Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 44

Thread: Can I see your ID

  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    116

    Post imported post


  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Washington Island, across Death's Door, Wisconsin, USA
    Posts
    9,193

    Post imported post

    Judge says showing ID to cops not required THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
    TACOMA -- Charges against an Olympia lawyer who refused to show identification during an anti-war protest at the Port of Tacoma have been dismissed.
    The lawyer for Legrand Jones had argued that it's not a crime to refuse to identify yourself to police. Attorney William Ferrell said police were stopping people without cause during the July protest to gather information and discourage demonstrators.
    The Tacoma News Tribune reports that Municipal Court Judge Karl Haugh also dismissed a trespassing charge Thursday against Jones who was accused of approaching a port fence with a "no trespassing" sign.
    Ferrell argued that such signs usually mean the area on the other side of the fence is off limits, not the area in front of the fence.
    ------

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    149

    Post imported post

    I wasn't there, BUT: I personally think that impeding a shipment of material going to a war zone is not only tacky, expensive for taxpayers, and illegal, but I don't much feel sorry for those that get arrested or hurt in the process. Have a nice, Commie protest somewhere it does not affect the flow of material. Protest, yes..... provoke, impede and damage, NYET, Comrads!

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Blaine, WA, ,
    Posts
    1,315

    Post imported post

    BlaineG wrote:
    I wasn't there, BUT: I personally think that impeding a shipment of material going to a war zone is not only tacky, expensive for taxpayers, and illegal, but I don't much feel sorry for those that get arrested or hurt in the process. Have a nice, Commie protest somewhere it does not affect the flow of material. Protest, yes..... provoke, impede and damage, NYET, Comrads!
    Although it sounds like this particular guy wasn't doing anything illegal, otherwise they would have arrested him.

    I agree with you in principal but we need to be careful that the line is not crossed between enforcing the law and harassing citizens expressing themselves. That being said, there were probably plenty of people (AARGH! My cat just decided to walk across my keyboard. I have now fixed all the stuff she did to this message) breaking the law that they could have and should have arrested for all sorts of things, he just didn't happen to be one of them.

    I am personally glad that the police can't ask you for ID without PC that you are breaking a law.

  5. #5
    Moderator / Administrator
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    8,711

    Post imported post

    I like the past part - sounds like what happenned to Jack Nobles in PA - police accuse him of disrupting a meeting by merely approaching the future meeting site!

    -




    http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/384829_portprotest25.html
    Judge says showing ID to cops not required

    THE ASSOCIATED PRESS


    TACOMA -- Charges against an Olympia lawyer who refused to show identification during an anti-war protest at the Port of Tacoma have been dismissed.

    The lawyer for Legrand Jones had argued that it's not a crime to refuse to identify yourself to police. Attorney William Ferrell said police were stopping people without cause during the July protest to gather information and discourage demonstrators.

    The Tacoma News Tribune reports that Municipal Court Judge Karl Haugh also dismissed a trespassing charge Thursday against Jones who was accused of approaching a port fence with a "no trespassing" sign.

    Ferrell argued that such signs usually mean the area on the other side of the fence is off limits, not the area in front of the fence.


  6. #6

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
    Posts
    753

    Post imported post

    heresolong wrote:
    I am personally glad that the police can't ask you for ID without PC that you are breaking a law.
    Actually they can still ask for it, you just aren't compelled to give it. Coercion and intimidation still convince lots of folks to voluntarily submit to things they are not legally required to.

    If in doubt, my response to any question might likely be "Am I being detained?" asked repeatedly until answered by either a yes or a no. If they say "No", then I will say good day and walk away.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    149

    Post imported post

    911Boss wrote:
    heresolong wrote:
    I am personally glad that the police can't ask you for ID without PC that you are breaking a law.
    Actually they can still ask for it, you just aren't compelled to give it. Coercion and intimidation still convince lots of folks to voluntarily submit to things they are not legally required to.

    If in doubt, my response to any question might likely be "Am I being detained?" asked repeatedly until answered by either a yes or a no. If they say "No", then I will say good day and walk away.
    I'm not arguing, but shouldn't there be a mid-situation where a LEO can check you out without the cuff and stuff? If it gets to the point where a cop can't assess a situation properly, things are gonna get tougher........Why the paranoia over an honest citizen helping the local authorities?

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    BlaineG wrote:
    911Boss wrote:
    heresolong wrote:
    I am personally glad that the police can't ask you for ID without PC that you are breaking a law.
    Actually they can still ask for it, you just aren't compelled to give it. Coercion and intimidation still convince lots of folks to voluntarily submit to things they are not legally required to.

    If in doubt, my response to any question might likely be "Am I being detained?" asked repeatedly until answered by either a yes or a no. If they say "No", then I will say good day and walk away.
    I'm not arguing, but shouldn't there be a mid-situation where a LEO can check you out without the cuff and stuff? If it gets to the point where a cop can't assess a situation properly, things are gonna get tougher........Why the paranoia over an honest citizen helping the local authorities?
    I got to disagree with you on this one,Blaine. Unless the cop has an idea that a crime is being committed and can say what that crime is, a gut feeling isn't gonna get it, then the cop has no right to ask for ID. This isn't a police state. Cops can not run rough shod over the citizens just because he feels like it. There are way to many cops on ego trips anymore. The policing themselves thing doesn'tworks any better for cops than lawyers or politicians. Hell, it is now legal and standard operating proceedure for cops to lie to you.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
    Posts
    753

    Post imported post

    BlaineG wrote:
    I'm not arguing, but shouldn't there be a mid-situation where a LEO can check you out without the cuff and stuff? If it gets to the point where a cop can't assess a situation properly, things are gonna get tougher........Why the paranoia over an honest citizen helping the local authorities?
    They don't need to know your name and such to "check something out". They can check it out and then if they have articulable suspicion or PC that a crime has been committed or is about to be THEN they can go to the next step and start ID-ing those involved.

    For the most part, if they are trying to ID you or are suspicious about something, they aren't trying to HELP you, so I am not going to be terribly interested in helping them either. I am going to help myself and that means protect my interests first.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
    Posts
    753

    Post imported post

    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    Hell, it is now legal and standard operating proceedure for cops to lie to you.
    To be fair, bad guys lie to cops all the time. I don't have a problem with "turn about being fair play".

    If some schmo confesses to shooting someone because he is told they have his fingerprint on the gun when they don't, or shows up at a warrant sting because he was told he won a free Playstation 3, I am all for it. Good guys have to follow a hell of a lot more rules than the bad guys, you can't completely tie their hands and still expect them to actually solve crimes.

  11. #11
    Regular Member thebastidge's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    2519 E Fourth Plain Blvd, Vancouver Washington, USA
    Posts
    313

    Post imported post

    But cops lying to everyone indisciminately undermines their credicbility as the "good guys". Particularly when it comes to a reasonably honest and upright member of the ocmmunity seeking information.

    Cops should only be allowed to deceive in carefully limited ways with oversight to make sure it doesn't slide over into abuse. For example, an authorized sting or investigation might include permission to misrepresent oneself (to deny being a police officer, for example) but obviously still not to instigate a crime on the part of someone who had no intent to commit a crime (entrapment) or by misinforming a citizen such that they violate a law.

    Sir Robert Peel's principles of policing are relevant:

    "Above all else, an effective authority figure knows trust and accountability are paramount. "

    "The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon the public approval of police actions. "

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peelian_Principles


    Be prepared. Be very prepared.

    http://swwsurplus.com/ *** 2519 E Fourth Plain Blvd Vancouver WA 98661 *** 360.314.6687
    http://www.facebook.com/SouthWestWashingtonSurplus *** https://twitter.com/SWWSurplus

  12. #12

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
    Posts
    753

    Post imported post

    thebastidge wrote:
    But cops lying to everyone indisciminately undermines their credicbility as the "good guys". Particularly when it comes to a reasonably honest and upright member of the ocmmunity seeking information.

    Cops should only be allowed to deceive in carefully limited ways with oversight to make sure it doesn't slide over into abuse. For example, an authorized sting or investigation might include permission to misrepresent oneself (to deny being a police officer, for example) but obviously still not to instigate a crime on the part of someone who had no intent to commit a crime (entrapment) or by misinforming a citizen such that they violate a law.

    Sir Robert Peel's principles of policing are relevant:

    "Above all else, an effective authority figure knows trust and accountability are paramount. "

    "The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon the public approval of police actions. "

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peelian_Principles

    It is my experience that they don't lie indiscriminately but only when it does serve a purpose such as in questioning, working undercover, etc. As to determining when and if someone violates a law, I don't disagree some might be "wrong", but that doesn't mean there was an intentional lie. Many times it is a judgment call (which is why we have prosecutors and courts), or it may be the officers misunderstanding, lack of training, or flat out stupidity.

    If I tell you the sky is green it isn't a lie if I believe the sky is green. Not every un-truth is a lie. To be a lie, there needs to be an intent to deceive.

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    911Boss wrote:
    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    Hell, it is now legal and standard operating proceedure for cops to lie to you.
    To be fair, bad guys lie to cops all the time. I don't have a problem with "turn about being fair play".

    If some schmo confesses to shooting someone because he is told they have his fingerprint on the gun when they don't, or shows up at a warrant sting because he was told he won a free Playstation 3, I am all for it. Good guys have to follow a hell of a lot more rules than the bad guys, you can't completely tie their hands and still expect them to actually solve crimes.
    Now this is rich. You are saying the bad guys lie and it is wrong, but the cops lying isn't? There is no logic in that statement at all. If lying is wrongthen it makes the cops no better than the bad guys. Which is why I don't trust cops anymore. If you give your word to someone, it doesn't matter who they are it is "your" word and you should keep it. Breaking your word because the guy is a scum ball degrades you not him. Hence lying degrades the cops, not the bad guys.

  14. #14

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
    Posts
    753

    Post imported post

    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    911Boss wrote:
    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    Hell, it is now legal and standard operating proceedure for cops to lie to you.
    To be fair, bad guys lie to cops all the time. I don't have a problem with "turn about being fair play".

    If some schmo confesses to shooting someone because he is told they have his fingerprint on the gun when they don't, or shows up at a warrant sting because he was told he won a free Playstation 3, I am all for it. Good guys have to follow a hell of a lot more rules than the bad guys, you can't completely tie their hands and still expect them to actually solve crimes.
    Now this is rich. You are saying the bad guys lie and it is wrong, but the cops lying isn't? There is no logic in that statement at all. If lying is wrongthen it makes the cops no better than the bad guys. Which is why I don't trust cops anymore. If you give your word to someone, it doesn't matter who they are it is "your" word and you should keep it. Breaking your word because the guy is a scum ball degrades you not him. Hence lying degrades the cops, not the bad guys.
    I didn't say it was "wrong" for the bad guys to lie. I just acknowledged that they do. Right and wrong are moral judgments and as such are frequently determined by the circumstances. There are times when the end DOES justify the means.

    To really mince words, what cops doe is not "lie" but to use a "ruse" during interviews to elicit information they might not otherwise get from a suspect about a crime.

    It is a legitimate and legal tactic. You may not like it but that is what the courts have ruled. Having it available doesn't mean that cops constantly lie with impunity, time and place for everything.

    Even in my job a certain amount of "dis-information" can be helpful. I have solicited taped admissions from DV suspects who freely admitted to slapping their wife or girlfriend around after I told them that everyone occasionally fights with their partner and even I have had the need to slap my wife on occasion (which is absolutely false).

    I've also told people that if they've done nothing wrong they won't be arrested, we just need to talk to hem and sort everything out for the report knowing full well if I could keep them there for a few more minutes the cops would arrive and they most certainly would be arrested.

    I made no "promise" to these fools that I broke and don't feel degraded in the least. There is very little in this world that is absolute black and white, you need to be able to see the gray.



  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    911Boss wrote:
    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    911Boss wrote:
    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    Hell, it is now legal and standard operating proceedure for cops to lie to you.
    To be fair, bad guys lie to cops all the time. I don't have a problem with "turn about being fair play".

    If some schmo confesses to shooting someone because he is told they have his fingerprint on the gun when they don't, or shows up at a warrant sting because he was told he won a free Playstation 3, I am all for it. Good guys have to follow a hell of a lot more rules than the bad guys, you can't completely tie their hands and still expect them to actually solve crimes.
    Now this is rich. You are saying the bad guys lie and it is wrong, but the cops lying isn't? There is no logic in that statement at all. If lying is wrongthen it makes the cops no better than the bad guys. Which is why I don't trust cops anymore. If you give your word to someone, it doesn't matter who they are it is "your" word and you should keep it. Breaking your word because the guy is a scum ball degrades you not him. Hence lying degrades the cops, not the bad guys.
    I didn't say it was "wrong" for the bad guys to lie. I just acknowledged that they do. Right and wrong are moral judgments and as such are frequently determined by the circumstances. There are times when the end DOES justify the means.

    To really mince words, what cops doe is not "lie" but to use a "ruse" during interviews to elicit information they might not otherwise get from a suspect about a crime.

    It is a legitimate and legal tactic. You may not like it but that is what the courts have ruled. Having it available doesn't mean that cops constantly lie with impunity, time and place for everything.

    Even in my job a certain amount of "dis-information" can be helpful. I have solicited taped admissions from DV suspects who freely admitted to slapping their wife or girlfriend around after I told them that everyone occasionally fights with their partner and even I have had the need to slap my wife on occasion (which is absolutely false).

    I've also told people that if they've done nothing wrong they won't be arrested, we just need to talk to hem and sort everything out for the report knowing full well if I could keep them there for a few more minutes the cops would arrive and they most certainly would be arrested.

    I made no "promise" to these fools that I broke and don't feel degraded in the least. There is very little in this world that is absolute black and white, you need to be able to see the gray.

    You really don't get it, do you? Which is sad. Either the cops are good guys or they are just more bad guys opposed to other bad guys. I don't want amoral bad guys supposedly defending me and my rights, mainly because they won't. This is just an indicator of why cops do as they please until caught and punished for it. The illegal harrassment of OCers is a perfect example too.

  16. #16
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445

    Post imported post

    ID related.
    Does this Border patrol officer have PC to forcibly remove this citizen from his car?

    http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=UrFRObbSDDo
    An Amazon best seller "MY PARENTS OPEN CARRY" http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/

    *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research. These are my opinions, if you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

  17. #17

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
    Posts
    753

    Post imported post

    Bear 45/70 wrote"
    You really don't get it, do you? Which is sad. Either the cops are good guys or they are just more bad guys opposed to other bad guys. I don't want amoral bad guys supposedly defending me and my rights, mainly because they won't. This is just an indicator of why cops do as they please until caught and punished for it. The illegal harrassment of OCers is a perfect example too.
    I "get it" just fine. The mentality of expecting someone to do a job, then throw up every possible obstacle to getting that job done, tying their hands, and then blaming them for not doing the job is what is sad. Blaming someone for using a tool in the performance of their job that the legal system has decided they can use is sad.

    The cops ARE the good guys. Sure, there are exceptions and one bad apple can spoil the whole bunch. That in no way diminishes the good that the vast majority of them do on a very regular basis.

    Nothing is "illegal harassment" until a judge decides it is. While I don't believe stopping and ID'ing without something other than OC being the issue is wrong, I also think it falls far short of "harassment" if that is all that is done.

    No point starting another one of our ******* matches, you won't change my mind and it isn't likely anyone will change yours.

    Fact of life is that the courts and the law allow the use of ruse and deceit in certain circumstances. If you don't like it work to change it, otherwise deal with it.

    You always like to point to the Constitution, where does it say you can't lie ("good" guys OR "bad" guys)???

  18. #18
    Anti-Saldana Freedom Fighter Venator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Lansing area, Michigan, USA
    Posts
    6,445

    Post imported post

    911Boss wrote:
    Bear 45/70 wrote"
    You really don't get it, do you? Which is sad. Either the cops are good guys or they are just more bad guys opposed to other bad guys. I don't want amoral bad guys supposedly defending me and my rights, mainly because they won't. This is just an indicator of why cops do as they please until caught and punished for it. The illegal harrassment of OCers is a perfect example too.
    I "get it" just fine. The mentality of expecting someone to do a job, then throw up every possible obstacle to getting that job done, tying their hands, and then blaming them for not doing the job is what is sad. Blaming someone for using a tool in the performance of their job that the legal system has decided they can use is sad.

    The cops ARE the good guys. Sure, there are exceptions and one bad apple can spoil the whole bunch. That in no way diminishes the good that the vast majority of them do on a very regular basis.

    Nothing is "illegal harassment" until a judge decides it is. While I don't believe stopping and ID'ing without something other than OC being the issue is wrong, I also think it falls far short of "harassment" if that is all that is done.

    No point starting another one of our ******* matches, you won't change my mind and it isn't likely anyone will change yours.

    Fact of life is that the courts and the law allow the use of ruse and deceit in certain circumstances. If you don't like it work to change it, otherwise deal with it.

    You always like to point to the Constitution, where does it say you can't lie ("good" guys OR "bad" guys)???
    It's against the law to lie to the police, but not the other way around.

    It's when a citizen stands up fortheir rights that some LEO's get pissy. I would wager that more rights are violated by LEO's on a day to day basis than are ever hindered by a citizen standing up for his rights. Be polite and stand firm.




    An Amazon best seller "MY PARENTS OPEN CARRY" http://www.myparentsopencarry.com/

    *The information contained above is not meant to be legal advice, but is solely intended as a starting point for further research. These are my opinions, if you have further questions it is advisable to seek out an attorney that is well versed in firearm law.

  19. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    911Boss wrote:
    Bear 45/70 wrote"
    You really don't get it, do you? Which is sad. Either the cops are good guys or they are just more bad guys opposed to other bad guys. I don't want amoral bad guys supposedly defending me and my rights, mainly because they won't. This is just an indicator of why cops do as they please until caught and punished for it. The illegal harrassment of OCers is a perfect example too.
    I "get it" just fine. The mentality of expecting someone to do a job, then throw up every possible obstacle to getting that job done, tying their hands, and then blaming them for not doing the job is what is sad. Blaming someone for using a tool in the performance of their job that the legal system has decided they can use is sad.

    The cops ARE the good guys. Sure, there are exceptions and one bad apple can spoil the whole bunch. That in no way diminishes the good that the vast majority of them do on a very regular basis.

    Nothing is "illegal harassment" until a judge decides it is. While I don't believe stopping and ID'ing without something other than OC being the issue is wrong, I also think it falls far short of "harassment" if that is all that is done.

    No point starting another one of our ******* matches, you won't change my mind and it isn't likely anyone will change yours.

    Fact of life is that the courts and the law allow the use of ruse and deceit in certain circumstances. If you don't like it work to change it, otherwise deal with it.

    You always like to point to the Constitution, where does it say you can't lie ("good" guys OR "bad" guys)???
    So your thinking it isOK for cops to be as bad as they want, aka amoral just like the bad guys, to get the job done? You really do have a cop mentality. The bad guysare bad guy because they lie, cheat and break the law.Cops are good guys because of the badge, butit is OK if they lie, cheat and break the law to catch the bad guys and you see nothing wrong with this? You sound just like the obama people, it's OK because we did it for the good of the party. You probably wonder why there are so many bad cops on the street too. Why? because of attitudes like yours. Not a Constitutional issue, it is one of morals and if the cops act like bad guys, badge or no, they are bad guys. Whoever said being a cop was easy anyway but there needs to be a difference between the bad guys and the good guys. If not we will have a police state or anarchy(I'm OK with anarchy, it's the police state I don't want to have to fight against). Ifcops want an easy jobthey should go on welfare and sit on their front pouch. You and your thinking will have all our rights gone because it will help catch the bad guys.

  20. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    Venator wrote:
    911Boss wrote:
    Bear 45/70 wrote"
    You really don't get it, do you? Which is sad. Either the cops are good guys or they are just more bad guys opposed to other bad guys. I don't want amoral bad guys supposedly defending me and my rights, mainly because they won't. This is just an indicator of why cops do as they please until caught and punished for it. The illegal harrassment of OCers is a perfect example too.
    I "get it" just fine. The mentality of expecting someone to do a job, then throw up every possible obstacle to getting that job done, tying their hands, and then blaming them for not doing the job is what is sad. Blaming someone for using a tool in the performance of their job that the legal system has decided they can use is sad.

    The cops ARE the good guys. Sure, there are exceptions and one bad apple can spoil the whole bunch. That in no way diminishes the good that the vast majority of them do on a very regular basis.

    Nothing is "illegal harassment" until a judge decides it is. While I don't believe stopping and ID'ing without something other than OC being the issue is wrong, I also think it falls far short of "harassment" if that is all that is done.

    No point starting another one of our ******* matches, you won't change my mind and it isn't likely anyone will change yours.

    Fact of life is that the courts and the law allow the use of ruse and deceit in certain circumstances. If you don't like it work to change it, otherwise deal with it.

    You always like to point to the Constitution, where does it say you can't lie ("good" guys OR "bad" guys)???
    It's against the law to lie to the police, but not the other way around.

    It's when a citizen stands up fortheir rights that some LEO's get pissy. I would wager that more rights are violated by LEO's on a day to day basis than are ever hindered by a citizen standing up for his rights. Be polite and stand firm.



    What laws says you can't lie to cops?

  21. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    149

    Post imported post

    Nothing is "illegal harassment" until a judge decides it is
    I'm No Fan of the ACLU, but they can articulate just fine what harassment is legal or not....... We can, too, if you try. That's why you ask if " AM I being Detained?"...Right?

    Bear, we've knocked heads on this one before. I'll support the Cops (and yeah, one or two might be crooked......burn 'em!!) over the Bad Guys, which are 100% bad guys. Dude, you want to take the law in your own hands, but don't want the LAW to take the law in it's own hands

  22. #22

    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Gone... Nutty as squirrel **** around here
    Posts
    753

    Post imported post

    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    So your thinking it isOK for cops to be as bad as they want, aka amoral just like the bad guys, to get the job done? You really do have a cop mentality. The bad guysare bad guy because they lie, cheat and break the law.Cops are good guys because of the badge, butit is OK if they lie, cheat and break the law to catch the bad guys and you see nothing wrong with this?
    Instead of you thinking up convoluted and twisted bullsh!t and then blaming me for having said it, why don't you actually read the fuc king posts. I'll quote them here for your ignorant convenience...

    911Boss wrote:
    To be fair, bad guys lie to cops all the time. I don't have a problem with "turn about being fair play".

    If some schmo confesses to shooting someone because he is told they have his fingerprint on the gun when they don't, or shows up at a warrant sting because he was told he won a free Playstation 3, I am all for it. Good guys have to follow a hell of a lot more rules than the bad guys, you can't completely tie their hands and still expect them to actually solve crimes.

    911Boss wrote:
    It is my experience that they don't lie indiscriminately but only when it does serve a purpose such as in questioning, working undercover, etc. As to determining when and if someone violates a law, I don't disagree some might be "wrong", but that doesn't mean there was an intentional lie. Many times it is a judgment call (which is why we have prosecutors and courts), or it may be the officers misunderstanding, lack of training, or flat out stupidity.

    If I tell you the sky is green it isn't a lie if I believe the sky is green. Not every un-truth is a lie. To be a lie, there needs to be an intent to deceive.
    911Boss wrote:
    I didn't say it was "wrong" for the bad guys to lie. I just acknowledged that they do. Right and wrong are moral judgments and as such are frequently determined by the circumstances. There are times when the end DOES justify the means.

    To really mince words, what cops doe is not "lie" but to use a "ruse" during interviews to elicit information they might not otherwise get from a suspect about a crime.

    It is a legitimate and legal tactic. You may not like it but that is what the courts have ruled. Having it available doesn't mean that cops constantly lie with impunity, time and place for everything.

    Even in my job a certain amount of "dis-information" can be helpful. I have solicited taped admissions from DV suspects who freely admitted to slapping their wife or girlfriend around after I told them that everyone occasionally fights with their partner and even I have had the need to slap my wife on occasion (which is absolutely false).

    I've also told people that if they've done nothing wrong they won't be arrested, we just need to talk to hem and sort everything out for the report knowing full well if I could keep them there for a few more minutes the cops would arrive and they most certainly would be arrested.

    I made no "promise" to these fools that I broke and don't feel degraded in the least. There is very little in this world that is absolute black and white, you need to be able to see the gray.

    911Boss wrote:
    I "get it" just fine. The mentality of expecting someone to do a job, then throw up every possible obstacle to getting that job done, tying their hands, and then blaming them for not doing the job is what is sad. Blaming someone for using a tool in the performance of their job that the legal system has decided they can use is sad.

    The cops ARE the good guys. Sure, there are exceptions and one bad apple can spoil the whole bunch. That in no way diminishes the good that the vast majority of them do on a very regular basis.

    Nothing is "illegal harassment" until a judge decides it is. While I don't believe stopping and ID'ing without something other than OC being the issue is wrong, I also think it falls far short of "harassment" if that is all that is done.

    No point starting another one of our ******* matches, you won't change my mind and it isn't likely anyone will change yours.

    Fact of life is that the courts and the law allow the use of ruse and deceit in certain circumstances. If you don't like it work to change it, otherwise deal with it.

    You always like to point to the Constitution, where does it say you can't lie ("good" guys OR "bad" guys)???
    Now where did I say it was ok for them to "be as bad as they want" ??? Where did I say it is ok if they "break the law"?. I very clearly pointed out that they are ALLOWED by law to use deceit under certain circuimstances. If something is ALLOWED by law, then it is OK - JUST LIKE OC YOU FUC KING MORON!

    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    You probably wonder why there are so many bad cops on the street too. Why? because of attitudes like yours. Not a Constitutional issue, it is one of morals and if the cops act like bad guys, badge or no, they are bad guys.
    You are ASSuming I "wonder why there are so many bad cops on the street". FACT is I DON"T believe there are that many "bad" cops. Yes, as I said there are a few, but the vast majority are not.

    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    Not a Constitutional issue, it is one of morals and if the cops act like bad guys, badge or no, they are bad guys.
    I agree it isn't a Consititutional issue. The point I was making is you are always spouting off about if something ain't in the Constitution then it doesn't mean anything as if it is the only law of the land.

    You have a problem with mixing morals and laws. Morality is a personal code that may or may not be shared with others, law is a societal code that ALL have to follow regardless of individual beliefs. Something can be completely immoral to some and yet be perfectly legal (case in point- Abortion).

    Again "Good" and "Bad" are concepts that you seem to hold absolute, unlike in real life where things vary in degree of "Legal" and "Illegal". The only time cops act like "Bad" guys is if they BREAK the law. If they are acting within their authority, they are still "Good" guys. Again, you may disagree, but thankfully you are not the arbiter of right and wrong in this world. Their failure to follow what YOU think should be done is of no consequence.

    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    If not we will have a police state or anarchy(I'm OK with anarchy, it's the police state I don't want to have to fight against).
    Yes, idiots like you think "Anarchy" is a wonderful idea. Since you get all your milk from the government teat, you really want to give it up?

    The absence of any societal rules or power to enforce them means everyone can just do what they want. Just how fine would that be when someone decided to come and take your sh!t? I am sure you believe that could never happen since you are the biggest bada$$ ever put on earth, but if there is one universal rule it is this- there is ALWAYS someone bigger and badder. Without the rule of law you would quickly find yourself as someones b!tch and watching them use your sh!t.

    Again, you can have law and order without a police state. It isn't a choice of one or the other, there are steps in between.

    Bear 45/70 wrote:
    Ifcops want an easy jobthey should go on welfare and sit on their front pouch. You and your thinking will have all our rights gone because it will help catch the bad guys.
    Where did I say that want an "Easy" job? We can't all be freeloaders on the system like you are, and thankfully there aren't a lot of folks who want to be. Once again you show your ignorance by thinking in absolutes only.



  23. #23
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    error

  24. #24
    State Researcher
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Olympia, WA, ,
    Posts
    3,201

    Post imported post

    double

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Union, Washington, USA
    Posts
    3,256

    Post imported post

    OK, in order so you can't complain.

    Convoluted may ass. You flat out said that not letting cops lie makes doing their job harder. That would be advocating that it is OK for cops to lie.

    Cops, just like any other person will do worse bad things if allowed to cheat a little. It's call human nature.

    Your idea of anarchy is so totally flawed it is unbelievable. You need to do a whole lot of reading before you can even start to comprehend the concept. For me to explain it to you would require a reading list that I am unwilling to supply you, mainly because you wouldn't read it anyway. You already made up your mind, regardless of the facts.

    As to easy, you seem to thing that the cops having to be honest and not lie creates a hardship on cops, there by making the job harder. MY response to that concept is "Too f'king Bad!" The copneed to live within the same rules that everyone else does or they aren't cops, but just thugs with a badge. Not my idea of law and order. Oh and if you think what we have now is law and order, then you are as confused about what law and order is, as you are about what anarchy is.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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