I have no idea what that means really but I know I have never been arrested for or charged with it...
Can you guess why?
Because, as you have made abundantly clear, you blindly submit to whatever the cops ask you to do because you don’t want to get into trouble. I wonder how far you would take that. How far would the police have to go before you said “I’m not doing that”? Is there anything?
I have no idea what that means really but I know I have never been arrested for or charged with it...
Can you guess why?
Because, as you have made abundantly clear, you blindly submit to whatever the cops ask you to do because you don’t want to get into trouble. I wonder how far you would take that. How far would the police have to go before you said “I’m not doing that”? Is there anything?
Now I think you're just being silly. Have we all been "PUNK'D!" Where's the camera?
I’m starting to think that as well.
This was originally about citizens filming police officers and a few here saying they shouldn’t be doing that, but he realized there was no way he was going to win that argument so now he is trying to turn it into a philosophical discussion about laws.
He is one of those “I am right and everyone else is wrong because I say so” types. There really isn’t much more to say.
0
Quote Originally Posted by kickinA:
Now I think you're just being silly. Have we all been "PUNK'D!" Where's the camera?
I’m starting to think that as well.
This was originally about citizens filming police officers and a few here saying they shouldn’t be doing that, but he realized there was no way he was going to win that argument so now he is trying to turn it into a philosophical discussion about laws.
He is one of those “I am right and everyone else is wrong because I say so” types. There really isn’t much more to say.
So making this simple. Why can't she "enjoy the fresh air" or videotaped something outside her yard at that particular moment of her desire while on her own property? Is she an underaged and rebellous child, needing to yield to the advice of her "dad" in the form of that moronic cop?
To your second point. Of course, few judges will consider anyone brought in and charged "innocent" because they have the integrity of law enforcement to uphold. But of course, this is a given.
Let me ask you this, if the cops felt "threatened," why wasn't that message applied toward everyone on the scene, but only to the one with a camera?
0
So making this simple. Why can't she "enjoy the fresh air" or videotaped something outside her yard at that particular moment of her desire while on her own property? Is she an underaged and rebellous child, needing to yield to the advice of her "dad" in the form of that moronic cop?
To your second point. Of course, few judges will consider anyone brought in and charged "innocent" because they have the integrity of law enforcement to uphold. But of course, this is a given.
Let me ask you this, if the cops felt "threatened," why wasn't that message applied toward everyone on the scene, but only to the one with a camera?
They violated her rights afforded to her by the 1st and 4th Amendments.
The police had no expectation of privacy during a traffic stop on a public street with several bystanders watching nearby.
face palm
freedom of speech? right to peaceably assemble? right to petition the government?
Are you kidding me?
You've got a right to petition the government NOT a right to argue with police officers performing their duty. You have NO RIGHT to petition the police officers themselves while they are doing their duty.
Freedom of speech was never impeded. Stopping the video from being posted would have infringed on that right.
Right to peaceably assemble does not include me and you hanging out on the sidewalk whenever we want.
As far as the 4th... This woman was not hanging out in her yard "enjoying the fresh air" when suddenly, for no reason, she is arrested... She said something to the police before she started filming (which they didn't like), she was filming them from the sidewalk (maybe) which is public property, she refused to cooperate when asked to move back, refused to go inside when asked, and continually argued with the police through SIX warnings that she would be arrested if she did not move back onto her property.
0
Quote Originally Posted by Werker:
They violated her rights afforded to her by the 1st and 4th Amendments.
The police had no expectation of privacy during a traffic stop on a public street with several bystanders watching nearby.
face palm
freedom of speech? right to peaceably assemble? right to petition the government?
Are you kidding me?
You've got a right to petition the government NOT a right to argue with police officers performing their duty. You have NO RIGHT to petition the police officers themselves while they are doing their duty.
Freedom of speech was never impeded. Stopping the video from being posted would have infringed on that right.
Right to peaceably assemble does not include me and you hanging out on the sidewalk whenever we want.
As far as the 4th... This woman was not hanging out in her yard "enjoying the fresh air" when suddenly, for no reason, she is arrested... She said something to the police before she started filming (which they didn't like), she was filming them from the sidewalk (maybe) which is public property, she refused to cooperate when asked to move back, refused to go inside when asked, and continually argued with the police through SIX warnings that she would be arrested if she did not move back onto her property.
Of course she is going to be charged with something if they took her in. Otherwise it would be called false imprisonment.
And I haven't been arrested or charged with anything either in my 30+ yrs, so what's your point? But unlike you, I don't surrender my rights that easily.
I've never surrendered any rights.
I fail to see where I have mentioned any of my own actions/experiences...
StraightShooter should take note that the above is how you (kickinA) commit a straw man fallacy.
0
Quote Originally Posted by kickinA:
Of course she is going to be charged with something if they took her in. Otherwise it would be called false imprisonment.
And I haven't been arrested or charged with anything either in my 30+ yrs, so what's your point? But unlike you, I don't surrender my rights that easily.
I've never surrendered any rights.
I fail to see where I have mentioned any of my own actions/experiences...
StraightShooter should take note that the above is how you (kickinA) commit a straw man fallacy.
It’s pretty obvious at this point that mrglue is a cop, a wannabe cop, has a close family member that’s a cop, is a few cards shy of a full deck, is a submissive that gets off being bossed around, and/or is trolling.
In any case I think we perhaps are wasting our time trying to educate him.
0
It’s pretty obvious at this point that mrglue is a cop, a wannabe cop, has a close family member that’s a cop, is a few cards shy of a full deck, is a submissive that gets off being bossed around, and/or is trolling.
In any case I think we perhaps are wasting our time trying to educate him.
I fail to see where I have mentioned any of my own actions/experiences...
StraightShooter should take note that the above is how you (kickinA) commit a straw man fallacy.
At the rate you're going and with your line of thinking, it's only a matter of time. I feel for people like yourself actually. And this is not meant to be an insult.
0
Quote Originally Posted by MrGlue:
I've never surrendered any rights.
I fail to see where I have mentioned any of my own actions/experiences...
StraightShooter should take note that the above is how you (kickinA) commit a straw man fallacy.
At the rate you're going and with your line of thinking, it's only a matter of time. I feel for people like yourself actually. And this is not meant to be an insult.
It’s pretty obvious at this point that mrglue is a cop, a wannabe cop, has a close family member that’s a cop, is a few cards shy of a full deck, is a submissive that gets off being bossed around, and/or is trolling.
In any case I think we perhaps are wasting our time trying to educate him.
Sadly that very well just may be the case.
It's odd because as a conservative leaning military man, I work with some good military friends that work in law enforcement as well. In fact, two I regularly meet and socialize with on many occasion through the years.
My point is, still I'd never condone such action, even if they were committed by them. The Navy core values of Honor, Courage, Committment takes precedence. Real friends would be able to make the distinction and understand.
0
Quote Originally Posted by StraightShooter:
It’s pretty obvious at this point that mrglue is a cop, a wannabe cop, has a close family member that’s a cop, is a few cards shy of a full deck, is a submissive that gets off being bossed around, and/or is trolling.
In any case I think we perhaps are wasting our time trying to educate him.
Sadly that very well just may be the case.
It's odd because as a conservative leaning military man, I work with some good military friends that work in law enforcement as well. In fact, two I regularly meet and socialize with on many occasion through the years.
My point is, still I'd never condone such action, even if they were committed by them. The Navy core values of Honor, Courage, Committment takes precedence. Real friends would be able to make the distinction and understand.
Because, as you have made abundantly clear, you blindly submit to whatever the cops ask you to do because you don’t want to get into trouble. I wonder how far you would take that. How far would the police have to go before you said “I’m not doing that”? Is there anything?
I'm not sure if I ever mentioned my own behavior... even less certain that I mentioned blindly submitting to whatever cops ask... or even fear of getting in trouble...
Ironic that your line of thinking/questions is ACTUALLY the straw man fallacy that you accused me of earlier.
So, I'll leave your questions above for your straw man to answer...
0
Quote Originally Posted by StraightShooter:
Because, as you have made abundantly clear, you blindly submit to whatever the cops ask you to do because you don’t want to get into trouble. I wonder how far you would take that. How far would the police have to go before you said “I’m not doing that”? Is there anything?
I'm not sure if I ever mentioned my own behavior... even less certain that I mentioned blindly submitting to whatever cops ask... or even fear of getting in trouble...
Ironic that your line of thinking/questions is ACTUALLY the straw man fallacy that you accused me of earlier.
So, I'll leave your questions above for your straw man to answer...
I'm not sure if I ever mentioned my own behavior... even less certain that I mentioned blindly submitting to whatever cops ask... or even fear of getting in trouble...
Ironic that your line of thinking/questions is ACTUALLY the straw man fallacy that you accused me of earlier.
So, I'll leave your questions above for your straw man to answer...
That’s what I figured.
0
Quote Originally Posted by MrGlue:
I'm not sure if I ever mentioned my own behavior... even less certain that I mentioned blindly submitting to whatever cops ask... or even fear of getting in trouble...
Ironic that your line of thinking/questions is ACTUALLY the straw man fallacy that you accused me of earlier.
So, I'll leave your questions above for your straw man to answer...
It’s pretty obvious at this point that mrglue is a cop, a wannabe cop, has a close family member that’s a cop, is a few cards shy of a full deck, is a submissive that gets off being bossed around, and/or is trolling.
In any case I think we perhaps are wasting our time trying to educate him.
I'm not a cop, I've never applied to any law enforcement agency for employment (any position), and have no family in law enforcement, I'm not submissive (by nature or in thought) at all, and I've never really understood what trolling meant....
I do not however, think like most people seem to... So, from that perspective, I might be a few cards shy.
You were wrong on all accounts about me except one.
I guess one out of six isn't that bad...
0
Quote Originally Posted by StraightShooter:
It’s pretty obvious at this point that mrglue is a cop, a wannabe cop, has a close family member that’s a cop, is a few cards shy of a full deck, is a submissive that gets off being bossed around, and/or is trolling.
In any case I think we perhaps are wasting our time trying to educate him.
I'm not a cop, I've never applied to any law enforcement agency for employment (any position), and have no family in law enforcement, I'm not submissive (by nature or in thought) at all, and I've never really understood what trolling meant....
I do not however, think like most people seem to... So, from that perspective, I might be a few cards shy.
You were wrong on all accounts about me except one.
I'm not a cop, I've never applied to any law enforcement agency for employment (any position), and have no family in law enforcement, I'm not submissive (by nature or in thought) at all, and I've never really understood what trolling meant....
I do not however, think like most people seem to... So, from that perspective, I might be a few cards shy.
You were wrong on all accounts about me except one.
I guess one out of six isn't that bad...
If what you said before that is true, then it’s pretty much what you are doing right now.
0
Quote Originally Posted by MrGlue:
I'm not a cop, I've never applied to any law enforcement agency for employment (any position), and have no family in law enforcement, I'm not submissive (by nature or in thought) at all, and I've never really understood what trolling meant....
I do not however, think like most people seem to... So, from that perspective, I might be a few cards shy.
You were wrong on all accounts about me except one.
I guess one out of six isn't that bad...
If what you said before that is true, then it’s pretty much what you are doing right now.
I don't know what that charge means exactly because I've never been accused of it, arrested for it, or charged with it. But I do know she probably could have avoided it by moving back or going into her house when asked.
That's probably because when cops are making an arrest I move away from the scene,
0
Quote Originally Posted by THEMUGG:
Hmmmm.....because you've never done it? The chick in the vid didn't do it either so what's your point?
I don't know what that charge means exactly because I've never been accused of it, arrested for it, or charged with it. But I do know she probably could have avoided it by moving back or going into her house when asked.
That's probably because when cops are making an arrest I move away from the scene,
If what you said before that is true, then it’s pretty much what you are doing right now.
You're saying (multiple) things about me which are not true, with very little rational basis for your claims.
Is refuting those claims (with the truth) trolling?
Also note, that I haven't accused you of anything (except a poor attempt at a straw man and speaking in non sequitur) and that all of my attacks have been on your logic as presented here and not your person.
Is that trolling?
0
Quote Originally Posted by StraightShooter:
If what you said before that is true, then it’s pretty much what you are doing right now.
You're saying (multiple) things about me which are not true, with very little rational basis for your claims.
Is refuting those claims (with the truth) trolling?
Also note, that I haven't accused you of anything (except a poor attempt at a straw man and speaking in non sequitur) and that all of my attacks have been on your logic as presented here and not your person.
Yes, pretty much everyone here is wrong and you are right because you say so. Well golly gee, case closed then.
This discussion was about citizens filming cops, but you realized that was a losing battle on your part so you keep trying to shift the discussion away from that.
If you honestly thought saying “these people must jerk off to Orwell’s 1984 on a daily basis” meant “the laws in the country are like the rules in Orwell’s 1984” then you are one of the dumbest people here.
Keep shying away from your original argument and attacking strawmen. That seems to be all you can do.
I'm not saying that ANYONE is right or wrong... I'm saying that conversations about the LAW can get very long and complicated (read boring waste of time) when the parties involved start bringing philosophical MORALITY (read RIGHT & WRONG) into the discussion. Apples and Oranges.
I wasn't implying case closed at all... just maybe a case not worth getting involved with.
For me the title (OP) was misleading because she wasn't arrested for filming a traffic stop... She was arrested for not following police instructions and charged with obstructing governmental administration. There's nothing about "filming" in there... The cop never asks her to stop filming (at one point, I think he says, "You can keep filming from inside")... It doesn't seem like he had a problem with "filming".
I'm curious as to what you think my initial argument was and what you think I'm trying to shift it to? And I'm certainly not going to LOSE an argument with you because OUR conversation has degenerated (from your side) into you making FALSE statements about my intentions and character. You make it too easy for me to "win" when all I have to do is state the truth about myself.
0
Quote Originally Posted by StraightShooter:
Yes, pretty much everyone here is wrong and you are right because you say so. Well golly gee, case closed then.
This discussion was about citizens filming cops, but you realized that was a losing battle on your part so you keep trying to shift the discussion away from that.
If you honestly thought saying “these people must jerk off to Orwell’s 1984 on a daily basis” meant “the laws in the country are like the rules in Orwell’s 1984” then you are one of the dumbest people here.
Keep shying away from your original argument and attacking strawmen. That seems to be all you can do.
I'm not saying that ANYONE is right or wrong... I'm saying that conversations about the LAW can get very long and complicated (read boring waste of time) when the parties involved start bringing philosophical MORALITY (read RIGHT & WRONG) into the discussion. Apples and Oranges.
I wasn't implying case closed at all... just maybe a case not worth getting involved with.
For me the title (OP) was misleading because she wasn't arrested for filming a traffic stop... She was arrested for not following police instructions and charged with obstructing governmental administration. There's nothing about "filming" in there... The cop never asks her to stop filming (at one point, I think he says, "You can keep filming from inside")... It doesn't seem like he had a problem with "filming".
I'm curious as to what you think my initial argument was and what you think I'm trying to shift it to? And I'm certainly not going to LOSE an argument with you because OUR conversation has degenerated (from your side) into you making FALSE statements about my intentions and character. You make it too easy for me to "win" when all I have to do is state the truth about myself.
I don't know what that charge means exactly because I've never been accused of it, arrested for it, or charged with it. But I do know she probably could have avoided it by moving back or going into her house when asked.
That's probably because when cops are making an arrest I move away from the scene,
If you don't know what it is then how can you say she "committed" it? She may have been charged with it but the evidence is overwhelming that she didn't commit it (I'm betting the cops had to dig deep to trump that charge up)...........I sure as hell didn't see her obstruct anyone from doing anything .............of course the evidence will probably be inadmissible for whatever reason (we all know why).
I don't know what that charge means exactly because I've never been accused of it, arrested for it, or charged with it. But I do know she probably could have avoided it by moving back or going into her house when asked.
That's probably because when cops are making an arrest I move away from the scene,
If you don't know what it is then how can you say she "committed" it? She may have been charged with it but the evidence is overwhelming that she didn't commit it (I'm betting the cops had to dig deep to trump that charge up)...........I sure as hell didn't see her obstruct anyone from doing anything .............of course the evidence will probably be inadmissible for whatever reason (we all know why).
If you don't know what it is then how can you say she "committed" it? She may have been charged with it but the evidence is overwhelming that she didn't commit it (I'm betting the cops had to dig deep to trump that charge up)...........I sure as hell didn't see her obstruct anyone from doing anything .............of course the evidence will probably be inadmissible for whatever reason (we all know why).
You're right... I can't say whether she committed it or not. Good point.
I'll try and spin back the clock to my original post:
"I'm no lawyer but I do know that (in many areas) the sidewalk is public
property whether it's on your property or not... This woman chose to get
involved with a police traffic stop and then repeatedly chose to be
uncooperative with police requests/instructions... she was argumentative
and created a new situation/disturbance in doing so... a whole host of
charges could apply."
Her arrest could have been avoided by simply moving away from the original arrest.
0
Quote Originally Posted by THEMUGG:
If you don't know what it is then how can you say she "committed" it? She may have been charged with it but the evidence is overwhelming that she didn't commit it (I'm betting the cops had to dig deep to trump that charge up)...........I sure as hell didn't see her obstruct anyone from doing anything .............of course the evidence will probably be inadmissible for whatever reason (we all know why).
You're right... I can't say whether she committed it or not. Good point.
I'll try and spin back the clock to my original post:
"I'm no lawyer but I do know that (in many areas) the sidewalk is public
property whether it's on your property or not... This woman chose to get
involved with a police traffic stop and then repeatedly chose to be
uncooperative with police requests/instructions... she was argumentative
and created a new situation/disturbance in doing so... a whole host of
charges could apply."
Her arrest could have been avoided by simply moving away from the original arrest.
You're saying (multiple) things about me which are not true, with very little rational basis for your claims.
Is refuting those claims (with the truth) trolling?
Also note, that I haven't accused you of anything (except a poor attempt at a straw man and speaking in non sequitur) and that all of my attacks have been on your logic as presented here and not your person.
Is that trolling?
I’m only going by what I see. It doesn’t take a genius to connect the dots.
Also you are the master of the straw man:
“These people must jerk off to Orwell’s 1984 on a daily basis” = “the laws in this country are like the rules in Orwell’s 1984.”
0
Quote Originally Posted by MrGlue:
You're saying (multiple) things about me which are not true, with very little rational basis for your claims.
Is refuting those claims (with the truth) trolling?
Also note, that I haven't accused you of anything (except a poor attempt at a straw man and speaking in non sequitur) and that all of my attacks have been on your logic as presented here and not your person.
Is that trolling?
I’m only going by what I see. It doesn’t take a genius to connect the dots.
Also you are the master of the straw man:
“These people must jerk off to Orwell’s 1984 on a daily basis” = “the laws in this country are like the rules in Orwell’s 1984.”
What kind of a threat exactly is she posing to them? She's going to sneak up from behind and bash all of them with her camera WWE style?
They've got the guns and outnumbered her. And she's on her own yard- private property. So what exactly did she do that warranted such? Refusing to obey an unlawful order is not a crime.
What if she had a Glock tucked in her waist band behind he back? Or maybe a Tek-9? Who knows...She was a little too close for comfort and that's why the cop reacted the way he did. She could have easily gone into her house and recorded this event. She could have also gone into her house, grabbed a gun, and started to shoot at the cops too (hypothetical situation).
The other issue is the cops are responsible for her well being. I didn't watch the whole video but I think I saw enough....what if the guy they were questioning was a murderer and somehow got hold of a gun and the female got shot? I know its a little far fetched but stranger things have happened.
0
Quote Originally Posted by kickinA:
What kind of a threat exactly is she posing to them? She's going to sneak up from behind and bash all of them with her camera WWE style?
They've got the guns and outnumbered her. And she's on her own yard- private property. So what exactly did she do that warranted such? Refusing to obey an unlawful order is not a crime.
What if she had a Glock tucked in her waist band behind he back? Or maybe a Tek-9? Who knows...She was a little too close for comfort and that's why the cop reacted the way he did. She could have easily gone into her house and recorded this event. She could have also gone into her house, grabbed a gun, and started to shoot at the cops too (hypothetical situation).
The other issue is the cops are responsible for her well being. I didn't watch the whole video but I think I saw enough....what if the guy they were questioning was a murderer and somehow got hold of a gun and the female got shot? I know its a little far fetched but stranger things have happened.
When I am confronted by a police officer I usually try not to argue or debate with them, even if it is on my own property. Sometimes common sense overides ones rights. Unless you have a premeditated agenda.
0
When I am confronted by a police officer I usually try not to argue or debate with them, even if it is on my own property. Sometimes common sense overides ones rights. Unless you have a premeditated agenda.
I don't know what that charge means exactly because I've never been accused of it, arrested for it, or charged with it. But I do know she probably could have avoided it by moving back or going into her house when asked.
That's probably because when cops are making an arrest I move away from the scene,
You're on crack if you think she commited a crime. Any good lawyer will destroy this cop in court.
I don't know what that charge means exactly because I've never been accused of it, arrested for it, or charged with it. But I do know she probably could have avoided it by moving back or going into her house when asked.
That's probably because when cops are making an arrest I move away from the scene,
You're on crack if you think she commited a crime. Any good lawyer will destroy this cop in court.
If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on
this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide
any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in
your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner
of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.
Hot Forum Topics
