Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics & World News' started by stinkyboy, Apr 16, 2009.
Please register to disable this ad.
White people are so funny when they get ****ed over by the man.
Where's your messiah now, Flanders?
Guy's a real K-9 and search/seizure expert. That said, if this story is even half-true, that's more than pretty ****ed up and he's got a hell of a Bivens lawsuit ahead of him...
Must spread rep? How can this be??!
Based on the last names he mentioned, it sounds like a little reverse racisim might have been going on there.
I totally believe his story.
Why are we permitting this sort of thing to happen here?
No such thing as "reverse" racism...that'd be racial egalitarianism. There's just plain old racism, whichever way it's going... (end semantics)
Edit: I do find it intriguing that you immediately see racism in a story with no racial dimension besides some last names...
Edit II: How exactly is anyone "allowing" this to happen...it's not yet been taken up legally, has it? You can't stop people with free will, and cops have free will...and some cops are bad cops. You can only try to mitigate it up front (set rules) deal with it after the fact (consequences to breaking rules), like any other crime. Police should be held to a harsher justice for willing criminal acts, however, since they've willingly taken on a role which should display the highest standards and have an authority to abuse.
Actually reverse racism would be a white person loving people of other colors and inherently hating/distrusting/stereotyping white people (you know, like Silver). Not that the poor oppressed whities prone to using the term use it that way, but that is what it would mean if it were a real thing.
I thought that was bizarro racism?
maybe it is just me. i always get all uptight when i hear about fellow crackerz gettin the beat down from the (hispanic-sounding-last-named) man. my bad.
So what am I talking about in saying, "Why are we permitting this sort of thing to happen here?"
I am talking about the bigger picture. I am talking about cops asserting whatever authority they want and then you had better comply or you will be forced to. It doesn't matter what your rights are. Your rights don't matter.
You could comply and complain later, or stand up for your rights and take a beating... either way you are wrong, and they are justified, and will be found to have reasonable cause or whatever. Unless maybe you have some video of what went down, or maybe even if you do, it probably doesn't matter anyhow.
Every funking day there is a new story about how some cop beat somebody bloody or maybe even killed them, but hey it's just a few bad apples, right?
Sounds like a pervasive and systemic issue to me.
Naw that's option 2 of the kansas city phenomenon™.
1: Where youth teter the fine line between wanting to string up black people and
2: listen to nothing but hip hop, lower their WRXs and go on oprah to talk about how they're really a black man trapped in a white body.......and call anyone who disagrees a racist.
I seen it.
Here is a little longer version of the story. The title suggests this may be a sermon excerpt. If so, he has now threatened his church's not for profit status by speaking politically. If he keeps pushing this, they will keep coming back with ever larger hammers.
It's just so funked up.
I think anyone who has dealt with a police stop knows that while in court, your civil rights will be protected and defended, that on the side of the road, anything can happen.
What's saying this pleasant looking white man isn't a White Supremacist? What's saying the investigating officer forgot to take his bipolar meds?
I haven't listened to his recount all the way thru. I read a few accounts from local tv news, which are mostly reporting his side only. Let's just say Attention Whore.
What was he doing in San Diego for a couple of days, huh? We all know what that means...
edit: I just listened to his sermon and he actually recommends NOT reading 1984 because "it has some bad content."
Sorry, I don't. Could you explain. Even with my amazingly high standardized testing scores I don't know everything.
I wonder what parts are bad exactly. The sexy parts, or the oppressive, lying, governmental ones?
Haha, he used the metric system to describe how much blood was on his face.
Donkey show in TJ. Bank on it...
I hate everyone, although I do hold a special place of hate in my heart for white people.
I'm more of a garden variety misanthrope...
As long as it's a male donkey and a female hooker, everyone still goes to heaven. (So long as they regret doing it or buying tickets to see it, that is...)
And what would you suggest...? Perhaps rules and laws defining conduct and consequences for breaking those laws...? Perhaps a free media to report on news stories so that people can see what's going on to the extent that they care to know?
For all your endless bitching about the media and your cleverly-spelled alternatives to "****" and "crap", you sure do tend to grab a lot of tasty bits from the media stream to feed your paranoia while ignoring the huge amount of litigation in this country surrounding police conduct. I know plenty of people who can carp (see, I used the word as a verb, and correctly, even) endlessly about the ridiculous number of settlements people get from police departments after the police take completely justifiable action in defense of themselves or the public...they're just as wrong as you, of course, reality being quite a bit more moderate than the histrionic over-dramatic ranters would like it to be.
Police are sued successfully all the time. Police departments give make out-of-court settlements, big, small, justified and unjustified, all the time. This is a HUGE country with a lot of people, a lot of cops, and a lot of crime. It generates a relatively large number of stories to float across your internet browser, which despite your SAT scores, you just can't filter or cross-reference.
You'd see an unarmed, panicked woman running around a corner, chased closely by a cop, watch the cop strike her with a baton, jam her roughly to the ground cutting her face on the pavement, and apply a painful wristlock until she screams, and you'd scream "police brutality" without ever asking if, say, the woman was under legitimate arrest, then slipped her handcuffs, kicked his partner in the balls, and ran away.
So all in all, things work around here. Not well enough for some keyboard commandos, but well enough for those who live in reality. Hey, just ask the BART cop who's on trial for murder how he enjoys his total immunity to consequences...
I like your first suggestion Mike. It sounds like how things are supposed to work.
Let me address the issue of payouts you mention. So, right or wrong, when there is a payout made, where does the money come from? The officer's personal account?
No, it comes from the government, which gets its money from the people.
So when **** like this happens, the people are double losers. They lose when their rights are violated, and the lose again when they get to pay compensation.
It seems to me the people are on the losing end most of the time (and keep in mind that I softened this statement from all the time, because I am sure sometime it must break for the people, because if it never did, the people wouldn't put up with it.).
Oddly enough, it's how it does work. However there are injustices in the world, and sometimes criminals get away, whether out of uniform or in uniform.
In a Bivens lawsuit, it comes from the officer. If the government determines an officer was clearly or willfully acting outside his Constitutional authority, an officer loses qualified immunity. Department settlements are different, of course, but many times outside settlements are made against very specious claims because it's cheaper than going to court in the end, right or wrong.
seems like numbnuts refused to get out of the car. refusing to do what an law official tells you what to do is generally not going to end up well.
i have no sympathy for this guy, it seems like he just wanted to make a scene.
A local TV station posted links to his other you tube videos. He likes to try to antagonize cops and border patrol agents. Seems like he got what he wanted.
Unless he provoked them in a way that presented a physical threat, neither being an asshole nor refusing unlawful search are grounds for the beatdown he got.
Good news is, all of this was video-taped extensively so both he and the officers involved should get a fair trial if they can keep the media circus out of this.
I watched some of them. It really looks like someone asserting their constitutional rights to me. Maybe he is provoking even, but still always seemed to be within his rights.
Johnny Law really doesn't like it when his authority is challenged and questioned though. It does seem like it was just a matter of time until one of these confrontations ended the way it did.
So now it did, and if it gets to court, I predict that there will be no consequence to the officers involved. I also predict that the video surveillance was inexplicably malfunctioning that day.
By the way, his understanding of his Constitutional rights is very flawed. They don't mean whatever he wants them to mean or thinks they mean.
Based *only* on his account, which I don't automatically accept as, ahem, gospel, I still don't think the cops dealt with his non-compliance reasonably.
If he had pulled into the secondary inspection, could the cops have just left him in the car until he could not stand it anymore? it is AZ and it would get hot in a closed car in short order.
I'm not surprised that it happened at this particular check point. I pass through it twice a month, and there is a stern no nonsense type of feel at this check point. The other ones on the 8 seem a lot more laid back.
delivering drugs or illegals?
apparently, there is a lot of built up anger over all the surveillance going down in the PHX area.
The guy says right up front in the video that he refused to answer the border patrol's questions. Why? Why would you refuse to answer questions? These guys are getting paid to ask you questions, they're doing there job. If you have nothing to hide you'll be on your way in no time flat.
That being said, his asshattery does not justify the beating he took (assuming his story is accurate).
But the other question to be asked is what to do when a police officer stops you.
According to the ACLU, "In certain cases, your car can be searched without a warrant as long as the police have probable cause."
The pastor did indicate the border police said they had dogs sniff his car and found probable cause of drugs or humans.
But in this bit of advice, the ACLU does not advise you to refuse searches, just noting the consequences of refusal or compliance.
From a layman's viewpoint, if a cop wants to search your car and you have nothing to hide, you might as well allow it because your car is going to get searched, except it will take a lot longer.
I also know that the harder you make it for police, the more unpleasant the police become.
Is it fair? Not to me. What can I do about it? Fight it at the Supreme Court?
which brings us back to my original point.
citizens have no rights. comply or expect a beatdown.
these are the only 2 choices. which is really no choice at all.
Hahaa, yes you're right. Citizens are expected to comply with the law. Amazing huh? You're right on the first half. The beat down? No, it should have been handled better.
The problem is you only hear about the situations that go South. You don't get You Tube video's of people being peaceably arrested for refusing a search. Most of the time, the above doesn't happen, and police searches go on every day across the country.
Also, I may be wrong here but isn't refusing a search probably cause that you have a reason to be searched?
To say that "Citizens have no rights" is really a pretty dramatic statement. How about, "sometimes citizen's rights are ignored by bad police enforcement".
Rick, are the police in your brain obligated to negotiate people into being arrested? They have to convince a subject to submit himself to custody willingly, or else they just have to walk away and hope the next suspect cooperates more?
He has rights. None of them were violated except, possibly, his 4th amendment right against unreasonable seizure (NOT unreasonable search) due to the force used to place him under arrest. Again, though, that's contextual and the subsequent legal action will determine whether it was appropriate or not.
This idea that there is no recourse to police abuses or mistakes is belied by the very fact that we have case law determining what police can and can't do and by the amount of litigation and investigation into use of force by police. I've been to and lived in countries with no such recourse. America's got plenty of it. And you generally don't get your ass beaten by the police, right or wrong, if you follow Chris Rock's simple rules in the first place.
This self-proclaimed Messiah of Constitutional rights is a ****ing moron and an egotistical attention whore of the first order, whether or not the police beat him without cause. Nonetheless, if they did, I hope they pay an appropriate price, whether it's time on the beach, loss of pay, loss of a job, or being his butler for the next year.
Indeed he is a moron. He thinks he's above being questioned so decides not to answer any, then get's pissed when the cops question his motives as to why he won't answer questions.
And MikeD, I really like the butler idea. Mind if I take that to some TV execs for a pilot????
If the police searched my car without a warrant, any evidence would be thrown out. If they used "probable cause", they better be able to prove it.
That is my fourth amendment rights.
Is it unreasonable to search the car of a driver who failed a dog sniffing challenge, and then refused to step out to be patted down (which is considered to be a reasonable search)?
Well then, you may as well just actually go find the constitution and rip the 4th amendment right out.
It's barely hanging by a thread as is.
I think you had better check your constitution on that one.
Wait, people are arrested for refusing to be searched? What would the charge be?
Right, because most of the time people comply because they know they have no real choice in the matter.
That is some damn good advice.