Pulled over tonight...

[Electron don]

There's no point to pissing off LEOs

IMHO Law enforcement can be a pretty crappy job. The get alot of crap for no good reason sometimes. From what I've seen on this board, we are all on the basic same side. Law abiding, responsible citizens. Most LEOs are not "anti gun" per say. However any traffic stop has the potential of being a life & death situation. Most LEOs that I know support responsible armed civilians. Give them a break.

 

[finity]

At no time did I mention disarming law abiding citizens.

Oh, come now. The thread is about LEO's disarming law abiding citizens & the gists of your posts are that a LEO can do WHATEVER THEY WANT to ensure their safety. I think most of us are literate & intelligent enough to read between the lines.

You sir, are afraid of the Police without reason.

I'd say that the police are afraid of law-abiding citizens for no reason, as well. If they are using the actions a FEW (VERY FEW) citizens who have a LTCH & commit serious crimes to justify ANY action they want to take as being OK, violation of rights or not (for their safety, doncha know), that is the pot calling the kettle 'black'.

Drive the speed limit, obey the traffic laws that protect me from idiots who think they can drive like Jehu, and you will not have to pay this tax. Why do you think you are exempt from the laws? Only law breakers have anything to fear from honest law enforcement. If one does not obey the traffic laws, what would make a LEO think that one would faithfully obey the Open Carry or Concealed Carry laws?

Umm...because there is a HUGE difference between driving a little too fast & committing murder?

What does a speeding ticket have to do with obeying any carry law?

I'm sure most cops have illegally driven over the speed limit or committed some other minor infraction at some point in their lives, probably even after they became cops. Based on that thinking, are you are trying to say that those cops should be fired & no longer be allowed to carry a gun either? I mean, do you think a cop who does not obey traffic laws can be trusted to obey the Constitution or any other silly laws in the performance of their duties?

Did I tell the LEO that I had a handgun in the car? No I did not voluteer the information. Did he ask? No he did not. Would I have told him if he had? Yes

I haven't had anyone here explain to me or show me where it is written that you have to tell the LEO you are carrying if they ask (& I've asked several times). There are some states that have that law. I haven't been able to find it in IN codes.

LEO's need to protect themselves. Can they be wrong? Yes they can. Can they be afraid? Yes they can. Would everyone on this thread do the same things that LEO's do if you were in their shoes? I'm guessing that you would....and more...and that's simply with the goal of going home alive at the end of their shift!

So can we as private citizens do whatever we want, whenever we want, to make sure we go home at the end of our "shifts"? If I get scared by someone that I'm interacting with in the course of my day without any evidence of danger do I have the right to take any pre-emptive action I want "for my safety"? Am I not endangered by that same potentially violent person with a LTCH as an officer would be? Should I be able to demand that the other person disarm when we have any interaction, again "for my safety"?

While I agree that there are things that "WE" can do to ensure that we go home at the end of our "shifts", we can’t “do whatever we feel is necessary” & if we do we will be held accountable for our actions. "WE" as private citizens can't generally be charged with a violation of Constitutional rights, LEO's can. They are given a HUGE AMOUNT OF POWER by the state & they are (or should be) held to a high standard to ensure that they don't abuse that power.

LEO's have two (2) things in their favor that are not written in the books...they are called instinct and experience. Their experience and their instincts are key to their survival on a daily basis and I don't know a LEO who isn't more concerned about his/her own safety than they are about the law.

& if you think that statement is OK then I hope you never become a LEO & that never becomes a common idea because if it does then all is lost. America will no longer be America.

So you are saying no one with an LTCH has ever commited a crime? Darn guess I shoulda let that young underage kid that was drinking go because he had a LTCH, wich he was packing, oh but wait it was stolen!

I don't think anybody thinks that LTCH holders are perfect or incapable of committing a crime. However, on the average the numbers show that people who have a LTCH are more LAW-ABIDING than those in the average population.

If anyone remembers, the IndyStar did a story not long ago about LTCH holders with violent histories. While I might question the overall integrity of the Star, the specific examples cited of individuals with a history of violence give me pause.

LTCH holder or not, there is a long history of any firearm becoming a potential threat to a police officer. Do I personally approve a cop being a dick? No. Do I understand why he might potentially or questionably step on someone's rights, so that I he can go home that night? Yes.

The firearm does not become a threat to anybody. The person holding it is the threat, whether that threat is to a cop or a private person. Don’t treat us all like we’re responsible for every crime committed by other private individuals or don’t complain when we treat you as if you are responsible for the excesses committed by your partners in blue.

If someone has an alternative to an LEO temporarily disarming a person's access to firearms, to assure their own safety: Please, I'm listening.

Oh I don’t know…why don’t you try acting like you do with someone who you don’t KNOW has a firearm? You are probably in less danger from a person who is carrying a visible firearm or volunteers that information than you are from someone who you have no idea if they are armed or not.

I assume you don’t pull every person out of their vehicles to perform a full search of them & their vehicles every time you stop someone. What allows you to go home at the end of your shift on those occasions?

Just like we are all voluntarily here, police officers are voluntarily police officers. Your proposal can easily be applied to them. If they don't like the liberties guaranteed citizens here, go be a police officer elsewhere.

Yep. If you can’t stand the heat…

I NEVER used the word

terrorist, You imagined that.

You may not have said “terrorist” but you implied it when you compared us to the guy that flew the plane into the building in Texas.

As for the words and actions of my brother Officers, I have no control over over that. Anything that I say is strictly MY take on the matter and NOT the opinion of anyone else.

Just as everyday citizens don’t have any control over the actions of others. We shouldn’t be treated as if we do over just a minor traffic infraction or in the case of the OP for absolutely no reason at all. I don’t care how “nervous” we make you.

 

[finity]

IMHO Law enforcement can be a pretty crappy job. The get alot of crap for no good reason sometimes. From what I've seen on this board, we are all on the basic same side. Law abiding, responsible citizens. Most LEOs are not "anti gun" per say. However any traffic stop has the potential of being a life & death situation. Most LEOs that I know support responsible armed civilians. Give them a break.

Nobody is saying that cops jobs are easy & that they don't deserve a break. The only thing that people get riled up over is the cavalier attitude of many officers that they can do whatever they want, claim "officer safety" & get away with it.

BTW there are a lot of jobs out there way more dangerous (& crappy) than LEO's. As a matter of fact cops are WAY down the list of the most dangerous jobs. It's not like cops are being killed left & right. Let's not lose sight of that bit of reality.

 

[theturtle06]

You can have a long gun in your vehicle. It doesn't have to be locked up, covered up, unloaded, or anything like that. You can have an AR with a drum mag, on fire, 1 in the chamber, hanging from your rearview mirror if you so desire.

Either the cop was unaware of the law, or more likely, he was letting his personal agenda interfere with his job.

I would have really pissed that guy off.
I would be calling/writing letters to his boss(es) if I were you.

Hey now, that right there is impeding your view of the road and will get you in trouble

I am not a leo, but my wife's dad is. I read this to her and she said, "when someone you love is in a risky situation, you will hope they take the safest way out too."

She has a point. He pulled you over bc you pulled over on accident. That is suspicious. The he sees you have a gun. Also suspicious. Keep in mind that most guns crimes are by people who do not have a license. So he got yours...checked it out. Now he has pissed off someone he doesnt know, and he doesnt want to get shot walking back to his car. So he does what he did to safely get back into his car. He has to assume you are not a stand up guy. As soon as he stops assuming that, someone will take advantage and bad things happen.

This is all very true .
To the OP - keep the above quoted post in mind and realize that you can't take this personally. Now don't take that as me saying you don't have a right to be peeved (you do, and if this happened to me, I would be too) but the cop simply has to cover his own rear. But in all reality, is this really THAT big of a deal? I certainly understand one's anger at having rights (seemingly) impeded on and I am a huge proponent of personal liberties, but is it really worth all the hassle you're going through? Like I said before if this happens to me I would be a bit salty, but so what? I'd get over it and go on with my day. They have a right to protect themselves from potential threats and it is only prudent to do so. (But, see what I ask a bit further down about handing a LEO a gun.)

LEOs are simply doing what they need to, to stay safe, go home and put food on the table. My - is it really worth getting so worked up over what boils down to a minor inconvenience? Cutting off your nose in spite of your face comes to mind for me here. Again, my and it is what it is.

Not only is that statement irrelevant to to my point.
It's an insult to those who died in the service of their communities.

I suppose you think that a licensed citizen deserves different treatment from other citizens.
NOT!!
The pilot who flew into the office complex in TX was fully licensed. Did that make him exempt from going loony and killing other people?
NO!!
Paranoia to a Police Officer is merely a heightened sense of reality.
People ARE trying to kill them.
Licensed or not.
Mike

That parallels the point I am trying to make, and the TX plane reference is very current and something I think we can all see relevance in.

To any and all LEOs - my safe gunhandling rules always have me handing someone a weapon with the action open/slide locked back, empty chamber, magazine out. If I am pulled over, should I hand you my pistol in this manner (if asked if I have a weapon)? I would obviously ask for permission to unload my weapon and have it pointed to the floorboard and clear it.
The times I have been pulled over already even reaching for my license and registration I inform the officer what I am doing before I do it just to be safe and not surprise them. But handing an officer a loaded gun that he may or may not be familiar with is, as others have stated, just offering one additional chance for it to be negligently discharged.

So, you are saying that having an LTCH is instant probable cause to believe that the carrier is a criminal? Why are you so anti-gun?

Why are you so eager to put words into other's mouths? I can sense you have a strong distaste for LEOs from your posts in this thread - if you don't, forgive me - but if that is the case, may I ask why you seem to dislike them so strongly? Or is it just you can't stand them (seemingly) trampling on your rights? I say seemingly because they can disarm you during a traffic stop.

Also to the OP - I realize that you probably couldn't have moved your rifle out of your car any other way, but you DID point a gun at someone. If I had been in your shoes I would have let him know what I was doing and inform him that I may end up pointing it in his general direction.

ALL IN ALL, GOOD THREAD SO FAR

 

[Joe Williams]

snip

Why are you so eager to put words into other's mouths? I can sense you have a strong distaste for LEOs from your posts in this thread - if you don't, forgive me - but if that is the case, may I ask why you seem to dislike them so strongly? Or is it just you can't stand them (seemingly) trampling on your rights? I say seemingly because they can disarm you during a traffic stop.
snip

Why didn't you take the poster I was responding to to task for putting words in my mouth? I didn't say what he claimed I did, I merely reflected his rhetorical style back at him, and your failure to reflect that in your post is deliberately dishonest.

I have no disdain or dislike for cops, nor do you have any factual basis for making such a claim. I do, otoh, have a great deal of disdain for bad cops. If you are unable to figure out the difference, I would suggest taking a basic reading comprehension class. Before you go putting words and emotions into MY mouth, perhaps you should get a clue as to who I am first.

 

[theturtle06]

You don't need to get so defensive - I even stated that I merely get the sense that you have a distaste for LEOs. I should have quantified that by saying "bad LEOs" so forgive my oversight on that. My basis is indeed not factual, and again, as I said in my post, I just get the sense that you don't really like LEOs. It is based on your replies in this thread and other threads that you seemingly bash LEOs. It may not be your intention but that is how I have interpreted it.

edit - oops, in my above post I didn't word it properly - I had meant to say "I get the sense" that you have a distaste for LEOs...maybe that would have helped.

 

[birdhunter55]

I am not a leo, but my wife's dad is. I read this to her and she said, "when someone you love is in a risky situation, you will hope they take the safest way out too."

She has a point. He pulled you over bc you pulled over on accident. That is suspicious. The he sees you have a gun. Also suspicious. Keep in mind that most guns crimes are by people who do not have a license. So he got yours...checked it out. Now he has pissed off someone he doesnt know, and he doesnt want to get shot walking back to his car. So he does what he did to safely get back into his car. He has to assume you are not a stand up guy. As soon as he stops assuming that, someone will take advantage and bad things happen.

So, he has to assume you are not a stand up guy because you have a valid license to carry? Ok, so he told the cop he pulled over because he saw flashing red lights. Better safe than sorry. Your argument don't wash with me!

 

[infidel]

I haven't had anyone here explain to me or show me where it is written that you have to tell the LEO you are carrying if they ask (& I've asked several times). There are some states that have that law. I haven't been able to find it in IN codes.

Amendment I

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.


Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

Doesn't look like it to me

 

[UncleMike]

Oh, come now. The thread is about LEO's disarming law abiding citizens & the gists of your posts are that a LEO can do WHATEVER THEY WANT to ensure their safety. I think most of us are literate & intelligent enough to read between the lines.
That's pretty cool. You are really good at twisting someones EXACT words.
I don't use "gists" to get my point across.
I don't put ANYTHING "between the lines".
I mean EXACTLY what I say.
Sorry if you can't understand that simple concept.



I'd say that the police are afraid of law-abiding citizens for no reason, as well. If they are using the actions a FEW (VERY FEW) citizens who have a LTCH & commit serious crimes to justify ANY action they want to take as being OK, violation of rights or not (for their safety, doncha know), that is the pot calling the kettle 'black'.
I said earlier that I survived thousands of traffic stops by being cautious.
As for violating someones rights, don't you think that the Officer has the "right" to go home at the end of his/her shift? He/she can do that only if they are extremely cautious on the job.





Umm...because there is a HUGE difference between driving a little too fast & committing murder?

What does a speeding ticket have to do with obeying any carry law?

I'm sure most cops have illegally driven over the speed limit or committed some other minor infraction at some point in their lives, probably even after they became cops. Based on that thinking, are you are trying to say that those cops should be fired & no longer be allowed to carry a gun either? I mean, do you think a cop who does not obey traffic laws can be trusted to obey the Constitution or any other silly laws in the performance of their duties?
What in the Hell do you mean "the Constitution or any other silly laws." ?(Your exact words.)
You sound like some of those people in Washington who want to abolish The Constitution because it interferes with their grand plans for the future of this country.




I haven't had anyone here explain to me or show me where it is written that you have to tell the LEO you are carrying if they ask (& I've asked several times). There are some states that have that law. I haven't been able to find it in IN codes.



So can we as private citizens do whatever we want, whenever we want, to make sure we go home at the end of our "shifts"? If I get scared by someone that I'm interacting with in the course of my day without any evidence of danger do I have the right to take any pre-emptive action I want "for my safety"? Am I not endangered by that same potentially violent person with a LTCH as an officer would be? Should I be able to demand that the other person disarm when we have any interaction, again "for my safety"?
YUP!!

While I agree that there are things that "WE" can do to ensure that we go home at the end of our "shifts", we can’t “do whatever we feel is necessary” & if we do we will be held accountable for our actions. "WE" as private citizens can't generally be charged with a violation of Constitutional rights, LEO's can. They are given a HUGE AMOUNT OF POWER by the state & they are (or should be) held to a high standard to ensure that they don't abuse that power.



& if you think that statement is OK then I hope you never become a LEO & that never becomes a common idea because if it does then all is lost. America will no longer be America.



I don't think anybody thinks that LTCH holders are perfect or incapable of committing a crime. However, on the average the numbers show that people who have a LTCH are more LAW-ABIDING than those in the average population.
I'd really like to see those statistics.
I wasn't aware that an LTCH holder was proven to be a better citizen than non LTCH holders.



The firearm does not become a threat to anybody. The person holding it is the threat, whether that threat is to a cop or a private person. Don’t treat us all like we’re responsible for every crime committed by other private individuals or don’t complain when we treat you as if you are responsible for the excesses committed by your partners in blue.
Ahhh!!
Now I understand!
Guilt by association!
Where have I heard that before?
Oh yeah!!
Tyrants have used that perception throughout history to demonize members of groups that they hate or fear.





Oh I don’t know…why don’t you try acting like you do with someone who you don’t KNOW has a firearm? You are probably in less danger from a person who is carrying a visible firearm or volunteers that information than you are from someone who you have no idea if they are armed or not.

I assume you don’t pull every person out of their vehicles to perform a full search of them & their vehicles every time you stop someone. What allows you to go home at the end of your shift on those occasions?
Pure dumb luck!!!




Yep. If you can’t stand the heat…
Turn down the fire. Which is exactly what the Officer did in this case.



You may not have said “terrorist” but you implied it when you compared us to the guy that flew the plane into the building in Texas.
I never IMPLY anything. I say EXACTLY what I mean and nothing more.
I'd appreciate it if you'd stop inserting your opinions after "guessing" what someone else is saying.



Just as everyday citizens don’t have any control over the actions of others. We shouldn’t be treated as if we do over just a minor traffic infraction or in the case of the OP for absolutely no reason at all. I don’t care how “nervous” we make you.

My comments are in blue.
Mike

 

[Joe Williams]

My comments are in blue.
Mike

I never IMPLY anything. I say EXACTLY what I mean and nothing more.

Yes, you say exactly what you mean. And what you said deliberately linked LTCH holders with a terrorist. Only the delusional would believe otherwise.

 

[mrjarrell]

My comments are in blue.
Mike

Yeah, we see. Too bad you didn't use purple.

 

[VUPDblue]

 

[trnsplntfrmohio]

I told him why I pulled over.
I know it's illegal but cops, tsa, fbi and the like need to discriminate.
a 24 year old white male, with in God we Trust license plates, found the car does indeed belong to me, this past evening's encounter should have ended like this.

officer: "sir I am sorry to have spooked you, have a good evening."
me: "Thank you sir"
me: vroom, shift, vrooom, shift all the way home.

 

[UncleMike]

Yes, you say exactly what you mean. And what you said deliberately linked LTCH holders with a terrorist. Only the delusional would believe otherwise.

Once again you are imagining things. I did not, at any time, use, or infer, the word "terrorist".
"Delusional" was a nice try, but still not good enough.
You'll have to try harder.
Mike

 

[trnsplntfrmohio]

Well I just got back from H&H shooting and Sam's club with my parents. I think I convinced my pops to retire here instead of North Carolina simply for the reason getting a permit is simple easy and you can open carry

 

[birdhunter55]

Many times as I read threads such as this one and many more, I remind myself that we are our own worst enemies. We continue to allow these types of actions to happen and alarm us, yet we do nothing or very little to change the situation.

I rememeber when I was younger, it was nothing to have a rifle in your car or truck. Heaven forbid, we even had them in our cars while at High School. It was very common to go squirrel or rabbit hunting after school and before going home. If you lived in the country or small town, it was a common sight to see someone outside shooting targets or birds most summer evenings. How often do we see that? Why are we as Law abiding citizens afraid to carry a rifle in our vehicle today? It is perfectly legal. I have for the last few years made it a point to shoot in my back yard. It is legal and my right to do. I WILL NOT HIDE MY GUNS OR MY RIGHT TO SHOOT TARGETS OR BIRDS AND I ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO THE SAME.

If we want to change the attitudes of LEO's and others, then make it a common practice, not the exception. After reading this thread earlier today, when I needed to go to town, I placed my rifle in the passenger seat of my truck and ran my errands! I will make it a point to do it more and more. Does this make me a bad person? No, I don't think so. Do I need a reason for this if pulled over by LEO? No, it is my right and I intend to exercise it!

 

[Walter Zoomie]

...if an officer lacks the courage to accept the risks of doing the job within the bounds of the law, they need a new career.

True.

But...Regarding the original poster...

Dude was admittedly acting kinda flaky, and had a rifle on the seat beside him.

The cop would have been a retard had he not acted more defensive than normal, I think.

To do otherwise would have been ignoring intuition, warning signs, and possible threats.

Isn't situational awareness preached ad nauseum here?

Applies to cops too...

...and I ain't no holster sniffer.

 

[finity]

That's pretty cool. You are really good at twisting someones EXACT words.
I don't use "gists" to get my point across.
I don't put ANYTHING "between the lines".
I mean EXACTLY what I say.
Sorry if you can't understand that simple concept.

Let me explain to YOU about the simple concept that eludes you.

The thread is about LEO’s disarming people.

You take the position that LEO’S can do whatever they want to ensure their safety. I assume that “whatever” includes the object of the thread – i.e. disarming people.

OK, let me ask you point blank so there is no assuming on my part. Do you think that it is OK for LEO’s to disarm citizens during ANY encounter if the officer feels he needs to for his own safety even if, as in the OP, the person is doing nothing illegal (i.e. being law-abiding)?

I said earlier that I survived thousands of traffic stops by being cautious.
As for violating someones rights, don't you think that the Officer has the "right" to go home at the end of his/her shift? He/she can do that only if they are extremely cautious on the job.

Every person has a right to be safe. What I disagree on is what actions that those people can take to ensure their safety, WHILE NOT INFRINGING ON THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS. That includes police officers. Police Officers even more so because they have been given great powers by the state that puts them in a position to infringe on those rights more easily than the average (non-LEO) person.

What in the Hell do you mean "the Constitution or any other silly laws." ?(Your exact words.)
You sound like some of those people in Washington who want to abolish The Constitution because it interferes with their grand plans for the future of this country.

I guess the concept of sarcasm eludes you too, huh? It’s probably my fault that I didn’t put my words in purple so there could be no doubt about my intentions.

I just assumed (there I go again) you could figure out from the gist of my post (oh my, not again) that I was being sarcastic.

You really read my post & thought I promote the abolishment of the Constitution? Wow. Or were you just trying to make me look anti-American to take the heat off you? It seems to work for those people in Washington you seem to dislike.

YUP!!

Really?

I can see how that would go now:

“I saw a gun on his side that scared me so I demanded he give it me so I wouldn’t be scared. He refused so I could only assume that he had ill intentions so I drew on him & ordered him to “drop it”. He didn’t do it fast enough so I shot him. That was OK wasn’t it? I mean, I was really scared & I just wanted to get home to my family at the end of my shift.”

Riiiight.

*Just to clarify the above conversation was a literary fantasy that had no relation to any actual incident that I concocted to rebut your silly premise as stated in blue above. Any similarities between this fictionalized account & any person or event is purely coincidental.

I'd really like to see those statistics.
I wasn't aware that an LTCH holder was proven to be a better citizen than non LTCH holders.

I’ll try to find the studies. They are fairly well known here so if anybody else can help me out it would be appreciated.

Now I understand!
Guilt by association!
Where have I heard that before?
Oh yeah!!
Tyrants have used that perception throughout history to demonize members of groups that they hate or fear.

Seriously?

“Where have you heard that before?”!?!?!?

You mean you really can’t see that the idea that you treating every person as a threat based on the actions of a few criminals is not the same thing?


Who are the ones promoting the idea that they fear every single person they interact with on a professional basis to the point of saying that LEO’s can do whatever they feel is necessary to be safe?

Who’s the tyrant here? I don’t have the state sanctioned power to violate people’s rights every day I go to work.

Geez!

 

[UncleMike]

[/i]

Let me explain to YOU about the simple concept that eludes you.

The thread is about LEO’s disarming people.

You take the position that LEO’S can do whatever they want to ensure their safety. I assume that “whatever” includes the object of the thread – i.e. disarming people.

OK, let me ask you point blank so there is no assuming on my part. Do you think that it is OK for LEO’s to disarm citizens during ANY encounter if the officer feels he needs to for his own safety even if, as in the OP, the person is doing nothing illegal (i.e. being law-abiding)? [/i]


Every person has a right to be safe. What I disagree on is what actions that those people can take to ensure their safety, WHILE NOT INFRINGING ON THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS. That includes police officers. Police Officers even more so because they have been given great powers by the state that puts them in a position to infringe on those rights more easily than the average (non-LEO) person.[/i]

I guess the concept of sarcasm eludes you too, huh? It’s probably my fault that I didn’t put my words in purple so there could be no doubt about my intentions.

I just assumed (there I go again) you could figure out from the gist of my post (oh my, not again) that I was being sarcastic.

You really read my post & thought I promote the abolishment of the Constitution? Wow. Or were you just trying to make me look anti-American to take the heat off you? It seems to work for those people in Washington you seem to dislike.

[/i]
Really?

I can see how that would go now:

“I saw a gun on his side that scared me so I demanded he give it me so I wouldn’t be scared. He refused so I could only assume that he had ill intentions so I drew on him & ordered him to “drop it”. He didn’t do it fast enough so I shot him. That was OK wasn’t it? I mean, I was really scared & I just wanted to get home to my family at the end of my shift.”

Riiiight.

*Just to clarify the above conversation was a literary fantasy that had no relation to any actual incident that I concocted to rebut your silly premise as stated in blue above. Any similarities between this fictionalized account & any person or event is purely coincidental.

[/i]

I’ll try to find the studies. They are fairly well known here so if anybody else can help me out it would be appreciated.[/i]

Seriously?

“Where have you heard that before?”!?!?!?

You mean you really can’t see that the idea that you treating every person as a threat based on the actions of a few criminals is not the same thing?

Who’s the tyrant here? I don’t have the state sanctioned power to violate people’s rights every day I go to work.

Who are the ones promoting the idea that they fear every single person they interact with on a professional basis to the point of saying that LEO’s can do whatever they feel is necessary to be safe?

Geez!

OK!
Whatever.
(Is this the right shade for sarcasm?)
I have other things to attend to right now but, I'll be back.
Mike

 

[CW9]

That's a slippery slope.

you should all watch this. our legal system is not made to help anyone. So please be careful on what you say to the police. You may have good intentions but what you say will be used against you.

Law school professor explains why not to talk to police. [VIDEO]