- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Ignorant BR PD Officer w/ FBI
Posted on 12/31/18 at 7:23 pm to Jim Rockford
Posted on 12/31/18 at 7:23 pm to Jim Rockford
quote:
I thought it was only a crime to lie to the FBI.
14:108
quote:
(c) Refusal by the arrested or detained party to give his name and make his identity known to the arresting or detaining officer or providing false information regarding the identity of such party to the officer.
0
Posted on 12/31/18 at 7:27 pm to TSLG
BRPD needs to put signs out along perimeter stating no filming or photographs from any distance of the site in question.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 7:29 pm to tigerbutt
quote:
BRPD needs to put signs out along perimeter stating no filming or photographs from any distance of the site in question.
Unfortunately that's illegal, fella.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 7:30 pm to cyarrr
quote:
Nope he’s right. They can ask you what your name is just like an ordinary citizen could.
Correct
quote:
Again, you don’t have to answer,
Depends on the State. In Louisiana you only have to answer if you're being detained or arrested.
quote:
but your refusal could lead to reasonable suspicion depending on how you are acting and the circumstances surrounding the stop.
Incorrect. That alone would not qualify. An officer would have articulable, specific facts that would lead a reasonable person to believe that a crime was committed, is being committed or is about to be committed. Somebody just filming in public, which is a legal act, and refuses to reveal his identity, also a legal act unless being detained, is not reasonable suspicion that a crime is being committed. In order to be detained, again, articulable facts that would lead to reasonable suspicion that a crime, blah blah blah.
Go read Terry v Ohio and it gives an example. In short, it would be the kind of shite you would expect like, a guy with a black ski mask walking around at night with a slim jim peeking in car windows. Really obvious shite like that and only really obvious shite like that.
This post was edited on 12/31/18 at 7:32 pm
Posted on 12/31/18 at 7:32 pm to nola000
Why would you not want to tell someone your name? That’s weird.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 7:33 pm to GeorgeTheGreek
Because they add you to the system?
Why do you want to force people to sacrifice their constitutional rights?
Why do you want to force people to sacrifice their constitutional rights?
Posted on 12/31/18 at 7:34 pm to The People
quote:
I am not defending the officer in this video, but I think some context may help some understand why he was on edge.
On July 17, 2016 (3) cops in this city were ambushed and assassinated. (5) more saw the same fate in Dallas a few weeks earlier.
Ask yourself, how paranoid/suspicious would you be if something as simple as going to get a cup of coffee on a Sunday morning was a death trap for people just like you.
That's nice. If they can't do the job without being on constant edge and in fear their life then they should find another job. Especially if such fear causes them to blatantly and wantonly ignore and trample even the most basic rights afforded to us as US citizens, nay, ordained by our creator.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 7:35 pm to nola000
quote:
quote:
Cops can stop, question, ask for a name for almost any reason.
LOL. No they can't. Jesus Christ! Where do you think you live?
He could be right. That's why I was asking if we were arguing semantics/technicalities earlier.
They "can ask" for any reason. He could even remove the could.
He didn't say that the person had to answer.
Cut him some slack; he knows this topic well enough to have an intelligent conversation about it.
I'll have to have more time, bc the 5th made it a little confusing, but he might have been right about situations where a person states that their purpose was to video the routine activities of a law enforcement building.
Not about our situation though. :)
Posted on 12/31/18 at 7:36 pm to Fat and Happy
quote:
He is the same as the douche bags that walk around with rifles slung on their shoulders to have an interaction with law enforcement.
The guy doing the video taping is a douche
Yeah? Well douchebags like you should know that a right not exercised is a right lost. People like you really don't belong in this country. You don't have the right mentality for it. You believe in Freedom right up until you don't. Then you bow down and lick some boots because of your feels.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 7:36 pm to GeorgeTheGreek
quote:
Why would you not want to tell someone your name? That’s weird.
What’s your full name? What’s your full address? Don’t be weird; tell us.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 7:39 pm to lsu13lsu
quote:
The guy filming is probably a giant douche but I am glad he is highlighting this.
I had an instance where a police officer harassed me when I did nothing wrong. All I did was leave work really late at night and being out late meant I must have been coming home from a party and drinking and driving.
Yes, the guy instigated it but these things need to be documented because everyday people who do not instigate it end up being harassed by the police
This!
I'm a perfectly law-abiding citizen with no criminal history and this has happened to me plenty.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 7:43 pm to TSLG
I wish a cop had “detained” Timothy McVeigh while he was suspiciously casing that fed bldg in Ok City
Posted on 12/31/18 at 7:54 pm to nola000
bullshite, his purpose is to push the limit. Of course law enforcement is going to question him.
It’s legal to film their building just as it is to pace back and forth on the street in front of a bank wearing a ski mask caring a gun.. However, just because it’s lawful does not mean it’s appropriate. The police were absolutely correct to question him.
By the way, I’m correct in what I stated and your reading comprehension skills are lacking. I stated that the police can ask you to identify yourself, which they can. I didn’t say you could be detained solely based on refusing.
It’s legal to film their building just as it is to pace back and forth on the street in front of a bank wearing a ski mask caring a gun.. However, just because it’s lawful does not mean it’s appropriate. The police were absolutely correct to question him.
By the way, I’m correct in what I stated and your reading comprehension skills are lacking. I stated that the police can ask you to identify yourself, which they can. I didn’t say you could be detained solely based on refusing.
This post was edited on 12/31/18 at 8:17 pm
Posted on 12/31/18 at 8:00 pm to Catman88
quote:
The law requires you provide name and place of residence. He refused that
You are wrong. You need to spouting bullshite you don't actually know about. Just cuz your friend is a cop and told you this shite or whatever it might be, doesn't make it true.
You're only required to identify yourself in Louisiana if you have been detained or arrested. First, the detainment or arrest itself has to be legal.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 8:01 pm to KosmoCramer
quote:
Because they add you to the system?
What system?
Posted on 12/31/18 at 8:02 pm to BobABooey
quote:
What’s your full name? What’s your full address? Don’t be weird; tell us.
There’s a difference between asking for a name and asking for a place of residence.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 8:02 pm to cyarrr
quote:
It’s legal to film their building just as it is to pace back and forth on the street in front of a bank wearing a ski mask caring a gun..
This is actually very false.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 8:06 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:
Here, the suspect was taking video of a federal building - an action with extremely limited reasonable non-criminal motivations.
Irrelevant. It's not an illegal activity and the actions have been specifically upheld.
quote:
When questioned as to motive, the suspect failed to answer.
Doesn't have to. He's not legally compelled to.
quote:
At that point, detaining the suspect was within the Constitutional bounds of law enforcement activity until motive could be determined and a probable cause determination made.
Incorrect. Not giving law enforcement a reason as to why you're conducting a legal activity is not grounds for reasonable suspicion of a crime and thus, detainment.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 8:08 pm to GeorgeTheGreek
Posted on 12/31/18 at 8:09 pm to nola000
If video boy decides to sue, how much would he likely win?
It was such a shiny hook and Detective bass ate it up.
It was such a shiny hook and Detective bass ate it up.
Page 13 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News