Case Dismissed Against Woman Arrested While Videotaping Police

Originally posted by crimvelvet

What a crock...

We as citizens are having wire tapping and other invasions of privacy done by Homeland Security under the Patriot Act but WE can not video cops when they are in PUBLIC or in our homes?????

If by what a crock your referring to your answer, I would agree. Wire tapping laws that have been used against civilians have been shot down in all states except for one - The Peoples Republic of Illinois. The lady in question was NOt arrested for videotaping the police, but for failing to obey a lawful command to mvoe away. You guys seem to ingore that otherwise it wont fit in your diatribes against the poilice.

Originally posted by crimvelvet
WE the citizens have the RIGHTS and WE DELEGATE those rights TO the government. Not only that but we have a DUTY to act as a watchdog on our government.

You do, and because of that there is a time and palce for everything, namely a court of law when it comes to going after government action, namely the police. It does not allow you to execute summary judgment roadside of a traffic stop you are invovled in or have all the information present.

Originally posted by crimvelvet
It is about time we understand what that means.

While your understanding, I would suiggest you learn how the laws work, both at the State and fEderal level, how your government works, again at both levels, and specifically how your civil rights work, at both levels, before you storm the castle.

Originally posted by crimvelvet

In Congress, July 4, 1776

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness...... www.usconstitution.net...

As I said, and your quote above proves, that you have much more to learn about how your government operates.

reply to post by Xcathdra

As far as my personal habits go. The last time I drove in a drunk state was college, which was about 15 years ago. I drink on occasion, and when I do I dont drive. That happens when you work accidents with many body parts of kids and parents, while the drunk who hit them walks away uninjured.

That's you.
Here's one from the area where I live:

Officials say an off-duty Berks County sheriff’s deputy who died in a fiery single-car crash was driving drunk. Investigators say 36-year-old Kyle Lesher had a blood-alcohol level more than three times the legal limit for drivers when he crashed and rolled his car Thursday night in Cumru Township, Berks County. The Lehigh County coroner’s office says the Sinking Spring man was transported to Lehigh Valley Hospital where he was pronounced dead. Police tell The Reading Eagle that neighbors ran to the scene and pulled Lesher from the burning wreckage before medics arrived. Lesher was a Berks County sheriff’s deputy and a part-time officer in Hamburg borough.

Source

I guess the body parts didn't phase him.

It happens more than we know, because the officers that have accidents while DUI have their buddies clean up for them and push everything under the rug whenever possible. I personally know about three cases of this happening, car gets towed, drunk cop or cops wife goes home to sleep it off. Normal citizens don't have that going for them.

reply to post by butcherguy


Case in point....

PA State trooper charged with tampering with evidence in DUI probe

A local state police trooper has been charged with tampering with evidence after investigators said he turned off another trooper’s in-car camera while it was recording a sobriety test being administered to an off-duty colleague.

According to state police, Henschel was on duty at about 9:15 p.m. on March 20 when he learned that an off-duty trooper, Christopher Pifer, was involved in a crash and had requested a tow for his vehicle. Henschel went to the scene, reported the crash to the barracks, then picked up Pifer, 34, of Philipsburg, and took him to a convenience store to buy gum and mints before returning to the scene.

When they got back, Cpl. Svin Donaldson, a patrol unit supervisor at the Clearfield barracks, had started a crash investigation, and thought Pifer was under the influence of alcohol. Donaldson asked him to submit to field sobriety testing. Pifer consented, and Donaldson positioned his patrol vehicle and its mobile video recorder to record the testing, state police said. “At some point prior to the testing, Henschel went into Donaldson’s patrol vehicle and shut off the recording,” the news release from state police says.

Pifer was charged with DUI in April, and is awaiting trial in Clearfield County.

Source: www.centredaily.com...

reply to post by anon72
Nice find. I wonder if the drunk-driving cop got nailed though?

How often will you get caught if you are a state trooper fudging the evidence for a buddy or co-worker?

Seldom. Who's there to catch you?

Originally posted by Lightrule
Please take the following not as disrespect but as an observation. Firstly Xcath thanks for being civil and giving us your honesty.

I have always been honest and I try to be civil in discussions like this. Any numbe rof mebers can vouch that I am not defending all officers 24/7. I have come down on officers for their actions when its warranted. At other times I have opted to remain neutral until more information comes out, as we know the media doesnt always get the story right, nor do they ever have the whole story from the start.

Originally posted by Lightrule
Allow me to explain my postings. I'm not posting as a lawyer, I post as a guy who has some legal knowledge. The reason being is because if I wrote posts like it was my job I WOULD end up sounding EXACTLY like you, because I DO understand EVERY argument you make to defend the police actions in the video. I really do, but because I can see the injustice in many of the "laws" governments have passed over the years I no longer wish to stay silent about legal vs lawful.

And thats fine.. However, not making the argument using legal terms can lead others who are not familiar with how the law or system works to wrong conclusion.A perfect example of this is how people continually invoke the 4th amendment, with absolutely no clue it does not apply to the individual, but the Government. Many have made the comment about private property, including you, and others have invoked the 4th, incorrectly.

I would say if people new what they were talking about, we would be having a lot less arguments that revolve arround the law and more about the substance of the action itself. I think we would have a lot less disagreements because people would know what they are arguing, instead of seeing what we have now, where mul;tiple people keep beating the same drum of -

- Show me this law or where it says that etc. Its been posted and explained. People refuse to read and acknowledge it because quite frankly they dont understand it. Because they dont understand it, and because its coming from a cop, they automaticall assume im lieing or misleading them. All it takes it 15 minutes of research, yet they fali to do that. I wonder why?

Originally posted by Lightrule
Now for the part that might sound disrespectful. You are not taught as a police officer to study law and all of its intricacies, you are trained to enforce the law based on how it is written as you understand it. I'm sure we can both agree that the justice system has seen its fair share of abuse in its time and I'm sure you can also agree that some of these "laws" we have simply don't make sense.

And you would be wrong. We undergo constant law updates because of local state, appeals, federral appeals and supreme court rulings. We also are issued opinon sby the AG's office as well as the PA's office on how they think a law should be enforced as opposed to how the law itself is written.

We go through Stat law classes as well as Con law classes in the academy, and those 2 sections take up wuite a bit of time. We also go through court room procedures, training in evidence collection, inaddition to laws and case law that has shaped the manner in whcih we collect evidence, interview suspects, intrerview minors, etc etc etc.

To assume that as police we dont recdive that type of training is rather naieve, and it is also incorrect.

What you and others fail to see is yes, as an officer I can interpret a law and make an arrest. Whether or not that interpretation is allowed is up to the PA, and if they go forward with it, its then up to the courts, who get to interprete my interpretation. Thats how it works., and you know this.

People posting dont, but would if they did some research into how the shystem itself works. Instead they would rather yell at the police for doing something they can do.

Originally posted by Lightrule
The thing I'm sick and tired of hearing is your (as in police in general) age old excuse of "I'm just doing my job." or "I'm just following the law." I was always taught that policemen were our friends and that they defend our safety. What I see now is police officers that LOVE the POWER of their job and constantly wish for more rules to enforce.

At no point have I ever said im doing my job, nor have I ever used that as an excuse, so kindly quote me to back up your accusation, or admit I never said that and appologize. What I am sick of is people like you and others who constantly see only what they want to see, while ignoring anything they dont know, donyt understand, or dont like because it doesnt support their argument or in some cases crusades against the police.

As far as your comment about police officer who love power, I could see how you and others can come to that conclusion when you dont understand the system or how it works. You claim you do, but your ocmments dont support that statement. Your statement is a blanket staement and is as naive as when other people say it and think all cops act that way.

As far as wanting more laws to enforce - You are absolutely crazy and have no clue what the hell your talkig about if you think thats even remotely true.

Originally posted by Lightrule
Your livelihood has been highjacked by the rich, powerful, corporate masters at the top of the pile. Yet we never see police officers stand up and scream "That statue is unlawful we will not enforce it!" they always bow their heads and obey. Well guess what? People were raised the same as me, believing you were there to protect us, but now we really are seeing the ugly truth, police are addicted to their power, always want more and are working against us rather than for us.

Ah yes, the ever present conpisracy theory of distrust all. Here is an idea, why dont you and the others who think the system sucks actually do something about it other than bitch? thats all I see people do and when I ask why they dont take a proactive approach to ixing something, I get the lazy ass excuse of my vote doesnt count, the system is rigged so nothing vcan be done blah blah blah.

If people spent as much time taking part in government than they do posting I hate the cops threads, thins would change.

The problem is I think some people just couldnt live with the knowledge of having the ability to make changes, because all they know how to do is bitch, and nothing more. There mental wiring couldnt handle it and would fritz out.

Originally posted by Lightrule
You need to give your head a good long shake, are citizens supposed to cower before the paranoid policemen?

Absolutely not, nor at the same time are citizens supposed to interfere with our duties when it does involved them in the first place. Give your head a good long shake and ask at what poiint her rights are allowed to interfere and override the rights of the driver who was detained and the 2 people in the car?

Her rights ended the moment they interfered with the others. As a lawyer, you know this, yet you stay away from it.

Originally posted by Lightrule
Here is exactly what *I* think went through that arresting officers head:

"Oh yeah look at this car, parked to far from the curb, time for justice!
I wonder if he has a gun, probably, this is the united states everyone has a gun, better unsnap my holster.
Look at this little punk, I bet he has something in the car I can arrest him for...
That's right you little punk just disobey once and you'll get my boot so fast...
OH CRAP! is that a CAMERA!? CRAP CRAP CRAP IT IS! Now what? I can't just beat this little punk for no reason now...
Aww shucks and I had my batoning arm all ready to go... How can I get rid of this camera? Oh I know!

LADY GO BACK INTO YOUR HOUSE! "There problem solved, she better follow my order too or else I'm gonna baton her as well."
"Damn! She isn't leaving and now I look like a pussie that can't even order a little girl around."

We all know what happened next. It was sad.

-Lightrule

and thats your opinon and thats fine. Apparently its not what was going through the offiecrs mind, and beng a lawyer you know this as well. I beleive it would be at this point an objection would be made because counsel is testifying as the what the officer though, is offering facts not in evidence, and is prejudicing the jury by making innaporprite comments about the clients state of mind at the time.

I guess its easier for you to make your argument that way than actually extend the benefiet of the doubt that the officer acted in a anner he felt was right. Afterall, he is innocent until proven guilty as well.

reply to post by butcherguy


Yeah its amazing how there can be so many different incidents.

It means you dont get to stereotype because they are jsut that, seperate - nice try though.

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by anon72

 

Nice find. I wonder if the drunk-driving cop got nailed though?

How often will you get caught if you are a state trooper fudging the evidence for a buddy or co-worker?

Seldom. Who's there to catch you?

edit on 1-7-2011 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)

And yet you claim with the thin blue line we dont police our own. if thats the case how did they get caught and why were they charged and proesecuted for it?

The next time you want to make a blanket statement, make sure you can back it up - because in this case, you cant.

reply to post by Xcathdra
There is a pervasive attitude in the LE community of being above the law.

That's why they do these things, and most of the time, who is going to catch them?

reply to post by Xcathdra

And yet you claim with the thin blue line we dont police our own. if thats the case how did they get caught and why were they charged and proesecuted for it? The next time you want to make a blanket statement, make sure you can back it up - because in this case, you cant.

I'm sure non-LEO's understand, even if you don't.

Like I said, most of the time, they can get away with it.

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

There is a pervasive attitude in the LE community of being above the law.

That's why they do these things, and most of the time, who is going to catch them?

All departments are sibject to investigation by outside agencies. We are subject to investigation by the AG as well as the PA's office. We are suibject to investigation by the FBI.

The mindset we all collude to protect our own shows a lack of understanding of the system as a whole.

reply to post by butcherguy


I refer yout o my post above about investigations by other agnecies and how they work. And yes, you guys dont understand how it works. You assume, which is the problem. and by extension of that assumption, you stereotype and make blanket accusations that are not supported.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by butcherguy

 

I refer yout o my post above about investigations by other agnecies and how they work. And yes, you guys dont understand how it works. You assume, which is the problem. and by extension of that assumption, you stereotype and make blanket accusations that are not supported.

Now this is pretty simple.

Cop drives drunk, wrecks his car.

Fellow officer responds to a phone call from the drunken cop.

Fellow officer calls for a tow.

Car is towed away.

Fellow officer takes drunk home to sleep it off.

At this point, both cops are criminals that have not been caught.

The two cops and the tow truck driver are the only ones that are aware of the accident occurring. The tow truck driver may not even be aware that the officer that crashed is over the legal limit.

Who is the person that is tipping off the FBI or the State Attorney General?

Probably not the two criminals wearing a uniform.

Like I said, I know of three separate instances where the above story happened.

No one was charged, no subsequent investigations by your cited groups, no one went to jail.

Xcathdra remains defiant against the tide of public opinion. Everyone else is wrong. He's right. No one else understands. Only him. He 'serves' the public - supposedly - but clearly has no respect for them or their views. They're all wrong. He's right. And he wonders why more and more people are beginning to dislike cops?

He reminds me of King Cnut, who sat defiantly facing the sea, commanding the incoming tide to turn. That's a British historical reference which may not go over with everyone. So, I'll simplify it in a way that might.

Xcathdra is a Cnut.



Now where is that ignore button.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

I have always been honest and I try to be civil in discussions like this. Any numbe rof mebers can vouch that I am not defending all officers 24/7. I have come down on officers for their actions when its warranted. At other times I have opted to remain neutral until more information comes out, as we know the media doesnt always get the story right, nor do they ever have the whole story from the start.

I know you have... So again, thanks.

And thats fine.. However, not making the argument using legal terms can lead others who are not familiar with how the law or system works to wrong conclusion.A perfect example of this is how people continually invoke the 4th amendment, with absolutely no clue it does not apply to the individual, but the Government. Many have made the comment about private property, including you, and others have invoked the 4th, incorrectly.

I made the comment about private property because this is one of the topics in law that has been hijacked. Nothing you have said is wrong. What is wrong is that you have been lead to believe what you believe is right. I think I can reasonably say 99% of the people that like to bash bad cops here on ATS (or online) wouldn't have any problem with an officer chasing a criminal through their private property.

I would say if people new what they were talking about, we would be having a lot less arguments that revolve arround the law and more about the substance of the action itself. I think we would have a lot less disagreements because people would know what they are arguing, instead of seeing what we have now, where mul;tiple people keep beating the same drum of -- Show me this law or where it says that etc. Its been posted and explained. People refuse to read and acknowledge it because quite frankly they dont understand it. Because they dont understand it, and because its coming from a cop, they automaticall assume im lieing or misleading them. All it takes it 15 minutes of research, yet they fali to do that. I wonder why?

For someone like you that has all the material and knows where to look for it, yeah it takes fifteen minutes. But in all other cases it takes years. I REALLY dumb it down because members here don't have a law degree, and they shouldn't have too.

I'll level with you here and now.

I work from the inside out to crash the corrupt legal system we have now. I hate it and I hate the players at the top of it. I've seen and heard (and VERY SADLY participated) in more corruption than you have seen on the mean streets. You are defending a sick, corrupt and dying system. Your calls for us to vote or change the system using the system (ie, courts) ring hollow in our ears because the exact same things you are telling us to use have been corrupted. Nobody wants to fight the system with the system because it is IMPOSSIBLE. Take it from the guy on the inside looking out. Many people now just want the system to leave them the hell alone as long as they are not hurting anybody.

And you would be wrong. We undergo constant law updates because of local state, appeals, federral appeals and supreme court rulings. We also are issued opinon sby the AG's office as well as the PA's office on how they think a law should be enforced as opposed to how the law itself is written.

We go through Stat law classes as well as Con law classes in the academy, and those 2 sections take up wuite a bit of time. We also go through court room procedures, training in evidence collection, inaddition to laws and case law that has shaped the manner in whcih we collect evidence, interview suspects, intrerview minors, etc etc etc.

To assume that as police we dont recdive that type of training is rather naieve, and it is also incorrect.

Well good for you, actually. Lots of police dept. don't have the time or resources to offer this to their officers, they get the academy training then they are on the streets. The academy training I'm sorry to say hardly covers the necessary requirements needed to apply to law school let alone the allowance of street level law interpretation.

What you and others fail to see is yes, as an officer I can interpret a law and make an arrest. Whether or not that interpretation is allowed is up to the PA, and if they go forward with it, its then up to the courts, who get to interprete my interpretation. Thats how it works., and you know this.

As per above I honestly don't believe you (again speaking as police as a group) have enough knowledge or training to be allowed to interpret the laws on the spot, from my point of view it is officers taking so many matters into their own hands and messing up the interpretations that cause the courts and DA's to get backed up for such long periods of time. Trying to sort thought the mess. Yes, I know this is how it works, but it shouldn't.

At no point have I ever said im doing my job, nor have I ever used that as an excuse, so kindly quote me to back up your accusation, or admit I never said that and appologize. What I am sick of is people like you and others who constantly see only what they want to see, while ignoring anything they dont know, donyt understand, or dont like because it doesnt support their argument or in some cases crusades against the police.

It could be argued that police do the same thing to justify arrests...

As far as your comment about police officer who love power, I could see how you and others can come to that conclusion when you dont understand the system or how it works. You claim you do, but your ocmments dont support that statement. Your statement is a blanket staement and is as naive as when other people say it and think all cops act that way.

Actually my comments come from the observation of a system I understand REALLY well. One that I am disgusted with.

As far as wanting more laws to enforce - You are absolutely crazy and have no clue what the hell your talkig about if you think thats even remotely true.

Man... what the? I see "my" police chief on TV all the time calling for a new law, supporting a new law, calling for tougher penalties on existing laws or demanding more power to stop by creating more laws they can use to capture said group. Nine out of ten times that law will be used against regular citizens "if the need arises". I don't want to say wake up cause it is way to over used on these boards so... OOGIE BOOGIE BOO GET OUT OF BED!!!

Ah yes, the ever present conpisracy theory of distrust all. Here is an idea, why dont you and the others who think the system sucks actually do something about it other than bitch? thats all I see people do and when I ask why they dont take a proactive approach to ixing something, I get the lazy ass excuse of my vote doesnt count, the system is rigged so nothing vcan be done blah blah blah.

Read above about my comment about working from the inside. Its not a conspiracy nor a theory at this point. I try everyday to correct the wrongs in the system, sadly I'm stonewalled by the higher ups 999 times out of 1000. I can tell you with 100% certainty (again read my comment about corruption) that a lot of judges are BOUGHT AND PAID FOR. 100% buddy... 100%. Oh I've filed some paperwork in my day let me tell you, against some pretty high profile people with witnesses, paper trails, ADMISSIONS! That get shredded to never be heard of again because Judge Corruption plays golf with Mr. Mayor.

I know full well how the system works and it don't work for the citizens. So I don't respect any argument that tells us to use the system to fight the system. Its bought and paid for and we aren't holding the receipt.

If people spent as much time taking part in government than they do posting I hate the cops threads, thins would change.

HAHAHAHA! So true! So true!

The problem is I think some people just couldnt live with the knowledge of having the ability to make changes, because all they know how to do is bitch, and nothing more. There mental wiring couldnt handle it and would fritz out.

See above comment.

Absolutely not, nor at the same time are citizens supposed to interfere with our duties when it does involved them in the first place. Give your head a good long shake and ask at what poiint her rights are allowed to interfere and override the rights of the driver who was detained and the 2 people in the car?

Her rights ended the moment they interfered with the others. As a lawyer, you know this, yet you stay away from it.

Yeah sure, but I think the bigger question of why the cop was paying any mind to her at all is what should be answered. A camera isn't dangerous and neither is a female standing on a lawn holding one. It worries me that a police officer can claim he felt endangered when in reality there was no danger.

If this officer was just a little bit smarter he would have told that women to get back into her house as she herself may be in danger. Maybe then she may have listened. But with little manners or tact he just started barking orders at her. Sorry bud, but no matter how many orders you guys bark we're not dogs and won't just grant you respect when we see NONE in return.

and thats your opinon and thats fine. Apparently its not what was going through the offiecrs mind, and beng a lawyer you know this as well.

No I don't know this, because based on what I saw the officer was acting like a bully, therefor it would not be far off to suggest he has a bully mindset.

I beleive it would be at this point an objection would be made because counsel is testifying as the what the officer though, is offering facts not in evidence, and is prejudicing the jury by making innaporprite comments about the clients state of mind at the time.

Again, sure I would have been handed my ass if I ever said something like that in a court room, good thing we aren't in one. Still, on ATS I'm allowed to speculate based on observation.

I guess its easier for you to make your argument that way than actually extend the benefiet of the doubt that the officer acted in a anner he felt was right. Afterall, he is innocent until proven guilty as well.

I never said that the officer was wrong, nor did I say he didn't think he was acting in an appropriate manner. I simply stated that even if he thought he was acting in a matter that was justified, doesn't make the action itself justified.

-Lightrule

reply to post by Malcram


Its petty and stupid but when I look through thread and see almost no stars on his posts it makes me smile.

Not because he is disliked or anything, but because people are finally starting to see through the clouds of BS he is spewing.

Bless him tho, he fully believes in his arguments.

-Lightrule

Originally posted by Malcram
Xcathdra remains defiant against the tide of public opinion.

That right, because public opinion has always been an indicator of rightfulness and non mob mentality based on ignorance at times.

Originally posted by Malcram
Everyone else is wrong. He's right. No one else understands. Only him.

I have posted the laws, you guys refuse to read them. I ahve explained the laws, you guys refuse to acknowledge thats how the law works. You guys make your claims about violating this right or that right, without understanding the fact that is not what she was arrested for.

So in your case and a few other sin these threads - yes, you have no clue as to what your talking about, and yes, I do. Sorry it comes to this, but from the outstart you have not understood one thing ive posted. Instead, whn that occurs, you resort topersonal attacks, such as this one, to shift the focus away from your ignorance, instead falling back on attack the police because they are all corrupt.

You have had ample time to prove me wrong, and you have not. You have had the time to post any laws that support your argument, and you have not posted any. Instead you fall back to your opinion, which is not law.

That uis not a hard concept for most to understand, but you take the cake in this area.

Originally posted by Malcram
He 'serves' the public - supposedly - but clearly has no respect for them or their views. They're all wrong. He's right. And he wonders why more and more people are beginning to dislike cops?

And when the views of the public is to take the accused child molester out front and shoot him, should I allow it? Regardless of how perverse you think a crime is, or how pervcerse you think the person comitting the crime is, its not up to you the public or me the officer to decide if that person is guilty or not. Its up toa court of law presided over by a judge and the defendent given the right to be be judged by a jury of his or her peers.

So you are damn right that I could give a rats ass about what the public opinion is on someting when that opinion has nothing to do with a court of law. And oh by the way, you should have that exact same viewpoint if you actually new how your system of justice worked.

Instead, your so damn blind beause of your hatred towards the police, that you yourself are willing to violate the law and a perosns right in order to correct a perceived injustice in the system.

Dont look now, but your no better than the cops you accuse of being crooked are.

Originally posted by Malcram
He reminds me of King Cnut, who sat defiantly facing the sea, commanding the incoming tide to turn. That's a British historical reference which may not go over with everyone. So, I'll simplify it in a way that might.

No man is above the law and no man is below it; nor do we ask any man's permission when we ask him to obey it. Obedience to the law is demanded as a right; not asked as a favor.
Theodore Roosevelt

Comparing me to Cnut is intresting when you take into account his history an what he was able to do not only for his Danish realm, but the British realm as well. Or are you just quoting something without knowing the entire history behind the person?

Originally posted by Malcram
Xcathdra is a Cnut.

which doesnt change the fact you are still ignorant on how the law works and how the system works. But hey, feel free to try and dig up some more quotes to divert peoples attention from your lack of knowledge. You shold probably just stick to goiing after law enforcement though, using high knowldge in your posts will confuse them as much as it does you.

Originally posted by Malcram

Now where is that ignore button.

edit on 1-7-2011 by Malcram because: (no reason given)

Its gone, much to a lot of peoples irritation, including myself. However, ignoring a person because you dont wish to learn is not ignoring the problem, its actually furthering the problem by beleiving in your own ignorance while ignoring the truth, as well as refusing to learn it.

Originally posted by Lightrule
reply to post by Malcram

 

Its petty and stupid but when I look through thread and see almost no stars on his posts it makes me smile.

Not because he is disliked or anything, but because people are finally starting to see through the clouds of BS he is spewing.

Bless him tho, he fully believes in his arguments.

-Lightrule

I was not aware that this was a popularity contest.. Its sad you and others think that way. Also again thank you for proving my point that when you nolonger make make a legal argument, you instead turn back to personal attacks.

If you are so right about the laws, then post them and prove my argument wrong.

reply to post by Xcathdra


No man, all I'm posting are my FEELINGS about the law based on my experiences with it. Done deal. Its the same for you as well.

It appears as tho the other members of ATS FEEL the same way as I do, about the bullspit laws our "betters" have laid down for us to follow. I'm glad for that.

You on the other hand are defending laws that a majority of people believe are bullspit. Not because you feel these laws are right, but because it is your job it to uphold them.

And even if you do honestly believe all the millions upon millions of "laws" you have sworn to uphold are truly justified you are slowly seeing yourself become a member of a minority viewpoint. The people positioned higher than you are seeing this and they are trying desperately to use their power to squash any type of resistance to the existing power structures.

As for my star comment, it wasn't personal I simply observed that many others are NOT agreeing with you by not staring your comments. That is exactly what the stars are for to mark posts you like and/or agree with. I was just saying how it looks as if not many people agree with you.

-Lightrule

reply to post by Lightrule


One of the Greatest weapons a Police Officer has is Discression.

Meaning he can enforce the laws in various ways or even choose not to enforce the law -if need be.

I would prefer Cops be more educators than presecutors.