• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

NY Senate Passes Bill Making annoying a Police Officer a Felony

Right Wing Wacko

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 11, 2007
Messages
645
Location
Marysville, Washington, USA
The New York State Senate today passed a bill that creates the crime of aggravated harassment of a police or peace officer. The bill (S.2402), sponsored by Senator Joe Griffo (R-C-I, Rome) would make it a felony to harass, annoy, or threaten a police officer while on duty.

“Our system of laws is established to protect the foundations of our society,” Senator Griffo said. “Police officers who risk their lives every day in our cities and on our highways deserve every possible protection, and those who treat them with disrespect, harass them and create situations that can lead to injuries deserve to pay a price for their actions.”

The bill establishes this crime as a Class E Felony, punishable by up to four years in prison. http://www.nysenate.gov/press-release/senate-passes-bill-making-harassment-police-officer-crime
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Please post the language of the proposed law. What I am seeing is just a conclusion. At least one person has posted good reason to doubt that conclusion.

I will not touch a police officer during a lawful stop. Therefore, if touching him is required to be guilty of annoying him, I will never be guilty of annoying him. At worst, this law will give a rogue officer another avenue to violate a citizen's rights (by falsely claiming unlawful annoyance despite zero touching). However, they already have and will always have other tools to try to harass folks for contempt of cop while that hides behind some law.

Carry a recorder. If they threaten you with unlawful annoyance, make sure that your statement that you are not touching him is not on the tape. If he touches you, be sure that a statement to that effect makes it onto the tape also.

Unless someone posts the actual text and I see something of concern in that text, then this earns a big meh. It is more of a waste of tax dollars than a danger to the tiny amount of Liberty the folks in NY are allowed by the State to exercise.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Yep. This is a big meh. All the stuff that this bill makes illegal is already a crime. This bill just creates a new charge.

BTW, the crime is not annoying the LEO, that is just one of the motives that will, when proven, will become an element of this new crime.

S 240.33 AGGRAVATED HARASSMENT OF A POLICE OFFICER OR PEACE OFFICER.
A PERSON IS GUILTY OF AGGRAVATED HARASSMENT OF A POLICE OFFICER OR
PEACE OFFICER WHEN, WITH THE INTENT TO HARASS, ANNOY, THREATEN OR ALARM
A PERSON WHOM HE OR SHE KNOWS OR REASONABLY SHOULD KNOW TO BE A POLICE
OFFICER OR PEACE OFFICER ENGAGED IN THE COURSE OF PERFORMING HIS OR HER
OFFICIAL DUTIES
, HE OR SHE STRIKES, SHOVES, KICKS OR OTHERWISE SUBJECTS
SUCH PERSON TO PHYSICAL CONTACT.

AGGRAVATED HARASSMENT OF A POLICE OFFICER OR PEACE OFFICER IS A CLASS
E FELONY.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
It seems that being armed for lawful self-defense, repeatedly, could be considered irritating by any give LEO.

Not under this law. Pistol-whipping him would be illegal under this law, if you were trying to annoy him.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
Not under this law. Pistol-whipping him would be illegal under this law, if you were trying to annoy him.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
Good point, but I consider pistol whipping to be beyond annoying. What has me confounded is a strategically placed 'or'.

S 240.33 AGGRAVATED HARASSMENT OF A POLICE OFFICER OR PEACE OFFICER.
A PERSON IS GUILTY OF AGGRAVATED HARASSMENT OF A POLICE OFFICER OR
PEACE OFFICER WHEN, WITH THE INTENT TO HARASS, ANNOY, THREATEN OR ALARM
A PERSON WHOM HE OR SHE KNOWS OR REASONABLY SHOULD KNOW TO BE A POLICE
OFFICER OR PEACE OFFICER ENGAGED IN THE COURSE OF PERFORMING HIS OR HER
OFFICIAL DUTIES, HE OR SHE STRIKES, SHOVES, KICKS OR OTHERWISE SUBJECTS
SUCH PERSON TO PHYSICAL CONTACT.
Not being a legal beagle it seems to me that the annoying is segregated from the pistol whipping thus making annoying a cop just as bad as pistol whipping a cop. Could be way off though. Anyway, I'll not be annoying or pistol whipping any cops anywhere especially in the state of New York.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
The "OR" that you highlighted is between "POLICE OFFICER" and "PEACE OFFICER." It has nothing to do with the actions, but is instead making the actions a crime if the target is either a police officer or a peace officer. I have no idea what the difference is between those two in NY.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
JUSTIFICATION: Police officers all across this state put their lives
on the line every day to protect the people of New York. New York
State must establish laws and toughen existing laws that protect the
police from becoming victims of criminals. Far too many law
enforcement officers are being harassed, injured, even killed while
honoring their commitment to protect and serve this state. The
Legislature has a responsibility to do everything we can to protect
our brave heroes, our police officers, from violent criminals. This
legislation contributes to that premise


"Preamble" to the text of the new law ... why would this just be limited to police .. seems like the legislature does not care about its citizens, only other gov't employees

+ I like to annoy cops sometimes, when they are annoying me.

Sounds like cops should quit and get new, safer jobs ... oh, wait...there is not another safer job.

What? You are asking me if you can go? That's annoying me!!! 2 yrs in the pen for that!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-_00q3Tr8E
Would this guy get arrested under this act? Old video of course ...
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
Again, folks, READ the law, annoying a cop is not going to be illegal. Kicking him, punching him, etc, in an attempt to annoy him will be made illegal. Hell, it already IS! And, under current law, the prosecutors don't have to prove that annoyance was the motivation!

Stupid law. Not dangerous to Liberty. Just stupid.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

joanie

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2013
Messages
306
Location
..
the proposed law also requires that physical contact be made.

So if I was to touch a cop's fist with my face, or their boots with my stomach while laying on the ground, I'd go to jail? So theres no diffrence or change at all. Same as it's always been. OCing annoys the police, me going into a store annoys police. Theres not too much that doesn't and they will touch you so they can put you in jail on a felony.

If a cop wants to lock someone up, they will come up with something or make up something, I've seen them do both first hand. In the meantime they just keep passing more and more laws to make us all criminals in hopes that so many of these bogus cases will stand up better in court. Under NDAA, they don't even have to give one due process, but they have had that even before NDAA was passed. A cop lies about one being a danger or threat, with no evedence and that person is subject to being locked up for at least a week and abused in a number of ways.
 

OC for ME

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
12,452
Location
White Oak Plantation
The "OR" that you highlighted is between "POLICE OFFICER" and "PEACE OFFICER." It has nothing to do with the actions, but is instead making the actions a crime if the target is either a police officer or a peace officer. I have no idea what the difference is between those two in NY.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
Ah!.....thanks, I see it now. The "distinction" of cop or peace officer threw me. Thanks.
 

papa bear

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2010
Messages
2,222
Location
mayberry, nc
I do believe EYE, he may be a deck but he does present good points :). i see this as a way to intimidate the public more. how many LEOs will use this as an excuse to harass citizens? especially those that don't know the difference. how many times will a LEO bump into someone to beat them down?

this law does a few things. it makes the politician look like he is doing something. it gives the LEO another weapon to use. if i am not mistaking it makes a felon out of someone that only crosses a LEO. another felon that can't own a gun
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Ah!.....thanks, I see it now. The "distinction" of cop or peace officer threw me. Thanks.

The term "police OFFICER" ... I find offense to.

One definition of OFFICER is a military officer ... and this is what cops want you to equate them with

But there is difference between a policeman and a soldier. If a soldier is order to get up that hill and he knows he faces a good chance of dying when carrying out that order..he still needs to do it or face UCMJ charges and possibly lose his freedom and be put into military jail. A policeman who in the same situation decides not to storm the hill would just be fired, in a worse case scenario...he is still a free man.


I think its a slap in the face to military officers to call policemen "police OFFICERS" ...

just my 2 cents ... its in respect to actual officers who can be ordered to really put their life on the line and who must
 

Mixael

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 26, 2012
Messages
44
Location
OKC, OK
One definition of OFFICER is a military officer ... and this is what cops want you to equate them with

And here's more definitions of officer:

of·fi·cer
[aw-fuh-ser, of-uh-]
noun
1. a person who holds a position of rank or authority in the army, navy, air force, or any similar organization, especially one who holds a commission.
2. a member of a police department or a constable.
3. a person licensed to take full or partial responsibility for the operation of a merchant ship or other large civilian ship; a master or mate.
4. a person appointed or elected to some position of responsibility or authority in the government, a corporation, a society, etc.
5. (in some honorary orders) a member of any rank except the lowest.

But, I suppose that an officer of a corporation is, in some minds ALSO a military equivalent, right?

(Oh, and this is from dictionary.com ... just so ya know :) )
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
the proposed law also requires that physical contact be made.

So if I was to touch a cop's fist with my face, or their boots with my stomach while laying on the ground, I'd go to jail?...

No, you would not. READ the bill. There is nothing new that has been made illegal by this law. There is now another charge that can be brought if YOU kick, strike, punch, etc. an officer.

I recommend that you stop seeing threats where there are none. You have damaged your reputation here a lot lately. You might want to strive to be seen as more rational than that.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
I do believe EYE, he may be a deck but he does present good points :). i see this as a way to intimidate the public more. how many LEOs will use this as an excuse to harass citizens? especially those that don't know the difference. how many times will a LEO bump into someone to beat them down?

this law does a few things. it makes the politician look like he is doing something. it gives the LEO another weapon to use. if i am not mistaking it makes a felon out of someone that only crosses a LEO. another felon that can't own a gun

Nope. You have to strike him in some fashion. And you have to do it for one of the motives listed in the law. That last part will make this nigh onto impossible to successfully prosecute folks under this law.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
The term "police OFFICER" ... I find offense to.

One definition of OFFICER is a military officer ... and this is what cops want you to equate them with

But there is difference between a policeman and a soldier. If a soldier is order to get up that hill and he knows he faces a good chance of dying when carrying out that order..he still needs to do it or face UCMJ charges and possibly lose his freedom and be put into military jail. A policeman who in the same situation decides not to storm the hill would just be fired, in a worse case scenario...he is still a free man.


I think its a slap in the face to military officers to call policemen "police OFFICERS" ...

just my 2 cents ... its in respect to actual officers who can be ordered to really put their life on the line and who must

You are flat wrong. An officer is someone who holds an office (not the room, the position). There are a lot of office-holders, aka officers, other than military officers.
 

joanie

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2013
Messages
306
Location
..
No, you would not. READ the bill. There is nothing new that has been made illegal by this law. There is now another charge that can be brought if YOU kick, strike, punch, etc. an officer.

I recommend that you stop seeing threats where there are none. You have damaged your reputation here a lot lately. You might want to strive to be seen as more rational than that.

All I care about is getting the truth out to as many as possible, I can only present truth, I can't make you believe it, if you want to believe the police's lies, then I'm a criminal anyway acording to you and by responding to what I say, you are assoeating with a criminal, that makes you a criminal by assoseation. I know I didn't spell that right but what do you expect from a criminal?
 
Top