Seriously, F the Police

Off Topic
241

[quote]165StateChamp wrote:

[quote]TheBodyGuard wrote:

[quote]165StateChamp wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]165StateChamp wrote:
Waylanderxx is obviously trolling. You people freak out over anything. Why are gregron and anonym the only calm and rational people in this thread? I will never understand the cop hate either…seems like everyone on the interwebz is quick to pass judgement. [/quote]

Cop hate? Everyone here isn’t talking about hating all cops. My next door neighbor is a cop. We get along great. Dude will call me if I leave my garage door open (I did this once) just to make sure I’m ok.

We are talking about the INSTITUTION of being a cop in this country and the FACT that they do cover up for each other and discourage acting against other cops if you do see something wrong.

You can’t even deny this…and acting like we shouldn’t have a problem with it is very strange.

THAT is why people say they “hate cops”…because even if you do know a great one, the institution itself is screwed from the ground up.

If this stuff was not being caught on film, people would be acting like people were making up the brutality…which obviously means there is tons of shit you don’t even know about.

As far as your support of “trolling”…no one claimed that poster wasn’t one. I do believe that is the point. if that is why you come here, then that is what you are. Why support the troll?[/quote]

Maybe not everyone, but the person who started the thread, TheBodyGuard, clearly hates any and all cops. angry chicken gave the impression that he did as well up until a few posts ago. Most people who posted in support of the OP also gave off that impression. I’m glad to hear that you don’t hate all cops.

It’s fine to have a hatred for the bad seeds in the law enforcement field but condemning a group as a whole due to the actions of a few is wrong in almost any instance.

I don’t ‘support’ trolling. I’m just saying that he’s trolling right now because people seem anxious to write him off as a racist when I don’t think he actually is.

[/quote]

You have no fucking idea what you’re talking about so please refrain from speaking on my behalf. I have worked along side LEO throughout my life during security gigs and I even used to play basketball with a few. A childhood friend is the head of the FOP locally and my best friend’s sister is employed by the FOP and we grew up together.

When you can find me an officer named “the police”, I will happily apologize to that officer. X could not have made it any clearer; it’s the INSTITUTION and they are known as “the police”. Fuck them. It’s a corrupt institution. If it didn’t operate under the color of law, they would be prosecuted along side the mafia and organized crime under RICO.

To be a police officer represents the HIGHEST public trust and with that trust, should come THE HIGHEST STANDARDS OF CONDUCT AND PROFESSIONALISM. The institution needs an overall and a cleaning from the floor up to the ceiling. [/quote]

“If you’re LEO, watch this, then go fuck yourself.”

Seems pretty clear to me. You are just an old man who loves arguing on the internet and telling stories about how much of a badass you were/are. Go capitalize some more words in your response to someone else because I hate interacting with you. You are the epitome of a vile old man and the biggest internet hardass on this site. Please do not respond to my post.[/quote]

Well that was intelligent.

And along those lines, go tip some cows and fuck some sheep lil man.

242

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

Not my question.

A policeman’s job is to investigate suspicious activity. Leaving a bar at 1:30am can definitelhy be viewed as suspicios when behind the wheel.

It is the courts job to determine guilt or innocence should a cop cuff you.

In your scenario, the cop didn’t beat you or violate your civil rights in any way.

You were innocent and he let you go too. Whining is pointless.

It’s a shame a cop didn’t stop the driver who hit the girl in my link, even if it was for a “domestic disturbance call”.

[/quote]

Ah, but he did. You see, in this country we are guaranteed the right to pass freely and unmolested.

Without reasonable suspicion, he has no right or ability to stop anybody.

Nice try, but it is hard to argue actual with hypothetical, because one is, and one isn’t.

Besides, Applebees is a restaurant that serves drinks, not a bar that serves food.

Now is when you respond with something equally weak and stupid as your entrance into this conversation.

[/quote]

The only real crime is that you went to Applebees that shit sucks.

243

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

Not my question.

A policeman’s job is to investigate suspicious activity. Leaving a bar at 1:30am can definitelhy be viewed as suspicios when behind the wheel.

It is the courts job to determine guilt or innocence should a cop cuff you.

In your scenario, the cop didn’t beat you or violate your civil rights in any way.

You were innocent and he let you go too. Whining is pointless.

It’s a shame a cop didn’t stop the driver who hit the girl in my link, even if it was for a “domestic disturbance call”.

[/quote]

Ah, but he did. You see, in this country we are guaranteed the right to pass freely and unmolested.

Without reasonable suspicion, he has no right or ability to stop anybody.

Nice try, but it is hard to argue actual with hypothetical, because one is, and one isn’t.

Besides, Applebees is a restaurant that serves drinks, not a bar that serves food.

Now is when you respond with something equally weak and stupid as your entrance into this conversation.

[/quote]

Your angry and pre-dismissive close to your post doesn’t warrant much in reply. Besides, Emily posted something similar so I’m going to debate with her, I think she is smarter and it will be fun. You can watch if you want.
[/quote]

That would almost be clever if I hadn’t beaten you to the punch.

Very fitting response to my close, I might add.

244

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

Not my question.

A policeman’s job is to investigate suspicious activity. Leaving a bar at 1:30am can definitelhy be viewed as suspicios when behind the wheel.

It is the courts job to determine guilt or innocence should a cop cuff you.

In your scenario, the cop didn’t beat you or violate your civil rights in any way.

You were innocent and he let you go too. Whining is pointless.

It’s a shame a cop didn’t stop the driver who hit the girl in my link, even if it was for a “domestic disturbance call”.

[/quote]

Ah, but he did. You see, in this country we are guaranteed the right to pass freely and unmolested.

Without reasonable suspicion, he has no right or ability to stop anybody.

Nice try, but it is hard to argue actual with hypothetical, because one is, and one isn’t.

Besides, Applebees is a restaurant that serves drinks, not a bar that serves food.

Now is when you respond with something equally weak and stupid as your entrance into this conversation.

[/quote]

Your angry and pre-dismissive close to your post doesn’t warrant much in reply. Besides, Emily posted something similar so I’m going to debate with her, I think she is smarter and it will be fun. You can watch if you want.
[/quote]

That would almost be clever if I hadn’t beaten you to the punch.

Very fitting response to my close, I might add.
[/quote]

What punch? And how about this one: You’ve got teh ghey.

245

[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:

The only real crime is that you went to Applebees that shit sucks.[/quote]

This I will fully own.

Now lets enjoy a maple butter blondie as we watch Emily bat Huston Guy around like a cat does to a mole.

246

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

You’ve got teh ghey.
[/quote]

You wouldn’t even know that if you weren’t the middle M in my last MMM.

To your credit, you took it like a champ.

247

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:

The only real crime is that you went to Applebees that shit sucks.[/quote]

This I will fully own.

Now lets enjoy a maple butter blondie as we watch Emily bat Huston Guy around like a cat does to a mole.
[/quote]

You mean a mouse. And Emily’s post is spot on except that free until proven guilty applies to the courts and a fair trial, which is a constitutionally sound thing for me to say. Police can investigate scenarios they find suspicious. There is no debate.

Emily is a sharp cookie though, so she may throw me a curve ball, but it will have to be factual. Emotions and opinions don’t really fit this equation.

248

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

You’ve got teh ghey.
[/quote]

You wouldn’t even know that if you weren’t the middle M in my last MMM.

To your credit, you took it like a champ.
[/quote]
That doesn’t even make sense. But I think you just admitted you have the ghey.

249

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:

The only real crime is that you went to Applebees that shit sucks.[/quote]

This I will fully own.

Now lets enjoy a maple butter blondie as we watch Emily bat Huston Guy around like a cat does to a mole.
[/quote]

You mean a mouse. And Emily’s post is spot on except that free until proven guilty applies to the courts and a fair trial, which is a constitutionally sound thing for me to say. Police can investigate scenarios they find suspicious. There is no debate.

Emily is a sharp cookie though, so she may throw me a curve ball, but it will have to be factual. Emotions and opinions don’t really fit this equation.
[/quote]

No, I meant mole. See? (haha I made a funny) Mole (animal) - Wikipedia

and while I’m at it, yeah, I know its the wiki version but here you go- Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Skip to the legal standard of probable cause.

250

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:

The only real crime is that you went to Applebees that shit sucks.[/quote]

This I will fully own.

Now lets enjoy a maple butter blondie as we watch Emily bat Huston Guy around like a cat does to a mole.
[/quote]

You mean a mouse. And Emily’s post is spot on except that free until proven guilty applies to the courts and a fair trial, which is a constitutionally sound thing for me to say. Police can investigate scenarios they find suspicious. There is no debate.

Emily is a sharp cookie though, so she may throw me a curve ball, but it will have to be factual. Emotions and opinions don’t really fit this equation.
[/quote]

No, I meant mole. See? (haha I made a funny) Mole (animal) - Wikipedia

and while I’m at it, yeah, I know its the wiki version but here you go- Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Skip to the legal standard of probable cause.

[/quote]

The probable cause was you leaving a bar late. Actually, it was you matching a disturbance call so this whole argument is pretty bunk.

But, for principals sake since we’ve taken it there, the probability clause was you leaving a bar late. You looked suspicious. Fuck you for thinking for the cop. He saw something he felt was suspicious and checked on it. Legally.

Now please explain MMM. I’m honestly in the dark.

251

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

You’ve got teh ghey.
[/quote]

You wouldn’t even know that if you weren’t the middle M in my last MMM.

To your credit, you took it like a champ.
[/quote]
That doesn’t even make sense. But I think you just admitted you have the ghey.[/quote]

It would make more sense if you hadn’t been missing when HolyMac arrived. There was MMF and MMM’s breaking out all over the place.

One dude lost an eye to a high velocity gob of lube. Fucking outrageous.

252

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

You’ve got teh ghey.
[/quote]

You wouldn’t even know that if you weren’t the middle M in my last MMM.

To your credit, you took it like a champ.
[/quote]
That doesn’t even make sense. But I think you just admitted you have the ghey.[/quote]

It would make more sense if you hadn’t been missing when HolyMac arrived. There was MMF and MMM’s breaking out all over the place.

One dude lost an eye to a high velocity gob of lube. Fucking outrageous.
[/quote]
Ohhhh, man you do have the ghey. I feel dirty all the way in Texas. Dirty and accurate.

253

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
Now please explain MMM.
[/quote]

Trust me. You don’t want to know.

Believe me. You’re better off that way.

254

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:

The only real crime is that you went to Applebees that shit sucks.[/quote]

This I will fully own.

Now lets enjoy a maple butter blondie as we watch Emily bat Huston Guy around like a cat does to a mole.
[/quote]

You mean a mouse. And Emily’s post is spot on except that free until proven guilty applies to the courts and a fair trial, which is a constitutionally sound thing for me to say. Police can investigate scenarios they find suspicious. There is no debate.

Emily is a sharp cookie though, so she may throw me a curve ball, but it will have to be factual. Emotions and opinions don’t really fit this equation.
[/quote]

No, I meant mole. See? (haha I made a funny) Mole (animal) - Wikipedia

and while I’m at it, yeah, I know its the wiki version but here you go- Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Skip to the legal standard of probable cause.

[/quote]

The probable cause was you leaving a bar late. Actually, it was you matching a disturbance call so this whole argument is pretty bunk.

But, for principals sake since we’ve taken it there, the probability clause was you leaving a bar late. You looked suspicious. Fuck you for thinking for the cop. He saw something he felt was suspicious and checked on it. Legally.

Now please explain MMM. I’m honestly in the dark.
[/quote]

You didn’t read that.

Anyhow, MMM= Male+Male+Male menage et trios. Like MFF Male+Female+Female only way more machismo.

255

[quote]postholedigger wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
Now please explain MMM.
[/quote]

Trust me. You don’t want to know.

Believe me. You’re better off that way.[/quote]So I just found out. It does make my hunch right though.

256

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

You’ve got teh ghey.
[/quote]

You wouldn’t even know that if you weren’t the middle M in my last MMM.

To your credit, you took it like a champ.
[/quote]
That doesn’t even make sense. But I think you just admitted you have the ghey.[/quote]

It would make more sense if you hadn’t been missing when HolyMac arrived. There was MMF and MMM’s breaking out all over the place.

One dude lost an eye to a high velocity gob of lube. Fucking outrageous.
[/quote]
Ohhhh, man you do have the ghey. I feel dirty all the way in Texas. Dirty and oily. [/quote]

Fixed that for ya.

Switch to water soluble lubes of you don’t want to feel like that.

257

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:

The only real crime is that you went to Applebees that shit sucks.[/quote]

This I will fully own.

Now lets enjoy a maple butter blondie as we watch Emily bat Huston Guy around like a cat does to a mole.
[/quote]

You mean a mouse. And Emily’s post is spot on except that free until proven guilty applies to the courts and a fair trial, which is a constitutionally sound thing for me to say. Police can investigate scenarios they find suspicious. There is no debate.

Emily is a sharp cookie though, so she may throw me a curve ball, but it will have to be factual. Emotions and opinions don’t really fit this equation.
[/quote]

No, I meant mole. See? (haha I made a funny) Mole (animal) - Wikipedia

and while I’m at it, yeah, I know its the wiki version but here you go- Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Skip to the legal standard of probable cause.

[/quote]

The probable cause was you leaving a bar late. Actually, it was you matching a disturbance call so this whole argument is pretty bunk.

But, for principals sake since we’ve taken it there, the probability clause was you leaving a bar late. You looked suspicious. Fuck you for thinking for the cop. He saw something he felt was suspicious and checked on it. Legally.

Now please explain MMM. I’m honestly in the dark.
[/quote]

You didn’t read that.

Anyhow, MMM= Male+Male+Male menage et trios. Like MFF Male+Female+Female only way more machismo.

[/quote]

I did read that. Cops are given the right to investigate suspicious activity. If they see a glass pipe and a bag of green stuff in a locked car for example, they can bust a window, confirm pot and make an arrest. If they see a potentially drunk driver they can investigate.

If, on the other hand, they see a car with no visible suspicious evidence but want to search it any ways, they have to get a warrant. This of course leaves a lot of grey area for a cop to use personal judgement but that is the nature of the human beast, which must be regulated.

258

I guess we disagree on interpretation then.

Fortunately for the rest of the country, the US supreme court agrees with mine.

Anyhoo, I liked you better when you argued nonsense with Rainjack. That dude used to take off into the stratosphere with profanity.

259

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:
Emily is a sharp cookie though, so she may throw me a curve ball, but it will have to be factual. Emotions and opinions don’t really fit this equation.
[/quote]

Then explain, please, why you are relying solely upon them. Your opinion is that people engaged in lawful activities are “suspicious,” which is, let us be clear, a feeling.

My point is that lawful activity is lawful activity and carries with it the presumption of innocence. These are neither opinions nor feelings. Unless you want to credit me with being of the opinion that cops’ feelings…absent clear indication of wrongdoing…are not compelling evidence. A bag of weed? Sure. A fretting, stewing, unhappy worry that something MIGHT be wrong given the hour and that there is alcohol sold inside the establishment the potential perp just exited? No.

260

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]HoustonGuy wrote:

[quote]SkyzykS wrote:

[quote]xXSeraphimXx wrote:

The only real crime is that you went to Applebees that shit sucks.[/quote]

This I will fully own.

Now lets enjoy a maple butter blondie as we watch Emily bat Huston Guy around like a cat does to a mole.
[/quote]

You mean a mouse. And Emily’s post is spot on except that free until proven guilty applies to the courts and a fair trial, which is a constitutionally sound thing for me to say. Police can investigate scenarios they find suspicious. There is no debate.

Emily is a sharp cookie though, so she may throw me a curve ball, but it will have to be factual. Emotions and opinions don’t really fit this equation.
[/quote]

No, I meant mole. See? (haha I made a funny) Mole (animal) - Wikipedia

and while I’m at it, yeah, I know its the wiki version but here you go- Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution - Wikipedia

Skip to the legal standard of probable cause.

[/quote]

The probable cause was you leaving a bar late. Actually, it was you matching a disturbance call so this whole argument is pretty bunk.

But, for principals sake since we’ve taken it there, the probability clause was you leaving a bar late. You looked suspicious. Fuck you for thinking for the cop. He saw something he felt was suspicious and checked on it. Legally.

Now please explain MMM. I’m honestly in the dark.
[/quote]

Please tell me you’re not serious. Please tell me you’re just fucking with him. Please tell me that you have enough intelligence, education and understanding of the law to understand that leaving an establishment during its business hours is NOT suspicious behavior and is NOT a basis for a DETAINMENT (yes, a police stop is a detainment and doing so without probable cause is a violation of your civil rights).

Now, whether or not there was actually a call for a domestic disturbance is a matter of conjecture. Assuming there was a call, and that he fit the description, the stop was likely legal. But you’re way off base with this “suspicion” line of reasoning as it applies to these facts as given. Driving away from Applebees at 4:00 a.m. when no surrounding business or Applebees is open is likely suspicious. Driving away while it’s still open for business IS NOT.