If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   Freedom of the press still exists, as long as you're not a journalist reporting about a police officer beating up a handcuffed kid in a high school cafeteria   (ireport.cnn.com) divider line 206
    More: Scary, nullification, wiretaps, cafeterias, jury selection, Officer Darren Murphy, journalists, high schools  
•       •       •

16877 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Aug 2012 at 6:10 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



206 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-04 11:08:16 PM
They should have just let the protesters sit there as long as they wanted. It's their campus, right? They own it. Why not let them set up permanent encampments on the sidewalks and do whatever else they felt like? Rules are only for conservative boot lickers.

/amidoinitright?
 
2012-08-04 11:18:40 PM

SevenizGud: ongbok: defended the cop who maced the college kids that were peacefully sitting and protesting

Peacefully sitting and blocking the sidewalk and causing a distruption that made it difficult for people to make it to class.

You forgot that part. If they had been sitting peacefully OFF the sidewalk, and got maced, then I'd agree with you.

Your other examples are just as shiatty.


So they were sitting peacefully on the sidewalk. If they were off, then nothing would have happened. Are you saying that the fact that they were obstructing people from using the sidewalk justifies spraying them? If not, what you said isn't relevant is it?
 
2012-08-04 11:27:36 PM

evilboyevil: I don't get it. Do DAs have to press charges when a cop places an arrest? Don't they get some sort of discretion? State attorneys deserve just as much hate for this, as well as state congressmen, who are unwilling to change a law that was meant to protect the people from being wiretapped by the government.


This law is meant to protect citizens from each other, not from the government. I'm sure it contains exemptions for law enforcement agents who have proper warrants for wiretapping.

Why should the DA refuse to press charges in this case? There is excellent evidence that the defendant did break the law.
 
2012-08-04 11:45:22 PM

Silly Jesus: They should have just let the protesters sit there as long as they wanted. It's their campus, right? They own it. Why not let them set up permanent encampments on the sidewalks and do whatever else they felt like? Rules are only for conservative boot lickers.

/amidoinitright?


5/10. Needs more "death to cops" and "loss of freedom." Add in some of that and they you will be doing it right.

:-D
 
2012-08-04 11:51:45 PM

andyfromfl: SevenizGud: ongbok: defended the cop who maced the college kids that were peacefully sitting and protesting

Peacefully sitting and blocking the sidewalk and causing a distruption that made it difficult for people to make it to class.

You forgot that part. If they had been sitting peacefully OFF the sidewalk, and got maced, then I'd agree with you.

Your other examples are just as shiatty.

So they were sitting peacefully on the sidewalk. If they were off, then nothing would have happened. Are you saying that the fact that they were obstructing people from using the sidewalk justifies spraying them? If not, what you said isn't relevant is it?


Not defending the cop (who was fired, if I remember correctly), but if they were lawfully ordered to clear the sidewalk then what would you have the cops do if they refuse to leave? Just let them sit there? Pepper spray is some pretty nasty stuff, but it is effective and it does not cause serious injury to the people. With all of the protesters locking arms it would be pretty hard to start trying to pry everyone apart without manhandling them and thus risking physical injury to the protestors. And pepper spray is certainly kinder than clubbing them.

Also, their sitting their peacefully is not an issue. The issue is whether or not they were breaking the law. While we do have the right of free association (and by extension the right to protest) that does not grant people the right to break the law while protesting. I do not know the legality of the situation at that particular event (as in whether or not they violated any statutes with their protest), however, so I cannot comment on whether or not the protesters were in the right or the police in ordering them to disperse.
 
2012-08-04 11:55:09 PM

evilboyevil: I don't get it. Do DAs have to press charges when a cop places an arrest? Don't they get some sort of discretion? State attorneys deserve just as much hate for this, as well as state congressmen, who are unwilling to change a law that was meant to protect the people from being wiretapped by the government.


I think it depends on the "crime" in question. From what I know (and I am far from being a lawyer) if the "crime" is not directly witnessed by law enforcement agents then the District Attorney's office has to press charges, which then leads to warrants being issued. A police officer who happens to see the video lacks the legal authority to go out at his own discretion and simply arrest this guy for some crime.
 
2012-08-05 12:04:09 AM

Silly Jesus: Doc Ok: consider this: Doc Ok: I was there. They were not sitting anywhere close to anywhere where someone would have had to walk around them. Universities typically have so-called "quads" where people sit around or play frisbee. That's where they were sitting.

You're obviously lying for attention since they were clearly sitting on a sidewalk and there's video to prove it.

It's not a sidewalk, it's a paved walkway through a big lawn. Here's an aerial photograph showing the protest in reaction to the pepperspraying a few days later. The walkway that was blocked is the one along the left edge of the picture; the protesters were sitting in the central circle. You'll notice that there is absolutely no obstruction on either side of the walkway, which is why it was not even an inconvenience to walk around them.

[i.imgur.com image 850x637]

The following comment is mostly serious...

I parked my car on a 3 lane road the other day. It was not an inconvenience because people could just use the other two lanes. My taxes were too high, so I protested. But take no notice, everyone can just go around.

The sidewalk is for people to walk on...not for people to sit on and block. They could have just as easily sat in the grass beside the sidewalk, but they wanted to make a point, so they decided to no longer allow people to use the sidewalk. Fark you, get off the damn sidewalk. I don't care if I can "easily walk around you", you can just as easily not sit in the middle of the farking sidewalk. It's not my obligation to change my route so that you can have a useless protest about some horrible grievance.


I agree, protests are so annoying. We should just do whatever we're told to make things easier for everyone.


/retard
//was trying to make it through the thread before posting but your horrible opinion outderped everyone so far. Congrats on standing out.
 
2012-08-05 12:11:31 AM

ThoughtSpy: It seems a stretch, but could the fact that he used a speakerphone be seen as putting it into the "could ordinarily be heard" category?


I seriously doubt it. Unless he clearly announces to the other party that a) He's using a speakerphone and b) He's got it loud enough that it can be heard even outside the room. In which case they'd probably hang up just because he's a d-bag, but that's a different matter. Even if he did that, I wouldn't want my liberty to hang in the balance on such a facetious bit of legal pedantry.
 
2012-08-05 12:24:08 AM

inclemency: Silly Jesus: Doc Ok: consider this: Doc Ok: I was there. They were not sitting anywhere close to anywhere where someone would have had to walk around them. Universities typically have so-called "quads" where people sit around or play frisbee. That's where they were sitting.

You're obviously lying for attention since they were clearly sitting on a sidewalk and there's video to prove it.

It's not a sidewalk, it's a paved walkway through a big lawn. Here's an aerial photograph showing the protest in reaction to the pepperspraying a few days later. The walkway that was blocked is the one along the left edge of the picture; the protesters were sitting in the central circle. You'll notice that there is absolutely no obstruction on either side of the walkway, which is why it was not even an inconvenience to walk around them.

[i.imgur.com image 850x637]

The following comment is mostly serious...

I parked my car on a 3 lane road the other day. It was not an inconvenience because people could just use the other two lanes. My taxes were too high, so I protested. But take no notice, everyone can just go around.

The sidewalk is for people to walk on...not for people to sit on and block. They could have just as easily sat in the grass beside the sidewalk, but they wanted to make a point, so they decided to no longer allow people to use the sidewalk. Fark you, get off the damn sidewalk. I don't care if I can "easily walk around you", you can just as easily not sit in the middle of the farking sidewalk. It's not my obligation to change my route so that you can have a useless protest about some horrible grievance.

I agree, protests are so annoying. We should just do whatever we're told to make things easier for everyone.


/retard
//was trying to make it through the thread before posting but your horrible opinion outderped everyone so far. Congrats on standing out.


Yes, because doing whatever we're told and sitting on the sidewalk are the only two options.

Do you always herp when you derp?
 
2012-08-05 12:30:19 AM

inclemency: I agree, protests are so annoying. We should just do whatever we're told to make things easier for everyone.


Because acting like a 3 year old throwing a tantrum gets shiat done, right?
 
2012-08-05 12:58:54 AM

consider this: inclemency: I agree, protests are so annoying. We should just do whatever we're told to make things easier for everyone.

Because acting like a 3 year old throwing a tantrum gets shiat done, right?


Do you feel there is a more appropriate way? This sort of 60's style protesters have other avenues? We're bought and sold long ago and those who own us are getting greedier every day. What other realistic solution can you provide? None I'm sure, frustration boils over and then we eat cake.
 
2012-08-05 01:14:35 AM

inclemency: Do you feel there is a more appropriate way? This sort of 60's style protesters have other avenues? We're bought and sold long ago and those who own us are getting greedier every day. What other realistic solution can you provide? None I'm sure, frustration boils over and then we eat cake.


Explain how refusing an officers orders to clear a sidewalk does anything to solve the issue with rising tuition rates?
 
2012-08-05 01:18:16 AM

consider this: inclemency: Do you feel there is a more appropriate way? This sort of 60's style protesters have other avenues? We're bought and sold long ago and those who own us are getting greedier every day. What other realistic solution can you provide? None I'm sure, frustration boils over and then we eat cake.

Explain how refusing an officers orders to clear a sidewalk does anything to solve the issue with rising tuition rates?


Explain how refusing an officer's lawful order to clear the bridge does anything to solve the issue of racism?

\Protesters deserve what they got, right?
 
2012-08-05 01:40:49 AM

agos1247: Not sure, but I think ultraholland was being sarcastic.

I don't even know where that's from, but even I recognized it was a quote from a book/movie. >:\

Then I rescind my statement. This shiat kinda pisses me off and have little room left for recognizing quotes or sarcasm


You might just be on the wrong site if any topic is SRS BSNS and you can't see the sarcasm that infests Fark through your blind rage.

/Even when they do seem serious, half the people that disagree with you are trolling you for lulz and just working you up on purpose.
 
2012-08-05 02:33:22 AM

Silly Jesus: ultraholland: Silly Jesus: It would disrupt my walk. Sit in the farking grass.

oh your tortured life!

Oh the tortured lives of the protesters who could move over two feet and sit in the grass instead of annoying everyone around them with their self absorbed douchbaggery.

See how that works?

Sidewalks are for walking, not whiny sit-ins.


Diners are for dining. Buses are for riding.

See how that works, you feckless pinhead?
 
2012-08-05 02:59:25 AM

knobmaker: Silly Jesus: ultraholland: Silly Jesus: It would disrupt my walk. Sit in the farking grass.

oh your tortured life!

Oh the tortured lives of the protesters who could move over two feet and sit in the grass instead of annoying everyone around them with their self absorbed douchbaggery.

See how that works?

Sidewalks are for walking, not whiny sit-ins.

Diners are for dining. Buses are for riding.

See how that works, you feckless pinhead?


Please tell me you did not just compare the Whatever-the-hell-they-called-themselves-Wallstreet-protesters to the Civil Rights Protesters.
 
2012-08-05 04:16:34 AM

agos1247: ultraholland: "Why am I in jail with a guy who beats up his wife and gets a one-year sentence from the state, but I'm facing 21 years for filming somebody?"

Because you don't know when to stop digging. You're a renegade and a liability!

Your statement means nothing. Whats he digging? What cause is he a renegade from? Who is he a liability to? Comeback with some substance, thanks for playing


There are ways to provide constructive critisism without being a dick about it.
 
2012-08-05 04:38:14 AM

Mock26: With all of the protesters locking arms it would be pretty hard to start trying to pry everyone apart without manhandling them and thus risking physical injury to the protestors. And pepper spray is certainly kinder than clubbing them.


Why didn't they just tickle the protesters?

You could likely get many individuals to move on their own based on the immediate discomfort of being tickled. As far as I'm aware, most people are ticklish and those who are usually can't ignore the sensation. As they were all facing the same direction with locked arms, seems like they'd have been easy to tickle from behind (sides or armpits).
 
2012-08-05 04:58:52 AM

Squik2: Mock26: With all of the protesters locking arms it would be pretty hard to start trying to pry everyone apart without manhandling them and thus risking physical injury to the protestors. And pepper spray is certainly kinder than clubbing them.

Why didn't they just tickle the protesters?

You could likely get many individuals to move on their own based on the immediate discomfort of being tickled. As far as I'm aware, most people are ticklish and those who are usually can't ignore the sensation. As they were all facing the same direction with locked arms, seems like they'd have been easy to tickle from behind (sides or armpits).


You should pass this along to the Police. It sounds like it could actually work. Until, of course, you come up against someone who was not ticklish.
 
2012-08-05 05:02:23 AM

miniflea: I hope he wins. I really don't see how it can be argued we don't live in an oppressive police state when you can go to prison for twenty years for filming the police in public.


It wasn't in public.

And I'm getting sick and tired of photographers thinking they can just stick their cameras in where they're not welcome.
 
2012-08-05 05:09:32 AM

Mock26: knobmaker: Silly Jesus: ultraholland: Silly Jesus: It would disrupt my walk. Sit in the farking grass.

oh your tortured life!

Oh the tortured lives of the protesters who could move over two feet and sit in the grass instead of annoying everyone around them with their self absorbed douchbaggery.

See how that works?

Sidewalks are for walking, not whiny sit-ins.

Diners are for dining. Buses are for riding.

See how that works, you feckless pinhead?

Please tell me you did not just compare the Whatever-the-hell-they-called-themselves-Wallstreet-protesters to the Civil Rights Protesters.


Oh, I know what you mean. The Wall Street protesters are only trying to save the middle class, and who gives a shiat about them, right?

Civil disobedience is civil disobedience, whether or not you have sympathy for the cause. Plenty of white bigots thought the same about the civil rights protesters as you do about the Wall Street protesters. Plenty of them cheered on the dogs and firehoses, just as the pinhead upthread cheers on the cop with pepper spray.

Nice company you keep.
 
Xai
2012-08-05 06:23:59 AM
In the land of the free?
 
2012-08-05 06:55:46 AM

knobmaker: Civil disobedience is civil disobedience, whether or not you have sympathy for the cause. Plenty of white bigots thought the same about the civil rights protesters as you do about the Wall Street protesters. Plenty of them cheered on the dogs and firehoses, just as the pinhead upthread cheers on the cop with pepper spray.


Civil disobedience also means you are willing to go to the wall for your cause. Ask any real veteran of the Civil Rights movement.
 
2012-08-05 08:46:07 AM
This is disturbing...

This criminal will do some time, maybe not the full twenty one years however even a six month stay at Con College will very quickly reshape his conditioning and by the time he gets out, watch and see if ever decides to disobey a direct order from a superior.

The bigger problem I see here though has nothing to do with this case, it's all of you citizens who seem to think you have special rights against law enforcement, and that you somehow really do live in a world where everything is supposed to be fair and honest. Wake up, you are causing problems here in America, obstructing Law Enforcement from doing our job. You also are causing some of the good people in this country to fear cops, the very people put in place to protect you. And yet you still can't get it through your head why Law Enforcement wins every time.

Yes, cops will do what they need to when it comes to protecting themselves. Unlike regular rank and file debt slaves, Cops actually stick together and back eachother, we do not turn on each other like animals, which is how you are viewed on a whole, and that explains why you are treated like such for the most part.

Save me your 'shock and awe', you fully understand that the ones in power in this world will never give it up freely and will kill as many of you, lock up as many of you or beat the living shiat out of as many of you as required to keep things moving along. These 'cop hatred' threads are a source of comedy for law enforcement, seeing a scared bunch of faceless pussies congregating in some comments section of a satirical news site? C'mon, herding you cattle has never been easier, most of you are afraid of your own shadow at this point.

So you can keep pretending to have a voice, that someone in power (and if you don't have the power, you don't matter) is going to give a shiat about you. Nothing is going to change, you will only condemn more of your fellow cop haters to death by raising the stakes in a battle designed to always, and I mean always, defeat you.

How any of you think you are going to stop this when you are so cowardly you won't even stand up together against what you claim is 'criminal behaviour from the police' is beyond me, but don't let me stop you, as I said it's a source of comedy to see you guys come in here and act tough. You'd all piss your pants in public if you ran into one of us and decided to show your true colours. You won't, because you have no say in this system, and the beat will continue to drum on.

The faster we have a fully operational 24 hours a day, 7 days a week surveillance America, I will not be happy. Way too many of you bottom feeders squeak past, and the time has finally come to remove that last barrier or protection from you. You are going to love what America is going to become, and you'll love it even more when you see what she has in store for you.
 
2012-08-05 09:40:56 AM

consider this: Same thing and blocking either isn't allowed. Douchebag kids were being douchebags and got a taste of pepper for their douchiness.


so . . . . that's like a law, or something?
 
2012-08-05 09:54:37 AM

knobmaker: Silly Jesus: ultraholland: Silly Jesus: It would disrupt my walk. Sit in the farking grass.

oh your tortured life!

Oh the tortured lives of the protesters who could move over two feet and sit in the grass instead of annoying everyone around them with their self absorbed douchbaggery.

See how that works?

Sidewalks are for walking, not whiny sit-ins.

Diners are for dining. Buses are for riding.

See how that works, you feckless pinhead?


So they were trying to gain the right for white people to sit on sidewalks?

Try again moran.
 
2012-08-05 12:08:09 PM

Silly Jesus: INTERTRON: Silly Jesus: I don't care if I can "easily walk around you", you can just as easily not sit in the middle of the farking sidewalk. It's not my obligation to change my route so that you can have a useless protest about some horrible grievance.

This is a really petty thing to get angry about, or to mace somebody for. You'll get over it.

It's a really petty thing to sit on the sidewalk and refuse to move because you're special.


Bolded part still applies.
 
2012-08-05 12:14:02 PM

INTERTRON: Silly Jesus: INTERTRON: Silly Jesus: I don't care if I can "easily walk around you", you can just as easily not sit in the middle of the farking sidewalk. It's not my obligation to change my route so that you can have a useless protest about some horrible grievance.

This is a really petty thing to get angry about, or to mace somebody for. You'll get over it.

It's a really petty thing to sit on the sidewalk and refuse to move because you're special.

Bolded part still applies.


Eh, the effects of the pepper extract only last for hours. They'll get over it. And maybe next time they'll throw their tantrums a few feet over in the grass.
 
2012-08-05 12:41:57 PM

HeartlineTwist: Video of the wiretapping


The call to the police station likely had no expectation of privacy in the first place. Aren't all such calls recorded by the police themselves as a matter of routine?
 
2012-08-05 12:49:57 PM

Silly Jesus: INTERTRON: Silly Jesus: INTERTRON: Silly Jesus: I don't care if I can "easily walk around you", you can just as easily not sit in the middle of the farking sidewalk. It's not my obligation to change my route so that you can have a useless protest about some horrible grievance.

This is a really petty thing to get angry about, or to mace somebody for. You'll get over it.

It's a really petty thing to sit on the sidewalk and refuse to move because you're special.

Bolded part still applies.

Eh, the effects of the pepper extract only last for hours. They'll get over it. And maybe next time they'll throw their tantrums a few feet over in the grass.


Too bad the police officer won't be there. Meanwhile, the department's acknowledgement that the police were in the wrong means the students will be throwing tantrums all the way to the bank.

lol.
 
2012-08-05 01:14:59 PM

INTERTRON: Silly Jesus: INTERTRON: Silly Jesus: INTERTRON: Silly Jesus: I don't care if I can "easily walk around you", you can just as easily not sit in the middle of the farking sidewalk. It's not my obligation to change my route so that you can have a useless protest about some horrible grievance.

This is a really petty thing to get angry about, or to mace somebody for. You'll get over it.

It's a really petty thing to sit on the sidewalk and refuse to move because you're special.

Bolded part still applies.

Eh, the effects of the pepper extract only last for hours. They'll get over it. And maybe next time they'll throw their tantrums a few feet over in the grass.

Too bad the police officer won't be there. Meanwhile, the department's acknowledgement that the police were in the wrong means the students will be throwing tantrums all the way to the bank.

lol.


"For reasons detailed in this report, we conclude that Lieutenant Pike's use of pepper spray was reasonable under the circumstances," the report states. The firing was a PR move. Nothing more. All levels of investigation, both inside the department and out, concluded that his actions were reasonable.

Your second link is to something unrelated.

LOL
 
2012-08-05 03:12:05 PM

knobmaker: Mock26: knobmaker: Silly Jesus: ultraholland: Silly Jesus: It would disrupt my walk. Sit in the farking grass.

oh your tortured life!

Oh the tortured lives of the protesters who could move over two feet and sit in the grass instead of annoying everyone around them with their self absorbed douchbaggery.

See how that works?

Sidewalks are for walking, not whiny sit-ins.

Diners are for dining. Buses are for riding.

See how that works, you feckless pinhead?

Please tell me you did not just compare the Whatever-the-hell-they-called-themselves-Wallstreet-protesters to the Civil Rights Protesters.

Oh, I know what you mean. The Wall Street protesters are only trying to save the middle class, and who gives a shiat about them, right?

Civil disobedience is civil disobedience, whether or not you have sympathy for the cause. Plenty of white bigots thought the same about the civil rights protesters as you do about the Wall Street protesters. Plenty of them cheered on the dogs and firehoses, just as the pinhead upthread cheers on the cop with pepper spray.

Nice company you keep.


Please tell me what basic Constitutionally granted rights are the middle class being denied that minorities we denied back then? Go on, list them.

I never said that the plight of the middle class is something not to not give a shiat about them (or rather, about "Us" as the case may be). But, the Civil Rights movement was fighting for something far more important than what the Wallstreet protesters are fighting for. No comparison at all.
 
2012-08-05 03:15:56 PM

fireclown: so . . . . that's like a law, or something?


Yes, blocking public walkways is illegal.
 
2012-08-05 03:38:56 PM

AndreMA: HeartlineTwist: Video of the wiretapping

The call to the police station likely had no expectation of privacy in the first place. Aren't all such calls recorded by the police themselves as a matter of routine?


Didn't you know? The police are above the law. Better not let them catch you thinking those things.
 
2012-08-05 04:19:12 PM
Pitabred: Didn't you know? The police are above the law. Better not let them catch you thinking those things.

Well except for the fact the law specifically has a provision that allows certain functions, such as police, to record phone calls.
 
2012-08-05 04:37:28 PM
agos1247: ultraholland: "Why am I in jail with a guy who beats up his wife and gets a one-year sentence from the state, but I'm facing 21 years for filming somebody?"

Because you don't know when to stop digging. You're a renegade and a liability!

Your statement means nothing. Whats he digging? What cause is he a renegade from? Who is he a liability to? Comeback with some substance, thanks for playing


You are asking too many questions. Someone will be over shortly to educate you.
 
2012-08-05 04:51:44 PM
Silly Jesus: INTERTRON: Silly Jesus: INTERTRON: Silly Jesus: INTERTRON: Silly Jesus: I don't care if I can "easily walk around you", you can just as easily not sit in the middle of the farking sidewalk. It's not my obligation to change my route so that you can have a useless protest about some horrible grievance.

This is a really petty thing to get angry about, or to mace somebody for. You'll get over it.

It's a really petty thing to sit on the sidewalk and refuse to move because you're special.

Bolded part still applies.

Eh, the effects of the pepper extract only last for hours. They'll get over it. And maybe next time they'll throw their tantrums a few feet over in the grass.

Too bad the police officer won't be there. Meanwhile, the department's acknowledgement that the police were in the wrong means the students will be throwing tantrums all the way to the bank.

lol.

"For reasons detailed in this report, we conclude that Lieutenant Pike's use of pepper spray was reasonable under the circumstances," the report states. The firing was a PR move. Nothing more. All levels of investigation, both inside the department and out, concluded that his actions were reasonable.

Your second link is to something unrelated.

LOL


UC Davis Police Chief Matthew Carmichael rejected the findings and wrote in a letter to Pike that "the needs of the department do not justify your continued employment".

Maybe with his talents he can get a job as a middle school gym teacher, since he won't be finding another job as an officer. Do middle schools employ people with sub-middle school education?

lol.
 
2012-08-05 04:56:21 PM
consider this: Pitabred: Didn't you know? The police are above the law. Better not let them catch you thinking those things.

Well except for the fact the law specifically has a provision that allows certain functions, such as police, to record phone calls.


Exactly. The police are exempt from the laws that everyone else has to follow. Not with a warrant, not with oversight, just straight-up exempt. That is the problem.
 
2012-08-05 05:12:13 PM
Pitabred: Exactly. The police are exempt from the laws that everyone else has to follow. Not with a warrant, not with oversight, just straight-up exempt. That is the problem.

Yes, it's a problem that phone calls to a police station or emergency services can be recorded since we all know there's no good reason for it.
 
2012-08-05 05:38:29 PM
consider this: Pitabred: Exactly. The police are exempt from the laws that everyone else has to follow. Not with a warrant, not with oversight, just straight-up exempt. That is the problem.

Yes, it's a problem that phone calls to a police station or emergency services can be recorded since we all know there's no good reason for it.


Don't be deliberately obtuse. I'm not saying it's a problem. I'm saying that the police having rights that the citizens do not for no reason other than for authoritarian procedures, it's a problem. I have no issues with the police recording conversations. I just want the same right. Fortunately, Colorado is one of those sane states that has a one-party consent law, so I can record any conversation I want, as long as I'm involved in it.
 
2012-08-05 06:02:04 PM

Pitabred: consider this: Pitabred: Exactly. The police are exempt from the laws that everyone else has to follow. Not with a warrant, not with oversight, just straight-up exempt. That is the problem.

Yes, it's a problem that phone calls to a police station or emergency services can be recorded since we all know there's no good reason for it.

Don't be deliberately obtuse. I'm not saying it's a problem. I'm saying that the police having rights that the citizens do not for no reason other than for authoritarian procedures, it's a problem. I have no issues with the police recording conversations. I just want the same right. Fortunately, Colorado is one of those sane states that has a one-party consent law, so I can record any conversation I want, as long as I'm involved in it.


If those "extra rights" allow them to enforce the laws, then what is the problem? For example, police has the "right" to run red lights and stop signs under certain circumstances. Now, let us say that there is a massive shooting someplace. By your reasoning police should have to stop at each and every stop sign and red light and obey the speed limit because having the extra "right" to ignore traffic laws is a problem, right?
 
2012-08-05 06:24:46 PM

ultraholland: Silly Jesus: Sidewalks are for walking, not whiny sit-ins.

now say that like Patsy Kline


Sidewalks are made for walkin',
That's just what they'll do.
If ya sit and start yore whining,
Ya'll get cs all over you?
 
2012-08-05 06:31:09 PM

INTERTRON: Silly Jesus: INTERTRON: Silly Jesus: INTERTRON: Silly Jesus: INTERTRON: Silly Jesus: I don't care if I can "easily walk around you", you can just as easily not sit in the middle of the farking sidewalk. It's not my obligation to change my route so that you can have a useless protest about some horrible grievance.

This is a really petty thing to get angry about, or to mace somebody for. You'll get over it.

It's a really petty thing to sit on the sidewalk and refuse to move because you're special.

Bolded part still applies.

Eh, the effects of the pepper extract only last for hours. They'll get over it. And maybe next time they'll throw their tantrums a few feet over in the grass.

Too bad the police officer won't be there. Meanwhile, the department's acknowledgement that the police were in the wrong means the students will be throwing tantrums all the way to the bank.

lol.

"For reasons detailed in this report, we conclude that Lieutenant Pike's use of pepper spray was reasonable under the circumstances," the report states. The firing was a PR move. Nothing more. All levels of investigation, both inside the department and out, concluded that his actions were reasonable.

Your second link is to something unrelated.

LOL

UC Davis Police Chief Matthew Carmichael rejected the findings and wrote in a letter to Pike that "the needs of the department do not justify your continued employment".

Maybe with his talents he can get a job as a middle school gym teacher, since he won't be finding another job as an officer. Do middle schools employ people with sub-middle school education?

lol.


Meh, you're too childish to fool with...
 
2012-08-05 07:21:56 PM

Mock26: Pitabred: consider this: Pitabred: Exactly. The police are exempt from the laws that everyone else has to follow. Not with a warrant, not with oversight, just straight-up exempt. That is the problem.

Yes, it's a problem that phone calls to a police station or emergency services can be recorded since we all know there's no good reason for it.

Don't be deliberately obtuse. I'm not saying it's a problem. I'm saying that the police having rights that the citizens do not for no reason other than for authoritarian procedures, it's a problem. I have no issues with the police recording conversations. I just want the same right. Fortunately, Colorado is one of those sane states that has a one-party consent law, so I can record any conversation I want, as long as I'm involved in it.

If those "extra rights" allow them to enforce the laws, then what is the problem? For example, police has the "right" to run red lights and stop signs under certain circumstances. Now, let us say that there is a massive shooting someplace. By your reasoning police should have to stop at each and every stop sign and red light and obey the speed limit because having the extra "right" to ignore traffic laws is a problem, right?


Are you just ignoring what I say, or are you just stupid? Look up above at the bolded part. This does not help them enforce the law, it is purely a law allowing extrajudicial behavior and exemption from accountability. Go ahead... tell me one good reason that the police should be able to record conversations at will, but the general public should NOT be allowed to record conversations they're part of, especially when they're with an officer acting in the officer's official capacity.

Police have a good reason to run stop signs UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. Not carte blanche to do so. The wiretapping laws give them carte blanche to a right that has no relevance to their job except for protecting the police force from scrutiny.

I'm not saying the law doesn't say what it does, or that the police are acting legally. I'm saying that it's WRONG. Law is not morality, and the sooner you stop conflating the two, the better.
 
2012-08-05 09:11:57 PM

PrinceofFark: This is disturbing...

This criminal will do some time, maybe not the full twenty one years however even a six month stay at Con College will very quickly reshape his conditioning and by the time he gets out, watch and see if ever decides to disobey a direct order from a superior.

The bigger problem I see here though has nothing to do with this case, it's all of you citizens who seem to think you have special rights against law enforcement, and that you somehow really do live in a world where everything is supposed to be fair and honest. Wake up, you are causing problems here in America, obstructing Law Enforcement from doing our job. You also are causing some of the good people in this country to fear cops, the very people put in place to protect you. And yet you still can't get it through your head why Law Enforcement wins every time.

Yes, cops will do what they need to when it comes to protecting themselves. Unlike regular rank and file debt slaves, Cops actually stick together and back eachother, we do not turn on each other like animals, which is how you are viewed on a whole, and that explains why you are treated like such for the most part.

Save me your 'shock and awe', you fully understand that the ones in power in this world will never give it up freely and will kill as many of you, lock up as many of you or beat the living shiat out of as many of you as required to keep things moving along. These 'cop hatred' threads are a source of comedy for law enforcement, seeing a scared bunch of faceless pussies congregating in some comments section of a satirical news site? C'mon, herding you cattle has never been easier, most of you are afraid of your own shadow at this point.

So you can keep pretending to have a voice, that someone in power (and if you don't have the power, you don't matter) is going to give a shiat about you. Nothing is going to change, you will only condemn more of your fellow cop haters to death by raising the stakes in a battle designed to always, and I mean always, defeat you.

How any of you think you are going to stop this when you are so cowardly you won't even stand up together against what you claim is 'criminal behaviour from the police' is beyond me, but don't let me stop you, as I said it's a source of comedy to see you guys come in here and act tough. You'd all piss your pants in public if you ran into one of us and decided to show your true colours. You won't, because you have no say in this system, and the beat will continue to drum on.

The faster we have a fully operational 24 hours a day, 7 days a week surveillance America, I will not be happy. Way too many of you bottom feeders squeak past, and the time has finally come to remove that last barrier or protection from you. You are going to love what America is going to become, and you'll love it even more when you see what she has in store for you.


Slowclap.jpg

10/10, bravo.

Though you did make one mistake: the police have no duty to protect individuals. They only have a duty to enforce the law and thereby protect the community. The individual is farked if he expects that the cops are there to prevent crime from happening to him, or harm, etc. Even the supreme court says so.

Otherwise, magnificent.
 
2012-08-05 09:29:51 PM
Protesters deserve to be pepper sprayed for subjecting everyone else to the minor inconvenience of taking two more steps to get to class.
Cops deserve special privileges that have absolutely nothing to do with their ability to enforce the law, and everything to do with avoiding accountability.
People should just suck it up and follow unjust laws. If they really wanted it changed, why don't they contribute a few million dollars to someone's campaign like everyone else?

Authoritarians actually believe this.
 
2012-08-05 10:19:22 PM

ubermensch:
Secondly, he wasn't arrested for publishing, he was arrested under a stupid law for wiretapping. The press is still free, he broke a law (albeit a stupid one).


According to New Hampshire state statues, in order to be guilty of wiretapping another party must have a reasonable expectation that their communications are not subject to interception. How can you have an reasonable expectation that you aren't being watched by a member of the public in a public place?
 
2012-08-05 10:53:10 PM

Pitabred: Mock26: Pitabred: consider this: Pitabred: Exactly. The police are exempt from the laws that everyone else has to follow. Not with a warrant, not with oversight, just straight-up exempt. That is the problem.

Yes, it's a problem that phone calls to a police station or emergency services can be recorded since we all know there's no good reason for it.

Don't be deliberately obtuse. I'm not saying it's a problem. I'm saying that the police having rights that the citizens do not for no reason other than for authoritarian procedures, it's a problem. I have no issues with the police recording conversations. I just want the same right. Fortunately, Colorado is one of those sane states that has a one-party consent law, so I can record any conversation I want, as long as I'm involved in it.

If those "extra rights" allow them to enforce the laws, then what is the problem? For example, police has the "right" to run red lights and stop signs under certain circumstances. Now, let us say that there is a massive shooting someplace. By your reasoning police should have to stop at each and every stop sign and red light and obey the speed limit because having the extra "right" to ignore traffic laws is a problem, right?

Are you just ignoring what I say, or are you just stupid? Look up above at the bolded part. This does not help them enforce the law, it is purely a law allowing extrajudicial behavior and exemption from accountability. Go ahead... tell me one good reason that the police should be able to record conversations at will, but the general public should NOT be allowed to record conversations they're part of, especially when they're with an officer acting in the officer's official capacity.

Police have a good reason to run stop signs UNDER CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. Not carte blanche to do so. The wiretapping laws give them carte blanche to a right that has no relevance to their job except for protecting the police force from scrutiny.

I'm not saying the law doesn't say w ...


I was deliberately ignoring what you said because it was so monumentally derpy.
 
2012-08-06 12:23:53 AM

ubermensch: Secondly, he wasn't arrested for publishing, he was arrested under a stupid law for wiretapping. The press is still free, he broke a law (albeit a stupid one).


What wires did he tap? Who did those belong to? As I understand it, one of the kids in school where it happened took the video on his phone, gave it to the guy in the press who told the story. That's what the press is supposed to do, tell the story. Taking a video of something happening in front of you while in a public space surely isn't "wiretapping". Broadcasting a video that was legal taken and given to you isn't "wiretapping". So where is the wiretapping?
 
2012-08-06 12:47:10 AM
Jesus. Late to the party and didn't read the article to boot.

This isn't about the cellphone video the student recorded. This is about Ademo calling the police station and the school and recording those phone calls and them publishing them via a youtube video. The secretary/receptionist at the police station, the chief of police (or another officer), and the principal of the school were all recorded without consent. Therefore, wiretapping.
 
Displayed 50 of 206 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report