• 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!

Gangsters

I liked the idea in that old movie from about 25 or so years ago. I can't remember the name of it, but basically, Manhatten (?) Island was turned into one huge prison. The prisoners were allowed to form their own society, but not allowed off the island.
I think it was titled "Escape from New York".
 
Oops- I meant to say Staten, not Manhattan, but frankly, I don't remember which it was.:D
 
Last edited:
What's not true? The cops make stuff up or that you are lucky if you get a warning before they taze you? It's hard for the blind to see, but she does make a valid point.


Just more examples of people who don't know jack running their mouths based off of a few media reports of bad apples or unpopular yet justified use of force situations.
 
Maybe you shouldn't question the cop for the sake of questioning the cop, just to be a pain in the ass.

Maybe cops should understand that their power isn't infinite and being questioned is part of the game. You seem very eager to make us all just accept the edicts of government and go along with whatever the authority tells us to do. It's rather fascist.
 
Maybe cops should understand that their power isn't infinite and being questioned is part of the game. You seem very eager to make us all just accept the edicts of government and go along with whatever the authority tells us to do. It's rather fascist.

maybe when you explain why there is a 'game' as you put it when dealing with cops i'll continue to debate that issue.....
also, what is arguing with a cop going to get you? he isnt the one who writes the laws.
 
Maybe you shouldn't question the cop for the sake of questioning the cop, just to be a pain in the ass.

Cops are not above criticism and questioning, even when they are in uniform. Your authoritah does not override the civil rights of the suspect.
 
Cops are not above criticism and questioning, even when they are in uniform. Your authoritah does not override the civil rights of the suspect.

Reading comprehension 101.

Re-read where I said "for the sake of questioning the cop".

There are times to question cops legitimately, and there are times where people are acting like asshats in an attempt to stir up some ****.
 
maybe when you explain why there is a 'game' as you put it when dealing with cops i'll continue to debate that issue.....
also, what is arguing with a cop going to get you? he isnt the one who writes the laws.

It's simple. The authority, all branches of government including police officers, utilize the power and sovereignty of the people. This is the basis of their authority, the People. Thus, as with any institution which wields the power and sovereignty of the People, it must be watched, controlled, and restrained to ensure proper usage of power. The "game" is that a police officer needs reasonable cause to pull someone over and a person may always question the cop at to why they were stopped or what grounds they are to be arrested on. Exercising one's rights is never a display of asshatery or anything else you may want to classify it as. The police can ALWAYS be questioned, and the questions give no reasonable response of violence of force against the individual. It is part and parcel with wielding the power and sovereignty of the People. A police officer is never above criticism and is never above questing. They must prove their intent and evidence, and questioning either of these things is always within the rights and obligations of the People themselves.
 
It's simple. The authority, all branches of government including police officers, utilize the power and sovereignty of the people. This is the basis of their authority, the People. Thus, as with any institution which wields the power and sovereignty of the People, it must be watched, controlled, and restrained to ensure proper usage of power. The "game" is that a police officer needs reasonable cause to pull someone over and a person may always question the cop at to why they were stopped or what grounds they are to be arrested on. Exercising one's rights is never a display of asshatery or anything else you may want to classify it as. The police can ALWAYS be questioned, and the questions give no reasonable response of violence of force against the individual. It is part and parcel with wielding the power and sovereignty of the People. A police officer is never above criticism and is never above questing. They must prove their intent and evidence, and questioning either of these things is always within the rights and obligations of the People themselves.

k, got it.
I have no problem with someone asking me why they were stopped, but im not saying **** until I get my requested license and registration first. In fact, its policy to always inform a person of why they were stopped, unless they mention it first then I dont have to :}
What I do not tolerate is a citizen trying to run my traffic stop. I dont go to their restaraunt and tell them how to wait tables. I dont go into the accountants office and tell them how to crunch their numbers. And thus I expect the same level of respect when I am doing my job. Most citizens give this respect and know the proper time to ask. There are the occasional people who act out as soon as I walk up, "WHY YOU STOP ME MOTHA ****A". Dont give respect, you wont get it.
Same regards to arrests. I always inform someone of what charge they are being arrested for. If they inquire as to why they are being charged with that, I inform them. But what I dont tolerate is douchebags telling me that I am wrong and angrily trying to argue with me about something that I know will and does hold up in court. Very few people actually admit they have done wrong, and that is what is wrong with society. And the number one reason why I dont believe people at face value.

What I find amusing about your quip that created this discussion is that rare outbursts of police abuse of power, unlawful uses of force, and dishonesty are viewed as the norm by you and your ilk, when it is FAR from reality. But then again, that is what the media has created. Why report about a police officer doing his regular job correctly? Because thats stupid, there is no point to it. But net media consumers like yourself who have a limited view of the world ingest this garbage and come away thinking it is the norm and all police are power hungry turds, which isnt the case for 98% of them across the nation.
 
Just more examples of people who don't know jack running their mouths based off of a few media reports of bad apples or unpopular yet justified use of force situations.

Don't take what I said as an insult because it goes against what you where told as a kid. I am going off of what I have seen and experienced and not what was told to me by the media. Maybe it just me, but if unions are a breeding ground for corruption, then what makes you think that a union with guns would be any different? Also, how many personal principles does a cop that claims he's conservative break? To me, cops are whores that enforce liberal justice. After all, if it's not violating another individuals life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness, you will be arrested. Sounds conservative to me.





EDIT: Just saw above you were a cop.
 
Last edited:
k, got it.
I have no problem with someone asking me why they were stopped, but im not saying **** until I get my requested license and registration first.
[/quote]

I think it is fine to question before handing over anything, if fact I find it prudent. Seeing as I have a right to secure myself, my belongings, my property, and my papers against unreasonable search and seizure. I think it's only fitting that the cop give the necessary reason for collecting these things first as that would be in accordance with our rights.

What I do not tolerate is a citizen trying to run my traffic stop. I dont go to their restaraunt and tell them how to wait tables. I dont go into the accountants office and tell them how to crunch their numbers. And thus I expect the same level of respect when I am doing my job. Most citizens give this respect and know the proper time to ask. There are the occasional people who act out as soon as I walk up, "WHY YOU STOP ME MOTHA ****A". Dont give respect, you wont get it.

That's fine, you don't have to personally respect me in the least. What you have to respect is the law and the rights and liberties of the individual. Those are first and foremost.

Same regards to arrests. I always inform someone of what charge they are being arrested for. If they inquire as to why they are being charged with that, I inform them. But what I dont tolerate is douchebags telling me that I am wrong and angrily trying to argue with me about something that I know will and does hold up in court. Very few people actually admit they have done wrong, and that is what is wrong with society. And the number one reason why I dont believe people at face value.

I'll say this. From most of your posts, and from other threads in which you say what you'd think should be legal and shouldn't; I do think that you are most likely a very good cop. I don't argue that there are no good cops out there. I appreciate the job they do, but they need to appreciate the fine line they walk. The badge isn't immunity from the law or license to do anything you want. It comes with great restriction and responsibility. I do not think that it is well understood at large. I think many get in charge and are consumed with power and act accordingly. The now defunk police chief of my University taught classes as well (one of the reasons he was able to rake in so much money that he was one of the highest paid public servants in the State...Chicago cop, VERY corrupt). Part of his classes finally got out where he was teaching up and coming law enforcement students that there are times when you have to give certain people crack for information or testimonials you may not have otherwise gotten. That it's ok for the police to break the law if it's in their envisionment of the "greater good". You do seem to like to play this down. Maybe you're in the three sigma out wing of the distribution and your station is composed of only good cops; but that's not the case everywhere. And police abuse, brutality, and tyranny does exist. On a greater scale than you really want to admit.

What I find amusing about your quip that created this discussion is that rare outbursts of police abuse of power, unlawful uses of force, and dishonesty are viewed as the norm by you and your ilk, when it is FAR from reality. But then again, that is what the media has created. Why report about a police officer doing his regular job correctly? Because thats stupid, there is no point to it. But net media consumers like yourself who have a limited view of the world ingest this garbage and come away thinking it is the norm and all police are power hungry turds, which isnt the case for 98% of them across the nation.

What I find amusing is that you consider this all to be some grand conspiracy against the police. Since the advent of very portable recording devices such as cell phone cameras and such; more and more comes out depicting the abuse of power perpetrated by the police. Abusing my power and my sovereignty and acting against the rights and liberties of the individual. That's not some media conspiracy, what it does demonstrate however is that the occurrence of police misconduct is greatly under covered. That we weren't seeing the full breadth of what was actually occurring. Now we start to see even a sliver of that. It's not people coming out against the cops. This is the cops coming out against the people. Doing all they can to try their damnedest from preventing it from coming to light. That police chief of ours told his class very similar stuff. A cop always protects other cops. If they are found out, yes they look sad in front of the cameras and say they're sorry; but back in the precinct they're singing a different tune. Maybe you have the greatest police department of all time; but even if that's true it doesn't speak to the countless others and the larger amount of documentation depicting police misconduct.

In the end, you want to sit there and chastise me for my distrust of the police. But it isn't me you should be shaking your finger at. We're on the outside. Yes there are good cops, but there are a significant number of bad cops too. How do I know which one is pulling me over? I don't. I have no way of telling which one of you is good and which one of you is bad. Thus it is wisest to err on the side of caution. I will assume the cop is bad until proven otherwise. If you don't like it, you need to wag that finger of yours at your fellow cops who are doing bad and abusive things. That's the reason I can't trust the lot of you. Make a more concerted effort to crack down on wrong doings and honestly and fairly punish those who abuse the power and sovereignty of the People. Till that time, I have no choice but to mistrust you all. I may be able to personally say "That Caine, he's a great cop". But I can't say that of the whole.
 
Don't take what I said as an insult because it goes against what you where told as a kid. I am going off of what I have seen and experienced and not what was told to me by the media. Maybe it just me, but if unions are a breeding ground for corruption, then what makes you think that a union with guns would be any different? Also, how many personal principles does a cop that claims he's conservative break? To me, cops are whores that enforce liberal justice. After all, if it's not violating another individuals life, liberty, or pursuit of happiness, you will be arrested. Sounds conservative to me.





EDIT: Just saw above you were a cop.

Can I get a translator... I cant quite understand what the hell you are saying here..
 
I think it is fine to question before handing over anything, if fact I find it prudent. Seeing as I have a right to secure myself, my belongings, my property, and my papers against unreasonable search and seizure. I think it's only fitting that the cop give the necessary reason for collecting these things first as that would be in accordance with our rights.
Fair enough. The problem comes in when you tell them and they are in denial (which about 70% of the people I deal with are, 95% for officers in other areas of my city) and want to argue with you instead of give over the license and reg. Thats an unnecessary delay which could result in the individual getting arrested because they want to run their mouth and refuse to comply with lawful orders on a lawful traffic stop. Once I have a license in hand and can identify the individual, and THEN they want to argue. Thats fine, they can talk to the air while I go back and write them a ticket or do what I have to do. Which if they are acting like an ass, 100% of the time they are getting that ticket instead of a warning because I am not required to give anyone a warning. Be disrespectful, you don't deserve discretion.



That's fine, you don't have to personally respect me in the least. What you have to respect is the law and the rights and liberties of the individual. Those are first and foremost.
This is where I find your attitude to be counter productive. A mutual respect between the police and the community is the most effective way at solving community problems. I fear you lived in an area where police didn't uphold these values and now you've been tainted to be disrespectul to law enforcement for good.




The badge isn't immunity from the law or license to do anything you want. It comes with great restriction and responsibility.
I agree.

I do not think that it is well understood at large. I think many get in charge and are consumed with power and act accordingly.
I agree, only substitute "many" with "few". Of course, this is area specific. Personally I find people who have issues with the police the most are people who live in areas like the New England states, the states surrounding the great lakes, and individuals in California. What the **** is wrong in those areas is beyond me, I can only speak for myself and my people.
You do seem to like to play this down.
Not really. The whole problem with the drug trade and the enforcement of controlled substance laws is that both sides are full of corruption. I don't get involved unless it lands in my lap.

Maybe you're in the three sigma out wing of the distribution and your station is composed of only good cops; but that's not the case everywhere. And police abuse, brutality, and tyranny does exist. On a greater scale than you really want to admit.
The problem is opinion and misinformation. Opinions on a situation of "police abuse" are many times way off base. As is the information given about situations that really aren't police abuse at all. The Crowley/Henry Louis Gates situation is a good example. There are still people who go around saying he was arrested for breaking into his own house. Thats not true, and those stories cause alot of harm when they aren't even the truth. The media and other story reporters dumb down the issue to make it seem more extreme than it is. Just go on youtube and look at the titles of police abuse vidoes. Alot of them say, "Tazed for Speeding" when you watch the video, the guy is stopped for speeding, gets out, attacks the officer, and gets tazed. That is not tazed for speeding, that is tazed for attacking the police. That is my issue with """police abuse""" that is reported.


What I find amusing is that you consider this all to be some grand conspiracy against the police.
There is no other reason for the intentional misinformation that gets spread around, see above.

Maybe you have the greatest police department of all time; but even if that's true it doesn't speak to the countless others and the larger amount of documentation depicting police misconduct.
Maybe I do :)


In the end, you want to sit there and chastise me for my distrust of the police.
Its not your distrust of the police, but the manner in which you show it that causes the problem. And in this sense I dont mean YOU literally, but those like you who distrust the police. If you silently distrust the police and cooperate with them while they do their thing, there are no problems. Its when people raise a big fuss over nothing is when nothing turns into something. This is not to be confused with a "bow down to me lowly citizen" type attitude. But even if a police officer is doing something unlawful, cooperating, informing him what he is doing is wrong, and then taking it up with the courts is the best answer. The reason I say that is because people fail to realize most of the time that the officer is acting within the law, they just dont know what within the law means, because their understanding of the law doesn't go past high school civics.
But it isn't me you should be shaking your finger at. We're on the outside. Yes there are good cops, but there are a significant number of bad cops too. How do I know which one is pulling me over? I don't. I have no way of telling which one of you is good and which one of you is bad. Thus it is wisest to err on the side of caution.
As long as erring on the side of caution doesn't include getting in a verbal fist fight with someone and refusing to comply with what one THINKS is unlawful when it is in fact lawful.
I will assume the cop is bad until proven otherwise.
I find it funny people say this, and then turn around and getting angry while accusing police officers of assuming someone is a suspect/criminal until proven not. Talk about double standards.
If you don't like it, you need to wag that finger of yours at your fellow cops who are doing bad and abusive things.
Sure, I'll do it when I see it. Ive only met one officer that I had serious disagreements with when it came to what he calls "articulation" where it actually meant "lie". That officer no longer works in my division.

That's the reason I can't trust the lot of you. Make a more concerted effort to crack down on wrong doings and honestly and fairly punish those who abuse the power and sovereignty of the People. Till that time, I have no choice but to mistrust you all. I may be able to personally say "That Caine, he's a great cop". But I can't say that of the whole.
When it comes to minor things like pulling people over for bull**** reasons, I tell the person I disagree with them, and then I let our court system fix the problem. There is nothing worse than having a bad reputation in the court room as a guy who makes bogus stops on a regular basis.
 
Reading comprehension 101.

Re-read where I said "for the sake of questioning the cop".

There are times to question cops legitimately, and there are times where people are acting like asshats in an attempt to stir up some ****.

I read and comprehended what you said, your ****ty response aside.

Cops are not above being questioned for the sake of being questioned. If a cop is going to be given the power to take away a person's freedom, even temporarily, on nothing more than their judgment, then they can expect to take some criticism. So long as it's not against any law, there isn't a damned thing a cop should be able to do to curb it. A badge does not grant the right to subjugate others for the sake of your poor wittle feewings or convenience of not hearing it. Period.
 
I read and comprehended what you said, your ****ty response aside.

Cops are not above being questioned for the sake of being questioned. If a cop is going to be given the power to take away a person's freedom, even temporarily, on nothing more than their judgment, then they can expect to take some criticism. So long as it's not against any law, there isn't a damned thing a cop should be able to do to curb it. A badge does not grant the right to subjugate others for the sake of your poor wittle feewings or convenience of not hearing it. Period.


I used to be a cop. I always tried to keep things on a professional level and never make anything personal... even the times when someone forced me to knock them down and get physical. As a result, individuals that I "interacted with" on multiple occasions tended to treat me with respect for the most part.

OTOH I knew some cops, a minority but maybe not such a small minority, who were basically jerks who enjoyed being able to frack with people. They sometimes escalated situations when there was no need; said things that caused someone to go off and a fight to ensure when a few carefully considered words might have settled things down instead. I never liked those guys even when I was a cop, and they concern me even more now that I am not.

It IS a minority of LEOs, but it happens often enough to create problems yes.

Cops are people. Some are jerks, most are just human beings doing a difficult job and trying hard to do what they are REQUIRED to do and go home in one piece. If you say things to a cop that would provoke a hostile reaction in most people, don't be surprised if the cop doesn't like it and reacts badly. Being polite will usually go a long way toward avoiding trouble; most cops appreciate it when citizens they interact with are polite.

On those rare occasions you DO encounter a genuinely bad cop, your best course of action is to document everything and call a lawyer. Arguing with a LEO on the side of the road rarely causes anything good to happen.

Case in point: I got pulled by a Trooper. Per SC law, I informed him that I had a CCW and was carrying. He told me that per SC law, my gun had to be in the glovebox or trunk and not on my person when I was driving...which I knew was total BS. I tried to inform him of this but he cut me off and told me I was wrong.

I didn't argue with him. When the stop was over, I contacted various SC gun rights orgs, the State Att'y General's office, and etc. Within a week ALL SC Trooper stations recieved memos for general distribution, telling them that a CCW IS allowed to carry his gun on his person while driving.

I knew I was right, but I also knew that arguing with the Trooper on the side of the highway was NOT going to lead anywhere good.

G.
 
I read and comprehended what you said, your ****ty response aside.

Cops are not above being questioned for the sake of being questioned. If a cop is going to be given the power to take away a person's freedom, even temporarily, on nothing more than their judgment, then they can expect to take some criticism. So long as it's not against any law, there isn't a damned thing a cop should be able to do to curb it. A badge does not grant the right to subjugate others for the sake of your poor wittle feewings or convenience of not hearing it. Period.

True. But my question is this.

Why in the hell would you encourage this?
It reeks of a "Yeah, talk **** to mutha ****in' pig" just for the sake of doing so. Which is why I don't understand what the point is.

As Ive stated, if you have an issue bring it up, but don't delay me or attempt to get into an argument which will result in you going to jail because you wanted to be a complete asshat.

Using a traffic stop as an example, When requested hand over license and registration and then commence to question why you were stopped, etc. I can answer the question and move on.
Refusing to hand over the documents requested and demanding to know why you were stopped and then becoming argumentative while still not handing over these documents could land ones ass in jail for r/o/d.
I dont have to sit there and verbally argue with someone who is in denial about something. If you want to be argumentative, you can do it in a manner in which I can just shrug my shoulders and go back to my car to do what I need to do and leave.
 
I used to be a cop. I always tried to keep things on a professional level and never make anything personal... even the times when someone forced me to knock them down and get physical. As a result, individuals that I "interacted with" on multiple occasions tended to treat me with respect for the most part.

OTOH I knew some cops, a minority but maybe not such a small minority, who were basically jerks who enjoyed being able to frack with people. They sometimes escalated situations when there was no need; said things that caused someone to go off and a fight to ensure when a few carefully considered words might have settled things down instead. I never liked those guys even when I was a cop, and they concern me even more now that I am not.

It IS a minority of LEOs, but it happens often enough to create problems yes.

Cops are people. Some are jerks, most are just human beings doing a difficult job and trying hard to do what they are REQUIRED to do and go home in one piece. If you say things to a cop that would provoke a hostile reaction in most people, don't be surprised if the cop doesn't like it and reacts badly. Being polite will usually go a long way toward avoiding trouble; most cops appreciate it when citizens they interact with are polite.

On those rare occasions you DO encounter a genuinely bad cop, your best course of action is to document everything and call a lawyer. Arguing with a LEO on the side of the road rarely causes anything good to happen.

Case in point: I got pulled by a Trooper. Per SC law, I informed him that I had a CCW and was carrying. He told me that per SC law, my gun had to be in the glovebox or trunk and not on my person when I was driving...which I knew was total BS. I tried to inform him of this but he cut me off and told me I was wrong.

I didn't argue with him. When the stop was over, I contacted various SC gun rights orgs, the State Att'y General's office, and etc. Within a week ALL SC Trooper stations recieved memos for general distribution, telling them that a CCW IS allowed to carry his gun on his person while driving.

I knew I was right, but I also knew that arguing with the Trooper on the side of the highway was NOT going to lead anywhere good.

G.

Exactly, its all about using common sense.

Thus "not arguing for the sake of arguing". If you have a real issue, bring it up, discuss it. But don't argue just to argue with a cop because your a juvenile prick.

Case in point: See "Don't Taze me Bro."
 
Back
Top Bottom