• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Another Cop being a Hard-on and Liar

V

Voidwar

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 24, 2006
Messages
5,122
Reaction score
600
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
More video of Cops doing what they do best, bully and lie.

http://www.break.com/index/cop-lies-and-threatens-kid-for-nothing.html

I recall a thread about cops a while back, and I got censored / banned from the thread, because the cops were getting SMEARED in the argument.

In that thread, a major contention of mine was that "probable cause" is just a code word for a cop deciding to violate someone's rights. In this video, we can see the same bullshit. When a kid pulls over to park, he is instantly a "suspicious vehicle" and this cop feels he can do anything he wants to the kid. Sorry, cop dick, your "hard on" is NOT probable cause.
 
Moderator's Warning:

Moved.
This thread is NOT about the Government & Separation of Powers.
 
It most certainly is, this government official is violating this citizens 4th amendment rights.

Further, movement to this sub-forum makes the thread frivilous and not noticed.
 

What the truth is and what the facts are determined to be are often two different things.

Hopefully this guy turned in the tape to the PD and this officer was reprimanded. Clearly abusive.
 
Some cop going on a power trip. This guy needs to get fired. Hmmm, good idea though, install a video recorder in the car, makes sense.
cops have it for objective evidence so should we, as well as for those accidents where clearly it was the guy ahead at fault.
 
Voidwar said:
It most certainly is, this government official is violating this citizens 4th amendment rights.
Click to expand...
Separation of powers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Separation of powers, a term coined by French political Enlightenment thinker Baron de Montesquieu, is a model for the governance of democratic states. The model is also known as Trias Politica.
Under this model, the state is divided into branches, and each branch of the state has separate and independent powers and areas of responsibility. The normal division of branches is into the Executive, the Legislative, and the Judicial.
​
Explain away about how this relates to the separation of powers.
 
Voidwar said:
I recall a thread about cops a while back, and I got censored / banned from the thread, because the cops were getting SMEARED in the argument.
Click to expand...

I remember that thread. You got banned from it for making personal attacks. Had nothing to do with who was winning or losing the debate.

And by the way, Simon was being real nice here. Please PM disagreements with mod actions rather than posting them.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
Explain away about how this relates to the separation of powers.
Click to expand...

I believe the category was "Government & Separation of Powers."

This man, while acting as a government official, is violating this citizen's 4th amendment rights.

Further, there is an another angle here to discuss, namely that this Law Enforcement Officer is trying to be the judge, and the prosecuting attorney.

Unfortunately, this particular bully works for the executive branch, not the judiciary.
 

It's not Govt OR the Separation of Powers. It's Govt AND the Separation of Powers.

90+% of DP threads involve a govt official. They don't all belong here.

FYI, local PDs do not work for the President.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
FYI, local PDs do not work for the President.
Click to expand...

FYI, all law enforcement officials are answerable, directly, to the Governor of their state, the jurisdiction's ranking executive.

The only exception to this rule I can think of, that aren't spies or CIA spooks, are U.S. Marshalls.
 
Voidwar said:
FYI, all law enforcement officials are answerable, directly, to the Governor of their state, the jurisdiction's ranking executive.

The only exception to this rule I can think of, that aren't spies or CIA spooks, are U.S. Marshalls.
Click to expand...
That STILL doesn't make about the Separation of Powers.

Most govt officials work for one of the three kinds of branches. Not everything they do is related to the Separation of Powers.
 
Voidwar said:
Further, there is an another angle here to discuss, namely that this Law Enforcement Officer is trying to be the judge, and the prosecuting attorney.

Unfortunately, this particular bully works for the executive branch, not the judiciary.
Click to expand...

You seem to have skipped or ignored the above part . . .

And a similar thread about video of LA Cops is still in the same forum section,


so I maintain that I put my thread right where it belonged.
 
Voidwar said:
You seem to have skipped or ignored the above part . . .

And a similar thread about video of LA Cops is still in the same forum section,



so I maintain that I put my thread right where it belonged.
Click to expand...

I didn't see anything in the OP that had anything to do with separation of powers.

If you think cops should work for the judiciary branch instead of the executive, start that and I'd guess that would have a place in the separation section.
 
If that is your objection, then go back in time and make it about the other very similar threads that were posted in the same forum.

The man is a government official violating a citizen's 4th amendment rights. This alone makes it properly categorized.

To broaden the discussion further, I already mentioned that the man is trying to act as judge and prosecutor and this involves him crossing the line between allegedly "separated" powers".
 
I have friends who are new to the force, and whos parents are cops. For their sake I would like to say that we should not judge all police based on the actions of a few bad apples.

Police have to deal with some serious douchebags and actually dangerous people daily, sometimes they will confuse you with the cliche dirtbags they expected.

This doesn't justify that particular cop's behavior, but for the sake of putting things into perspective, try to realize that not all cops are the enemy, most of them believe they are serving the public, and most of them are right IMO.
 

Absolutely true. The corrolary is, just because they are police doesn't mean they are honest and trustworthy. They're just people.
 
With a video going in my car I think I definitely would have let the cop take me to jail and get his *** fired. But is this video even real?
 
"Damn, high school's over, how am I gonna get my rocks off by picking on and abusing people?"



"Ah, the police academy."
 
Voidwar said:
If that is your objection, then go back in time and make it about the other very similar threads that were posted in the same forum.
Click to expand...
The suggestion to "go back in time" is just plain silly.
Are you trying to imply that because mistakes have been made in eth past that the same mistakes should be repeated?
Voidwar said:
The man is a government official violating a citizen's 4th amendment rights. This alone makes it properly categorized.
Click to expand...
Discussions of violations of a citizen's Constitutional rights is not the same thing as discussions of the Separation of Powers. Discussions of the Separation of Powers would include items such as presidential signing statements, Congressional attempts to influence the CinC's military decisions, and judicial activism - instances where the lines between the branches and their respective powers are blurred or blurry - as well as general discussion about the theory behind and benefits/downsides of the Separation of Powers.
Rants abut hard-ons belong in a different forum.
 

Have you ever looked at the statistics of cops who are shot during these kinds of stops?

The fact is that a traffic stop is often when, where and how crimes are prevented and criminals are apprehended. These stops are the cop's version of lifting the lid on a pot on a stove to check to see how things are in the 'soup' of his jurisdiction.

He never knows exactly what he will find so he must always exercise caution and even with this knowledge drummed into him, that NO traffic stop is routine, there are times when the officer unknowingly walks into a situation where a bad guy is willing to kill him rather than be caught. And yet the cop does his or her job, day in and day out. They are only humans doing a sometimes inhumanly difficult job.

Probable cause exists because there are times when only probable cause could give the officer the ability to do the job even you want them to.

You benefit from having a strong and alert constabulary in your town, county, state and country. If they don't have probable cause to use as a tool in fighting crime you and your property and your rights would be less safe.
 
Iriemon said:
Absolutely true. The corrolary is, just because they are police doesn't mean they are honest and trustworthy. They're just people.
Click to expand...

Yes, cops are just people. People who are trained to respond differently than you and I. And they are sworn, (not just assumed) to uphold the law and who are subject to great scrutiny during the performance of their jobs and unbelievable second guessing whenever a complaint is lodged against them, whether it is a valid & legal complaint (or not) or sincere (or not).

The only people who are more angry and upset about Police misbehavior and who are more determined to eliminate it than you complainers are the Police, themselves.
 
bhkad said:
Probable cause exists because there are times when only probable cause could give the officer the ability to do the job even you want them to.
Click to expand...

Incorrect.

Probable cause is a "codeword" cops use when they want to violate a citizen's 4th Amendment.

bhkad said:
If they don't have probable cause to use as a tool in fighting crime you and your property and your rights would be less safe.
Click to expand...

Again, incorrect. Property is rarely recovered, and no replacement for the rights they VIOLATE, like my 4th Amendment rights. Cops ignoring my 4th amendment does not make my rights "safer", it takes them away.
 
Simon W. Moon said:
The suggestion to "go back in time" is just plain silly.
Are you trying to imply that because mistakes have been made in eth past that the same mistakes should be repeated?
Click to expand...

No, I submit the existance and location of that other very similar thread as proof that no mistake was made.
 
Voidwar said:
Incorrect.

Probable cause is a "codeword" cops use when they want to violate a citizen's 4th Amendment.
Click to expand...
The cop in this video did not have probable cause, someone parking into a commuter parking lot is not probable cause. But if a cop pulls you over for speeding and smells alcohol he has probable cause to give you a sobriety test and your 4th Amendment rights would not be violated.



Again, incorrect. Property is rarely recovered, and no replacement for the rights they VIOLATE, like my 4th Amendment rights. Cops ignoring my 4th amendment does not make my rights "safer", it takes them away.
Click to expand...
Probable cause is often abused, but the theory behind the law is correct. If you think the officer is wrong, get his badge number and report him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…