Aurora PD

[clublights]

Is violating the rights of 19 people a little much, sure... I suppose... But, if one person were to have died because the police didn't act soon enough, then what's the bigger trade off?

Right's are RIGHTS. for a reason ....

What 19-20 of us have posted in this thread.. there a bouts right ?


well if taking all of our guns away saves just one life...


It's worth it .. right ?

Oh whats that ? it won't save a life?

Just like violating the rights of those folks ( more then 19 .. it was just 19 cars .. many had more then one person in them ) Didn't catch the bad guy.

[Steps]

To your first point....they had a description of the robbery victim in your example, they had no description of the robber or his verhicle in this case. Moot point.

To your second example....again you have a felon in a KNOWN location, no guessing, they know FOR SURE he is there. Again, in this case, they went off of an anonymous tip and had no idea if he was there at all, which he wasn't.

Yes, they did what they thought was right, but as it turns out sometimes, their choice is wrong. Police make mistakes, I have a lot in my family and they admit the same. They are human to!

I agree, no one was hurt. However, the fact they potentially put all of those people at risk, and violated certain rights, is still not right.

No justification will make a wrong "right". Wrong is simply "wrong".

[JM Ver. 2.0]

So you are capable of knowing folks emotions from reading plain text? Kudos to you....

Read the posts... You can tell...


So...because we were not there we have no reason to worry about our rights as citizens? An abuse of power and mistreatment of fellow citizens should be ignored by anyone who is not involved?

Hmm... Sure. I suppose you're right.. But if you're gonna do that... You shouldn't be mad at the COPS.. Just the one cop that made the order to detain. The rest were just following orders...

By your statements above I could surmise that you would be ok if Obama ordered a nuke strike in El Paso, TX, and because you were not involved or hurt in any way, you would be ok with it.

I don't live in Texas. Nor do I know anyone that lives in Texas. I do know this though... There is a show my mom tells me about called "Big Rich Texas." That show alone would make me not care if a nuke went off in Texas.





How has anyone in this thread directly told anyone involved how they should feel? Not one person in this thread has posted they were there, and I doubt anyone who has posted is in contact with anyone that was in order to tell them how to feel.

More than one person said that the people involved should be upset and sue... Go back and read. That's telling those involved how to feel.

A violation of rights is worth it to catch 4 criminals? Now you are sayng it is ok to violate the rights of innocent people in order to catch the few bad ones...wow.

Are you mad we dropped two nukes on Japan? I mean... All those innocent people we killed to kill just a few bad ones...

I understand you are getting a good laugh from the posts in this thread. What I find sad and laughable myself is your complete lack of understanding of what you are reading and your complete disregard of your own rights.

I understand it all more than you know... You just assume I don't...

Nobody said you're not entitled to an opinion. Don't try to make it sound like you're being victimized.

I wasn't. I hope you don't think that. I'm not a victim.

And the fact that no one talks about the good things cops do on here is not true. The bad posts do outnumber the good posts, that is true. But police officers are not above reproach. And there's a difference between love and respect. Just because someone doesn't love or even like police officers doesn't equate to disrespect.

You're right.. The comments made don't beam with disrespect at all...

And I hope we all keep discussing.

I do too. This is the most fun I've had all day! I forgot.. I don't drink...

Like you already said.. totally different..

But I'll play

Thanks for playing. I like games.

Nope I wouldn't be. The cops had more of a tip other then " in the area" and besides the odds of 5 of the same car being in the same place at the same time are astronomical .

That would be crazy, wouldn't it?

Look the real point is that stopping everyone "in an area" at gun point is just over the top. and to add to it... the "tactic" didn't even work . .they caught the guy hours later somewhere else. they can;t even say "well we got our man so it's ok" instead they did all of they FOR NOTHING! ( well ok not true .. they proved he wasn't there)

You're totally right. It didn't work. I wonder if the discussion would be different if it would have worked...

I just want you all to know... I still love all of you...

[FromMyColdDeadHand]

Originally Posted by JM Ver. 2.0
Looks like the only people pissed off so far are people that WEREN'T THERE... Which includes you... And 99% of the other people posting in this thread...

I love it... Keep going...

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Socialist.
Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out--
Because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.

[stevelkinevil]

JM I was an LEO, so to answer your earlier challenge, This incident was in fact not handled correctly. The ends do not justify the means.
Problem 1. A vague geographical area does not probable cause make! Had they had a description of a suspect, a vehicle ect.. then that is PC for a stop of said vehicle. You must still have PC to go under exigent circumstances. Had they had a suspect description and information that he was hiding in a motorists vehicle, PC exists there as well. They had nothing but a vague geographical area. You must have reasonable suspicion, and that does not include everyone, not enough information in this case to clearly state PC for the actions taken.
Problem 2. If you have GPS on the subject why in gods green earth stop 19 cars at a busy intersection going one by one pulling folks out and putting them in harms way, had the suspect been inclined to come out guns blazing he surely would have done so knowing they were going to get to him eventually. Now you have put many innocent lives at risk unnecessarily.
Problem 3. Consent to search as pointed out earlier is not valid if obtained under duress, gun point certainly qualifies as under duress. If exigent circumstances exist no consent is necessary but again, not enough information for valid PC existed with only a vague geographical locale.
The idea that you must support fellow officers actions and follow orders regardless of whether or not they are justified or correct is wrong.

[JM Ver. 2.0]

Right's are RIGHTS. for a reason ....

What 19-20 of us have posted in this thread.. there a bouts right ?


well if taking all of our guns away saves just one life...


It's worth it .. right ?

Oh whats that ? it won't save a life?

Just like violating the rights of those folks ( more then 19 .. it was just 19 cars .. many had more then one person in them ) Didn't catch the bad guy.

No... Because taking your guns would be a permanent(can't spell that word) loss of said right... These people lost it for 2 hours...

To your first point....they had a description of the robbery victim in your example, they had no description of the robber or his verhicle in this case. Moot point.

To your second example....again you have a felon in a KNOWN location, no guessing, they know FOR SURE he is there. Again, in this case, they went off of an anonymous tip and had no idea if he was there at all, which he wasn't.

Yes, they did what they thought was right, but as it turns out sometimes, their choice is wrong. Police make mistakes, I have a lot in my family and they admit the same. They are human to!

I agree, no one was hurt. However, the fact they potentially put all of those people at risk, and violated certain rights, is still not right.

No justification will make a wrong "right". Wrong is simply "wrong".

Like I said... It had nothing to do with it. I knew that.

But, acting on a tip. They thought they knew where he was.

[Steps]

Originally Posted by Steps
So you are capable of knowing folks emotions from reading plain text? Kudos to you....

Read the posts... You can tell...

You can "GUESS"



So...because we were not there we have no reason to worry about our rights as citizens? An abuse of power and mistreatment of fellow citizens should be ignored by anyone who is not involved?

Hmm... Sure. I suppose you're right.. But if you're gonna do that... You shouldn't be mad at the COPS.. Just the one cop that made the order to detain. The rest were just following orders...

It upsets me with everyone involved. Any officer there can step up and tell his fellow officers if he/she thinks someting is right or wrong.


By your statements above I could surmise that you would be ok if Obama ordered a nuke strike in El Paso, TX, and because you were not involved or hurt in any way, you would be ok with it.

I don't live in Texas. Nor do I know anyone that lives in Texas. I do know this though... There is a show my mom tells me about called "Big Rich Texas." That show alone would make me not care if a nuke went off in Texas.

I expected this response to be honest. Because you have no relations there and come to your own conclusions of a state from a T.V. show you have a complete diregard for human life.



How has anyone in this thread directly told anyone involved how they should feel? Not one person in this thread has posted they were there, and I doubt anyone who has posted is in contact with anyone that was in order to tell them how to feel.

More than one person said that the people involved should be upset and sue... Go back and read. That's telling those involved how to feel.

Yes, they stated their opinion. However, last time I checked, a person stating their opinion on an internet forum about someone does not generate any alerts out of thin air revealing what was said or telling them how they should feel.



A violation of rights is worth it to catch 4 criminals? Now you are sayng it is ok to violate the rights of innocent people in order to catch the few bad ones...wow.

Are you mad we dropped two nukes on Japan? I mean... All those innocent people we killed to kill just a few bad ones...

Comparing a war to a loss or abuse of our civil rights?!?!

I understand you are getting a good laugh from the posts in this thread. What I find sad and laughable myself is your complete lack of understanding of what you are reading and your complete disregard of your own rights.

I understand it all more than you know... You just assume I don't...
I only base my opinion off of what you are posting.


I just want you all to know... I still love all of you...

[JM Ver. 2.0]

JM I was an LEO, so to answer your earlier challenge, This incident was in fact not handled correctly. The ends do not justify the means.
Problem 1. A vague geographical area does not probable cause make! Had they had a description of a suspect, a vehicle ect.. then that is PC for a stop of said vehicle. You must still have PC to go under exigent circumstances. Had they had a suspect description and information that he was hiding in a motorists vehicle, PC exists there as well. They had nothing but a vague geographical area. You must have reasonable suspicion, and that does not include everyone, not enough information in this case to clearly state PC for the actions taken.
Problem 2. If you have GPS on the subject why in gods green earth stop 19 cars at a busy intersection going one by one pulling folks out and putting them in harms way, had the suspect been inclined to come out guns blazing he surely would have done so knowing they were going to get to him eventually. Now you have put many innocent lives at risk unnecessarily.
Problem 3. Consent to search as pointed out earlier is not valid if obtained under duress, gun point certainly qualifies as under duress. If exigent circumstances exist no consent is necessary but again, not enough information for valid PC existed with only a vague geographical locale.
The idea that you must support fellow officers actions and follow orders regardless of whether or not they are justified or correct is wrong.

I'm not supporting anyone... I never once said what they did was right... You've all assumed that though.

And, I think, given the situation anyone would have followed the order to stop all the cars. Just because of the speed at which it had to be done. But hey, I wasn't there... I donno.

Thanks for commenting though! All of your points are spot on.


Damnit.. Forgot again.. Not a beer guy...

[Sharpienads]

I understand 90% of you aren't going to like this, but hey, it's the truth.

I'd rather have the rights of 1 person violated to save the lives of 1,2,3,4,5,6 as many as you want to put there...

Is violating the rights of 19 people a little much, sure... I suppose... But, if one person were to have died because the police didn't act soon enough, then what's the bigger trade off?

I can't tell if you're just messing with us, or if you actually believe everything you're saying. If you do, well then I guess agree to disagree.

Liberty and living in a free society has a price, and that price is not getting you inalienable rights trampled on when it's for the greater good. I would rather the robber get away than to have one person's rights violated by anybody. A lot of your arguments hinge on the assumption that the police are the only ones capable of defending the populace (i.e., "what if one person died because the police didn't act soon enough" or "what if the robber shot other people because the police didn't do this or that"). This isn't and should not be the case.

My rights are not negotiable, and yours shouldn't be either. The fact that those involved are not pissed (that I know of) is very discouraging.

[JM Ver. 2.0]

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?