Page 17 of 27 FirstFirst ... 71516171819 ... LastLast
Results 161 to 170 of 261

Thread: "I'm Not Your Brother," Officer tazes Man in Front of His Children.

  1. #161
    Sage
    roguenuke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    29,030

    Re: "I'm Not Your Brother," Officer tazes Man in Front of His Children.

    Quote Originally Posted by CrabCake View Post
    I'm not sure why you think this is relevant; it's not. If I have a right to be somewhere and someone asks me and another person to leave, the person leaves and I don't, I still have the right to be there. That someone else listened to the guards is irrelevant.

    In your opinion. But your opinion is based on a partial video and a news article. The District Attorney seems to disagree with you. Despite seeing the full video, reading all the eyewitness testimony, and being familiar with the layout of the space and the presence (or lack of) signs, etc. He felt that the guy either did nothing wrong or that despite the video and eyewitnesses he could not prove the guy did anything wrong.

    In your opinion. But if he had a right to be there then he had a right to stand up for that right. You don't have to leave when asked if you are somewhere that you have a right to be. Now we know that it is alleged this was a private area (although there seems to be no evidence that it was clear to everyone this area was private), so we know he didn't have the right to be there. But that's not what matters, what matters is whether the proper signs were posted letting it be known that this is private property. If the signs weren't there, you aren't required to listen to a security guard who is claiming the bench you're sitting on is private. We don't know what signage there might have been, but we do know the District Attorney chose to drop the charges, therefore we know he felt his case was not provable.

    I agree with you on this. I don't approve of such tactics. But these tactics, pioneered by right wing libertarian groups, are legal. A bad idea? Yes. Harmful to society? Yes. But illegal? No. Worthy of being tased over? No.

    He may have been a douchebag for taking this route, but cops don't get to tase people for being douchebags. If they do, they are abusing their power.

    Luckily we have someone who weighed in on this case who has seen all the video evidence, all of the eyewitness testimonies, and (most likely) pictures of the area and all the appropriate signs. This person also happens to be a professional who works in the legal field and has a team of people who research the law for him. This person, the District Attorney, reached the conclusion that the evidence that existed (video, eyewitness testimony, photographs, etc.) wasn't enough to prove this guy did anything illegal.
    He didn't have a right to be there, it is that simple. He was told this by a security officer. Had the officer called before telling him, that would have been harassing him for nothing. But that isn't what happened. He asked him several times to move because he was not supposed to be sitting in those chairs/seats. He refused to move after being asked those several times and had the cops called on him. Likely they are trying to ensure that there aren't random people loitering in the skywalk.

    Likely, the DA felt it simply wasn't a case he would win with a jury. Just because the DA drops charges, doesn't mean the person didn't do anything wrong.

    He didn't have a right to be there though. It was not "public property". It is a private business building open to the public except it does have areas that are not open to the public. And even businesses open to the public can ask people to leave. This guy went straight to claiming racial discrimination. Why? Because that is in fact what he does, writes/sings songs about racial discrimination (imagine that). No, signs don't need to be there if someone is telling him multiple times that he can't be there, an official of the building in fact. If the security guard is wrong, that is dealt with somewhere else. You complain to management, you don't not listen to the security guard, who is a representative of the owner/manager.

    His actions are what caused him to get tasered, actions that could not be seen on the video. Actions described by the police on their reports however. Cops do get to taser people who are resisting arrest, as this guy was. That is not an abuse of power, it is controlling the situation.

    Bull. The DA did nothing but drop the charges, months after they were filed. Most likely because he felt he couldn't win the case or had a lower than he liked chance of winning, so figured the charges weren't worth pursuing. It didn't have to have anything to do with whether the DA actually believed the guy or the police was right in the matter, only what he felt he could or couldn't prove.

    And police are not held to the same level when it comes to what they need to prove to either detain or arrest someone, heck even for use of force. Just because the DA didn't feel the case could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, doesn't mean the police wouldn't be justified in their actions to detain/arrest this guy, including tasing him.
    "A woman is like a teabag, you never know how strong she is until she gets in hot water." - Eleanor Roosevelt

    Keep your religion out of other people's marriages.

  2. #162
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: "I'm Not Your Brother," Officer tazes Man in Front of His Children.

    Quote Originally Posted by ChezC3 View Post
    You watched a different video perhaps?
    That's entierly possible. I saw the video linked in the OP, which video did you see?

    A bully huh....hmmmm.... http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullying... the police "used phisical force....to dominate another". Yes the cop's actions meet the literal criteria for a bully. I guess a police officer's job does require them to be a bully to effect an arrest. Any and every time they make an arrest. Anytime they subdue even the most violent drugged up knife/gun wielding gangbangers, they are using phisical force to dominate another; they are being bullys.

    Sometimes you have to be a bad guy to do the right thing.

    A woman attacked by a rapist pulls out a gun and shoots him dead, she "used phisical force....to dominate another". She bullied the rapist out of raping her.

    I have to admit, then, that I support a color of bullying. Not all bullying is bad.

    Its not what you do, its why you it.
    Last edited by Jerry; 08-31-14 at 01:46 AM.

  3. #163
    Professor
    CrabCake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Last Seen
    12-15-17 @ 03:09 PM
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    1,920

    Re: "I'm Not Your Brother," Officer tazes Man in Front of His Children.

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    He didn't have a right to be there though. It was not "public property". It is a private business building open to the public except it does have areas that are not open to the public. And even businesses open to the public can ask people to leave. This guy went straight to claiming racial discrimination. Why? Because that is in fact what he does, writes/sings songs about racial discrimination (imagine that). No, signs don't need to be there if someone is telling him multiple times that he can't be there, an official of the building in fact. If the security guard is wrong, that is dealt with somewhere else. You complain to management, you don't not listen to the security guard, who is a representative of the owner/manager.
    Whether it is posted or not matters. If you owned any amount of property beyond a homestead, you would be well aware of this. If random strangers are hunting on your land and you didn't have any signs saying this is private property, guess what? They get to hunt there and cannot be prosecuted for trespassing. You can ask the people to leave because this is your land, but if they choose not to believe you then you will just have to call the police and wait until they get there so they can inform the people that this is, in fact, private property and they must leave. In some jurisdictions even that isn't enough and the police will tell you "I'm sorry, but there aren't any signs posted anywhere, they can legally be here." Signs matter tremendously in these situations, they are basically what matters the most.

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    His actions are what caused him to get tasered, actions that could not be seen on the video. Actions described by the police on their reports however. Cops do get to taser people who are resisting arrest, as this guy was. That is not an abuse of power, it is controlling the situation.
    He was not resisting arrest. This is another of the charges that was dropped.

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    Bull. The DA did nothing but drop the charges, months after they were filed. Most likely because he felt he couldn't win the case or had a lower than he liked chance of winning, so figured the charges weren't worth pursuing. It didn't have to have anything to do with whether the DA actually believed the guy or the police was right in the matter, only what he felt he could or couldn't prove.
    So, how is it bull? You just called what I said bull and then proceeded to describe exactly what I said as the correct interpretation. Are you simultaneously wanting to present a position and call your own position bull?

    Quote Originally Posted by roguenuke View Post
    And police are not held to the same level when it comes to what they need to prove to either detain or arrest someone, heck even for use of force. Just because the DA didn't feel the case could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, doesn't mean the police wouldn't be justified in their actions to detain/arrest this guy, including tasing him.
    I never claimed they weren't justified.

    I'm sorry, but you seem to be wanting to argue with someone who sees things in black and white and thinks there is a right and a wrong here and that clearly one side is wrong and the other is right. You should probably look to another person's posts to find such a person. Read my post again. My whole point is that there aren't clear-cut good guys and bad guys here. If you decide to pretend I am anti-cop and address me from that angle, you're doing nothing but fighting straw men.

  4. #164
    Sage
    reinoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Out West
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    16,122
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: "I'm Not Your Brother," Officer tazes Man in Front of His Children.

    Quote Originally Posted by buck View Post
    it could have been all avoided had the guy just provided his ID when asked. It seems like a reasonable request when someone is in a private area. The cops would have probably run it through and let him on his way, assuming he didn't have a warrant or something.
    The police do not have a right to demand we identify ourselves if we've done nothing wrong. Although such practices are common in Europe, this is America.
    Trump Attacked A Syrian Airfield. Trump will be a one-term president.

  5. #165
    Pragmatic Idealist
    upsideguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rocky Mtn. High
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    10,133

    Re: "I'm Not Your Brother," Officer tazes Man in Front of His Children.

    Quote Originally Posted by Henrin View Post
    Control = ownership. The whole premise of public property is actually flawed for a few different reasons. One of those reasons is that if the government controls the property they are the owner of the property and everyone else is only given permission to use their property at their behest. The fact is "public property" is something that only exists on paper, because in reality all property is private.
    I, for one, find it amusing that the same group of people that seem to hate the government arguing that it encroaches on liberty, are quick to support the cops (the enforcement arm of government) when they encroach on the liberties of individuals. They are outraged when the government taxes, but cheering it on when the government tazes...

  6. #166
    Sage
    reinoe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Out West
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    16,122
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: "I'm Not Your Brother," Officer tazes Man in Front of His Children.

    Quote Originally Posted by VanceMack View Post
    "hi...yeah...I was a little snippy with the private security cuz he was a little snippy with me. Sorry...heres my ID...Im just waiting to pick up my kids" this whoooooooooooooole thing would have been avoided.
    That's not true and you know it.
    Trump Attacked A Syrian Airfield. Trump will be a one-term president.

  7. #167
    Sage
    VanceMack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:33 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,717

    Re: "I'm Not Your Brother," Officer tazes Man in Front of His Children.

    Quote Originally Posted by reinoe View Post
    That's not true and you know it.
    Thats very true. You know how white people dont get ****ed up by cops? They treat them with respect and cooperate. You know how black people dont get ****ed up by cops? Same way.

    Conversely...you know how EVERYONE ends up in a bind with the law? You be an asshole to them and dont cooperate. Oh...and make sure you tell them all about your 'rights'.

  8. #168
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: "I'm Not Your Brother," Officer tazes Man in Front of His Children.

    Quote Originally Posted by reinoe View Post
    The police do not have a right to demand we identify ourselves if we've done nothing wrong. Although such practices are common in Europe, this is America.
    You are wrong. You DO have to identify yourself if you are being detained. You could give your ID or just state your legal name and date of birth, but yes you do have to identify yourself even if you did nothing wrong.

    Lillie was being detained, so refusing to identify himself was a crime, refusing to answer questions without spisificaly invoking his right to remain silent was a crime, walking away was a crime, resisting arrest was a crime, on top of the original trespass.
    Last edited by Jerry; 08-31-14 at 02:57 AM.

  9. #169
    Relentless Thinking Fury
    ChezC3's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    9,144

    Re: "I'm Not Your Brother," Officer tazes Man in Front of His Children.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    That's entierly possible. I saw the video linked in the OP, which video did you see?

    A bully huh....hmmmm.... Bullying - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia... the police "used phisical force....to dominate another". Yes the cop's actions meet the literal criteria for a bully. I guess a police officer's job does require them to be a bully to effect an arrest. Any and every time they make an arrest. Anytime they subdue even the most violent drugged up knife/gun wielding gangbangers, they are using phisical force to dominate another; they are being bullys.

    Sometimes you have to be a bad guy to do the right thing.

    A woman attacked by a rapist pulls out a gun and shoots him dead, she "used phisical force....to dominate another". She bullied the rapist out of raping her.

    I have to admit, then, that I support a color of bullying. Not all bullying is bad.

    Its not what you do, its why you it.

    Word garble, eh?

    Everyone knows bully's are cowards. And the kids that stand behind the coward's shoulder?????

  10. #170
    Mixed Government advocate
    Master PO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    93,000,000 miles from Earth where its very Hot
    Last Seen
    11-30-17 @ 01:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    31,331

    Re: "I'm Not Your Brother," Officer tazes Man in Front of His Children.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry View Post
    Violence does not mean intent to harm. Violence is merly the use of phisical force. The word does not regard intent, only behavior.

    Police even have to use an aproved martial art with aproved grappeling tecniqus designed to use phisical force while causeing little to no harm.



    vi·o·lent

    adjective: violent

    using or involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.

    its plain stupidity for the police to ever say they were violent, ...use......necessary force, respond with force..

    and to say "we became violent [aggression], because we believe he may run"...........running away is not an aggressive action.

Page 17 of 27 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
  •