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.

(Herald Tribune (SW Florida))   Remember those warrantless door to door searches everyone was okay with in Boston because it was a unique circumstance and other police agencies would never try it? Welcome to the new America   (heraldtribune.com) divider line 592
    More: Asinine, Louise Goldsberry, United States Marshals Service, police raid, home invasions  
•       •       •

25516 clicks; posted to Main » on 20 Jul 2013 at 6:02 PM (38 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-21 04:26:42 AM

hardinparamedic: Z1P2: No offense but you're an idiot. Prior poster was repeating what is taught in law school. Just because you haven't been screwed yet doesn't mean you won't ever and if you do it can possibly ruin your life.

Uh, I'm one of the most pro-LE people on this website, and even I'll tell you that unless you have a reason to be around the cops, it's probably best you don't do so. And even if they are your friends, the moment you commit a crime or are a suspect in a crime, that friendship is over. You are now a perp, not a friend.

Do not talk to the cops about anything without a lawyer present.
Do not consent to anything you are not legally bound to do. Do only the minimum necessary to meet the law.
Do not admit to anything. Be polite, but do NOT admit guilt.
Do not consent to a search.
If you have a HCP, you are only required to inform the officer that you have a carry permit, and if you are armed or not.
Be very careful what you say, and say only the minimum information you need to get out of the situation without incriminating yourself.


Always start your audio or (better) video recorder and ask the police multiple times if

a, you are legally required to perform their requests and

b, they are legally allowed to perform their actions.

"Yes officer, I would never interfere with you performing your duties, Am I legally required to do that? Which law requires me to do that? Are you allowed to do that under the law? Which law?"

Then as soon as they overstep the mark, all evidence gathered from that point becomes fruit from the tainted tree...

How to talk to the police as a white male in the UK (youtube)
 
2013-07-21 04:43:49 AM

FormlessOne: That's the problem with escalation. If it happens, you lose. You want to do something useful? Push for de-militarizing the cops, not militarizing the civilians.


Personally I'm all for taking away hand guns from the public and assault weapons and tactical gear from cops.

\Not going to happen, but I'm for it,
 
2013-07-21 04:46:06 AM

redmid17: fnordfocus: Smackledorfer: That's enough to show up in a background check, so you're pretty much farked when it comes to getting a job.

Lying once again?

I'm guessing you've never had to taint yourself by filling out a job application?

Except for the biggest corporate employers, they all ask if you have an arrest record.  That leaves a civilian like me two choices. Say "no," and the background check shows a "detention" or "contact" with Officers, or say "yes" and they don't even bother with the background check.  In no case, would the rest of my application even get read.

You apparently haven't. They ask you if you've been convicted of a felony. I've also seen them ask if you've been convicted of a crime that was punishable by more than a year in prison, but I'd say 95% of the job application I've filled out only refer to felonies. But to your point, even a detention or contact wouldn't prevent someone from hiring you, and they don't show up on background checks. I know. I've seen the full printout of border background checks and typical job background checks. Only things they've processed you for will show up unless it is some type of drinking ticket. Basically unless you've got the option for a court date, it isn't going to show up.


They keep record of every detention, even if they don't take you in, and it will all show up if you are ever being vetted for security clearance.

"Why didn't you include being pulled over in 1989 on your form?"

"Because I was sixteen and I was let go with a warning."

"We clearly asked for everything."
 
2013-07-21 04:46:36 AM

dready zim: hardinparamedic: Z1P2: No offense but you're an idiot. Prior poster was repeating what is taught in law school. Just because you haven't been screwed yet doesn't mean you won't ever and if you do it can possibly ruin your life.

Uh, I'm one of the most pro-LE people on this website, and even I'll tell you that unless you have a reason to be around the cops, it's probably best you don't do so. And even if they are your friends, the moment you commit a crime or are a suspect in a crime, that friendship is over. You are now a perp, not a friend.

Do not talk to the cops about anything without a lawyer present.
Do not consent to anything you are not legally bound to do. Do only the minimum necessary to meet the law.
Do not admit to anything. Be polite, but do NOT admit guilt.
Do not consent to a search.
If you have a HCP, you are only required to inform the officer that you have a carry permit, and if you are armed or not.
Be very careful what you say, and say only the minimum information you need to get out of the situation without incriminating yourself.

Always start your audio or (better) video recorder and ask the police multiple times if

a, you are legally required to perform their requests and

b, they are legally allowed to perform their actions.

"Yes officer, I would never interfere with you performing your duties, Am I legally required to do that? Which law requires me to do that? Are you allowed to do that under the law? Which law?"

Then as soon as they overstep the mark, all evidence gathered from that point becomes fruit from the tainted tree...

How to talk to the police as a white male in the UK (youtube)



hmmm not sure about the above since in the us - cops are allowed to lie to you

http://www.officer.com/article/10233095/training-cops-to-lie-pt-1
"Police lie. It's part of their job. They lie to suspects and others in hopes of obtaining evidence. These investigative lies cover a wide web of deception - a web that can get tangled. Some investigative lies are legal, some are not, and some generate significant disagreement amongst courts, prosecutors, the public and officers themselves."
 
2013-07-21 04:48:15 AM

hardinparamedic: Z1P2: No offense but you're an idiot. Prior poster was repeating what is taught in law school. Just because you haven't been screwed yet doesn't mean you won't ever and if you do it can possibly ruin your life.

Uh, I'm one of the most pro-LE people on this website, and even I'll tell you that unless you have a reason to be around the cops, it's probably best you don't do so. And even if they are your friends, the moment you commit a crime or are a suspect in a crime, that friendship is over. You are now a perp, not a friend.

Do not talk to the cops about anything without a lawyer present.
Do not consent to anything you are not legally bound to do. Do only the minimum necessary to meet the law.
Do not admit to anything. Be polite, but do NOT admit guilt.
Do not consent to a search.
If you have a HCP, you are only required to inform the officer that you have a carry permit, and if you are armed or not.
Be very careful what you say, and say only the minimum information you need to get out of the situation without incriminating yourself.


Seconded. And as someone with a JD and who was a part-time cop, I can tell you that if/when it gets to the point that the cops want to search you or ask you questions, they WILL find a reason to search you and they WILL be able to justify anything they do afterwards in their report and in court. So keep your mouth shut unless you absolutely have to.

That said, there's no reason to be an asshole and give them a reason. When they pull you over even if it's for a bullshiat did-you-know-your-taillight-was-broken stop, be polite, hand over your credentials, DO NOT get into a pissing match with them about your rights or how your light is not broken. Sign the ticket and then ask politely if you may leave. If you want to make an issue of it, hire an attorney and do it in court. So many people get themselves into trouble they weren't going to get into by deciding that the best way to fight for their rights is to show the cop how much they know about Constitutional law. This is a mistake.
 
2013-07-21 04:51:46 AM

ChicagoKev: fnordfocus: I'm guessing you've never had to taint yourself by filling out a job application?

Except for the biggest corporate employers, they all ask if you have an arrest record.  That leaves a civilian like me two choices. Say "no," and the background check shows a "detention" or "contact" with Officers, or say "yes" and they don't even bother with the background check.  In no case, would the rest of my application even get read.

Sorry, but you're wrong.  First, in the USA asking about arrest records is generally not permissible.  Aside from state laws against such questions in job interviews, the EEOC also has made it clear that asking this is a good for an employer to get sued, and lose.

Second, most background checks are actually "criminal record checks"; they don't have access to general police records, only court records (charged, indicted, convicted, etc).  A detention or "contact" without any charges filed doesn't appear in court records.


I haven't seen a job application in decades that didn't ask about convictions.  I seem to recall a couple that asked if you had been charged.  Regardless, all they have to do is claim that they don't deny employment based on that information to get around the EEOC regulation.

/took me years to save up the paltry fees to get my record expunged.  Once I could legally claim no convictions I was offered the next three jobs for which I applied.
 
2013-07-21 04:57:02 AM
A door not answered is a reasonable reason to bust in and point your gun at people.  This is how cops think.  More precisely, this is how they don't think correctly.  They have a great deal of authority and are protected by many different layers legally.  This leads to a distinct lack of empathy and a definite spike in feelings of personal entitlement.
 
2013-07-21 05:42:02 AM

cgremlin: MrHappyRotter: because the cops mistook hibiscus for marijuana

That's pretty impressive.  How can *anyone* mistake the two?


i.imgur.com


An everyday, untrained person ... I can maybe understand.

A trained police officer on the other hand, has no rational or reasonable excuse.  What takes it over the top is that the plants weren't visible from the street to begin with, and after convincing the officer that it wasn't pot, something that should have been clear and obvious, I was told in a threatening manner that I'm asking for trouble for growing it.
 
2013-07-21 05:44:27 AM

Heffaloo: redmid17: fnordfocus: Smackledorfer: That's enough to show up in a background check, so you're pretty much farked when it comes to getting a job.

Lying once again?

I'm guessing you've never had to taint yourself by filling out a job application?

Except for the biggest corporate employers, they all ask if you have an arrest record.  That leaves a civilian like me two choices. Say "no," and the background check shows a "detention" or "contact" with Officers, or say "yes" and they don't even bother with the background check.  In no case, would the rest of my application even get read.

You apparently haven't. They ask you if you've been convicted of a felony. I've also seen them ask if you've been convicted of a crime that was punishable by more than a year in prison, but I'd say 95% of the job application I've filled out only refer to felonies. But to your point, even a detention or contact wouldn't prevent someone from hiring you, and they don't show up on background checks. I know. I've seen the full printout of border background checks and typical job background checks. Only things they've processed you for will show up unless it is some type of drinking ticket. Basically unless you've got the option for a court date, it isn't going to show up.

They keep record of every detention, even if they don't take you in, and it will all show up if you are ever being vetted for security clearance.

"Why didn't you include being pulled over in 1989 on your form?"

"Because I was sixteen and I was let go with a warning."

"We clearly asked for everything."


If you try to get a job at an important enough place, they'll have a record of the time you maliciously farted in a McD's and laughed so hard they asked you to leave. They'll know if you got detention too many times in high school.

The shiat they run on you for a job at a bank, or a border crossing, or whatever pedestrian shiat obviously isn't going to show anything that isn't major.

How does this require a discussion or argument? It's farking known by anyone that's pursued a job that secure.
 
2013-07-21 05:57:55 AM

MurphyMurphy: If you try to get a job at an important enough place, they'll have a record of the time you maliciously farted in a McD's and laughed so hard they asked you to leave. They'll know if you got detention too many times in high school.

The shiat they run on you for a job at a bank, or a border crossing, or whatever pedestrian shiat obviously isn't going to show anything that isn't major.

How does this require a discussion or argument? It's farking known by anyone that's pursued a job that secure.


It gets ridiculous sometimes.
 
2013-07-21 07:30:37 AM

Your Average Witty Fark User: Where's Cruiser Twelve to defend this shiat?


He changed his name to TutTibilmperes.

m00: from the article: The most volatile night of the convention featured one incident in which Jefferson County, Colorado, deputies unknowingly clashed with and then pepper-sprayed undercover Denver cops posing as violent protesters.


Wait, what?


This is nothing new.

Randy Weaver had no inclination at all to do anything illegal until some jackhole from the BATFE (they hate it when you use all their initials because they want to be a three-letter-agency) badgered him into sawing off a single shotgun in order to justify the siege on Ruby Ridge.

cgremlin: hardinparamedic: If you have a HCP, you are only required to inform the officer that you have a carry permit, and if you are armed or not.

In some states, not all (mine is among those that don't require it).  Having said that, use your best judgment, taking the situation into account.  The professional conversation you're having with an officer can change *very* quickly if your shirt tail blows up and he sees the concealed Glock you're (legally) carrying.


There are plenty of cops in Pennsylvania who will go to great lengths to confiscate a lawfully owned, lawfully carried firearm that they only know is there because they were told. They love to use the Record of Sale database (containing records that are supposed to be deleted 72 hours after the approval) as a de facto registry. If your gun's not in it, because you brought it when you moved to PA, it was a gift from your parent, or the record actually was deleted, they use that to take your gun.

Since I prefer not to be robbed of my firearms at badgepoint, I don't tell them. My gun is no threat to them and not their concern.

cgremlin: How much more likely is it that you will hear screaming inside a given house from a woman in legitimate distress, or just from someone watching a horror movie on TV?


Well, it kind of stacks the deck if you paint her with a laser sight in order to induce the screaming.
 
2013-07-21 08:01:11 AM
This makes me happy that I now live in a tiny mountain town where all the cops are fat and lazy.
 
2013-07-21 08:11:44 AM

Lenny_da_Hog: This makes me happy that I now live in a tiny mountain town where all the cops are fat and lazy.


media.screened.com

"That sounds great, I think I'll give it a shot."
 
2013-07-21 08:20:00 AM

Boojum2k: Fark_Guy_Rob: Whoa - a cop treated as a lowly civilian?! I wish I could have seen that....must have been a long time ago.

Pretty sure it happens frequently when they come onto a military base. It was a while ago, but I doubt they've changed those rules. And yes, they looked like they had raw lemon for lunch when turning in their sidearms.

Good times.


And by the stories I have heard, I am sure they took it out on some average Airman wondering outside the base.

heili skrimsli: There are plenty of cops in Pennsylvania who will go to great lengths to confiscate a lawfully owned, lawfully carried firearm that they only know is there because they were told. They love to use the Record of Sale database (containing records that are supposed to be deleted 72 hours after the approval) as a de facto registry. If your gun's not in it, because you brought it when you moved to PA, it was a gift from your parent, or the record actually was deleted, they use that to take your gun.

Since I prefer not to be robbed of my firearms at badgepoint, I don't tell them. My gun is no threat to them and not their concern.


A buddy of mine had a cop ask to see his gun after informing the officer of his CCW.  My friend was already out of his truck and just locked and shut the truck door.  The officer said I need to see the gun and was quickly told "No, you don't".  The cop backed down because it would've took a warrant to get into the truck.  It also helps that the cop is likely shorter than my friend, most people are.
 
2013-07-21 08:38:20 AM
"I feel bad for her," Wiggins conceded, finally. "But at the same time, I had to reasonably believe the bad guy was in her house based on what they were doing."

What were they "doing" - washing dishes or protecting themselves from what they perceived as a home invasion?

Fark the cops.  First responders my ass.
 
2013-07-21 08:41:12 AM
Never Again.
 
2013-07-21 08:49:18 AM
While I agree that a lawsuit is in order here and that the police over-stepped (again) in a clutch situation, the end result of the issue is that the cop (even if he loses his job) will simply shuffle off to yet another role in LE.  Taxpayers will AGAIN need to pay out the nose for another 3/4 million dollar settlement and we will AGAIN have not learned the lessons we need to cut down on this crap.

I propose that we change all police malpractice cases to a personal liability model.  Part of being a licensed police officer then becomes a requirement (much like doctors) to carry malpractice insurance.  You fark up, YOU get the bill (or in this case the insurance company does).

Suddenly it's not the public being forced to pay for the polices mistakes, but the police themselves (and their power structure) getting hit with the bill.  I imagine police will be unhappy at the need to pay more for insurance, but the flip side of this is a desire to NOT MAKE your fellow boys in blue pay more for insurance that you need to carry (which could moderate some of the more egregious violations and keep bad cops out of the system.)
 
2013-07-21 08:50:16 AM

Spanky McStupid: "I feel bad for her," Wiggins conceded, finally. "But at the same time, I had to reasonably believe the bad guy was in her house based on what they were doing."

What were they "doing" - washing dishes or protecting themselves from what they perceived as a home invasion?

Fark the cops.  First responders my ass.


What, people hiding criminals in their apartment can't clean their dishes?  I bet they can fold their laundry too.  Not all criminals are actually covered in dirt.
 
2013-07-21 09:08:30 AM
If someone screaming warrants breaking and entering, better not do legal things like, loud orgasmic sex, watch scary movies, see a spider, prank your friends..etc
 
2013-07-21 09:23:19 AM

ARagingRebel: If someone screaming warrants breaking and entering, better not do legal things like, loud orgasmic sex, watch scary movies, see a spider, prank your friends..etc


Read the politics tab...
 
2013-07-21 09:40:32 AM

fredklein: Personally, I think people should file HUGE lawsuits (for the publicity), but then make a quite reasonable settlement offer- A decent amount of money, AND each and every cop involved in your case being FIRED (no pensions), and never hired in a cop (or cop-like) position again.

It's a win-win. Either you're RICH, and basically have immunity from the cops, OR the cops who bothered you are GONE. And their friends who remain will have to think twice before they hassle you- do they want to be fired, too?


I don't think the department can make such a settlement.  While they can fire the cops they can't stop them from working elsewhere.

cgremlin: In some states, not all (mine is among those that don't require it). Having said that, use your best judgment, taking the situation into account. The professional conversation you're having with an officer can change *very* quickly if your shirt tail blows up and he sees the concealed Glock you're (legally) carrying.


Yeah, law or not one certainly should inform the cop that you're carrying.  You don't want him to find out by other means!

heili skrimsli: Randy Weaver had no inclination at all to do anything illegal until some jackhole from the BATFE (they hate it when you use all their initials because they want to be a three-letter-agency) badgered him into sawing off a single shotgun in order to justify the siege on Ruby Ridge.


No.  The problem wasn't badgering him into sawing it off, it was that he did a poor job and produced an illegal firearm in the process.  A stupid, no criminal intent.
 
2013-07-21 09:58:22 AM
DATURA

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-07-21 10:42:51 AM
I seriously hope that Mr. Matt Wiggins of the U.S. Marshal's fugitive division ends up shot because of these tactics one day...  Along with all these other commando raiding thugs with a badge...  Seriously, How can this shiat be allowed to go on in this country?

/note that I threatened nobody in the post
//slashies
 
2013-07-21 10:47:31 AM

Slaxl: "I went above and beyond," Wiggins said. "I have to go home at night."

No you didn't, you giant back of dicks, and one day you won't be going home at night because someone will shoot you, and you'll probably be to blame.


yuuuuuuup
 
2013-07-21 10:49:44 AM

thamike: Lenny_da_Hog: This makes me happy that I now live in a tiny mountain town where all the cops are fat and lazy.

[media.screened.com image 600x400]

"That sounds great, I think I'll give it a shot."


How dangerous was this kiddy diddler that they need a fully armed SWAT team anyway, what did Rambo start touching kids.
 
2013-07-21 11:01:49 AM

mrlewish: What they gonna do on the day some innocent home owner shoots multiple cops dead while they are barging in without a warrant and he/she records it all?


Well on that day I will be donating to someones legal defense fund...
 
2013-07-21 11:22:20 AM
Screaming heard from inside the apartment, no one answers when the police identify themselves, to me that's a legitimate reason to open the door to check on the safety of those inside.
She asked for ID and they told her

They did ask  for the man outside her door for ID:

"He was claiming to be a police officer, but the man she had seen looked to her more like an armed thug. Her boyfriend, Dorris, was calmer, and yelled back that he wanted to see some ID.

But the man just demanded they open the door. The actual words, the couple say, were, "We're the f------ police; open the f------ door."
 
2013-07-21 11:33:17 AM

Loren: fredklein: Personally, I think people should file HUGE lawsuits (for the publicity), but then make a quite reasonable settlement offer- A decent amount of money, AND each and every cop involved in your case being FIRED (no pensions), and never hired in a cop (or cop-like) position again.

It's a win-win. Either you're RICH, and basically have immunity from the cops, OR the cops who bothered you are GONE. And their friends who remain will have to think twice before they hassle you- do they want to be fired, too?

I don't think the department can make such a settlement.  While they can fire the cops they can't stop them from working elsewhere.


A bad recommendation (but an honest one) , combined with the publicity would pretty much take care of that.
 
2013-07-21 11:46:28 AM

TuteTibiImperes: If I'm understanding the timeline of this correctly:

1. Lady sees a guy in a hunting vest pointing a gun at her while she's washing dishes (I'm assuming she saw him through a window as mysterious hunting-vest-dude apparently disappears from the rest of the story, perhaps it was one of the officers)

2. Lady starts screaming (understandably) and crawls across the floor to get her gun

3. There's a banging on the door and someone identifying themselves as a police officer requests entry (which is understandable considering he just heard screaming coming from inside the apartment)

4. After the door doesn't open, the police force it open, again, which is understandable - warrants aren't needed for exigent circumstances, and he just heard a lady screaming and is apparently aware that there's reported fugitive, possibly armed, in the area

5.  Because he's concerned for her safety and there is a possible armed fugitive, he comes in fully armed, and rightfully tells her to put down her weapon.

6.  The boyfriend asks to come out, he's let out, and immediately handcuffed, appropriately, as the police don't know who he is, if this is a domestic dispute, if he's the fugitive, etc, better safe than sorry - restrain him and then figure out what's going on

7.  The lady is screaming things that aren't related to the situation (being an American citizen does not give you the right to hold a gun on a police officer or to disobey their orders in that type of situation) but is finally calmed down by the boyfriend after he sees the other police outside.

8. Lady puts her gun down, the house is searched (there was a confrontation inside the home, screaming coming from it, it seems reasonable to me)

9. The situation is explained to the lady and her boyfriend, and they're let go

I don't see a police over-reach in this.  If an officer was driving past my house and heard loud screaming in terror I'd want him to come in as I very well could be in mortal danger.  Perhaps the guy was a b ...


Police can't create the exigency.  Durrr
 
2013-07-21 11:48:33 AM

Slaxl: "I went above and beyond," Wiggins said. "I have to go home at night."

No you didn't, you giant back of dicks, and one day you won't be going home at night because someone will shoot you, and you'll probably be to blame.


He did go above and beyond, what was needed to make sure he get home and anyone else be damned
 
2013-07-21 12:28:04 PM
fnordfocus,
Enemabag Jones: The complete unmarked vehicles with civilian plates is used alot during prime time DWI hours to find drunk people.
And also leads to dead civilians who pull over for fake cops because we've been conditioned that Police Officers don't need to identify themselves.
http://www.contracostatimes.com/ci_9430905
Plus, I just saw a murdered out Dodge Durango police vehicle with civilian plates. It's designed to stand out, not blend in, and it's a waste of quite a bit of taxpayer money.


What I am talking about is a police cruiser working in conjunction with a unmarked car, like a Chevy Cavalier, Aveo, or clapped out POS from teh 70's or early 80's.

When they are not doing show of force by having marked cars following any suspect vehicles a few meters behind the bumper, they work as teams, one police, one unmarked.

How do I know, I have worked second and third shift alot and the night crew for the police dept loves to use aggressive tatics.

I have seen marked/civilian unmarked cars pull up next to each other driver window to driver window and talk to each other. I have seen a marked and unmarked civilian car drive way over the speed limit no lights following each other appearing to work together.

I have been behind a possible drunk going twenty in a twenty-five zone, behind me was a suv or something with brights, in a no passing zone. Six blocks down, a police car sitting there. This was not the only time something wtf happened, suprise, a cop pulls up behind me.

I have never have issues with police, somehow in this town I have.
 
Juc
2013-07-21 12:29:33 PM
Land of the free eh?
 
2013-07-21 12:39:46 PM
<i> BATFE (they hate it when you use all their initials because they want to be a three-letter-agency) </i>

I like it when nutters give themselves away with bizarre rhetoric.  Yes, I'm sure the ATF is just totally enraged every time someone uses the incorrect acronym to refer to them.  Now excuse me while I pop a fresh clip into my 32-calibre glock.
 
2013-07-21 01:00:41 PM

thamike: Lenny_da_Hog: This makes me happy that I now live in a tiny mountain town where all the cops are fat and lazy.

[media.screened.com image 600x400]

"That sounds great, I think I'll give it a shot."



Rambo was a story about how shiatty we treated Nam vets after they returned from war. Since the Hollywood Shootout, those vets are now the most desired candidates for Law Enforcement jobs. Rambo would be a cop if he was a veteran of US war in Afghanistan.
 
2013-07-21 02:54:24 PM

bhcompy: Rambo was a story about how shiatty we treated Nam vets after they returned from war. Since the Hollywood Shootout, those vets are now the most desired candidates for Law Enforcement jobs. Rambo would be a cop if he was a veteran of US war in Afghanistan.


Crank the crazy dial back a few. I think you set it to 11.   

A preference for veterans is not even remotely similar to a demand for ptsd rambos, and you know it.
 
2013-07-21 03:10:39 PM
Jesus guys, it was a f*cking joke.
 
2013-07-21 05:25:11 PM

Smackledorfer: bhcompy: Rambo was a story about how shiatty we treated Nam vets after they returned from war. Since the Hollywood Shootout, those vets are now the most desired candidates for Law Enforcement jobs. Rambo would be a cop if he was a veteran of US war in Afghanistan.

Crank the crazy dial back a few. I think you set it to 11.   

A preference for veterans is not even remotely similar to a demand for ptsd rambos, and you know it.


I wasn't trying to be crazy, rather, just pointing out that First Blood as it was written isn't valid today, and, more likely, Rambo would be on the other side of the aisle(and reality shows this) somewhere soon after his return from war.  While Rambo had flashbacks and had some symptoms of what we now call PTSD, the film was about Rambo trying to find acceptance somewhere in the world and getting shiat on everywhere he went.
 
2013-07-21 07:44:04 PM

ManateeGag: Benevolent Misanthrope: NeoAnderthal: Busting in without a warrant? Sounds like a cop going rogue and a lawsuit to me.

Really?  Sounds like a bunch of cops exercising their machismo and power-high on a Very Important Mission, and and teaching some insufficiently servile biatch a lesson to me.  Damn, they did everything but gang-rape her to prove their power.

Remember friends - Police are not nice.  Never, ever trust them, and never, ever call them unless you have absolutely no alternative.  They are as likely to shoot you as they are to shoot the bad guy.  They are even somewhat likely to think you ARE the bad guy, if you don't cower in awe before them.

what shiatty interactions have you had with police officers?  I've never, not ever once, had a horrible interaction with a police officer where I thought I was going to get shot or he was going to fark me over.  I've felt like an idiot for getting a ticket a few times, but none of them have ever been outright assholes to me.


Give it time.
 
2013-07-21 07:48:05 PM

TuteTibiImperes: If I'm understanding the timeline of this correctly:

1. Lady sees a guy in a hunting vest pointing a gun at her while she's washing dishes (I'm assuming she saw him through a window as mysterious hunting-vest-dude apparently disappears from the rest of the story, perhaps it was one of the officers)

2. Lady starts screaming (understandably) and crawls across the floor to get her gun

3. There's a banging on the door and someone identifying themselves as a police officer requests entry (which is understandable considering he just heard screaming coming from inside the apartment)

4. After the door doesn't open, the police force it open, again, which is understandable - warrants aren't needed for exigent circumstances, and he just heard a lady screaming and is apparently aware that there's reported fugitive, possibly armed, in the area

5.  Because he's concerned for her safety and there is a possible armed fugitive, he comes in fully armed, and rightfully tells her to put down her weapon.

6.  The boyfriend asks to come out, he's let out, and immediately handcuffed, appropriately, as the police don't know who he is, if this is a domestic dispute, if he's the fugitive, etc, better safe than sorry - restrain him and then figure out what's going on

7.  The lady is screaming things that aren't related to the situation (being an American citizen does not give you the right to hold a gun on a police officer or to disobey their orders in that type of situation) but is finally calmed down by the boyfriend after he sees the other police outside.

8. Lady puts her gun down, the house is searched (there was a confrontation inside the home, screaming coming from it, it seems reasonable to me)

9. The situation is explained to the lady and her boyfriend, and they're let go

I don't see a police over-reach in this.  If an officer was driving past my house and heard loud screaming in terror I'd want him to come in as I very well could be in mortal danger.  Perhaps the guy was a bit gruff in his language, but he identified himself as a police officer and the couple delayed allowing him entry, and then the lady refused to lower her weapon.  She's frankly lucky that she didn't get shot.


Please leave the country. No seriously. Get the fark out.
 
2013-07-21 07:51:50 PM

TuteTibiImperes: Pray 4 Mojo: TuteTibiImperes: Let me clarify with this too - her screaming was the only reason they had legitimate cause to enter the apartment.

If they'd knocked normally, she'd opened the door unarmed, and refused them entry, any further push to enter the apartment would have been wrong.

Here is the problem with that (assuming this is a reasonably accurate description of that the Marshal actually said):

But when the people in Goldsberry's apartment didn't open up, that told Wiggins he had probably found the right door. No one at other units had reacted that way, he said.

"Open up. It's the police" does not give officers free reign to do whatever the fark they want.

Screaming heard from inside the apartment, no one answers when the police identify themselves, to me that's a legitimate reason to open the door to check on the safety of those inside.


Well this seems like the perfect ruse to pull if someone wants to conduct a home invasion. "Open up, it's the police!"

There's NO way criminals could ever abuse this. Great standards for these asshole cops to set.
 
2013-07-21 08:24:06 PM

MurphyMurphy: ManateeGag: what shiatty interactions have you had with police officers? I've never, not ever once, had a horrible interaction with a police officer where I thought I was going to get shot or he was going to fark me over. I've felt like an idiot for getting a ticket a few times, but none of them have ever been outright assholes to me.

Let's play pictionary

[4.bp.blogspot.com image 252x147][www.dntdesigns.co.uk image 225x183]


Two slices short of a loaf?
 
2013-07-21 11:22:42 PM
Lets see, unidentified person trying to break into my house with guns... I would have shot them dead.
 
Displayed 42 of 592 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report