Page 17 of 21 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 208

Thread: Los Angeles California - 5000 Angelenos For Kelly Thomas Protest

  1. #161
    Sage
    ric27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    06-15-17 @ 02:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,539

    Re: Los Angeles California - 5000 Angelenos For Kelly Thomas Protest

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    Its not about 'emotions'. The FACTS are that the cop is an embarrasing slug that engaged in a power play for 15:27, got angry, and broke the law by threatening to beat the **** out of a suspect and demonstrating the intent to do so. Your continued defense of his behavior is sad.
    Dept policy, the law, the jury.....including my behavior of my continued defense of the officers involved is sad?

  2. #162
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Los Angeles California - 5000 Angelenos For Kelly Thomas Protest

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    Its not about 'emotions'. The FACTS are that the cop is an embarrasing slug that engaged in a power play for 15:27, got angry, and broke the law by threatening to beat the **** out of a suspect and demonstrating the intent to do so. Your continued defense of his behavior is sad.
    Those are not the facts, just ridiculous emotional opining from you.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  3. #163
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    09-27-16 @ 12:59 PM
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    5,189

    Re: Los Angeles California - 5000 Angelenos For Kelly Thomas Protest

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post

    Excuse me?

    Apparently your comments more accurately reflect upon you than they do upon me.

    If you hadn't noticed I stated that if what he says is true, it is excessive force.

    The problem with it possibly being true is that his story and the circumstances cast suspicion on his claim.
    Stupid would be not recognizing that. And that is hardly uncaring.
    One difference is that I don't have a multi-paged thread in the basement in my honor.

  4. #164
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Los Angeles California - 5000 Angelenos For Kelly Thomas Protest

    Quote Originally Posted by Texmex View Post
    One difference ...
    No meaningful difference noted.
    As I stated.
    Apparently your comments more accurately reflect upon you than they do upon me.

    If you hadn't noticed I stated that if what he says is true, it is excessive force.

    The problem with it possibly being true is that his story and the circumstances cast suspicion on his claim.
    Stupid would be not recognizing that. And that is hardly uncaring.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  5. #165
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,752

    Re: Los Angeles California - 5000 Angelenos For Kelly Thomas Protest

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    Those are not the facts, just ridiculous emotional opining from you.
    Why thats just horse****, son. Just like you refuse to accept the FACTS regarding the cited Ca Penal code, you refuse to see anything beyond your blind defense of Ramos.

  6. #166
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,752

    Re: Los Angeles California - 5000 Angelenos For Kelly Thomas Protest

    Quote Originally Posted by ric27 View Post
    Dept policy, the law, the jury.....including my behavior of my continued defense of the officers involved is sad?
    Reeeeeeealllllllyyyyyyy? Please...DO cite department policy that endorses an officer breaking the law and threatening to beat the **** out of a suspect. Should be good for a laugh.

    Yes...sad. Pathetic. Absolutely.

  7. #167
    Sage
    ric27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    06-15-17 @ 02:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,539

    Re: Los Angeles California - 5000 Angelenos For Kelly Thomas Protest

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    Reeeeeeealllllllyyyyyyy? Please...DO cite department policy that endorses an officer breaking the law and threatening to beat the **** out of a suspect. Should be good for a laugh.

    Yes...sad. Pathetic. Absolutely.
    Once again, you continue to let your emotions dominate/control you and blatantly spew untruths

    PDs encourage, the use of a taser as the first choice in a verbal non-compliance confrontation, age/gender is not considered a factor as far as the training of officers

    An officer might do something that doesn't necessarily have to be done, but that doesn't mean that they are wrong or are not allowed to do it. Unfortunately, LEOs are in a damned if you do, damned if you don't job and yeah, it would nice and try to keep things all soft/friendly and talk them into getting in the back seat, but what about when *said suspect* goes ape****??

    Basically, it's do as you are told, or get tased, tased again by back up, sprayed, and then on up the ladder

  8. #168
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,752

    Re: Los Angeles California - 5000 Angelenos For Kelly Thomas Protest

    Quote Originally Posted by ric27 View Post
    Once again, you continue to let your emotions dominate/control you and blatantly spew untruths

    PDs encourage, the use of a taser as the first choice in a verbal non-compliance confrontation, age/gender is not considered a factor as far as the training of officers

    An officer might do something that doesn't necessarily have to be done, but that doesn't mean that they are wrong or are not allowed to do it. Unfortunately, LEOs are in a damned if you do, damned if you don't job and yeah, it would nice and try to keep things all soft/friendly and talk them into getting in the back seat, but what about when *said suspect* goes ape****??

    Basically, it's do as you are told, or get tased, tased again by back up, sprayed, and then on up the ladder
    Its not about 'emotions'. Its not an 'emotional' response...it is a factual response. I have personally been on thousands of crisis calls with people that were actually dangerous and represented a real threat. This guy was NOT dangerous and did NOT represent a threat. Ramos spent 15:27 engaged in a power play, then lost his temper and committed a crime. The law you keep hiding behind does NOT say "no one can threaten violent harm...well...except police officers" Your assertion is that somehow because he was a cop that exempts him from responsibility for making a verbalized threat to beat the **** out of someone. Your argument is foolish. Your defense is sad. Your continued insistence that law enforcement can and should behave in such a manner is pathetic.

    I have no doubt you will continue to blindly defend Ramos. Can you answer why he is FORMER officer Ramos?
    Last edited by VanceMack; 02-01-14 at 03:32 AM.

  9. #169
    Sage
    Excon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Last Seen
    10-14-17 @ 01:26 PM
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,997

    Re: Los Angeles California - 5000 Angelenos For Kelly Thomas Protest

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    Why thats just horse****, son. Just like you refuse to accept the FACTS regarding the cited Ca Penal code, you refuse to see anything beyond your blind defense of Ramos.
    I have no idea who you think you are trying to bamboozle, but no, it isn't horse ****. Those are not the facts, just ridiculous emotional opining from you.

    All you originally provided is what you said the law defines it as you did not provide the actual law as I did.

    I have no clue why you want to continue arguing what you were wrong about, but oh well...
    The following is you not actually providing the law. But only providing a persons interpretation of the law.
    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    California Penal Code 422 PC defines the crime of "criminal threats" (formerly known as terrorist threats).

    A "criminal threat" is when you threaten to kill or physically harm someone and

    that person is thereby placed in a state of reasonably sustained fear for his/her safety or for the safety of his/her immediate family,
    the threat is specific and unequivocal and
    you communicate the threat verbally, in writing, or via an electronically transmitted device.1

    Criminal threats can be charged whether or not you have the ability to carry out the threat...and even if you don't actually intend to execute the threat
    .
    The info you provided above, which was unsourced, can be found at the following.
    California laws on "Criminal Threats" | Penal Code 422 PC
    Which is not the actual law.
    (And yes, you did later provide the full law after you were challenged as not providing it, which in no way negates that challenge)


    Then "Dittohead not!" switched it up to "Assault", in which, unlike you I provided the actual law.
    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    And again.
    This was not an assault. ...

    240. An assault is an unlawful attempt, coupled with a present
    ability, to commit a violent injury on the person of another.

    CA Codes (pen:240-248)

    There was no unlawful attempt to commit a violent injury.

    We then got back to 422 when he quotes what you provided.

    At which time I respond with the relevant portion of the actual law.

    Quote Originally Posted by Excon View Post
    You are reaching to an extreme, and it is why you are wrong.
    He was acting in Official capacity attempting to gain compliance. Acting within his training.
    He was not threatening to commit a crime.

    422. (a) Any person who willfully threatens to commit a crime [...]


    Of which, from all of the above, nothing applies.
    As the Officers were acting within their training. You can not get around that no matter how you try.
    And even more telling in the debate, as to which side is correct, is the fact that they were not charged with any such a crime. Duh!



    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    Its not about 'emotions'. Its not an 'emotional' response...it is a factual response.
    No it wasn't. It was emotional tripe.


    As for the Officers being out of a job?
    And?
    A decision based on uninformed public outrage, of what the terminating authority believes wasn't proper conduct for their Department, in no way shape or form says it was criminal.
    They had a trial for that and were found not guilty.
    Last edited by Excon; 02-01-14 at 06:01 AM.
    “The law is reason, free from passion.”
    Aristotle
    (≚ᄌ≚)

  10. #170
    Sage
    ric27's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Last Seen
    06-15-17 @ 02:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,539

    Re: Los Angeles California - 5000 Angelenos For Kelly Thomas Protest

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    Its not about 'emotions'. Its not an 'emotional' response...it is a factual response. I have personally been on thousands of crisis calls with people that were actually dangerous and represented a real threat. This guy was NOT dangerous and did NOT represent a threat. Ramos spent 15:27 engaged in a power play, then lost his temper and committed a crime. The law you keep hiding behind does NOT say "no one can threaten violent harm...well...except police officers" Your assertion is that somehow because he was a cop that exempts him from responsibility for making a verbalized threat to beat the **** out of someone. Your argument is foolish. Your defense is sad. Your continued insistence that law enforcement can and should behave in such a manner is pathetic.

    I have no doubt you will continue to blindly defend Ramos. Can you answer why he is FORMER officer Ramos?
    Ah, you left out *sue*like in $$$$$

    Again, your emotions impede rational thought regarding, the law and yes, you will be seeing in the future....a huge settlement for, the officers for wrongful termination/serious libel and slander.

    This is just the beginning

Page 17 of 21 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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