• 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.

"Fine" for no blinker $6000 ! Cops and doggy caused previous anal probing

Jeff. State

Banned
Joined
Aug 29, 2012
Messages
650
Location
usa
Before this gets locked, I would like to ask Grapeshot why he is running protection for BAD cops?????


skidmark might say "good probe!" on this case, instead of "good shoot" on shooting a 13 y/o with a toy.
 

onus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
699
Location
idaho
Before this gets locked, I would like to ask Grapeshot why he is running protection for BAD cops?????


skidmark might say "good probe!" on this case, instead of "good shoot" on shooting a 13 y/o with a toy.

I have been banned from at least 30 forums due to "cop bashing".

I always ask then the same question you ask "why do you support and protect bad cops and why do you censor evidence and proof of bad cops"

Of course I never get an answer because I get banned and my threads get deleted.

America has a strong cop worship sentiment. However, things are changing because the truth cant be covered up anymore.
 

PistolPackingMomma

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
1,884
Location
SC
Perhaps John, Mike and Grapeshot need to amend the social lounge rules.

"No posting in the social lounge is permitted unless it is on topic with OC/RKBA."
"Members are forbidden from posting anything about cops unless it portrays them in nothing less than a positive light."
 
Last edited:

John Pierce

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 5, 2006
Messages
1,777
We do NOT want to protect bad officers nor have we banned you Onus.

We try to keep the focus of the forum on OC / RKBA issues.

However, our rules against LEO bashing do not extend to cases where there is a specific incident of bad conduct and the discussion is limited to those officers and that specific bad conduct.

Here, we have a news story that is very disturbing and people are welcome to discuss the legal issues involved.

However ... if it devolves into people making generalized statements about all cops being bad then it crosses the line.

Make sense?


John
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
...nor have we banned you Onus...

John

Actually, I think you did. If I am not mistaken (and I doubt that I am), this poster, onus, is CaPatriot, whom you banned.

Not saying that you (or the 35 other boards) did anything wrong by doing so. Could it be that 36 boards are being unreasonable and onus isn't? Or is it more likely that onus is being unreasonable and 36 boards are not?
 

skidmark

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
10,444
Location
Valhalla
Billing the guy for involuntary activities is so wrong on so many moral, ethical, and legal grounds that I am having great difficulty understanding why the bill was sent.

I'm going to guess that the hospital's and the doctors' billing services just cranked the bill out without bothering to determine who the fiscally responsible party was. And if they made the guy sign a fiscal responsibility agreement while he was under arrest they are about to find out that he was legally incompetent to make such an agreement.

I do have to say that when these guys decided to, pardon the expression, screw up, they went all they way.

And no, Jeff.state, this was not a "good probe". Sorry that you did not understand why I made the call I did on the other situation - maybe some day you can spend some time figuring out why, even if you still disagree with me.

stay safe.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
We do NOT want to protect bad officers nor have we banned you Onus.

We try to keep the focus of the forum on OC / RKBA issues.

However, our rules against LEO bashing do not extend to cases where there is a specific incident of bad conduct and the discussion is limited to those officers and that specific bad conduct.

Here, we have a news story that is very disturbing and people are welcome to discuss the legal issues involved.

However ... if it devolves into people making generalized statements about all cops being bad then it crosses the line.

Make sense?


John

That's exactly how I saw the rules being applied in the past. Thanks for the post. General cop bashing is a no no ...

Being charged 6K for a blinker .... maybe the guy's wife was in the car "best turn on your blinker Henry" Henry: "don't tell me how to drive" ...
 
Last edited:

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
Ok, so without being there, I can wager a guess how this went down.

I'm wiling to bet a pretty decent amount of money that this was a precurser stop. Meaning, they probably already had surveilance on this guy and they waited till he did any traffic violation and executed the search.

It says "unclear why they think he possessed drugs". They most likely already had this guy as a dealer/user. I know the headlines sound crazy "blinker leads to cavity search", but I bet they aren't telling the whole story. This is a routine thing (not the cavity search). You build intel on the guy, then you wait for him to conduct a traffic infraction and then you stop them. This is all to set up a clear chain of seizure/stop. It's so that if they did find alot of drugs, it won't get thrown out based on unreasonable stop. This is actually a good thing, because it adds an extra layer of legal protection for us.
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
Protection from what? Prostrate cancer?

Was waiting for it.... if they just stopped him and searched him you'd scream civil rights violation and SUE. The .gov takes the extra step to get a LEGAL stop, and your still not happy.

Again, I wasn't there so I can't attest to what they did.
 

onus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
699
Location
idaho
Actually, I think you did. If I am not mistaken (and I doubt that I am), this poster, onus, is CaPatriot, whom you banned.

I have never been banned from this forum. Stop being so obsessed with my life.
 

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
Was waiting for it.... if they just stopped him and searched him you'd scream civil rights violation and SUE. The .gov takes the extra step to get a LEGAL stop, and your still not happy.

Again, I wasn't there so I can't attest to what they did.

Well, I don't know from personal experience that the surface of the sun in hot....but betcha a buck it is.
 

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
Well, I don't know from personal experience that the surface of the sun in hot....but betcha a buck it is.

That was constructive. Thank you for the drive by drop of some wisdom for us. Glad you could share more info that was on topic of this thread and forum in general. Keep up the good work.
 

eye95

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
13,524
Location
Fairborn, Ohio, USA
I have never been banned from this forum. Stop being so obsessed with my life.

I believe you to be the same person as CaPatriot. I believe that CaPatriot was banned from this site. Are you saying that one or both of those statements is false? If one, which one?

I really don't expect an answer. However, silence will be telling.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>
 

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Was waiting for it.... if they just stopped him and searched him you'd scream civil rights violation and SUE. The .gov takes the extra step to get a LEGAL stop, and your still not happy.

Again, I wasn't there so I can't attest to what they did.

Sure if you don't care about the 4th and due process and all that.

Pretext stops used to be a bad thing even in judges eyes....as the states grow more and more into a police state the judges don't seem to think so any more.
 

F350

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2012
Messages
941
Location
The High Plains of Wyoming
Ok, so without being there, I can wager a guess how this went down.

I'm wiling to bet a pretty decent amount of money that this was a precurser stop. Meaning, they probably already had surveilance on this guy and they waited till he did any traffic violation and executed the search.

It says "unclear why they think he possessed drugs". They most likely already had this guy as a dealer/user. I know the headlines sound crazy "blinker leads to cavity search", but I bet they aren't telling the whole story. This is a routine thing (not the cavity search). You build intel on the guy, then you wait for him to conduct a traffic infraction and then you stop them. This is all to set up a clear chain of seizure/stop. It's so that if they did find alot of drugs, it won't get thrown out based on unreasonable stop. This is actually a good thing, because it adds an extra layer of legal protection for us.

OK; what are your thoughts on using a drug sniffing dog that has NO certification to be a drug sniffer?? A friend of mine has cadaver dogs and is constantly doing certification updates.
 

onus

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2013
Messages
699
Location
idaho
I believe you to be the same person as CaPatriot. I believe that CaPatriot was banned from this site. Are you saying that one or both of those statements is false? If one, which one?

I really don't expect an answer. However, silence will be telling.

I have never been banned from this forum. Since you don't believe me why don't you ask a moderator.
 
Top