Originally Posted by stevelkinevil
Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums
Welcome to the Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums.
Welcome to the Colorado AR-15 Shooters Club Discussion Forums.
I like a good clean debate.
So far, we've kept it clean, free of name calling and such. Nothing to exhibit hate or anything. I, for one, don't feel the need to bash anyone's head in.
If people get tired of seeing it, don't open it. IMHO.
Last edited by 00tec; 06-07-2012 at 07:33.
This thread ripe to be whored, now.
Thomas, very good post. I agree with pretty much everything that you said. Without knowing the full circumstances of the case I make myself to comment only think about what I would potentially do in the event I were in the same circumstances that have been provided for by the media and by this thread.
That was yesterday... You can have the sloppy seconds though.
I had to address this because this is, how do they say, hitting the nail on the head. Kev will probably agree with me here, as would any of our LEOs, that while society and precedence can influence LEO behavior- not to mention policy instituted by higher ranking administration- the line between non-cooperation and standing up for your rights has been blurred quite a bit over the years. I've seen it, experienced it, and heard about it. It's very sad, and in a case like this- police trying to locate a fleeing suspect- I fear that the doors open for abusive tactics to be employed when tensions are running high. I would hope that we as a society would wake the hell up and see these transgressions and aid in "pumping the brakes" so that cops don't get themselves in trouble.
Moreover, on the flip side, we do not want to "pussify" our LEOs by putting a bunch of barriers in the way so that they question their actions in a hostile situation. As the Army taught me, hesitation can kill you, but that correlates quite differently to civilian law enforcement. I guess my point is that it's become so commonplace that in a high stress situation, like the one in this case, many don't stop and think if their rights are being violated and simply comply with toeing the line of constitutional rights tactics. I'm not saying the PD blatantly violated rights, they were under a lot of stress and on edge because of the circumstances and maybe used a little too aggressive options in trying to locate the suspect. Hopefully in the future, if, as Ginsue put it best, they didn't have a clear sight or exact location of the suspect, they would recognize a lack of need for use of such tactics. Of course there probably isn't going to be much backlash so we can all chalk this one up to setting a new precedence.
"There is no news in the truth, and no truth in the news."
"The revolution will not be televised... Instead it will be filmed from multiple angles via cell phone cameras, promptly uploaded to YouTube, Tweeted about, and then shared on Facebook, pending a Wi-Fi connection."
I had to address this because this is, how do they say, hitting the nail on the head. Kev will probably agree with me here, as would any of our LEOs, that while society and precedence can influence LEO behavior- not to mention policy instituted by higher ranking administration- the line between non-cooperation and standing up for your rights has been blurred quite a bit over the years. I've seen it, experienced it, and heard about it. It's very sad, and in a case like this- police trying to locate a fleeing suspect- I fear that the doors open for abusive tactics to be employed when tensions are running high. I would hope that we as a society would wake the hell up and see these transgressions and aid in "pumping the brakes" so that cops don't get themselves in trouble.
Moreover, on the flip side, we do not want to "pussify" our LEOs by putting a bunch of barriers in the way so that they question their actions in a hostile situation. As the Army taught me, hesitation can kill you, but that correlates quite differently to civilian law enforcement. I guess my point is that it's become so commonplace that in a high stress situation, like the one in this case, many don't stop and think if their rights are being violated and simply comply with toeing the line of constitutional rights tactics. I'm not saying the PD blatantly violated rights, they were under a lot of stress and on edge because of the circumstances and maybe used a little too aggressive options in trying to locate the suspect. Hopefully in the future, if, as Ginsue put it best, they didn't have a clear sight or exact location of the suspect, they would recognize a lack of need for use of such tactics. Of course there probably isn't going to be much backlash so we can all chalk this one up to setting a new precedence.
This is one of those things that people need to be careful with though...
The place to "fight this battle" isn't on the side of the road or during a situation. The place is in court. Just like a traffic ticket.. If you're getting a ticket you're getting a ticket. Arguing with the cop on the side of the road won't change that. You're gonna have to do it in court.
To make your life and the lives of the police you're dealing with easier... Fight the battle in court. Court is safe. No one is going to shoot you in court... No one is going to throw you on the ground in court...
Telling the cop to piss off (in a sence) during a high stress situation isn't going to go well for either person involved. Go with the flow, fight it out in court.
WHOA, really? So it actually DID happen to someone exercising their Constitutional rights? Now this is getting interesting...
μολὼν λαβέ
But this brings to the discussion now what's the difference between arguing with a cop and respectfully exercising your right to refuse consent to a warrantless search? Now I know you see what I'm getting at here, but if a cop is looking for a suspect we must stand by the motto of justice "innocent until PROVEN guilty" and the proof is in the pudding, they must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you're in the wrong. Simply saying (and I stress be respectful) "I refuse to give consent to any searches" is just you following the law and exercising your rights... what the LEO interprets that as is where we risk going into abuse of power or failure to do their job properly if it's construed as something it really isn't. Otherwise, they can feel free to move on and let me go about my business in peace.
"There is no news in the truth, and no truth in the news."
"The revolution will not be televised... Instead it will be filmed from multiple angles via cell phone cameras, promptly uploaded to YouTube, Tweeted about, and then shared on Facebook, pending a Wi-Fi connection."
Eh.. Depends on the situation.. Guns drawn, yelling "Get on the ground!"... I suggest you refrain from saying anything and get on the ground. That's just me though... I tend to do what ever the police ask me to do.. But, you all know what I do for work.. Granted, I did that even before I worked here.
I think there are few cops out there with the mindset of, "Let's go mess with people today." I think most of them are honest people and they're just doing their job. Choices have to be made and I'm sure most of them believe that, at the time, their choice is the right one. Mistakes happen though.
Just be glad this was a "harmless" mistake. When I say that I mean no one got hurt...
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote