• 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.

2013 report of LEO who died on the job

Fuller Malarkey

Fuller Malarkey

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2010
Messages
1,020
Location
The Cadre
Primus said:
Lol yea Fuller. The next day I work I'll make sure I cite every guy I see. I'll post a video of a cruiser doing a traffic stop of a another cruiser.

Even better.... how about you come up here get a job as an Leo and pull me over if one day I'm not wearing my seatbelt.

Put up or shut up.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Ah. YOU are afraid of "breaking blue", so you dodge accountability by TRYING to assign some kind of responsibility on ME, you believing you are in some position to enter ME into a black / white situation that doesn't exist.......and I don't buy into it and your comeback fizzles.

Others have called you repeatedly on your fallacies of thought. I'm coming to believe you ARE a fallacy.
 
Primus

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
JoeSparky said:
What is stopping you?
:eek:
Click to expand...

What?

Wait... your proposing while on patrol I pull over another cruiser that has a taillight out? Then conduct a traffic stop on said cruiser? Then cite the operator cop for not wearing a seat belt? Lol really?



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 
Primus

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
Fuller Malarkey said:
Ah. YOU are afraid of "breaking blue", so you dodge accountability by TRYING to assign some kind of responsibility on ME, you believing you are in some position to enter ME into a black / white situation that doesn't exist.......and I don't buy into it and your comeback fizzles.

Others have called you repeatedly on your fallacies of thought. I'm coming to believe you ARE a fallacy.
Click to expand...

Lol yea u nailed it... trying to avoid "breaking blue".. or maybe its just a really stupid idea.

Again.. you come work up here or any agency and show me how its done. Well once you turn 21 of course. Then you can post your dash cam videos of pulling over other cruisers and citing for tail lights and seat belt violations. I'd love to learn from you.

Discussions like these are why I avoid even responding to you. I get better conversations with young children.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 
P

PistolPackingMomma

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
1,884
Location
SC
Primus said:
What?

Wait... your proposing while on patrol I pull over another cruiser that has a taillight out? Then conduct a traffic stop on said cruiser? Then cite the operator cop for not wearing a seat belt? Lol really?



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Why not? Citizens are subject to this exact scenario; why not your brothers in blue?
 
Fuller Malarkey

Fuller Malarkey

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2010
Messages
1,020
Location
The Cadre
Primus said:
What?

Wait... your proposing while on patrol I pull over another cruiser that has a taillight out? Then conduct a traffic stop on said cruiser? Then cite the operator cop for not wearing a seat belt? Lol really?



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk[/QUOTE

More greased pig routine. [not oily, smarmy cop, the porky pig kind, greased up and hard to catch.]

You were asked a direct question, nothing was proposed. That was something YOU conjured up.
Click to expand...
 
Fuller Malarkey

Fuller Malarkey

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2010
Messages
1,020
Location
The Cadre
Primus said:
Lol yea u nailed it... trying to avoid "breaking blue".. or maybe its just a really stupid idea.

Again.. you come work up here or any agency and show me how its done. Well once you turn 21 of course. Then you can post your dash cam videos of pulling over other cruisers and citing for tail lights and seat belt violations. I'd love to learn from you.

Discussions like these are why I avoid even responding to you. I get better conversations with young children.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You probably do, as they are still in that "I believe in Santa and the Easter Bunny and police are my friend" stage. I can only hope your fascination with young children ends there. For many police, it doesn't.

More fizzle. I am not obligated to become like you to point out what is repulsive, contradictory and pure hypocrisy.
 
Primus

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
PistolPackingMomma said:
Why not? Citizens are subject to this exact scenario; why not your brothers in blue?
Click to expand...

Because that would be extremely time consuming and a waste of tax payers money. They pay us to respond to calls not cjte each other for tail lights out on city vehicles. So who pays for the tail light being out? The officer? Or the city? So the city pays the state a fine and pays the officer to charge the city the fine? Really?

Same applies to cabs, FedEx, ups, USPS. I dont bother them for the same reason. Not citizens fault FedEx didn't put a bulb in the FedEx truck.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 
Fuller Malarkey

Fuller Malarkey

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2010
Messages
1,020
Location
The Cadre
Primus said:
I'm confused about the relevance. ~SNIPPED

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

No you're not. You are resentful that we know. That we use information like this to form conclusions about the world around us.

The only confusion you have is self inflicted: trying to make US believe YOUR case of red _ss is "confusion". :lol:
 
J

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,621
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
Primus said:
What?

Wait... your proposing while on patrol I pull over another cruiser that has a taillight out? Then conduct a traffic stop on said cruiser? Then cite the operator cop for not wearing a seat belt? Lol really?



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Well, ONLY if they have in fact do have a light out and are not wearing the seatbelt! would that be two tickets? One for operation of a vehicle with inoperative lights and the other for failure to wear the lawfully required seatbelt.

While on patrol MAY be more safe than for you to attempt this from your POV.

BUT-----

I am not familiar with ANY exemption in the various vehicle codes of the various states that allows an exemption as you would be seeming to suggest. Care to provide one or two cites?
 
Last edited:
Fuller Malarkey

Fuller Malarkey

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2010
Messages
1,020
Location
The Cadre
Primus said:
Because that would be extremely time consuming and a waste of tax payers money. They pay us to respond to calls not cjte each other for tail lights out on city vehicles. So who pays for the tail light being out? The officer? Or the city? So the city pays the state a fine and pays the officer to charge the city the fine? Really?

Same applies to cabs, FedEx, ups, USPS. I dont bother them for the same reason. Not citizens fault FedEx didn't put a bulb in the FedEx truck.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

What an ingenious hack! More Red Herring Strawmen and at least four other fallacies in one paragraph.

YOU drug the tail light into this [straw man]. Nothing compels you to write a ticket for the taillight. A ticket COULD and should be issued for the seat belt violation, paid for by the cop, just like a UPS driver, a Fed Ex driver...they get into a wreck, no seatbelt THEY get wrote up. Boys in Blue???? Hm?
 
Primus

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
JoeSparky said:
Well, ONLY if they have in fact do have a light out and are not wearing the seatbelt! would that be two tickets? One for operation of a vehicle with inoperative lights and the other for failure to wear the lawfully required seatbelt.

While on patrol MAY be more safe than for you to attempt this from your POV.

BUT-----

I am not familiar with ANY exemption in the various vehicle codes of the various states that allows an exemption as you would be seeming to suggest. Care to provide one or two cites?
Click to expand...

Doesn't need to be a written exemption. There is nothing that says you SHALL cite for said infraction. Only one law in ma has the word SHALL in it. That is violation of restraining order.

So discretion on officers (unless dictated by dept. Policy) as to whether they cite or enforce said motor vehicle stuff. Its all in chapter 89 and 90. 90-16 I believe is seat belt stuff. 90-6 for a light out if plate light. And maybe 9016 for other lights being out. None say SHALL.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 
J

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,621
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
Primus said:
Doesn't need to be a written exemption. There is nothing that says you SHALL cite for said infraction. Only one law in ma has the word SHALL in it. That is violation of restraining order.

So discretion on officers (unless dictated by dept. Policy) as to whether they cite or enforce said motor vehicle stuff. Its all in chapter 89 and 90. 90-16 I believe is seat belt stuff. 90-6 for a light out if plate light. And maybe 9016 for other lights being out. None say SHALL.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Which leads us right back to the infamous "blue" thing and special privileges for special people based upon employment and a uniform.
One might suggest that this is the basis for corruption or otherwise known as the "good ole boys club"


link to the code?
 
Last edited:
Primus

Primus

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 24, 2013
Messages
3,939
Location
United States
Fuller Malarkey said:

What an ingenious hack! More Red Herring Strawmen and at least four other fallacies in one paragraph.

YOU drug the tail light into this [straw man]. Nothing compels you to write a ticket for the taillight. A ticket COULD and should be issued for the seat belt violation, paid for by the cop, just like a UPS driver, a Fed Ex driver...they get into a wreck, no seatbelt THEY get wrote up. Boys in Blue???? Hm?
Click to expand...

Lol yes fuller I drug the tail light out into this...... BECAUSE A SEAT BELT IS NOT A PRIMARY OFFENSE IN MA. YOU CANNOT PULL OVER JUST FOR A SEAT BELT. YOU NEED ANOTHR INFRACTION. I USED A LIGHT OUT TO KEEP IT SIMPLE FOR YOU.

note: I used all caps because all caps makes you read things slower. Hoping if I slow things down for fuller he can catch up.

Its discretion if you cite for seatbelt or taillight out. For anyone. There is no exemption for a Leo and their cruiser. There is also no exemption for fed ex employees. I personally use my discretion to not stop or cite either party. Basically any person using their vehicle for work I leave alone. That's personal opinion..not law or dept policy so can't cite it. If your a dominos driver I won't bother you. Delivering flowers in a van? Won't see me pulling you over.

Instead of reading that and saying "hey good on him for giving working joes a break" we have some that are just digging and trying desperately to find something wrong with it.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
Fuller Malarkey

Fuller Malarkey

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2010
Messages
1,020
Location
The Cadre
In some cases, it appears NYC attempts to cash in on the aggressive, assaultive driving skills of their police officers. One of those "when you have lemons, make lemonade" things.....


Mother Owes NYPD for Dent in Police Car That Killed Her Son

Witnesses claim the victim was run down with a squad car, the police said, after they investigated themselves, it was an "accident".

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...nt-made-nypd-car-struck-son-article-1.1175484

Not only did they charge his mother for the dent, they "SWATTED" the family's home the day of the victim's funeral. After busting the door in, it was discovered they had committed "isolated incident" 88,877. "Whoops. My bad. Wrong house".

Isolated incident 88,896:

Hearing impaired pedestrian hit in cross walk with the green light by police car. Police bill him a thousand bucks for damage to cop car after he files suit for hospital bills.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/man-billed-patrol-car-damage-struck-article-1.1200445
 
J

JoeSparky

Centurion
Joined
Jun 20, 2008
Messages
3,621
Location
Pleasant Grove, Utah, USA
Fuller Malarkey said:
In some cases, it appears NYC attempts to cash in on the aggressive, assaultive driving skills of their police officers. One of those "when you have lemons, make lemonade" things.....


Mother Owes NYPD for Dent in Police Car That Killed Her Son

Witnesses claim the victim was run down with a squad car, the police said, after they investigated themselves, it was an "accident".

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...nt-made-nypd-car-struck-son-article-1.1175484

Not only did they charge his mother for the dent, they "SWATTED" the family's home the day of the victim's funeral. After busting the door in, it was discovered they had committed "isolated incident" 88,877. "Whoops. My bad. Wrong house".

Isolated incident 88,896:

Hearing impaired pedestrian hit in cross walk with the green light by police car. Police bill him a thousand bucks for damage to cop car after he files suit for hospital bills.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/man-billed-patrol-car-damage-struck-article-1.1200445
Click to expand...


Not having read any of the posted links just the FUQ's provided it does certainly have the "getting even for contempt of cop flavor to it"!
 
P

PistolPackingMomma

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
1,884
Location
SC
Primus said:
Because that would be extremely time consuming and a waste of tax payers money. They pay us to respond to calls not cjte each other for tail lights out on city vehicles.
Click to expand...

That's funny, I thought you were paid to enforce the law equally. So you use taxpayer money to cite ONLY tax payers. Interesting.

(Also, isn't Fed Ex a private company, not city?)

Primus said:
So discretion on officers (unless dictated by dept. Policy) as to whether they cite or enforce said motor vehicle stuff.
Click to expand...

Basically, cops get to play asphalt judge, but only cite tax payers. Interesting.
 
P

PistolPackingMomma

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 1, 2011
Messages
1,884
Location
SC
Primus said:
I personally use my discretion to not stop or cite either party. Basically any person using their vehicle for work I leave alone. That's personal opinion..not law or dept policy so can't cite it. If your a dominos driver I won't bother you. Delivering flowers in a van? Won't see me pulling you over.

Instead of reading that and saying "hey good on him for giving working joes a break" we have some that are just digging and trying desperately to find something wrong with it.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Why do you deserve a pat on the back for your personal discretion in the application of the law?
 
sudden valley gunner

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Hahaha you guys and lady, let him tie his own noose and hang himself.....tacit admissions of hypocrisy and two faced ness, and he painted himself into the corner he then ran away from......

+1
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top