Of course, today we know why: this show of disrespect for the police has gotten out of hand.
So what is the response? A sudden crackdown, a hard crackdown, on the perpetrators of a minor offense that has gotten out of hand.
Now, I support this law, because I understand why it is in place. I hope every person who so much as thought about joining in this craziness gets a
nice legal beatdown to emphasize that even minor violence against the police can have consequences. But that's really not the base reason for this
law that will one day be a punchline. The real issue is that this got out of control in the first place. The
New York Times gives the reason this has happened:
Police officers are often accused of using too much force, as the proliferation of cellphone cameras makes it easy for people to record and share
events widely online. But the recent videos prompted a rare rebuke from the Police Department’s highest-ranking uniformed officer, who said the
officers had put up with too much.
Accusations of police abuse have run rampant as of late. I get that. Many of them have merit. I get that, too. But then again, not all of them do.
These accusations are typically based in a lack of understanding of the situation the officer found him/herself in. But there are some which are abuse
of power, and that responsibility falls on the shoulders of those in the upper levels of the police department who allow such things to happen. So the
officers are confronted with a dilemma... it's just water. Should they (properly) respond to the attack and risk being accused of excessive use of
force? Or should they ignore it and let the practice go viral, potentially endangering themselves and others if some kid decides it will be fun to
throw a bucket of water at an inopportune moment?
Most have chosen to ignore the practice as long as they can.
Now, I have to congratulate Bill DeBlasio... excuse me while I puke in my mouth a little at that thought... for quickly coming to the aid of these
officers. Several perpetrators have been rounded up and arrested already, most as I understand it for "criminal mischief." More arrests are surely
coming. But at the end of the day, what has been accomplished by this viral prank?
A new harsh law that will make no sense to future generations.
Was it really worth the sudden, quick thrill of dousing a cop?
The problem, as I see it, is that we have allowed our youth to ignore reality far too long. We teach them that they have not only a right, but a duty
to "protest" anything that doesn't go their way. We show them the proper method of demonizing those we disagree with. We instruct them on how to
avoid responsibility and how to expect others to make them more comfortable, while never showing them that they might need to retaliate someday. And
it has gotten us a quick thrill, akin to throwing a bucket of water on a random cop.
It has also gotten us Antifa beatings, disrespect for authority, acceptance of criminal activity, social gimme programs we cannot hope to afford, poor
production in the workplace, and unrealistic life expectations. Watch for new stupid laws coming to a town or state near you, as throngs of youth find
out the hard way that reality is... well, reality.
In Georgia , it is illegal to have an ice cream cone in your back pocket on Sunday
Any other day ? - apparently not.
Any other pocket ? - apparently not.
I though an assault on a police officer was a Federal offense anyway ...
Oops , felony.
The country today...
edit on 7/31/19 by Gothmog because: (no reason given)
Oddly enough I would imagine all those laws were made because the situation was a problem at the time. Or at least one idiot was a
That's my point. Of course, I'm not sure about the porcupine thing in Florida... seems the act might be considered excessive punishment by
Now as for the police getting soaked, today its water, tomorrow it's a rock.
You shouldn't be able to do that to anyone walking down the street so why is it kosher to do it to a cop?
Oh, agreed completely! If someone is bold enough to do something to a cop, they are far more than bold enough to do it to anyone else. That's the real
reason why "cop-killers" are hunted with such ferocity: if someone is willing to kill an armed, trained cop, a normal person has no hope.
And of course, knowing the person killed adds a bit of urgency as well.
I'm still trying to figure out a logical reason why gambling is illegal in the first place. I now it can become an addiction, and I know that some
people will gladly bet away their life savings... but what's the difference between that and buying groceries at a convenience store for three times
the going price? Or spending your last dime on a bottle of Mad Dog 20-20?
Even worse, all insurance is a gamble. You spend a small amount in the future expectation of a huge payoff. The difference is that when that payoff
happens, you don't get the money; the hospital, doctor, body shop, or undertaker does. We literally try to force people to take that gamble.
Rigged games (like insurance), sure, that's fraud. But just gambling? Nah...
On a slightly less quirky topic, it's illegal to carry a push dagger in Virginia UNLESS it is not concealed.
Of course nothing will get you stopped and frisked quite as quickly as strolling around with a Cold Steel Push dagger easily visible on your belt,
though I doubt anyone here will scream 'KNIFE!'.
Now you can have a 6" fixed blade like a Kabar hunting knife on your belt and nobody cares, particularly in the rural Mid-Atlantic states, again, not
concealed, and particularly if you're wearing 'fishing or hunting' attire.
It IS apparently legal to carry a concealed Ka-bar TDI knife on your belt since many officers also carry them (the 'bro-effect') and it's not
technically defined as a push dagger.
What's ironic about this is that among defensive tools, a push dagger is pretty much the only knife that the elderly, females and small stature
individuals can use effectively because it does not require a a lot of wrist strength to operate.
Of course the typical LEO is not very likely to confront or try to arrest or frisk an attractive female who is carrying any kind of knife since they
think that's sexy and adorable (unless it's a militant female officer). To be serious, knife carrying 'offenses' are generally only pushed or added to
charges if some other offense has been committed in the Officer's eyes (called pile-on charges).
edit on 31-7-2019 by Maverick7 because: (no reason given)
Don't use x-rays to fit shoes in Washington unless you want a criminal charge.
Isn't this supposed to be a health issue? Fitting children's shoes by X-ray was all the rage when I was a child, and I had it done several times. I
understand that it was stopped and probably banned because over-frequent x-rays were thought to damage growing feet even more than wrong-sized shoes.
Just as luminous paint to mark the numbers on watch-dials got banned.
I'm surprised, then, if Washington is the only state (or is it D.C.?) to make it illegal.
City Journal had an interesting piece on that full of links and videos.
For a population that we're told so lives in fear of law enforcement because law enforcement is so racist, they seem to be terribly brazen and
Do these look like kids who received the talk a go around with their heads down cowering in fear? How to write stupid laws indeed!
Apparently, it is not actually legal to shoot a Welshman with a crossbow after midnight from the walls of Chester.
However, until 1960, it was actually illegal not to carry out at least two hours of longbow practice a week according to the Unlawful Games Act 1541
which required every Englishman between the ages of 17 and 60 to own a longbow and practice archery.
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.