- 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
0
Posted on 11/15/25 at 9:40 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I said I don't know what that is
And USSC Justice Jackson doesn't know what a woman is either.
You progs are frickwits.
Posted on 11/15/25 at 9:40 am to Timeoday
quote:
Why people have allowed the government to live that wet dream is beyond me.
Columbine, Colorado. This was a knee jerk reaction to one of the most famous school shootings in history, I'm sure.
Stupid people do stupid things.
Posted on 11/15/25 at 9:41 am to lsuguy84
quote:
I’ve had mixed, but typically more good than bad. The overarching point of guilty until proven innocent has definitely become more prevalent over the last 20 years.
For most of my adult life I had a favorable opinion of most cops. It helps I don't break the law and even know a lot of the cops around places I've lived.
When I deal with cops through my business, it’s usually fine, but two personal, non-business interactions in the last eight years completely changed my perspective.
One was a questionable, probably illegal traffic stop where the cop was clearly fishing. The other was a little 5'3" deputy who didn’t know the law at all, telling me I was in the wrong over an incident. His sergeant had to get involved, straighten him out, and even told me I could file a complaint if I wanted.
But my favorite example is the fact that the dumbest guy I knew in high school is now not only a cop, but the drug-dog handler for a parish here. He was 22 by the time they finally kicked him out of high school, and he got his GED. He was fired from a small-town police department for being racist and aggressive, causing problems during a few arrests, and now he’s a sheriff’s deputy who can make or break people’s lives.
Too dumb to finish high school, too much of a problem for a tiny police force, but somehow perfectly fine to hold a job where he can absolutely wreck someone’s future. It just doesn’t make sense to me.
Posted on 11/15/25 at 9:42 am to homesicktiger
Nah, that's a crooked, lying piece of shite agent of the police state.
Every time crooked cops and other agents of the police state get caught, they should get life in prison without parole. Period. End of story.
Every time crooked cops and other agents of the police state get caught, they should get life in prison without parole. Period. End of story.
Posted on 11/15/25 at 9:43 am to mudshuvl05
quote:
Nah, that's a crooked, lying piece of shite agent of the police state.
Every time crooked cops and other agents of the police state get caught, they should get life in prison without parole. Period. End of story.
^ this
This cop needs his arse beaten. ...severely
Posted on 11/15/25 at 9:44 am to Azkiger
quote:
What % of interactions must be of a certain way to be classified as "typical" for that specific interaction?
Over 50
quote:
What percent of police interactions are like this
I didn't answer this because of this framing.
For an interaction above patrol in an actual investigatory position? It's higher than 50, I'd imagine. Hence the usage of typical.
quote:
and what study did you get that percentage from?
This is message board, sir, not an academic journal.
Here is an Institue of Justice Memo on it
quote:
In the United States, the use of deceptive interrogation techniques, such as lying to suspects in order to obtain a confession, has become a routine practice for law enforcement. Police utilize these tactics since they are authorized by a flexible constitutional jurisprudence that has sanctioned the practice of lying during interrogation and utilizes an ill-defined test to assess the voluntariness of a confession. In contrast to American law on the matter, British and German law explicitly prohibit the use of deceptive techniques during interrogations.
quote:
In the United States, the use of deception as a tool in interrogations in order to elicit a confession has become a routine practice for law enforcement. Today, virtually all interrogations in the United States, at least all successful interrogations, involve the use of police deception at least to some extent.1 Since the Supreme Court has put few limits on the practice, the varieties of deceptive techniques police may use are limited chiefly by officers’ ingenuity.2 Deceptive techniques are taught to officers in interrogation manuals and sociological studies have confirmed that officers rely heavily on these practices, often to the exclusion of using other strategies.3 Since the practice is entirely legal, law enforcement officers freely admit to lying to suspects during interrogation. However, since the vast majority of cases in the United States end in guilty pleas, only a fraction of cases of police lying ever come to light.4 The use of deception is so widespread among American police, that Richard Leo, a leading expert on police interrogations, has described it as “the single most salient and defining feature of how interrogation is practiced [in the United States].
quote:
He found that deceptive interrogation practices were indeed incredibly common.16 In 34% of interrogations officers offered suspects moral justifications for their actions in order to convince them their behavior was acceptable.17 In 30% of cases, interrogators confronted the suspect with a false piece of evidence.18 In 22% of cases the officer attempted to minimize the moral seriousness of the offense committed.19 In almost all interrogations, 88% of those observed, the officer appealed to the suspect’s self-interest in order to induce a confession.20 While an appeal to self-interest might not appear to be a form of trickery, it is almost always premised on a lie. It is rarely if ever in a suspect’s self-interest to confess, so police must feign allyship, and lie to them in order to prompt a confession
Plenty of cites in that memo for you. It even has studies on worse behaviors like perjury.
Posted on 11/15/25 at 9:45 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Your white flag is noted, as it was expected.
Its so funny to watch you continue to obfuscate and lie about that thread everytime i bring it up. Mr 500k just can't help himself.
Posted on 11/15/25 at 9:46 am to Azkiger
quote:
And USSC Justice Jackson doesn't know what a woman is either.
Well she tried to be cute about it and looked silly.
I was very direct and plain. The malleable terms are used for a Sharpshooter fallacy post hoc. They have no definition and evolve as the user uses them.
quote:
You progs
I'm the one fighting against leftist-style language destruction
Posted on 11/15/25 at 9:47 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:They act on people doing things illegally and acting suspiciously.
They thrive on people making mistakes to give them excuses to then act legally.
Seems perfectly justified in your case.
Cops dislike being laughed at as well. If you were an actual lawyer instead of pretending to be one you might know that.
Posted on 11/15/25 at 9:48 am to UncleFestersLegs
quote:
Its so funny to watch you continue to obfuscate and lie about that thread everytime i bring it up.
The opposite, which makes this obsession with owning yourself hilarious.
Posted on 11/15/25 at 9:50 am to llfshoals
quote:
They act on people doing things illegally and acting suspiciously.
Except, in my example, I wasn't.
quote:
Seems perfectly justified in your case.
Pulling someone over in their driveway for stopping at a ghetto gas station is reasonable suspicion of a crime now?
quote:
Cops dislike being laughed at as well.
He wasn't happy, but he wasn't given rope, either. He knew he fricked up. I guess I should feel bad for the poor person he went to pick on after interacting with me. I had never thought about that until now.
quote:
If you were an actual lawyer instead of pretending to be one you might know that.
Posted on 11/15/25 at 9:52 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
The opposite,
Did you cry when that thread got whacked, slowing your slog to 500k?
Posted on 11/15/25 at 9:54 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
He found that deceptive interrogation practices were indeed incredibly common.16 In 34% of interrogations officers offered suspects moral justifications for their actions in order to convince them their behavior was acceptable.17 In 30% of cases, interrogators confronted the suspect with a false piece of evidence.18 In 22% of cases the officer attempted to minimize the moral seriousness of the offense committed.19 In almost all interrogations, 88% of those observed, the officer appealed to the suspect’s self-interest in order to induce a confession.20 While an appeal to self-interest might not appear to be a form of trickery, it is almost always premised on a lie. It is rarely if ever in a suspect’s self-interest to confess, so police must feign allyship, and lie to them in order to prompt a confession
So all under 50% besides the 88% which is justified by "It is rarely if ever in a suspect’s self-interest to confess" which suggests extreme bias or outright stupidity.
Good job proving that interaction was atypical.
And, to be honest, the woman did open up with a lie herself "I don't go to that area I drive 20+ times a month". Her blatant lie likely informed the rest of that interaction.
Posted on 11/15/25 at 9:54 am to UncleFestersLegs
Oh he's flailing now
White flag to ad hom
White flag to ad hom
This post was edited on 11/15/25 at 9:55 am
Posted on 11/15/25 at 9:57 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
White flag to ad hom
There is absolutely no way you can not respond. Pathological narcissism
Posted on 11/15/25 at 9:58 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:So you say about this fictitious encounter.
Except, in my example, I wasn't.
quote:Again, you’re making mistakes in your fictitious declaration. Unless of course you’re going to say your trophy house because you’re a successful wealthy lawyer is in the ghetto. Somehow I doubt that one is gonna fly.
Pulling someone over in their driveway for stopping at a ghetto gas station is reasonable suspicion of a crime now?
quote:In an actual encounter he could have applied failure to yield, no turn signal, improper lane change. The list is long he could use while fishing for more. So yeah, trying to toss it off as a “why did you” is weaker than a popcorn fart.
He wasn't happy, but he wasn't given rope, either.
Posted on 11/15/25 at 9:59 am to SlowFlowPro
A lot of "back the blue" tards ITT, and sadly, I think many of them are only taking that side in because you made the thread.
Any reasonable person would understand there's a real issue with what police forces have become. Full of military rejects who missed and/or miss the gulf war and dream of still having that power over people. The fact that local police forces drive military vehicles, and can take your money under Civil Asset Forfeiture with shaky to no evidence, should be concerning.
Had the woman in your video not driven a Rivian with that much technology, that cop would have ruined her life over false allegations for a $25 package. Acting like this doesn't happen often these days is head-in-the-sand behaviour.
Anyone watching the auditor guys on Youtube should know the majority of cops don't actually understand or care about the laws. The auditor guys can be annoying but looking past that part you should understand why cops are not out to serve you.
I had a plain clothes cop hit the mirror on my truck at FedEx on Clarence St a few weeks ago. I told him to watch what he was doing, and he threatened me saying I'd better drive carefully when I leave the parking lot. He acted like I should bow down to his badge and not only accept his apology but be OK with him hitting my truck. I truly think he was drunk and when I asked him for a business card, he refused by saying he was off duty, but he had his badge on his belt like he was on duty. He was just being a bully with his badge.
Any reasonable person would understand there's a real issue with what police forces have become. Full of military rejects who missed and/or miss the gulf war and dream of still having that power over people. The fact that local police forces drive military vehicles, and can take your money under Civil Asset Forfeiture with shaky to no evidence, should be concerning.
Had the woman in your video not driven a Rivian with that much technology, that cop would have ruined her life over false allegations for a $25 package. Acting like this doesn't happen often these days is head-in-the-sand behaviour.
Anyone watching the auditor guys on Youtube should know the majority of cops don't actually understand or care about the laws. The auditor guys can be annoying but looking past that part you should understand why cops are not out to serve you.
I had a plain clothes cop hit the mirror on my truck at FedEx on Clarence St a few weeks ago. I told him to watch what he was doing, and he threatened me saying I'd better drive carefully when I leave the parking lot. He acted like I should bow down to his badge and not only accept his apology but be OK with him hitting my truck. I truly think he was drunk and when I asked him for a business card, he refused by saying he was off duty, but he had his badge on his belt like he was on duty. He was just being a bully with his badge.
This post was edited on 11/15/25 at 10:05 am
Posted on 11/15/25 at 9:59 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
White flag to ad hom
I don't get the ad hom? Are you saying he's saying you're wrong because you're a spammer trying to hit 500k posts?
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News