- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Any boot lickers here defend these police actions?
Posted on 11/8/22 at 7:16 am to AMS
Posted on 11/8/22 at 7:16 am to AMS
quote:
There's no state where cops can stop to ID you without a crime (not driving). 'acting unusual'or even 'looking like you have a gun' isn't a crime. Even if the cops were called for those reasons the man wouldn't have to give ID
Wrong
Open carry is not legal in Florida. If she thought he was open carrying a firearm she could stop him and ask for his identification.
Now as another poster said as soon as he made it clear it was a walking stick they should have let him go. I don’t think they had a right to put him in cuffs unless they argue he failed to identify himself.
This post was edited on 11/8/22 at 7:24 am
2
Posted on 11/8/22 at 7:37 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
No fricking shite. I didn’t think I had to explain that because it’s in my post.
you showed that you didnt understand what you posted by asking:
quote:
Did someone call the police and say he was acting unusual or looked like he had a gun? I’m not saying I agree with these laws but I think y’all believe you have rights that you may not.
its obvious you didnt understand it because your 'did someone call' scenario wouldnt meet criteria to justify a 'stop and ID' described in your post which was why I brought it up. acting unusual or having a weapon isnt a crime, it doesnt meet stop and ID criteria. your rights are still intact even if cops are called on you because you are 'acting unusually'
quote:
I’m simply saying you don’t know when a cop has reasonable suspicion or they don’t.
its when they can articulate the suspicion of a crime. if they stop you and they are just spewing nonsense about being 'unusual' without mentioning some underlying related crime they dont have RAS.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 7:41 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
Wrong
Open carry is not legal in Florida. If she thought he was open carrying a firearm she could stop him and ask for his identification.
dude just stop. reading comprehension isnt that hard.
I posted:
quote:
There's no state where cops can stop to ID you without a crime (not driving). 'acting unusual'or even 'looking like you have a gun' isn't a crime. Even if the cops were called for those reasons the man wouldn't have to give ID
and you tell me im wrong giving an example of IDing for a crime
Posted on 11/8/22 at 7:42 am to AMS
quote:
Whenever any law enforcement officer of this state encounters any person under circumstances which reasonably indicate that such person has committed, is committing,or is about to commit a violation of the criminal laws of this state or the criminal ordinances of any municipality or county,
So you don’t have to commit a crime. They could believe you are about to commit a crime. And I read that he crossed a crosswalk when the light didn’t say walk. Does that qualify as jaywalking?
I don’t think the cops should have the right to do any of this I’m just saying that they can find ways to ask you for your ID under the current law.
This post was edited on 11/8/22 at 7:44 am
Posted on 11/8/22 at 7:46 am to AMS
quote:
dude just stop. reading comprehension isnt that hard.
Look in the mirror buddy.
The law clearly states if they “think you are about to commit a crime”
So your standard of having to already have committed a crime is flat out wrong
Posted on 11/8/22 at 7:47 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
Look in the mirror buddy.
The law clearly states if they “think you are about to commit a crime”
So your standard of having to already have committed a crime is flat out wrong
And in this case what would cause them to reasonably think he was about to commit a crime?
Posted on 11/8/22 at 7:49 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
I don’t think they had a right to put him in cuffs unless they argue he failed to identify himself.
He wasn't legally required to ID himself
Posted on 11/8/22 at 7:52 am to Powerman
quote:
He wasn't legally required to ID himself
So if he crossed the street illegally or she thought he was open carrying a firearm she couldn’t ask for his ID?
I’ll keep saying it, I don’t think they SHOULD have this right but I could easily see how they could justify it under the current law. That doesn’t excuse the nonsense of the resisting arrest though.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 7:53 am to East Coast Band
TBH, both parties were acting a dick.
What's up with "boot licker" comment anyway?
What's up with "boot licker" comment anyway?
Posted on 11/8/22 at 7:53 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
So if he crossed the street illegally or she thought he was open carrying a firearm she couldn’t ask for his ID?
There was no mention of him crossing the street illegally
He demonstrated he wasn't carrying a fire arm. That should be the end of the encounter. They can ask for his ID but he isn't required to ID himself
Posted on 11/8/22 at 7:54 am to F1y0n7h3W4LL
quote:
What's up with "boot licker" comment anyway?
Refers to people that back the police in all instances
Their behavior here can't be justified by anyone other than a "bootlicker"
Posted on 11/8/22 at 7:57 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
So you don’t have to commit a crime. They could believe you are about to commit a crime. And I read that he crossed a crosswalk when the light didn’t say walk. Does that qualify as jaywalking?
I don’t think the cops should have the right to do any of this I’m just saying that they can find ways to ask you for your ID under the current law.
this is our point. youre going pretty far bootlicking to come up with excuses for the cops to justify this behavior.
pointing out they will 'find ways to ask for ID under current law' isnt really an acceptable defense of their behavior bc thats the problem. coming up with some nonsense unrelated 'found a way' justification after the fact isn't legitimate and shouldn't be treated as such.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 8:02 am to Powerman
quote:
There was no mention of him crossing the street illegally
They say that in another article. So Crossing the street when the “do not walk sign” is up technically is illegal. That’s why I originally asked what happened before the video started.
I think all these laws are absurd but I’m trying to get you to realize you don’t have as much leeway as you think you do when it comes to showing identification. Yea you are correct but you better be damn well sure you didn’t do anything illegal or that they were lookin for a perp that fits your description, etc.
Most of the OT is going to read this and think “I don’t have to do shite a cop says if I didn’t do anything wrong” and that’s not technically correct.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 8:04 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
So your standard of having to already have committed a crime is flat out wrong
you are just flat out making things up for this argument.
that isnt my standard, if you re-read my posts i even mention if cops think you are about to do something illegal with the weapon they can ID.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 8:05 am to AMS
quote:
this is our point. youre going pretty far bootlicking to come up with excuses for the cops to justify this behavior.
How many times do I have to say I don’t agree with this stretching of the law? You want to paint me as the enemy so you have someone to attack.
I’m simply saying you don’t have as many rights as you think you do.
Now if you want to talk about changing some of these laws I would support you in that, but there is a fine line between preserving our rights and handicapping the police and their ability to solve crime. So it would have to be well written.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 8:11 am to AMS
quote:
you are just flat out making things up for this argument.
You said this..
quote:
There's no state where cops can stop to ID you without a crime (not driving).
And that’s what prompted my response. In the video the guy asks what crime he committed and the officer said “I’m investigating…” then he cut her off and started talking. She also at one point said she thought he was carrying a gun. And it’s apparent now that he crossed a cross walk illegally.
I’ll repeat it again as nauseam but i think all these laws are trivial and shouldn’t be grounds to stop someone but you need to correct your statement that she couldn’t stop him.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 8:13 am to East Coast Band
Those pigs vote blue no doubt.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 8:15 am to WaWaWeeWa
quote:
In the video the guy asks what crime he committed and the officer said “I’m investigating…”
i.e. she could not articulate a crime that he committed
Posted on 11/8/22 at 8:16 am to East Coast Band
That guy is lucky that cop didn't shoot him when he reached back and whipped out his walking stick. Regardless, she was way out of line.
Posted on 11/8/22 at 8:19 am to Powerman
quote:
i.e. she could not articulate a crime that he committed
Why did you leave out the part where he cut her off and kept arguing. She tried to explain her position.
Again you think they have to do things they don’t.
I’m just trying to help you out because you think you can be a douche bag without knowing the law.
You remind me of the Darrell brooks trial. You have no clue about the law and think you can catch them on technicalities that hold no merit.
This post was edited on 11/8/22 at 8:22 am
Page 8 of 11
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News