College Student Tackled in Her Desk By Cops Because She Smoked a Cigarette Outside

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
LOL....campus police....nothing better to do. These guys were wanna be real police but couldn't cut the mustard.

I wasn't going to communicate this very sediment but seeing that the cat is out of the bag... YEP in CAPS even..

I'll co-sign this.

Personal Observations after 1,000's of hours of police work in a Ca. 'hotbed'... There are folks cut out for 'The Job' and then there are NOT. The ones that are worth their salt will actually want to start in a bigger dep't. to help more people, these are empathetic people after all. Then You have the guy that got beat up in high school and now has a vendetta and that badge becomes heavier and heavier than ever. Now some guys will get burned out, divorced, booze it up, get another divorce and then HAVE to continue to work because of bills. In the Police Academy they stress "Not to get caught up w/the 3 B's Booze, Broads and/or Bills" Younger guys as Campus Cops (Rubber Gun Squad) doesn't bode well for anyone.. They couldn't get into Chicago PD or Schaumberg for that matter but I bet they go to the bigger cities and badge their way into bars and act stupid... Wanna bet?

Now I feel like IA... hahahaha

namaste

originally posted by: TycoonBarnaby

originally posted by: Enochstask

originally posted by: TycoonBarnaby

originally posted by: Enochstask
a reply to: TycoonBarnaby

Why do you laugh when someone uses Nazi and Liberals interchangeably? If they wanted to talk to her outside the classroom so they wouldn't disrupt the class and she refused, and then it lead to this situation, then I don't have a problem. I mean we can't have people deciding whether or not they want to go with law enforcement because nobody would go.

I laugh because the definitions of those two words are not at all similar. Maybe I should state this: I don't self identify as a "liberal", "nazi", "progressive", "neocon" etc.

By all means, you are free to believe and go along with whatever a law enforcement officer tells you to do. Enjoy your authoritarianism.

So if some man rapes your mother and the police spot him and pull him over then asks him to step out of the car to answer some questions, and he says "no" you are okay with that? I know her issue was a cigarette but violators of laws cannot pick and choose when they want to talk to police. Like I said earlier maybe they just wanted to talk to her.

No one is ever required to talk to a law enforcement officer. If the law enforcement officers have reasonable suspicion to detain someone for rape, then they can arrest them. STILL, the person being arrested does not have to talk to the law enforcement officers. Learn the laws you are subjected to.

Well you are a little more hard core than me. I don't see all law enforcement officers as the enemy like you do, and I sure as hell am not going to get into semantics with a stressed out Los Angeles police officer that has to deal with scumbags all day.

originally posted by: Enochstask

originally posted by: TycoonBarnaby

originally posted by: Enochstask

originally posted by: TycoonBarnaby

originally posted by: Enochstask
a reply to: TycoonBarnaby

Why do you laugh when someone uses Nazi and Liberals interchangeably? If they wanted to talk to her outside the classroom so they wouldn't disrupt the class and she refused, and then it lead to this situation, then I don't have a problem. I mean we can't have people deciding whether or not they want to go with law enforcement because nobody would go.

I laugh because the definitions of those two words are not at all similar. Maybe I should state this: I don't self identify as a "liberal", "nazi", "progressive", "neocon" etc.

By all means, you are free to believe and go along with whatever a law enforcement officer tells you to do. Enjoy your authoritarianism.

So if some man rapes your mother and the police spot him and pull him over then asks him to step out of the car to answer some questions, and he says "no" you are okay with that? I know her issue was a cigarette but violators of laws cannot pick and choose when they want to talk to police. Like I said earlier maybe they just wanted to talk to her.

No one is ever required to talk to a law enforcement officer. If the law enforcement officers have reasonable suspicion to detain someone for rape, then they can arrest them. STILL, the person being arrested does not have to talk to the law enforcement officers. Learn the laws you are subjected to.

Well you are a little more hard core than me. I don't see all law enforcement officers as the enemy like you do, and I sure as hell am not going to get into semantics with a stressed out Los Angeles police officer that has to deal with scumbags all day.

I don't see law enforcement officers as enemies. I see them as law enforcement officers. Knowing your legal rights is not semantics.

a reply to: Enochstask

Where then do you find sympathy for liberals? At Walmart?

originally posted by: TycoonBarnaby

originally posted by: Enochstask

originally posted by: TycoonBarnaby

originally posted by: Enochstask

originally posted by: TycoonBarnaby

originally posted by: Enochstask
a reply to: TycoonBarnaby

Why do you laugh when someone uses Nazi and Liberals interchangeably? If they wanted to talk to her outside the classroom so they wouldn't disrupt the class and she refused, and then it lead to this situation, then I don't have a problem. I mean we can't have people deciding whether or not they want to go with law enforcement because nobody would go.

I laugh because the definitions of those two words are not at all similar. Maybe I should state this: I don't self identify as a "liberal", "nazi", "progressive", "neocon" etc.

By all means, you are free to believe and go along with whatever a law enforcement officer tells you to do. Enjoy your authoritarianism.

So if some man rapes your mother and the police spot him and pull him over then asks him to step out of the car to answer some questions, and he says "no" you are okay with that? I know her issue was a cigarette but violators of laws cannot pick and choose when they want to talk to police. Like I said earlier maybe they just wanted to talk to her.

No one is ever required to talk to a law enforcement officer. If the law enforcement officers have reasonable suspicion to detain someone for rape, then they can arrest them. STILL, the person being arrested does not have to talk to the law enforcement officers. Learn the laws you are subjected to.

Well you are a little more hard core than me. I don't see all law enforcement officers as the enemy like you do, and I sure as hell am not going to get into semantics with a stressed out Los Angeles police officer that has to deal with scumbags all day.

I don't see law enforcement officers as enemies. I see them as law enforcement officers. Knowing your legal rights is not semantics.

I feel you are hostile towards law enforcement.

originally posted by: Enochstask

originally posted by: TycoonBarnaby

originally posted by: Enochstask
a reply to: TycoonBarnaby

Why do you laugh when someone uses Nazi and Liberals interchangeably? If they wanted to talk to her outside the classroom so they wouldn't disrupt the class and she refused, and then it lead to this situation, then I don't have a problem. I mean we can't have people deciding whether or not they want to go with law enforcement because nobody would go.

I laugh because the definitions of those two words are not at all similar. Maybe I should state this: I don't self identify as a "liberal", "nazi", "progressive", "neocon" etc.

By all means, you are free to believe and go along with whatever a law enforcement officer tells you to do. Enjoy your authoritarianism.

So if some man rapes your mother and the police spot him and pull him over then asks him to step out of the car to answer some questions, and he says "no" you are okay with that? I know her issue was a cigarette but violators of laws cannot pick and choose when they want to talk to police. Like I said earlier maybe they just wanted to talk to her.

I don't think smoking a cigarette and raping someone's mom is the same thing.
I would've ignored them too and just have gone back to class.

They're campus cops.
They gave a warning.
Warning was accepted.
They didn't have to snort meth and turn it into some kind of scene from The Wire or something.
She pays probably more money in the year to go to school then they make in that same year.
Warning accepted officer. Now move along.

originally posted by: NowWhat
a reply to: Enochstask

Where then do you find sympathy for liberals? At Walmart?

When they clap for Frosty the Hag when she says “Earlier today I announced that as president I will take steps to ‘ban the box,’ so former presidents won’t have to declare their criminal history at the very start of the hiring process.”

a reply to: Enochstask

Boy, for a thread that has nothing to do with Hillary, or liberals, you Republicans just can't stay on topic. Oh wait, let me guess, you're "not" a Republican?

You call liberals "Nazi's", but you seem to have no problems with law enforcement behaving like the SS, interesting

originally posted by: TycoonBarnaby

originally posted by: Enochstask
a reply to: infolurker

Liberals create these Nazi colleges. Smoke free zones, gender free-for-all bathrooms and when they got up in their own crap then they cry like babies. I really don't have much sympathy for Liberals in colleges.

I have to laugh when someone uses the words 'liberal' and 'nazi' to describe the same thing.

Why? Left-wing ideology is pro-socialist which means they solve problems by increasing the size and power of government (social programs are run by the government). Right-wing ideology is generally more independent (entrepreneurship, private ownership) and free market capitalist, which means less government and more freedom.

On this spectrum Facism (like the Nazis) are an extreme left wing ideology. Anarchism is on the extreme right.

That doesn't mean liberals necessarily agree with what the Nazis did, but their ideology is inherently big government. Neither do conservatives necessarily want anarchy, but most generally oppose government intervention into people's lives.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
LOL....campus police....nothing better to do. These guys were wanna be real police but couldn't cut the mustard.

THey are real police.

Or, rather, may be "real police", depending on state and the type of school

blogs.findlaw.com...

originally posted by: mymymy
a reply to: Enochstask

Boy, for a thread that has nothing to do with Hillary, or liberals, you Republicans just can't stay on topic. Oh wait, let me guess, you're "not" a Republican?

You call liberals "Nazi's", but you seem to have no problems with law enforcement behaving like the SS, interesting

I have never had a cop force me to buy a healthcare policy. What I find peculiar is all of you Liberals telling me I should know my laws when it comes to law enforcement, yet I was forced to buy a healthcare policy against my will. It never said in the Constitution I need to buy what the government tells me to.

originally posted by: Enochstask

originally posted by: TycoonBarnaby

originally posted by: Enochstask
a reply to: TycoonBarnaby

Why do you laugh when someone uses Nazi and Liberals interchangeably? If they wanted to talk to her outside the classroom so they wouldn't disrupt the class and she refused, and then it lead to this situation, then I don't have a problem. I mean we can't have people deciding whether or not they want to go with law enforcement because nobody would go.

I laugh because the definitions of those two words are not at all similar. Maybe I should state this: I don't self identify as a "liberal", "nazi", "progressive", "neocon" etc.

By all means, you are free to believe and go along with whatever a law enforcement officer tells you to do. Enjoy your authoritarianism.

So if some man rapes your mother and the police spot him and pull him over then asks him to step out of the car to answer some questions, and he says "no" you are okay with that? I know her issue was a cigarette but violators of laws cannot pick and choose when they want to talk to police. Like I said earlier maybe they just wanted to talk to her.

You don't initiate a conversation by throwing someone to the floor.
WOW! Equating rape with violation of a university college campus policy isn't much exaggeration is it? University councils can't make laws, only policy. Now, had she attempted to put the ciggie out on the cop's forehead...but she didn't, did she? She walked away---a crime?
Those two were thugs, plain and simple. Their behavior defined them.

originally posted by: diggindirt

originally posted by: Enochstask

originally posted by: TycoonBarnaby

originally posted by: Enochstask
a reply to: TycoonBarnaby

Why do you laugh when someone uses Nazi and Liberals interchangeably? If they wanted to talk to her outside the classroom so they wouldn't disrupt the class and she refused, and then it lead to this situation, then I don't have a problem. I mean we can't have people deciding whether or not they want to go with law enforcement because nobody would go.

I laugh because the definitions of those two words are not at all similar. Maybe I should state this: I don't self identify as a "liberal", "nazi", "progressive", "neocon" etc.

By all means, you are free to believe and go along with whatever a law enforcement officer tells you to do. Enjoy your authoritarianism.

So if some man rapes your mother and the police spot him and pull him over then asks him to step out of the car to answer some questions, and he says "no" you are okay with that? I know her issue was a cigarette but violators of laws cannot pick and choose when they want to talk to police. Like I said earlier maybe they just wanted to talk to her.

You don't initiate a conversation by throwing someone to the floor.
WOW! Equating rape with violation of a university college campus policy isn't much exaggeration is it? University councils can't make laws, only policy. Now, had she attempted to put the ciggie out on the cop's forehead...but she didn't, did she? She walked away---a crime?
Those two were thugs, plain and simple. Their behavior defined them.

I didn't equate rape with smoking a cigarette. My point was we are going to have a problem if all people who don't follow the law start picking and choosing when they will or will not talk to the police. I was picking an extreme opposite to make my point.

a reply to: Enochstask

Again, what does this have to do with this thread?

You want to piss and moan about liberals, start a thread. WHY are you seemingly OK with law enforcement behaving like brownshirts if liberals are the Nazis?

a reply to: Enochstask

the problem with an extreme example to make a point is that it is derived from a false equivocation.

Seriously...smoking a cigarette...is worth physical contact with the police? What did that officer hope to gain by the interaction? Is it about the law, or is it about his ego and a demand that he be treated with unearned respect?

She was annoyed by his pettyness. So she walked away. No crime happened...as he felt comfortable with a "warning" being given verbally.

Im the kind of guy that ignores inconvenient laws as a daily habit. Like the "no smoking" ordinance atthe local hospital. Ill smoke in my car (or, would, when I smoked). If i am standing outside, even, there is no victim to my "crime". Its a pointless regulation that seizes rights without returning a tangible benefit to the public. Basically: its a social bully law.

Damned straight I'd ignore it. Just on principle.

originally posted by: mymymy
a reply to: Enochstask

Again, what does this have to do with this thread?

You want to piss and moan about liberals, start a thread. WHY are you seemingly OK with law enforcement behaving like brownshirts if liberals are the Nazis?

Not that it's any of your business, but I was answering another ATS members question.
Did you see or hear what the campus officers and the woman talked about before the altercation and phone recording started? None of us did. My point was, if people start picking and choosing when they talk to law enforcement then we have a problem. If she did or didn't do anything wrong it will come out in court. If the law enforcement were wrong, then let the punishments begin. For all we know the law enforcement officers might of just wanted to talk to her outside so they wouldn't disturb the class.

originally posted by: Enochstask

originally posted by: mymymy
a reply to: Enochstask

Again, what does this have to do with this thread?

You want to piss and moan about liberals, start a thread. WHY are you seemingly OK with law enforcement behaving like brownshirts if liberals are the Nazis?

Not that it's any of your business, but I was answering another ATS members question.
Did you see or hear what the campus officers and the woman talked about before the altercation and phone recording started? None of us did. My point was, if people start picking and choosing when they talk to law enforcement then we have a problem. If she did or didn't do anything wrong it will come out in court. If the law enforcement were wrong, then let the punishments begin. For all we know the law enforcement officers might of just wanted to talk to her outside so they wouldn't disturb the class.

Upon issuing the verbal warning the "detainment" ended. What legal reason did they have to detain her after that? Anyone can choose to not speak to a LEO at any time.

a reply to: Enochstask

My point was, if people start picking and choosing when they talk to law enforcement then we have a problem

You Republicans like to go on and on about our rights and how the "left" want to take them away, you have the right to not speak to law enforcement, which means

For all we know the law enforcement officers might of just wanted to talk to her outside so they wouldn't disturb the class.

Then they could have easily waited until the class was over

And no, none of us know what was said before the altercation started, but they could have waited until the class was over. Meanwhile, all you Republicans keep stating that it's the "liberals" who are "Nazis' and "fascists", but you're the ones that always say we should bow down to authority all the time

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan
a reply to: Enochstask

the problem with an extreme example to make a point is that it is derived from a false equivocation.

Seriously...smoking a cigarette...is worth physical contact with the police? What did that officer hope to gain by the interaction? Is it about the law, or is it about his ego and a demand that he be treated with unearned respect?

She was annoyed by his pettyness. So she walked away. No crime happened...as he felt comfortable with a "warning" being given verbally.

Im the kind of guy that ignores inconvenient laws as a daily habit. Like the "no smoking" ordinance atthe local hospital. Ill smoke in my car (or, would, when I smoked). If i am standing outside, even, there is no victim to my "crime". Its a pointless regulation that seizes rights without returning a tangible benefit to the public. Basically: its a social bully law.

The problem with your premise is we don't know what happened before the phone started recording. Maybe she flipped her cigarette (which would be assault) at the officer. That in turn might of got her a suspension from campus, but first they had to taker to an administrator. We haven't heard the officers version yet. Maybe she saw that the black girl last week is going to get a payday and she was creating that scenario. If the officers are guilty then let the punishments commence.
As for what you typed that I highlighted in bold. That was my original point! Liberals make all of these dopey social bully laws and she was snarled in her own Liberal mind set which ended up in a bad situation.

Even if there becomes a total lack of justice and a complete absence of regress of grievances in America, there will still be plenty of rope and trees.

This is something that should not be lost on 320 million Americans.