Rustlestiltskin Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 (From another forum that turned into a 12pg thread on who was right and wrong.) 2 Quotes that I liked from the thread at the other forum: "ur rights are on a "Use them or lose them" basis in my opinion. After the door was open, he told the guy to turn off the camera (cop doesn't have any say in this), then TECHNICALLY, he illegally grabs for the camera. In addition, when the guy wants the police to provide proper identification, the officer says "You wanna play games?" Insinuating that freely expressing our rights is "a game". Then threatens "I'm gonna drag you out". The cop was a douchebag. I don't give a shit if the guy with the camera was a dickhead, I would be one too if they came knocking on my door at night and tried a borderline aggressive approach to gaining access to my house." And ""you wanna play games" "I'm gonna drag you outside" "don't point that in my face" followed by slapping the camera away Hey dipshits, cops like these are NOT trying to help you. They're using intimidation and fear tactics to get a citizen to forfeit his rights. Some of you guys are so fucking stupid it's like you can't see anything even when its laid out in front of you. A citizen who is well within his rights refuses to let cops inside his home so they can search it. These are fundamental rights granted to Americans that are meant to protect innocent citizens. He asserted his rights. Deal with it.gif" Would you let the cops in? cliffs: -cops looking for a fugitive in apartment complex. -knock on some guys door so they can search his apartment -He says no, and argument ensues. I side with the apt. owner. This "above the law" shit is getting out of hand. I'm all for helping out the authorities but actions like this is the reason why they are getting a bad name and that i've lost respect for them. mobile link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CZh9xumD1cQ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackson1647545504 Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 http://media.giphy.com/media/10spcFioEOY7zG/giphy.gif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geeto67 Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 this is one of my favorite websites, but admittedly it is a little biased: http://photographyisnotacrime.com/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKilbourne Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 "We don't know what he looks like".....umm, then how would you know if you found him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HotCarl Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 "We don't know what he looks like".....umm, then how would you know if you found him? Exactly. "If you're looking for a fugitive i can confidently say he's not in my home and unless you have a warrant you're not allowed to enter my home." That's all that needed to be said. Yeah the citizen was being a prick and yeah he sounded like a fucking idiot but there's no need to argue and escalate tensions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
87GT Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 His first problem was opening the door. You don't have to open your door for anyone especially at night time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RyM3rC Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 That domestic terrorist is lucky that policeman didn't call in for his MRAP or helo support! Wait, was that a scream or gunshot from a movie/video game? EXIGENT CIRCUMSTANCES! Breaching... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedRocket1647545505 Posted September 11, 2014 Report Share Posted September 11, 2014 Didn't El Karacho post something a few years ago that states that if a LEO finds evidence via illegal search and seizure, that its still admissible as evidence. That shit still worries me. And call me crazy, but I still feel like LEOs should be better educated. I have to hold at least an associates degree (bachelors in some states and probably soon to be all) to do my job, but these guys get by with a simple high school education? And we trust them all with our lives..................and firearms. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImUrOBGYN Posted September 12, 2014 Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 I love how the LEO still felt he had to have control of the situation so much so that he still had to have the last fucking word. "Close the door." Man, fuck you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xTHExBOSSx46 Posted September 12, 2014 Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 I love how the LEO still felt he had to have control of the situation so much so that he still had to have the last fucking word. "Close the door." Man, fuck you. Ha I noticed that. Completely unnecessary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RC K9 Posted September 12, 2014 Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 Those guys can EAD. No warrant? Bye. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted September 12, 2014 Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 duplicate. damn internet issues today pissing me off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTQ B4U Posted September 12, 2014 Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 Would you let the cops in? You might not have a choice. cliffs: -cops looking for a fugitive in apartment complex. -knock on some guys door so they can search his apartment -He says no, and argument ensues. I side with the apt. owner. This "above the law" shit is getting out of hand. I'm all for helping out the authorities but actions like this is the reason why they are getting a bad name and that i've lost respect for them. Would be interesting to see the follow up on this. In the end, the cops seemed to have backed off perhaps because they weren't sure the bad guy was in there. However, in many cases, where their pursuing a guy like this if they indeed were actually chasing him at that moment, exigent circumstances would allow them to search that guys apartment. They don't always need a warrant. My guess is if they really did suspect he was in there, they would have simply surrounded the house/exit points and gotten a warrant. Those two cops probably weren't sure thus backed off. That or again, they had the exits covered and then came back. The guy in the apartment did good, but it could have ended differently. "If you're looking for a fugitive i can confidently say he's not in my home and unless you have a warrant you're not allowed to enter my home." That's all that needed to be said. Again, not true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
87GT Posted September 12, 2014 Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 Didn't El Karacho post something a few years ago that states that if a LEO finds evidence via illegal search and seizure, that its still admissible as evidence. That shit still worries me. And call me crazy, but I still feel like LEOs should be better educated. I have to hold at least an associates degree (bachelors in some states and probably soon to be all) to do my job, but these guys get by with a simple high school education? And we trust them all with our lives..................and firearms. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. http://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/story?id=95836 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LPFSTheFett Posted September 12, 2014 Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 And call me crazy, but I still feel like LEOs should be better educated. I have to hold at least an associates degree (bachelors in some states and probably soon to be all) to do my job, but these guys get by with a simple high school education? And we trust them all with our lives..................and firearms. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. In a perfect world it would be nice, but in the real world impossible. It's already hard enough for communities to keep up with the cost of their police departments. Forcing police officers to get a degree would not only increase the cost associated with every police officer hired, but their salaries would need to reflect the increased skill level involved. Add to that many would feel getting the position too difficult and drop out of the program making hiring police officers even more difficult. As cars as this confrontation, the gentleman opening the door had every right to act like that. The police were bothering him by knocking on the door and need to respect the person at the residence. Catch more flies with honey. The black community already distrusts law enforcement and these cops didn't make it better by threatening to drag him out of the house. The fact the officer was black is irrelevant as many in his community would consider him a sell out. Thats my take. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ben Posted September 12, 2014 Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 Can't say I agree with the title of this thread. I don't recall ever reading a Supreme Court case saying that a uniformed police officer has to provide three forms of ID. In addition, I would never advise anyone to behave in the bellicose way this fellow did. A polite refusal to let the police enter and a polite refusal to stop filming would have gone over better. You should never surrender your rights. But there's a difference between insisting that the law be respected and effectively telling the police to go to hell. Vindication in a later court proceeding, after all, is cold comfort if your poor attitude provokes an aggressive response from the police. That said, these officers were bang out of line telling this guy they were going to drag him out of his house and, while I can certainly understand why officers don't like to be filmed, they should not have been telling him to turn his camera off either. As one prior commentator noted, if the police had truly thought a fugitive had taken refuge in this fellow's home, they may not have needed a warrant. Typically warrants are required for searches of a residence. Even if they had a warrant to arrest the fugitive, this alone would not suffice to excuse entry into a third-party's house in order to do so. However, if the fugitive was thought to be putting people within the residence in imminent danger or if the fugitive was a felon and the police could be said to be in "hot pursuit" a warrant would not have been necessary and the police could simply have pushed the homeowner aside and entered. Probably the best course here would have been for the homeowner to politely tell the officers that he was not hiding anyone, that they did not have his permission to enter his house, and that, whatever they decided to do, he intended to film it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unfunnyryan Posted September 12, 2014 Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 Can't say I agree with the title of this thread. I don't recall ever reading a Supreme Court case saying that a uniformed police officer has to provide three forms of ID. There is none. That's just bullshit, but you know what? Cops are allowed to bullshit you too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kirks5oh Posted September 12, 2014 Report Share Posted September 12, 2014 That guy is my hero Not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.