I'm glad you expected my answer on Texas, Steps...
And yes... I did just compare a war to what happened in Aurora. Wanna fight about it?[ROFL1][ROFL2][ROFL3]
Printable View
I'm glad you expected my answer on Texas, Steps...
And yes... I did just compare a war to what happened in Aurora. Wanna fight about it?[ROFL1][ROFL2][ROFL3]
[ROFL1]Quote:
Originally Posted by JM Ver. 2.0
Just for you....
[Driver][M2][PoPo]
haha.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharpienads
I didn't say they were the only ones that could defend us...
And yes, I'm just messing around... Gotta get my posts back some how. [Stooge]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steps
I'm glad I finally got a giggle out of you...
You should watch that show, by the way... You might feel the same way about that little piece of Texas. [ROFL2]
Your car is not an "extension" of your home.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fmedges
Quote:
Originally Posted by spqrzilla
Maybe this post marks the start of round two... [ROFL1]
JM Ver. 2.0
Is there a reason you are more interested in discussing the irrelevant made-up "facts" of your hypothetical and not discuss the facts of the actual incident?
Quote:
Originally Posted by spqrzilla
Yes. There is... Because the horse been beaten to death, revived by CPR, then beaten to death again. Then, just for good measure, another horse was also beatenn to death...
Agree to disagree should be the first and last post in almost all these threads...
Nothing will change how I feel about TX. I am from Texas!Quote:
Originally Posted by JM Ver. 2.0
[Beer]
You should be ashamed of your people...Quote:
Originally Posted by Steps
http://images.zap2it.com/images/tv-E...h-texas-16.jpg
Don't worry Obama will protect your constitutional rights...vote accordingly come November!
I just had a thought (yes it hurt, a little)...
What, if in the course of this "exigent circumstances" dragnet (call it what it is), during one of these "consent at gunpoint" searches, the officers in question discover that one of the detainees has a bench warrant out for a traffic FTA? Other than the anonymous tip, the officer in question would have had no reasonable suspicion or probable cause to make a stop, and thus only made contact with the subject as a result of the blanket stop. Regardless, the subject ends up going to jail. Now that the door has opened to these kinds of searches and detainments, where do we draw the line?
http://th243.photobucket.com/albums/...-fingeryou.gifQuote:
Originally Posted by JM Ver. 2.0
There's more than one Texan here....
Lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by TFOGGER
Wouldn't be a legal arrest and any good D attorney would get the entire thing tossed... It would also open the door for said arestee to sue. Which would then probably stop these sorts of searches...
See? I can play both sides... [ROFL1]
Quote:
Originally Posted by 00tec
I see I'm out numbered.... BRING IT ON!!!!
[M2]
You should know better JM...Quote:
Originally Posted by JM Ver. 2.0
DON'T MESS WITH TEXAS!
It's not nice to pick on the mentally handicapped![ROFL1]
I though so...fruit of the poison tree and all...Quote:
Originally Posted by JM Ver. 2.0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
Uhmm...Obama won Colorado....which state is handicapped?!?!?
[Beer]
Hey now! That's not fair! Texas doesn't have the People's Republic of Boulder and the Denver Metro area... where we all know that 90% of the population of those areas is Liberal. [Flower]Quote:
Originally Posted by Steps
Fruit of the poison tree refers to the exclusion of evidence. Specifically evidence obtained solely on the basis of information gleaned from an illegal search is suppressed or made not admissable as a remedial act for the illegal search.Quote:
Originally Posted by TFOGGER
An arrest warrant is an arrest warrant. Someone who is the subject of an arrest warrant can be arrested whenever found regardless of whether or not the "search" was legal. A judge is not going to release someone from custody on the basis of that someone being arrested pursuant to a pre-existing warrant on the basis of the search being illegal.
Very true! But hey...you "started" it!
lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by JM Ver. 2.0
I thought that the world learned after WW2 that "I was just following orders" isn't an excuse or defense
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeT
But being faced with "DO AS I SAY!" or be fired... I'll take my chances with do as they say... Unless it's deadly stuff.
TMI, my friend. TMI.Quote:
Originally Posted by JM Ver. 2.0
I only opened this thread today in the hopes that it would be locked. [Bang]
why do you want it locked? I was surprised too!
Adding one more troll to the ignore list. [Roll1]
i'm serious, I suck at the internet, why would you lock a thread?
When a thread turns into a train wreck and most all relevant discussion is exhausted, the mods are kind enough to put it out of it's misery.Quote:
Originally Posted by rutz777
roger that pook, makes sense. Thanks!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ah Pook
Quote:
Originally Posted by rutz777
Which is what happens to 99% of the cop threads on this forum... [ROFL1]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ah Pook
That is the most profound way it could have been put.
I so dearly hope you don't bring this level of drama and narcissism to your day job but I suspect that is being overly optimistic...Quote:
Originally Posted by JM Ver. 2.0
You take me way too seriously.Quote:
Originally Posted by hatidua
this thread is still going eh? good grief.
Quote:
Originally Posted by stevelkinevil
I know, I thought I was clear in the begging and pleading with the mods to shut it down...they are having a laugh...Torturing KevDen! [Coffee]
Quote:
Originally Posted by FromMyColdDeadHand
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockhound
I've only made it through the first 75 posts of this thread and feel the need to address something.Quote:
Originally Posted by cstone
CStone hit the nail on the head. LE did not have a description of the suspect and were not in what is officially recognized as hot pursuit. Because of these facts, the use of the exigency clause is invalid. While not absolute, it is very difficult to maintain officially recognized hot pursuit without maintaining direct eye contact/line-of-site with a known suspect. To exercise "exigent circumstances", you MUST combine "Hot pursuit" with "fleeing felon" (as in We were in hot pursuit [which can stand up in court] of a fleeing felon). This was not the case here. Individually, they do not justify most tactics.
On to another topic within this discussion...
This has already been mentioned a few times but I find this particularly alarming. While I'm sure (hope) there was more involved than was identified in the referenced news story, a particular statement in the story stands out like a red flag to me:
With more and more individuals realizing their obligation to their own personal safety begins with themselves and are exercising their rights to carry firearms, what if more individuals detained in this instance had been carrying? Would this have been enough to have gotten them arrested and their vehicles and other personal items confiscated until LE could sort through the most likely suspect?Quote:
“Once officers got to his car, they found evidence that he was who they were looking for,” Fania said. “When they searched the car, they found two loaded firearms.”
This entire situation disturbs me on multiple levels. And no, I would not grant authorization to search my vehicle (I've learned the hard way as well as being on the other side of this coin). Either be prepared to present uncontestable evidence of probable cause before a judge, or obtain a warrant (which also requires some degree of probable cause to satisy a judge).
We all know that simply exercising your Constitutional rights and refusing a search shouldn't be construed as a form of guilt, however, it is most often taken that way. As has been identified in some of the real life experiences of some of our members, there is a certain amount of leniency provided to the LE community to make it increasingly uncomfortable for you to refuse to cooperate. Anyone making the decision to exercise their rights needs to understand from the outset that to do this WILL come at the expense of your time and comfort. You can likely expect some degree of manhandling short of actual mistreatment. The longer you are detained or in custody increases the likelyhood that you will give them sufficient reason to charge you with a crime where they will likely receive a conviction. Techniques such as "kettling" are often used to escalate a situation beyond boiling point on behalf of the "suspect" and providing LE with justification to move you from "detainment" to "arrest". It's exceptionally easy to fall victim to these techniques and the officers have effectively used them on many suspects before they came across you. Once they decide you are to be arrested, it's equally easy to claim "resisting arrest" - which you really have little ability to prove your innocence against. Yes, I know the laws say "innocent until proven guilty", but when it's your word against 3+ duly sworn officers of the court, you haven't a chance.
Gentlemen, we are stuck in an untenable situation these days where we are damned if we do (damned if we acquiesce & forfeit our rights) and damned if we don't. We, as a society, have voted into office individuals who have put forth laws which make it practically impossible to maintain our rights. The obvious answer is to vote new people into office that still believe in what the Founding Fathers of this nation had in mind. Sadly, I never see this happening again. We, again, as a society, have happily and voluntarily handed over our essential freedoms in order to obtain some sort of promised security. Make peace with this reality now because this trend will only continue until we are no longer a free people.
ETA: I also feel the responsibility to make a few things here clear so as to not be misquoted:
(a) I have a profound respect for Law Enforcement and the officers who have to face difficult deciions and events every day on the job.
(b) I don't know and I am not making any claims that individuals here had their 4th Amendment rights violated via the searching of their vehicles. In fact, I honestly believe all individuals involved grantged authority to search.
(c) While I think the 2 hours is excessive, I understand and agree that once the decision to perform this dragnet was made, the decision to handcuff the affected individuals was the right this to do to protect officer and citizen safety. Unfortunately, had I been one of those people I would have been in tremendous pain after more than 10 minutes due to repetitive shoulder injuries.
ETA2:
I know your pain brother.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronin13
ETA3: Wait a minute. So what I'm hearing is that the guy they apprehended at the scene of this busy intersection (the guy with a couple of guns in his car) was NOT the armed robber? So, this guy was arrested (er, "apprehended") simply for the fact that he had 2 firearms in full exercise of his Constitutional rights in his vehicle? Oh, this is grand. I suspect HE will have something more to say to the City of Aurora about this even if the adult occupants of the other 18 car do not.
?? What happened to all of your posts?Quote:
Originally Posted by JM Ver. 2.0
Oh, I'm seeing the last page of posts here where there is a call to lock this thread.
Is that what all of you want? (I don't want to be accused of getting the last word in and then locking the thread before someone can rebutt my comments).
Nah, leave it open...it's like an all night Bitch-o-Rama...[ROFL1]