ID?

Primus said:

Walking wolf..... shhhhhhhh... please let the adults speak.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Not surprised that you would resort to such a childish remark as you do not have the grey matter to make a intelligent case.

I can't think of anything more childish than claiming to know more about the law than a lawyer, and law professors.

Add on top of that you claim to be gullible enough to let a suspect go ONLY based on their word they didn't do it. :lol:

The criminals on your beat must love you? I bet they buy you a xmas basket every year.:lol:

eye95 said:

The point is, whose advice would you rather take if you are facing a cop who thinks he has RAS or PC that YOU committed a crime? A cop or a lawyer?

Ooooo...dat's a toughee.

Click to expand...

What do wanna bet he never turns down a union lawyer...

Primus said:

I'll make one more effort to explain about speaking to the po po....

For those that in familiar, you need RS to stop and PC to charge/arrest. Just as a baseline.

So if you get a call somewhere and someone says there's a guy with a gun right there and they make accusations such as you did something illegal. You pick. Anything. Waving the gun shooting the gun... whatever. So right out the gate if the PD has a named witness that meets a two prong test they may have enough to arrest without ever getting your story. But say they still ask what happened. Or say they know they have PC but might not be a "string" case. Well they ask you what happened. This is your chance to exonerate yourself. What if the complainant said that the guy from a certain direction or a store maybe. Maybe they said the BG was driving a car. Well you happen to be near the vehicle. You KNOW its not yours. You could provide key information that will exonerate you on the spot. Or you can just lawyer up get charged arraigned go to court to THEN say its not your vehicle (or whatever concrete evidence you have and could have used).

Say your girlfriend calls and says you beat her. That's enough all day to make an arrest. But wait you weren't even home. You were at the bar. When the po po shows up you could easily state you weren't even home. You easily explain what happened. Maybe state something like "go check with the bartender ". Bang... they check no charges. Instead you do the "nor talking to you" so be it then you get hooked and booked based on her story.

Also say she struck you first? How does the Leo know that unless you say it?

Its not just "I'm innocent I swear". You can provide valuable evidence on your behalf.

Do leos "fish"? Yes. Its their job to be fact finders. Can't find facts unless you ask.

I know for the majority this post will change nothing. I accept that. I just hope the people in the middle realize they can speak up and avoid a big case by speaking with Leo. Instead of catching a case they could have avoided because they followed some guys advice on the internet.....

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

For those "in the middle".....Try to find TWO defense attorneys that would agree to this nonsense.

Take the only consistent universal free advice attorneys give: Do not talk to the police. The task of police in an investigation is to find reason to take your money and / or your liberty. This forum is just being used by posters such as primas and pathos as exercise and practicing the con job of overcoming your objections to your rights. To instill doubt. It might be something they put on their resume, that they parked themselves on forums where non-conformists gather, engaging in spreading bad information, part truths, encouraging illegal activities [this poster primas only recently encouraged a newcomer to this forum to shoot at police].

Do your due diligence and don't trust someone that is practicing their skills of deception. You are under no moral or legal obligation to "bite" when police "fish" Avoid the hook and ask if yu are free to find less polluted water.

eye95 said:

The point is, whose advice would you rather take if you are facing a cop who thinks he has RAS or PC that YOU committed a crime? A cop or a lawyer?

Ooooo...dat's a toughee.

Click to expand...

Depends. Seeing as how by he lawyer would need to read cops report to gather the facts......

Oh and I'll give lawyers their due all day they are smart. But please remember they argue the facts we give them. They are good arguers not investigators. Depending on the case they may have nothing to ho on the case other then what the street cop out detective gives them. Its on the street cop or detective to give the right info. This is where people get worried about talking to cops. The info might end up in a lawyers hands.

And let's be honest all a defense attorney does is find any flaw they can in the prosecution. Its not about innocence its about beating the system.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

A cop trying to talk you out of talking to a lawyer. What is this? An episode of Law & Order?

Again, folks, bear in mind that this is a cop trying to convince you not to talk to a lawyer. Moving on.

1. Being as there are bad cops out there although we know the majority are probably good and being as we can't, by visual inspection, tell the good cops from the bad cops, and
2. Being as the cops can, and do, lie to you but woe be unto you if you lie to them, and
3. Being as every attorney I've ever heard say anything on the subject has said the same thing:

Don't talk to the police!!

Be polite, yes. Be courteous, yes. Keep your cool even when the cop starts screaming and spraying spittle in your face, yes. But don't talk to the police.

SFC: Thanks for that caveat. Yes, I believe most cops are good cops. But, yes, there is no decoder ring that helps us figure out who is good and who is bad. Oh, and even good cops unintentionally do bad things.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

enoungh of the cop love. of course they are the enemy. the whole point of the discussion is because they are the enemy. they are not your friend. talking to them will never help. avoid them and don't deal with them. I only give them what I legally have to, after that its we' re done here. I'm not playing 40 questions with them. if they won't tell me what they want upon contact the contact is over and I go. they can pound sand.

Nightmare said:

See, wigwag, what you did. Remember, NEVER TALK TO THE POLICE You may beat the rap but you will not beat their ride! The rap is the charges that they the cops recommend to the prosecutor. The ride is their extra-legal harassment, sometimes committed in the back of the patrol car.

Arrest or detention or anything non-consensual exists when you or I believe, reasonably or unreasonably, that we are not free to refuse contact; a cop using his big boy command voice is sufficient to effect an arrest, his uniform and badge, his gun, more than one cop, tactical positioning - all contribute to the perception of force majeure arrest.

Click to expand...

I walked home from hunting. That's it. City cop respected my right to remain nameless. County cop wanted to show the boys how tough she was. BTW, I never showed ID and kept 2 handguns concealed. Had she asked if I had any other weapons, I would have been required by law to provide such info. Laughed all the way home ******************

Sent using Tapatalk 2.

Primus said:

Depends. Seeing as how by he lawyer would need to read cops report to gather the facts......

Oh and I'll give lawyers their due all day they are smart. But please remember they argue the facts we give them. They are good arguers not investigators. Depending on the case they may have nothing to ho on the case other then what the street cop out detective gives them. Its on the street cop or detective to give the right info. This is where people get worried about talking to cops. The info might end up in a lawyers hands.

And let's be honest all a defense attorney does is find any flaw they can in the prosecution. Its not about innocence its about beating the system.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

If you really are a police officer, you should probably stop trying to prove whatever it is you're trying to prove...

Sent using Tapatalk 2.

SFCRetired said:

1. Being as there are bad cops out there although we know the majority are probably good and being as we can't, by visual inspection, tell the good cops from the bad cops, and
2. Being as the cops can, and do, lie to you but woe be unto you if you lie to them, and
3. Being as every attorney I've ever heard say anything on the subject has said the same thing:

Don't talk to the police!!

Be polite, yes. Be courteous, yes. Keep your cool even when the cop starts screaming and spraying spittle in your face, yes. But don't talk to the police.

Click to expand...

This Primus cop in the last page or so is giving dangerous advice--and he knows it. He's already been thoroughly refuted in previous threads. And, yet he pretends like those refutations never occurred.

He's great at giving examples of how talking to a cop can help sort things out and avoid arrest, but he carefully omits that the talker is rolling the dice on whether the cop is just looking for something to add to an arrest he already intends to make.

Primus also skips over Prof. Duane's point that police, if they have contradictory evidence, can use it to paint the talker as a liar, even if he isn't lying.

And, then there's the whole bit about phrasing something the wrong way when under stress or upset.

Here's the story of a guy who talked to police. His car was trashed when a moose walked in front of him. The cop spent a great deal of time and energy trying to pin a DUI on him (the victim). Check out what happened when the driver incautiously remarked, after repeated pestering, that he had a glass of wine with supper the night before. http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/12/eric-peters/what-are-they-good-for/

Flat out, Primus is no friend of freedom. Not when it took hundreds of years, torture, burnings, dispossession, imprisonment, and exile to win that right. You can bet that if he's being investigated, he's not going to be anywhere near as cooperative as he is advocating citizens should be. His advice is dangerous. And, he's using the trust some people put in police to get that dangerous message accepted.

I had a friend/HA who got drunk and rode his FL to the end of No Name Key, hitting the large rock at the end of the road. He was injured critically and his jaw was shattered, so he could not talk to the police. After he got out of the hospital, and a couple months passed the Monroe County Sheriffs office arrested him for DUI. When they went to court the judge threw the case out, because???

OK enough time has passed I will give the answer why the judge threw out the charges. Because he could not be placed on the motorcycle. Everybody knew he was driving it, including the judge, but when the judge asked the prosecution what proof they had of him operating the vehicle they could not provide any.

Not only did he keep his mouth shut, it was wired shut. Because there was no statement the state lost.

Only time a arrest is valid is when there is evidence and probable cause. If there is none the officer is violating the constitution by making a bogus arrest. If the officer releases a suspect only on that suspect's word he is innocent, he deserves the ridicule he receives.

Listen I tried guys. I even gave a very detailed example of how someone talking helped them. You guys can continue to bash and fear monger. I get it hanging out with guys who dislike cops who only post bad cop stories who only tell war stories about bad cops gets you jaded. So be it.

How many of you guys who have posted here and made allegations have actually been screwed by a cop? Probably few if any. But I get it. I'm aware of how these forums are and the guys that frequent them. Either toe the line or get heckled till either you leave or shut up.

I've been open to any questions. I've cited my responses and I've admitted when wrong. The only part that rubs me is guys lack the decency to even respectfully disagree. Can't just say... "hey sorry I disagree". Nope it has to be a big lynch mob. Based on what? Videos on the internet? Cmon. A few of us (3) have tried to reach out in various ways and bridge the gap. You guys just aren't having it.

Here's some food for thought. There's only 3 guys on here that are current le and have been playing lately. Does it help or hurt your cause to treat them the way you've treated them? With the bashing and the general fear mongering of police how are we supposed to represent you guys when people from our department ask us?

For example we have a guy who's le from NC and actually deals with OCers. Well he takes time and writes a post trying to reach out. He promptly gets ridiculed and run out. So how do you think he's potraying you guys at the next roll call? So how do you think the next time he deals with an OCer is going to go? Will he break any laws. No. But I wouldn't expect any slack either.

Its not just you guys so don't feel too proud that you've manage to s**** on some cops. Its basically every pro gun website I've found. So be it. As always I hope you guys are safe.

Finally as always this post is not meant towards the guys on the sidelines or even the few that do respond and can disagree respectfully. Its only towards the guys are the most vocal. You guys want us to police our own... so why do you guys let these guys represent you for all the world to see?



Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Citizen what is it you want me to refute? List some points. So far you've said talking to cops is bad. I refuted that by giving a first hand experience where it wasn't. This isn't a legal debate. Its a debate on opinion. How can I refuge your opinion other then how I already have which is to show its not always bad to speak up and talk to the police.

Listen if you murdered your girlfriend then so be out lawyer up I recommend it definitely. If your just walking along and someone rolls up. At least try and talk first before you f*** yourself. How can I be any more blunt about it?

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Citizen said:

Bwahahahahahahaaaa!! That argument was already old in 2008.

There is no bridge building required. All it takes is cops scrupulously observing rights. Instead we get screenfuls of advice from Primus telling us to not exercise a right paid for in blood, supported by specious arguments that overlook facts.

No, your problem, bucko is that you're trying cheesy tactics and demonstrating anti-freedom/anti-rights attitudes previously demonstrated by other cops on this forum. We got experience dealing with your argument tactics and anti-freedom attitudes.

Click to expand...

Is that your list of points to refute? Because it sounded like more crying and bashing.

Just saying....

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Citizen said:

See, guys. Typical cop tactic. He's asking me a question, trying to get me to respond.

No, sir, buster. You're the one who launched the ad hominem attack instead of explaining why our refutation of your dodges and omissions (across multiple threads, thank you). You figure out which points you wanted to dodge and didn't want to counter-argue.

Click to expand...

Ok I'll break down both sides since your incapable of doing your own work...

You- talking to cops is bad because they are only going to screw you by looking for evidence against you.

Me- no sir we don't screw you. Just a day ago I let a giy go after a 5 maybe 6 minute conversation because he explained where he was coming from and showed evidence. He avoided a lot of hassle on both of our parts. We both left happy and we wished each other a good night and to be safe.



Anything else? Pretty sure Palo also used an example of guys getting cleared at the outset because they were willing to talk and state they didn't do anything and cooperated.

Have I made it clear enough?

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk

Primus said:

SNIP There's only 3 guys on here that are current le and have been playing lately. Does it help or hurt your cause to treat them the way you've treated them? With the bashing and the general fear mongering of police how are we supposed to represent you guys when people from our department ask us?

For example we have a guy who's le from NC and actually deals with OCers. Well he takes time and writes a post trying to reach out. He promptly gets ridiculed and run out. So how do you think he's potraying you guys at the next roll call? So how do you think the next time he deals with an OCer is going to go? Will he break any laws. No. But I wouldn't expect any slack either.

Click to expand...

Ohhh, that one's juicy.

Citizens can't have strong opinions and voice them vigorously in support of freedom, or some cops will have some sort of "bad taste" about OCers. Heh, heh, heh. Now, what exactly are those cops gonna do with that "bad impression?" Pass along the "bad impression". I know! They'll paint all OCers with a broad brush because they don't like some OCers. He's threatening OCer-bashing! Bwahahahhhahahahahhahahaa!!!

Or, as Primus inadvertently admits, the cops will let their personal prejudice get in the way and not grant "any slack either." Presumably, to all OCers, since the OCers with the police-objected attitude aren't being singled out.

And, remember. He's a cop. Its not invalid to assume he knows cops, how they think, and how they'll behave.

Oh, man. I wonder if Primus's department knows what he's posting on here.

Primus said:

If your just walking along and someone rolls up. At least try and talk first before you f*** yourself. How can I be any more blunt about it?

Click to expand...

OK. I'll ask if I'm free to go.

WalkingWolf said:

I had a friend/HA who got drunk and rode his FL to the end of No Name Key, hitting the large rock at the end of the road. He was injured critically and his jaw was shattered, so he could not talk to the police. After he got out of the hospital, and a couple months passed the Monroe County Sheriffs office arrested him for DUI. When they went to court the judge threw the case out, because???

OK enough time has passed I will give the answer why the judge threw out the charges. Because he could not be placed on the motorcycle. Everybody knew he was driving it, including the judge, but when the judge asked the prosecution what proof they had of him operating the vehicle they could not provide any.

Not only did he keep his mouth shut, it was wired shut. Because there was no statement the state lost.

Only time a arrest is valid is when there is evidence and probable cause. If there is none the officer is violating the constitution by making a bogus arrest. If the officer releases a suspect only on that suspect's word he is innocent, he deserves the ridicule he receives.

Click to expand...

Great point.

Separately, that judge reminds me of a judge (Mark Twain?) mentioned. Or, maybe Abe Lincoln. The judge was a stickler for law and legal details. The example given was that if blowing your nose in public was illegal, he'd accept the indictment. But! If the indictment failed to specifiy which hand was used to blow the nose, he'd quash the indictment.

Along the lines of your judge, ancient Hebrew judges would tell witnesses something along these lines. If you see one man with a sword chasing another man. And, he chases him into a house. And, you run into the house and find him standing over the other, blood dripping from the sword, and the victim in his death throes--you saw nothing.* Meaning, its a lesson in the difference between facts and conclusions.


*The Origins of the Fifth Amendment: The Right Against Self-Incrimination. By Leonard Levy. The admonition about seeing nothing is in the appendix.

This thread is a total train wreck of personal insults.

LEOs are not our enemies. While much of the advice is good, there is no need/reason to be abrasive or insulting.

That stops here.