Excessesive Force

a reply to: thefourthjokerscard

What you have described is much the way policng is done in the UK. It largely works because the population is disarmed and unable to protect themselves legally.

I think whats worked out in the US is better, i.e., the cops have guns to protect themselves but are no longer expected to respond to active scenes. They only show up AFTER the situation has gone neutral and then only to protect the clean-up crew, EMT and Fire.

a reply to: Grimpachi

One reason is using names of informants.

There can be nefarious reasons for doing anything. That doesn’t mean there are only nefarious reasons for it. I’m glad you’re “sure” nobody would want to see that and I admit it was a bit of a silly example. The fact remains that those who demand continuous recording and access to the recording by anybody who wants it are pushing for things they have zero reason or right to.

Cops on the street need guns. They are not out there to commit suicide. Wake up OP. Criminals have guns, crazy people have guns. To do their jobs Cops need guns in this country.

Only a person who is worried about getting shot while committing a crime has to worry about cops having guns and shooting them. Be civil and do not piss off a cop when you are confronted, act respectful to the man who actually is protecting the people. Sure, there are some bad cops, but the vast majority of them are decent people just trying to do their job to protect the interests of us citizens.

a reply to: vethumanbeing
Don't hammer the guy/gal. It's not called for here.

Some years ago, the discussion came up as to whether it is the police responsibility to protect citizens and a determination was made that they are under no legal obligation to protect people. If you think about this, police are employees of corporate entities. Cities, towns, states, the nation is a structured corporate entity. All but county sheriff's are corporate employees hired to protect corporate entities assets.
Does that help you understand.

a reply to: CharlesT

The discussion was whether or not a person can sue law enforcement for not protecting them and the court ruled that no, you can’t sue your local LE agency for not preventing somebody from breaking into your house specifically. Law enforcement has a duty to the public as a whole, not to you as a private person. They are obligated to protect the public as a whole, not CharlesT as a person.

a reply to: Shamrock6
I won't contest that. It is still up for debate, I guess. Regardless, I live in a sparsely populated area in my state and I don't depend on the police for my security.
And I don't hassle them if I get pulled over either.

Yes, you remember better than I do, that discussion.

originally posted by: opethPA
I'm a lazy, waste of flesh criminal doing something illegal and I'm armed.

Now I'm a cop, "stop doing your crime"

What a perfect description of a cop !

originally posted by: gallop

originally posted by: opethPA
I'm a lazy, waste of flesh criminal doing something illegal and I'm armed.

Now I'm a cop, "stop doing your crime"

What a perfect description of a cop !

Lemme guess..you probably have some criminal element, be it something really selfish like DUI or whatever, to you so you felt offended.

All the same, I see what you did there.. =)

Agree wholeheartedly!

Only private citizens exercising their 2A rights should be afforded the protection of carrying firearms.
After all,even if armed with a mighty tazer, when every second counts, the police are always minutes away.

ganjoa

a reply to: Shamrock6
If you are still watching this thread, I have a question for you.
If police are not charged with protecting the individual, are, or should individuals be subjected to police authority? Does that not abrogate the individuals privilege to defy police authority? Or is this relationship skewed in the police and corporate entity's favor but in essence, detrimental to an individual's rights and freedoms?
Serious question here.



I'd like to stick around for a reply but I have to go see my sister.

a reply to: CharlesT

Good question. The short answer is no, it doesn’t.

Law enforcement officers aren’t acting from an authority granted to themselves by themselves. Nor does a law enforcement agency. The authority and powers are granted to them by the state. Or, to use another word, granted to them by the public as a whole. When a person defies a law enforcement action, they are defying the public as a whole. They aren’t defying the officer as an individual but rather defying the officer as an agent of the state. That’s why criminal cases are “state v person” rather than “arresting officer v arrestee.”

Beyond that, your question starts to touch on “sovereign citizen” territory which could be, and should be, a thread of its own.

a reply to: Shamrock6
I'm certainly no sovereign citizen but I think you kinda reinforced my point in that they are corporate employees. Just because the corporation is our government means little to me in formulating my opinion but we all have one we are welcome to. How about J-walking, or saying something derogatory about the state, or depriving me of my liberty of buying an over the counter antihistamine that I now have to show a drivers license and be fingerprinted, to buy what used to be freely available until the state decided to restrict my access because stupid people abuse it. Or mandating fireproof cigarettes because careless people don't use good discretion and burn themselves up. Should I have to pay twice the price because the state has placed such an outrageous tax on tobacco trying to get people to quit. Or forcing people to purchase health insurance even if they don't want it. Every day, bleeding heart do gooders are slowly chipping away at our freedoms.

I live on a rural highway. At one time I was driving trucks locally and every Friday afternoon, the State Police Training Academy let out and the new officers from various city and state agencies would be spilling out onto the highways running 20 miles over the speed limit, every Friday without fail.
One Friday, I was just going to work a police car from the town north of me came flying through a posted intersection just 1000 feet south of me doing 80 miles an hr. I got in my truck and tried to keep up with him but I couldn't. When I drove around to the city jail, he was just emptying out the trunk of the car and I just stopped, rolled down my window and asked if that was him. He looked at me with a startled stair and said absolutely nothing so I told him that if I had been driving that way, at the very least I would get a speeding ticket and maybe even a reckless driving charge. I rolled up my window and drove away.

Yes, this is a discussion that requires it's own thread, for sure. I don't have all the answers here. But I truly do sense a need for relationships between individuals, cops, and corporate governance over free citizens needs closer examination.

The truth is that our constitution prohibits the federal government from even passing all of the myriad of federal statutes governing individual citizens that are reserved to the states. Our federal government, and even the states and municipalities is morphing into a tyrannical, all powerful oppressor of our civil rights through regulations originating from all of the different agencies created through the years. Congress doesn't pass unconstitutional laws to govern us. They just created the massive bureaucracy to govern, or might I say, dictate our daily lives.
Well that's enough BS. Have a good evening.




Go to your local ChinaMart, buy a new 5 gallon gas can and get it filled. Then go to your car and try to pour that gasoline into your tank. You can't hardly do it because some swamp creature was sitting at a desk trying to come up with any idea just to justify their presence on a government job. The gasoline spout is just one example. Stupid, asinine sheat.

I bought a new wood stove several years ago. Now instead of vent a little dirty smoke I vent one hell of alot of clean smoke because the EPA put so restrictive a mandate on efficiency of new stoves you can't damper them down any more and the only means to regulate the heat output is bythe amount of wood you put in it. They ruined wood stove heating and probably, in time the wood stove market.
Well, I ended up gutting all of the crap required to meet their standard and started putting out a little dirty smoke when I was through with it


By the way, by restricting my access to my favorite sinus med, the just created another black market for the drug cartels in Mexico to ship the crap north by the truckload.

originally posted by: 2Faced
Often that kind of situation needs a quick and immediate response. When lives are at stake there’s no time to wait for a special team to arrive.

This is not true...Cops don't stop crimes with their guns or anything else....Cops go investigate after crimes have been committed....absolutely brilliant idea...disarm most of them...force them to use protocals….and use different methods....same with high speed chases...stop them...in todays world there is no escape if the Cops put in the work.

a reply to: Shamrock6

Literally nothing you said is relevant to the question you asked, or my answer. You have a beef with the laws, talk to the people that write them. If you want to challenge the laws in court, knock yourself out. You want to argue about it, or something else, on the side of the road with a cop then good luck to you.

They should have these teams available with backup. Have u ever had a sandbag shot at u? It really hurts

a reply to: 2Faced

a reply to: beyondknowledge

Well im thinking that having a gun on ur side, might have some considerable influence to if they are used or not?

a reply to: Plotus

Thank u for your support

a reply to: Stupidsecrets

So they send out this suggested specialists. If disbatch knows there is a gun on sence would make it presumably easier in a hypotethical world.

a reply to: beyondknowledge

That would be a lot of work, and sounds like more of a job for the army, or a firefighter

a reply to: FlukeSkywalker

Im actually a gun owner myself believe it or not