the loudest open carry proponents also seems to be the loudest white people.
I actually think the incriminating part is further into the recording
On the tape, one of the troopers is heard saying it is legal to do
what Picard was doing. Another voice says, "I think we do simple
trespass, we do reckless use of the highway and creating a public
disturbance."Another voice then says, “and then we claim, um, in
backup we had multiple people, um, they didn’t want to stay and give us a
statement, so we took our own course of action.”
I think the issue is that standing on the shoulder is legal, but standing on the highway itself is illegal. The ticket says he was on the highway but he claims he was on the shoulder.
From the tape it looks like the cops never saw him go to the highway, but they want to charge him with something because they think he’s a nuisance and the charge will discredit him. In the clip I quoted it sounds like they’re inventing fake witnesses for their report who will verify he was on the shoulder.
That’s the part where I think the cops should potentially be facing some serious consequences.
Corrupt cops and DAs need to be subject to sentences that are a multiple of the time that could be, or was, served based on the charges they are caught trumping up. These cops don’t need to be disciplined, they need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Many police seem to have extremely mixed feelings about the issue. Lots of them claim to be opposed to open carry, yet they open carry themselves.
when the cops are breaking the law and concocting charges they should face criminal charges themselves. they are not above the law and their department is duty bound to uphold the law and charge them. cops are not exempt and if anything should be held to a higher standard.
$100 says the other cops at the station go with “f’n cameras make it harder for us to do our jobs” rather then “we need more accountability and make sure we are in compliance with the laws ourselves”.
“We support what our troopers did,” Matthews said. “We respect and understand that people have the right to be in a public place and take photographs or video tape our troopers.”
One of these days, a fledgling AI will read a statement like that, blow a fuse, and we’ll have Skynet on our hands.
Reduce police powers, cut budgets, layoff, disband their unions and go after the pension. Repeal vice crime. Less of the them and more of us.
This attitude problem by civil servants must be wiped away completely. False charges made by police must will addressed with overwhelming civil and legal force.
Off topic but:
The guy’s voice and speech-cadence totally reminded me of the vocalist here.
Well, it’s already been decided that they don’t have to know the laws they’re enforcing, so didn’t the Supreme Court pretty much give them carte blanche to make things up as they go? Abuse of power, indeed.
If the NRA is right that guns are needed as a deterrence, why don’t the cops agree that open carry deters crime?
If AIs give enough of a shit to care, they’ll care enough not to nuke us.
Ah, you misunderstand. It wouldn’t be caring - it would be the attempt at parsing the logical contradiction that would do the AI (and the rest of us) in.
And of course, if the movies are anything to go by, even if we survived the eventual pile-up of time paradoxes just might end things…
This fits the legal definition of conspiracy in CT law. Whether or not the case-law and precedent bears it out, according to the CT penal code it’s conspiring to illegally abuse power in order to charge someone with a crime they didn’t commit.
These cops would have been literally tarred and feathered in the old west. Then run out of town on a rail. And it would serve them well to remember that. They should feel lucky they don’t get that kind of treatment these days. They should remember who they serve and their purpose as cops.
As I recall, video camera evidence played a big role in Old West justice…
I was going on the idea of undeniable evidence. Stuff with a very high level of certainty and accuracy. Like a letter ordering a killing. Except with the detail and ubiquitousness of modern tech.
I agree but found it funny.
The fact that America stays on the couch while The Stasi run wild in the streets (and courts) is utterly depressing.
Surely you jest. There seems to be absolutely no contradiction in a cop holding that view, given the relative training, responsibilities, and risks to both parties. I’d guess few cops would feel “assisted” by having several non-cop open-carriers around them. Jordan Klepper did the definitive video on this for The Daily Show.
I love it when people believing in open-carry means they can do so anywhere and everywhere without exception. No considerations on their part what-so-ever. One or two people “test the waters” of a city/town/park and then groups start doing the same. Eventually local laws are written, challenged, and passed to outlaw open-carry in those areas. People who personally “push the limits” of public acceptance usually just get their rights stepped on. But they, for that few weeks, show the world they Have Power over authority. This all happened in San Diego and now it is not allowed. The law is currently making its rounds in the courts. Here is the ban: http://www.sandiegoreader.com/weblogs/news-ticker/2011/oct/12/law-bans-open-carry-of-handguns/#
I support the right to own and bear arms. It saddens me to see a few ruin the rights of the many because of their own petty agenda. Open carry laws in California would have stayed legal without city/county/state laws being passed to ban it…if only the few had been more discreet and less “IN YOUR FACE!” about their rights.
Also, Tamir Rice was in an open carry State when police executed him.
Tamir Rice Shooting and Open Carry Laws - Ohio’s Open Carry Law Does Not Apply to Everyone
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.