or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › WTF over-zealous police?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

WTF over-zealous police? - Page 165

post #2461 of 6095
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3146802/Surveillance-footage-shows-unauthorized-force-fired-New-Orleans-police-officer-used-against-16-year-old-girl.html#v-4333556141001

Guy goes right from 0-10 against a 16 year old girl because she's giving him backtalk.
post #2462 of 6095
http://tinyurl.com/oyy58m4


Cop goes 0-10 against his fellow K-9 officer.
post #2463 of 6095
Quote:
Two major credit card companies this week announced that they will refuse to process payments for "adult" ads on the popular advertising site Backpage.com. Mastercard said Tuesday that it would no longer process these payments; on Wednesday, Visa followed suit. Since American Express did the same earlier this year, that leaves Bitcoin as the only current means of paying for adult ads on Backpage.

Both Visa and Mastercard decided to stop processing the payments upon request from Thomas Dart, a Cook County, Illinois, sheriff on a crusade against Backpage.com. "We have objectively found [sites like Backpage] promote prostitution and facilitate online sex trafficking," he wrote in a letter to the credit card companies. "Institutions such as yours have the moral, social and legal right to step up on this pervasive problem and make a fundamental and everlasting difference."


http://reason.com/archives/2015/07/02/visa-mastercard-refuse-backpage-payments#comment_5415690


TLDR: Petty tyrant uses clout to shut down credit card payments nationwide to a free-market website that has violated no laws.

Look at this badass, he's like "Walker: Sex Traffic Ranger".



Thank goodness there's no more serious crimes occurring in Chicago so he can spend his time saving hookers from voluntarily selling their pussies.
post #2464 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harold falcon View Post

Get a clue. You've jumped into this Fred on page 163. We've been discussing this for 2 years. Your lame and sad unjustified proclamation that it was a righteous shoot based on your incorrect reading of the penal code does you no favours. If you want to start a debate by disagreeing with my previous post you have to explain why I'm wrong, rather than just be a stupid cunt.

The fact is there was no imminent danger when Sweat was shot. Ergo, the shoot was not good. Of course, no one is going to stick up for a wanted felon so everybody jumps on the cop's dick to celebrate.

I can pick and choose to fight whatever the fuck I want. I'm not beholden to someone else's idea of what constitutes police brutality.

You're 26 years old and you've got the whole criminal justice system figured out. You've been a lawyer for what, 2 1/2 years? Show some fucking humility.

And again, you should lurk more before you post stupid shit. The idea that I would visit the HuffPo is ludicrous.
reread the penal code. Deadly force is permitted for escape in the first degree. Also, your language is appropriate.
Edited by Jmm722 - 7/2/15 at 11:31am
post #2465 of 6095

Because I want to see further argument, here is the code:

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
S 35.30 Justification; use of physical force in making an arrest or in
             preventing an escape.
   1. A police officer or a peace officer, in the course of effecting  or
  attempting  to  effect  an  arrest,  or  of  preventing or attempting to
  prevent the escape from custody, of a person whom he or  she  reasonably
  believes  to  have committed an offense, may use physical force when and
  to the extent he or she reasonably believes  such  to  be  necessary  to
  effect  the  arrest,  or  to  prevent  the  escape  from  custody, or in
  self-defense or to defend a third person from what he or she  reasonably
  believes  to  be  the use or imminent use of physical force; except that
  deadly physical force may be used for such purposes only when he or  she
  reasonably believes that:
    (a) The offense committed by such person was:
    (i)  a  felony  or  an attempt to commit a felony involving the use or
  attempted use or threatened imminent use of  physical  force  against  a
  person; or
    (ii)  kidnapping,  arson,  escape in the first degree, burglary in the
  first degree or any attempt to commit such a crime; or
    (b) The offense committed or attempted by such person was a felony and
  that, in the course of resisting arrest therefor or attempting to escape
  from custody, such person is armed with a firearm or deadly weapon; or
    (c) Regardless of the particular offense which is the subject  of  the
  arrest  or  attempted  escape,  the  use  of  deadly  physical  force is
  necessary to defend the police  officer  or  peace  officer  or  another
  person  from  what  the  officer  reasonably  believes  to be the use or
  imminent use of deadly physical force.
post #2466 of 6095
From the rules cops made for themselves to follow:


https://www.muckrock.com/foi/new-york-city-17/nypd-patrol-guide-11302/#file-21775

Quote:
"police officers shall not discharge their firearms to subdue a fleeing felon who presents no threat of imminent death or serious physical injury to themselves or another person present."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jmm722 View Post

reread the penal code. Deadly force is permitted for escape in the first degree.


So your argument is that deadly force is permitted to prevent the escape of a person who has committed the offense of escape in the first degree? So by virtue of escaping the person is simultaneously guilty of two crimes? Having escaped and escaping? Does this man have a time machine?
post #2467 of 6095

It was a state trooper though... 

post #2468 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by ethanm View Post

It was a state trooper though... 


Glad we hold them to a lower standard then.
post #2469 of 6095

In my experience they are usually bigger dickheads. I think its the hat. Putting on a campaign hat automatically increases your dickheadedness +5. 

post #2470 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harold falcon View Post

From the rules cops made for themselves to follow:


https://www.muckrock.com/foi/new-york-city-17/nypd-patrol-guide-11302/#file-21775

So your argument is that deadly force is permitted to prevent the escape of a person who has committed the offense of escape in the first degree? So by virtue of escaping the person is simultaneously guilty of two crimes? Having escaped and escaping? Does this man have a time machine?


NYC has a different policy than New York state.  That policy has no bearing on anyone besides NYPD.  Each police department can promulgate their own standards, but they have no impact on another department.  

 

Also, you're misreading the penal code again.  It is "in the course of effecting or attempting to effect an arrest" OR "of preventing or attempting to prevent the escape from custody".  The applicable standard would be "in the course of effecting or attempting to effect an arrest" not what you state.  I have bolded the applicable parts below.  

 

1 A police officer or a peace officer, in the course of effecting or attempting to effect an arrest, or of preventing or attempting to prevent the escape from custody, of a person whom he or she reasonably believes to have committed an offense, may use physical force when and to the extent he or she reasonably believes such to be necessary to effect the arrest, or to prevent the escape from custody, or 1 in self-defense or to defend a third person from what he or she reasonably believes to be the use or imminent use of physical force; except that 2 deadly physical force may be used for such purposes only when he or she reasonably believes that: reasonably believes that:

  • (a)  The offense committed by such person was:
    • (i)  a felony or an attempt to commit a felony involving the use or attempted use or threatened imminent use of physical force against a person; or
    • (ii)  kidnapping, arson, escape in the first degree, burglary in the first degree or any attempt to commit such a crime; or

 

 

Feel free to apologize for your tone and attitude at any time.

post #2471 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jmm722 View Post

Feel free to apologize for your tone and attitude at any time.

HAHAHA, clearly this guy is new smile.gif
post #2472 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by A Canuker View Post


HAHAHA, clearly this guy is new smile.gif


Yeah, but I think calling me a "cunt" was a little uncalled for.

post #2473 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jmm722 View Post
 


Yeah, but I think calling me a "cunt" was a little uncalled for.


Yeah, I mean, you definitely sound more like a twat. 

post #2474 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by ethanm View Post
 


Yeah, I mean, you definitely sound more like a twat. 


Because I was right?  makes sense

post #2475 of 6095
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jmm722 View Post

reread the penal code. Deadly force is permitted for escape in the first degree.

I suppose the school you went to taught you that the Nazis were right killing the Jews because their laws said they can? There is something called morality, which is a higher standard than ethics.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › WTF over-zealous police?