Can you tell the BB gun from the real gun?
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: Can you tell the BB gun from the real gun?

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Cobbs Creek, VA
    Posts
    15,923

    Can you tell the BB gun from the real gun?

    Can you tell the BB gun from the real gun?
    .
    That’s the point, you hear almost every day, oh why did those bad cops shoot my little darling and he was such a good boy. Its total bull sh!t, you point anything that looks like a gun you’re going to get your butt ventilated really quickly.
    .
    Right mow there’s two policemen being charged because they shot a teenager that was running around a playground and they were sent there because of a 911 call saying there was someone running around with a gun pointing it at people and they roll up and boom he’s got a gun and points it at them and his little butt in at room temperature really fast.
    .
    The bottom line is, as with everything in this life, “actions have consequences”.

    Can you tell the BB gun from the real gun?-107x.jpg
    The only easy day was yesterday
    Dedicated to my brother in law who died
    doing what he loved being a Navy SEAL

  2.   
  3. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,819
    How much (if any) did you write in the OP, opsspec? If it's none, would you mind telling us where it came from, and also which case of cops shooting a kid in a playground where the kid pointed the fake gun at the cops before he got killed the writing is referencing? If that really happened, I'm sure it will be easy to substantiate the truthfulness and accuracy of what the paragraphs in your OP say. I'm pretty sure I know what case is being referenced, but I'd like to see if you know, or if the author of wherever you lifted that from knows what they're talking about either.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  4. I know which case he is most likely referencing. The sad thing is that there are more than a few cases out there and it's not an indictment of officers, though many will try to turn it into one. The point isn't even whether it was an officer or a legally armed man or woman who happened to be there who shot the kid. The point is that within a certain segment of society, and I am NOT talking about race, I am talking about reckless youth who think it's "okay" or "funny" to take a realistic looking airsoft, or BB gun...(and be real, there are a LOT of models out there that look identical to the real thing)...and point them at people to get a fear reaction, or even to commit robberies thinking that a "fake gun" doesn't carry the same weight in the eyes of the law as a real one in the commission of a crime.

    Even to someone with vast experience with many different models of firearms...the differentiation between "real or memorex" is close to impossible in the time one must assess whether or not to fire. Remember in the eyes of the law, and in through the lens of common sense, "if a reasonable person would believe that it was a real gun, then it is in fact a real gun".

    It is common for gangbangers to spray the mandated orange muzzle cap on a toy gun, BB gun, airsoft gun, black to make it look like a real gun. Perversely, it is becoming not uncommon to see a real gun with the muzzle painted orange!

    Regardless of the case cited by the original poster, he is correct....actions have consequences, conversely a lack of actions also have consequences.

    Fortunately during my career I never had to make that shoot/no shoot decision on the street where a kid was involved, but I can understand the moment having had to make that decision under other circumstances.

    What is even more surprising to me is that is hasn't happened more often than it has...oh wait...no it isn't. Officers are receiving some of the best tactical and situational training in the world today. No, not all departments, but in many, and certainly better than I received back in the 80's where it was all static, square range, shoot the paper bad guy. I spent a lot of my own money at Gunsite, and I spent as much time with and learning from my late and cherished friend Louis Awerbuck before he decided to exit on his own terms. I was an enthusiast, and I still shoot USPSA, IDPA, 3 Gun, and LE competitions weekly here in AZ. More and more officers are competing too to become more proficient with their sidearms.

    More officers are spending their own money on advanced training schools taught by true professionals, and not the famous youtube tacticool goobers who are selling stuff that "looks" tacticool, but works about as well as a concrete submarine in real life. Cops are taking this seriously. To think that there is a cavalier attitude toward a tragic shooting such as this when it occurs is dead wrong.

    What is even poorer in my estimation, is that many of the posters who criticize an officer for having to make that call are the same ones who will scream to the rafters about how THEY would blow someone away for pointing a realistic looking BB gun or airsoft at them. But hell, most would defecate in their pants if someone pointed a bb gun at them anyway.
    Last edited by Frisco85132; 06-12-2017 at 11:55 PM. Reason: Punctuation...yes, I am a grammar nazi

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,819
    That's all very interesting [/sarcasm], but the question I asked the OP is which story was being referenced where a kid pointed the BB gun at the officer(s). I also asked where the quoted piece came from, because it's for damn sure that it didn't come out of the mind or keyboard of the person who posted it in the OP.

    No one, especially not I, was confused about the story referencing the Tamir Rice killing in Cleveland. While there is surveillance video of him walking around the park with gun in hand and pointing it at passersby, to suggest that he pointed it at the cops when they arrived on scene and shot him less than 2 seconds later, is an assertion that cannot be proved by the video. Loehmann, the cop who pulled the trigger, was just fired last month (in May) for having lied on his employment application. The driver of the car was suspended for breaking department tactics policy on that day. One is a proven liar, the other a proven rules-breaker. Neither are credible witnesses. The City settled a wrongful death lawsuit for $6 million. Kinda hard to portray these two killers as victims of a jaded, ignorant and/or dishonest public in light of all these facts. They should've been prosecuted, but that thin blue line is rarely crossed by prosecutors, so that's a bit too much to expect.

    Very few regulars around here who have stuck it out for any significant amount of time have ever screamed "blow them all away" for anything. Many of us speak more about the art of avoidance and/or deescalation than about any premise that would suggest we're looking for an "opportunity" to shoot our weapons at anyone, or even anywhere besides on the range or during training for that matter. We regularly criticize newcomers who do portray such an attitude, and your attitude is just the other side of that same coin, taking for granted that "many of the posters" around here can be pigeonholed the way you did above in any way, shape, manner or form.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  6. Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    That's all very interesting [/sarcasm], but the question I asked the OP is which story was being referenced where a kid pointed the BB gun at the officer(s). I also asked where the quoted piece came from, because it's for damn sure that it didn't come out of the mind or keyboard of the person who posted it in the OP.

    No one, especially not I, was confused about the story referencing the Tamir Rice killing in Cleveland. While there is surveillance video of him walking around the park with gun in hand and pointing it at passersby, to suggest that he pointed it at the cops when they arrived on scene and shot him less than 2 seconds later, is an assertion that cannot be proved by the video. Loehmann, the cop who pulled the trigger, was just fired last month (in May) for having lied on his employment application. The driver of the car was suspended for breaking department tactics policy on that day. One is a proven liar, the other a proven rules-breaker. Neither are credible witnesses. The City settled a wrongful death lawsuit for $6 million. Kinda hard to portray these two killers as victims of a jaded, ignorant and/or dishonest public in light of all these facts. They should've been prosecuted, but that thin blue line is rarely crossed by prosecutors, so that's a bit too much to expect.

    Very few regulars around here who have stuck it out for any significant amount of time have ever screamed "blow them all away" for anything. Many of us speak more about the art of avoidance and/or deescalation than about any premise that would suggest we're looking for an "opportunity" to shoot our weapons at anyone, or even anywhere besides on the range or during training for that matter. We regularly criticize newcomers who do portray such an attitude, and your attitude is just the other side of that same coin, taking for granted that "many of the posters" around here can be pigeonholed the way you did above in any way, shape, manner or form.

    Blues
    You may not have been confused about the story (though I reference it as a case)...and "certainly not you" (there, I inserted my own sarcasm), feel better? But you most certainly missed the point of my post. The point is the behavior that leads to these tragic shootings in the first place has to be addressed. I have read many of your posts and the ones I have read are all, without exception, diatribes against police officers, but as yet I haven't read one where you actually look a the behavior or actions of anyone BUT the officer(s) involved. What did you say in the one about all cops should be in jail before they start their shift, or words to that effect?

    As for your other side of the coin comment...negative Ghostrider, I am one of the first to criticize improper or criminal behavior on the part of an officer. Why? Because it makes ALL officers look bad, and more importantly, there is no place for it in a community of men and women who have sworn an oath to serve. An officer has authority that MUST be used with care and discretion, otherwise the trust is broken between the law abiding community and the officers who serve them.

    Jeronimo Yanez is an example, since this is one of the most current cases. I am the last one who will try in any way to excuse his actions the night he fatally shot Philando Castile. From everything I have read, this case is pretty clearly a case of negligent homicide. I have read about zero exculpatory evidence to suggest that the victim (yes, victim not suspect), Castile was actually going for his gun, and there is no corroborative evidence or testimony from the other officer on scene to support Yanez's claim of self defense. Do I think there was criminal intent on the part of Yanez? No I don't, so Murder Two is off the table, but Manslaughter or Negligent Homicide are definitely in play here and if he is found guilty by the triers of the facts, then he should face punishment to fit the charges.

    The tragic shooting of Daniel Shaver in Mesa Arizona is another example of an officer who made a horribly bad call that cost a person their life. Mesa officer Philip Brailsford shot and killed Daniel Shaver in a hotel room in Mesa for allegedly "going for a gun". The problem is that Shaver was on his hands and knees, begging for officers NOT to shoot him, and he was in his underwear. Where he might have been concealing the gun he was allegedly going for is beyond me. The other officers on scene, who were also covering Shaver while the sergeant on scene was giving commands to the victim did not fire their weapons, or perceive a similar lethal threat which is very telling when multiple other officers did not fire in the same totality of circumstances. This was a tragic killing that should not have happened, and Brailsford should face the full weight and consequences of his actions, not a BS plea deal that takes jail time off the table. This boils down to an officer who was not in control of himself, his actions, or the situation in which he found himself, and a man who shouldn't have, died because of it and there is no excuse.

    But...these are two officers out of 800 thousand sworn officers who go to work every day in the US. Even if you take every unjustified shooting, and I agree that they happen, and I agree that they shouldn't happen, and I further agree that the officers involved should be held to the highest level of accountability....the percentage is so infinitesimally small that painting all officers with the brush you use is wrong.

    For every wrongful shooting whether it was criminal or negligent in nature you could possibly cite, dozens if not hundreds of incidences where officers could have justifiably used lethal force without question, but didn't could be cited. This is one reason why I think body cams are a GREAT idea, and should be mandatory in every department in the country. I wore one for the last six years I was on, and thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. It is a dispassionate, accurate, and objective eye witness to every contact an officer has during their shift. My son works for a local agency and has worn a body cam (two in fact...one is issued by his department, and the other is one he purchased) since he graduated from the academy. He'd leave home without his gun before he'd leave without his body cam.

  7. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,819
    Quote Originally Posted by Frisco85132 View Post
    You may not have been confused about the story (though I reference it as a case)...and "certainly not you" (there, I inserted my own sarcasm), feel better? But you most certainly missed the point of my post.
    My point was that you missed the point of my post, which had to do with a specific allegation about Rice that is not part of the public record. Why you chose to reply to me about behaviors and gangstas and, "...posters who criticize an officer for having to make that call are the same ones who will scream to the rafters about how THEY would blow someone away for pointing a realistic looking BB gun or airsoft at them," is quite the mystery, but it definitely did not address the incorrect specific allegation that Rice was pointing his BB gun at the officers who shot him less than 2 seconds after they arrived on-scene in a manner that the driver was suspended for 10 days for for breaking tactics policies of his own department.

    And while I did notice that you didn't include a quote of my post as a direct reply, I was the only one who asked the OP, "...would you mind telling us ...which case of cops shooting a kid in a playground where the kid pointedthe fake gun at the cops before he got killed..." and your first line was, "I know which case he is most likely referencing." You made an unequivocal allusion to the crux of my post, and the went straight from that into a.... dare I say, diatribe, about the po' po' pitiful PoPo who "...many will try to turn it into..." an indictment of the officers in the Tamir Rice case who shot the kid literally at the same time he was shouting orders, all within 1.xx seconds of arrival on-scene. My my, how unreasonable it is to blame the premature shooter and his driver who broke with department policy in putting his partner that close to a suspect reported to have been pointing a gun at random passersby, eh? Pfffft. Your observations about parents and the behavior problems of their gangsta kids is meaningless to me or to anything I said before you ever got here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frisco85132 View Post
    The point is the behavior that leads to these tragic shootings in the first place has to be addressed.
    That is your point, and it had absolutely nothing to do with anything that had been said in this thread when you entered it. You want to make out like some social scholar who could fix every urban youth on the planet if only given the chance, go start a thread about your ostensible expertise, but don't pretend to be responding to a question that I posed of the OP and then type another ~600 words that are about nothing being discussed here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frisco85132 View Post
    I have read many of your posts and the ones I have read are all, without exception, diatribes against police officers, but as yet I haven't read one where you actually look a the behavior or actions of anyone BUT the officer(s) involved.
    Well, first, perhaps you should read "many" of opsspec's posts and find out how (in)famous he is for copy and paste jobs without attribution to the website or author from whence it came. Secondly, you could've and should've read his OP carefully in this specific thread, where you would've noticed the outright lie that the writing was based on when it states:

    Quote Originally Posted by opsspec1991 View Post
    Right mow [sic] there’s two policemen being charged because they shot a teenager that was running around a playground and they were sent there because of a 911 call saying there was someone running around with a gun pointing it at people and they roll up and boom he’s got a gun and points it at them and his little butt in at room temperature really fast.
    The prosecutor's Grand Jury declined to indict Loehmann on Dec. 28, 2015, right at 5 months before opsspec placed the OP here, and more than a year before you resurrected a dead thread to go on about something completely off-topic to it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frisco85132 View Post
    What did you say in the one about all cops should be in jail before they start their shift, or words to that effect?
    I'm gonna assume you got the facts just as straight in your reports during your years as an LEO as you got the above straight, which is to say, probably never. Find whatever quote you think says that, and I'll respond to the actual words I typed, but I won't respond to this nonsensical prattle.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frisco85132 View Post
    As for your other side of the coin comment...negative Ghostrider, I am one of the first to criticize improper or criminal behavior on the part of an officer. Why? Because it makes ALL officers look bad, and more importantly, there is no place for it in a community of men and women who have sworn an oath to serve. An officer has authority that MUST be used with care and discretion, otherwise the trust is broken between the law abiding community and the officers who serve them.

    Jeronimo Yanez is an example, since this is one of the most current cases. I am the last one who will try in any way to excuse his actions the night he fatally shot Philando Castile. From everything I have read, this case is pretty clearly a case of negligent homicide. I have read about zero exculpatory evidence to suggest that the victim (yes, victim not suspect), Castile was actually going for his gun, and there is no corroborative evidence or testimony from the other officer on scene to support Yanez's claim of self defense. Do I think there was criminal intent on the part of Yanez? No I don't, so Murder Two is off the table, but Manslaughter or Negligent Homicide are definitely in play here and if he is found guilty by the triers of the facts, then he should face punishment to fit the charges.
    This is just the kind of self-serving bloviating that an ex-friend of mine, who happened to be a cop in the town where I owned and ran a business, used to pat himself on the back for until his shoulder locked up. You can read about it here if you're interested, or maybe that's where you started your "investigation" of me with the "many" posts of mine you've read already, since that post is linked in my sig-line. Whatever, I guess you have your reasons for being jaded against people who deign to criticize cops, and/or kids and their incompetent parents (or whatever), and I have my reasons for being jaded enough to consistently criticize cops. I have literally heard all of this before and witnessed with my own eyes how fast and easy it all goes out the window when someone who's protected from accountability, gets triggered.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frisco85132 View Post
    The tragic shooting of Daniel Shaver in Mesa Arizona is another example of an officer who made a horribly bad call that cost a person their life. Mesa officer Philip Brailsford shot and killed Daniel Shaver in a hotel room in Mesa for allegedly "going for a gun". The problem is that Shaver was on his hands and knees, begging for officers NOT to shoot him, and he was in his underwear. Where he might have been concealing the gun he was allegedly going for is beyond me. The other officers on scene, who were also covering Shaver while the sergeant on scene was giving commands to the victim did not fire their weapons, or perceive a similar lethal threat which is very telling when multiple other officers did not fire in the same totality of circumstances. This was a tragic killing that should not have happened, and Brailsford should face the full weight and consequences of his actions, not a BS plea deal that takes jail time off the table. This boils down to an officer who was not in control of himself, his actions, or the situation in which he found himself, and a man who shouldn't have, died because of it and there is no excuse.

    But...these are two officers out of 800 thousand sworn officers who go to work every day in the US. Even if you take every unjustified shooting, and I agree that they happen, and I agree that they shouldn't happen, and I further agree that the officers involved should be held to the highest level of accountability....the percentage is so infinitesimally small that painting all officers with the brush you use is wrong.

    For every wrongful shooting whether it was criminal or negligent in nature you could possibly cite, dozens if not hundreds of incidences where officers could have justifiably used lethal force without question, but didn't could be cited. This is one reason why I think body cams are a GREAT idea, and should be mandatory in every department in the country. I wore one for the last six years I was on, and thought it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. It is a dispassionate, accurate, and objective eye witness to every contact an officer has during their shift. My son works for a local agency and has worn a body cam (two in fact...one is issued by his department, and the other is one he purchased) since he graduated from the academy. He'd leave home without his gun before he'd leave without his body cam.
    All this would make sense if the only crimes that cops commit on a regular basis were shooting-related. There are guys making $20,000 or $30,000 per year just on YouTube monetized ads who video record nothing but cops violating rights for perfectly lawful activity, like photography or open carry as just two prime examples. Sometimes it's limited to just an illegal detention and is handled with a complaint form at the station, and sometimes the subject gets arrested, roughed up to some greater or lesser degree, has to post bond, maybe is charged, maybe their camera gear or weapons get confiscated, their memory cards destroyed or erased, and all they did was walk down the street geared-up and camera'ed-up to see if cops would follow the law and leave 'em alone. The reason they make any money at all is because cops can be counted upon to not leave them alone, and the vids go viral in a New York minute, the worse the cops' reactions, the higher the view-count goes. Those folks criticize cops a lot more often than I do, because I go out of my way to avoid contact, but when a killing comes up like Tamir Rice, Keith Vidal, Oscar Grant, Walter Scott, Charles Kinsey or a host of others, you're damn skippy I'm gonna comment negatively about the cops involved.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  8. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,819
    Quote Originally Posted by Frisco85132 View Post
    What did you say in the one about all cops should be in jail before they start their shift, or words to that effect?
    So it turns out I did say something "to that effect" in a thread about someone you said in the same post I'm clarifying my reply to now, "should face punishment to fit the charges." That was Yanez, the cold-blooded killer of Philando Castile who got off last week, just as I predicted he would.

    Anyway, what I said about "nearly all" cops should be behind bars was in the thread about Castile/Yanez, and here it is in its entirety:

    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    I am at the point where I rarely even cite specific incidents of cop corruption and abuse. I think very nearly all of them belong behind bars, if for no other more specific reason than daily violations of 18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law. Show me a cop who hasn't violated the 1st, 2nd, 4th or 5th Amendments during their tour of duty (a shift if you prefer), and I'll show you either a retired cop or one who passed away for whatever reason before their tour began. The cop who shot Kinsey could/should get 10 years just on the basis of 18 U.S. Code 242, and could/should get more than that based on local/state laws where sentences could/should run consecutively. Prosecutors and judges who let this special treatment pass for LEOs should face the same penalties under 18 U.S. Code 242. The fact that none of them do face those penalties though, is proof that they're all on the same team, all in it together, and all law-breakers, and the system that fails to hold them to account is broken beyond repair. Kinsey's shooter is just one among millions of illegal and unconstitutional actions by government agents at all levels, from the cop on the beat to the prosecutors and judges to the DOJ to the Supreme Court that codifies rewriting the above-mentioned amendments by judicial fiat.

    It's why I can say with confidence that Yanez will get off. The game is fixed, which really means it's broken beyond repair.
    Now, in order for that post to be understood in context, 18 U.S. Code § 242 needs to be likewise understood in context, which happens to be something that I believe most cops routinely ignore, and routinely get away with ignoring because both prosecutors and judges protect them from having to pay attention to its mandates, which are, again, offered here in its entirety:

    Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or to different punishments, pains, or penalties, on account of such person being an alien, or by reason of his color, or race, than are prescribed for the punishment of citizens, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if bodily injury results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.
    If a cop forces a contact on a subject under the color of the laws established in either the Fourth Amendment (probable cause) or Terry v. Ohio (reasonable articulable suspicion) when the subject is engaging in perfectly legal activity that cannot under any circumstances rise to the level of PC or RAS (for sake of brevity, we'll use only public photography or open carry as examples here), that cop falls under the auspices of 18 U.S. Code § 242. If the cop states that the subject is being detained in such a circumstance, he/she doubles his/her culpability under 18 U.S. Code § 242. If the cop cuffs them during the detention and the slightest of injuries ensues, his/her potential punishment goes from one year in jail to 10. If he arrests and forcibly removes the subject from the scene, that is kidnapping since the contact, detention and arrest are all based on no law having been broken that would justify any of it, and the potential sentence goes from 10 years to unlimited years, up to and including life, and if a subject is killed under such dubious circumstances, the potential sentence goes from unlimited years in prison to the death penalty.

    Now, the subject does indeed have some responsibility to establish the nature of the interaction for themselves, the most basic of which is asking the cop, "Am I being detained?" If the cop answers, "Yes, you are being detained," it is incumbent upon the subject to demand to know upon what PC or RAS of a crime having been, about to be, or in the process of being committed is he/she basing the detention. If the cop says something to the effect of, "I don't know yet. That's what we're here trying to figure out," then he/she immediately falls under the auspices of 18 U.S. Code § 242 because his/her hunch that something suspicious is going on because the subject is photographing in public or open carrying doesn't rise to the level of PC or RAS in and of itself.

    Show me a cop who hasn't stammered and stuttered at one incident or another when the basis for the Terry stop was demanded of them, and I'll show you a liar. Show me a prosecutor who seeks indictments against cops on a regular basis for such "mundane" violations of citizens' rights, and I'll show you a prosecutor who has an untenable relationship with the agencies he/she depends on to provide investigatory and evidence-gathering services from so both entities can do their jobs. In other words, finding a prosecutor who holds cops to the mandates of 18 U.S. Code § 242 would be like finding a unicorn in the wild. It doesn't happen, and because it doesn't happen, cops ignore the provisions and restrictions of 18 U.S. Code § 242 all the time. They are almost never held to account to violations of that code section personally either. The worst that's almost ever going to happen when it can be proven that rights were violated by cops, is that the jurisdiction they work for gets successfully sued by their victim(s), which means that if their victim(s) are taxpayers, then they themselves foot the bill for their own "award" in civil, not criminal, court.

    If you want to discuss the above without taking it personal that I distrust cops for the reasons articulated therein, that's fine. It's not just cops that I have a problem with as regards the near-boycott-like lack of enforcement of 18 U.S. Code § 242. I'm pretty sure the above quote of mine is the only time I've ever said cops belong behind bars, but I've said many times that the system is set up such that it's impossible for cops to conduct themselves lawfully anymore, and I touched on it above regarding how the system puts alliances between LE agencies and prosecutors WAY above the protection and defense of citizens' rights, but it goes deeper than just that. I'd be glad to get into that too if you're inclined to understand how I could come to such a conclusion, but that's up to you. I don't hate you or any cop. I distrust that I will come out of a contact with them with my rights fully intact the way that I went into that contact. My personal way of avoiding that circumstance is to do everything I can to avoid being contacted in the first place, and being the law-abiding citizen I am, it ain't really all that hard. I do happen to open carry, but I don't happen to go to town very much at all, but when I do, I'd be lyin' if I said I wasn't on high alert for cops to harass me about it. Thankfully it hasn't happened to me since I've been OC'ing, but there are several well-known cases in this state where OC was the initial "suspicious activity" that escalated to arrests/charges/and even a couple of convictions that I'm aware of, of which one was overturned in the AL Supreme Court, but at a monumental cost to the man that he had to pay by begging for help from his fellow gun-rights proponents, and for which the cops, prosecutors and judges who violated his rights through four levels of courts and appeals, had to pay exactly zero. There's something wrong with that picture. If you disagree, tell me why. If you agree, tell me what should be done about it other than heaping criticism and distrust on the purveyors of the problem(s). Or, if you agree, but like the rest of us have very few answers to offer, just say OK, I get it, I understand, or umm.... you know.... something to that effect.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  9. Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    So it turns out I did say something "to that effect" in a thread about someone you said in the same post I'm clarifying my reply to now, "should face punishment to fit the charges." That was Yanez, the cold-blooded killer of Philando Castile who got off last week, just as I predicted he would.

    Anyway, what I said about "nearly all" cops should be behind bars was in the thread about Castile/Yanez, and here it is in its entirety:



    Now, in order for that post to be understood in context, 18 U.S. Code § 242 needs to be likewise understood in context, which happens to be something that I believe most cops routinely ignore, and routinely get away with ignoring because both prosecutors and judges protect them from having to pay attention to its mandates, which are, again, offered here in its entirety:



    If a cop forces a contact on a subject under the color of the laws established in either the Fourth Amendment (probable cause) or Terry v. Ohio (reasonable articulable suspicion) when the subject is engaging in perfectly legal activity that cannot under any circumstances rise to the level of PC or RAS (for sake of brevity, we'll use only public photography or open carry as examples here), that cop falls under the auspices of 18 U.S. Code § 242. If the cop states that the subject is being detained in such a circumstance, he/she doubles his/her culpability under 18 U.S. Code § 242. If the cop cuffs them during the detention and the slightest of injuries ensues, his/her potential punishment goes from one year in jail to 10. If he arrests and forcibly removes the subject from the scene, that is kidnapping since the contact, detention and arrest are all based on no law having been broken that would justify any of it, and the potential sentence goes from 10 years to unlimited years, up to and including life, and if a subject is killed under such dubious circumstances, the potential sentence goes from unlimited years in prison to the death penalty.

    Now, the subject does indeed have some responsibility to establish the nature of the interaction for themselves, the most basic of which is asking the cop, "Am I being detained?" If the cop answers, "Yes, you are being detained," it is incumbent upon the subject to demand to know upon what PC or RAS of a crime having been, about to be, or in the process of being committed is he/she basing the detention. If the cop says something to the effect of, "I don't know yet. That's what we're here trying to figure out," then he/she immediately falls under the auspices of 18 U.S. Code § 242 because his/her hunch that something suspicious is going on because the subject is photographing in public or open carrying doesn't rise to the level of PC or RAS in and of itself.

    Show me a cop who hasn't stammered and stuttered at one incident or another when the basis for the Terry stop was demanded of them, and I'll show you a liar. Show me a prosecutor who seeks indictments against cops on a regular basis for such "mundane" violations of citizens' rights, and I'll show you a prosecutor who has an untenable relationship with the agencies he/she depends on to provide investigatory and evidence-gathering services from so both entities can do their jobs. In other words, finding a prosecutor who holds cops to the mandates of 18 U.S. Code § 242 would be like finding a unicorn in the wild. It doesn't happen, and because it doesn't happen, cops ignore the provisions and restrictions of 18 U.S. Code § 242 all the time. They are almost never held to account to violations of that code section personally either. The worst that's almost ever going to happen when it can be proven that rights were violated by cops, is that the jurisdiction they work for gets successfully sued by their victim(s), which means that if their victim(s) are taxpayers, then they themselves foot the bill for their own "award" in civil, not criminal, court.

    If you want to discuss the above without taking it personal that I distrust cops for the reasons articulated therein, that's fine. It's not just cops that I have a problem with as regards the near-boycott-like lack of enforcement of 18 U.S. Code § 242. I'm pretty sure the above quote of mine is the only time I've ever said cops belong behind bars, but I've said many times that the system is set up such that it's impossible for cops to conduct themselves lawfully anymore, and I touched on it above regarding how the system puts alliances between LE agencies and prosecutors WAY above the protection and defense of citizens' rights, but it goes deeper than just that. I'd be glad to get into that too if you're inclined to understand how I could come to such a conclusion, but that's up to you. I don't hate you or any cop. I distrust that I will come out of a contact with them with my rights fully intact the way that I went into that contact. My personal way of avoiding that circumstance is to do everything I can to avoid being contacted in the first place, and being the law-abiding citizen I am, it ain't really all that hard. I do happen to open carry, but I don't happen to go to town very much at all, but when I do, I'd be lyin' if I said I wasn't on high alert for cops to harass me about it. Thankfully it hasn't happened to me since I've been OC'ing, but there are several well-known cases in this state where OC was the initial "suspicious activity" that escalated to arrests/charges/and even a couple of convictions that I'm aware of, of which one was overturned in the AL Supreme Court, but at a monumental cost to the man that he had to pay by begging for help from his fellow gun-rights proponents, and for which the cops, prosecutors and judges who violated his rights through four levels of courts and appeals, had to pay exactly zero. There's something wrong with that picture. If you disagree, tell me why. If you agree, tell me what should be done about it other than heaping criticism and distrust on the purveyors of the problem(s). Or, if you agree, but like the rest of us have very few answers to offer, just say OK, I get it, I understand, or umm.... you know.... something to that effect.

    Blues
    I've read all your holier than thou, sanctimonious, essays about LEO's and other people that you seem to have have a problem with and they all seem to have the same "problem". They're out there serving and covering your butt every hour of every day, not getting paid for what their actual societal contribution value is, and most aren't looking for affirmation from people like yourself.

    Instead of doubling down on what you said which was arguably anti cop, and definitely your inner wounded child talking, you could have just said sorry. You know apologize. For lumping all LEO's in one pile of Deplorables and Irredeemables. That's just wrong.

    No one is comfortable or happy when a morally bankrupt or badly trained cop does awful things. I shouldn't say no one. No sane person. Considering though, how many LEO's there are, how many calls they respond to, how many criminals we have walking amongst us, and how the threat landscape has evolved, what is your answer? I read your post and aside from the nearly endless laws they must also comply with, what's the answer?

    Would I be wrong in assuming that you would be as quick as any of us to call Police for an issue that you wouldn't or can't resolve yourself? Who do you call Blues? The answer is the same for most of the population except those that are criminals or don't want LEO involvement in anything they do. Ya know, like mafia, gangs, and the elite that have sizeable security teams.

    I am disgusted by having anyone, never mind a fellow gun owner, regardless of race be executed like some of these victims have been. They should see the Swift sword of justice if they murdered anyone in cold blood. This latest verdict was no salve for the wounds of that family.

    I doubt either one of us is a person that the police would be interested in killing. Vehicles in good repair, drive carefully, courteous (every CC or OC person seems to be), no record, pay taxes, and as unfortunate as it is to say, the "right" color.

    Our perceptions of citizen behavior based on race are the biggest obstacle we have to fair and equal justice under the law. I don't believe the entire "white privilege" mantra as a whole and am smart enough to know there are areas where there are substantial disparities that need to be bridged or the country is at All Stop.

    Slamming on LEOs as a community is just too simplistic and petty. The underlying LEO incidents are the symptoms, not the root cause and you know that.
    The media loves a good cop killer story. It's all the other same race violence that is completely ignored by the MSM.

    The Place To Be

  10. Oh yeah, Happy Father's Day Concealed Carry Advocate Dad's everywhere!

    The Place To Be

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,819
    Quote Originally Posted by niceshootintex View Post
    <....snip....>
    Blah blah.
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast