Continued from Part I HERE
Last few posts from Part I
I put up a post talking about his resisting arrest The you say it was "passive resistance" I then pointed out that it was still resistance (meaning to arrest=Resist arrest) Then you say yep resistance to tyranny and post a video of OBAMA... the law "stupid" law was there way before obama, as I already pointed out. You post get more rabid, extreme, and make less and less sense the longer this thread gets.... My browser/PC does not do good with long threads like this. So that combined with tthe fact that you just keep repeating the same things that I have refuted... I'm done here
I put up a post talking about his resisting arrest
The you say it was "passive resistance"
I then pointed out that it was still resistance (meaning to arrest=Resist arrest)
Then you say yep resistance to tyranny and post a video of OBAMA...
the law "stupid" law was there way before obama, as I already pointed out. You post get more rabid, extreme, and make less and less sense the longer this thread gets....
My browser/PC does not do good with long threads like this. So that combined with tthe fact that you just keep repeating the same things that I have refuted...
I'm done here
Well I'm not through yet as long as you keep arguing. I just happen to think you are wrong about this and I am right because it says in the constitution that we have the right to peaceful protests.
No policeman or judge should stop it because it's not harming anyone and if that judge hadn't overstepped his bounds in the first place then we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
Most of the cops I know would have politely asked them to stop but if they didn't they would ignore it as long as they were not hurting anyone. Then they would have gotten tired of it and went away. They just wanted to make a point that it was a stupid ruling and I agree. Like Katii says you use your discretion and pick your battles.
I've seen cops rough people up for no good reason just because they were having a bad day. I've also seen cops just try to reason with people. I prefer the 2nd kind.
Once there was this drugged or drunk teenager who passed out and his head was nearly in the street. We were worried about him getting hit by a car so we called the police. The kid was out of it and the cop picked him up and stood him next to the car. He told the kid to spread his legs so he could frisk him and he didn't respond so the cop started just beating the crap out of him. We went out on the porch and he stopped, put him in the car, and drove 2 blocks away to a parking lot and continued the beating. That kid was so out of it he wasn't even fighting back just taking licks. Stuff like that makes me sick. So the premise that we should let them get away with this kind of behavior is wrong.
In Washington DC, hundreds of people have been dancing at the Jefferson Memorial claiming they are exercising their first amendment rights. It comes after last week RT America host Adam Kokesh and four others were arrested by the police for dancing at the same spot.
Adam Kokesh, host of RT's Adam vs the Man, rallies hundreds of protestors at the Jefferson Memorial on Saturday, June 4. People gathered to dance to defy recent legislation which made doing such at the Memorial illegal.
Tonight on Adam vs. the Man with Adam Kokesh: Adam returns to the Jefferson Memorial along with his supporters where he stared down the police state and they apparently accepted his challenge to a dance off. In the end Adam and his dancing friends were victorious with their non-violent message.
The amount of support for 'United We Dance' is growing. Adam talks about the growing list of cities around the U.S. and the world who supported his cause.
Adam also talks about the French restricting commercial enterprises from being promoted on news programs. This means it will now be illegal to promote social websites like, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube in that country. Really? Are the French that clueless about economics and competition?
Then the U.S. government's war on youth and disregard for the rights of people too young to vote continues in Hastings, Minnesota where city leaders are considering the installation of a screeching device that's supposedly only detectable to younger adults and children. Ouch! Plus the NYPD Blew is taking on a new meaning. And a Florida family fights back and wins against Bank of America's attempt to foreclose on their home. And don't miss a special guest panel with Jake Diliberto and Stephen Molyneux.
From Lynn (part I)
Katii.........it is interesting that this says "recent legislation". When was that stupid law passed then, I wonder and who was behind it? To my mind, the fact that it is recent legislation lends even more credibility to their protest as they have historically always been allowed to dance there until some idiot decided otherwise.
What about all those others who visit the Monument everyday that dont want to get hit or bumped into by those dancing? I have been to this Monument several times and on any given day it draws a pretty nice size crowd with little children...What if one of these dancers bumps into a child and harms a child - is that ok? I mean it seems that more of ya'll are for people breaking laws then you are for those who are there on any day just to admire the Monument...where is the outrage for them? But I guess since they arent breaking the law then they can just leave...yep those dancers are going to ruin it for others, sad if you ask me. Why would you want to dance at this Monument anyway or did they just pick a stupid law and protest it?
Its disrespectful to go there and ruin the experience for others but again, it appears no one gives a donkeys butt about them. SMDH
Kat..............the dancing is actually academic!
Lynn, the 'offense' (dancing in celebration of Jefferson's birthday) was committed in 2008. I don't know when the original ban was imposed after that, but it was just in May that an appeals court 'upheld' the original ban. Judge Thomas Griffith even noting:
Jefferson is “on record discouraging the celebration of his birthday.” The judge quoted Jefferson saying the only birthday he ever commemorates is the Fourth of July.
However... The Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation does note and 'celebrate' Jefferson's birthday. To 'celebrate' his 250th birthday, this past April...
the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation has done a fantastic job in assembling various paintings, furniture, Natural History specimens, and scientific instruments he originally collected. Additionally, the Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation has, for the past seventy years, done a magnificent job of restoring the house and its grounds. It is truly a sight to see. In the Foundations efforts to collect his original property, they have amassed more than one hundred-fifty items, collections from museums, universities, private homes and Historical Societies. These original items are on display at Monticello in a special exhibition titled, "The Worlds of Thomas Jefferson at Monticello."
Thomas Jefferson's Monticello
Kat, now you seem to be grasping at straws ... children get bumped into by people walking, or just 'turning around' every day - oft times getting knocked to the ground. Should we make 'walking' illegal too then?
MOST people would be 'polite' and even amused and 'make way' for the dancers so as not to get in THEIR way. JUST like the tourists at the Memorial were doing these past two weekends during the 'dance demonstrations'.
Notice that when 50 people showed up in protest and 'danced' this past weekend the police decided not to be assholes and let them do their dance for about 20 minutes. Why? Because they got a lot of 'heat' from the public due to Kokesh's video, of the abusive treatment by police the previous weekend, going viral.
Good job, Kokesh
Rhonda "People don't realize that if it weren't for civil disobedience in peaceful protests then nothing will ever change when unjust laws are imposed."
Yay!!!! And for Katii too!
Seems to me what is WRONG is too many people just nodding their heads and apathetically grumbling about stuff and DOING NOTHING!
Yep Katii you pegged me - Im grasping at just about anything and everthing - considering it is still illegial - I try to obey the law as much as possible, sorry some think that is silly.
Kat, you seriously would argue that dancing should be illegal because someone might bump into a child even knowing that this happens during the course of 'life' when people are just walking every day?
^^^ that vid is the Police State in action 'silencing the press'
Kat..........stop it! I understand your motivation. You are married to a policeman. You are loyal. That's a good thing and I admire that. But don't let loyalty get in the way of reason! Sorry........maybe that should have been a personal post.
Lynn this has nothing to do with me being married to a Police Officer or loyalty and Katii NO I never said dancing should be illegial b/c someone might bump into a kid...But obviously this ban was put in place for a reason, stupid or not - all I am saying is that it is there and as far as I am concerned, married to a Cop or not, it is the law and most civilized citizens obey the law no matter how stupid they are. I am sure people think speed limits are stupid or jay walking is stupid but its the law.....and if you get caught breaking it then deal with it and stop complianing.
Lynn I dont have a problem with what you posted and again obeying the laws no matter how stupid they are is what good citizens do.
What if one of these dancers bumps into a child and harms a child - is that ok? -Kat
Kat, I didn't bring up the idea that 'dancing might knock down a child' - you did.
Kat, only citizens who are 'lazy' or ignorant, or worse, disrespectful of the principles under which America was founded put up with stupid laws.
No, obeying laws no matter how stupid (i.e. unjust) is not what 'good citizens' do! It is our DUTY as 'good citizens' to disobey stupid laws.
If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so. -Thomas Jefferson
An unjust law is itself a species of violence. Arrest for its breach is more so. Gandhi, Mahatma
No, we will not 'quit complaining'. And lucky for you that people do 'complain' about unjust laws because when they are repealed YOU benefit from not having to 'obey' the stupid law which otherwise infringed upon your freedom and liberty. You're welcome.
This post was modified from its original form on 09 Jun, 13:50
I disagree, Kat. Obeying a stupid law is being a BAD citizen IMO. Doing nothing and just blindly obeying allows the stupid laws to continue.
More POLICE STATE IN ACTION...
Hey, I didn't see this thread. I thought I was going to have to try to open the other one Anyway...
I get it/got it... Of course it took a long conversation with my great uncle but yeah I see it now... at least the police state part, and it's still complicated, but when I'm wrong I say I'm wrong. That's what I came to say... I was wrong.
Crazy...... The cops involved should be cited. Upon a repeat occurrence they should be disciplined. One more time and they should be dismissed without any benefits.
Cop: "We don't feel safe"......a lady with a camera????? Hey, your job is supposed to make the citizens feel safe. Not for the citizens to make you feel safe. "
You have been given a police order"... What? A police order supersedes the rights of a citizens to be on their own property? I must have missed that change in the Constitution.
Let's see now.... 1st Amendment still there: Free speech.
Must be they changed the 4th Amendment when I wasn't looking........Leme check.... Nope, it's still there too.
Mister police man... "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
You arrested this poor woman. Have the decency to resign from a job you are clearly not suited for.
Rhonda - I can give you one answer to that - how about if you tape them and put it on youtube and some crazy NUT like the one who shot the Congress woman - shoots the Cop b/c of that video? Oh damn, who gives a poop - its just a Cop - who cares that he has a family and their lives could be in danger as well.......
Kat, let's turn that around then... what if some crazy NUT cop sees one of us on a video and decides he doens't 'approve' and goes after US? And how do we know that's not happening? I'll bet it IS happening!
It can not be a one way street - not in AMERICA. But if it were a 'one way street' in AMERICA then it should be the government and law enforcement who are being 'watched' !!!
THEY WORK FOR US! NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND!
I don't understand. If there is no law forbidding videotaping of ANY sort of incident, especially if it's on their own property, then if the cops or whoever don't like being videotaped, that's tough. In just about any profession, there are things that happen that people don't like. When I was working as a legal secretary back in the '80's, one of the lawyers whom I worked for asked me if I would object to backdating a sworn statement. This would have made a difference and given our client a distinct advantage. I said yes, I would feel uncomfortable doing it, so he just shrugged and asked another secretary to do it. I don't know what happened. I don't think anything big came of it. But it could have.
It seems to me that the cops were breaking the law when they arrested this woman. Unless there is no law against false arrest, she just might have had grounds for a lawsuit against the police department. I hope she found a good lawyer.
Wow Katii you just proved to me that a Cops life to you doesnt mean a thing and neither do their families. First off if a COP just happens to see a video and your name is not out there - how in the world are they going to find out who you are??? Its different for a Cop b/c on video you have their name on their badge - also if your a Cop and your in uniform, its easy to follow them home to find out where they live and who their family is...
How easy do you really think it is for a Cop to find out who made a video if they see it on youtube - if your name isnt given?
Yep Police State in Action
Taking the distressed child into his arms, Deputy Kirkpatrick, a 2 1/2 year veteran to the SO, began performing infant CPR by administering the Heimlich maneuver to try and dislodge the obstruction. Working calmly but with determination, Brother Ben kept at it for several moments until the baby began to cough out the sunflower seeds he was choking on. Deputy Kirkpatrick continued to clear the child's airways and his breathing and color slowly began to recover. Polk County Fire & EMS arrived on scene by this time and took over, stabilizing the young boy and readied him for transport to be checked over at the hospital. Baby is doing well.
Sheriff Grady Judd stated "Deputy Sheriff Benjamin Kirkpatrick will be receiving a commendation for his (Heroic) actions".
Though our words will never compare to the feeling of knowing you saved a life, all of us here at Law Enforcement Today, your Brothers and Sisters, as well as supporters, would like to say THANK YOU DEPUTY KIRKPATRICK! Because of you, we are able to once again remind folks that the Police are there to help, not hurt. And that we are out there not just to catch the bad guys but to assist all those in need. The next time you have one of those 'real bad out there' kind of days, I hope that you are able to use this moment, this memory, to get through it. WAY TO GO BEN!!!
Just b/c you feel that a law is stupid doesnt mean everyone feels that way...Lets take wearing a seat belt for instance - I am sure you can find plenty of people who feel being made to wear a seat belt is wrong and its a stupid law - YET, it has been proven time and time again that it saves lives....But here is a video of someone who didnt want to stop for a seat belt check...YEP Police State at work
I dont expect anyone to actually watch the video b/c it doesnt show Cops doing anything "wrong"....
Kat, what on this earth gave you that idea? Wow Kat, you've just convinced me that you think cops have more rights than citizens do!!!
What you can take to the bank though is that I don't consider a police officer's life any more important than anyone else's life.
First off if a COP just happens to see a video and your name is not out there - how in the world are they going to find out who you are??? Its different for a Cop b/c on video you have their name on their badge - Kat
First off, what about traffic light cameras that take a photo of your 'face' AND your car's license number? Easy pickin's! And, I've never seen a pedestrian video of any cops that I could read their name or badge number, but so what if I could? They are public servants (which is why they are required to wear their name on their chest and have badge numbers). Citizens are not.
Regardless, we have a Constitutional right to privacy. We also have a Constitutional right to freedom of speech and our property and are 'supposed' to be protected from unlawful arrest.
A Police Officer will pull over an impaired driver, making the roadways a safer place before someone is harmed and later that day will have a complaint filed against him because he was forced to use defensive tactics in order to protect himself against the fight brought on by the suspect. Intense scrutiny by the media, public and agency of his actions follows, forgetting all the while that he may have saved an innocents life. But if the same Officer had not stopped the driver and someone was injured (or worse), the Officer would still undergo the same scrutiny.
A Police Officer will arrive and investigate a child abuse claim. She ascertains and takes action by recommending the child be removed. Later that day, a complaint is filed against the same Officer by the guardian(s) because their child was taken by social services based on the "lies" the Officer wrote about in her report. But if the Officer had given the guardian(s) the benefit of doubt and only sends in a recommendation of a follow-up to social services and the child is found harmed the following week, the Officer is the first to be blamed and held accountable.
Damned if we do, damned if we don't.
Police Officers respond to an armed barricaded subject and will stay there for hours upon hours to resolve the situation peacefully, all the while risking their lives. They will use every ounce of their training to talk the subject into a surrender. Sometimes they are the target of gunfire throughout. In the end, several things may happen ... The armed suspect gives him/herself up ... the armed suspect remains barricaded ... or perhaps even comes out but refuses to obey commands to disarm him/herself. At any of these points, the choice has already been made for the responders by the suspect. They take him peacefully, they go in and get him, or they are forced to stop him by using force. But no matter what the outcome, these Officers will always find themselves under the scrutiny and second-guessed by the media, the public and even the agencies. All the while, nothing is said about the patience and dedication they gave for the last several hours. Nor about how while the negotiators were communicating, there were several others working non-stop in the background planning their best ... and safest for all ... course of action. They get it done and all innocents are safe and yet they are still blamed and complaints are filed because they didn't do enough or they did 'too much' and the subject ... who caused the incident in the first place ... winds up deceased. If the suspect shot and killed an innocent during the course of all this, it would be the Officers, not the killer, who gets the blame.
These are just three scenarios that a Police Officer will go through nearly every day. I go through literally 3,000+ news articles every single day for our NEWS page and I needed to finally speak my peace. Now I know things are not likely to change, especially regarding the media, but I am so sick and tired of reading headlines that no matter what the outcome is on any given situation that the Police are involved with, the media has screaming headlines that would imply the Police are at fault. Even if in their own articles, somewhere tucked away in a line or two, it is obvious they did their jobs and did it well. Then I scroll to comments and, more often than not, the readers react to just the headline and slam the Police without even reading any (though scant) facts of what really went down. The fact is, we are forever being scrutinized, second-guessed, 'Monday morning quarterbacked' and out-right blamed for what comes down to ... saving lives.
Damned if we do, damned if we don't.
And yet, what the media and the general public does not seem to take notice of, is that we still go right back out there, day after day, risking our lives because ... truth be told ... you'd be damned if we didn't.
~article written by Nessie, a Sister who gives a damn~
Kat, not that I have a big issue with wearing a seat belt myself - I would 'choose' to in most cases, but at what point did you decide it's the state's job to decide FOR us how 'safe' we are in our own cars and to make it 'illegal' for us not to wear one? Why should I be given a citation that requires 'paying a fine' if I 'don't' wear one? I shouldn't.
What I take issue with is the STATE ORDERING me to do something that whether I do it or not is none of the state's business and is of NO harm to anyone else. If my insurance company wants to take up the issue with seat belt wearers that's a different story because they have a stake in the outcome of an auto accident. The STATE doesn't.
You bet that I would resent the hell out of 'breaking the law' and getting penalized because I forgot to put my seatbelt on. That is just wrong.
And I will promise you that the 'seatbelt' law was lobbied for by 'insurance companies' with the state using the EXCUSE that it's "for our safety".
Part of a police persons job is to accept a certain amount of risk. It goes with the job. In the above the risk and future risk to the officer is tiny. The idea that a citizen would have his or her rights violated because of that is hard to understand.
According to the BLS, the death rate per year for police officers on the job is about 22/100,000. And the number one cause is traffic accidents not violence. In fact that is about the same as taxi drivers (21.3/100,000). But the number one cause of death on the job for taxi drivers is violence/assault.
I don't mean to underplay the dangers to police officers. But to say that a police officer had a reason to violate this lady's rights and arrest her because of some feeling the officer had has no merit.
Simply speaking, this woman was arrested because she refused to accept an unlawful order from the officer. She pissed him off and he abused his authority. Actions like this create fear and distrust of the police. The people should not fear the police. But the fact is we do.
This post was modified from its original form on 22 Jun, 15:45
Katii your words "what if some crazy NUT cop sees one of us on a video and decides he doens't 'approve' and goes after US? And how do we know that's not happening? I'll bet it IS happening! so all I did was tell you how difficult it would be for a Cop to find out who you are from a youtube video....yet you take it an extra mile and bring up traffic cameras so again I have to ask - how easy do you think it is for a Cop to review these traffic cameras? They cant just go into the room where the videos are and watch them without cause...jeez ya'll really do think Cops have more power then what they do...shameful.
Katii so basically what your saying is the video, which I wonder if you watched, since you didnt mention it, was justified - the Cop deserved to get run over b/c a Cop was making sure the driver had his or her seatbelt on? So I guess you would do the same - run over a Cop b/c of a "stupid" law since you did say a Cops life isnt worth anything more then the next person - I guess you mean that about murders and child molesters? So you are now comparing a cops life to people who kill others......oh wait according to you that is all cops are good for anyway.
Jim yes you do mean to underplay the dangers of Police work or you wouldnt have said anything about it...
Yep and this was the reason why I stayed away from this thread......
I truly hope none of ya'll ever need a Cop b/c I can just imagine you would call one for something and then bitch about it.
So Jim you fear every Cop - every Cop you see your scared? Hmmmm, so would it them be wrong for me to say that every white man wearing a blue shirt and blue jeans, scares me - without knowing that person?
We certainly do go down the "rabbit hole" sometimes don't we.
As far as the lady videoing the cops on the street in front of her house?The knee-jerk reaction of the cops is what terrifies me. She was not threatening them ... she answered their questions clearly ... and they came on to her property and took her to jail. She should have been safe and within her rights ... she should have been able to film without worry. Dear Lord, arrested in her own yard for nothing. Poor thing, I feel for her and her family. That whole scenario is very scary.
Oh yes .... I still can't figure out what law she broke that got her arrested.
doesn't a law have to be broken or the person threatening some sort of evil doing before you are put in handcuffs? What happened to her CANNOT be constitutional.
Laura I would try and explain why she was arrested but I dont feel it would do any good.
No, I don't "fear every cop". Kat. The local police that I know are just fine. The vast majority are fine. But you never know when you are going to get a bad one. One that abuses his/her authority. A cowboy type. You must know what I am talking about. It only takes a few to make us fear the police. You argued that the lady from Rochester could somehow be a threat. Even though the fact is that we are probably more likely to get a bad cop than the cop is to have some kind of incident from the situation in Rochester.
A former girl friend of 9 years had a father who was a deputy sheriff, and I loved the guy. He told me a lot of inside stories. I don't think that the police are properly screened for individuals that are not suited for that line of work. There is a culture of protecting the bad cops. Knee jerk rejection of criticism from the outside.
What I said we fear the police. Because many of us, me included don't know when we might get one of the ones that has let the power go to his/her head.
Kat: "Jim yes you do mean to underplay the dangers of Police work or you wouldnt have said anything about it..."
????? That's unfair. So you are saying that pointing out statistics to make a point is somehow off limits when it comes to police? You are the one who opened that door when you made the claim that the police officer did what he did because of a potential threat. What I did was logical. I looked up statistics to see how valid your claim was.
IMO You're too close to this and IMO you are being defensive. You are doing what many in the police do.
BTW Did I mention my ex works in law enforcement? She says fears the police.
This post was modified from its original form on 22 Jun, 17:44
This post was modified from its original form on 22 Jun, 17:45
what your saying is the video, which I wonder if you watched, since you didnt mention it, was justified - the Cop deserved to get run over b/c a Cop was making sure the driver had his or her seatbelt on? So I guess you would do the same - run over a Cop b/c of a "stupid" law since you did say a Cops life isnt worth anything more then the next person - I guess you mean that about murders and child molesters? So you are now comparing a cops life to people who kill others......oh wait according to you that is all cops are good for anyway. -Kat
WTF Kat? I don't know what video you are referring to (we are discussing the woman that pussy cop arrested for standing in her yard video taping) but it's pretty f'ing low of you to bring up something that happened in a video that you "wonder if" if I watched since I "didn't bring it up" to make your disgusting attempt to demonize me by 'guessing' I think anyone 'deserves' to be run over - for any reason. "I" am not making ANY such 'comparisons', Kat - YOU are making them FOR me and I'll thank you to STOP IT. If you have an ounce of honor you would apologize for making such nasty unfounded claims about me - there is not a shred of truth in the insulting things you've just said, nor is there any excuse for it.
There is an understanding in this group that members will not personally attack other members, Kat, but that is just exactly what you've done. That has to stop.
In the future you can rely upon me to express how I feel about something - do not ever presume to do it for me again. Got it?
No, not 'girls girls' ... it's 'girl' - one girl was insulting.
"Rhonda - I can give you one answer to that - how about if you tape them and put it on youtube and some crazy NUT like the one who shot the Congress woman - shoots the Cop b/c of that video? Oh damn, who gives a poop - its just a Cop - who cares that he has a family and their lives could be in danger as well......."
When it's contract time the police "risk their lives for us daily."
And then thewy get a pay raise so out of the pockets of people that do real work-
Then- sometimes- one of these steroid addled turkeys gets killed in the line of duty.
The good thing is that at that point they actually do their job like they care.
They turn every stone to find the killer.
not another file gathering dust.
A far cry from their tired line of "putting themselves at risk daily"
and while many do help people it's only because occasionally it is easier than the paperwork of allowing them (the person in disrtress) to perish.
There are good and bad in any profession. Hey - again, when I was working as a legal secretary: Most of the lawyers I worked with were basically honest - even the one who wanted me to backdate a document. I enjoy the company of educated people, including lawyers - and so did most of the people I worked with. But there was one law office that made my blood boil. I won't go into detail, but I called the agency and said I didn't want to work there. It turned out that many other secretaries refused to work there. In fact, one of them had just left the vacancy that I had for about two hours!
There are good doctors, there are incompetent doctors; there are good teachers and there are bad teachers, and if you are unfortunate enough to have a rotten supervisor I advise that you give notice immediately. The recession isn't that bad! There are good and bad in any profession. The guy who arrested that woman was way out of line - and I hope that his supervisor gave him an angry reprimand. A few years back, however, I was witness to a really terrific cop who definitely went above and beyond the call of duty. A kitten in some way managed to climb on top of the roof of a two-story apartment building, and this young police officer climbed a rickety old ladder and rescued her. Those who had been watching burst into applause!
I've been working on a major assignment, so I didn't see this thread when it first was posted. So I probably don't have all the details. But in ANY profession, there are good eggs and bad eggs. There's no way around it. NO ONE should misuse authority, which the cop we're discussing did. But that doesn't mean that there aren't honest policemen out there who obey the rules and don't overstep their authority. There are plenty of them. Unfortunately, the guy who arrested that poor woman wasn't one of them.
This post was modified from its original form on 23 Jun, 0:07
This post was modified from its original form on 23 Jun, 0:08
Katii I have nothing to apologize for - your exact words were "I don't consider a police officer's life any more important than anyone else's life" so I simply asked then I guess you feel the driver who ran over the Cop in the link video I provided was ok? And that since no ones life is more important than the other - you feel the same about child molesters and murderers...I asked a simple question - if you took it as an insult then maybe the truth hurts. You said I attacked you yet you claim I have no honor, isnt that the same?
But hey ya'll have at it...If it makes all of you feel better to continue to post videos of Cops thinking your watching the whole video and not some edited version - have at it. YET I posted stories of Cops doing great and NO ONE posted a damn thing about it so ya'll continue to post on the negative...such a shame.
"I don't consider a police officer's life any more important than anyone else's life" -Kat
Kat, you took a statement I made in 'generality' that any sane person would not assume it meant that I think someone standing on the side of the road - cop or otherwise - deserved to be run over by a car. But that's what you did, and I think you did it just to insult me because I don't believe you are 'insane' - I think you're ultra-sensetive to the subject and so defensive you twisted my words in a desperate attempt to defend your argument that merely because they are cops they have more rights than, and who's lives are 'more important' than a citizens rights or life. Well, guess what. They are not more important than the next person. They perform an important JOB, but that doesn't make THEM more important than someone else, and it SURE doesn't give them the right to hold themselves above the law or to unlawfully arrest someone - or to beat them while they're unconscious after having been throw from a car window during an accident...
Cops are just people. They are not God and they are not more special than any other D E C E N T <--- disclaimer lest you decide to 'assume' something sh!tty again> person.
I didn't watch whatever video you're talking about because I didn't see it.
The root of the problem is the internal affairs system of oversight. This is literally allowing the fox to watch the henhouse. People are by nature flawed and when you add the authority of a badge to the incomprehensibly poor enforcement of internal affairs it is a recipe for trouble at best and rampant criminal activity at worst.
There is no reason that this proven to fail system should not be fixed.
When police officers (pigs) are held to the same standards as the rest of us things will change rapidly.
When they start to act human as a whole- instead of the odd individual- the public trust will slowly return.
This is not rocket science. I have worked with pigs and seen the insanity of how they think- and how they couldn't see it in themselves at all. They feel "entitled".
It is a sad state of affairs, all things considered.
Well if you think the Police are this bad I hate to see what ya'll think of our Military...You say Cops feel entitled - damn those men and women in our Military must really feel entitled - considering they are fighting for our Freedoms (some of the time).
Katii - you didnt watch the video which I posted the link too and even stated it was a link to that...If you feel I insulted you - all I have to say is your wrong.
I never once said they were more important then the next person - what I have always said is that regardless of how you and others feel about them if you ever happen to need them - they would be there regardless if they knew how you truly felt.
Mary just b/c he arrested that woman doesnt make him a bad Cop - he is human and they make mistakes. If he truly felt his life was in danger and NONE of us can say for sure just by the video b/c like I said we only see what those taping it want us to see...so instead of always assuming the Cop did wrong - maybe just stop and think there is more to the story then some damn PIG wanting to be a dick while he is at work...
I can't believe anybody would try to defend the pig in that video- he just didn't want to be taped.
The truth is what he didn't like. The truth is what makes most pigs feel unsafe.
Very typical of our "protectors". We are actually less safe than we would be without them at this point. For every life they save they kill at least one. Usually the wrong one, too.
And comparing our troops to the pigs? now that's a hell of a stretch.
Maybe the MP's.
Kat, I think you are missing the point. The concerns many have are focused on the bad cops. And the problem is aggravated when other cops make excuses for them. And when they are protected by the police establishment.
Jose Guerena Killed: Arizona Cops Shoot Former Marine In Botched Pot Raid
First Posted: 05/25/11 05:42 PM ET Updated: 05/26/11 12:25 PM ET
On May 5 at around 9:30 a.m., several teams of Pima County, Ariz., police officers from at least four different police agencies armed with SWAT gear and an armored personnel carrier raided at least four homes as part of what at the time was described as an investigation into alleged marijuana trafficking. One of those homes belonged to 26-year-old Jose Guerena and his wife, Vanessa Guerena. The couple's 4-year-old son was also in the house at the time. Their 6-year-old son was at school.
As the SWAT team forced its way into his home, Guerena, a former Marine who served two tours of duty in Iraq, armed himself with his AR-15 rifle and told his wife and son to hide in a closet. As the officers entered, Guerena confronted them from the far end of a long, dark hallway. The police opened fire, releasing more than 70 rounds in about 7 seconds, at least 60 of which struck Guerena. He was pronounced dead a little over an hour later.
The Pima County Sheriff's Department initially claimed (PDF) Guerena fired his weapon at the SWAT team. They now acknowledge that not only did he not fire, the safety on his gun was still activated when he was killed. Guerena had no prior criminal record, and the police found nothing illegal in his home. After ushering out his wife and son, the police refused to allow paramedics to access Guerena for more than hour, leaving the young father to bleed to death, alone, in his own home.
I can now report a number of new details that further call into question the police account of what happened that morning. But first some context:
The Pima County Sheriff's Office has now changed its story several times over the last few weeks. They have issued a press release (PDF) scolding the media and critics for questioning the legality of the raid, the department's account of what happened, and the department's ability to fairly investigate its own officers. They have obtained a court order sealing the search warrants and police affidavits that led to the raids, and they're now refusing any further comment on the case at all. When I contacted Public Information Officer Jason Ogan with some questions, he replied via email that the department won't be releasing any more information. On Saturday, Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik told Arizona Daily Star columnist Josh Brodesky that he may never release the search warrants and police affidavits. Dupnik rose to national prominence earlier this year after claiming combative political rhetoric contributed to Jared Loughner killing six people and wounding 19 others, including Rep. Gabielle Giffords, last January.
The department's excuses for keeping all of this information under wraps make little sense. In his May 18 press release (PDF), for example, Ogan wrote, "The investigation that lead to the service of the search warrants on May 5 is a complicated one involving multiple people suspected of very serious crimes. Sometimes, law enforcement agencies must choose between the desire of the public to quickly know details, and the very real threat to innocent lives if those details are released prematurely." Dupnik used the same line of reasoning with Brodesky. "Those are the real sensitive parts of why we are having difficulty with trying to put information out publicly--because we don't want somebody getting killed," Dupnik said.
The problem with that explanation is that the search warrants and affidavits weren't sealed until four days after the raids were executed, right at about the time the troubling questions about Jose Guerena's death began to make national headlines. If revealing the details of this investigation -- which remember, was initially described by the Sheriff's Department as a marijuana investigation -- could endanger lives, why weren't the warrants and affidavits sealed from the start? It isn't difficult to understand why some would suspect a cover-up, or at least an attempt to suppress details until the department can come up with a narrative that mitigates the damage. In any case, it's awfully audacious for a police agency to scold the media for not trusting them and for "spreading misinformation" just days after revealing they themselves released bad information.
There are other reasons to doubt the excuse that releasing the search warrants would jeopardize public safety. The raids on the other homes carried out that same morning, all part of the same operation, resulted in no arrests and turned up little if any actual contraband. (When police find illegal substances after these raids -- especially raids that end badly -- they usually quickly release that information.)
Moreover, if this was all about breaking up a dangerous home invasion ring, where are the suspects, and where is the evidence? According to an advocate for the Guerena family I spoke with this week, the police also mistakenly raided another home near Guerena's the same morning, and have since replaced that home's front door. Again, the Pima County Sheriff's Department is refusing comment, so I can't verify this allegation with them. But police officials have admitted that even the Guerena warrant was only for his residence, not for Jose Guerena personally; his name doesn't appear anywhere on the warrants.
The police also concede they weren't aware that there was a child in the home at the time of the raid. Given all of this, it seems reasonable to question just how thorough this investigation really was.
I've been reporting on the overuse of SWAT teams and military police tactics for about six years now. You begin to see patterns in how police agencies respond to high-profile incidents like this one. One near-universal tactic is to lock down information once the media begins to grow skeptical. Another, often undertaken simultaneously, is to unofficially leak information that's beneficial to the police department. They're doing both in Tucson.
Michael Storie, the attorney for the Arizona police union, is apparently handling the smear campaign portion of the strategy. Storie points out on the union's website that under his watch, no union police officer "has ever been convicted on charges relating to on-duty conduct." That may be a boastworthy claim when it comes to Storie's lawyering prowess. But it isn't exactly a testament to his trustworthiness. (Police critic William Grigg also points out that the boast isn't entirely true -- Storie represented a cop convicted of a sexual assault and kidnapping committed in 2005, despite Storie's best efforts to blame the victims.)
On Friday, Storie told the Arizona Daily Star that Guerena was "linked" to a "home-invasion crew," and that police found rifles, handguns, body armor, and a "portion of a law-enforcement uniform" in Guerena's house. "Everything they think they're going to find in there, they find," Storie said. "Put it together, and when you have drug rip-offs that occasionally happen where people disguise themselves as law enforcement officers, it all adds up."
I asked Chris Scileppi, the attorney representing Guerena's family, about the "portion of a law enforcement uniform" allegation. "They're trying to imply that he was dressing up as a police officer to force his way into private homes," Scileppi says. But when police serve a search warrant they leave behind a receipt what they've taken from the residence. According to Scileppi, the only item taken from Gurena's home that remotely fits that description was a U.S. Border Control cap -- which you can buy from any number of retail outlets, including Amazon.com.
About the guns and body armor Scileppi says, "Is it really that difficult to believe that a former Marine living in Arizona would have guns and body armor in his home? Nothing they found in the house is illegal to own in Arizona." In fact, Storie himself acknowledged in the Daily Star that had the SWAT team entered Guerena's home peacefully, they wouldn't have made an arrest.
And when you "put it together," to borrow his own terminology, Storie's comments thus far lead to a pretty astonishing conclusion: After violently breaking into Guerena's home, the police found exactly the evidence they were looking for -- yet none of that evidence merited an arrest. Storie is either shamelessly posturing, or he actually believes that the police are justified in violently forcing their way into a private home with their guns drawn, even if they have no expectation that they'll find any evidence of a crime.
At his press conference last week, Storie also defended the SWAT team's refusal to allow paramedics to access Guerena for more than hour. "They still don't know how many shooters are inside, how many guns are inside and they still have to assume that they will be ambushed if they walk in this house," Storie said.
This is absurd. The entire purpose of using SWAT teams, dynamic entry, and like paramilitary-style police tactics is to subdue dangerous suspects and secure the building within seconds. If it took more than an hour to secure the Guerenas' small home, this particular SWAT team was incompetent. By contrast, paramedics were tending to the wounded after the Jared Loughner shootings within 12 minutes, and that was a far more volatile crime scene.
Storie has offered up a number of other questionable allegations and explanations in recent days.
Last week, for example, Storie told the Daily Star that the investigation leading up to the raids was from the start about home invasions and "drug rip-offs" -- not just marijuana distribution, as the Sheriff's Department initially indicated. Storie also says the police vehicles ran their lights and sirens until they were parked in the Guerenas' driveway, and that a police officer knocked on the door and announced himself for a full 45 seconds before the SWAT team forced its way inside. He emphasized that the raid was "in no way" a "no-knock" operation.
Storie is laying groundwork for the argument that Guerena should have known that the men breaking into his home were police. That he still met them with his rifle meant he was intent on killing them, which of course would justify their rash of gunfire. For good measure, Storie added that just before they opened fire, several officers reported hearing Guerena say, "I've got something for you; I've gotten something for you guys."
There are a number of problems here, beginning with the lights, the sirens, and the knocking. If these warrants were, as Storie claims, for suspected dangerous, well-armed members of a home invasion ring, why would they give a violent suspect such ample warning that they're coming? Why wouldn't the police have sought and obtained a no-knock warrant? This is precisely the scenario for which no-knock entry is warranted -- to apprehend suspected dangerous people who may present an immediate threat to police and the public.
This week I also spoke with Ray Epps, a retired Marine sergeant from Mesa, Arizona and president of the Arizona chapter of Oath Keepers, the controversial organization of police and military personnel who have vowed not to enforce laws they believe are unconstitutional. After hearing about Guerena's death, Epps drove to Tucson to investigate.
"We spoke with several of the neighbors," Epps says. "And none of them -- none of them -- heard any sirens that morning. Every one of them told us they didn't hear anything, no knocking, no shouting, until the shooting started. They didn't hear anything until the shooting started." Scileppi, who is conducting his own investigation, wouldn't say if he had spoken to neighbors, but did say of the lights and sirens, "What we've found contradicts what they're saying." Epps added, "What I found disturbing is that none of the neighbors would give us their names. These people are terrified of the police, now. Another thing I found strange, they said the police didn't evacuate them until after the shooting."
If next-door neighbors didn't hear the sirens or police announcement at the door, it's plausible that Guerena, who was sleeping off the graveyard shift he'd worked the night before, didn't hear them either. Of course, the other possibility here is that the police are lying about the sirens and the announcement.
To buy what Storie is pitching, you would have to believe that Guerena -- the father of two young boys, who was working a night job to save money for a new home, who had no criminal record, who served two tours of duty in Iraq and was honorably discharged -- knowingly took on a team of armored, well-armed police officers, himself armed only with his rifle, and with his wife and young child still in the home. You'd also have to believe that the battle-tested former Marine forgot to turn off his weapon's safety before the shooting began.
The alternate explanation -- and I think the more plausible one -- is that Guerena thought the men breaking into his home were criminals, but held his fire until he was sure. (That's also the mark of someone well-trained in gun safety, and a stark contrast to the SWAT team, which despite never receiving hostile fire, unleashed a barrage of bullets that penetrated not only Jose Guerena but, according to sources I spoke with, also the walls of neighboring homes.)
If you're not actually a criminal and you wake up to the sound of armed men breaking into your home, your first thought isn't likely to be that you're being visited by the police. There may also have been something else on Guerena's mind: Last year, two of Vanessa Guerena's relatives were murdered by armed intruders. The intruders also shot the couple's children. What Guerena is alleged to have said -- "I've got something for you; I've gotten something for you guys" -- sounds damning if you assume he knew the men in his home were police, but there's nothing in that sentence indicating Guerena knew he was confronting cops. It also sounds like something a former soldier might shout out to intimidate armed intruders. And let's not forget, the same team of SWAT officers who reported hearing Guerena say those words also reported seeing a muzzle flash from Guerena's gun, which we now know couldn't have happened.
Storie also says police found a photo of Jesus Malverde in Guerena's home.
Malverde is an iconic, probably mythical figure often described as the "narco saint". But as my former Reason magazine colleague Tim Cavanaugh points out, while it's true that Malverde has been embraced by drug traffickers, he is also revered by the poor, by immigrants, and by people who feel they've been wronged. "That Guerena had a picture of Jesus Malverde tells us two things," Cavanaugh writes. "He had a family to worry about and he shared the belief of most Americans that a supernatural being or beings can influence earthly circumstances."
When Daily Star columnist Josh Brodesky asked Sheriff Dupnik if Storie's chats with the press about the details of the Guerena raid were hindering the investigation, Dupnik said, simply, "No." So while Dupnik's department is refusing to officially release any information about the raid or surrounding investigation due to "the real threat to innocent lives," he has no problem with the police union lawyer disclosing details that smear Guerena to the benefit of Dupnik and his department.
Perhaps we will at some point see convincing evidence that Dupnik and Storie are right -- that Jose Guerena was in fact a drug dealer and violent criminal who dressed up like a cop to rob rival drug dealers and innocent citizens of Pima County. But at this point, all we have is a dead father and veteran, a violent series of raids that make little sense, and a police agency that over the last three weeks has put out incorrect information, insisted that it would be dangerous to release any further information, and, at the same time, allowed a police representative to release information favorable to the department.
The government of Pima County has killed one of its own citizens. This is the most serious, solemn, and severe action a local government can undertake. It demands complete transparency. The Pima County Sheriff's Department and other agencies involved in the raid ought to be doing anything and everything to make themselves accountable. Instead, they've shown arrogance, defiance, and obstinacy -- all wrapped in an appeal to public safety.
Hey Jim - I think you need to find out more information on the Pima Co SWAT team b/c there is a video now of when they entered the home and the article you posted above doesnt give the full story...The SWAT team showed up with sirens and then announced themselves several times before entering the property and they even yelled the whole time they were inside.....What happened after that I cant speak for b/c there is no video - it is a shame that he died and I dont like that he died; however, they announced themselves several times so that article, like I said, is a lie...
You can watch and hear for yourself at this link:
But I will say this again - I dont think its right he died - I do feel he raised the gun at the SWAT and that is why they shot him but again I feel awful he was shot.
But see Jim - I see the point people are trying to make but what ya'll fail to see is that there is ALWAYS 2 sides to every story and most refuse to even see the full story or the other side.
Edward - your just a hateful man and I feel sorry for you. I pray you never need a PIG - I pray that you are never in an auto accident and trapped in your car with fuel leaking and first on scene is a PIG b/c I would be afraid for that PIG b/c you would probably curse them out and not let them help you out of a car that could blow up or you would be the man begging for help and then when the PIG pulled you out - you would sue them b/c you got a cut on your leg......shameful, truly shameful.
Thye real shame here is that Guerena didn't have a chgance to bkill any of those pigs- because they fired so verry quickly.
They just don't hesitate to kill on of "us".
The Phucking cowards.
Amen, Rhonda. Again, there are good and bad people in every profession. We can think of the guy who arrested that woman who had broken no law. He should have been suspended if not fired. On the other hand, Kat, the way you describe your husband, it seems that he is one of the conscientious types who goes by the rules. Why not move on to another topic? I think we have beaten this topic to death three or four times! Sometimes we just have to agree to disagree.
This post was modified from its original form on 24 Jun, 11:06
Rhonda I dont know why you keep bringing up my husband...he has nothing to do with this conversation.
There is another website: policelink that you can go to and find the video that has sound...it just takes a little bit of searching yet it seems no one wants to find the good - they just want to believe the bad.
Rhonda "but don't acknowledge that there are bad ones" - I have always said there are bad Cops out there........I have never once said all Cops are great b/c I know that is not true and for you to assume I would feel tha way b/c yes my husband is a great Cop - is just mind boggling or you think I am that stupid...Im going to go for the mind boggling......
I have always looked at both sides and tried to give people the benefit of the doubt - The Cop arresting the lady with the video camera - how do we know she ended up in jail - how do we know he didnt let her out of the car after he put her in handcuffs - WE DONT KNOW b/c the video tape stopped.....that is my damn point with all of these videos........
We have more than our share in California too. I've dealt with cops who haven't quite gotten that the tired old game of "good cop, bad cop" has been broadcast on every TV cop show for the past 25 years! If they don't want to look like idiots, they'd better create a newer and better game!
The bad cops are the ones that do nothing about the ones that break the law.
There will always be pigs that take advantage of their position-
At least until somebody starts arresting them.
So the real problem is the enablers- the so called "good cops".
So there are criminal cops, enabler cops, and "Frank Serpico" style cops.
We don'ty have any more Serpicos- just criminals and the - WORSE - enablers whose blue blindness is the core of this whole problem.
And I am not hateful I just call it as I see it- and our so called "police" are degenerating into hit squads.
I could regale you with many a story about police corruption run amok.
Like how my father quit his commision as a leutinant in our local sheriff patrol because he could no longer tolerate the collusion with organised crime. Or how he was murdered 35 years later by a member of that same organisation.
Or the time- never mind I could go on all day.
Kat, the only thing that shows on that video is a police entry on what appears to be another address. And that one doesn't show the shooting. Or all the warnings you claim.
Let's not lose sight to the fact that the the victim was in his own home and nothing was found. If he had nothing to hide, why would he confront the police? Clearly , he didn't know they were police. His neighbors also confirmed that they heard no warnings and no sirens.
Let's also not forget that the SWAT team have changed their story. The originally said that they had been fired upon. That's a big differences from the claim that a gun was pointed.
You are too close to this. The attitude of the police, the authorities and those that claim the police can do no wrong make many less trustful. Your defense of the police establishment without question is confirming my worst fears.
This post was modified from its original form on 24 Jun, 17:13
Update on this case: The Rochester lady in question is being charged with second-degree obstructing governmental administration, "Good would have had to impede police through intimidation, force or a separate illegal act."
Note: The police arrest report notes that she was 10 to 15 feet away.
Police use selective enforcement and harassment in Rochester case involving Ms Good.
"A group of Rochester citizens meeting to show support for a woman arrested while video taping a police traffic stop claim police harassment.
Members of the group IndyMedia say several police officers converged on Clarissa Street late Thursday afternoon and began ticketing their parked cars for being more than 12 inches from the curb. A member of the group video taped the incident and posted the video on line. The pictures show police using a pink ruler to measure the distance from the curb to the wheels, and then issuing parking tickets.
Spokeswoman Dawn Zuppelli says this was obvious retaliation. "This was a clear intimidation tactic. And I'm outraged about it. It was an appalling use of city (police) resources. They told us it was citizen complaints about how the cars were parked, and I don't believe it for a second. I absolutely think we're being targeted. They're leaving us a message that they are angry about this. It's gotten international coverage at this point, the misconduct of the RPD and they want to let us know that they're not happy about it," Zuppelli said.
Zuppleii says their meeting was well publicized on all the social media networks. Four police cars showed up within 20 minutes of the meeting starting.
Emily Good was arrested earlier this week while taking pictures of police from her yard using her cell phone. The police officer reportedly instructed Good to go back into her home because he felt his safety was threatened. She's been charged with obstructing governmental administration. Her arrest and video have drawn outrage and national media coverage.
Zuppelli said she and other concerned citizens Thursday were simply discussing what she called the the Rochester Police Department's harassment and misconduct surrounding Good's case and other cases in the city. "It's ridiculous and it's going to make more of a mockery of the Rochester Police Department," said Zuppelli. "We're not going to be intimidated by RPD and we're not going to stop organizing around this and bringing these injustices to light."
Davy Vara has been critical of the Rochester Police Department in the past. "The officers are rogue. They need to be put on notice that this behavior is not tolerated."
And Vara says it goes beyond what happened yesterday. "Our youth especially are being taught when they see incidents such as this clear retaliation and intimidation tactics by Rochester police officers, they're being taught not to respect authority."
News 10NBC has put in requests for reaction to the Clarissa Street incident with both Police Chief James Sheppard and Mayor Thomas Richards. A spokesman for Sheppard says the police department is trying to gather all the information.
Rochester Police Union President Mike Mazzeo told News 10NBC that he has serious concerns about releasing the names and addresses of the officers online. He wouldn't comment directly on charges police were deliberately intimidating citizens. He says he doesn't want to put more fuel on the fire.
Mazzeo says, "City police officers write ticket every night after parking enforcement officers leave for the day. And if there's a parking infraction they come across in their patrol areas, they will write those violations. That's part of their job."
"Selective enforcement is the ability that executors of the law (such as police officers or administrative agencies, in some cases) have to arbitrarily select choice individuals as being outside of the law. The use of enforcement discretion in an arbitrary way is referred to as selective enforcement or selective prosecution.
Historically, selective enforcement is recognized as a sign of tyranny, and an abuse of power, because it violates rule of law, allowing men to apply justice only when they choose. Aside from this being inherently unjust, it almost inevitably must lead to favoritism and extortion, with those empowered to choose being able to help their friends, take bribes, and threaten those they desire favors from."
This is a pretty clear case of retailation against citizens by the police.
And this is exactly what many fear from those who have power in government. Abuse of authority. It is the basis of corruption.
Virginia state trooper killed in crash in King George County
A Virginia state trooper died in a car accident that injured two other people Friday night.
Investigators say the crash happened about 6:45 p.m. in the James Madison section of King George County, about 60 miles northeast ofRichmond.
Police say the trooper was responding to a call for assistance, when his patrol car collided with another car at the intersection of Route 3 and Madison Drive. Investigators say the impact forced the trooper's car off the road and into a light pole, splitting the cruiser in half.
Investigators say the front end of the squad car then continued into a nearby parking lot, where it struck three parked cars before coming to a stop.
The trooper died on the scene. Police have not yet released his name. The driver and passenger in the other car were taken to Mary Washington Hospital with minor injuries.
The Virginia State Police Accident Reconstruction Team is assisting with the investigation of the crash.
If you watch the video attached to this you can see what was left of his car...
RIP 1988 your VSP Family will miss you.
Kat, we all know there are good cops, we all know cops, firemen, miners, cab-drivers and people from any number of very dangerous professions die in the 'line of duty' all the time - yes, it's tragic but, GOOD COPS are not the problem! BAD CAPS are who will abuse us are the problem, so all the sad stories you post about an officer being hurt or killed is not going to make us feel one bit 'safer' from the BAD COPS.
but what ya'll fail to see is that there is ALWAYS 2 sides to every story and most refuse to even see the full story or the other side. -Kat
Everyone knows there's more than one side to as story - we are not toddlers for petesake, but what YOU fail to see is that there is NEVER ever a 'side' of a story that EXCUSES POLICE ABUSE. N E V E R. So, I guess you think it's OK for police to beat up and kill innocent people simply because they are cops and their side of the story will excuse their abuse of power.
And, Kat, about the insult you so smugly deny making... You don't get to decide how other people feel.
Perhaps YOU wouldn't feel insulted if someone twisted your words to say something degrading and disgusting about you, but most people with an ounce of empathy for others would certainly feel insulted.
Katii I posted the loss of 1988 b/c he was a close friend of ours and worked closely with my husband. Never once did I post it to change anyones mind. I know that will never happen. Today I fell and broke my left leg so I won't be on care2 a lot. Enjoy this thread. I'm done with it.
Kat, I'm very sorry to hear about your friend, it's always heartbreaking to hear of these tragedies - I lost someone I'm very close to a few days ago too
I think a more suitable thread is in order to honor the fallen, I think we have one here so if you don't mind I'll post it there as well so it can stand in a more appropriate 'environment' than this thread.
I'm very sorry too to hear you broke your leg! I hope it's not too serious and that you're good as new in no time
Kat, I hope your leg heals well and soon!!
Ditto. I hope that you get well soon, Kat. I broke an arm once, when I fell off a horse - but that must have been a picnic compared to a broken leg. Take care of yourself.
The video is quite clear.
OMG!! That poor man. This is such a disgusting action by the cop. No editing on this film ... it was the cops own video. I hope he gets fired and then gets some therapy, at the least.
This is what adds insult to injury for me... The cop is clearly brutally abusing this man yet the 'department' is LYING trying to protect the crazy cop! It's bad enough that people are brutally beaten, seriously injured and sometimes DEAD because some cop has gone insane - we can even understand that sometimes because cops are human there may be rare events that cause them to just 'lose it' - as in a 'crime of passion' (against someone actually 'guilty' of something 'serious' - not a traffic violation!), but then for his 'brothers' to not come to the defense of the injured is just disgusting. It's criminal.
I have to wonder if there is even one cop that has publicly spoken out against this beating...
From what I saw of the video as soon as the man laid on the ground and put his hands behind his head, the Cop should have stopped and put handcuffs on him.......but once the man laid on the ground with his hands behind his head and the Cop continued to beat him - I would get back up to defend myself as well.
I dont agree that the man driving led the Cop on a chase - once he saw the blue lights he should have pulled over but like I said above once the man got down and put his hands behind his back, which the video clearing shows he did, that was the end of it.....
Anybody who loses it and beats the crap out of someone needs a mental evaluation...
Was a crime committed?
And despite the Las Vegas Police Department admitting the officer’s actions “violated several Metropolitan Police Department policies,” the officer is probably not going to be punished!
Amazing, isn’t it?
A cop can grab a guy and beat the snot out of him for the simple act of operating a video camera, yet he may not even get fired.
It’s possible that all he will get is a 40-hour unpaid suspension.
Now get ready for the worst part…
…he’s been on paid “administrative leave” for 4 months!
I should tell you, I have several friends in law enforcement.
I’ve done ride-alongs with them, and witnessed firsthand, from their perspective, what a tough job they have.
And I deeply respect them for doing that job, because I think we need more constitutionally-minded law enforcement officers.
But this Las Vegas incident is yet another example of the ever-growing police state that you and I live in.
In a mad rush to make our country safer, police departments are using strong-arm tactics that go far beyond their moral and legal boundaries.
I think Ben Franklin put it best when he said that those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
I don’t want to lose our freedom in exchange for some perceived temporary safety by creating a police state, and I know you feel the same.
Can you imagine if the guy in the video had been carrying a firearm?
The cops would probably have branded him as a “terrorist,” or worse, they might have simply shot him as a matter of course.
Today it’s a random guy with a video camera.
Tomorrow it could be you.
Executive Director (NAGR)
These videos rip my heart out. How dare they say he was interfering with them. They are sooooo wrong!! He was in his own frontyard. Once again they have violated an innocent person AND tried to destroy his property. Shameful!
This Video segment features Dr Bill Deagle and John Moore.
This video segment taken from....Dr Deagle Show 2012/12/28 - PREPAREDNESS, CIVIL DEFENSE, MARTIAL LAW AND EARTH CHANGES ...posted by youtube channel urupiper2 LINK: http://youtu.be/3QavwmX-73U
Is this more fear porn?
Or is the likelihood greater than ever that the real deal is at the door?
When looking at the leading cause of un-natural human death WORLDWIDE, does it really make sense to give up your arms to become defenseless to the very powers responsible for these un-natural deaths?
Do NOT be fooled by the mainstream media's (bought and paid for by the powers that be) fear mongering in an attempt to leave you defenseless against our rapidly changing tyrannical government!
Our Government is supposed to be made up of PUBLIC EMPLOYEES that we hold in trust of OUR best interest, money and laws WE vote on. They are not supposed to be dictators that go against the will of the people, taking away our rights through excessive executive orders, propaganda, fear mongering, lies, cover-ups, false flag attacks and intimidation. Our Government is clearly in BREACH OF TRUST!
links for works / statistics cited
The Time Times http://thetimetimes.com/2012/06/18/leading-cause-of-unnatural-human-death-in-...
20TH CENTURY DEMOCIDE http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM
Gupta: Let's end the prescription drug death epidemic http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/14/health/gupta-accidental-overdose/index.html?utm...
Alcohol Related Injuries and Deaths in the US http://recoveryfirst.org/alcohol-related-injuries-and-deaths-in-the-us.html/
Who Should Pay? The Product Liability Debate http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v4n1/pay.html
United States military casualties of war http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_military_casualties_of_war
Top 5 Causes of Accidental Death in the United States http://listosaur.com/miscellaneous/top-5-causes-of-accidental-death-in-the-un...
Gun violence in the United States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States
address our greivances is a part of the constitution and our legal DUTY to oblige.