patrick.net

Dan8267 says

hree more changes should be made to the law, preferably in the form of Constitutional amendments.

1. Federal, state, and local governments can make no laws restricting the possession, use, or sale of any drugs. This power has simply been abused too much. The permanent revocation of this power will serve as a reminder to the state not to overstep its bounds.

2. The use of animals in law enforcement for any reason is hereby forbidden. Again, this is because the power has been too widely abused. No trust means no power.

3. No police office can search any person, place, or thing without a court order. There is a limit on the total number of warrants issued at any level of government. That total for all levels combined is 1 warrant per 100,000 citizens per year. That gives any citizen about a 1% chance of being searched in his lifetime. That's more than enough if warrants aren't abused.

If you run for President, all the criminals will vote for you.

Strategist says

Preventing crimes is exactly what cops are for. You are stopping them from doing their job, and in the process putting all of us at risk.

That cop wasn't doing his job. He wasn't investigating or preventing any crime. The cop decided he wanted to illegal search a citizen's property in the hopes of finding anything he could use to arrest that citizen out of pure spite.

He pretended that the dog was giving a signal, but obviously the dog gave no signal. The entire reason the courts let dogs be used to indicate probably cause is because false positives are unheard of. The fact that no contraband was found is clear proof that the dog gave no signal. The fact that the officer said it did after refusing to say what that signal would be is clear indication of criminal intent.

The officer then committed a felony breaking and entering into the citizen's vehicle and illegally searched it. This would be considered burglary in most, if not all, states.

Definition burglary - entry into a building illegally with intent to commit a crime, especially theft.

Note that theft is not a requirement for a conviction of burglary. Any crime, including an illegal search, counts.

This cop's actions were purely criminal, purely spiteful, and in no way was done in the service of the public or to prevent or investigate a crime. You shouldn't give terrorists a free pass simply because they are paid with taxpayer dollars.

Strategist says

If you run for President, all the criminals will vote for you.

No one in Washington would vote for me.

Nor would this or any other criminal cop because I'm tough on crime, including crime committed using the power of the state.

PCGyver says

Not only is he an asshole but he is stupid as well and really shouldn't be a cop.

He should be a prisoner for the felonies he committed.

And the victim should be paid with the assets of the cop, including his house, rather than by the tax payer.

Dan8267 says

That cop wasn't doing his job. He wasn't investigating or preventing any crime. The cop decided he wanted to illegal search a citizen's property in the hopes of finding anything he could use to arrest that citizen out of pure spite.

PCGyver says

ablycause.

The cops had probable cause. They arrested the passenger. Obviously they would want to search the car he was riding in.
The driver/attorney could have just let the cops search and be on his way. What's the big deal? Why kick up a fuss? What did the driver gain in all this?

Strategist says

The cops had probable cause.

Do you even know what the word probable means? It means more than half the time. Searches done under probable cause would, by mathematical definition, result in finding illegal items more than half the times. The fact that this is not the case proves mathematically that the cause is not probable.

In this particular case, the criminal cop committed perjury by stating in an official report that the dog indicated the presence of drugs. The dog did not. If sniffer dogs were this fucking inaccurate then they could not be used as indication of probable cause.

The cop is a criminal and had criminal intent. Why do you coddle some criminals, strategist?

APOCALYPSEFUCK_is_ADORABLE says

When a cop says 'search' he really means, 'plant cocaine' in the car so he can arrest you, drag you to jail, have you convicted of trafficking

Unfortunately, this is actually quite often true.

Also, if a cop can search your car without due process, he can search your ass or your daughter's pussy without due process, and yes, that does happen.

Dan8267 says

Strategist says

The cops had probable cause.

Do you even know what the word probable means? It means more than half the time. Searches done under probable cause would, by mathematical definition, result in finding illegal items more than half the times. The fact that this is not the case proves mathematically that the cause is not probable.

Don't you get tired of presenting your delusions as facts?

prob·a·ble cause
nounLAWNORTH AMERICAN
reasonable grounds (for making a search, pressing a charge, etc.).

It's obvious from the story and video evidence what happened. You are simply covering up for a criminal because you believe cops are above the law. You are an authoritarian and that is why your opinions should not be respected. You'd be happiest living in Nazi Germany. America is no place for you.

Dan8267 says

It's obvious from the story and video evidence what happened. You are simply covering up for a criminal because you believe cops are above the law. You are an authoritarian and that is why your opinions should not be respected. You'd be happiest living in Nazi Germany. America is no place for you.

he he he.
I'm perfectly happy in America. We have law and order. Police, firemen, ambulances always show up to protect me.
You are the one who is not happy. I recommend you go to the Soviet Union. Oops they failed, they longer exist. I recommend Mecca.

PCGyver says

Strategist says

prob·a·ble cause

Then what was the probable cause?

They arrested the passenger riding in the car. They had probable cause.

PCGyver says

Once the officer lied about recording really nothing he says can be believed. So really can't take his word for there being probable cause.

Not necessarily. There were other cops too.
You can file a complaint about the cop, and claim he was lying, but that's about it.

PCGyver says

Another officer told me that me and my Uber passenger were free to go.

Did they arrest the passenger? I must have missed that part.

I thought they did arrest the passenger. Nevertheless, I believe they had probable cause. The benefit of the doubt always goes to the police officers.
Dan makes it sound like all cops never have probable cause, and are the true criminals is so silly, it makes me laugh.

Strategist says

We have law and order. Police, firemen, ambulances always show up to protect me.

Law and order means prosecuting criminals, especially ones that are part of law enforcement. No one is above the law. Not cop, judge, senator, or president.

Strategist says

Dan makes it sound like all cops never have probable cause

That's not what I said. If you have to resort to Straw Man argument, then you have no case.

The evidence in this case clearly demonstrates criminal intent and action on the part of the corrupt cop. Keeping him on the force endangers all cops and the public.

Dan8267 says

Strategist says

Dan makes it sound like all cops never have probable cause

That's not what I said. If you have to resort to Straw Man argument, then you have no case.

The evidence in this case clearly demonstrates criminal intent and action on the part of the corrupt cop. Keeping him on the force endangers all cops.

ha ha ha
I told you. Let me repeat:
Dan makes it sound like all cops never have probable cause

Ironman says

The whining by certain people here regarding cops is amazing... Can you imagine how they would be crying if a cop didn't show up right away if their apartment was robbed or if they were held up by gun point?

This is coming from someone who says that you need a gun because cops are worthless.

Strategist says

I told you. Let me repeat:

You can repeat a lie all you want. It just makes you look more foolish.

Give me one reason why a cop who commits a crime intentionally and without remorse should not be prosecuted like any other thug.

Dan8267 says

Give me one reason why a cop who commits a crime intentionally and without remorse should not be prosecuted like any other thug.

None. Zip Zero Zilch.
The problem is, you have no idea what a crime is. You think a cop doing his job is a crime, and a criminal committing a crime, is innocent.

Dan8267 says

This is coming from someone who says that you need a gun because cops are worthless.

That's because people like you don't allow the cops to do their fucking job. To you cops are always breaking the law, even when they do their jobs.

That video was really ugly stuff. What if the driver was not an attorney, and did not work at the courthouse? This could have gotten much uglier. Police being bullies is dangerous, demeaning, illegal, and on top of that it undermines respect for the law and faith in justice. After seeing such videos, I will never take at face value anything that an officer says in a courtroom. If criminals go free for that reason, it is the fault of the police that will not act to stop such behavior.

What on earth does "this vehicle has a lot of history" mean. Does it mean that the computer system shows that Police has entered the license plate number many times? That can and should NOT be deemed probable cause, ESPECIALLY not for an Uber car that is on the street a lot. My guess is that police officers routinely type in random license plates that they see, in order to look for matches to an outstanding warrant or the like. Such searches do not in any way constitute a probable cause for anything.

Strategist says

The cop was an asshole.

I would have stopped recording anyway. I would also let them search the car.

Why waste everyone's time?

and what would you plan be when the cop came up with a bag of pot or coke that wasn't yours because he lives in some southern shithole and doesn't like out of state assholes with a fancy car. Don't say it doesn't happen.

Although I think dan has moronic opinions about cops and believe the vast majority work hard at a very tough job, there are always going to be a percentage of incompetent or just plain psychotic who should have never been cops. Those are the ones we have to protect ourselves against. The good cops have no problem with people doing that.

bob2356 says

and what would you plan be when the cop came up with a bag of pot or coke that wasn't yours because he lives in some southern shithole and doesn't like out of state assholes with a fancy car. Don't say it doesn't happen.

Although I think dan has moronic opinions about cops and believe the vast majority work hard at a very tough job, there are always going to be a percentage of incompetent or just plain psychotic who should have never been cops. Those are the ones we have to protect ourselves against. The good cops have no problem with people doing that.

So what do you do when a cop stops you? You can't assume off the bat he is a bad cop. You can't wrestle him to the ground.

PCGyver says

You're bias for cops is quite obvious when you imagine that the passenger was arrested.

You seem biased against the cop. He gets the benefit of the doubt.

PCGyver says

If a cop can't handle his job he really shouldn't be a cop. For everybody's safety.

We all agree with that.

Strategist says

So what do you do when a cop stops you? You can't assume off the bat he is a bad cop. You can't wrestle him to the ground.

I've read that the Supreme Court has ruled that a person can resist an unlawful arrest. Even unto death if need be.

Idiots who defend criminal cops are defending criminals, not cops.

Ironman says

No, this is coming from someone who owns multiple guns because when SECONDS count, cops are only MINUTES away (and will be there in time to take the report after the fact).

The logical consequence of this statement is that cops are worthless in that scenario. This is true even if you don't have the balls to state it clearly.

Ironman says

And that would be an example of the "needle" and not the "haystack".

You miss the point entirely. The whole idea behind the bill of rights, groups like the aclu, and a shtiload of supreme court decisions is to protect the citizens from the "needles", of which there are way more than there should be. The blue wall protects far too many. The fact you call it a needle in a haystack means you are far out of touch with reality of police abuses in the swat team, civil forfeiture, guilty until proven innocent atmosphere today. Militarization of police was a terrible mistake that many forces are now recognizing and trying to change.

Tell them you don't have any because you brush regularly...

PCGyver says

. If the cop said we didn't find anything so now we want to do a full cavity search,

Strategist says

So what do you do when a cop stops you? You can't assume off the bat he is a bad cop. You can't wrestle him to the ground.

I will record it if the cop is not being professional. The stop is over the second they hand you the ticket. Rodriguez v. US c Once you have the ticket or if they aren't writing a ticket simply ask if you are free to go. If not ask if you are being detained. Ask nothing else. If they say you are being detained say nothing other than I want to speak to a lawyer. I'm not going to let them search the car without a warrant, that's for sure. You are nuts if you do.

Ironman says

Now, wait a second, can you please make up your mind, or do you have a Jekyll/Hyde situation in your head. You posted this above:

Ironman says

So, which is it?? Are there more "needles" or "haystacks"?? Please make a decision.

There are over 1 MILLION law enforcement officers in the country. How much crap do they deal with in any day? Do you think all 100% are totally pure as driven snow?

I thought it was plain english. The vast majority of cops are hard working and do a good job. That still leaves probably 10 of thousands or more assholes that shouldn't be on the job. Which is, exactly as I said, far too many. The entire point of civil rights is to protect the public from the bad apples.

My personal impression, and I worked with cops a lot 40 years ago, is police are a lot more aggressive, in your face, and quick to escalate situations than 40 years ago. Which is pretty strange because being a cop is a lot safer now than it was in the 60's and 70's. So what changed? The training and tactics became military based starting 20-25 years ago. Now instead of a couple cops walking up and knocking on the door you have a swat team knock down the door for someone kiting checks. You have a dozen cops show up guns drawn for a burglar alarm ringing. The high aggression levels are going to carry into many encounters with public leaving a bad impression even for good cops doing their job correctly as per their training. Cops need to go back to being social workers first and only being rambo in the once in a long while situation where it really needed.

bob2356 says

Cops need to go back to being social workers first and only being rambo in the once in a long while situation where it really needed.

+100, what Bob said, the entire post.

It just dawned on me one big reason why have had a 30-year trend in police militarization. It is because "equality" in the police force caused a loss of status for male police officers. The male officers sought refuge in SWAT teams and the like, over-dramatizing and over-escalating every little situation into something supposedly dangerous that required pointing guns and shouting orders and being manly.

Kind of like US foreign policy.

Ironman says

bob2356 says

Now instead of a couple cops walking up and knocking on the door you have a swat team knock down the door for someone kiting checks. You have a dozen cops show up guns drawn for a burglar alarm ringing.

Really??

Exaggerate much??

Nope, there are states that now require a swat team for all felony arrests no matter what the charge. Here is some data. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/02/17/shedding-light-on-the-use-of-swat-teams/?utm_term=.4792ad0eca98

Even Forbes writers aka the voice of conservative news thinks things have gone too far. https://www.forbes.com/sites/trevorburrus/2014/12/09/how-states-can-fix-the-police/#2984e4a5548c

Half of swat deployments were for non violent crimes in Maryland mostly serving warrants. Which used to be a couple cops walking up to the door, just. like I said. Want to try again?

justme says

It just dawned on me one big reason why have had a 30-year trend in police militarization. It is because "equality" in the police force caused a loss of status for male police officers. The male officers sought refuge in SWAT teams and the like, over-dramatizing and over-escalating every little situation into something supposedly dangerous that required pointing guns and shouting orders and being manly.

Doesn't explain Traffic Stops.

And man, that is one Intersectional Racist Sexist Orthodoxy you got there.

I could just as easily say the huge increase in Female Cops are goading the men on to impress them with their brutality. After all, the numbers of women and minorities in the Police have exploded in the past few decades.

It's the Drug War that caused this, and Clinton's Wedge Issue of Crime and Mass Incarceration. That's why the SWAT teams are loaded with dough, but police aren't dispatched to take reports of robberies and make you go to the station. Traffic Enforcement in lieu of Taxes is another element.

WaPoIsHitler Lipsovitch says

Doesn't explain Traffic Stops.

I think it does actually. Police have been militarizing traffic stops.

WaPoIsHitler Lipsovitch says

And man, that is one Intersectional Racist Sexist Orthodoxy you got there.

I'll take that as a compliment. I'm not sure it is orthodoxy, though. It's more like heresy to blame feminists for causing an increase in violence, is it not? I'm pretty much the male equivalent of a witch for saying something like that.

WaPoIsHitler Lipsovitch says

I could just as easily say the huge increase in Female Cops are goading the men on to impress them with their brutality.

That *is* what I am saying, in slightly different words. No disagreement from me.

PCGyver says

I mean come on? What did the civilian do in this video other than have the camera rolling?

I'll tell you one reason why cops don't like to be recorded. When the time comes to convict criminals in court, a recording gives an opportunity to a smart lawyer to get him off technicalities.
It ends up wasting everyones time at the tax payers expense.

Strategist says

recording gives an opportunity to a smart lawyer to get him off technicalities.

What kind of "technicalities"? That the cop invoked some non-existent law as justification for doing something that is in fact highly illegal? That a cop shot some unarmed man that was no threat whatsoever? Please do tell us about these "technicalities" that you are invoking.

Ironman says

So, according to you, check kiting and burglar alarm ringing are felony arrests??

Really??

Come on Bobby boy, you're just digging yourself a DEEPER hole with your straw man redirections

The reading comprehension thing again. Reread my post. I never said a swat team responding to a burglary or anything about arrests for a ringing burglar alarm. . That troublesome period ending the sentence then starting a new idea in a different sentence thing trips you up a lot doesn't it?

Yes check kiting is a felony depending on the amount, which varies by state. Felony check kiting was an example of a non violent crime that using a swat team for is absurd. Everyone else figured that out. Just so you don't feel left because you don't know anything about the law here are some more examples of felony (again depending on the amount of money, sorry you are unaware that the difference between felony and misdemeanour depends on the amount of money involved) non violent crimes that would require a swat team in some states: theft, embezzlement, receipt of stolen goods, and arson of personal property, fraud, tax crimes, other forms of white collar crime, etc..

Your frequently proven ignorance of the law is no excuse for embarrassing yourself. you're just digging yourself a DEEPER hole with your straw man redirections. Just quit before you go any deeper in the ground.