233247 Bullies, 3618 online  
  • Register
Our Sponsors:

Results 101 to 110 of 123
Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 7891011 1213 LastLast
Sponsored Links Spacer Image
  1. bobyclumsyninja is offline
    bobyclumsyninja's Avatar

    :)

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Bahstun
    Posts
    7,061

    Posted On:
    4/07/2012 12:46pm

    supporting member
     Style: Ex-Tiger KF, ex-SanDa

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by johnny_cage View Post
    a sea of words including:
    I understand you are saying 'we should have a more legal disagreement with the policy rather than allow citizen to defend against it
    '
    I follow you, but most posters won't read through that. Hit the enter button/key every three or four sentences.

    Otherwise it's tldr, and they'll miss your wisdom.
  2. johnny_cage is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    218

    Posted On:
    4/07/2012 2:27pm


     Style: Jujutsu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Duly noted.

    thanks
  3. johnny_cage is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    218

    Posted On:
    4/07/2012 2:53pm


     Style: Jujutsu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by bobyclumsyninja View Post
    I follow you, but most posters won't read through that. Hit the enter button/key every three or four sentences.

    Otherwise it's tldr, and they'll miss your wisdom.
    My main points are as follows;

    -Because of the multiple assumptions/reverse onus used in no-knock-raids a LEGAL response (lawsuit/appeal/trial/letters) do not really apply nor rectify the situation because during a raid such as this (because they prepare on the assumption of a threat) EVEN if no resistance is encountered your animals/loved ones/property may be taken/destroyed.

    -It is a precarious situation because (due to the cost of the invasion and the pressure for it to produce results) i fear the incentive is FAR too strong for police/swat to FIND something that justified the raid. (and due to the INCREDIBLY vague laws i feel it is far more believable that a minor drug offense/misdemeanor would be found rather than admit 'ooops wrong house no Al' Capone here' and used to justify a para-military raid.)

    -These raids bring up an interesting point. (and one that hasn't really existed since 1910 western boom-town settlements and sheriff-law.) I am not going to get into the discussion of WHETHER the government should have the ability to POSSIBLY send a no-knock-raid to the wrong house (since they do not require court-warrants therefor proof the basis of the 'intelligence' is very questionable). But SINCE it has happened several times where a no-knock-raid was sent to the wrong place (such as the mayor! of a small town) The question raised is IF A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER is acting in a manor that relies on force violence AND the threat of death AND IS NOT ACTING UNDER/GOVERNED BY LEGAL STATUTE . . . are his actions still protected by the same concepts/laws that require cooperation/lack of resistance to his actions??.
    Personally I think the answer is no. If an officer is threatining someones life/liberty in a manor THAT DOES NOT confer legal backing of his actions (ie beating his wife at a shopping mall . . . selling drugs to a minor etc) the fact that he IS an officer and his actions MIGHT be protected are not relevant in my opinion.
  4. BadUglyMagic is offline
    BadUglyMagic's Avatar

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Atlanta
    Posts
    393

    Posted On:
    4/07/2012 7:07pm


     Style: slackerjitsu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Uh, may be the law is intended to"decriminalize" resistance to illegal or inappropriate acts by police officers. Please exclude no-knock raids from the definition of illegal.
  5. johnny_cage is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    218

    Posted On:
    4/07/2012 9:25pm


     Style: Jujutsu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by BadUglyMagic View Post
    Uh, may be the law is intended to"decriminalize" resistance to illegal or inappropriate acts by police officers. Please exclude no-knock raids from the definition of illegal.
    Sorry I don't understand what you mean.
    What do you mean 'exclude no-knock raids from the definition of illegal'? I don't follow.
  6. tgace is online now
    tgace's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Western New York
    Posts
    1,435

    Posted On:
    4/07/2012 9:33pm


     Style: Arnis/Kenpo hybrid

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by johnny_cage View Post
    Sorry I don't understand what you mean.
    What do you mean 'exclude no-knock raids from the definition of illegal'? I don't follow.
    No knock warrants in and of themselves are not illegal.

    Even when hitting the wrong house....in the cops mind he believes hes hitting a valid target with a valid warrant. There is no mens rea.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea

    A rouge cop rapeing a woman on a dark roadside? Illegal through and through.

    I think that's what hes talking about.
    Last edited by tgace; 4/07/2012 9:37pm at .
  7. bobyclumsyninja is offline
    bobyclumsyninja's Avatar

    :)

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Bahstun
    Posts
    7,061

    Posted On:
    4/08/2012 2:06am

    supporting member
     Style: Ex-Tiger KF, ex-SanDa

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by tgace View Post
    No knock warrants in and of themselves are not illegal.

    Even when hitting the wrong house....in the cops mind he believes hes hitting a valid target with a valid warrant. There is no mens rea.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mens_rea

    A rouge cop rapeing a woman on a dark roadside? Illegal through and through.

    I think that's what hes talking about.
    That's why I'm confused. Some things are illegal for anyone to do.

    If the officers are doing what they believe to be their duty, why would the legislature attempt to place them in potential danger, beyond what they already are in.

    I would suggest that a reasonable person, who find themselves being swarmed by swat in body armor, would assume, unless they were into some ****, that they are, in fact, mistakenly targeted, and not that cartoon drug cartels randomly decided to take over the ranch and act accordingly.

    This spurious law, IMO, worsens the climate, and needlessly harms LE outreach, which is a vital component of effective policing. It's not damn the police/DEA need better intel., It's they are the enemy sometimes. That isn't helpful.
  8. johnny_cage is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    218

    Posted On:
    4/08/2012 8:32am


     Style: Jujutsu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by bobyclumsyninja View Post
    That's why I'm confused. Some things are illegal for anyone to do.

    If the officers are doing what they believe to be their duty, why would the legislature attempt to place them in potential danger, beyond what they already are in.

    I would suggest that a reasonable person, who find themselves being swarmed by swat in body armor, would assume, unless they were into some ****, that they are, in fact, mistakenly targeted, and not that cartoon drug cartels randomly decided to take over the ranch and act accordingly.

    This spurious law, IMO, worsens the climate, and needlessly harms LE outreach, which is a vital component of effective policing. It's not damn the police/DEA need better intel., It's they are the enemy sometimes. That isn't helpful.
    Thanks great response.
    @tgce I agree and yes I see/understand the difference between the 'rouge cop' scenario and a no-knock raid. You are correct without mens rea they are not equal . . .

    BUT (agreeing with bobyclumsyninja) I believe the BIGGER issue is the climate created from BEING ABLE to claim 'ooops wrong house sorry bout your dog and child' because the cops were 'in their mind executing a valid warrant on a valid criminal' and somehow the cops LACK OF INTENT to raid the wrong house = no foul??!. If a 'law' was passed tomorrow requiring anyone of color to wear an insignia/ be subject to arrest . . . forgive me but I would not suffer to allow the country to continue enforcing laws/policies/and raids REGARDLESS of what the LEO feels about what he is doing.

    Not every German soldier was a nazi . . . but EVERY German soldier believed that what he was doing was correct enough that- anyone who stands against/disagrees or was willing to resist against the nazi laws/legislation WAS somehow an enemy/threat.

    I am CERTAIN LEO`s feel they are doing `what is right`but that is not a valid reasoning.
    Nearly every LEO on earth intends to work his shift then go home afterwards . . . I believe this is the weakness/flaw/focus we should have on activism AGAINST these.

    I feel it is a SERIOUS problem that we live in a society at the point where an LEO can 'kettle' and arrest an entire group of people whether they were protesting or walking their dog . . . or raid the wrong house and kill their animals just to punch out and go home and watch a movie.

    Most LEO might realize many of their policies are silly or incorrect but THEY STILL ENFORCE THEM. and UNLIKE THE RESPECT I GRANT MILITARY . . . THEY DO NOT EVEN [B]ARTIFICIALLY BELIEVE THAT THEIR CAUSE IS 'JUST' OR WORTH LIVES TO ACCOMPLISH.

    When an LEO wrestles a kid to the ground to SEE if HAD anything and the kid resists . . . because this LEO is a part timer trying to go home to his cushy bed afterwards . . . HE WILL NEVER regard resistance as 'hmmm maybe this kid doesn't like a cop with a complex frisking him for no reason' INSTEAD all he thinks is 'omg omg omg i don't wanna die i have kids and a comfy bed' and respond accordingly. (usually with LOTS more force than it require . .. but hey the cops are frightened they might get HURT imposing these drug laws and traffic tickets HEAVEN FORBID.)
    Last edited by johnny_cage; 4/08/2012 8:54am at . Reason: sorry sorry- I will use enter from-now-on
  9. tgace is online now
    tgace's Avatar

    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Western New York
    Posts
    1,435

    Posted On:
    4/08/2012 8:44am


     Style: Arnis/Kenpo hybrid

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Its to early to decipher that wall of text.

    While they do happen...and they shouldn't. This black helicopter fear of the cops raiding your home by mistake is hyperbole. Meteors can hit your home too....

    I equate it to the nationwide fear of child abduction everytime a news story hits the press. People on the other side of the nation start keeping their kid's indoors over a statistically minuscule occurrence.

    Cops lying after a mistaken raid?...accusations without evidence.

    A nazi comparison already? I thought it would take a bit longer.

    Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
  10. johnny_cage is offline

    Registered Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    218

    Posted On:
    4/08/2012 9:18am


     Style: Jujutsu

    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by tgace View Post
    Its to early to decipher that wall of text.

    While they do happen...and they shouldn't. This black helicopter fear of the cops raiding your home by mistake is hyperbole. Meteors can hit your home too....

    I equate it to the nationwide fear of child abduction everytime a news story hits the press. People on the other side of the nation start keeping their kid's indoors over a statistically minuscule occurrence.

    Cops lying after a mistaken raid?...accusations without evidence.

    A nazi comparison already? I thought it would take a bit longer.

    Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk
    I never said that cops would or have lied. Im saying it doesnt really matter.
    I am also not afraid of 'the black helicopter' lol. Nor am i worrying about an exaggerated threat . . . it is more that I am concerned about the climate it creates.

    "accusations without evidence" hahaha you mean "come on that was mean- cops do not like being told they are lying just because they do it . . . you know . .. constantly and have a career nearly BASED on it." If you REALLY believe that saying 'oops sorry bout your dogs . . . we will get the right house next time" is somehow morally superior to 'lying' then i will instead focus on that' being a VERY poor apology for threat of death and imprisonment.
    Nazi comparison? was it really far fetched? All I am saying is whether or not LEO feels they are 'doing the right thing' they had better be QUITE certain they are justified and correct in their actions.
Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 7891011 1213 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Powered by vBulletin™© contact@vbulletin.com vBulletin Solutions, Inc. 2011 All rights reserved.