(05-13-2015 09:40 AM)Fitbud Wrote: The Real Epidemic.
Crazy, Drugged up Out Of Control Youth with Nothing Else to Do but act the Thug with innocent people and let their Stupidity get themselves Killed. Yeah It's becoming an epidemic Alright.
Meanwhile this kid does the same thing and lives.
Not the same thing.
Happens Daily at UCF ! Oh ! Cop had body cam too !
(This post was last modified: 05-13-2015 11:53 AM by CardFan1.)
(05-13-2015 09:53 AM)CardFan1 Wrote: Crazy, Drugged up Out Of Control Youth with Nothing Else to Do but act the Thug with innocent people and let their Stupidity get themselves Killed. Yeah It's becoming an epidemic Alright.
There's that "T" word again to describe a black man.
I just don't understand how this has become a political issue. This should just be a right and wrong issue yet it seems that many liberals are claiming that there is a huge problem with our police force. In my opinion, it seems like the problem, by in large (and yes I know there are some bad cops), is an issue with people, whether they are black or white, respecting our police officers. Why are you resisting arrest? If you feel wrongly accused, fine, let them arrest you and get a lawyer and argue your case, don't attack the police officer.
It seems like the only problem we have is a growing number of people that think it's okay to attack police officers who are trying to make their communities safer.
(05-13-2015 12:06 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote: There have been what, 50 shootings in Baltimore since the curfew was lifted? How many have those awful police been involved in?
Funny how Obama, Mosby, Sharpton, etc have all been silent about that.
For the millionth time, it's not about shootings or deaths. It's about authorities seemingly dragging their feet when it comes to arresting the person(s) responsible.
(05-13-2015 12:06 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote: There have been what, 50 shootings in Baltimore since the curfew was lifted? How many have those awful police been involved in?
Funny how Obama, Mosby, Sharpton, etc have all been silent about that.
For the millionth time, it's not about shootings or deaths. It's about authorities seemingly dragging their feet when it comes to arresting the person(s) responsible.
So what you want is for them to throw cops in jail without an investigation and without following the established procedure for these types of investigations?
In essence what you want is to violate their civil rights just because they are cops.
(05-13-2015 12:06 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote: There have been what, 50 shootings in Baltimore since the curfew was lifted? How many have those awful police been involved in?
Funny how Obama, Mosby, Sharpton, etc have all been silent about that.
For the millionth time, it's not about shootings or deaths. It's about authorities seemingly dragging their feet when it comes to arresting the person(s) responsible.
So what you want is for them to throw cops in jail without an investigation and without following the established procedure for these types of investigations?
In essence what you want is to violate their civil rights just because they are cops.
When did I ever say what I want.
I'm simply trying to explain the difference between incidents regarding when people protest and don't protest.
(05-13-2015 12:06 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote: There have been what, 50 shootings in Baltimore since the curfew was lifted? How many have those awful police been involved in?
Funny how Obama, Mosby, Sharpton, etc have all been silent about that.
For the millionth time, it's not about shootings or deaths. It's about authorities seemingly dragging their feet when it comes to arresting the person(s) responsible.
So what you want is for them to throw cops in jail without an investigation and without following the established procedure for these types of investigations?
In essence what you want is to violate their civil rights just because they are cops.
When did I ever say what I want.
I'm simply trying to explain the difference between incidents regarding when people protest and don't protest.
(05-13-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote: For the millionth time, it's not about shootings or deaths. It's about authorities seemingly dragging their feet when it comes to arresting the person(s) responsible.
If that is actually your concern, then you don't understand the process. Someone else can explain it better, but generally speaking, in order to arrest someone, you have to present your evidence to a judge ( a formality often) but once you serve that arrest warrant, his attorney will demand a hearing where the evidence can be challenged/disputed. Unless you have a lot of your evidence ready to roll, you risk the judge throwing the case out and you never get to try them.
You guys seem to think... dead person = immediate arrest... and that just isn't always or even often the case... especially when elements of self defense appear. In cop shootings or shootings on your own property of someone who didn't belong there, it is almost NEVER the case.
Perfect example was ZImmerman. They arrested him which made him stop talking. It also started the clock on how long they had to collect evidence. They lost. It's possible (likely?) that had they waited to arrest him, he would have said something... or they would have discovered something... or he would have done something else that resulted in a conviction.
Unless someone is an immediate and general threat to the public at large (which a cop on desk duty generally is not) then you don't immediately arrest someone unless you have overwhelming evidence of a crime. (and no, a dead body is not overwhelming evidence of a crime if self defense is even an option)
(This post was last modified: 05-13-2015 01:38 PM by Hambone10.)
(05-13-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote: For the millionth time, it's not about shootings or deaths. It's about authorities seemingly dragging their feet when it comes to arresting the person(s) responsible.
If that is actually your concern, then you don't understand the process. Someone else can explain it better, but generally speaking, in order to arrest someone, you have to present your evidence to a judge ( a formality often) but once you serve that arrest warrant, his attorney will demand a hearing where the evidence can be challenged/disputed. Unless you have a lot of your evidence ready to roll, you risk the judge throwing the case out and you never get to try them.
You guys seem to think... dead person = immediate arrest... and that just isn't always or even often the case... especially when elements of self defense appear. In cop shootings or shootings on your own property of someone who didn't belong there, it is almost NEVER the case.
Perfect example was ZImmerman. They arrested him which made him stop talking. It also started the clock on how long they had to collect evidence. They lost. It's possible (likely?) that had they waited to arrest him, he would have said something... or they would have discovered something... or he would have done something else that resulted in a conviction.
Unless someone is an immediate and general threat to the public at large (which a cop on desk duty generally is not) then you don't immediately arrest someone unless you have overwhelming evidence of a crime. (and no, a dead body is not overwhelming evidence of a crime if self defense is even an option)
let's not bring facts into this discussion, shall we?
(05-13-2015 12:06 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote: There have been what, 50 shootings in Baltimore since the curfew was lifted? How many have those awful police been involved in?
Funny how Obama, Mosby, Sharpton, etc have all been silent about that.
For the millionth time, it's not about shootings or deaths. It's about authorities seemingly dragging their feet when it comes to arresting the person(s) responsible.
Yeah, heaven forbid the investigation be completed before charges are filed.
(05-13-2015 12:06 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote: There have been what, 50 shootings in Baltimore since the curfew was lifted? How many have those awful police been involved in?
Funny how Obama, Mosby, Sharpton, etc have all been silent about that.
For the millionth time, it's not about shootings or deaths. It's about authorities seemingly dragging their feet when it comes to arresting the person(s) responsible.
So you want them to arrest before they have the case nailed down, and end up with a not guilty verdict as a result?
(05-13-2015 12:06 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote: There have been what, 50 shootings in Baltimore since the curfew was lifted? How many have those awful police been involved in?
Funny how Obama, Mosby, Sharpton, etc have all been silent about that.
For the millionth time, it's not about shootings or deaths. It's about authorities seemingly dragging their feet when it comes to arresting the person(s) responsible.
So you want them to arrest before they have the case nailed down, and end up with a not guilty verdict as a result?
Or try them with a crime that is going to be nearly impossible to convict only to have somebody who is likely guilty of some wrong doing get off scott free? Isn't that what people supposedly were b*tching about with Zimmerman?
That is why it is ludicrous trying the officer in the BPD case with second degree murder. There is next to no chance that accusation holds and I imagine another round of riots will break out and idiots talking heads will say he "got away with murder" when they only would've been able to argue negligent homicide or gross neglect at best.
(05-13-2015 12:14 PM)Fitbud Wrote: For the millionth time, it's not about shootings or deaths. It's about authorities seemingly dragging their feet when it comes to arresting the person(s) responsible.
If that is actually your concern, then you don't understand the process. Someone else can explain it better, but generally speaking, in order to arrest someone, you have to present your evidence to a judge ( a formality often) but once you serve that arrest warrant, his attorney will demand a hearing where the evidence can be challenged/disputed. Unless you have a lot of your evidence ready to roll, you risk the judge throwing the case out and you never get to try them.
You guys seem to think... dead person = immediate arrest... and that just isn't always or even often the case... especially when elements of self defense appear. In cop shootings or shootings on your own property of someone who didn't belong there, it is almost NEVER the case.
Perfect example was ZImmerman. They arrested him which made him stop talking. It also started the clock on how long they had to collect evidence. They lost. It's possible (likely?) that had they waited to arrest him, he would have said something... or they would have discovered something... or he would have done something else that resulted in a conviction.
Unless someone is an immediate and general threat to the public at large (which a cop on desk duty generally is not) then you don't immediately arrest someone unless you have overwhelming evidence of a crime. (and no, a dead body is not overwhelming evidence of a crime if self defense is even an option)
It's not my concern. I'm just attempting to express why these people are doing what they are doing.
(05-13-2015 12:06 PM)ECUGrad07 Wrote: There have been what, 50 shootings in Baltimore since the curfew was lifted? How many have those awful police been involved in?
Funny how Obama, Mosby, Sharpton, etc have all been silent about that.
For the millionth time, it's not about shootings or deaths. It's about authorities seemingly dragging their feet when it comes to arresting the person(s) responsible.
So what you want is for them to throw cops in jail without an investigation and without following the established procedure for these types of investigations?
In essence what you want is to violate their civil rights just because they are cops.
When did I ever say what I want.
I'm simply trying to explain the difference between incidents regarding when people protest and don't protest.
Problem is people protest without knowing any facts with regard to the incident.
(05-13-2015 02:43 PM)Fitbud Wrote: It's not my concern. I'm just attempting to express why these people are doing what they are doing.
I'm not out there protesting.
then replace you with they... and my apologies.
But you should still be interested in teaching those people that they may be CAUSING the problem.
I'm not saying that those that aren't part of the solution are part of the problem, but I AM saying that having 'the other side' continue to hit them over the head with the facts isn't going to educate them.
(This post was last modified: 05-13-2015 02:52 PM by Hambone10.)
Oh ! Cop had body cam too !
