Is this argument presentable for everyone that has an issue with the way the law works?
Do you think a police officer should be legally justified asking your wife to exit her vehicle so he can ogle her? According to Last, that would be within the confines of the law.
It's not according to me. It's according to the law.
I've heard you use this example a couple of times in this thread and I don't understand why you're so worried about cops ogling your wife.
That's a deflection, I didn't say it was something I worried about. Are you saying that is fine by you? You have avoided the scenario as many times as I have posited it.
I'm saying that if a cop asked my wife to get out of the car, she obligated to by law. If he did something inappropriate from there, I will deal with it appropriately.
That's not the question though, the question is if that is just.
Of course it's not.
Are you suggesting the officer asked Bland out of the vehicle to see her ass?
The argument has fallen down (about 7 pages ago) and now you are resorting to alternate scenarios to... prove what? Is there potential for police to abuse their power? I'll say 'yes'. Have police abused their power? I'll say 'yes'. Did this officer abuse his when dealing with Bland? I'll say 'no'.
No I am not suggesting that was his motivation, I have maintained his motivation was to exercize authority after she sassed him. I had to present another example that might hit home harder because you (plural) either don't agree with that, or don't care.
That you have admitted that the law provides easy opportunity for police to abuse their power is what I have been driving for. That we disagree on this case is less important to me than the broader implications of laws that give ample opportunity for abuse and scant opportunity for redress.
So within this context... are you suggesting that the officer should not have looked to probe a bit and ascertain whether this woman was in a mental state to be behind the wheel? I presented the following in an earlier post that was not addressed:
This cop had every right to ascertain exactly what had this woman so anxious. She had just committed a traffic violation and now was confrontational and extremely agitated.
We'd have a different headline if the woman was high and minutes after being pulled over plowed into a young mother and her newborn- killing them both.
His line of questioning seemed to suggest he might have been probing a bit to determine whether or not Bland was in the right state of mind to be behind the wheel.
Do you think if an officer pulls over a driver for an illegal lane change and then upon questioning finds the driver highly agitated and somewhat brash... there might be grounds to question a little deeper? And if upon selecting that course of action... the woman becomes defiant... what do you think the officer should do?
I understand what you are saying, I just disagree with it's application to this case. I haven't seen any evidence that he thought she was under the influence or ddangerous, both situations that he would need to address ffurther. While she was agitated and argumentative, she was also rational and not erratic. I think the officer played as much of a role in escalating the situation as she did, and he could easily have given her a ticket and told her she should be more respectful.
Is this argument presentable for everyone that has an issue with the way the law works?
Are you suggesting there are not, and have never been immoral and unfair laws? Or are you just attacking for arguments sake?
In the time I have spent on the MT (since '09)... on no occasion has the argument you presented ever been accepted (outside of referring to things such as Sharia Law).
I've been very outspoken towards facets of the law I disagree with in different contexts, however I accept the application of the law as it is written and practiced. It is what it is.
You're trying to demonize this officer as he performed his duties within the boundaries afforded to him. If you wanted to spend your time criticizing those boundaries... then fair enough, but you're spending your energies attacking him when he... get this... has done nothing wrong- whether you care to admit it or not.
Have you read your exchanges with Last 12? Your last few retorts sound like, "I know you are but what am I." Come on, man.
I'm confused, are you saying that no one has ever accepted the argument that some laws are unjust? There are entire threads devoted to the just or unjust nature of laws...marijuana prohibition, same-sex marriage, gun control, death ppenalty, etc.
So you are comparing a cop being able to ask somebody to get out of a car to weed laws, gun control, and the death penalty? A bit dramatic, no?
It's an argument of logic not emotion.
Drama is not an emotion. But we're veering.
This cop did not abuse his power at all by asking her to get out of the car. That seems to be your sticking point. It's legal. Why he did is irrelevant. Once people realized that, the chatter about her died down a lot.
My question about the ogling was precisely in response to this notion that the "why" is irrelevant. That is inconsistent with our constitutional and moral rights, if the "why" was truly irrelevant there would be no such thing as "probably cause" and profiling wouldn't be controversial.
Just because you don't care if your wife gets ogled, doesn't mean everyone agrees. Would she think that is just? I know mine wouldn't.
Just pointing out this tactic, which you have admonished others (well... me anyways) for at different times.
For the record, I don't care how you attempt to illustrate your points; however, in the event I did take exception to such tactics... I'd be careful not to employ them myself.
Is this argument presentable for everyone that has an issue with the way the law works?
Do you think a police officer should be legally justified asking your wife to exit her vehicle so he can ogle her? According to Last, that would be within the confines of the law.
It's not according to me. It's according to the law.
I've heard you use this example a couple of times in this thread and I don't understand why you're so worried about cops ogling your wife.
That's a deflection, I didn't say it was something I worried about. Are you saying that is fine by you? You have avoided the scenario as many times as I have posited it.
I'm saying that if a cop asked my wife to get out of the car, she obligated to by law. If he did something inappropriate from there, I will deal with it appropriately.
That's not the question though, the question is if that is just.
Of course it's not.
Are you suggesting the officer asked Bland out of the vehicle to see her ass?
The argument has fallen down (about 7 pages ago) and now you are resorting to alternate scenarios to... prove what? Is there potential for police to abuse their power? I'll say 'yes'. Have police abused their power? I'll say 'yes'. Did this officer abuse his when dealing with Bland? I'll say 'no'.
No I am not suggesting that was his motivation, I have maintained his motivation was to exercize authority after she sassed him. I had to present another example that might hit home harder because you (plural) either don't agree with that, or don't care.
That you have admitted that the law provides easy opportunity for police to abuse their power is what I have been driving for. That we disagree on this case is less important to me than the broader implications of laws that give ample opportunity for abuse and scant opportunity for redress.
So within this context... are you suggesting that the officer should not have looked to probe a bit and ascertain whether this woman was in a mental state to be behind the wheel? I presented the following in an earlier post that was not addressed:
This cop had every right to ascertain exactly what had this woman so anxious. She had just committed a traffic violation and now was confrontational and extremely agitated.
We'd have a different headline if the woman was high and minutes after being pulled over plowed into a young mother and her newborn- killing them both.
His line of questioning seemed to suggest he might have been probing a bit to determine whether or not Bland was in the right state of mind to be behind the wheel.
Do you think if an officer pulls over a driver for an illegal lane change and then upon questioning finds the driver highly agitated and somewhat brash... there might be grounds to question a little deeper? And if upon selecting that course of action... the woman becomes defiant... what do you think the officer should do?
I understand what you are saying, I just disagree with it's application to this case. I haven't seen any evidence that he thought she was under the influence or ddangerous, both situations that he would need to address ffurther. While she was agitated and argumentative, she was also rational and not erratic. I think the officer played as much of a role in escalating the situation as she did, and he could easily have given her a ticket and told her she should be more respectful.
But you aren't trained and you weren't there. We saw video footage, but that's hardly the best vantage point for trying to establish the state of mind of someone- especially when we cannot see facial expressions and body language.
Is this argument presentable for everyone that has an issue with the way the law works?
Are you suggesting there are not, and have never been immoral and unfair laws? Or are you just attacking for arguments sake?
In the time I have spent on the MT (since '09)... on no occasion has the argument you presented ever been accepted (outside of referring to things such as Sharia Law).
I've been very outspoken towards facets of the law I disagree with in different contexts, however I accept the application of the law as it is written and practiced. It is what it is.
You're trying to demonize this officer as he performed his duties within the boundaries afforded to him. If you wanted to spend your time criticizing those boundaries... then fair enough, but you're spending your energies attacking him when he... get this... has done nothing wrong- whether you care to admit it or not.
Have you read your exchanges with Last 12? Your last few retorts sound like, "I know you are but what am I." Come on, man.
I'm confused, are you saying that no one has ever accepted the argument that some laws are unjust? There are entire threads devoted to the just or unjust nature of laws...marijuana prohibition, same-sex marriage, gun control, death ppenalty, etc.
So you are comparing a cop being able to ask somebody to get out of a car to weed laws, gun control, and the death penalty? A bit dramatic, no?
It's an argument of logic not emotion.
Drama is not an emotion. But we're veering.
This cop did not abuse his power at all by asking her to get out of the car. That seems to be your sticking point. It's legal. Why he did is irrelevant. Once people realized that, the chatter about her died down a lot.
My question about the ogling was precisely in response to this notion that the "why" is irrelevant. That is inconsistent with our constitutional and moral rights, if the "why" was truly irrelevant there would be no such thing as "probably cause" and profiling wouldn't be controversial.
Just because you don't care if your wife gets ogled, doesn't mean everyone agrees. Would she think that is just? I know mine wouldn't.
I didn't say I didn't care. I said I don't have a say in whether she can get out when asked by a cop. If something inappropriate happens from there, I will deal with it appropriately (or not so appropriately). Again, you're putting words in my mouth.
How is it against your constitutional rights to get out of your car?
You said it was just, I thought you understood that by just I meant morally acceptable and personally palatable, I should have been more clear I guess. I have a constitutional right to avoid undue search and seizure. I feel that (with the exception of safety issues) being removed from my vehicle without probable cause is a violation of that right. The courts have ruled otherwise.
Is this argument presentable for everyone that has an issue with the way the law works?
Are you suggesting there are not, and have never been immoral and unfair laws? Or are you just attacking for arguments sake?
In the time I have spent on the MT (since '09)... on no occasion has the argument you presented ever been accepted (outside of referring to things such as Sharia Law).
I've been very outspoken towards facets of the law I disagree with in different contexts, however I accept the application of the law as it is written and practiced. It is what it is.
You're trying to demonize this officer as he performed his duties within the boundaries afforded to him. If you wanted to spend your time criticizing those boundaries... then fair enough, but you're spending your energies attacking him when he... get this... has done nothing wrong- whether you care to admit it or not.
Have you read your exchanges with Last 12? Your last few retorts sound like, "I know you are but what am I." Come on, man.
I'm confused, are you saying that no one has ever accepted the argument that some laws are unjust? There are entire threads devoted to the just or unjust nature of laws...marijuana prohibition, same-sex marriage, gun control, death ppenalty, etc.
So you are comparing a cop being able to ask somebody to get out of a car to weed laws, gun control, and the death penalty? A bit dramatic, no?
It's an argument of logic not emotion.
Drama is not an emotion. But we're veering.
This cop did not abuse his power at all by asking her to get out of the car. That seems to be your sticking point. It's legal. Why he did is irrelevant. Once people realized that, the chatter about her died down a lot.
My question about the ogling was precisely in response to this notion that the "why" is irrelevant. That is inconsistent with our constitutional and moral rights, if the "why" was truly irrelevant there would be no such thing as "probably cause" and profiling wouldn't be controversial.
Just because you don't care if your wife gets ogled, doesn't mean everyone agrees. Would she think that is just? I know mine wouldn't.
Just pointing out this tactic, which you have admonished others (well... me anyways) for at different times.
For the record, I don't care how you attempt to illustrate your points; however, in the event I did take exception to such tactics... I'd be careful not to employ them myself.
I genuinely thought he was accepting of that issue from his capitalized assertion that it was just, but I realize we were on different pages about what "just" means.
Is this argument presentable for everyone that has an issue with the way the law works?
Do you think a police officer should be legally justified asking your wife to exit her vehicle so he can ogle her? According to Last, that would be within the confines of the law.
It's not according to me. It's according to the law.
I've heard you use this example a couple of times in this thread and I don't understand why you're so worried about cops ogling your wife.
That's a deflection, I didn't say it was something I worried about. Are you saying that is fine by you? You have avoided the scenario as many times as I have posited it.
I'm saying that if a cop asked my wife to get out of the car, she obligated to by law. If he did something inappropriate from there, I will deal with it appropriately.
That's not the question though, the question is if that is just.
Of course it's not.
Are you suggesting the officer asked Bland out of the vehicle to see her ass?
The argument has fallen down (about 7 pages ago) and now you are resorting to alternate scenarios to... prove what? Is there potential for police to abuse their power? I'll say 'yes'. Have police abused their power? I'll say 'yes'. Did this officer abuse his when dealing with Bland? I'll say 'no'.
No I am not suggesting that was his motivation, I have maintained his motivation was to exercize authority after she sassed him. I had to present another example that might hit home harder because you (plural) either don't agree with that, or don't care.
That you have admitted that the law provides easy opportunity for police to abuse their power is what I have been driving for. That we disagree on this case is less important to me than the broader implications of laws that give ample opportunity for abuse and scant opportunity for redress.
So within this context... are you suggesting that the officer should not have looked to probe a bit and ascertain whether this woman was in a mental state to be behind the wheel? I presented the following in an earlier post that was not addressed:
This cop had every right to ascertain exactly what had this woman so anxious. She had just committed a traffic violation and now was confrontational and extremely agitated.
We'd have a different headline if the woman was high and minutes after being pulled over plowed into a young mother and her newborn- killing them both.
His line of questioning seemed to suggest he might have been probing a bit to determine whether or not Bland was in the right state of mind to be behind the wheel.
Do you think if an officer pulls over a driver for an illegal lane change and then upon questioning finds the driver highly agitated and somewhat brash... there might be grounds to question a little deeper? And if upon selecting that course of action... the woman becomes defiant... what do you think the officer should do?
I understand what you are saying, I just disagree with it's application to this case. I haven't seen any evidence that he thought she was under the influence or ddangerous, both situations that he would need to address ffurther. While she was agitated and argumentative, she was also rational and not erratic. I think the officer played as much of a role in escalating the situation as she did, and he could easily have given her a ticket and told her she should be more respectful.
But you aren't trained and you weren't there. We saw video footage, but that's hardly the best vantage point for trying to establish the state of mind of someone- especially when we cannot see facial expressions and body language.
Yeah, I understand those arguments, and they are valid, but the video rolls for a long time, and in his summation I don't recall him noting any concerns about her being intoxicated or a danger to himself or the public.
Is this argument presentable for everyone that has an issue with the way the law works?
Do you think a police officer should be legally justified asking your wife to exit her vehicle so he can ogle her? According to Last, that would be within the confines of the law.
It's not according to me. It's according to the law.
I've heard you use this example a couple of times in this thread and I don't understand why you're so worried about cops ogling your wife.
That's a deflection, I didn't say it was something I worried about. Are you saying that is fine by you? You have avoided the scenario as many times as I have posited it.
I'm saying that if a cop asked my wife to get out of the car, she obligated to by law. If he did something inappropriate from there, I will deal with it appropriately.
That's not the question though, the question is if that is just.
Of course it's not.
Are you suggesting the officer asked Bland out of the vehicle to see her ass?
The argument has fallen down (about 7 pages ago) and now you are resorting to alternate scenarios to... prove what? Is there potential for police to abuse their power? I'll say 'yes'. Have police abused their power? I'll say 'yes'. Did this officer abuse his when dealing with Bland? I'll say 'no'.
No I am not suggesting that was his motivation, I have maintained his motivation was to exercize authority after she sassed him. I had to present another example that might hit home harder because you (plural) either don't agree with that, or don't care.
That you have admitted that the law provides easy opportunity for police to abuse their power is what I have been driving for. That we disagree on this case is less important to me than the broader implications of laws that give ample opportunity for abuse and scant opportunity for redress.
So within this context... are you suggesting that the officer should not have looked to probe a bit and ascertain whether this woman was in a mental state to be behind the wheel? I presented the following in an earlier post that was not addressed:
This cop had every right to ascertain exactly what had this woman so anxious. She had just committed a traffic violation and now was confrontational and extremely agitated.
We'd have a different headline if the woman was high and minutes after being pulled over plowed into a young mother and her newborn- killing them both.
His line of questioning seemed to suggest he might have been probing a bit to determine whether or not Bland was in the right state of mind to be behind the wheel.
Do you think if an officer pulls over a driver for an illegal lane change and then upon questioning finds the driver highly agitated and somewhat brash... there might be grounds to question a little deeper? And if upon selecting that course of action... the woman becomes defiant... what do you think the officer should do?
I understand what you are saying, I just disagree with it's application to this case. I haven't seen any evidence that he thought she was under the influence or ddangerous, both situations that he would need to address ffurther. While she was agitated and argumentative, she was also rational and not erratic. I think the officer played as much of a role in escalating the situation as she did, and he could easily have given her a ticket and told her she should be more respectful.
But you aren't trained and you weren't there. We saw video footage, but that's hardly the best vantage point for trying to establish the state of mind of someone- especially when we cannot see facial expressions and body language.
Yeah, I understand those arguments, and they are valid, but the video rolls for a long time, and in his summation I don't recall him noting any concerns about her being intoxicated or a danger to himself or the public.
Danger to herself is one other concern, which, as we know now... was legitimate.
Is this argument presentable for everyone that has an issue with the way the law works?
Do you think a police officer should be legally justified asking your wife to exit her vehicle so he can ogle her? According to Last, that would be within the confines of the law.
It's not according to me. It's according to the law.
I've heard you use this example a couple of times in this thread and I don't understand why you're so worried about cops ogling your wife.
That's a deflection, I didn't say it was something I worried about. Are you saying that is fine by you? You have avoided the scenario as many times as I have posited it.
I'm saying that if a cop asked my wife to get out of the car, she obligated to by law. If he did something inappropriate from there, I will deal with it appropriately.
That's not the question though, the question is if that is just.
Of course it's not.
Are you suggesting the officer asked Bland out of the vehicle to see her ass?
The argument has fallen down (about 7 pages ago) and now you are resorting to alternate scenarios to... prove what? Is there potential for police to abuse their power? I'll say 'yes'. Have police abused their power? I'll say 'yes'. Did this officer abuse his when dealing with Bland? I'll say 'no'.
No I am not suggesting that was his motivation, I have maintained his motivation was to exercize authority after she sassed him. I had to present another example that might hit home harder because you (plural) either don't agree with that, or don't care.
That you have admitted that the law provides easy opportunity for police to abuse their power is what I have been driving for. That we disagree on this case is less important to me than the broader implications of laws that give ample opportunity for abuse and scant opportunity for redress.
So within this context... are you suggesting that the officer should not have looked to probe a bit and ascertain whether this woman was in a mental state to be behind the wheel? I presented the following in an earlier post that was not addressed:
This cop had every right to ascertain exactly what had this woman so anxious. She had just committed a traffic violation and now was confrontational and extremely agitated.
We'd have a different headline if the woman was high and minutes after being pulled over plowed into a young mother and her newborn- killing them both.
His line of questioning seemed to suggest he might have been probing a bit to determine whether or not Bland was in the right state of mind to be behind the wheel.
Do you think if an officer pulls over a driver for an illegal lane change and then upon questioning finds the driver highly agitated and somewhat brash... there might be grounds to question a little deeper? And if upon selecting that course of action... the woman becomes defiant... what do you think the officer should do?
I understand what you are saying, I just disagree with it's application to this case. I haven't seen any evidence that he thought she was under the influence or ddangerous, both situations that he would need to address ffurther. While she was agitated and argumentative, she was also rational and not erratic. I think the officer played as much of a role in escalating the situation as she did, and he could easily have given her a ticket and told her she should be more respectful.
But you aren't trained and you weren't there. We saw video footage, but that's hardly the best vantage point for trying to establish the state of mind of someone- especially when we cannot see facial expressions and body language.
Yeah, I understand those arguments, and they are valid, but the video rolls for a long time, and in his summation I don't recall him noting any concerns about her being intoxicated or a danger to himself or the public.
Danger to herself is one other concern, which, as we know now... was legitimate.
True, but I didn't see any evidence that this concern was in his mind. That is by no means definitive, but neither would a statement That it was a concern be definitive after the fact.
Gambs,that's something we can all agree is a good thing.A drink in the lounge this evening on me,30 and L12.
I have some Blueberry Ale in the fridge...it's good stuff! I'll toast it up later here and there!
Blueberry ale huh? Wild Dog?
Blue Point Brewery out of New York. The Wild Dog I haven't tried yet, it's an 8.5% lager so that's a little rich for my candyass. Next I want to try that Not Your Dad's Root Beer, I only drink 1 or 2 at a time so the heavy sweetness and rootbeeriness shouldn't bother me. I have a friend who makes root beer floats with it. Alcoholic ice cream? Sign me up lol That would go really well with a fat hogleg joint, if I still partook anyways.
Gambs,that's something we can all agree is a good thing.A drink in the lounge this evening on me,30 and L12.
I have some Blueberry Ale in the fridge...it's good stuff! I'll toast it up later here and there!
Blueberry ale huh? Wild Dog?
Blue Point Brewery out of New York. The Wild Dog I haven't tried yet, it's an 8.5% lager so that's a little rich for my candyass. Next I want to try that Not Your Dad's Root Beer, I only drink 1 or 2 at a time so the heavy sweetness and rootbeeriness shouldn't bother me. I have a friend who makes root beer floats with it. Alcoholic ice cream? Sign me up lol That would go really well with a fat hogleg joint, if I still partook anyways.
Here we go again.Black kid in Texas busting up a car dealership ends up shot.News just says"unarmed black teen killed by police" No mention of what led up to it or his refusal to freeze or listen to commands. Where is personal responsibilty?
Here we go again.Black kid in Texas busting up a car dealership ends up shot.News just says"unarmed black teen killed by police" No mention of what led up to it or his refusal to freeze or listen to commands. Where is personal responsibilty?
Personal responsibility doesn't get clicks or followers and in turn, ad money.
Here we go again.Black kid in Texas busting up a car dealership ends up shot.News just says"unarmed black teen killed by police" No mention of what led up to it or his refusal to freeze or listen to commands. Where is personal responsibilty?
Agree news does inflame but that doesn't change the fact that if this where a white soccer mom driving a new suburban with Dubya sticker she wouldn't have been targeted and pulled over. Also doesn't change the fact that police have been shooting and killing lotsa blacks.
Here we go again.Black kid in Texas busting up a car dealership ends up shot.News just says"unarmed black teen killed by police" No mention of what led up to it or his refusal to freeze or listen to commands. Where is personal responsibilty?
Agree news does inflame but that doesn't change the fact that if this where a white soccer mom driving a new suburban with Dubya sticker she wouldn't have been targeted and pulled over. Also doesn't change the fact that police have been shooting and killing lotsa blacks.
Pulled over? This kid drove his car into a building. I get your point, but in this situation I think a traffic stop was warranted.
Here we go again.Black kid in Texas busting up a car dealership ends up shot.News just says"unarmed black teen killed by police" No mention of what led up to it or his refusal to freeze or listen to commands. Where is personal responsibilty?
Agree news does inflame but that doesn't change the fact that if this where a white soccer mom driving a new suburban with Dubya sticker she wouldn't have been targeted and pulled over. Also doesn't change the fact that police have been shooting and killing lotsa blacks.
Pulled over? This kid drove his car into a building. I get your point, but in this situation I think a traffic stop was warranted.
Here we go again.Black kid in Texas busting up a car dealership ends up shot.News just says"unarmed black teen killed by police" No mention of what led up to it or his refusal to freeze or listen to commands. Where is personal responsibilty?
Agree news does inflame but that doesn't change the fact that if this where a white soccer mom driving a new suburban with Dubya sticker she wouldn't have been targeted and pulled over. Also doesn't change the fact that police have been shooting and killing lotsa blacks.
Pulled over? This kid drove his car into a building. I get your point, but in this situation I think a traffic stop was warranted.
Was referring to Bland not football player.
Ok. I was confused because of what you quoted. My bad.
Here we go again.Black kid in Texas busting up a car dealership ends up shot.News just says"unarmed black teen killed by police" No mention of what led up to it or his refusal to freeze or listen to commands. Where is personal responsibilty?
Agree news does inflame but that doesn't change the fact that if this where a white soccer mom driving a new suburban with Dubya sticker she wouldn't have been targeted and pulled over. Also doesn't change the fact that police have been shooting and killing lotsa blacks.
Pulled over? This kid drove his car into a building. I get your point, but in this situation I think a traffic stop was warranted.
Was referring to Bland not football player.
Ok. I was confused because of what you quoted. My bad.
Officer Encinia has been indicted on perjury charges and to be fired by police dept. Sandra Bland is gone from this world because of another hothead, bully with a badge and a gun.All over a minor traffic violation. She made some poor decisions but did not deserve to be incarcerated.If the officer had any intellect, common sense, sense of empathy or basic human kindness in him, this would have never been in the news.Such a waste of a young life.I feel so sad for her family.Rest peaceful Sandra.
1993 08-18 Toronto ON CNE w/ Neil Young, Soundgarden
1998 08-22 Barrie ON Molson Park
2003 05-02 Buffalo NY HSBC, 06-28 Toronto ON Molson Amp.
2004 10-02 Toledo OH Vote For Change w/ Neil Young
2005 09-19 Toronto ON ACC, 09-13 Hamilton ON Copps, 09-11 Kitchener ON Memorial Gardens
2006 05-10 Toronto ON ACC, 05-09 Toronto ON ACC
2007 EV 09-11 Toronto ON Body of War TIFF Screening Isabel Bader Theatre - Grateful to have met Ed!!
2008 EV 08-12 Toronto ON Massey Hall
2009 08-21 Toronto ON Molson Amp.
2010 05-10 Buffalo NY HSBC
2011 09-15 Hamilton ON Copps, 09-11 Toronto ON ACC, 09-12 Toronto ON ACC,
2011 EV 06-26 Detroit MI Fox Theatre
2013 10-12 Buffalo NY First Niagara, 07-16 London ON Bud Gardens
2016 05-10, 05-12 Toronto ON ACC 2022 09-06 Hamilton ON First Ontario Centre
Officer Encinia has been indicted on perjury charges and to be fired by police dept. Sandra Bland is gone from this world because of another hothead, bully with a badge and a gun.All over a minor traffic violation. She made some poor decisions but did not deserve to be incarcerated.If the officer had any intellect, common sense, sense of empathy or basic human kindness in him, this would have never been in the news.Such a waste of a young life.I feel so sad for her family.Rest peaceful Sandra.
He didn't kill her.She killed herself.He was a douche bag,agreed but his perjury has nothing to do with her taking her own life
Blaming the cop for her suicide is near or at the pinnacle of cop bashing.
Blaming a cop for the death of a guy attempting to flee and killing himself in a high speed car crash would be more appropriate- as moronic as that would be.
Officer Encinia has been indicted on perjury charges and to be fired by police dept. Sandra Bland is gone from this world because of another hothead, bully with a badge and a gun.All over a minor traffic violation. She made some poor decisions but did not deserve to be incarcerated.If the officer had any intellect, common sense, sense of empathy or basic human kindness in him, this would have never been in the news.Such a waste of a young life.I feel so sad for her family.Rest peaceful Sandra.
He didn't kill her.She killed herself.He was a douche bag,agreed but his perjury has nothing to do with her taking her own life
I understand that she killed herself.His lying, being fired and and inability to control a what should have been a minor traffic stop speaks to his character or lack thereof.I am just glad he will not be able to hide behind his badge anymore.We need more good cops who are well trained and who are able to recognize and work with people who may need professional mental help, not incarceration.
1993 08-18 Toronto ON CNE w/ Neil Young, Soundgarden
1998 08-22 Barrie ON Molson Park
2003 05-02 Buffalo NY HSBC, 06-28 Toronto ON Molson Amp.
2004 10-02 Toledo OH Vote For Change w/ Neil Young
2005 09-19 Toronto ON ACC, 09-13 Hamilton ON Copps, 09-11 Kitchener ON Memorial Gardens
2006 05-10 Toronto ON ACC, 05-09 Toronto ON ACC
2007 EV 09-11 Toronto ON Body of War TIFF Screening Isabel Bader Theatre - Grateful to have met Ed!!
2008 EV 08-12 Toronto ON Massey Hall
2009 08-21 Toronto ON Molson Amp.
2010 05-10 Buffalo NY HSBC
2011 09-15 Hamilton ON Copps, 09-11 Toronto ON ACC, 09-12 Toronto ON ACC,
2011 EV 06-26 Detroit MI Fox Theatre
2013 10-12 Buffalo NY First Niagara, 07-16 London ON Bud Gardens
2016 05-10, 05-12 Toronto ON ACC 2022 09-06 Hamilton ON First Ontario Centre
Blaming the cop for her suicide is near or at the pinnacle of cop bashing.
Blaming a cop for the death of a guy attempting to flee and killing himself in a high speed car crash would be more appropriate- as moronic as that would be.
I am not cop bashing.I am just presenting facts and my personal opinion based on factual information.While I can't speak to your hypothetical comparison, I can say that if he acted as a well trained professional civil servant, he may have been able to assist someone who was in need of professional help.He made a series of poor decisions, has been charged with perjury and his career is done.So yeah, those facts are all direct consequences of his actions and his choices.Not someone I want serving in my community.
1993 08-18 Toronto ON CNE w/ Neil Young, Soundgarden
1998 08-22 Barrie ON Molson Park
2003 05-02 Buffalo NY HSBC, 06-28 Toronto ON Molson Amp.
2004 10-02 Toledo OH Vote For Change w/ Neil Young
2005 09-19 Toronto ON ACC, 09-13 Hamilton ON Copps, 09-11 Kitchener ON Memorial Gardens
2006 05-10 Toronto ON ACC, 05-09 Toronto ON ACC
2007 EV 09-11 Toronto ON Body of War TIFF Screening Isabel Bader Theatre - Grateful to have met Ed!!
2008 EV 08-12 Toronto ON Massey Hall
2009 08-21 Toronto ON Molson Amp.
2010 05-10 Buffalo NY HSBC
2011 09-15 Hamilton ON Copps, 09-11 Toronto ON ACC, 09-12 Toronto ON ACC,
2011 EV 06-26 Detroit MI Fox Theatre
2013 10-12 Buffalo NY First Niagara, 07-16 London ON Bud Gardens
2016 05-10, 05-12 Toronto ON ACC 2022 09-06 Hamilton ON First Ontario Centre
Comments
I think the officer played as much of a role in escalating the situation as she did, and he could easily have given her a ticket and told her she should be more respectful.
For the record, I don't care how you attempt to illustrate your points; however, in the event I did take exception to such tactics... I'd be careful not to employ them myself.
I have a constitutional right to avoid undue search and seizure. I feel that (with the exception of safety issues) being removed from my vehicle without probable cause is a violation of that right. The courts have ruled otherwise.
Woot!
Next I want to try that Not Your Dad's Root Beer, I only drink 1 or 2 at a time so the heavy sweetness and rootbeeriness shouldn't bother me. I have a friend who makes root beer floats with it. Alcoholic ice cream? Sign me up lol
That would go really well with a fat hogleg joint, if I still partook anyways.
It really offered some badly needed perspective.
Next time I'll save Geezuz for the end.
No mention of what led up to it or his refusal to freeze or listen to commands.
Where is personal responsibilty?
Sandra Bland is gone from this world because of another hothead, bully with a badge and a gun.All over a minor traffic violation. She made some poor decisions but did not deserve to be incarcerated.If the officer had any intellect, common sense, sense of empathy or basic human kindness in him, this would have never been in the news.Such a waste of a young life.I feel so sad for her family.Rest peaceful Sandra.
1998 08-22 Barrie ON Molson Park
2003 05-02 Buffalo NY HSBC, 06-28 Toronto ON Molson Amp.
2004 10-02 Toledo OH Vote For Change w/ Neil Young
2005 09-19 Toronto ON ACC, 09-13 Hamilton ON Copps, 09-11 Kitchener ON Memorial Gardens
2006 05-10 Toronto ON ACC, 05-09 Toronto ON ACC
2007 EV 09-11 Toronto ON Body of War TIFF Screening Isabel Bader Theatre - Grateful to have met Ed!!
2008 EV 08-12 Toronto ON Massey Hall
2009 08-21 Toronto ON Molson Amp.
2010 05-10 Buffalo NY HSBC
2011 09-15 Hamilton ON Copps, 09-11 Toronto ON ACC, 09-12 Toronto ON ACC,
2011 EV 06-26 Detroit MI Fox Theatre
2013 10-12 Buffalo NY First Niagara, 07-16 London ON Bud Gardens
2016 05-10, 05-12 Toronto ON ACC
2022 09-06 Hamilton ON First Ontario Centre
Blaming a cop for the death of a guy attempting to flee and killing himself in a high speed car crash would be more appropriate- as moronic as that would be.
1998 08-22 Barrie ON Molson Park
2003 05-02 Buffalo NY HSBC, 06-28 Toronto ON Molson Amp.
2004 10-02 Toledo OH Vote For Change w/ Neil Young
2005 09-19 Toronto ON ACC, 09-13 Hamilton ON Copps, 09-11 Kitchener ON Memorial Gardens
2006 05-10 Toronto ON ACC, 05-09 Toronto ON ACC
2007 EV 09-11 Toronto ON Body of War TIFF Screening Isabel Bader Theatre - Grateful to have met Ed!!
2008 EV 08-12 Toronto ON Massey Hall
2009 08-21 Toronto ON Molson Amp.
2010 05-10 Buffalo NY HSBC
2011 09-15 Hamilton ON Copps, 09-11 Toronto ON ACC, 09-12 Toronto ON ACC,
2011 EV 06-26 Detroit MI Fox Theatre
2013 10-12 Buffalo NY First Niagara, 07-16 London ON Bud Gardens
2016 05-10, 05-12 Toronto ON ACC
2022 09-06 Hamilton ON First Ontario Centre
1998 08-22 Barrie ON Molson Park
2003 05-02 Buffalo NY HSBC, 06-28 Toronto ON Molson Amp.
2004 10-02 Toledo OH Vote For Change w/ Neil Young
2005 09-19 Toronto ON ACC, 09-13 Hamilton ON Copps, 09-11 Kitchener ON Memorial Gardens
2006 05-10 Toronto ON ACC, 05-09 Toronto ON ACC
2007 EV 09-11 Toronto ON Body of War TIFF Screening Isabel Bader Theatre - Grateful to have met Ed!!
2008 EV 08-12 Toronto ON Massey Hall
2009 08-21 Toronto ON Molson Amp.
2010 05-10 Buffalo NY HSBC
2011 09-15 Hamilton ON Copps, 09-11 Toronto ON ACC, 09-12 Toronto ON ACC,
2011 EV 06-26 Detroit MI Fox Theatre
2013 10-12 Buffalo NY First Niagara, 07-16 London ON Bud Gardens
2016 05-10, 05-12 Toronto ON ACC
2022 09-06 Hamilton ON First Ontario Centre