wasn't taking a shot at anyonelowing wrote:
Funny, I am 43 years old and I never had to say such things to a cop. Oh well.FatherTed wrote:
as jay-z wisely put it 'you gonna need a warrant for that'
Don't bawl out the cops and you probably won't provoke such a reaction.AussieReaper wrote:
Black Harvard scholar equals shithead, lowing? Grow up.
I did address the post --> it lacks common senselowing wrote:
If I act like this to cops I would fully expect to be dragged off. Not to worry though, I respect the police and what we charge them do to.Diesel_dyk wrote:
I glad he was protecting all of our rights, including yourslowing wrote:
Actually the cop did not respond to a "black" man breaking into a house, they responded to a man breaking into a house.
So let me get this straight. As liberals, you expect to have all guns removed from law abiding citizens claiming protection is the job of the police. Then when the police show up to actually protect you, you claim you can treat them anyway you want ( in your home ) refuse to identify yourself, and hassle them for trying to do what you have charged them to do.
As a liberal you EXPECT and DEMAND their protection,because feel your protection is not your responsibility, but in the same breathe declare you owe nothing to their position of authority in dealing with a situation, and this makes perfect sense to you. You mother fuckers are insane.
BTW Cambridge dropped the charges, I expect that there will be a huge lawsuit on this one. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090721/ap_ … disorderly
So if the arrest was SO kosher, I doubt that would have happened. Here's to hoping that one day you get dragged off kicking an screaming from your home by some retarded, under educated cop/ bully..... and perhaps clubbed in the privates and probed in the neither regions... may then you might learn empathy, because I sense a real lack of empathy in your statements that results in a real lack of common sense.
By the way, don't quote a post if you are not actually addressing the post.
QFTTurquoise wrote:
What I've read of this suggests that the professor didn't do anything illegal, but he did act like a douchebag.
Had he chosen a calmer way to act, this would never have happened.
Well, that's why I hope he loses the case. I know he'll probably win, but these lawyer types are just looking for a reason to sue.Diesel_dyk wrote:
QFTTurquoise wrote:
What I've read of this suggests that the professor didn't do anything illegal, but he did act like a douchebag.
Had he chosen a calmer way to act, this would never have happened.
I have to agree, proviso, probably racial tensions surfacing, and the profesor is older and probably not willing to back down in his own house.
But the cop just provided this guy with a racial justice platform to work from, its like a Harvard activist wet dream.... I can't wait to hear about what happens next.
Knowing Harvard and its influence on the City of Cambridge I would imagine that there was some pressure on the city to dump this case and fast.Turquoise wrote:
Well, that's why I hope he loses the case. I know he'll probably win, but these lawyer types are just looking for a reason to sue.Diesel_dyk wrote:
QFTTurquoise wrote:
What I've read of this suggests that the professor didn't do anything illegal, but he did act like a douchebag.
Had he chosen a calmer way to act, this would never have happened.
I have to agree, proviso, probably racial tensions surfacing, and the profesor is older and probably not willing to back down in his own house.
But the cop just provided this guy with a racial justice platform to work from, its like a Harvard activist wet dream.... I can't wait to hear about what happens next.
I say dump the guy in the middle of Alabama, so he can remember what REAL racism is. (halfway joking on that, of course)
ticking me off? I for the most part, rarely get pissed off in this forum, you are more than welcome to continue to try however, and good luck with it.Diesel_dyk wrote:
I did address the post --> it lacks common senselowing wrote:
If I act like this to cops I would fully expect to be dragged off. Not to worry though, I respect the police and what we charge them do to.Diesel_dyk wrote:
I glad he was protecting all of our rights, including yours
BTW Cambridge dropped the charges, I expect that there will be a huge lawsuit on this one. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090721/ap_ … disorderly
So if the arrest was SO kosher, I doubt that would have happened. Here's to hoping that one day you get dragged off kicking an screaming from your home by some retarded, under educated cop/ bully..... and perhaps clubbed in the privates and probed in the neither regions... may then you might learn empathy, because I sense a real lack of empathy in your statements that results in a real lack of common sense.
By the way, don't quote a post if you are not actually addressing the post.
And the arguments about liberals and guns are non sequitor the OP
And I generally don't waste my time commenting on rants but you're a special case. I'm not sure is ticking you off is sport or just plain fun.
So apparently this professor was returning from China where he was filming a PBS documentary. He returned to his house, tried to open the front door and it was stuck. so he went in the back door let himself in with his key. then open the front door and was trying to fix the stuck front door on the house which he OWNS when the cops showed up.
So as you say "I respect the police and what we charge them do to." well this professor was harassed and arrested for.... doing maintenance on his own house.... yah I think the cops are charged with protecting property by prohibiting owners from doing maintenance.
and BTW he was arrested by Harvard police in 2004 for walking through campus without ID.... That's twice for him, I'd say there's a problem with cops feeling entitled in Cambridge that needs to be cleaned up.
There is nothing in the law that says you need to cooperate with the police. And there is nothing that says you can't eject a cop from your property like a lousy trespasser. To bad this guy didn't just retreat into his own home and tell them to get the F off of his property. But then again the cops would have probably broke the door down and arrested him under the criminal charge of "a black man living in a white man's house." Remember its his property, he can kick to door down, break a window, paint a Malcolm X mural on it, whatever he wants and that's because its his property and he has property rights.
I really hope this guy sues and wins
Last edited by lowing (2009-07-21 17:02:07)
No, this is a cops can't catch a break from liberals who refuse their authority, yet insist they protect them, thread.S3v3N wrote:
Hey look another Cops are terrible thread.
Also if you go on the NAACP website, you can link to a program that spells out how you can bust cops for what they perceived as being bad by video taping them or cell phone pics etc...., yet have no provisions or program helping cops bust criminals. Go figure huh?S3v3N wrote:
Hey look another Cops are terrible thread.
Hmmmkay.lowing wrote:
Also if you go on the NAACP website, you can link to a program that spells out how you can bust cops for what they perceived as being bad by video taping them or cell phone pics etc...., yet have no provisions or program helping cops bust criminals. Go figure huh?S3v3N wrote:
Hey look another Cops are terrible thread.
Any chance they throw the book more often at not black people, but people that engage in such behavior more frequently? Also should the book not hit harder on repeat offenders?ATG wrote:
Hmmmkay.lowing wrote:
Also if you go on the NAACP website, you can link to a program that spells out how you can bust cops for what they perceived as being bad by video taping them or cell phone pics etc...., yet have no provisions or program helping cops bust criminals. Go figure huh?S3v3N wrote:
Hey look another Cops are terrible thread.
Why would they?
Beings as the police arguably throw the book harder and more often at blacks, why the hell would they?
Quite the stretch of logic there pal.
Last edited by lowing (2009-07-21 17:54:15)
Same for you Alex.ATG wrote:
Hmmmkay.lowing wrote:
Also if you go on the NAACP website, you can link to a program that spells out how you can bust cops for what they perceived as being bad by video taping them or cell phone pics etc...., yet have no provisions or program helping cops bust criminals. Go figure huh?S3v3N wrote:
Hey look another Cops are terrible thread.
Why would they?
Beings as the police arguably throw the book harder and more often at blacks, why the hell would they?
Quite the stretch of logic there pal.
Here's a link to the NBC evening news story on this, like all news the story gets updated as the facts come to light. charges. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp … 4#32061094 Just in case you thought I was making it up. Sorry the facts don't fit your distorted view of what happened. And Cambridge dropped thelowing wrote:
as for the rest of your post, there really isn't much worth debating since nothing of what you said, fits to the actual events of the situation. Try re-reading it, like I did and see if you can come up with something, instead of making up bullshit.
Actually, you totally do. You can do and say lots of things to police officers that if they were normal members of the public might land you in jail. I completely agree that Gates didn't act very sensibly and could've handled the situation better, the fact is the officers had no grounds (and certainly no reason) to arrest him. These vindictive arrests of awkward people who make the polices lives a little bit more difficult are a waste of the police forces time, the judicial systems time and the taxpayers money. They should not happen.lowing wrote:
Gotta disagree, you have NO RIGHT, treating the police investigating a reported crime like shit. Being uncooperative will not end well for you.Bertster7 wrote:
In your own home, when you haven't commited a crime, that's simply not the case. It's you running the show unless they have a warrant.lowing wrote:
Why do you continue to ignore the fact that the guy refused to show ID initially? It is like a high speed chase, if you pull over as soon as they turn on the sirens, you will have no problem, if you do it after a 100 mile an hour chase through a nieghborhood, you have just bought some problems.
and again,during an investigation it is the cop thatis running the show, not the suspect.
If you prove your identity to them, you are well within your rights to then tell them to get off your property immediately. The moment his identity was established they had no business being there. He did show them ID, whether there was a delay or not does not impact his rights in his own home.
However it does figure you would take the side of a guy who would act like that, over a police officer who was there to sort out a situation and possibly prevent a robbery.
It does figure that you could not possibly agree that, all the guy had to do was be repectful, cooperate, and let the cop gather his information so he can determain everything was fine and he could be on his way without incident.
yup that is the story, the cops were called, the cop waas not simply driving by and saw this happening. They were responding to a call.Diesel_dyk wrote:
Here's a link to the NBC evening news story on this, like all news the story gets updated as the facts come to light. charges. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp … 4#32061094 Just in case you thought I was making it up. Sorry the facts don't fit your distorted view of what happened. And Cambridge dropped thelowing wrote:
as for the rest of your post, there really isn't much worth debating since nothing of what you said, fits to the actual events of the situation. Try re-reading it, like I did and see if you can come up with something, instead of making up bullshit.
Quote from the NBC story
the professor "returned home from a weeks travel and found his front door jammed, he went in through the backdoor, and then with the help of his driver also an African American pulled the front door open, a witness mistook the scene for a burglary in progress..." and called the cops.
Anyway, that's the story, if you're working on your front door I would call that doing home maintenance and that's basically what he was doing when they arrested him. The professor produced two forms of ID and the cop simply refused to believe he lived in the house, I'd say that fact alone is enough to label this cop a worthless POS.
I guess if he were up on a ladder painting a second story window sill the cop would have shot him off the ladder and arrested him for graffiti /sarcasm
So much for the saying a home is a man's castle.
so you say we should be able to trat cops any way we feel like it thumbing our noses at authority and expect them to walk away with their tails between their legs as if YOU are in charge of any given scenerio. NOt a very effective police force pal, especially since most of you expect them to do your job of defending yourselves.Bertster7 wrote:
Actually, you totally do. You can do and say lots of things to police officers that if they were normal members of the public might land you in jail. I completely agree that Gates didn't act very sensibly and could've handled the situation better, the fact is the officers had no grounds (and certainly no reason) to arrest him. These vindictive arrests of awkward people who make the polices lives a little bit more difficult are a waste of the police forces time, the judicial systems time and the taxpayers money. They should not happen.lowing wrote:
Gotta disagree, you have NO RIGHT, treating the police investigating a reported crime like shit. Being uncooperative will not end well for you.Bertster7 wrote:
In your own home, when you haven't commited a crime, that's simply not the case. It's you running the show unless they have a warrant.
If you prove your identity to them, you are well within your rights to then tell them to get off your property immediately. The moment his identity was established they had no business being there. He did show them ID, whether there was a delay or not does not impact his rights in his own home.
However it does figure you would take the side of a guy who would act like that, over a police officer who was there to sort out a situation and possibly prevent a robbery.
It does figure that you could not possibly agree that, all the guy had to do was be repectful, cooperate, and let the cop gather his information so he can determain everything was fine and he could be on his way without incident.
If the officers had left without incident after being yelled at (they're police officers ffs they're supposed to be fairly thick skinned) then nothing further would've come of this. As it is the whole process of arresting him will have wasted time and money. Since this sort of thing happens extremely regularly it becomes a major drain on resources.
Cops don't have 'authority' in someones own home when no crime has been committed.lowing wrote:
No, this is a cops can't catch a break from liberals who refuse their authority
When a cop is called to investigate a situation, yeah he has the authority to conduct his investigation.Dilbert_X wrote:
Cops don't have 'authority' in someones own home when no crime has been committed.lowing wrote:
No, this is a cops can't catch a break from liberals who refuse their authority
There are things like benefit of the doubt, innocent until proven guilty, suspect until proven otherwise.
Of course in a Police state its not quite like that.
And people are allowed not to cooperate if they don't want to.he has the authority to conduct his investigation
You conduct your investigation, weigh up the available information and take action on it.A quick thought, in your world, how do you PROVE someone is innocent or guilty, or given the benifit of the doubt or beyond a reasonable doubt without investigating and adding up the facts?
lol you are correct, this is when they are arrested and taken in to get sorted out.Dilbert_X wrote:
And people are allowed not to cooperate if they don't want to.he has the authority to conduct his investigationYou conduct your investigation, weigh up the available information and take action on it.A quick thought, in your world, how do you PROVE someone is innocent or guilty, or given the benifit of the doubt or beyond a reasonable doubt without investigating and adding up the facts?
Police can't force people to speak, show ID, obey their orders, respect their 'authority' if they choose not to.
If someone refuses to cooperate then they can be arrested as a suspect, but not for refusing to cooperate.
Seems probable the guy was being a twat but being a twat is not an arrestable offence - yet.
Since he wasn't arrested as a burglary suspect the Police officer was just being a dickhead.
