Police union condemns Obama's comments , page 4
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 9 times


reply posted on 26-7-2009 @ 02:27 PM by apacheman
reply to post by northexpedition


Since when is private property a public place?

Just because a cop makes an assertion doesn't make it true.

I notice you didn't address the lack of judgment issue.


reply posted on 26-7-2009 @ 02:39 PM by Highground
Originally posted by apacheman
The man was in his own home, a private residence.

Not when he stepped outside, in public view, with onlookers, and continued yelling about racism and oppression.

Crowley exhibited an appalling lack of judgment in that he failed to use any reasoning ability at all that I can percieve.

Cops tend to put great store by their supposedly special grasp of people's intentions, behaviors, modes of dress, etc. etc. ad nauseum to justify stopping someone because their gut and experience tell them something illegal is going on.

A burglar and a homeowner present two entirely different demeanors when confronted by police. A burglar and a college professor exhibit two entirely different demeanors when interacting with police. If Crowley couldn't figure out which was which, why would anyone take his word for squat?
[edit on 26-7-2009 by apacheman]


You are correct. A homeowner would promptly provide identification and get the whole ordeal over with, especially after being informed the reason they came was a 911 report. A homeowner would not be belligerent, refuse to provide ID, scream about racism, and start provoking police officers.

No sane homeowner, anyway.

Originally posted by richierich
You totally miss the point: This old statute is NOT in force. Court cases since it's writing have narrowed it all down. For example, it is NOT illegal anymore to be ' idle' now is it? No. It is not illegal anymore to censor words because of the sex of the person offended:"or annoy persons of the opposite sex"..See? You can quote any old general law that has been made invalid in this day and age, but it is not a valid debating point. It is like me quoting an old supreme court decision that validated slaery and saying that is is still Ok today...it is not!

It is also not illegal to be a ' streetwalker', whatever that means...now the courts demand specific and not general applications. Prostitution is illegal, but walking down a street , whether or not some cop thinks you are a hooker, is LEGAL. Those old laws are gone, thank God..and you should find a real example or admit that I am right.

By the way, how would you define today the following: RAILER...AND BRAWLER ?? Invalid..AND INVALID MEANS not in effect.


1) You failed to mention why you used the term, "redneck," and imply that all "rednecks" are racist.

2) If those "old laws" are gone, why are they still listed in the Massachusetts state code? Why not find me the block of legislature or judicial rulings that nullify this code and section - it is the same code and section listed in the arrest report filed against Mr. Gates. The only judicial ruling against that particular code is Commonwealth v. Mulvey, in which the court decided that police presence alone cannot "turn an otherwise purely private outburst into disorderly conduct." However, the man stepped out of his house, where you cannot be guaranteed, or reasonably expect privacy, and continued yelling and making his remarks.

In reaching its decision, the Court noted that the rationale behind criminalizing disorderly conduct rests on the belief that a disorderly person can provoke violence in others. Commonwealth v. Mulvey

Again, there was the possibility that Mr. Gates could have provoked a violent reaction by the crowd surrounding his lawn/porch area.

I have provided my sources, your turn.


reply posted on 26-7-2009 @ 02:50 PM by northexpedition
reply to post by apacheman


With all the police brutality I've seen in the world, I think it IS a good reason to kiss their ass, lest your ass get raped with a radio or baton.

Yeah, you are correct, sometimes people are in a bad mood, and the last thing they want to deal with is a cop.

But what are we really arguing about here? First it was about racism, then that got debunked after it was found out Crowley teaches a racial profiling class at the police academy, and attempted to save the life of an African-American NBA basketball player who collapsed in a gymnasium.

www.bostonherald.com... - Crowley teaches racial profiling class at police academy

The whole reason this debate is going on is because it got misconstrued as some racial injustice. Now that Obama made himself look like a jackass without knowing all the facts, it has turned into "abuse of power" which it clearly is not. Anyone that insults anyone's mother deserves retaliation.

If he thinks he can say that to a cop because the cop is unable to "take it outside" like a bar fight, he is sorely mistaken.

The whole reason Gates got uppity in the first place was because he felt profiled, "What? Because I'm a black man in America?!"

Would have ended a lot more peaceful if he hadn't decided to assume.

Lke the old saying goes, when you assume, you make an ass out of u and me.



reply posted on 26-7-2009 @ 02:56 PM by Highground
Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by northexpedition


Since when is private property a public place?

Just because a cop makes an assertion doesn't make it true.

I notice you didn't address the lack of judgment issue.


It was outside the home. Go read the 4th amendment, then go read the Supreme Court's findings on the definition of "curtilage." There has to be some effort to make the area private, hidden from public view or passers-by in order to meet the requirement for a "reasonable expectation of privacy," in the area immediately surrounding the house. Read United States v. Dunn, Katz v. United States, and Oliver v. United States. They all address the reasonable expectation of privacy, and open fields doctrine.

Mr. Gates' front yard would be considered an "open field," and therefore, it is no longer considered a private place.


reply posted on 26-7-2009 @ 02:58 PM by northexpedition
reply to post by apacheman


What are you even talking about?

Onlookers/creating a scene = public disturbance/disorderly conduct. If you blare music really loud in your home you can get a public disturbance ticket. If you play music too loud in your car you can get a public disturbance ticket. If you took the time to read the police report, you'd notice there were about seven people crowded around watching the incident. Everyone thinking Crowley "abused his power" needs to take 5 minutes and read the 3 page police report. I assure you, it will take less time to read than it will to type a whole page of misinformed drivel. Just like Obama, making a blanket statement without knowing all the facts.

As I descended the stairs to the sidewalk, Gates continued to yell at me, accusing me of racial bias and continued to tell me that I had not heard the last of him. Due to the tumultous manner Gates had exhibited in his residence as well as his continued tumultous behavior outside the residence, in view of the public, I warned Gates that he was becoming disorderly. Gates ignored my warning and continued to yell, which drew the attention of both the police officers and citizens, who appeared surprised and alarmed by Gates's outburst. For a second time I warned Gates to calm down while I withdrew my department issued handcuffs from their carrying case. Gates again ignored my warning and continued to yell at me. It was at this time that I informed Gates that he was under arrest. I then stepped up the stairs onto the porch, and attempted to place handcuffs on Gates. Gates initially resisted my attempt to handcuff him, yelling that he was "disabled" and would fall without his cane.

-Officer James Crowley


So what now, are you going to try and say he fabricated a police report? Because that in itself is a crime, and there were plenty of witnesses there to corroborate his story, including Officer Figueroa.

www.thesmokinggun.com...

I think what we have here is a classic example of "anything the pigs do is automatically wrong because my friend/myself got wronged in the past." Just because Ice Cube told you to "F*** Tha Police" doesn't make it acceptable.

[edit on 26-7-2009 by northexpedition]


reply posted on 26-7-2009 @ 02:59 PM by Oldnslo
Originally posted by richierich
Originally posted by Oldnslo
reply to post by danj3ris


It's what we called in the old days, "RESPECT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT".

Prof. Gates of Harvard forgot the basic rules in dealing with the police. Its show them your ID, answer questions honestly with a "Yes Sir/No Sir" and when driving, "where do I sign" and then keep your trap shut. Treat the officers with the respect they DESERVE!!!

You defend your rights in the court room, geez.... Bad mouth a police officer, stupid, stupid move.

The Cambridge PD were leaving Gate's home, when the Professor decided since he's BO's bud, he'd play the ole race card on the local PD. It did not work!! Greatly offended the local officers who handled the situation properly and law enforcement all across America, got a GOOD look at the real BO.

Prof. Gates got what he deserved, a trip to the station for having a fat mouth.

As far as BO's twin performances regarding Prof. Gates, I have come to the conclusion the he's not just TPTB's empty suit, he's nothing but a bully and a punk.

You'd think a Harvard educated President would have known better. But in his scheme of things, he'd rather play "Divide and Conquer" than be the President of all the American people.

Professor Gates has an excuse, he dropped out of Yale, where they teach real men how to play hardball. I've seen all I need to see. BO carries a bag of softballs.


As a final note, God bless Los Angeles' Ex-Chief of Police, Daryl Gates, the best Chief of Police this city has ever had.



I hope you are being sarcastic; if not, shame on you. While you are kowtowing and genuflecting and bowing to a COP, of all people, I will be standing toe to toe with them if they think they are above the law. Cops do NOT deserve ' respect' any more than anyone else.

You are obviously one of those timid cop groupies that fawn over any thug with a badge. Because in the OLD days people were even MORE afraid of cops going beserk and violating rights than today. With video to capture police abuses of the people we can catch more cops abusing us.

Gates was NOT guilty of anything. Here is a refresher course in how the LAW operates. disorderly conduct is a ' breach of the peace'. An ESSENTIAL ELEMENT of a breach of the peace is VIOLENCE, either actual or IMMANENT. It is supposed to be used to stop words from becoming violence. If a redneck is shouting racist words at a car load of LA gangbangers, the cops could charge the redneck with DC because if they did not remove him there would no doubt be a violent confrontation.

The INTENT to provoke a violent retaliation is an essential part of DC. since no one in their right mind would TRY to get a cop to beat him senseless, there can be NO intent on Gates part to provoker any violence. he was just expressing his OPINION ...and the cop didn't LIKE Gates opinion, so he used a false charge to show him who is ' boss'.

Well, black folks today are NOT going to be violated by any more ' boss' types if they can help it. Gates for sure is not going to stand by while some cop refuses to walk away and has his huge ego hurt by a man taking a stand in his OWN HOME.

Your entire post seems to reek of submissive groveling by us citizens when we happen to encounter one of our SERVANTS..one of the people we pay to show US respect...we pay them to act professionally, and a charge that gets thrown out as fast as this one did was phony all the way or it would have stuck and been taken to trial.

Can you imagine this typical white Irish Boston cop getting on the stand and tring to say that Gates was violent? Or that his neighbors were in fear of immanent violence/ no way!! It is ridiculous. What immnent violence was the cop preventing? None!! The cop just got fed up, and that means he is NOT a p[rofessional, he is typical.



No sarcasm, “nothing but the facts” sir. And it’s SHAME ON YOU for your ignorance and posting it here on ATS for all to read and see. Gates, at the very least, is guilty of not using his college educated mind, when mouthing off and playing the race card at the officers at the scene.

Your line of thinking is what has gotten this country into the position its in. Lack of respect for authority (anarchy).

“You are obviously one of those timid cop groupies that fawn over any thug with a badge. Because in the OLD days people were even MORE afraid of cops going beserk and violating rights than today. With video to capture police abuses of the people we can catch more cops abusing us.”


Timid cop groupie, kowtowing and genuflecting and bowing to a COP, of all people"?

Huh.......I’m just a US Army Vet 1968-70 (MOS:67N20) and a crew chief on a UH-1D Huey with the 1st Cav.

Currently a Traffic/Distribution Manager with many over-the-road teams dealing with law enforcement agencies all across this great country.

Frat brother is/was the Night Tactical Commander, Los Angeles Sheriff Department.

Future son-in-law is a 20 year veteran of the Los Angeles Police Department, and he’s one heck of a guy. Couldn't ask for a better son-in-law!!!!!

Sure don’t know if that qualifies as a cop groupie, or not, but one thing I know for sure:

STAY THE HELL AWAY FROM ME

I’m more afraid of folks with your attitude than any law enforcement personnel I’ve ever dealt with on a personal or profession level. In the years ahead, you will reap the rewards for your attutide and your lack of respect for those who enforce the law.

Respect is a 2 way street. You’ve got to give it to get it in return.


reply posted on 26-7-2009 @ 05:24 PM by apacheman
Originally posted by Oldnslo

Respect is a 2 way street. You’ve got to give it to get it in return.




Exactly.

Cops fail to offer respect in the first place, most times, not always, but mostly.

And Darryl Gates' LAPD was filled with thugs, apparently you missed all the reports of corruption, abuse, etc., throughout the eighties and nineties?

Did you forget Rampart Division? You know, the division where the cops fabricated evidence, shook down drug dealers, killed witnesses, and generally ran the local rackets?

A lot of cops are criminals, and a lot of so-called "good cops" cover for them, making them accessories.

Look, the cops are human beings, same as the rest of us. They are not magically better just because they are cops. There is probably a higher percentage of lawbreakers among police than among the general population, just because the job itself is so attractive to personality types that are likely to abuse the power vested in them, and the lack of courage on the part of their colleagues to confront and prosecute the "bad apples".

I'd be a lot more respectful if there were a lot less tolerance of "bad apples" by the mythological "good ones".

As far as I'm concerned a cop is a state-sanctioned criminal until and unless proven otherwise. I can personally imagine no circumstance which would drive me to call them, as most issues I can resolve on my own, peacefully and without major trauma to anyone. Calling in cops nearly always has unforseen and usually negative consequences, occasionally resulting in the death of someone who didn't need to die, but irritated a cop.


reply posted on 26-7-2009 @ 05:41 PM by northexpedition
reply to post by apacheman


As far as I'm concerned a cop is a state-sanctioned criminal until and unless proven otherwise.


You're the type of person that talks trash about the police and then turns around and calls 911 the instant your house is burglarized.

MOST cops are reasonable people trying to make a living, and only a few bad apples spoil the whole bunch.

[edit on 26-7-2009 by northexpedition]



reply posted on 26-7-2009 @ 06:46 PM by apacheman
reply to post by northexpedition


Then why don't the good ones get rid of the bad apples? Everywhere I've worked, sooner or later a "bad apple" showed up, but they never lasted for long, because they got fired sooner rather than later. Why do police tolerate "bad apples" to the extent they do? I know of no other profession that does.

My home was invaded, but I didn't call 911, because there was no point in doing so after the fact. I handled the situation with no loss of life and little loss of property. What would the cops do? Pretty much what they always do: nothing, take a report, waste my time, and annoy the hell out of me.

I've never seen a situation improve because somebody called the cops: whatever else is going on, once they show up, everything depends on the state of their ego at the moment.


reply posted on 26-7-2009 @ 09:48 PM by northexpedition
reply to post by apacheman


1. I meant when you have a home invader in your house and you have no way of defending yourself from an immediate threat.

2. You did not reply to my previous post.

3. Most good cops don't do anything about bad cops b/c they know their superiors won't do anything about it. It might get them fired or put in an unfavorable light in the jock-type social climate.

4. Cops don't answer to anybody, so it makes sense abuse of power would go unpunished, e.g. "Who polices the police?"

5. At the end of the day, it's just a paycheck.

[edit on 26-7-2009 by northexpedition]


reply posted on 26-7-2009 @ 10:15 PM by Highground
Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by northexpedition


Then why don't the good ones get rid of the bad apples? Everywhere I've worked, sooner or later a "bad apple" showed up, but they never lasted for long, because they got fired sooner rather than later. Why do police tolerate "bad apples" to the extent they do? I know of no other profession that does.

My home was invaded, but I didn't call 911, because there was no point in doing so after the fact. I handled the situation with no loss of life and little loss of property. What would the cops do? Pretty much what they always do: nothing, take a report, waste my time, and annoy the hell out of me.

I've never seen a situation improve because somebody called the cops: whatever else is going on, once they show up, everything depends on the state of their ego at the moment.


Then you obviously don't live in the city. I'm in the Atlanta suburbs (and not the nice ones, mind you), and I have called the police on numerous occasions for various things, and have never had issues with any of them. Perhaps it is YOUR arrogant attitude towards police officers that makes them less than willing to help you - I sure as hell wouldn't.

What would you do if an armed person broke into your house in the middle of the night whilst you were sleeping? Consult with them, try to "deflect" the situation, as someone else with your stance suggested, and suggest they only take a few things, then leave quietly? I would imagine that since you have only mentioned calling the police once, but having had numerous interactions with them, you've been on the... erm... reported end more than once. Which would probably alter your opinion of them.

Perhaps you shouldn't be so prejudiced.

edit to add: You haven't responded to the/my posts that clearly show Mr. Gates was violating the law.

[edit on 26-7-2009 by Highground]


reply posted on 26-7-2009 @ 10:31 PM by apacheman
reply to post by northexpedition


My home was invaded by four guys with guns who thought I had drugs or something worth taking...bad call on their part. The guy who held a gun on me was flabbergasted that I didn't feel threatened by him. If it hadn't been for the fact that I had others to think about, I would have taken it from him and shot his dumb ass. That and the mess I'd have to clean up afterwards, both physical and paperwork saved his life for him that night.

As it was, they got some minor crap and the worst anyone suffered was a lump on the head, a friend of mine who happened to be there and didn't know how to handle things...quite literally a cowboy. I actually could have killed all four of them without much effort or difficulty, but it simply wasn't worth the hassle.

At least one of them died for sure a short time later, a week or so. What none of them realized was that there are more ways to kill than by shooting or knifing someone. If you reach into someone's spirit you can tweak them to do things that will get them killed, just by pushing on their natural tendencies and let nature take its course. I tweaked them all while they thought they were taking from me...I doubt any of them are still alive today, they pissed me off no end.

So no, I don't need cops to protect me, or to protect mine. I can take care of most anything comes up, and have.

The ONLY reason I will ever call 911 is for a medic or firefighter, not a cop: they are vastly more trouble than they're worth.

[edit on 26-7-2009 by apacheman]


reply posted on 26-7-2009 @ 10:41 PM by apacheman
reply to post by Highground


I've lived in some pretty hard places, and have usually been the guy people come to for help with whatever.

And, no, I've rarely had to interact with cops on that level, and nobody's ever called the cops on me because I'm not that kind of person. I'm not violent by nature and am pretty respectful to most people. But I tolerate arrogant cowards not in the slightest little bit, and that's what most cops are: arrogant and cowardly.

I HAVE defused numerous dangerous situations without resorting to violence, including a bar holdup where the perp was about to shoot someone. I HAD to, my lady wasn't going to give up her bingo money for jack, and unless I did something, bad things would happen. So I changed the situation and made the bad guy leave, without threats or violence, and my lady kept her bingo money.

Edit to add:

What law exactly was he violating? He never got farther into "public" than his front stoop from what the cop reported. I still say that a man's home is his private space and the cop had no right to arrest him. Just because he insulted him isn't an excuse for arrest.

[edit on 26-7-2009 by apacheman]


reply posted on 26-7-2009 @ 11:46 PM by northexpedition
reply to post by apacheman


Well obviously I fell for your trap. Badmouth the police and act like they have no use, and expect someone like me to say the cliche "you're the type that needs the police when you're in trouble" and then proceed to brag about a time you got lucky in a home invasion incident and escaped injury/death.

If the specter of police wasn't there in the back of the minds of criminals everywhere, we'd have drug dealing thugs running around doing what they did to you a lot more often. You can't really deny that. Crime would be through the roof.

Right, cops aren't always necessary, but you're the type of person that acts like they have nothing to offer you, when in reality, every day the police are helping you and you just don't realize it.

Try walking down a street at night in an anarchist society where police don't exist and see what happens. Of course they're not going to get there the instant you call 911, but that's not my point. My point is, the presence of police everywhere significantly diminishes crime before it happens. There is obviously a purpose to the police. You're trying to say that just because a few police officers are human and make mistakes, that completely cancels out all the positive aspects of law enforcement. That's really ignorant. If we didn't have police, the criminals would fill the power vacuum pretty quick.

Also, one bad apple does NOT spoil the whole bunch. For every crooked cop that chokes an ambulance driver for no reason, there's five cops who save lives.

Anyway, we're derailing the thread, and we should get back on topic.

[edit on 27-7-2009 by northexpedition]


reply posted on 27-7-2009 @ 12:34 AM by apacheman
reply to post by northexpedition


I did not "get lucky", any more than a cop "gets lucky" in his confrontations with bad guys. I used my training, experience, intelligence, and spirit to control several situations to satisfactory outcomes. How, sir, does that constitute "lucky"? I am a professional in all that I choose to do. You demean me, sir, without knowing a thing about who I am or what I've done, experienced, or trained for. If you approached me with such an attitude meaning to harm me, you'd find yourself extremely unlucky.

And just because a cop can technically find reasons to abuse his authority doesn't make it right.

I'm a Native American. Over my lifetime, cops have thought we were legitimate target practice. Try being the lowest ranking member of society before you mouth off about things you have little understanding of.

[edit on 27-7-2009 by apacheman]


reply posted on 27-7-2009 @ 01:04 AM by Highground
Originally posted by apacheman
reply to post by northexpedition


I did not "get lucky", any more than a cop "gets lucky" in his confrontations with bad guys. I used my training, experience, intelligence, and spirit to control several situations to satisfactory outcomes. How, sir, does that constitute "lucky"? I am a professional in all that I choose to do. You demean me, sir, without knowing a thing about who I am or what I've done, experienced, or trained for. If you approached me with such an attitude meaning to harm me, you'd find yourself extremely unlucky.

And just because a cop can technically find reasons to abuse his authority doesn't make it right.

I'm a Native American. Over my lifetime, cops have thought we were legitimate target practice. Try being the lowest ranking member of society before you mouth off about things you have little understanding of.

[edit on 27-7-2009 by apacheman]


How, by arresting someone for a legitimate crime, did a police officer abuse his authority? Does that mean that every time someone gets arrested, it's a cop trying to exercise his power, show his dominance, and it should be stopped? Should arrests be halted altogether?

And seems like you're playing the race card, now. I'm not entirely sure what police you're referring to, but in my lifetime, I've never been aware of "police using native americans as target practice." I'm pretty sure that would've been brought up at some point or another. And even if this did happen, just because the police in your locale happened to be racist, that means every single other police officer in America is racist, arrogant, and worth nothing?


reply posted on 27-7-2009 @ 01:17 AM by apacheman
Originally posted by northexpedition
reply to post by apacheman


Well obviously I fell for your trap.


Also, one bad apple does NOT spoil the whole bunch. For every crooked cop that chokes an ambulance driver for no reason, there's five cops who save lives.



[edit on 27-7-2009 by northexpedition]


I set no trap. I just told the truth.

One bad apple DOES spoil the whole bunch.

Just because some save lives doesn't forgive the fact that they tolerate killers, abusers, and lawbreakers among themselves. You either uphold the law or you don't. Justice is supposed to be blind, remember? Your excuse that higher authorities won't back up the good guys is utter and complete validation of my contempt. If that is the case, they are lawbreakers, too. You are a lawbreaker as well, if you are aware enough to make that statement, since it implies that you DO know of cops who violate their authority or otherwise break the law, and choose to do nothing about it out of self-interest.

You stated that in the end "it's just a paycheck". I respectfully submit that it most certainly IS NOT. Honor demands that if you choose such a career and demand the kind of respect you seem to wish from the public, then you have the reciprocal obligation to adhere to a higher level of probity than "it's just a paycheck". Are you saying that if someone offered you more for special treatment, "it's just a paycheck"?

Bah!

I once considered a career in law enforcement, in the hope that I might make a difference. But when I truly looked at the reality of what I might join...it turned my stomach, frankly.

I left the Air Force after seven years, nearly all of it spent overseas, with a significant portion under combat conditions. All I'd dreamt of growing up was a career in the military, and I was damned good at it. I left because it was the only honorable thing to do. I realized the people I was fighting and killing weren't my enemies, they were people who annoyed my bosses in much the same way I did. I discovered the difference between a soldier and a warrior:

A soldier answers to his superiors.

A warrior answers to himself.

I am a warrior who conducts himself with honor, who has acquitted himself well in battle, who cares for and sustains the weak and the helpless.

I hold most cops in contempt through my daily observation of their behavior and weakness. I stand by my right to my opinion, and by my right to judge.


reply posted on 27-7-2009 @ 02:02 AM by northexpedition
reply to post by apacheman


I'm not trying to start a fight or anything, but you should be more careful about bragging so much. Just giving you some advice passed down to me. It will only lead to trouble. You might have to back up your claims. You might even meet your match someday.

So you're saying that because you have "superhuman" abilities, that means grandma down the street doesn't need the police to protect her?

A true "honorable warrior" knows he has nothing to prove to people on the internet.

I salute you for serving your country. That's all well and good, but it doesn't make you better than me, and it certainly doesn't give weight to your "arguement," which I am not really sure what it is at this point.

[edit on 27-7-2009 by northexpedition]
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^