Do you support our current president?
POSTED BY: canttakesky
UPDATED: Tuesday, December 21, 2021 17:33
VIEWED: 12746
PAGE 3 of 15
Back to the original question - Do I support our current president?
No.
MAL "You only gotta scare him."
JAYNE "Pain is scary..."
http://www.fireflytalk.com - Big Damn Podcast
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Although one of his biggest mistakes was holding over that Democrap appointed Pineta as Transportation Sec - who has created all of the bad parts of TSA and Travel - I do still support the President (this is 2008, next year I will not). Imagining how much worse it would be with algore or Swiftboat Kerry brings on nightmares.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by canttakesky:
"Do you support our current president?"
Besides the fact that this whole story is a load of crap, the question is relevant not because of the question...but for the answer.
Kinda like when a cop asks you off the bat if you know why you've been pulled over. There are questions whose specific intent is to get some kind of confession or admission or to lead to follow up questions.
Best way to answer: Do you know why I pulled you over? "Yes." or "No." or "Why no Officer, is there something wrong?"
Do you support the President? "Yes." or "No." or "I don't understand the question."
That said, if someone were to rush to the airport, run inside, and hand someone a package and then leave just as quickly...I think we'd want to know a couple more details. Thats good security. But this story is crap cause Customs Agents lack the authority to operate in the manner you described.
Also, police have the right to ask anyone any question anytime if they see you at the gas station or on the street. Its called a consensual encounter. Its consensual...you can say nothing, walk away, or stop and talk all friendly like. Now if they want to detain you they need reasonable suspicion based upon reasonable articulable facts.
Based upon the made up story you gave us...well, in made up stories we can make up answers, and in this case my made up legal opinion is that they could not only pretend to detain the alleged man they could shoot him if he does not support the President (with imaginary bullets).
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
It's well known, indisputable fact that if you in any way try to express or enforce your rights when in communication with a Law Enforcement Officer, they will more often than not react quite nastily, anything from petty intimidation up to outright murder, can, have and will.
True. I have a couple friends who are cops, and they've told me point blank that their philosophy on this kind of thing is:
"You can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride."
In other words, give us any shit at all, and you're going downtown, either for resisting arrest or for disorderly conduct.
Of course, no cop will ever admit this kind of thing in front of a camera or a jury...
Mike
"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence[sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions
I can't help the sinking feeling that my country is now being run by people who read "1984" not as a cautionary tale, but rather as an instruction manual. - Michael Mock
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I’m sure you’re friends were talking about something else, or maybe they’re just assholes, but I’ve never in my life encountered an officer who was ever anything but polite and lenient. And THAT is actually how they taught to be - not this paranoid fascist fantasy that Frem has invented. In fact, just the other day, I was at the gas station, when an officer came in with a woman who was visibly drunk. The officer told her that if he catches her driving drunk again he’s going to take her to jail, and then informed the attended of the gas station, who was evidently an acquaintance of the drunk woman, that he had called a friend of hers to come pick her up. Now bearing in mind, that in this state, the police are required to take you to jail if they pull you over drunk, this officer was extremely forgiving and polite - and the truth is that this is the rule, not the exception.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
this is the rule, not the exception.
Again, I call BS, the evidence is wholly against that perception.
You MIGHT get that in a small town or district, but measured across the board the only dependable factor is abusive behavior, and the only noteable difference is the degree.
http://www.aele.org/losbeyond2000.html
"This year saw, for the first time ever, a United States Supreme Court opinion in which four justices of the Court opined that some citizens might well be justified in their belief that fleeing from an approaching police officer may be the best thing to do, whether innocent or guilty."
Oh, and mikey ?
Nowadays they don't even have to take you downtown to rough you up for a little "street justice" - that's what tasers are for, right ?
Here's the incident that started my distaste for the damned things in the hands of the police, btw...
Should anyone care to know what set me off about it in the first place.
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2007-06-28/news/death-by-electrocutione
r/print
"Anderson fired his Taser stun gun into Graff's bare chest from close range and held the trigger for 84 uninterrupted seconds as it discharged 50,000 volts of electricity into the man."
Paranoid fantasy, eh ?
Tell that to Graffs family.
-Frem
It cannot be said enough, those who do not learn from history, are doomed to endlessly repeat it
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Yep. I can cherry pick events or take things out of context and claim that defines the whole system as well as anyone else, but in the end, I’ve never met a police officer who didn’t treat me and others with as much or more respect then was deserved. Never. In my life.
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
Paranoid fantasy, eh ?
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Given the pathetic credibility you have after repeatedly lying to us around here, I rather doubt you'll get anyone to believe you on that.
Especially since no one HAS to cherrypick, in fact, you have to do that to get examples of where an interaction with a LEO has *not* gone nasty.
You're arguing, once again, in the face of mountains of evidence proving just the opposite of what you are trying to tell folk, which works about as well as tryin to tell em the earth is flat, and with about the same end results.
And while the behavior of the force in general over the past twelve years has indeed degenerated, in part due to militarization of the force - the sad fact is that they have prettymuch *always* behaved like this, it's just that by turning their own surveillence society against them in our technological age, they're finally getting CAUGHT at it, is all.
And in my eyes that's progress, but it's not so easy to rectify the problem when folks still deny passionately it exists.
Abusive behavior is the rule, not the exception, and I for one would like to change that, instead of denying the problem while things get worse.
Again, all I really want is for them to do their job with a minimum of waste, abuse and stupidity, and I do NOT think that is too much to ask of them.
-F
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:The more likely scenario is that increases in surveillance devices, both those used by the police and those held by others, in recent years has allowed for isolated incidences to draw attention disproportionate with their nature. Then paranoid opportunist jump on these images to claim they are the rule, but in the end, I have never IN MY LIFE ever encountered an officer like you claim they are. I have no doubt they exist, but in what proportion? Is it just coincidence that every officer I have ever met was polite and/or lenient? Have I, by mistake, just happened upon the only good officers in the country? No, I think it’s more likely the police officer just simply aren’t the monsters you portray them as. And of course, anyone who has listened to your long tirades on the evils of the state and your Marxist utopia of an anarchic society would know that you have an ideological incentive to portray the police the way you do.
Originally posted by Fremdfirma:
And while the behavior of the force in general over the past twelve years has indeed degenerated, in part due to militarization of the force - the sad fact is that they have prettymuch *always* behaved like this, it's just that by turning their own surveillence society against them in our technological age, they're finally getting CAUGHT at it, is all.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
You see, that argument might have worked but for a couple reasons.
First, there's a big credibility gap here - you got none, you've lied, repeatedly, been caught lying, denied it, and lied some more, and you almost never offer proof of any of your claims, the few times you have it's been shot to pieces immediately.
If I am offering unsupported opinion, I tell you up front, unless I feel it's bloody obvious, and if I feel proof or examples are necessary they get included - and if you ever even bothered (your own statements prove you don't, given the content of some previous examples and links, so don't bother with more lies) to read them instead of dismissing without a thought or glance anything that might not agree with how you wanna view the world, you might know where I am coming from.
But you can't even get your bashes right, since I am neither a Marxist, nor a Utopian in principle or practice, but a Kropotkinist in principle, and an incremental minimalist* in practice.
You are also missing the general behavioral bents that are so pointedly obvious even those who believe in the utility and function of police departments are pissed off, the conduct of the FOP, Police Unions and departments and their thin blue line covering up for instead of exposing abusive officers - were things actually as you perceive them, they would be first in line to scourge these "bad apples" from the ranks, but they are not, which shows an intentional complicity in their behavior.
That whole few bad apples and isolated incidents bullshit falls flat every single time an officer who violates the law is held to a LOWER standard than us mere citizens, instead of a higher one as they should be - it creates a class division that feeds into an "us and them" mentality that is realistically and psychologically impossible to NOT happen when the same rules don't apply to both classes.
You give a person a gun, power over others and then insulate them from the negative consqeuences of their actions, this behavior becomes inevitable, it's that very lack of consequences that feeds it, and rather than calling for an abusive officers head, the police unions, FOP, and related orgs act in a concerted fashion to conceal, play down or justify that behavior, all the while playing up how "dangerous" (which it ain't we proved that a while ago) the job is and going for the sympathy-beg.
This places them at the same level as a mafia protection racket, in my eyes, for as much as it costs to maintain and operate a police department, we should be getting a lot more for the money - and we'd do well to put that money into training instead of shiny new toys, if you ask me.
I think police officers should be held to, and suject to, every single little nitpick law and regulation we are, with MORE severe consequences for violation than any non police officer - and I very, very specifically include weapons laws in that, and as well any fine levied against a department or it's personnel for misconduct should come directly out of their salaries.
And a civilian review board drawn from the population they are serving to review any use of force or misconduct allegations, let the community decide whether they are being served or abused.
And while these measures all make sense, all have merit - tell me, what exactly is blockading them, and in a fashion that smacks of la cosa nostra ?
Why, the Police Unions, FOP, and related orgs, of course.
When they actively standing in the way of flat out common sense reforms, it's not a few bad apples or an isolated incident any more, it's a pattern of conduct that they actively support.
When they stop ACTING like a mafia or street gang, I will stop flaming them as one.
-Frem
*Incremental Minimalism is favoring a rollback of redundant, unneccessary of unwanted laws, offices, agencies and taxes as both a net cost savings and to reduce the amount of legal and social hassle upon the population as a whole as well as a cost savings measure.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME