed them as punishments. All the sudden, over the past 200 years we have decided that we know better than God and that taking a man's freedom is a more "just" or less "cruel and unusual" punishment.
We have been wrong. It's time to take the example from the old Testament and change what we consider "crimes" and start prosecuting for things that actually harm others and do so in the manner prescribed they the maker of the universe. We are not smarter, nor more "compassionate" than he.
Here are the criminal laws of the old Testament: (excluding the well-known ten commandments)
MURDER - Not to slay an innocent person (Ex. 20:13) (CCN32). See Life.
KIDNAPPING - Not to kidnap any person of Israel (Ex. 20:13) (according to the Talmud, this verse refers to stealing a person, distinguished from Lev. 19:11, regarding the taking of property) (CCN33).
THEFT - Not to rob by violence (Lev. 19:13) (CCN35).
THEFT - Not to defraud (Lev. 19:13) (CCN37).
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT THEFT - Not to covet what belongs to another (Ex. 20:14) (CCN40).
CONSPIRIACY TO COMMIT THEFT -Not to crave something that belongs to another (Deut. 5:18) (CCN41).
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT THEFT - Not to indulge in evil thoughts and sights (Num. 15:39) (CCN156).
Punishment and Restitution
That the Court shall pass sentence of death by decapitation with the sword (Ex. 21:20; Lev. 26:25) (affirmative).
That the Court shall pass sentence of death by strangulation (Lev. 20:10) (affirmative).
That the Court shall pass sentence of death by burning with fire (Lev. 20:14) (affirmative).
That the Court shall pass sentence of death by stoning (Deut. 22:24) (affirmative).
To hang the dead body of one who has incurred that penalty (Deut. 21:22) (affirmative).
That the dead body of an executed criminal shall not remain hanging on the tree over night (Deut. 21:23) (negative).
To inter the executed on the day of execution (Deut. 21:23) (affirmative)
NO BUYING YOUR WAY OUT OF IT - Not to accept ransom from a murderer (Num. 35:31) (negative).
JUST PUNISHMENT FOR ACCIDENTS - To exile one who committed accidental homicide (Num. 35:25) (affirmative).
JUST PUNISHMENT FOR ACCIDENTS - To establish six cities of refuge (for those who committed accidental homicide) (Deut. 19:3) (affirmative).
NO BUYING YOUR WAY OUT OF IT - Not to accept ransom from an accidental homicide, so as to relieve him from exile (Num. 35:32) (negative).
To decapitate the heifer in the manner prescribed (in expiation of a murder on the road, the perpetrator of which remained undiscovered) (Deut. 21:4) (affirmative).
Not to plow nor sow the rough valley (in which a heifer's neck was broken) (Deut. 21:4) (negative).
COMPENSATION INSTEAD OF INCARCERATION - To adjudge a thief to pay compensation or (in certain cases) suffer death (Ex. 21:16; Ex. 21:37; Ex. 22:1) (affirmative).
COMPENSATION INSTEAD OF INCARCERATION -That he who inflicts a bodily injury shall pay monetary compensation (Ex. 21:18-19) (affirmative).
To impose a penalty of fifty shekels upon the seducer (of an unbetrothed virgin) and enforce the other rules in connection with the case (Ex. 22:15-16) (affirmative).
COMPENSATION INSTEAD OF INCARCERATION - That the violator (of an unbetrothed virgin) shall marry her (Deut. 22:28-29) (affirmative).
COMPENSATION INSTEAD OF INCARCERATION - That one who has raped a damsel and has then (in accordance with the law) married her, may not divorce her (Deut. 22:29) (negative).
Not to inflict punishment on Shabbat (Ex. 35:3) (because some punishments were inflicted by fire) (negative). See Shabbat.
CORPORAL PUNISHMENT INSTEAD OF INCARCERATION - To punish the wicked by the infliction of stripes (Deut. 25:2) (affirmative).
JUST PUNISHMENT AND NOT OVERLY HARSH PUNISHMENT -Not to exceed the statutory number of stripes laid on one who has incurred that punishment (Deut. 25:3) (and by implication, not to strike anyone) (CCN43).
JUSTICE IN ALL CASES WHERE THERE IS A VICTIM - Not to spare the offender, in imposing the prescribed penalties on one who has caused damage (Deut. 19:13) (negative).
PUNISHMENT OF THOSE WHO LIE IN COURT - To do unto false witnesses as they had purposed to do (to the accused) (Deut. 19:19) (affirmative).
UNDERSTANDING THAT THE LAW IS FLEXIBLE - Not to punish any one who has committed an offense under duress (Deut. 22:26) (negative).
Most scholars believe they numbered between 1.5 and 2 million. That is up to 2 million people living together in a small confined space much like any given city in the United States today. Things are not that much different.
God gave them a guideline for dealing with the criminal element. While there were many religious laws they were to uphold, many of them were criminal laws to keep society free from being taken over by the criminal element just like our laws today.
One striking thing about these laws is that virtually none of them were "preventative" or "deterrents". In other words without any victim, there was no crime. There are only a couple of obvious exceptions. I know people are going to say that things changed in the New Testament, but the fact is the New Testament provides NO laws for the secular government and ALL the laws in the New Testament are directed towards the individual members of the Kingdom or the followers of Christ. So the only pattern we have to go by is the pattern set for government in the Old Testament. The founding fathers realized this and that is why the government of our nation was set up based on those laws and those principals.
We also forget that the founding fathers still used physical punishment, whippings, stockades, etc almost 4000 years after God first prescribed them as punishments. All the sudden, over the past 200 years we have decided that we know better than God and that taking a man's freedom is a more "just" or less "cruel and unusual" punishment.
We have been wrong. It's time to take the example from the old Testament and change what we consider "crimes" and start prosecuting for things that actually harm others and do so in the manner prescribed they the maker of the universe. We are not smarter, nor more "compassionate" than he.
Here are the criminal laws of the old Testament: (excluding the well-known ten commandments)
MURDER - Not to slay an innocent person (Ex. 20:13) (CCN32). See Life.
KIDNAPPING - Not to kidnap any person of Israel (Ex. 20:13) (according to the Talmud, this verse refers to stealing a person, distinguished from Lev. 19:11, regarding the taking of property) (CCN33).
THEFT - Not to rob by violence (Lev. 19:13) (CCN35).
THEFT - Not to defraud (Lev. 19:13) (CCN37).
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT THEFT - Not to covet what belongs to another (Ex. 20:14) (CCN40).
CONSPIRIACY TO COMMIT THEFT -Not to crave something that belongs to another (Deut. 5:18) (CCN41).
CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT THEFT - Not to indulge in evil thoughts and sights (Num. 15:39) (CCN156).
Punishment and Restitution
That the Court shall pass sentence of death by decapitation with the sword (Ex. 21:20; Lev. 26:25) (affirmative).
That the Court shall pass sentence of death by strangulation (Lev. 20:10) (affirmative).
That the Court shall pass sentence of death by burning with fire (Lev. 20:14) (affirmative).
That the Court shall pass sentence of death by stoning (Deut. 22:24) (affirmative).
To hang the dead body of one who has incurred that penalty (Deut. 21:22) (affirmative).
That the dead body of an executed criminal shall not remain hanging on the tree over night (Deut. 21:23) (negative).
To inter the executed on the day of execution (Deut. 21:23) (affirmative)
NO BUYING YOUR WAY OUT OF IT - Not to accept ransom from a murderer (Num. 35:31) (negative).
JUST PUNISHMENT FOR ACCIDENTS - To exile one who committed accidental homicide (Num. 35:25) (affirmative).
JUST PUNISHMENT FOR ACCIDENTS - To establish six cities of refuge (for those who committed accidental homicide) (Deut. 19:3) (affirmative).
NO BUYING YOUR WAY OUT OF IT - Not to accept ransom from an accidental homicide, so as to relieve him from exile (Num. 35:32) (negative).
To decapitate the heifer in the manner prescribed (in expiation of a murder on the road, the perpetrator of which remained undiscovered) (Deut. 21:4) (affirmative).
Not to plow nor sow the rough valley (in which a heifer's neck was broken) (Deut. 21:4) (negative).
COMPENSATION INSTEAD OF INCARCERATION - To adjudge a thief to pay compensation or (in certain cases) suffer death (Ex. 21:16; Ex. 21:37; Ex. 22:1) (affirmative).
COMPENSATION INSTEAD OF INCARCERATION -That he who inflicts a bodily injury shall pay monetary compensation (Ex. 21:18-19) (affirmative).
To impose a penalty of fifty shekels upon the seducer (of an unbetrothed virgin) and enforce the other rules in connection with the case (Ex. 22:15-16) (affirmative).
COMPENSATION INSTEAD OF INCARCERATION - That the violator (of an unbetrothed virgin) shall marry her (Deut. 22:28-29) (affirmative).
COMPENSATION INSTEAD OF INCARCERATION - That one who has raped a damsel and has then (in accordance with the law) married her, may not divorce her (Deut. 22:29) (negative).
Not to inflict punishment on Shabbat (Ex. 35:3) (because some punishments were inflicted by fire) (negative). See Shabbat.
CORPORAL PUNISHMENT INSTEAD OF INCARCERATION - To punish the wicked by the infliction of stripes (Deut. 25:2) (affirmative).
JUST PUNISHMENT AND NOT OVERLY HARSH PUNISHMENT -Not to exceed the statutory number of stripes laid on one who has incurred that punishment (Deut. 25:3) (and by implication, not to strike anyone) (CCN43).
JUSTICE IN ALL CASES WHERE THERE IS A VICTIM - Not to spare the offender, in imposing the prescribed penalties on one who has caused damage (Deut. 19:13) (negative).
PUNISHMENT OF THOSE WHO LIE IN COURT - To do unto false witnesses as they had purposed to do (to the accused) (Deut. 19:19) (affirmative).
UNDERSTANDING THAT THE LAW IS FLEXIBLE - Not to punish any one who has committed an offense under duress (Deut. 22:26) (negative).
Tony Shelton
BS Detector, Esquire
Here's one a little closer to home.
Last night at around 2-3 am Chris was in the parking lot of a restaurant he cleans twice a month. He was sitting in the truck prior to doing the job when a cop pulls up behind him.
The cop gets out and says "What are you doing here?"
Chris answers "I clean the concrete here, it says Vegas Pressure Wash right on the side of the truck".
Cop says "Why are you sitting in the parking lot?"
Chris says "What crime have I committed? Am I being detained?"
Cop says "We've had break-ins at some of the buildings around here. Do you have a drivers license and registration?"
Chris says "Yes, what traffic violation did I commit while sitting here in the parking lot for you to ask for my drivers license?"
Cop says "Give me your drivers license."
Chris says "No, I haven't done anything wrong and I haven't violated any traffic laws and my license plates are current, look them up".
Cop puts his hand on his gun and says "Get out of the car".
Chris says, "Look at the side of my truck. It has my company name and number, the bed of my truck has pressure washing equipment in it. My drivers license or insurance isn't going to change the fact that I am here to work and not here to break into buildings.
Cop yells "Get out of the car", still with his hand on his gun and backing up.
Chris says "No, I haven't done anything wrong"
Cop draws his weapon down on Chris and yells "Get out of the car now!"
Chris, now starts visualizing being shot in the car and the gun in his pocket being all the proof the police would need to frame him and say he pulled his gun on them long after he was dead so he gets out.
They handcuffed him and patted him down and made him stand in front of the cruiser.
They first said his plates wouldn't come up, which was a lie. (he knows this because when the supervisor eventually came they told him his plates came up clean)
Then, they eventually saw his concealed weapons permit while searching through his wallet and they asked him if he had any weapons in the truck
He said no, but he has one in his pocket that they missed on the patdown.
The gun is a Smith and Wesson Bodyguard 38 revolver. They took the weapon, emptied it, then came back to him getting all over his case wanting to know where he stole the gun because the serial number is missing. He told them they had to open the cylinder to see the serial number inside but they were yelling at him so much no one would listen.
They ask if they can search his truck. He tells them they can see all they need to see through the windows and again asks if he is free to go. They tell him he's not arrested, but is just being cuffed "for their safety".
After about an hour of them going through checking all the registration cards he has to carry in his wallet for all his handguns a supervisor finally shows up. They are still claiming the Bodyguard is stolen because the serial number has been removed.
The supervisor shows up, opens the cylinder, shows them the serial number, uncuffs Chris and apologizes for taking so much of his time. Chris never allowed them to search his truck.
Now, I'm sure there are many who would say he should simply "submit" to whatever they ask of him.
Here are some questions I'd like to ask the police:
1) If there were break-ins in the area wouldn't be smarter (and safer) to watch a suspect and determine what he is doing rather than confronting before a crime has been committed?
2) If a truck bed is completely filled with equipment wouldn't it be fairly safe to say that there's not enough room on the truck for a criminal to run off with a bunch of loot from strip mall stores?
3) What does a permit to drive on public streets have to do with investigating break-in's?
4) If I confronted someone out on the street in front of my house and drew down on them because they wouldn't get out of there car would I not be in jail right now for brandishing a weapon? or even worse, Reckless Endangerment?
No one in my family is going to "help" the police do their job if doing so violates anyone's rights to travel and live peacefully. The circumstances would be different if the police were investigating a crime that had just been committed by someone in a black work truck, or of they were even investigating a crime that had been committed that same night. But that wasn't the case.
Why should anyone who is sitting in their truck on private property be forced to explain who they are and what they are doing there, drawn down on when they don't "comply" and cuffed for "their safety"? When simple surveillance for another 20 minutes would have cleared everything up when he started cleaning the sidewalks?
We won't support lazy, dominating police when they create situations that are completely unnecessary.
Last night at around 2-3 am Chris was in the parking lot of a restaurant he cleans twice a month. He was sitting in the truck prior to doing the job when a cop pulls up behind him.
The cop gets out and says "What are you doing here?"
Chris answers "I clean the concrete here, it says Vegas Pressure Wash right on the side of the truck".
Cop says "Why are you sitting in the parking lot?"
Chris says "What crime have I committed? Am I being detained?"
Cop says "We've had break-ins at some of the buildings around here. Do you have a drivers license and registration?"
Chris says "Yes, what traffic violation did I commit while sitting here in the parking lot for you to ask for my drivers license?"
Cop says "Give me your drivers license."
Chris says "No, I haven't done anything wrong and I haven't violated any traffic laws and my license plates are current, look them up".
Cop puts his hand on his gun and says "Get out of the car".
Chris says, "Look at the side of my truck. It has my company name and number, the bed of my truck has pressure washing equipment in it. My drivers license or insurance isn't going to change the fact that I am here to work and not here to break into buildings.
Cop yells "Get out of the car", still with his hand on his gun and backing up.
Chris says "No, I haven't done anything wrong"
Cop draws his weapon down on Chris and yells "Get out of the car now!"
Chris, now starts visualizing being shot in the car and the gun in his pocket being all the proof the police would need to frame him and say he pulled his gun on them long after he was dead so he gets out.
They handcuffed him and patted him down and made him stand in front of the cruiser.
They first said his plates wouldn't come up, which was a lie. (he knows this because when the supervisor eventually came they told him his plates came up clean)
Then, they eventually saw his concealed weapons permit while searching through his wallet and they asked him if he had any weapons in the truck
He said no, but he has one in his pocket that they missed on the patdown.
The gun is a Smith and Wesson Bodyguard 38 revolver. They took the weapon, emptied it, then came back to him getting all over his case wanting to know where he stole the gun because the serial number is missing. He told them they had to open the cylinder to see the serial number inside but they were yelling at him so much no one would listen.
They ask if they can search his truck. He tells them they can see all they need to see through the windows and again asks if he is free to go. They tell him he's not arrested, but is just being cuffed "for their safety".
After about an hour of them going through checking all the registration cards he has to carry in his wallet for all his handguns a supervisor finally shows up. They are still claiming the Bodyguard is stolen because the serial number has been removed.
The supervisor shows up, opens the cylinder, shows them the serial number, uncuffs Chris and apologizes for taking so much of his time. Chris never allowed them to search his truck.
Now, I'm sure there are many who would say he should simply "submit" to whatever they ask of him.
Here are some questions I'd like to ask the police:
1) If there were break-ins in the area wouldn't be smarter (and safer) to watch a suspect and determine what he is doing rather than confronting before a crime has been committed?
2) If a truck bed is completely filled with equipment wouldn't it be fairly safe to say that there's not enough room on the truck for a criminal to run off with a bunch of loot from strip mall stores?
3) What does a permit to drive on public streets have to do with investigating break-in's?
4) If I confronted someone out on the street in front of my house and drew down on them because they wouldn't get out of there car would I not be in jail right now for brandishing a weapon? or even worse, Reckless Endangerment?
No one in my family is going to "help" the police do their job if doing so violates anyone's rights to travel and live peacefully. The circumstances would be different if the police were investigating a crime that had just been committed by someone in a black work truck, or of they were even investigating a crime that had been committed that same night. But that wasn't the case.
Why should anyone who is sitting in their truck on private property be forced to explain who they are and what they are doing there, drawn down on when they don't "comply" and cuffed for "their safety"? When simple surveillance for another 20 minutes would have cleared everything up when he started cleaning the sidewalks?
We won't support lazy, dominating police when they create situations that are completely unnecessary.
Doug Rucker
Roundtable Host 2009
So glad I got to meet Chris in San Diego...so much easier to visualize him doing that
Call or Text 281.883.8470
Clean and Green Solutions
Call or Text 281.883.8470
Clean and Green Solutions