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.

(Courthouse News Service)   Refusing to let the police use your home as a lookout? That's a smashed open door and assault and arresting and jailing and some looting by the police while you are away   (courthousenews.com) divider line 372
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

14050 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Jul 2013 at 5:03 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-04 05:24:23 PM
Land of the free...


/not so much anymore.
//you guys are totally farked.
///NSA! NSA! er... USA!
 
2013-07-04 05:25:40 PM

bunner: Guess what time it is.


Time to call you a farking idiot for masturbating over the thought of Civil War round II?

OgreMagi: If they aren't military, they need to stop looking and acting like military.  Until that happens, they are military.


That's your opinion and I respect it as such. However, your opinion also carries absolutely no weight in the courts or legislature, and reality does not reflect your belief in the least.

Reality is what you argue about when you get the financial windfall this situation banks out. Any federal judge would laugh at you if you suggest the local police are actually representatives of the federal military.

TopoGigo: hardinparamedic: He'd have no legal right to do so

No, but he'd damned sure have a moral right.
At least, his moral right to defend his home from hostile invaders could be weighed against his moral obligation to stay alive to provide for a wife/child/dog, and possibly come up favorably.


Well. At least when you're setting in a jail cell, awaiting your date with Big Bobby, you can know you're morally superior in turning the situation completely against you for the majority of the United States population.
 
2013-07-04 05:26:08 PM
He refused a police order. They put their lives on the line every day to protect him and protect his rights! That day was just not his turn. The ungrateful civilian is lucky to be alive . These cops are i.imgur.com .
 
2013-07-04 05:26:53 PM
My favorite part is how they totally forgot all about the original reason for wanting to use his house in the first place.

Sorry sacks of sh*t, the lot of them. And anyone that didn't protest the orders to storm this guy's house, doubly so.
 
2013-07-04 05:27:44 PM

wambu: He refused a police order. They put their lives on the line every day to protect him and protect his rights! That day was just not his turn. The ungrateful civilian is lucky to be alive . These cops are [i.imgur.com image 54x11] .


+2 for carefully crafted irony.
 
2013-07-04 05:28:01 PM

A Shambling Mound: And anyone that didn't protest the orders to storm this guy's house, doubly so.


What if they obeyed... under protest?
 
2013-07-04 05:28:43 PM

The_Gallant_Gallstone: A Shambling Mound: And anyone that didn't protest the orders to storm this guy's house, doubly so.

What if they obeyed... under protest?


What do protestants have to do with this?
 
gja [TotalFark]
2013-07-04 05:29:38 PM
This shiat simply MUST stop. The alternative is this continues, festers and gets worse.
Then, at some point, it will all come to a head like a deep pustulistic boil and 'pop!'.
These types of incidents only have 1 effect, to galvanize the seething hatred the general populous feel for those who feel they are above the laws they are charged with upholding while abusing those they have been chartered with serving (the public at general).

Dear LEOs,
Stop this crap or at some point someone WILL go utterly batshiat and find a group of folks who feel the same and they will bring it to your front door.
It's not a matter of if, but when, as long as you stay this course of behaviour.
Sincerely,
John Q. Public
 
2013-07-04 05:29:40 PM

wambu: He refused a police order. They put their lives on the line every day to protect him and protect his rights! That day was just not his turn. The ungrateful civilian is lucky to be alive . These cops are [i.imgur.com image 54x11] .


Pretty sure you're being sarcastic, but it's absolutely legal to refuse a request from a police officer. They have to give you a lawful order. Otherwise, it's a request. Unfortunately, most people aren't good at figuring out which is which.

Even worse, neither are most police officers.
 
2013-07-04 05:29:50 PM
Wambu: 1/10. Nice try. Need to be a little more invective, maybe use a "personal story."
 
2013-07-04 05:30:16 PM

A Shambling Mound: And anyone that didn't protest the orders to storm this guy's house, doubly so.


But zey were only follovink orderrs.

www.addictinginfo.org

Godwin's pithy remark is not actually a law.  It was a pithy remark.  Deal.
 
2013-07-04 05:30:41 PM

The_Gallant_Gallstone: A Shambling Mound: And anyone that didn't protest the orders to storm this guy's house, doubly so.

What if they obeyed... under protest?


I'll give them a gold star for effort, I suppose. They'll have to ask a lawyer what that's worth in court.

hardinparamedic: The_Gallant_Gallstone: A Shambling Mound: And anyone that didn't protest the orders to storm this guy's house, doubly so.

What if they obeyed... under protest?

What do protestants have to do with this?


Well, by doctrine they don't have to actually be nice to anyone so maybe there's more to this than I first suspected....
 
2013-07-04 05:30:47 PM
Sure, let the police hang out at your home for an open-ended amount of time, they seem like good, reasonable fellows.
 
2013-07-04 05:30:48 PM
For all those who have no problem with the ever increasing "security measures" enacted to keep us safe. There is a whole lot more of this in your future.
 
2013-07-04 05:31:11 PM

OgreMagi: hardinparamedic: OgreMagi: They violated both the 3rd

No, they did not. There is NO Third Amendment Violation here, as the police are NOT considered under constitutional jurisprudence as members of the United States Military OR a State National Guard or Militia under the command of a Federal military commander.

Instead, it's a slam dunk for a fourth, and a fifth amendment violation of their rights.

If they aren't military, they need to stop looking and acting like military.  Until that happens, they are military.


Walks like a duck.
Dresses like a duck.
Has weapons like a duck.
F**ks up your duck with pepperballs.

It's a duck.
 
2013-07-04 05:31:20 PM

Milo Minderbinder: Rincewind53: Jesus farking Christ.

They're right, that is a Third Amendment violation. Do you know how rare that is?

No, its not. Cops are not soldiers.


endthelie.com
 
2013-07-04 05:31:34 PM

wambu: He refused a police order. They put their lives on the line every day to protect him and protect his rights! That day was just not his turn. The ungrateful civilian is lucky to be alive . These cops are [i.imgur.com image 54x11] .


8/10 would troll again!
 
2013-07-04 05:31:59 PM

OgreMagi: If they aren't military, they need to stop looking and acting like military. Until that happens, they are military.


They also use military rank systems. Sargent, Lt. Captain, etc, and frequently use sleeve stripes.


The problem is that the amendment specifies "soldier" and not military. I don't think law enforcement personnel count as soldiers. It will be interesting to see how the courts rule on this.
 
2013-07-04 05:32:00 PM

eventhelosers: Milo Minderbinder: Rincewind53: Jesus farking Christ.

They're right, that is a Third Amendment violation. Do you know how rare that is?

No, its not. Cops are not soldiers.

[endthelie.com image 850x637]


IT'S SPELLED DIFFERENT!1!!1!
 
2013-07-04 05:33:20 PM

Lady Indica: wambu: He refused a police order. They put their lives on the line every day to protect him and protect his rights! That day was just not his turn. The ungrateful civilian is lucky to be alive . These cops are [i.imgur.com image 54x11] .

Pretty sure you're being sarcastic, but it's absolutely legal to refuse a request from a police officer. They have to give you a lawful order. Otherwise, it's a request. Unfortunately, most people aren't good at figuring out which is which.

Even worse, neither are most police officers.


This.

This actually stinks of "I don't like you, citizen, exercising your rights and all.", and really sickens me.

bunner: A Shambling Mound: And anyone that didn't protest the orders to storm this guy's house, doubly so.

But zey were only follovink orderrs.

[www.addictinginfo.org image 524x516]

Godwin's pithy remark is not actually a law.  It was a pithy remark.  Deal.


Was it the joke that you chose a picture of American Schoolchildren doing the Bellamy salute to the Pledge of Allegiance? Because all you're illustrating with that is nationalism, not fascism. It wasn't changed until the entry of the US in WWII, and it's association with some cheeky German guy.
 
2013-07-04 05:33:50 PM

hardinparamedic: OgreMagi: If they aren't military, they need to stop looking and acting like military. Until that happens, they are military.

That's your opinion and I respect it as such. However, your opinion also carries absolutely no weight in the courts or legislature, and reality does not reflect your belief in the least.

Reality is what you argue about when you get the financial windfall this situation banks out. Any federal judge would laugh at you if you suggest the local police are actually representatives of the federal military.


When 3rd was written it was specifically because the British government had placed soldiers in private homes for the purpose of POLICING the colonialists.  There was no actual police force at the time.  I think a judge would rule that this does fall under the meaning of the amendment.
 
2013-07-04 05:34:33 PM

The_Gallant_Gallstone: A Shambling Mound: And anyone that didn't protest the orders to storm this guy's house, doubly so.

What if they obeyed... under protest?


"I was only following orders" historically isn't exactly the best defense, but it tends to work pretty much only if the person is new, or lowest on the totem pole. They may believe they have no other options. Someone with rank or experience, they know they have other options.

So it seems to me anyway, I'm hardly expert in such.
 
2013-07-04 05:34:40 PM

kyrg: For all those who have no problem with the ever increasing "security measures" enacted to keep us safe. There is a whole lot more of this in your future.


as long as it doesn't happen to ME!
 
2013-07-04 05:35:09 PM
Cops found guilty of abusing their authority should be, at the very least, imprisoned for the rest of their lives.
 
2013-07-04 05:35:23 PM

hardinparamedic: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: "Their duties" include illegally breaking into people's homes and shooting them and their pets with pepper balls?

You do not have the right to shoot the police. Alternatively, Quinton Tarantino movies do not adequately represent real life, feet and all.

Unless that cop breaks into your house without identifying himself AND is in the act of raping or murdering you, you have no chance of beating a murder or attempted murder rap for shooting one, and he is perfectly within the law for forcing entry at that time after identifying himself and the reason for entry. All you're actually doing is ensuring either you'll rot in prison, or go down in a hail of police gunfire.

In fact, most states with a CCW/HCP law blatantly state the only way you have an affirmative defense to shooting a cop is the exact act I stated.

The fact that it is illegal or unconstitutional, at that point, obviously doesn't matter to Officer Friendly. At that point, if you're already that far into a situation, discretion would say do not resist, and demand a lawyer immediately, don't say a word.

But yeah. Shoot a cop, and see how far that gets you.


Hey dude, I get it, you're friends with cops, and you think they'd never do something like this to you. It's cool.
 
2013-07-04 05:35:38 PM

wambu: Walks like a duck.
Dresses like a duck.
Has weapons like a duck.
F**ks up your duck with pepperballs.

It's a duck.


What apparantly constitutes the Military in your mind:

ionenewsone.files.wordpress.com 
media.npr.org
www.veteranstoday.com
 
2013-07-04 05:35:57 PM

Lady Indica: "I was only following orders"


Use of that phrase should be sufficient cause for an immediate firing.
 
2013-07-04 05:36:24 PM
I'm honestly a little curious to know what was going through those cops heads.
 
2013-07-04 05:36:34 PM

OgreMagi: The law needs to be changed so that when a cop (or anyone in a position of authority) blatantly and knowingly breaks the law, they can be held personally liable and their pension is not immune.  Let's see how quickly the cops start paying attention to the Constitution when that happens.

/Yes, I know, never going to happen.


THIS would solve so many problems.
 
2013-07-04 05:37:31 PM
I am not a lawyer, and the Wikipedia looks little iffy. But I keep thinking that RICO could be used more?
 
2013-07-04 05:38:17 PM

James F. Campbell: Cops found guilty of abusing their authority should be, at the very least, imprisoned for the rest of their lives.


Don't necessarily agree with that [life], but I do believe any 'abuse of legal authority' should carry with it a hefty sentence modifier, like a hate crime. Along with similar burdens of proving it. That should go for ANY legal authority that is abused in the commission of a criminal act, IMHO.
 
2013-07-04 05:38:40 PM

Gergesa: I'm honestly a little curious to know what was going through those cops heads.


Testoserone, and a very poor understanding of their role. That's about it.
 
2013-07-04 05:39:14 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Hey dude, I get it, you're friends with cops, and you think they'd never do something like this to you. It's cool.


And I get that you knuckleglaze with the idea of not being an internet tough guy, and shooting a cop. Really. Stop being such a pussy and just do it. Be the an hero FARK wants you to be, bro.

James F. Campbell: Cops found guilty of abusing their authority should be, at the very least, imprisoned for the rest of their lives.


License them at the state level, like every other regulated profession. Take the departments out of this, and appoint a board to oversee those licensed by the state.

Department refuses to discipline Officer Dickbag? Yank his license. Legally, can't work as a cop anymore anywhere without that. Problem solved.

Also think there should be a federal level agency just to handle police civil rights and brutality issues.

OgreMagi: When 3rd was written it was specifically because the British government had placed soldiers in private homes for the purpose of POLICING the colonialists.  There was no actual police force at the time.  I think a judge would rule that this does fall under the meaning of the amendment.


Well, the problem with that is those soldiers were commissioned regulars of the British Army or the Commissioned Militia under control of the British Continental Army, not town constables or the county/province sheriff. So, the term would be more applicable to Military Police than it would regulars, given the intent of the language.
 
2013-07-04 05:40:39 PM

hardinparamedic: wambu: Walks like a duck.
Dresses like a duck.
Has weapons like a duck.
F**ks up your duck with pepperballs.

It's a duck.

What apparantly constitutes the Military in your mind:

[ionenewsone.files.wordpress.com image 640x380] 
[media.npr.org image 850x637]
[www.veteranstoday.com image 370x278]



One (a police officer) has essential immunity from prosecution. The others are rednecks and you can shoot them at will.
 
2013-07-04 05:40:55 PM

hardinparamedic: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Hey dude, I get it, you're friends with cops, and you think they'd never do something like this to you. It's cool.

And I get that you knuckleglaze with the idea of not being an internet tough guy, and shooting a cop. Really. Stop being such a pussy and just do it. Be the an hero FARK wants you to be, bro.

James F. Campbell: Cops found guilty of abusing their authority should be, at the very least, imprisoned for the rest of their lives.

License them at the state level, like every other regulated profession. Take the departments out of this, and appoint a board to oversee those licensed by the state.

Department refuses to discipline Officer Dickbag? Yank his license. Legally, can't work as a cop anymore anywhere without that. Problem solved.

Also think there should be a federal level agency just to handle police civil rights and brutality issues.

OgreMagi: When 3rd was written it was specifically because the British government had placed soldiers in private homes for the purpose of POLICING the colonialists.  There was no actual police force at the time.  I think a judge would rule that this does fall under the meaning of the amendment.

Well, the problem with that is those soldiers were commissioned regulars of the British Army or the Commissioned Militia under control of the British Continental Army, not town constables or the county/province sheriff. So, the term would be more applicable to Military Police than it would regulars, given the intent of the language.


I have zero interest in shooting anyone... Not have I expressed any in this thread or any other.... You drunk?
 
2013-07-04 05:41:12 PM

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Gergesa: I'm honestly a little curious to know what was going through those cops heads.

Testoserone, and a very poor understanding of their role. That's about it.


I'm guessing steroids were involved.
 
2013-07-04 05:41:14 PM
So is there any other links to this story that don't just refer back to this article? Incident happened in 2011.
 
2013-07-04 05:42:33 PM
I'm usually on the side of law and order and think most lawsuits are BS, but this one, I hope they clean the hell up and these cops get fired and even imprisoned.  I know it won't happen, but I can always hope.
 
2013-07-04 05:43:07 PM

Lady Indica: EngineerAU: The only other third amendment case I can think of was one where prison guards went on strike and were replaced with members of the national guard. The prison guards had living quarters on site at the prison which they paid rent for. During the strike they were locked out of their living quarters and the national guard used them. If I recall correctly, the judge said he couldn't rule for the prison guards because there was no precedence set for him to rule on and the case wasn't clear cut enough for him to create one.

That's really interesting, hadn't heard of that. Plus the lockout was probably in relation to other action (the strike) and not 'we're locking you out to give them your home', otherwise even without precedence that'd be a slam dunk. Without that with it being a seperate action...yeah I could see them throwing up their hands.

/loves learning cool new things


Engblom v. Carey. The USSC said it was a violation and remanded it. The district court found qualified immunity because the government didn't KNOW it was a violation because there  was no previous history (It's the ONLY significant case EVER settled on the third amendment.)  Part of the issue at hand was that they were national guard, so technically state troops, not federal, and that the housing was government owned.  The USSC found that there was tenancy, and that by virtue of the 14th amendment, the 3rd applied to the state.
 
2013-07-04 05:44:28 PM
I like how they name the units "rescue 2".  These tuff guy cops need to grow a pair and sign up for infantry.

Oh and I have a family member that is a cop, fortunately for the community he serves he is not a control freak, and I served albeit national guard as well.  This shiat is out of line.  Plaintiff could have helped the cops out but the point is he had a right to be an ahole and not let them in.

denverandmore.com
 
2013-07-04 05:45:02 PM
Revenge is a dish best served cold...behind the officers home one dark night with a golf club.
 
2013-07-04 05:45:33 PM

Slappajo: One (a police officer) has essential immunity from prosecution.


Yeah. That's not exactly true. (Link is from VA, but yeah.)

There's an ex-cop in Memphis right now who's on trial for two counts of Vehicular Homicide in direct violation of that claim.

Slappajo: The others are rednecks and you can shoot them at will.


Yeah, for a second degree murder charge.
 
2013-07-04 05:46:03 PM

EVERYBODY PANIC: Hey, this is what big government does. Why are we surprised. And just wait... Big government is  gonna get LAAAAARGER! Yay!


This isn't big government, this is city government, which is as small time as you can get.  Don't forget, the people crying about big government often say that the states, counties, and cities should be able to do practically whatever they want, even though that's the level where the most blatant rights abuses take place since the feds tend to watch their step and make sure that they actually have a good and legal reason to do so when it comes to actually causing legal injury to others.

TopoGigo: hardinparamedic: OgreMagi: They violated both the 3rd

No, they did not. There is NO Third Amendment Violation here, as the police are NOT considered under constitutional jurisprudence as members of the United States Military OR a State National Guard or Militia under the command of a Federal military commander.

Instead, it's a slam dunk for a fourth, and a fifth amendment violation of their rights.

Any judge who holds an original intent doctrine would say this violates the third. In fact, I'd guess the SCOUS would rule 6-3 against, depending on Scalia's mood.


Yeah, they are government employees after all, members of the executive branch, even though they're at the bottom of the ladder.  It generally applies to any one in the employ of the government at any level, which was how it was used to create the right to privacy.
 
2013-07-04 05:46:50 PM
Note to self if I ever get a call like that, spray paint a big sign on the garage door that says "the police asked me to use my house as a lookout! Isn't that neat?!" after the call where I refused and before they arrive.

Yeah, I have a big mouth lol.
 
2013-07-04 05:47:18 PM

A Shambling Mound: My favorite part is how they totally forgot all about the original reason for wanting to use his house in the first place.

Sorry sacks of sh*t, the lot of them. And anyone that didn't protest the orders to storm this guy's house, doubly so.


I don't think it mattered much by then, since the crooks would've changed locations after all that commotion going on. The key to good stake out is the element of surprise.
 
2013-07-04 05:48:17 PM
This happened two YEARS ago and they just filed a complain this week?
 
2013-07-04 05:48:51 PM

eventhelosers: I like how they name the units "rescue 2".


Riiiight.

First - those vehicles are used for rescue in active shooter situations. They allow tactical teams to deliver care safely to victims that otherwise would set and bleed until the shooter was neutralized. Second - they're not patrol vehicles. They don't rumble down the streets all the time. They're basically kept locked up until needed.

Third - Those have no weapons on them. In fact, that model of the M113 was either used as a military ambulance, or as a coms/command post vehicle

Forth- The reason those departments use them is because they're dirt cheap from surplus sources.
 
2013-07-04 05:49:37 PM

namatad: OgreMagi: The law needs to be changed so that when a cop (or anyone in a position of authority) blatantly and knowingly breaks the law, they can be held personally liable and their pension is not immune.  Let's see how quickly the cops start paying attention to the Constitution when that happens.

/Yes, I know, never going to happen.

THIS would solve so many problems.


You know what solves a lot of problems? Requiring cams and recording equipment. Good cops have NOTHING to fear from it.

Interesting how many departments fought tooth and nail against it, and how many still do NOT utilize a tool which can ONLY protect good cops, and help assure convictions.

If you have to go outside the law to do your job, to work the grey areas to dispense justice...you're one of the bad guys and fark you.
 
2013-07-04 05:50:55 PM

theknuckler_33: This happened two YEARS ago and they just filed a complain this week?


And all the news stories are coming out within the last few hours.
 
2013-07-04 05:52:31 PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engblom_v._Carey

In Engblom v. Carey, it was ruled that the third amendment applies to state authorities as well as it does federal. In this case it was the state national guard that was ruled to be the same as soldiers mentioned in the Constitution. While that doesn't automatically mean that police are covered, the fact that the court was willing to consider members of a state entity to be soldiers is interesting.
 
Displayed 50 of 372 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report