It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"If We Don't Have A RIGHT To Question A Police Officer Then We Are Living In A Police State!"

page: 19
60
<< 16  17  18    20  21 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
You do have a right to question the police. The problem is people dont understand there is a time and place for that. A 3rd party trying to question an officer who is on a traffic stop is not the time nor place. Demanding answers from an officer during the middle of a call or questioning doesnt quite work either.

While I understand people hate the police and so they are targeted because of it, how come you dont bother to go after the courts? Seriously, walk into a courtroom during the middle of a trial and question the judge and watch what happens.

While I understand the fear mongering peole like to do, they need to understand the law and how the system works before opening their mouths.

The guy was let go because no weapon was found in the vehicle, the driver had no warrants for his arrest, he had a valid license and proof of insurance. Exactly what would he be arrested for? Or are you suggesting that because the dirver was stopped and because he is black he should have been arrested?

Secondly, the lady was not arrested for recording the incident. She was arrested because she would not move back. A I have stated in other threads, you guys need to get that through your heads. She was NOT arrested because she was recording. Hell her own recording proves that.

I also find it intresting you guys ignore the females past history, namely the fact she has been arrested in the past for the exact same behavior while protesting foreclosures.
edit on 3-7-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)


your reasoning have failed you. here is a simple reason why it has failed you: recording is not questioning. that act lead to the officer being aggressive toward the woman doing the recording. he then order her to step back not as a police officer but as GOD himself. she then have the right to question his orders for the reason that it was not reasonable or was it dictated by law.



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
You do have a right to question the police. The problem is people dont understand there is a time and place for that. A 3rd party trying to question an officer who is on a traffic stop is not the time nor place. Demanding answers from an officer during the middle of a call or questioning doesnt quite work either.

While I understand people hate the police and so they are targeted because of it, how come you dont bother to go after the courts? Seriously, walk into a courtroom during the middle of a trial and question the judge and watch what happens.

While I understand the fear mongering peole like to do, they need to understand the law and how the system works before opening their mouths.

The guy was let go because no weapon was found in the vehicle, the driver had no warrants for his arrest, he had a valid license and proof of insurance. Exactly what would he be arrested for? Or are you suggesting that because the dirver was stopped and because he is black he should have been arrested?

Secondly, the lady was not arrested for recording the incident. She was arrested because she would not move back. A I have stated in other threads, you guys need to get that through your heads. She was NOT arrested because she was recording. Hell her own recording proves that.

I also find it intresting you guys ignore the females past history, namely the fact she has been arrested in the past for the exact same behavior while protesting foreclosures.
edit on 3-7-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)


You need to get something through your head; the cop told her to go in the house. She was under no obligation to go in the house, she was in her own front yard and reserves the right to observe and record from her own yard. I heard the cop say, "your'e behind me and I feel threatened", AFTER he turned his back on her. If you are going to sit there and tell me this cop wasn't manipulating the situation to create a reason to arrest her then you are no better than he is. You said yourself the guy they had stopped was cool; no reason to arrest him, he wasn't violent, no warrants, had proof of insurance and a valid driver's license, therefore this wasn't a volatile situation. It was not different than a "meter maid" situation.

You and I both know that this was about the camera. If she was just standing there with her arms crossed, this wouldn't have happened, and again, if you don't recognize that they your'e either a cop or a shill for big brother.



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 11:36 AM
link   
America must have more than 100k police officers, are u implying they are all evil? And part of a "police state" for fuhrer Obama?



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   
All this blame game, yet no one is adressing the issue of WHY she was recording, now she says racial profiling, so lets look at the evidence at hand, a black man in cuff's having is car searched. Now please, don't get me wrong, I fully understand a cop will do what ever he wants whenever he wants. But play along here, the idea of probable cause is that, at least as I have understood it over the last 44 years of my life is, you better have a damn good reason to cuff a human (kidnap and imprison) and violate his property. Now since this "human" wasn't given so much as a rolling stop ticket leads me to believe that these cops were caught profiling this person and should be fired. And you say?



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 11:58 AM
link   


While I understand people hate the police and so they are targeted because of it, how come you dont bother to go after the courts? Seriously, walk into a courtroom during the middle of a trial and question the judge and watch what happens.

Are you making this analogy because you believe the justice system is on equal footing as law enforcement? No wonder cops have this judge, jury and executioner mentality.



The guy was let go because no weapon was found in the vehicle, the driver had no warrants for his arrest, he had a valid license and proof of insurance. Exactly what would he be arrested for? Or are you suggesting that because the driver was stopped and because he is black he should have been arrested?

Why was the driver pulled over? Oh yeah, the Police State's favorite excuse: Probable Cause. Or was it because he was black, which in some jurisdictions might as well be Probable Cause?


Secondly, the lady was not arrested for recording the incident. She was arrested because she would not move back.

Since when does a cop without a warrant have the right to tell you what to do on your own property?


I also find it interesting you guys ignore the females past history, namely the fact she has been arrested in the past for the exact same behavior while protesting foreclosures.

Why don't you go into that same courtroom you talk about and present this irrelevant information to the judge on this case? The fact that you have to throw in this irrelevant character assassination nonsense shows that your argument is on shaky ground to begin with.



edit on 4-7-2011 by SphinxMontreal because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 12:00 PM
link   
reply to post by ABWarrior58
 


the benefeit of the doubt? there shoud be a non problem, what happend to the lady was a non crime the cop just made up a new law and arrested her on it all the other details do not matter the cop was wrong lol if only they could find a way to fine her for it.



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 12:02 PM
link   


But play along here, the idea of probable cause is that, at least as I have understood it over the last 44 years of my life is, you better have a damn good reason to cuff a human (kidnap and imprison) and violate his property.

Where you been living? Being a minority, having long hair, being a youth, etc. is probable cause in the USA.



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 12:10 PM
link   
I keep seeing many posters on here saying that the police acted and carried out the "LAW"
There is common LAW, and then there are statutes.
The statutes are not the common law, and if You do not agree to the police officers statutes over you , they cannot arrest You.
pjcjournal.wordpress.com...

There is no common law that says this lady could not question the police.



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 12:29 PM
link   
You can always count on a few things in these threads:
-accusations of 'cop-hating'
-insinuations that if you are not a cop, you dont know the law
-claims that cops have authority in areas they dont


like clockwork, really.



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 12:36 PM
link   
What many of you cop groupies and jack boot lickers fail to realize is that the police have VERY FEW legitimate reasons to give " orders" to us civilians.

There are only TWO (2) legal reasons for a thug cop to give an order: One is for SAFETY reasons, such as
directing traffic around some incident or otherwise protecting the public. The other is CUSTODY , in which a thug cop tells you to freeze, assume the position, or place your hand behind your back for cuffing.

These are the ONLY two legitimate ways a cop can give " orders". All others are ILLEGAL requests and may be ignored. A stinking thig cop cannot " order " you to shine his shoes, buy his lunch, tell you where you are going or where you have been, who your friends are or anything else. Cops do NOT have the legal right to demand answers to their interrogations or bullying , nor do they have any legal right to order you away from them, UNLESS you were so close that you caused a distraction or interference.

The thug cops CANNOT legally give " orders ' of any type and then arrest you when you fail to obey the illegal orders...telling a citizen to go into her home because she was filming the scum cops abusing another person is NOT a legal order. The ONLY way to teach these filthy, rights destroying pieces of human scum are to SUE the hell out of them, expose their crimes in the local media, and if possible begin a campaign of retribution against the offending cop so his infamous crimes cannot go unnoticed.

Cops are FAMOUS for lying and abusing our rights, and they revel in that sick power, which is bestowed on so many marginally intelligent bullies every day when badges are pinned on the shirts of idiots and twisted psychopaths arcoss this nation every month. Every new copper is itching to get out there and practice brutalizing the people, making themselves feel like real men .. most cops are insecure cowards and need the armor and numbers, as alone and without equipment they fall apart and whine and beg for help when anyone says BOO to them....witness the Tazers being used as torture devices anytime someone does not instantly obey any ridiculous " order ' given by some rookie who just got back from murdering Iraqui's without any repurcussions..

Some day, I predict that the cops in this nation will either stop the illegal actions they use constantly, or face the wrath of an armed citizenry with NO mercy for the thuggish and brutal strormtroopers who call themselves cops today. Maybe is cops had to watch their backs day and night they would get some respect back in their attitudes and realize that WE the People are their bosses, NOT the politicians who profit from the same old system that deprives us all of our God given rights...may that day come soon.

Many years ago, I arrived in Amsterdam on a day whwn the people had decided to fight the police over them trying to evict squatters from some abandoned buildings...it was a pitched fight,street to street, and many cop were hurt...the people literally chased the cops away from a huge area and held it for quite a while...the cops would NEVER walk on the streets back then..they would have been beaten senseless by the crowds...maybe if that happened here, a lot, the thusg would get the message; catch burglars and rapists and real criminals and leave the rest of the people the HELL ALONE!! All we can do is hope..



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wrong
Reading all your comments is hilarious. None of you know anything about this woman yet you take her side. If you actually delved into the history of this woman, you will find that she's been arrested before at protests. Her whole sob story has been carefully crafted. It is all an act and you all unfortunately have fallen for it. Yay denying ignorance!


So a history of being wrong renders this action wrong? That's circular logic. By applying your reasoning (if you want to call what you said "reason"), Woodrow Wilson was wrong to bring women's suffrage, Hitler was a saint for making Germany strong, and Nero became a better fiddler.

Rational people can look at this incident on its own merit and judge it for what it is: an infringement by the LEO on the 1st and 4th Amendment. Upon further review, it could possibly even be a violation of the 5th:

"nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;[/b]"

/TOA
edit on 4-7-2011 by The Old American because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 01:10 PM
link   
Fact: Anywhere in the world (over my course of observe cop behavior in the U.S., I've just also included them to the list)............you as a civillian SHOULD NOT question or respond to authority officers while they are conducting their business or not because

1) They are the law
2) They have superiority complex.
3) They do as they are told.....so they do not answer to you, tax-payer or not doesn't matter.
Tax-paying mean you pay your due to the authority....it DOES NOT mean you own them.....they own you.
4) You could go to jail, taser, or get shot if they see you as a threat to them (include 4 years old to 90 years old, we are all the same to them).

There are also many good cops.....I mean very upstanding honest officers out there helping to make a better world......but the chance that you meet them is very very low......count on your luck if you like, but I would not do that.

The fact is straight......it is up to you what you are going to do.



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 01:22 PM
link   
I love hearing people gripe about this. If an officer is conducting an investigation and your proximity makes him uncomfortable(within reason) or if he feels it interferes with his investigation, he can instruct you to move away if it is on your property or not. How can he focus on the person he's investigating if you are 10 feet away holding something in your hand? He probably thinks he's going to get shot at.

Secondly, many states have wiretapping laws and it is illegal in those states to record a conversation without the consent of all partys. In such places if an officers refuses to give you his consent to record or the person being investigated, then you must turn off the audio or stop recording.

Your recording may also be seized if it is evidence in a crime.

As far as the Good case, 99%of illegal wiretapping cases in circumstances like this are never prosecuted. New York has a one party consent wiretapping law, 1 party must consent to the recording prior to recording the conversation. She did not get consent prior to recording so she broke NY wiretapping law whether you agree with it or not. And it wasn't prosecuted like most of those cases. THe police didn't feel safe with her behind them which is understandable. She's had problems with the police before. SHe was obviously out there to make an issue, I wish they would have prosecuted her. SHe deserved it. SHe has issues.



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 01:22 PM
link   
What I want t know is whatever gave you the idea we DONT live in a police state?..Was it when obama revoked the Patroit Act?..Oh wait...was it when obama lived up to 20% of his campaign promises?..oh,wait...was it whe he closed gitmo?..oh,wait,..was it when he threw open the dorrs with his new TRANSPARENT office?..oh,wait..never mind



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by DrJay1975
Your recording may also be seized if it is evidence in a crime.


Not true. They can take it if it's used in a commission of a crime. If they need it for evidence they need a warrant.



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 



She never was arrested for recording the Police. She was arrested for failing to obey a lawful command.


IT WAS NOT A LAWFUL ORDER!!! She was on her own private property and posed no threat whatsoever to the officer. He had no authority to tell her what to do on her property. He was just teed off that he could not do as he pleased without getting caught on video tape. He was trying to intimidate her pure and simple!


Since the charges were dropped by the PA, MS. Good has since filed a civil suit for false arrest and violatin her civil rights - which wont go anywhere.


The charges were dropped because they were unlawful harassment, and intimidation. Good for her I hope she bankrupts these thugs and puts them out business!!!


They also ignore that MS. Good has been down this road prior to this incident, up to and including being arrested for failing to obey lawful commands by other officers while proteting foreclosures.


Standing up to these thugs enabling the banksters to steal the homes and wealth of the people even though they are the ones most believe are supposed to be protecting the people... Hmmmm Sounds like a good upstandingAmerican fighting for freedom and fighting fascism to me. MORE POWER TO HER!!!



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 01:42 PM
link   
reply to post by DrJay1975
 



Secondly, many states have wiretapping laws and it is illegal in those states to record a conversation without the consent of all partys. In such places if an officers refuses to give you his consent to record or the person being investigated, then you must turn off the audio or stop recording.


Ah no he is acting in a public capacity under color of law he has no right to privacy here! He is an agent of the state there is no right to privacy in any public or commercial capacity which he is operating under. He has no right to tell someone what to do on thier property as long as they are not posing any threat and no clear evidence of a crime being committed. This women was clearly posing no threat and violated no laws and he was acting the thug trying to intimidate her pure and simple!!!




edit on 4-7-2011 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by fleabit
 


you got all that from this thread?

its a two way thing, not a one way thing or even about taking sides. you could replace the word police officer in that post with the word 'people' and that is how alot of police men think they should treat the public.
edit on 4-7-2011 by lifeform11 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 01:50 PM
link   
What will ATS say when we really are in a police state? I think it'll be out of sensationalism and over exaggeration by then...



posted on Jul, 4 2011 @ 02:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


in the united states law enforcemret is twice as likely engage in criminal conduct that a normal citizen

fear of the police and suspision of misconduct before the fact are sane and valuable fears for the peaceful citizen in
the united states today




top topics



 
60
<< 16  17  18    20  21 >>

log in

join