How would you like to be treated by law-enforcement?

[Benny]

I was directed to this thread from another thread. I was curious as to what all of the fuss was about. I click on the link and say to myself, "I'ma read a couple of these posts, but there is no way in hell I'm going through this entire thread." Well, at some point midway through the first page I must have blacked out, because 260 posts later I was finished reading everything.

I'm going to go take a shower now. Have a good night.

 

[GetA2J]

Since that was a US Supreme Court decision, yes, it does apply here.

Again??? I supposed you skipped a few pages......or are you just jumping on the dogpile?

 

[GetA2J]

This is a totally invalid concept. Allowing citizen contacts to be governed more by the OPINIONS of "certain law enforcement officers" as opposed to be ruled by the law and common sense.

Consider the fact that "CERTAIN law enforcement officers" may consider black people, or long haired people, or hispanics, or whatever, to be "questionable." While I'm sure the number of LEOs who hold that belief is small, is it your position that it is acceptable for those LEOs to let their opinion govern their behavior when presented with such a person??

I don't think you got what I was getting at. Please re-read my comments as well as those I was commenting about. If I read what you're writing here correctly, you are making the same point I was attempting to make.

 

[GetA2J]

But, don't you think common sense has to come into play at some point??

Consider two examples: A middle aged guy with his wife, pushing a 1 year old in a stroller through the park at 4pm, with a Kimber OCed in a OWB holster. The second example is that of a young guy in a hoodie with a Glock stuck in his waistband standing outside a VP door at 2am.

Are you saying that both should be approached in exactly the same confrontational manner, disarmed, possibly cuffed, and their firearm's serial number run?

OR, perhaps you could see the first guy and think to yourself "looks like a guy and his family out for a day in the park," and look at the second guy and decide "looks like a thug getting ready to rob the VP?"

At some point, people have to realize that you can't treat every citizen as a criminal, and approach every contact in that context.

You're talking in circles.... I don't understand what you are trying to point out.
In the big scheme of things in this thread, I was advocating law enforcement officers do not treat every citizen as a criminal.
Heck for that matter I would prefer that the police officer view both individuals the same (assuming the hooded fellow is carrying concealed) what I would like to see transpire is that the middle aged man were shopping in that vp Mart if he observed the[STRIKE] other individual[/STRIKE] any individual holding a handgun aimed at an innocent employee that he would feel confident in today's society in using his own firearm to protect innocent life without fear of jail time for his heroic act simply because his own life was not in imminent danger.

 

[ThrottleJockey]

You're talking in circles.... I don't understand what you are trying to point out.
In the big scheme of things in this thread, I was advocating law enforcement officers do not treat every citizen as a criminal.
Heck for that matter I would prefer that the police officer view both individuals the same (assuming the hooded fellow is carrying concealed) what I would like to see transpire is that the middle aged man were shopping in that vp Mart if he observed the[STRIKE] other individual[/STRIKE] any individual holding a handgun aimed at an innocent employee that he would feel confident in today's society in using his own firearm to protect innocent life without fear of jail time for his heroic act simply because his own life was not in imminent danger.

No worries about that here in IN, we have a law on the books that protects us if we use deadly force to stop a violent felony.

 

[Jack Burton]

Ok Jack, I am too ignorant to understand when the true intellectuals speak.

Yes, this is true, and for once we agree in this thread.

You come across similar to a five year old on his first tricycle attempting to explain to a NASCAR racer what the winning strategy is at Daytona. Under that circumstances I see no value in correcting your multiple misstatements, misconceptions and mistakes. You'll just be even more confused and bewildered, and like most five year olds, strike out against what you don't comprehend.

I'll leave it to the other more competent INGOers to judge what I actually posted, instead of the fantasy that you've concocted in your mind.

Excelsior!

 

[Markedup]

The Crossroads of America

 

[remauto1187]

Just to nitpick, you may notice that it says "serving the community," and NOT "serving the citizens."

Whom exactly do you think makes up "the community"? Uhhh maybe citizens? Yup!
Don't quit that McDonalds job anytime soon there slick.

 

[thompal]

Whom exactly do you think makes up "the community"? Uhhh maybe citizens? Yup!
Don't quit that McDonalds job anytime soon there slick.

I guess maybe with some people I have to spell it out.

I guess I SHOULD have said "NOT serving the citizens' needs as individuals." Does THAT clarify it for you enough???

Sheeesh. Some people must really try to be obtuse.

(and to others it apparently comes naturally)

 

[You'll shoot your eye out]

Yes, this is true, and for once we agree in this thread.

You come across similar to a five year old on his first tricycle attempting to explain to a NASCAR racer what the winning strategy is at Daytona. Under that circumstances I see no value in correcting your multiple misstatements, misconceptions and mistakes. You'll just be even more confused and bewildered, and like most five year olds, strike out against what you don't comprehend.

I'll leave it to the other more competent INGOers to judge what I actually posted, instead of the fantasy that you've concocted in your mind.

Excelsior!

Oh, I see now. You can't defend your position and have now started making emotional personal attacks having no bearing on the issue being addressed. very typical of your posts. I am chuckling that I am a 5 year old, and you are making NASCAR references to illustrate your intellectual superiority! So ironic......

I really love your posts, They are as idiotic as your avatar looks. I always know when I see that dull and senseless looking face that it is a realistic expression of who you really are and the thread is sure to take a wacky turn.

Here is the merriam webster definition for the word "Excelsior!"

ex·cel·si·or

noun \ik-ˈsel-sē-ər, -ȯr\


Definition of EXCELSIOR

: fine curled wood shavings used especially for packing fragile items

See excelsior defined for kids »

Origin of EXCELSIOR

trade name, from Latin, higher, comparative of excelsus high, from past participle of excellereFirst Known Use: 1868

Are you talking about Excelsior because you use it to pack fragile things like, maybe your ego? Or are you referencing the Latin "excelsus" to explain to me that you are high?

(There's how you make personal attacks!)

 

[IndyDave1776]

Oh, I see now. You can't defend your position and have now started making emotional personal attacks having no bearing on the issue being addressed. very typical of your posts. I am chuckling that I am a 5 year old, and you are making NASCAR references to illustrate your intellectual superiority! So ironic......

I really love your posts, They are as idiotic as your avatar looks. I always know when I see that dull and senseless looking face that it is a realistic expression of who you really are and the thread is sure to take a wacky turn.

Here is the merriam webster definition for the word "Excelsior!"

ex·cel·si·or

noun \ik-ˈsel-sē-ər, -ȯr\


Definition of EXCELSIOR

: fine curled wood shavings used especially for packing fragile items

See excelsior defined for kids »

Origin of EXCELSIOR

trade name, from Latin, higher, comparative of excelsus high, from past participle of excellereFirst Known Use: 1868

Are you talking about Excelsior because you use it to pack fragile things like, maybe your ego? Or are you referencing the Latin "excelsus" to explain to me that you are high?

(There's how you make personal attacks!)

Then again, he could be referring to this:

Or maybe this:

 

[Tinner666]

This thread sure took some turns while I was gone.

But, don't you think common sense has to come into play at some point??

Consider two examples: A middle aged guy with his wife, pushing a 1 year old in a stroller through the park at 4pm, with a Kimber OCed in a OWB holster. The second example is that of a young guy in a hoodie with a Glock stuck in his waistband standing outside a VP door at 2am.

Are you saying that both should be approached in exactly the same confrontational manner, disarmed, possibly cuffed, and their firearm's serial number run?

OR, perhaps you could see the first guy and think to yourself "looks like a guy and his family out for a day in the park," and look at the second guy and decide "looks like a thug getting ready to rob the VP?"

At some point, people have to realize that you can't treat every citizen as a criminal, and approach every contact in that context.

This is what I was getting at when I mentioned situational awareness by the PD. Long story I won't go into, but the only time I had worries with a stop was when I was rubbing my bad L4 with my knuckle, between a Colt and my skin. Eight to ten PD's surrounded us because they thought I was going to shoot my friend. Guns drawn and in our faces, etc. No roughing up other than disarming and frisk before asking ID, etc. No problem as far as I was concerned.
When I've been 'met' by PD when printing, ot OC, they were respectful, and so was I. They were 'non-incidents' every time.
Point is, PD can determine a logical course of action without me getting in their face.

 

[Foxbat2k]

I was once pulled over for a traffic violation. The officer asked if there was a weapon in the car. I was near IUPUI - not the best area and police are normally a little more cautious.

Long story short after 15 minutes of getting hassled he proceeded to lecture why he did not believe citizens should be carry a gun. When I explained that since he was not around to prevent the Second Amendment from being enacted he was basically stuck with enforcing the law not creating laws as he saw fit.

Not how an officer should deal with the situation.

 

[You'll shoot your eye out]

Then again, he could be referring to this:

Or maybe this:

Maybe this,

The shades of night were falling fast, As through an Alpine village passed A youth, who bore, 'mid snow and ice, A banner with the strange device, Excelsior!
His brow was sad; his eye beneath, Flashed like a falchion from its sheath, And like a silver clarion rung The accents of that unknown tongue, Excelsior!
In happy homes he saw the light Of household fires gleam warm and bright; Above, the spectral glaciers shone, And from his lips escaped a groan, Excelsior!
"Try not the Pass!" the old man said:"Dark lowers the tempest overhead,The roaring torrent is deep and wide! And loud that clarion voice replied, Excelsior!
"Oh stay," the maiden said, "and rest Thy weary head upon this breast!" A tear stood in his bright blue eye, But still he answered, with a sigh, Excelsior!
"Beware the pine-tree's withered branch! Beware the awful avalanche!" This was the peasant's last Good-night, A voice replied, far up the height, Excelsior!
At break of day, as heavenward The pious monks of Saint Bernard Uttered the oft-repeated prayer, A voice cried through the startled air, Excelsior!
A traveller, by the faithful hound, Half-buried in the snow was found, Still grasping in his hand of ice That banner with the strange device, Excelsior!
There in the twilight cold and gray,Lifeless, but beautiful, he lay, And from the sky, serene and far, A voice fell, like a falling star, Excelsior! -(Longfellow)

The kid believes that he is wise and noble despite several warnings made by "intellectually inferior" common folk. Next he is proven a 'tard by giving his life for his ridiculous quest to be superior, believing that he was striving ever higher instead of hearing that he was blindly marching into his folly......... Sounds just like Jack Burton!

(I will stop now, thus showing that I am the the reasonable one. Either jack will retaliate proving his insecurity and inability to let it lay, or he will not show up again and I will have the last word...... Checkmate! It's so easy to manipulate an elitist.)
​

 

[Birds Away]

There's a whole lotta FAIL in this thread.

 

[Jack Burton]

You can't defend your position

AGain... it's simply not worthwhile for someone such as you. All the posts are already up for anyone to read at their leisure.

I really love your posts, They are as idiotic as your avatar looks. I always know when I see that dull and senseless looking face that it is a realistic expression of who you really are and the thread is sure to take a wacky turn

Best you can do, eh.

Probably never heard of this guy either...

 

[Benny]

So like, this thread happened.

 

[Rookie]

I know. Right?

 

[Birds Away]

Good thing they don't allow personal attacks on here. IBTL.

 

[88GT]

I'll leave it to the other more competent INGOers to judge what I actually posted, instead of the fantasy that you've concocted in your mind.

Sure looked to me like you were trying to minimize Frank's opinion by claiming that his belief that servant = menial was historically inaccurate/incomplete. Whether or not I meet the threshold for competency for this opinion to matter is up for debate.

I guess maybe with some people I have to spell it out.

I guess I SHOULD have said "NOT serving the citizens' needs as individuals." Does THAT clarify it for you enough???

Sheeesh. Some people must really try to be obtuse.

(and to others it apparently comes naturally)

Stop with the ad hom attacks, will ya? It really irritates some people to be called out for their vices. (Yes, purple.)

Good thing they don't allow personal attacks on here. IBTL.

iknowright.