Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Discussion - Disorderly Conduct ???

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Morgan, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,580

    Post imported post

    What is your take when you are approached by a LEO that is stating that your being "investigated" for "disorderly conduct", which could be construed as "criminal conduct"due to the fact that you are OCing ??

    Here is something interesting that I found in Utah codes,

    76-2-101. Requirements of criminal conduct and criminal responsibility.
    (1) (a) A person is not guilty of an offense unless the person's conduct is prohibited by law; and
    (b) (i) the person acts intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, with criminal negligence, or with a mental state otherwise specified in the statute defining the offense, as the definition of the offense requires; or
    (ii) the person's acts constitute an offense involving strict liability.
    (2) These standards of criminal responsibility do not apply to the violations set forth in Title 41, Chapter 6a, Traffic Code, unless specifically provided by law.


    Amended by Chapter 2, 2005 General Session
    Download Code Section Zipped WordPerfect 76_02_010100.ZIP 2,178 Bytes


    [line]

    Sections in this Chapter|Chapters in this Title|All Titles|Legislative Home Page


    Last revised: Thursday, May 01, 2008


    Am I WAY of base on this one. Just asking what you guys think of this.

    TJ

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Catasauqua, Pennsylvania, USA
    Posts
    3,047

    Post imported post

    I'd just start laughing.

    Like this:

    Only less yellow.

  3. #3
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    I would laconically reply, "Cool, let me know how it all turns out."

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    7,607

    Post imported post

    I would respond with.....

    [media=160,128]http://www.folloder.com/sounds/alrighty.wav[/media]

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Tucson, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    1,098

    Post imported post

    LEO 229 wrote:
    I would respond with.....




    Buwaaaaahahahahahaha!!!

    This is why we love you man.....




    P.S. If you ever make me snort Fat Tire Pale Ale again, I'm filing a complaint....

  6. #6
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766

    Post imported post

    Mike wrote:
    I would laconically reply, "Cool, let me know how it all turns out."
    I'll go with the concept behind Mike's reply.

    Rephrased, "Officer, I realize you are just doing your job, but I do not consent to this encounter and I have nothing to say in the absense of my attorney."

    But I guess what you really want to know is our analysis of the applicability of DC to OCin the presence of76-2-101.

    I don't think it will help much. If they come at you for DC, "causing alarm," etc., they're basically saying whatever you're doing is illegal, and thus outside the protections of 76-2-101.

    For example, OC in your home wouldn't cause alarm, and since it is otherwise legal itwouldn't be actionable in the presence of 76-2-101, or even its absence. But causing alarm is illegal (in this example).So, the OC is legal. But causing alarm isn't, so they try to get you for causing alarm, not OC.

    It seems thatall that clause in 76-2-101 does iscodify the obvious. If it ain't illegal, you can't be found guilty of it.If it isn't against the law, then there is neither offense, nor guilt.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47 12 x W122 10
    Posts
    1,762

    Post imported post

    I guess I would ask if I am being detained. If I was, then I would say "state your cause or suspicion" and then I would probably clam up.

    When it got to court, I (through my lawyer) would ask the officer to describe the disorder in question. A charge of disorderly conduct logically implies that there was some sort of disorder going on at the scene of the arrest.

  8. #8
    Regular Member thx997303's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Lehi, Utah, USA
    Posts
    2,716

    Post imported post

    We seem to have a problem with Disorderly Conduct here in Utah, The officers really like to fall back on that when you are DOING NOTHING WRONG.

  9. #9
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    And in Wisconsin.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •