Black Lives Matter

Gern Blansten · August 2022

Cropduster-80 said:

nicknyr15 said:

Gern Blansten said:

The Juggler said:

Gern Blansten said:

The Juggler said:

Cropduster-80 said:

mace1229 said:

Cropduster-80 said:

The Juggler said:

Here's the thing though--nobody would bitch in this case. The woman who called the police even admitted she made a mistake.

If there was a systemic culture shift in the police where this didn’t happen at all, yes people would bitch. The whole narrative would be our streets are less safe because the police can’t do it

in this one instance, sure no one would complain

all of this kind of stuff gets packaged in police reform initiatives that never go anywhere

You really don’t think people wouldn’t bitch if they called police for some suspicious guy, police never came, and there was a series of break ins, stolen cars or something similar by the guy they never checked out?
People complain their favorite show gets postponed a month. Pretty sure they’ll bitch over that.
Not saying that was going to happen here. But that’s what I meant when I said if they don’t respond and something does happen, it will be just as bad of an outcome.

Lots of white people would bitch yes. That’s what I’m saying

People are generally ok with rights being violated as long as it’s not theirs.

I know plenty of people in my neighbourhood who want more policing. They even pay extra for supplemental officers (real police, not rental cops). They don’t want themselves to be policed though they want other people policed. The cops know this, so they really don’t actively look for anything that isn’t external.

policing has always been targeted.

Look at drug enforcement as an example specifically possession charges. Any soccer mom yoga class is filled with illegal prescription drugs: opioids, Adderall, and a mix of a lot of other things. I’ve never seen the cops line them up and search them for being in a high drug area. Black communities though it’s common

Cops know this too, however arresting your tax base isn’t how to get more funding. Violating some peoples rights on the chance it reduces crime is a strategy. The police use it and white people generally don’t care, so it continues. It’s not their rights being violated most of the time.

policing without violating anyones rights shouldn’t even be a question. Sure it makes their jobs harder, but that’s what the job is supposed to be. If a crime ends up happening because a cop couldn’t legally stop it, so be it. Our rights are more important and the ends don’t justify the means

Also....no one is suggesting the police should have ignored the call. lol....

But not confirming someone's identity who might not have the property owner's best intentions in mind is ignoring. My opinion.

I don't like the idea that someone can be watering my flowers when I'm not home and a neighbor watching my house calls the cops to say that something doesn't look right and they don't do anything.

If he was watering the flowers at 3am does that make a difference?

I would think that makes a world of difference. This was a guy watering flowers probably around noon, as it was after Church. He wasn't attempting to break into the house. I think that makes a huge difference as opposed to spotting someone at the house in the middle of the night.

What kind of burglar makes a big show of watering flowers so everyone can see him, before breaking into the place? Makes no sense. If the police utilized a little bit of common sense, the whole thing would have been averted.

the kind of burglar that realizes someone has seen him?

Maybe I'm too submissive to the cops but I would have shown my ID and made it a 2 minute transaction.

I guess I’m too submissive too.

That’s kind of why it’s a racial issue. Expecting a black person to be submissive is kind of a problem, historically speaking. Having to submit for no legal reason can be a much bigger deal since it never really ended

As a white person I can never understand besides knowing It’s apples and oranges

looking at the same situation through two different lenses doesn’t mean it is the same. White people also overwhelmingly believe the police are on their side, not out to get them.

Comply and submit even when it’s not a lawful request means very different things to different groups

I don't disagree with that. I'm white so I don't really fear the police nor do I care if they see my ID even if I'm not legally required to provide it.

But if I fear the police I would think the same would apply. You know it's going to escalate if you don't.

Cropduster-80 · August 2022

Gern Blansten said:

Cropduster-80 said:

nicknyr15 said:

Gern Blansten said:

The Juggler said:

Gern Blansten said:

The Juggler said:

Cropduster-80 said:

mace1229 said:

Cropduster-80 said:

The Juggler said:

Here's the thing though--nobody would bitch in this case. The woman who called the police even admitted she made a mistake.

If there was a systemic culture shift in the police where this didn’t happen at all, yes people would bitch. The whole narrative would be our streets are less safe because the police can’t do it

in this one instance, sure no one would complain

all of this kind of stuff gets packaged in police reform initiatives that never go anywhere

You really don’t think people wouldn’t bitch if they called police for some suspicious guy, police never came, and there was a series of break ins, stolen cars or something similar by the guy they never checked out?
People complain their favorite show gets postponed a month. Pretty sure they’ll bitch over that.
Not saying that was going to happen here. But that’s what I meant when I said if they don’t respond and something does happen, it will be just as bad of an outcome.

Lots of white people would bitch yes. That’s what I’m saying

People are generally ok with rights being violated as long as it’s not theirs.

I know plenty of people in my neighbourhood who want more policing. They even pay extra for supplemental officers (real police, not rental cops). They don’t want themselves to be policed though they want other people policed. The cops know this, so they really don’t actively look for anything that isn’t external.

policing has always been targeted.

Look at drug enforcement as an example specifically possession charges. Any soccer mom yoga class is filled with illegal prescription drugs: opioids, Adderall, and a mix of a lot of other things. I’ve never seen the cops line them up and search them for being in a high drug area. Black communities though it’s common

Cops know this too, however arresting your tax base isn’t how to get more funding. Violating some peoples rights on the chance it reduces crime is a strategy. The police use it and white people generally don’t care, so it continues. It’s not their rights being violated most of the time.

policing without violating anyones rights shouldn’t even be a question. Sure it makes their jobs harder, but that’s what the job is supposed to be. If a crime ends up happening because a cop couldn’t legally stop it, so be it. Our rights are more important and the ends don’t justify the means

Also....no one is suggesting the police should have ignored the call. lol....

But not confirming someone's identity who might not have the property owner's best intentions in mind is ignoring. My opinion.

I don't like the idea that someone can be watering my flowers when I'm not home and a neighbor watching my house calls the cops to say that something doesn't look right and they don't do anything.

If he was watering the flowers at 3am does that make a difference?

I would think that makes a world of difference. This was a guy watering flowers probably around noon, as it was after Church. He wasn't attempting to break into the house. I think that makes a huge difference as opposed to spotting someone at the house in the middle of the night.

What kind of burglar makes a big show of watering flowers so everyone can see him, before breaking into the place? Makes no sense. If the police utilized a little bit of common sense, the whole thing would have been averted.

the kind of burglar that realizes someone has seen him?

Maybe I'm too submissive to the cops but I would have shown my ID and made it a 2 minute transaction.

I guess I’m too submissive too.

That’s kind of why it’s a racial issue. Expecting a black person to be submissive is kind of a problem, historically speaking. Having to submit for no legal reason can be a much bigger deal since it never really ended

As a white person I can never understand besides knowing It’s apples and oranges

looking at the same situation through two different lenses doesn’t mean it is the same. White people also overwhelmingly believe the police are on their side, not out to get them.

Comply and submit even when it’s not a lawful request means very different things to different groups

I don't disagree with that. I'm white so I don't really fear the police nor do I care if they see my ID even if I'm not legally required to provide it.

But if I fear the police I would think the same would apply. You know it's going to escalate if you don't.

In the 60’s the guy would get beaten, so if you count that as progress I guess it is. You can make a stand now more safely, but getting arrested is still probable so yeah I think overwhelmingly most just show ID or do whatever the cops demand.

then it just undermines the view of police under the surface as it doesn’t mean they aren’t still mad about it. There is a reason the black community views the police in a vastly different way than the white community. This kind of stuff is one reason

you wouldn’t see all the interactions when someone just complies. Both situations are wrong on the part of the police, but all the complying with unlawful demands how would you even track that? I think it happens way way too often. Since technically it’s providing ID on request, and allowable since you willingly gave it. Even if it’s willingly provided because you know you will get arrested if you don’t. So is it really willingly provided?

tempo_n_groove · August 2022

Cropduster-80 said:

mace1229 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cblock4life said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cblock4life said:

The Juggler said:

Here's the thing though--nobody would bitch in this case. The woman who called the police even admitted she made a mistake.

Two points about this, had she gone outside and spoke to him before calling the police she would have realized it was her neighbor (she did say it didn’t look like him) and this wouldn’t have happened, and how is that police working their area in daylight doesn’t know the pastor from across and right down the street.

Why are white people afraid of black people?

And why shouldn’t an elderly black gentleman not be immediately disgusted when being questioned while doing a favor for his neighbor considering it’s probably happened to him his whole life.

There is no excuse for her and the cops reaction. None except racial profiling. I’m not saying they’re racist but the profiling is grotesquely blatant.

Or she knew her neighbor was away and thought it odd that someone was over there?

Was the person that called even white? Was that proven?

For ID purposes. A cop is allowed to detain you until you are recognized or provide ID. There are some gray areas with that too though.

Not being an ass but I wouldn’t have said whites are afraid of blacks if she wasn’t white.
She came out of her house, not immediately, and said “I think this was my fault”. Well yes it was. Take your ass outside and approach the gentleman and she would have seen he lived right across the street and the pastor at a local church. Let’s not forget he had every right to refuse and as someone else stated was knowledgeable about the law and his rights.

No, not being an ass until you mentioned not being an ass, lol. I thought that was funny, forgive me.

It's why I asked the question. I didn't see where it was mentioned.

If I see someone poking around that looks out of place I confront them, not everyone is that brazen to do it though and I get that. Some people just call the cops and let them deal with the process.

In hindsight the pastor is in the right but no one knew that prior. You may not have to produce ID but it sure does make mountains out of molehills when you don't.

These were pretty much my thoughts. I don't know the motives of the neighbor or if there is a history there. But everyone seems to be willing to just jump to the conclusion she was profiling if not racist. And maybe she is, but I can't tell that from what I saw.
We live in this roller coaster world of if you see something, say something. But when you do, you're racist. I wouldn't ask a woman to confront a man who she believes is acting suspicious. Maybe he couldn't find the hose and was snooping around. An innocent act but could look suspicious to a neighbor. I wouldn't tell a female neighbor to confront a suspicious man, so I don't know why so many are acting like that would be the normal thing to do.
And maybe she did over react, maybe if she just observed for a few more seconds she would have realized he was just there to water. I don't know.
She saw someone out of place and called the cops. He could have ended this very quickly and chose not to. The only question here for me is what exactly did the cops do when they detained him and was it lawful? I've seen some pretty fluid definitions of an arrest, so not sure what that would have entailed in this case and if any rights were violated in confirming his identity. That would be my only question.

she absolutely called the cops because he was black I don’t think that’s even debatable. Her first assumption if he was white would not have been “criminal”. Having that thought doesn’t make you a bad person though. Not working on it does, so I hope she does.

Not being able to admit we all have prejudice is a problem. It’s human nature for one thing to be suspicious of people not in our group. All this pretending we are in a post racial world borders on the absurd

In what world is watering flowers suspicious, If you take race out of the equation? It’s not

try for just a second to see the situation from the perspective of the guy watering the flowers rather than looking at it from the police, and the white neighbours perspective. Everyone is getting the benefit of the doubt except the person who’s rights were in fact violated. You have blamed him several times for not doing something he didn’t have to do

Pastor says "I'm supposed to be here" You don't live there, you won't show ID that you live in the area, the owners of the home aren't there, a neighbor called because she doesn't recognize you but the cop is to take your word?

I know we have rights but you have to see the forest for the trees sometimes.

Cropduster-80 · August 2022

tempo_n_groove said:

Cropduster-80 said:

mace1229 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cblock4life said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cblock4life said:

The Juggler said:

Here's the thing though--nobody would bitch in this case. The woman who called the police even admitted she made a mistake.

Two points about this, had she gone outside and spoke to him before calling the police she would have realized it was her neighbor (she did say it didn’t look like him) and this wouldn’t have happened, and how is that police working their area in daylight doesn’t know the pastor from across and right down the street.

Why are white people afraid of black people?

And why shouldn’t an elderly black gentleman not be immediately disgusted when being questioned while doing a favor for his neighbor considering it’s probably happened to him his whole life.

There is no excuse for her and the cops reaction. None except racial profiling. I’m not saying they’re racist but the profiling is grotesquely blatant.

Or she knew her neighbor was away and thought it odd that someone was over there?

Was the person that called even white? Was that proven?

For ID purposes. A cop is allowed to detain you until you are recognized or provide ID. There are some gray areas with that too though.

Not being an ass but I wouldn’t have said whites are afraid of blacks if she wasn’t white.
She came out of her house, not immediately, and said “I think this was my fault”. Well yes it was. Take your ass outside and approach the gentleman and she would have seen he lived right across the street and the pastor at a local church. Let’s not forget he had every right to refuse and as someone else stated was knowledgeable about the law and his rights.

No, not being an ass until you mentioned not being an ass, lol. I thought that was funny, forgive me.

It's why I asked the question. I didn't see where it was mentioned.

If I see someone poking around that looks out of place I confront them, not everyone is that brazen to do it though and I get that. Some people just call the cops and let them deal with the process.

In hindsight the pastor is in the right but no one knew that prior. You may not have to produce ID but it sure does make mountains out of molehills when you don't.

These were pretty much my thoughts. I don't know the motives of the neighbor or if there is a history there. But everyone seems to be willing to just jump to the conclusion she was profiling if not racist. And maybe she is, but I can't tell that from what I saw.
We live in this roller coaster world of if you see something, say something. But when you do, you're racist. I wouldn't ask a woman to confront a man who she believes is acting suspicious. Maybe he couldn't find the hose and was snooping around. An innocent act but could look suspicious to a neighbor. I wouldn't tell a female neighbor to confront a suspicious man, so I don't know why so many are acting like that would be the normal thing to do.
And maybe she did over react, maybe if she just observed for a few more seconds she would have realized he was just there to water. I don't know.
She saw someone out of place and called the cops. He could have ended this very quickly and chose not to. The only question here for me is what exactly did the cops do when they detained him and was it lawful? I've seen some pretty fluid definitions of an arrest, so not sure what that would have entailed in this case and if any rights were violated in confirming his identity. That would be my only question.

she absolutely called the cops because he was black I don’t think that’s even debatable. Her first assumption if he was white would not have been “criminal”. Having that thought doesn’t make you a bad person though. Not working on it does, so I hope she does.

Not being able to admit we all have prejudice is a problem. It’s human nature for one thing to be suspicious of people not in our group. All this pretending we are in a post racial world borders on the absurd

In what world is watering flowers suspicious, If you take race out of the equation? It’s not

try for just a second to see the situation from the perspective of the guy watering the flowers rather than looking at it from the police, and the white neighbours perspective. Everyone is getting the benefit of the doubt except the person who’s rights were in fact violated. You have blamed him several times for not doing something he didn’t have to do

Pastor says "I'm supposed to be here" You don't live there, you won't show ID that you live in the area, the owners of the home aren't there, a neighbor called because she doesn't recognize you but the cop is to take your word?

I know we have rights but you have to see the forest for the trees sometimes.

Again, what crime was being committed worst case assuming he was a criminal? Let’s say he was. Any “what if” still requires an actual illegal act to be actively in progress, not one about to happen

He wasn’t inside (yet), so it’s not burglary
he was outside.
That’s trespass. Only enforceable by the owner of the property. You really can’t commit trespass via a third party witness technically

this is police entering private property to determine who has a right to be there on the request of a neighbour. It’s wrong on so many levels regardless of any of the racial components

people are wanting police to stop a crime before it’s committed with no basis to do so. As a property owner I would argue the police trespassed on my property. If there was no probable cause for them to be there they were the ones unauthorised

fundamentally it’s no different than the police deciding one day to randomly walk down my street to do ID checks door to door because they want to and arresting anyone who refuses. It’s just as wrong and neither has any actual justification

tempo_n_groove · August 2022

Cropduster-80 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Cropduster-80 said:

mace1229 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cblock4life said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cblock4life said:

The Juggler said:

Here's the thing though--nobody would bitch in this case. The woman who called the police even admitted she made a mistake.

Two points about this, had she gone outside and spoke to him before calling the police she would have realized it was her neighbor (she did say it didn’t look like him) and this wouldn’t have happened, and how is that police working their area in daylight doesn’t know the pastor from across and right down the street.

Why are white people afraid of black people?

And why shouldn’t an elderly black gentleman not be immediately disgusted when being questioned while doing a favor for his neighbor considering it’s probably happened to him his whole life.

There is no excuse for her and the cops reaction. None except racial profiling. I’m not saying they’re racist but the profiling is grotesquely blatant.

Or she knew her neighbor was away and thought it odd that someone was over there?

Was the person that called even white? Was that proven?

For ID purposes. A cop is allowed to detain you until you are recognized or provide ID. There are some gray areas with that too though.

Not being an ass but I wouldn’t have said whites are afraid of blacks if she wasn’t white.
She came out of her house, not immediately, and said “I think this was my fault”. Well yes it was. Take your ass outside and approach the gentleman and she would have seen he lived right across the street and the pastor at a local church. Let’s not forget he had every right to refuse and as someone else stated was knowledgeable about the law and his rights.

No, not being an ass until you mentioned not being an ass, lol. I thought that was funny, forgive me.

It's why I asked the question. I didn't see where it was mentioned.

If I see someone poking around that looks out of place I confront them, not everyone is that brazen to do it though and I get that. Some people just call the cops and let them deal with the process.

In hindsight the pastor is in the right but no one knew that prior. You may not have to produce ID but it sure does make mountains out of molehills when you don't.

These were pretty much my thoughts. I don't know the motives of the neighbor or if there is a history there. But everyone seems to be willing to just jump to the conclusion she was profiling if not racist. And maybe she is, but I can't tell that from what I saw.
We live in this roller coaster world of if you see something, say something. But when you do, you're racist. I wouldn't ask a woman to confront a man who she believes is acting suspicious. Maybe he couldn't find the hose and was snooping around. An innocent act but could look suspicious to a neighbor. I wouldn't tell a female neighbor to confront a suspicious man, so I don't know why so many are acting like that would be the normal thing to do.
And maybe she did over react, maybe if she just observed for a few more seconds she would have realized he was just there to water. I don't know.
She saw someone out of place and called the cops. He could have ended this very quickly and chose not to. The only question here for me is what exactly did the cops do when they detained him and was it lawful? I've seen some pretty fluid definitions of an arrest, so not sure what that would have entailed in this case and if any rights were violated in confirming his identity. That would be my only question.

she absolutely called the cops because he was black I don’t think that’s even debatable. Her first assumption if he was white would not have been “criminal”. Having that thought doesn’t make you a bad person though. Not working on it does, so I hope she does.

Not being able to admit we all have prejudice is a problem. It’s human nature for one thing to be suspicious of people not in our group. All this pretending we are in a post racial world borders on the absurd

In what world is watering flowers suspicious, If you take race out of the equation? It’s not

try for just a second to see the situation from the perspective of the guy watering the flowers rather than looking at it from the police, and the white neighbours perspective. Everyone is getting the benefit of the doubt except the person who’s rights were in fact violated. You have blamed him several times for not doing something he didn’t have to do

Pastor says "I'm supposed to be here" You don't live there, you won't show ID that you live in the area, the owners of the home aren't there, a neighbor called because she doesn't recognize you but the cop is to take your word?

I know we have rights but you have to see the forest for the trees sometimes.

Again, what crime was being committed worst case assuming he was a criminal? Let’s say he was

He wasn’t inside (yet), so it’s not burglary
he was outside.
That’s trespass. Only enforceable by the owner of the property. You really can’t commit trespass via a third party witness technically

this is police entering private property to determine who has a right to be there. It’s wrong on so many levels regardless of any of the racial components

people are wanting police to stop a crime before it’s committed with no basis to do so. As a property owner I would argue the police trespassed on my property. If there was no probable cause for them to be there they were the ones unauthorised

How do the cops get in trouble for entering a private residence but the pastor doesn't? You can't have that both ways.

Halifax2TheMax · August 2022

Maybe Brandon can invite them all to the White House for a beer summit?

Cropduster-80 · August 2022

tempo_n_groove said:

Cropduster-80 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Cropduster-80 said:

mace1229 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cblock4life said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cblock4life said:

The Juggler said:

Here's the thing though--nobody would bitch in this case. The woman who called the police even admitted she made a mistake.

Two points about this, had she gone outside and spoke to him before calling the police she would have realized it was her neighbor (she did say it didn’t look like him) and this wouldn’t have happened, and how is that police working their area in daylight doesn’t know the pastor from across and right down the street.

Why are white people afraid of black people?

And why shouldn’t an elderly black gentleman not be immediately disgusted when being questioned while doing a favor for his neighbor considering it’s probably happened to him his whole life.

There is no excuse for her and the cops reaction. None except racial profiling. I’m not saying they’re racist but the profiling is grotesquely blatant.

Or she knew her neighbor was away and thought it odd that someone was over there?

Was the person that called even white? Was that proven?

For ID purposes. A cop is allowed to detain you until you are recognized or provide ID. There are some gray areas with that too though.

Not being an ass but I wouldn’t have said whites are afraid of blacks if she wasn’t white.
She came out of her house, not immediately, and said “I think this was my fault”. Well yes it was. Take your ass outside and approach the gentleman and she would have seen he lived right across the street and the pastor at a local church. Let’s not forget he had every right to refuse and as someone else stated was knowledgeable about the law and his rights.

No, not being an ass until you mentioned not being an ass, lol. I thought that was funny, forgive me.

It's why I asked the question. I didn't see where it was mentioned.

If I see someone poking around that looks out of place I confront them, not everyone is that brazen to do it though and I get that. Some people just call the cops and let them deal with the process.

In hindsight the pastor is in the right but no one knew that prior. You may not have to produce ID but it sure does make mountains out of molehills when you don't.

These were pretty much my thoughts. I don't know the motives of the neighbor or if there is a history there. But everyone seems to be willing to just jump to the conclusion she was profiling if not racist. And maybe she is, but I can't tell that from what I saw.
We live in this roller coaster world of if you see something, say something. But when you do, you're racist. I wouldn't ask a woman to confront a man who she believes is acting suspicious. Maybe he couldn't find the hose and was snooping around. An innocent act but could look suspicious to a neighbor. I wouldn't tell a female neighbor to confront a suspicious man, so I don't know why so many are acting like that would be the normal thing to do.
And maybe she did over react, maybe if she just observed for a few more seconds she would have realized he was just there to water. I don't know.
She saw someone out of place and called the cops. He could have ended this very quickly and chose not to. The only question here for me is what exactly did the cops do when they detained him and was it lawful? I've seen some pretty fluid definitions of an arrest, so not sure what that would have entailed in this case and if any rights were violated in confirming his identity. That would be my only question.

she absolutely called the cops because he was black I don’t think that’s even debatable. Her first assumption if he was white would not have been “criminal”. Having that thought doesn’t make you a bad person though. Not working on it does, so I hope she does.

Not being able to admit we all have prejudice is a problem. It’s human nature for one thing to be suspicious of people not in our group. All this pretending we are in a post racial world borders on the absurd

In what world is watering flowers suspicious, If you take race out of the equation? It’s not

try for just a second to see the situation from the perspective of the guy watering the flowers rather than looking at it from the police, and the white neighbours perspective. Everyone is getting the benefit of the doubt except the person who’s rights were in fact violated. You have blamed him several times for not doing something he didn’t have to do

Pastor says "I'm supposed to be here" You don't live there, you won't show ID that you live in the area, the owners of the home aren't there, a neighbor called because she doesn't recognize you but the cop is to take your word?

I know we have rights but you have to see the forest for the trees sometimes.

Again, what crime was being committed worst case assuming he was a criminal? Let’s say he was

He wasn’t inside (yet), so it’s not burglary
he was outside.
That’s trespass. Only enforceable by the owner of the property. You really can’t commit trespass via a third party witness technically

this is police entering private property to determine who has a right to be there. It’s wrong on so many levels regardless of any of the racial components

people are wanting police to stop a crime before it’s committed with no basis to do so. As a property owner I would argue the police trespassed on my property. If there was no probable cause for them to be there they were the ones unauthorised

How do the cops get in trouble for entering a private residence but the pastor doesn't? You can't have that both ways.

The pastor had permission, the police didn’t.

A property owner is the only one who can allow someone on their land except in extreme or specific circumstances. It’s not up to the police or your neighbour to decide if that permission is there or not. It’s the property owners job. If I have a no trespassing sign up for example I can have 20 people on my property and randomly say these 3 are trespassing, the others are fine. Who is or isn’t authorised is up to me, not the police and I can selectively enforce it as much as I want

the police wouldn’t know, it’s none of their business. Minus a crime in progress that they can clearly see, with a warrant, or at the request of the property owner, the police really shouldn’t be on private property at all. Saying otherwise is a terrifying and dangerous precedent for all manner of government intrusion.

tempo_n_groove · August 2022

Cropduster-80 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Cropduster-80 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Cropduster-80 said:

mace1229 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cblock4life said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cblock4life said:

The Juggler said:

Here's the thing though--nobody would bitch in this case. The woman who called the police even admitted she made a mistake.

Two points about this, had she gone outside and spoke to him before calling the police she would have realized it was her neighbor (she did say it didn’t look like him) and this wouldn’t have happened, and how is that police working their area in daylight doesn’t know the pastor from across and right down the street.

Why are white people afraid of black people?

And why shouldn’t an elderly black gentleman not be immediately disgusted when being questioned while doing a favor for his neighbor considering it’s probably happened to him his whole life.

There is no excuse for her and the cops reaction. None except racial profiling. I’m not saying they’re racist but the profiling is grotesquely blatant.

Or she knew her neighbor was away and thought it odd that someone was over there?

Was the person that called even white? Was that proven?

For ID purposes. A cop is allowed to detain you until you are recognized or provide ID. There are some gray areas with that too though.

Not being an ass but I wouldn’t have said whites are afraid of blacks if she wasn’t white.
She came out of her house, not immediately, and said “I think this was my fault”. Well yes it was. Take your ass outside and approach the gentleman and she would have seen he lived right across the street and the pastor at a local church. Let’s not forget he had every right to refuse and as someone else stated was knowledgeable about the law and his rights.

No, not being an ass until you mentioned not being an ass, lol. I thought that was funny, forgive me.

It's why I asked the question. I didn't see where it was mentioned.

If I see someone poking around that looks out of place I confront them, not everyone is that brazen to do it though and I get that. Some people just call the cops and let them deal with the process.

In hindsight the pastor is in the right but no one knew that prior. You may not have to produce ID but it sure does make mountains out of molehills when you don't.

These were pretty much my thoughts. I don't know the motives of the neighbor or if there is a history there. But everyone seems to be willing to just jump to the conclusion she was profiling if not racist. And maybe she is, but I can't tell that from what I saw.
We live in this roller coaster world of if you see something, say something. But when you do, you're racist. I wouldn't ask a woman to confront a man who she believes is acting suspicious. Maybe he couldn't find the hose and was snooping around. An innocent act but could look suspicious to a neighbor. I wouldn't tell a female neighbor to confront a suspicious man, so I don't know why so many are acting like that would be the normal thing to do.
And maybe she did over react, maybe if she just observed for a few more seconds she would have realized he was just there to water. I don't know.
She saw someone out of place and called the cops. He could have ended this very quickly and chose not to. The only question here for me is what exactly did the cops do when they detained him and was it lawful? I've seen some pretty fluid definitions of an arrest, so not sure what that would have entailed in this case and if any rights were violated in confirming his identity. That would be my only question.

she absolutely called the cops because he was black I don’t think that’s even debatable. Her first assumption if he was white would not have been “criminal”. Having that thought doesn’t make you a bad person though. Not working on it does, so I hope she does.

Not being able to admit we all have prejudice is a problem. It’s human nature for one thing to be suspicious of people not in our group. All this pretending we are in a post racial world borders on the absurd

In what world is watering flowers suspicious, If you take race out of the equation? It’s not

try for just a second to see the situation from the perspective of the guy watering the flowers rather than looking at it from the police, and the white neighbours perspective. Everyone is getting the benefit of the doubt except the person who’s rights were in fact violated. You have blamed him several times for not doing something he didn’t have to do

Pastor says "I'm supposed to be here" You don't live there, you won't show ID that you live in the area, the owners of the home aren't there, a neighbor called because she doesn't recognize you but the cop is to take your word?

I know we have rights but you have to see the forest for the trees sometimes.

Again, what crime was being committed worst case assuming he was a criminal? Let’s say he was

He wasn’t inside (yet), so it’s not burglary
he was outside.
That’s trespass. Only enforceable by the owner of the property. You really can’t commit trespass via a third party witness technically

this is police entering private property to determine who has a right to be there. It’s wrong on so many levels regardless of any of the racial components

people are wanting police to stop a crime before it’s committed with no basis to do so. As a property owner I would argue the police trespassed on my property. If there was no probable cause for them to be there they were the ones unauthorised

How do the cops get in trouble for entering a private residence but the pastor doesn't? You can't have that both ways.

The pastor had permission, the police didn’t.

A property owner is the only one who can allow someone on their land except in extreme or specific circumstances. It’s not up to the police or your neighbour to decide if that permission is there or not. It’s the property owners job. If I have a no trespassing sign up for example I can have 20 people on my property and randomly say these 3 are trespassing, the others are fine. Who is or isn’t authorised is up to me, not the police and I can selectively enforce it as much as I want

the police wouldn’t know, it’s none of their business. Minus a crime in progress that they can clearly see, with a warrant, or at the request of the property owner, the police really shouldn’t be on private property at all. Saying otherwise is a terrifying and dangerous precedent for all manner of government intrusion.

Outside, no one to tell them otherwise, yeah, I get the law but the owner isn't there to tell them what is who and where.

I am happy the police checked it out but getting to where it ended is silly.

Cropduster-80 · August 2022

tempo_n_groove said:

Cropduster-80 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Cropduster-80 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Cropduster-80 said:

mace1229 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cblock4life said:

tempo_n_groove said:

cblock4life said:

The Juggler said:

Here's the thing though--nobody would bitch in this case. The woman who called the police even admitted she made a mistake.

Two points about this, had she gone outside and spoke to him before calling the police she would have realized it was her neighbor (she did say it didn’t look like him) and this wouldn’t have happened, and how is that police working their area in daylight doesn’t know the pastor from across and right down the street.

Why are white people afraid of black people?

And why shouldn’t an elderly black gentleman not be immediately disgusted when being questioned while doing a favor for his neighbor considering it’s probably happened to him his whole life.

There is no excuse for her and the cops reaction. None except racial profiling. I’m not saying they’re racist but the profiling is grotesquely blatant.

Or she knew her neighbor was away and thought it odd that someone was over there?

Was the person that called even white? Was that proven?

For ID purposes. A cop is allowed to detain you until you are recognized or provide ID. There are some gray areas with that too though.

Not being an ass but I wouldn’t have said whites are afraid of blacks if she wasn’t white.
She came out of her house, not immediately, and said “I think this was my fault”. Well yes it was. Take your ass outside and approach the gentleman and she would have seen he lived right across the street and the pastor at a local church. Let’s not forget he had every right to refuse and as someone else stated was knowledgeable about the law and his rights.

No, not being an ass until you mentioned not being an ass, lol. I thought that was funny, forgive me.

It's why I asked the question. I didn't see where it was mentioned.

If I see someone poking around that looks out of place I confront them, not everyone is that brazen to do it though and I get that. Some people just call the cops and let them deal with the process.

In hindsight the pastor is in the right but no one knew that prior. You may not have to produce ID but it sure does make mountains out of molehills when you don't.

These were pretty much my thoughts. I don't know the motives of the neighbor or if there is a history there. But everyone seems to be willing to just jump to the conclusion she was profiling if not racist. And maybe she is, but I can't tell that from what I saw.
We live in this roller coaster world of if you see something, say something. But when you do, you're racist. I wouldn't ask a woman to confront a man who she believes is acting suspicious. Maybe he couldn't find the hose and was snooping around. An innocent act but could look suspicious to a neighbor. I wouldn't tell a female neighbor to confront a suspicious man, so I don't know why so many are acting like that would be the normal thing to do.
And maybe she did over react, maybe if she just observed for a few more seconds she would have realized he was just there to water. I don't know.
She saw someone out of place and called the cops. He could have ended this very quickly and chose not to. The only question here for me is what exactly did the cops do when they detained him and was it lawful? I've seen some pretty fluid definitions of an arrest, so not sure what that would have entailed in this case and if any rights were violated in confirming his identity. That would be my only question.

she absolutely called the cops because he was black I don’t think that’s even debatable. Her first assumption if he was white would not have been “criminal”. Having that thought doesn’t make you a bad person though. Not working on it does, so I hope she does.

Not being able to admit we all have prejudice is a problem. It’s human nature for one thing to be suspicious of people not in our group. All this pretending we are in a post racial world borders on the absurd

In what world is watering flowers suspicious, If you take race out of the equation? It’s not

try for just a second to see the situation from the perspective of the guy watering the flowers rather than looking at it from the police, and the white neighbours perspective. Everyone is getting the benefit of the doubt except the person who’s rights were in fact violated. You have blamed him several times for not doing something he didn’t have to do

Pastor says "I'm supposed to be here" You don't live there, you won't show ID that you live in the area, the owners of the home aren't there, a neighbor called because she doesn't recognize you but the cop is to take your word?

I know we have rights but you have to see the forest for the trees sometimes.

Again, what crime was being committed worst case assuming he was a criminal? Let’s say he was

He wasn’t inside (yet), so it’s not burglary
he was outside.
That’s trespass. Only enforceable by the owner of the property. You really can’t commit trespass via a third party witness technically

this is police entering private property to determine who has a right to be there. It’s wrong on so many levels regardless of any of the racial components

people are wanting police to stop a crime before it’s committed with no basis to do so. As a property owner I would argue the police trespassed on my property. If there was no probable cause for them to be there they were the ones unauthorised

How do the cops get in trouble for entering a private residence but the pastor doesn't? You can't have that both ways.

The pastor had permission, the police didn’t.

A property owner is the only one who can allow someone on their land except in extreme or specific circumstances. It’s not up to the police or your neighbour to decide if that permission is there or not. It’s the property owners job. If I have a no trespassing sign up for example I can have 20 people on my property and randomly say these 3 are trespassing, the others are fine. Who is or isn’t authorised is up to me, not the police and I can selectively enforce it as much as I want

the police wouldn’t know, it’s none of their business. Minus a crime in progress that they can clearly see, with a warrant, or at the request of the property owner, the police really shouldn’t be on private property at all. Saying otherwise is a terrifying and dangerous precedent for all manner of government intrusion.

Outside, no one to tell them otherwise, yeah, I get the law but the owner isn't there to tell them what is who and where.

I am happy the police checked it out but getting to where it ended is silly.

You are saying the police should be the gatekeepers of private property access.

If there is a light on in my house at night and my neighbour thinks someone may be inside while I’m out of town that isn’t enough evidence for the police to break my door down to check. It’s a better example of the same thing. Fundamentally it’s not enough evidence a crime is in progress. If my sister is housesitting and someone is actually there,she absolutely doesn’t have to answer the door nor does she have to let anyone inside or have to justify why she is there. The police also don’t need a note from me granting permission to my sister. It’s not their job to determine why she is at my house.

her presence is not evidence of a crime, you need more than that. Signs of forced entry etc. the police can knock on the door, and my sister can say go away. It’s as simple as that

this case is simply someone being present as evidence of a possible crime. why someone is there or who they are doesn’t matter.

tempo_n_groove · August 2022

Cropduster-80 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Cropduster-80 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

How do the cops get in trouble for entering a private residence but the pastor doesn't? You can't have that both ways.

The pastor had permission, the police didn’t.

A property owner is the only one who can allow someone on their land except in extreme or specific circumstances. It’s not up to the police or your neighbour to decide if that permission is there or not. It’s the property owners job. If I have a no trespassing sign up for example I can have 20 people on my property and randomly say these 3 are trespassing, the others are fine. Who is or isn’t authorised is up to me, not the police and I can selectively enforce it as much as I want

the police wouldn’t know, it’s none of their business. Minus a crime in progress that they can clearly see, with a warrant, or at the request of the property owner, the police really shouldn’t be on private property at all. Saying otherwise is a terrifying and dangerous precedent for all manner of government intrusion.

Outside, no one to tell them otherwise, yeah, I get the law but the owner isn't there to tell them what is who and where.

I am happy the police checked it out but getting to where it ended is silly.

If you can’t locate the only person who can give you permission that doesn’t mean you have permission. That’s kind of the point. There were no extreme circumstances that required entering.

It’s both an interesting private property case and one with racial undertones.

specifically from a property rights perspective the police had no business there, no matter if you are glad they checked it out or not.

You are saying the police should be the gatekeepers of private property access.

If there is a light on in my house at night and my neighbour thinks someone may be inside while I’m out of town that isn’t enough evidence for the police to break my door down to check. It’s a better example of the same thing. Fundamentally it’s not enough evidence a crime is in progress. If my sister is housesitting and someone is actually there,she absolutely doesn’t have to answer the door nor does she have to let anyone inside or have to justify why she is there

The letting someone indoors thing is a big one. I knew that from years ago. I begged my friends to not open the door when the cops came, but they did and they rounded us all up and questioned us outside. I wasn't about to make any situation worse so did as we were asked.

Cropduster-80 · August 2022

tempo_n_groove said:

Cropduster-80 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

Cropduster-80 said:

tempo_n_groove said:

How do the cops get in trouble for entering a private residence but the pastor doesn't? You can't have that both ways.

The pastor had permission, the police didn’t.

A property owner is the only one who can allow someone on their land except in extreme or specific circumstances. It’s not up to the police or your neighbour to decide if that permission is there or not. It’s the property owners job. If I have a no trespassing sign up for example I can have 20 people on my property and randomly say these 3 are trespassing, the others are fine. Who is or isn’t authorised is up to me, not the police and I can selectively enforce it as much as I want

the police wouldn’t know, it’s none of their business. Minus a crime in progress that they can clearly see, with a warrant, or at the request of the property owner, the police really shouldn’t be on private property at all. Saying otherwise is a terrifying and dangerous precedent for all manner of government intrusion.

Outside, no one to tell them otherwise, yeah, I get the law but the owner isn't there to tell them what is who and where.

I am happy the police checked it out but getting to where it ended is silly.

If you can’t locate the only person who can give you permission that doesn’t mean you have permission. That’s kind of the point. There were no extreme circumstances that required entering.

It’s both an interesting private property case and one with racial undertones.

specifically from a property rights perspective the police had no business there, no matter if you are glad they checked it out or not.

You are saying the police should be the gatekeepers of private property access.

If there is a light on in my house at night and my neighbour thinks someone may be inside while I’m out of town that isn’t enough evidence for the police to break my door down to check. It’s a better example of the same thing. Fundamentally it’s not enough evidence a crime is in progress. If my sister is housesitting and someone is actually there,she absolutely doesn’t have to answer the door nor does she have to let anyone inside or have to justify why she is there

The letting someone indoors thing is a big one. I knew that from years ago. I begged my friends to not open the door when the cops came, but they did and they rounded us all up and questioned us outside. I wasn't about to make any situation worse so did as we were asked.

Yeah I think inside the house and more people agree the cops can’t do that.

the larger point remains the same in both though. It’s literally no different minus them breaking down your door

You don’t need to justify why you are there or who you are to the police no matter if you are inside or on the lawn IF there isn’t any other supporting evidence you are actively committing a crime. In this case there wasn’t any.

Gern Blansten · August 2022

My daughter (she was 17 at the time) was driving home from working at DQ one evening and got pulled over for speeding. Like 48 in a 40 or something.

Apparently she was hiding her purse when the cop walked up so he had reasonable cause to search her vehicle or at least asked her if he could search and she didn't know any better. Who says no when you are supposed to trust cops?

They found a grinder in her purse with dust particles of marijuana on it. This created an arrest and a year worth of random drug tests and probation type meetings. Since she was under 18 she could enter a diversion program and have it removed from her record which is funny because I can still look it up online.

I always wondered if things would be different if she had refused the search. Not sure if it would have mattered or not.

Another funny thing was that the judge that oversaw the process was arrested for possession of meth not too long after my daughter's arrest.

https://fox59.com/news/indycrime/ex-hamilton-county-magistrate-banned-from-judicial-service-after-meth-case/
correction...he was a magistrate rather than a judge but same duties

not trying to hijack the thread....just remembered that and thought it was interesting

Cropduster-80 · August 2022

Gern Blansten said:

My daughter (she was 17 at the time) was driving home from working at DQ one evening and got pulled over for speeding. Like 48 in a 40 or something.

Apparently she was hiding her purse when the cop walked up so he had reasonable cause to search her vehicle or at least asked her if he could search and she didn't know any better. Who says no when you are supposed to trust cops?

They found a grinder in her purse with dust particles of marijuana on it. This created an arrest and a year worth of random drug tests and probation type meetings. Since she was under 18 she could enter a diversion program and have it removed from her record which is funny because I can still look it up online.

I always wondered if things would be different if she had refused the search. Not sure if it would have mattered or not.

Another funny thing was that the judge that oversaw the process was arrested for possession of meth not too long after my daughter's arrest.

Of course it would change it. Always refuse then you can argue probable cause later.

a cop can either try to prove
1. exigent circumstances as he was in immediate danger and searched without a warrant or
2. woken up a judge to explain why they need to authorise a search warrant
3. the illegal substance was in plain sight when he walked up

allowing access and you have no defense.

Highly unlikely it would hold up if you had the money for a good lawyer. That’s the problem, cops are an authority figure so it’s hard to refuse and getting off may require a certain financial commitment

you never ever answer any questions without a lawyer either if you are ever questioned. Guilt or innocence has nothing to do with it. You stay quiet no matter what. The fact they are talking to you means you are a suspect to them. My dad who was law enforcement my whole life told me that as early as I could remember as I will with mine

Gern Blansten · August 2022

Cropduster-80 said:

Gern Blansten said:

My daughter (she was 17 at the time) was driving home from working at DQ one evening and got pulled over for speeding. Like 48 in a 40 or something.

Apparently she was hiding her purse when the cop walked up so he had reasonable cause to search her vehicle or at least asked her if he could search and she didn't know any better. Who says no when you are supposed to trust cops?

They found a grinder in her purse with dust particles of marijuana on it. This created an arrest and a year worth of random drug tests and probation type meetings. Since she was under 18 she could enter a diversion program and have it removed from her record which is funny because I can still look it up online.

I always wondered if things would be different if she had refused the search. Not sure if it would have mattered or not.

Another funny thing was that the judge that oversaw the process was arrested for possession of meth not too long after my daughter's arrest.

Of course it would change it. Always refuse then you can argue probable cause later.

a cop can either try to prove
1. exigent circumstances as he was in immediate danger and searched without a warrant or
2. woken up a judge to explain why they need to authorise a search warrant
3. the illegal substance was in plain sight when he walked up

allowing access and you have no defense.

Highly unlikely it would hold up if you had the money for a good lawyer

At the time I'm not sure I would have paid the attorney....probably would have thought it was a good lessen.

In hindsight I wish she would have refused and demanded an attorney. It was a pain in the ass to deal with all of that stuff.

The cops were real assholes to her at the time. All for fucking dust. Hardly worth their time either.

tempo_n_groove · August 2022

Gern Blansten said:

My daughter (she was 17 at the time) was driving home from working at DQ one evening and got pulled over for speeding. Like 48 in a 40 or something.

Apparently she was hiding her purse when the cop walked up so he had reasonable cause to search her vehicle or at least asked her if he could search and she didn't know any better. Who says no when you are supposed to trust cops?

They found a grinder in her purse with dust particles of marijuana on it. This created an arrest and a year worth of random drug tests and probation type meetings. Since she was under 18 she could enter a diversion program and have it removed from her record which is funny because I can still look it up online.

I always wondered if things would be different if she had refused the search. Not sure if it would have mattered or not.

Another funny thing was that the judge that oversaw the process was arrested for possession of meth not too long after my daughter's arrest.

https://fox59.com/news/indycrime/ex-hamilton-county-magistrate-banned-from-judicial-service-after-meth-case/
correction...he was a magistrate rather than a judge but same duties

not trying to hijack the thread....just remembered that and thought it was interesting

How long ago was this that weed was a problem? It always bothered me for years that people got nailed over pot.

Cropduster-80 · August 2022

Gern Blansten said:

Cropduster-80 said:

Gern Blansten said:

My daughter (she was 17 at the time) was driving home from working at DQ one evening and got pulled over for speeding. Like 48 in a 40 or something.

Apparently she was hiding her purse when the cop walked up so he had reasonable cause to search her vehicle or at least asked her if he could search and she didn't know any better. Who says no when you are supposed to trust cops?

They found a grinder in her purse with dust particles of marijuana on it. This created an arrest and a year worth of random drug tests and probation type meetings. Since she was under 18 she could enter a diversion program and have it removed from her record which is funny because I can still look it up online.

I always wondered if things would be different if she had refused the search. Not sure if it would have mattered or not.

Another funny thing was that the judge that oversaw the process was arrested for possession of meth not too long after my daughter's arrest.

Of course it would change it. Always refuse then you can argue probable cause later.

a cop can either try to prove
1. exigent circumstances as he was in immediate danger and searched without a warrant or
2. woken up a judge to explain why they need to authorise a search warrant
3. the illegal substance was in plain sight when he walked up

allowing access and you have no defense.

Highly unlikely it would hold up if you had the money for a good lawyer

At the time I'm not sure I would have paid the attorney....probably would have thought it was a good lessen.

In hindsight I wish she would have refused and demanded an attorney. It was a pain in the ass to deal with all of that stuff.

The cops were real assholes to her at the time. All for fucking dust. Hardly worth their time either.

My kids will do stupid kid stuff when they are older I’m sure.

To me teaching a lesson is hard if it could affect them forever.

If the cops honestly get them doing something wrong is one thing, the cops tricking them into incriminating themselves is another. It’s a tough call, but for me I want them to have the knowledge first

having been pulled over for an obvious fishing expedition before I know the reason for the stop often isn’t the actual reason. It’s a way to look for other stuff

Gern Blansten · August 2022

tempo_n_groove said:

Gern Blansten said:

My daughter (she was 17 at the time) was driving home from working at DQ one evening and got pulled over for speeding. Like 48 in a 40 or something.

Apparently she was hiding her purse when the cop walked up so he had reasonable cause to search her vehicle or at least asked her if he could search and she didn't know any better. Who says no when you are supposed to trust cops?

They found a grinder in her purse with dust particles of marijuana on it. This created an arrest and a year worth of random drug tests and probation type meetings. Since she was under 18 she could enter a diversion program and have it removed from her record which is funny because I can still look it up online.

I always wondered if things would be different if she had refused the search. Not sure if it would have mattered or not.

Another funny thing was that the judge that oversaw the process was arrested for possession of meth not too long after my daughter's arrest.

https://fox59.com/news/indycrime/ex-hamilton-county-magistrate-banned-from-judicial-service-after-meth-case/
correction...he was a magistrate rather than a judge but same duties

not trying to hijack the thread....just remembered that and thought it was interesting

How long ago was this that weed was a problem? It always bothered me for years that people got nailed over pot.

four years ago....but I'm in IN...the land where Mike Pence and Jesus are one in the same

Gern Blansten · August 2022

Cropduster-80 said:

Gern Blansten said:

Cropduster-80 said:

Gern Blansten said:

My daughter (she was 17 at the time) was driving home from working at DQ one evening and got pulled over for speeding. Like 48 in a 40 or something.

Apparently she was hiding her purse when the cop walked up so he had reasonable cause to search her vehicle or at least asked her if he could search and she didn't know any better. Who says no when you are supposed to trust cops?

They found a grinder in her purse with dust particles of marijuana on it. This created an arrest and a year worth of random drug tests and probation type meetings. Since she was under 18 she could enter a diversion program and have it removed from her record which is funny because I can still look it up online.

I always wondered if things would be different if she had refused the search. Not sure if it would have mattered or not.

Another funny thing was that the judge that oversaw the process was arrested for possession of meth not too long after my daughter's arrest.

Of course it would change it. Always refuse then you can argue probable cause later.

a cop can either try to prove
1. exigent circumstances as he was in immediate danger and searched without a warrant or
2. woken up a judge to explain why they need to authorise a search warrant
3. the illegal substance was in plain sight when he walked up

allowing access and you have no defense.

Highly unlikely it would hold up if you had the money for a good lawyer

At the time I'm not sure I would have paid the attorney....probably would have thought it was a good lessen.

In hindsight I wish she would have refused and demanded an attorney. It was a pain in the ass to deal with all of that stuff.

The cops were real assholes to her at the time. All for fucking dust. Hardly worth their time either.

My kids will do stupid kid stuff when they are older I’m sure.

To me teaching a lesson is hard if it could affect them forever.

If the cops honestly get them doing something wrong is one thing, the cops tricking them into incriminating themselves is another. It’s a tough call, but for me I want them to have the knowledge first

having been pulled over for an obvious fishing expedition before I know the reason for the stop often isn’t the actual reason. It’s a way to look for other stuff

Yeah it was bullshit but she shouldn't have been stuffing that purse in the back seat while he was walking up. I do wish I would have given some advice ahead of time but until you are in that situation I'm not sure she would have even remembered what I said.

There was like four cop cars there. Real overkill. They had everything in the car sat out on the ground and on her hood. Mostly just junk but still humiliating.

Cropduster-80 · August 2022

tempo_n_groove said:

Gern Blansten said:

My daughter (she was 17 at the time) was driving home from working at DQ one evening and got pulled over for speeding. Like 48 in a 40 or something.

Apparently she was hiding her purse when the cop walked up so he had reasonable cause to search her vehicle or at least asked her if he could search and she didn't know any better. Who says no when you are supposed to trust cops?

They found a grinder in her purse with dust particles of marijuana on it. This created an arrest and a year worth of random drug tests and probation type meetings. Since she was under 18 she could enter a diversion program and have it removed from her record which is funny because I can still look it up online.

I always wondered if things would be different if she had refused the search. Not sure if it would have mattered or not.

Another funny thing was that the judge that oversaw the process was arrested for possession of meth not too long after my daughter's arrest.

https://fox59.com/news/indycrime/ex-hamilton-county-magistrate-banned-from-judicial-service-after-meth-case/
correction...he was a magistrate rather than a judge but same duties

not trying to hijack the thread....just remembered that and thought it was interesting

How long ago was this that weed was a problem? It always bothered me for years that people got nailed over pot.

It’s enforced aggressively in texas. Ironic because it’s often the reason for an arrest in urban areas but big cities increasingly refuse to prosecute it

keeping it illegal and on the books does serve a purpose even if penalties are going down or not enforced. You still get arrested

Gern Blansten · August 2022

It's just crazy to me that I can drive a few hours to IL or MI and buy marijuana legally. In OH I could get it with a medical card (maybe not as a non-res but definitely residents can) yet IN will bust your ass for dust.

Black Lives Matter

Comments

Categories