Jump to content
Underdog

This Officer was Made in America!

Recommended Posts

We need more of our law enforcement brothers and sisters to step up!

  • Like 2
  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just watched the interview, He has a lot of good points and is right on target. Unlike Murphy et al he understands our/his constitutional rights and bill of rights. He has a lot of support from fellow LEOs. Refreshing to see

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Contrary to what a lot of people think here, this is the attitude of most police.

Cops are pounded with Constitutional Rights in the police academy.

Most cops are not out there to screw with you.

No matter what you may think.

If the law said you were okay with carrying a bazooka in your car they'd be okay with that.

Don't  blame the cops. Blame the lawmakers.

  • Like 4
  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not blaming "the cops", pointing out that the police are American, too, with all the rights and RESPONSIBILITIES of that title.  Also, pointing out that this patriot that is doing the right thing and thinking the right way is now being penalized for shedding some light and being all American.   It wasn't above his pay grade as NJ_SIG pointed out.

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, GRIZ said:

Don't  blame the cops. Blame the lawmakers.

I blame them for being so enthusiastic about enforcing the laws you say they disagree with. Not for enforcing them per se but for thier eagerness. Just look at the recent videos of people being slammed into sidewalks, look at he videos of them showing up at protests in armored cars with their tactical get ups. 

They haven't been covering themselves with glory recently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn’t this cop now on admin leave pending termination. Because he refused to remove this video. 

So even when these type of cops do exist when they expose themselves as constitutionalists and express they’re not willing to violate people’s rights they get removed from their position of power ? That interesting to say the least....

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, GRIZ said:

Contrary to what a lot of people think here, this is the attitude of most police.

Cops are pounded with Constitutional Rights in the police academy.

Most cops are not out there to screw with you.

No matter what you may think.

If the law said you were okay with carrying a bazooka in your car they'd be okay with that.

Don't  blame the cops. Blame the lawmakers.

You're right, doesn't matter what I think. You know what else doesn't matter? Everything else you listed. Mostly the " pounding of Rights at the academy", why even bother teaching them when in the end the cops just do their jobs enforcing laws, constitutional or not as dictated to them by their superiors and bad lawmakers?  I don't blame them, and don't absolve them either. To me they are a neutral entity and not to be counted on as part of the checks and balances when debating a tyranical govt.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, WP22 said:

I blame them for being so enthusiastic about enforcing the laws you say they disagree with. Not for enforcing them per se but for thier eagerness. Just look at the recent videos of people being slammed into sidewalks, look at he videos of them showing up at protests in armored cars with their tactical get ups. 

They haven't been covering themselves with glory recently.

I'm not saying cops don't slam people into sidewalks.  Sometimes that's what has to be done. Sometimes the cops are wrong. You're projecting an image that everyone arrested comes along peaceably.  That's not real life.

A show of force at a peaceable protest helps keep it peaceable.  More so when there's a demonstration and a counter-demonstration in the same place.  Tactical gear bothers you?  I guess you think they should show up with pool noodles and water pistols.

There is a lot of talk about unconstitutional laws.  The fact is a law doesn't become unconstitutional until a court says it is.  Cops or anyone else can't decide that.  That's our system.

Many of this shutdown due to the virus is bs.  Cops don't want to be bothered enforcing mask wearing, social distancing, and most of this other stuff.  The PBA in NYC told DeBlassio so.  Many mayors and sheriffs have refused to enforce stupid shutdowns mandated by governors.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, GRIZ said:

I'm not saying cops don't slam people into sidewalks.  Sometimes that's what has to be done. Sometimes the cops are wrong. You're projecting an image that everyone arrested comes along peaceably.  That's not real life.

A show of force at a peaceable protest helps keep it peaceable.  More so when there's a demonstration and a counter-demonstration in the same place.  Tactical gear bothers you?  I guess you think they should show up with pool noodles and water pistols.

There is a lot of talk about unconstitutional laws.  The fact is a law doesn't become unconstitutional until a court says it is.  Cops or anyone else can't decide that.  That's our system.

Many of this shutdown due to the virus is bs.  Cops don't want to be bothered enforcing mask wearing, social distancing, and most of this other stuff.  The PBA in NYC told DeBlassio so.  Many mayors and sheriffs have refused to enforce stupid shutdowns mandated by governors.

 

 

Tell me you aren't embarrassed and bothered by this.

And when this becomes the public image of the police, who do you think is going to support them? 

The police, in general, rely on the compliance, trust, support and cooperation of the community to make their job easier; to go home every night to their families, as they like to say. When their public image becomes of  jackboot thugs enforcing perceived unfair and capricious laws, that trust is eroded and the results won't be good.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, WP22 said:

Tell me you aren't embarrassed and bothered by this.

And when this becomes the public image of the police, who do you think is going to support them? 

The police, in general, rely on the compliance, trust, support and cooperation of the community to make their job easier; to go home every night to their families, as they like to say. When their public image becomes of  jackboot thugs enforcing perceived unfair and capricious laws, that trust is eroded and the results won't be good.

 

I'm not embarrassed by that.  I didn't have any part of it.

It is troubling based on what the video shows.

Your last paragraph explains why most police don't want to be bothered with enforcing these shutdown mandates.  I said that in my last response.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, 0Jeep4 said:

Isn’t this cop now on admin leave pending termination. Because he refused to remove this video. 

I 1000% support his message, but had he made the video sitting in his living room dressed in T-shirt and shorts he may have avoided that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GRIZ said:

There is a lot of talk about unconstitutional laws.  The fact is a law doesn't become unconstitutional until a court says it is.  Cops or anyone else can't decide that.  That's our system.

Are you saying they have no discretion in what gets enforced?

Quote

Many of this shutdown due to the virus is bs.  Cops don't want to be bothered enforcing mask wearing, social distancing, and most of this other stuff.  The PBA in NYC told DeBlassio so.  Many mayors and sheriffs have refused to enforce stupid shutdowns mandated by governors

... or do they?

I am on your side and pro-police, but what's the point then of "Cops are pounded with Constitutional Rights in the police academy"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GRIZ said:

There is a lot of talk about unconstitutional laws.  The fact is a law doesn't become unconstitutional until a court says it is.  Cops or anyone else can't decide that.  That's our system.

This is very confusing to me. If a law is facially contrary to the Constitution that is what it is from the moment it is signed into law.

When a court finds a law to be unconstitutional the people who have been pretending it is valid are finally forced to face the truth, but the law was unconstitutional all along. Any prior convictions under an unconstitutional law have to be nullified because the law used to convict was no law at all.

For a law to be constitutional until it is reviewed by a court is crazy! For this to work, every single law would have to be reviewed and there is just not enough court time to do that.

All public officials swear an oath to uphold the Constitution. If they make a mistake - OK fine, a court reviews and everybody learns from it. To decide not to even consider the Constitution is dereliction of that oath - for all officials at every level.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tomk62 said:

I 1000% support his message, but had he made the video sitting in his living room dressed in T-shirt and shorts he may have avoided that.

Said the same thing to my wife this morning. But the video probably wouldn’t have been as effective and garnered as much publicity as it has

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, GRIZ said:

I'm not embarrassed by that.  I didn't have any part of it.

It is troubling based on what the video shows.

Your last paragraph explains why most police don't want to be bothered with enforcing these shutdown mandates.  I said that in my last response.

I am not nor I've ever been an LOE and I'm embarrassed that them and their actions are the modern face of our  police forces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, tomk62 said:

I 1000% support his message, but had he made the video sitting in his living room dressed in T-shirt and shorts he may have avoided that.

So basically he’s admin or someone up top didn’t like the message, went looking for any little technical rule the officer broke, to punish him? So we’re just making sure any other cops that feel like this know, if they openly express themselves or are true to their values and convictions well make sure to eliminate them ?

I’m just so confused about how anyone could justify that ....... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Mr.Stu said:

This is very confusing to me. If a law is facially contrary to the Constitution that is what it is from the moment it is signed into law.

When a court finds a law to be unconstitutional the people who have been pretending it is valid are finally forced to face the truth, but the law was unconstitutional all along. Any prior convictions under an unconstitutional law have to be nullified because the law used to convict was no law at all.

For a law to be constitutional until it is reviewed by a court is crazy! For this to work, every single law would have to be reviewed and there is just not enough court time to do that.

All public officials swear an oath to uphold the Constitution. If they make a mistake - OK fine, a court reviews and everybody learns from it. To decide not to even consider the Constitution is dereliction of that oath - for all officials at every level.

I agree with this 100%.  To say "The fact is a law doesn't become unconstitutional until a court says it is." is simply not true.  This would be akin to the Nuremburg Defense "Just following orders".  A police officer should use judgement and experience to decide.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/15/2020 at 11:42 AM, GRIZ said:

I'm not saying cops don't slam people into sidewalks.  Sometimes that's what has to be done. Sometimes the cops are wrong. You're projecting an image that everyone arrested comes along peaceably.  That's not real life.

A show of force at a peaceable protest helps keep it peaceable.  More so when there's a demonstration and a counter-demonstration in the same place.  Tactical gear bothers you?  I guess you think they should show up with pool noodles and water pistols.

Grizzy, why would a show of force be needed at a PEACEFUL protest?    Power Trippin?  Imagine if your wife or daughter was arrested because your kid or grandkid was playing on swings.  Imagine if your papers were checked and you weren't allowed to leave the Republik of Maryland.  People that blindly followed orders and let their betters sort it out did unspeakable evils during the 1940s.  

 

Quote

There is a lot of talk about unconstitutional laws.  The fact is a law doesn't become unconstitutional until a court says it is. 

You should be ashamed of yourself.  Are you related to Greenie?  AVB?  What a dumb thing to say. Dumb.   No responsibility for your actions as long as you are following orders?   An Unconstitutional Law is Unconstitutional and illegal when it is passed, and those that did it are breaking their oaths to the United States.   Those given authority also have a responsibility to keep others given that responsibility are kept in check.    I hope to God that there are a lot of "cops" that feel that the Virus response is poltical, BS, and wrong and I believe that there are.  But they have a responsibility to hold other LEOs accountable.    

 

Quote

Cops or anyone else can't decide that.  That's our system.

Really, just because a "cop" has a badge, he or she can't think for themselves and have no concept of what is right or wrong, good or evil.  

Quote

Many of this shutdown due to the virus is bs.  Cops don't want to be bothered

"Bothered" you say, as they are getting paid while those that temporarily gave them authority are suffering and their rights are being trampled on.  You might as well turn your badge in now, if that is what you think and support.  I don't want to give you that power.  

Quote

...enforcing mask wearing, social distancing, and most of this other stuff.

Your views are disturbing to me and clearly show a duality between police and non-police and that thinking doesn't garner you ANY respect from me.   I presume that you are a seasoned LEO.  Is this the kind of thinking you are passing on to the new recruits?

Listen to this man.  Another Peace Officer standing for what is right...  Thank you, Sheriff Bianco.  Griz has washed his hands of the whole affair and cannot be bothered.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/15/2020 at 2:16 PM, tomk62 said:

I 1000% support his message, but had he made the video sitting in his living room dressed in T-shirt and shorts he may have avoided that.

Why?  He has a right to free speech.  He said nothing wrong.  He actually verbally vocalized the oath that he and others in uniforms made.   He didn't criticize HIS department.  Maybe he WAS off duty.  Who cares.  I would be willing to bet if he was sitting in his house,  he still would have faced a slap down by those same "authority figures" above him that are in fact abusing their powers.  I respect and support  Law Enforcement, but I have less respect for any officers that abuse their power, and actually any who are not members of the Oathkeepers.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/16/2020 at 7:46 AM, 0Jeep4 said:

I’m just so confused about how anyone could justify that ....... 

To be clear I did not say it was justified nor did I say I agreed with the disciplinary action.  I was merely speculating how things might have been different.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Underdog said:

Why?  He has a right to free speech.  He said nothing wrong.  He actually verbally vocalized the oath that he and others in uniforms made.   He didn't criticize HIS department.   

1000%  - as a private citizen he has a right to free speech. 

The reason I can't stand Colin Kaepernick, in addition to not agreeing with his message, is that as an employee of the NFL he does not have the right to express his message during an NFL event.

Maybe it should be different for public employees though - thinking this through - "Congress (the government) shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech" - in this case his employer is the government - maybe they should they held to the same standard here?  Maybe it's different for public employees?  I don't know, IANAL.

My wife made a great point - he was merely saying in his video that as a police officer he swore to uphold his code of ethics, the Constitution, the core principles our country was founded on.  How can you be punished in any respect for that? Again, I did not say I agree that he should be punished.  It was just speculation that things may (or may not) have gone differently.  Just some points to ponder and discuss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Underdog said:

Grizzy, why would a show of force be needed at a PEACEFUL protest?    Power Trippin?  Imagine if your wife or daughter was arrested because your kid or grandkid was playing on swings.  Imagine if your papers were checked and you weren't allowed to leave the Republik of Maryland.  People that blindly followed orders and let their betters sort it out did unspeakable evils during the 1940s.  

 

You should be ashamed of yourself.  Are you related to Greenie?  AVB?  What a dumb thing to say. Dumb.   No responsibility for your actions as long as you are following orders?   An Unconstitutional Law is Unconstitutional and illegal when it is passed, and those that did it are breaking their oaths to the United States.   Those given authority also have a responsibility to keep others given that responsibility are kept in check.    I hope to God that there are a lot of "cops" that feel that the Virus response is poltical, BS, and wrong and I believe that there are.  But they have a responsibility to hold other LEOs accountable.    

 

Really, just because a "cop" has a badge, he or she can't think for themselves and have no concept of what is right or wrong, good or evil.  

"Bothered" you say, as they are getting paid while those that temporarily gave them authority are suffering and their rights are being trampled on.  You might as well turn your badge in now, if that is what you think and support.  I don't want to give you that power.  

Your views are disturbing to me and clearly show a duality between police and non-police and that thinking doesn't garner you ANY respect from me.   I presume that you are a seasoned LEO.  Is this the kind of thinking you are passing on to the new recruits?

Listen to this man.  Another Peace Officer standing for what is right...  Thank you, Sheriff Bianco.  Griz has washed his hands of the whole affair and cannot be bothered.  

 

Underdoggy, you apparently didn't read the first sentence in my first post.  It was,

"Contrary to what a lot of people think here this is the attitude of most police".

That was agreement with what was said in the video in the OP.

You've gone on to cut snippets out of my responses to throw a totally different twist to what I've written.  I take exception to your efforts to portray me as something I'm not.  Your character attack is so wrong as others on this forum who know me could tell you.

I'll set that straight now.

Police  need to have a show of force at any demonstration.  It's got nothing to do with power tripping.  It has to do with maintaining order.  The show of force is tailored to the level of the threat.  I saw, in the past few weeks, some Catholic nuns were picketing the Supreme Court.  There were a few police there. More to ensure the right to demonstrate wasn't interfered with rather than expecting trouble from the nuns.  So yeah, that was a show of force.   You probably didn't like that.  You'd call that too much power tripping.

If there's a demonstration where there is a likelihood of turning violent the police need to show up with more than a few cops.

You should be ashamed of yourself.  You've been making all these claims about rights but apparently only read parts of the COTUS that support your ideas. Your understanding of the COTUS and the system it establishes are seriously lacking.

The police, part of the Executive Branch has no power to determine the constitutionality of a law.  That power lies in the Judicial Branch.  The shutdown restrictions that have been imposed are by executive orders which, for the most part, have the force of law.  However,  EOs can be nullified by the Legislative Branch.

As far as declaring a law unconstituional, that is a job for the Judicial Branch.  Most cases that go to appellate courts don't question the constitutionality of the law but the constitutionality of the procedures used.

So yes, you can say a law is unconstituional when it is written.  It gets passed by the legislature, signed into law by the chief executive or his veto overriden by the legislature.  But until that law is found unconstutional by a court or repealed by the same process that passed it you can be arrested, prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced for violating it.  Blame the legislature for not nullifying EOs.

I've said in this thread cops don't want to be bothered with enforcing all these EO shutdowns.  I said that and made the point that's because they they think these EOs are bs.  You've tried to turn that around to say it's a lack of sympathy on my part but you're wrong.   Instead of blaming someone of a lack of sympathy I've supported relatives and friends during this time.  If I get the money back, fine.  If not that's fine too.  I put my money where my heart is.  Do you?I

You talk about holding cops accountable for the actions of other cops.  So should you be held accountable because your 20 year old commits a heinous crime because you didn't bring them up right?  Your way of thinking is how North Korea is run.

You want to hold cops accountable for the actions of other cops.  America doesn't work that way. Communism and Nazi Germany do or did.  As I've already noted you lack an understanding of the COTUS.  Now there has been many instances of police over eagerly enforcing these shutdown EOs.  I never defended that.  You fail to realize when they were making arrests the EO was legal.  You want them and all cops held accountable.  The COTUS prohibits  ex post facto laws.  You forgot that part.

Yes most cops don't want to be bothered with enforcing shutdown restrictions.  I've said that most of these restrictions are bs.   This is evident from the lack of hundreds or thousands of arrests for violations.  How many can you find?  Cops not arresting someone because they took their kids to a playground or not arresting someone for anything doesn't make the news.

Why do you applaud Officer Anderson and Sheriff Bianco for not wanting to be bothered with enforcing these bs EOs but when I say the same you show me no respect?  That's okay.  I don't need or desire respect from you.  

You blame police for getting paid while others are suffering.  Do you have the same attitude about other "essential workers"? 

Yes, there is a difference between the way police and non-police think just as there are differences between every other profession.  The big difference is there are many more people with no knowledge who think they know how cops should do their job

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2020 at 4:34 PM, GRIZ said:

Underdoggy,

Sorry for my disrepect, Griz.  I should have wrote Griz.  

Quote

you apparently didn't read the first sentence in my first post.  It was,

"Contrary to what a lot of people think here this is the attitude of most police".

That was agreement with what was said in the video in the OP.

You've gone on to cut snippets out of my responses to throw a totally different twist to what I've written.  I take exception to your efforts to portray me as something I'm not.  Your character attack is so wrong as others on this forum who know me could tell you.

Wasn't portraying you as something you are not.  LOL

Quote

I'll set that straight now.

You set me straight, Griz!

Quote

Police  need to have a show of force at any demonstration.

That is a load of crap.  Police don't need to show a force at ANY demonstration.    I am not trying to tell you how to do your job, but peaceful 2nd Amendment Gatherings are not the same as ANTIFA antics.  I completely realize that there could be some unintended guests showing up, though.  There is hardly ANY show of force needed in a peaceful public park in a playground...

Quote

  It's got nothing to do with power tripping.  It has to do with maintaining order.  The show of force is tailored to the level of the threat.

The level of threat perceived by a militarized law enforcement always scanning for and looking for a threats on beaches?  

Quote

  I saw, in the past few weeks, some Catholic nuns were picketing the Supreme Court.  There were a few police there. More to ensure the right to demonstrate wasn't interfered with rather than expecting trouble from the nuns. 

I am glad they were there.  Did they write any citations?  Were any nuns thrown to the ground, or handcuffed in front of their 3-year-old?  

Quote

So yeah, that was a show of force.   You probably didn't like that. 

No, I would have been OK with that, and in particular if their purpose was standing for the 1st Amendment.   I wouldn't have wanted drones and SWAT there, though, to frighten those blessed people.  And, I assume that they weren't needed.  

Quote

You'd call that too much power tripping.

No, I wouldn't.  How many police were there when Schumer actually made a real threat?  What was done about it, that fire in a movie-theater action...  Now back from your distraction.  

Quote

If there's a demonstration where there is a likelihood of turning violent the police need to show up with more than a few cops.

Absolutely!   Have you seen a lot of violence at the park with fathers playing ball with their kids?  Perhaps the threat of showing up in force just ups the ante?   I am not disagreeing with you that things could turn violent. I am disagreeing with the way you are looking at this saying "can't be bothered" and "let them sort it out in the courts".  

Quote

You should be ashamed of yourself.  You've been making all these claims about rights but apparently only read parts of the COTUS that support your ideas. Your understanding of the COTUS and the system it establishes are seriously lacking.

What part of the Constitution are you referring to?  Police power is exercised by the legislative and executive branches of the various states through the enactment and enforcement of laws. States have the power to compel obedience  to these laws through whatever measures they see fit, provided these measures do not infringe upon any of the rights protected by the United States Constitution their own state constitutions and are not unreasonably arbitrary or oppressive.   In my opinion and apparently the opinions of the LEOs mentioned, these sporadic instances are unreasonable and oppressive.  

Quote

The police, part of the Executive Branch has no power to determine the constitutionality of a law.  That power lies in the Judicial Branch.  The shutdown restrictions that have been imposed are by executive orders which, for the most part, have the force of law.  However,  EOs can be nullified by the Legislative Branch.

NO they don't because they are Unconstitutional.  

Quote

As far as declaring a law unconstituional, that is a job for the Judicial Branch.  Most cases that go to appellate courts don't question the constitutionality of the law but the constitutionality of the procedures used.

NO.   It is the job of ALL government working in tandem (and for the people) creating checks and balances to uphold the Constitution and the right of the individual to his or her government.  It is the responsibility for the legislature to make Constitutional Laws and it is is the Executive Branch's responsibility to enforce those laws justly and through the lens of the Constitution.  Carrying that badge and that gun is a lot of responsibility and power and should be met judiciously (and thank God in most cases is).  The Court is suppose to be a safeguard, and those powers (Judicial Review) were not specifically granted within the Constitution, but assumed by the Court, itself.   Chief Justice Marshall took a big leap on that one, and there needs to be checks and balances on that self-granted power!  Just because it is a safeguard when used properly doesn't mean that it has to, or should be exercised to reach that level.  

Quote

So yes, you can say a law is unconstituional when it is written.  It gets passed by the legislature, signed into law by the chief executive or his veto overriden by the legislature.  But until that law is found unconstutional by a court or repealed by the same process that passed it you can be arrested, prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced for violating it. 

This is where you are fundamentally wrong in claiming that YOU have no responsibility, and that was what I was essentially pointing out.  It is that view that is ultimately dangerous to a Republic and what I strongly disagree with.  

Quote

Blame the legislature for not nullifying EOs.

They have culpability and a duty and responsibility, but so does ANYONE that takes an oath and carries a badge and a gun, or a "civilian" citizen for that matter performing a duty.  

Quote

I've said in this thread cops don't want to be bothered with enforcing all these EO shutdowns. 

It is not a question of "being bothered".  They have a fundamental duty to protect the Constitutionally enumerated rights of the citizen, first and foremost before all of their other duties.  That is why it is that part of YOUR oath comes first.  

Quote

I said that and made the point that's because they they think these EOs are bs.  You've tried to turn that around to say it's a lack of sympathy on my part but you're wrong. 

This has NOTHING to do with feelings in any way.  It has to do with conditioning of our law enforcement and the top-down structure that promotes this duality and in some cases, robotic militarization.    Unlike,  just as law enforcement has no duty to protect individuals, they have a moral duty, officers DO have a moral and legal duty to uphold the law of the land (The Constitution) to the best of their abilities.    

Quote

 Instead of blaming someone of a lack of sympathy I've supported relatives and friends during this time.  If I get the money back, fine.  If not that's fine too.  I put my money where my heart is.  Do you?I

I am glad that you are good person with a good conscious.  My response has NOTHING to do with YOU personally.   It doesn't matter whether you have sympathy or not.  You are bound by your oath.  

Quote

You talk about holding cops accountable for the actions of other cops. 

Yes, I do, as law enforcement's PRIMARY duty is to protect the rights of its citizens (who law enforcement took an oath to protect and ultimately work for).  You don't work for the politicians.   You work on behalf of the people, just like those potentially self-serving politicians and administrators that sign your checks on yours and my behalves.  You aren't accountable for the actions of other individual cops (they are), but you are responsible for keeping them in check.  And, you have a duty to that respect, I would think, in educating fellow cops on these very principles and setting the right example in your departments and troops.  

Quote

So should you be held accountable because your 20 year old commits a heinous crime because you didn't bring them up right? 

I have a duty to do something about it and not look the other way, even if it is my LEO partner or, perhaps, my adult child. 

Quote

Your way of thinking is how North Korea is run.

What are you talking about.  Please clarify so I can respond.

Quote

You want to hold cops accountable for the actions of other cops. 

I want all cops to hold themselves accountable for their own choices and actions and I want them to make sure each other is on the same page and that they individually and collectively live up to their oaths and are worthy of the temporary and limited power that has been granted to them.  Their first and foremost duty is to uphold the Constitution and the rights of individuals they serve.  

Quote

America doesn't work that way. Communism and Nazi Germany do or did. 

No, actually in those places cops just did what they were told and let their betters sort it out.   

Quote

 As I've already noted you lack an understanding of the COTUS.  Now there has been many instances of police over eagerly enforcing these shutdown EOs.

You haven't made it clear exactly what I don't understand.  I might add there are a few unlawful instances in which the police "eagerly" over-reacted rather gleeful or solemn that have recently emerged in the news, and it would be distasteful and dangerous to our Republic if it was to become a pattern.

Quote

  I never defended that.  You fail to realize when they were making arrests the EO was legal. 

In many of those instances those EOs are NOT legal and therefore should not be enforced.   Contrary to mine, and by your logic the police that have had the Constitution beat into them at the academy have no duty on their own to make that determination, or do they? 

 I say they do.  Do they have an ability to exhibit their own discretion?

Quote

You want them and all cops held accountable. 

I want them to hold themselves to a higher standard and hold themselves accountable.  With greater power comes greater responsibility.  I want the politicians to do the same... The executive, judicial and legislative government individuals all have that individual duty.  

Quote

The COTUS prohibits  ex post facto laws.  You forgot that part.

What are you talking about, now?   What does this have to do with the discussion?   The Constitution came first.   It has precedence.  How does this apply to what we are friendly sparring with about?

Quote

Yes most cops don't want to be bothered with enforcing shutdown restrictions.  I've said that most of these restrictions are bs.   This is evident from the lack of hundreds or thousands of arrests for violations.  How many can you find?  Cops not arresting someone because they took their kids to a playground or not arresting someone for anything doesn't make the news.

You are almost comical.  I applaud those peace officers that they are not jackboot thugs and that they expound Constitutionally framed familiarity and common sense and that they are the mega-majority of law enforcement, and particular those that are the beat cops and not the politically-motivated higher-up politician cops.  

Quote

Why do you applaud Officer Anderson and Sheriff Bianco for not wanting to be bothered with enforcing these bs EOs but when I say the same you show me no respect?  That's okay.  I don't need or desire respect from you.  

Maybe we are saying the same thing, but "bothered" to me is the wrong word.  It is not "bothered" but they are willfully standing up for liberty.  

I do respect you and the difficult job you have, Griz. I wouldn't want, nor am I suited to your line of work.    I respect those two LEOs  because they are speaking out against the growing tyranny that they are seeing.  I value YOU for the job you have and the common sense you have.  I am trying to get you to look at what you are saying in a different light.  Officer Anderson and Sheriff Bianco weren't appealing to me as much as they were appealing to all law enforcement in the US to do the right thing.  They were instructing other LEOs to consider what is going on in this country and respond in a possible, Constitutionally-framed manner.  

Quote

You blame police for getting paid while others are suffering.  Do you have the same attitude about other "essential workers"? 

ALL jobs and the workers that do them are essential, police, medical, shoe store, hair cutters, etc.  There is no "us and them"... 

Quote

Yes, there is a difference between the way police and non-police think just as there are differences between every other profession.  The big difference is there are many more people with no knowledge who think they know how cops should do their job

Agreed, Sir.  However, there are just as many similarities.  

By the way, should illegal red-flag laws be enforced until you are told not to do it?   

I am not the enemy, and I am not happy that you are being put in that position to make calls like enforcing COVID BS.  That is your call and your conscious.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2020 at 4:34 PM, GRIZ said:

So yes, you can say a law is unconstituional when it is written.  It gets passed by the legislature, signed into law by the chief executive or his veto overriden by the legislature.  But until that law is found unconstutional by a court or repealed by the same process that passed it you can be arrested, prosecuted, convicted, and sentenced for violating it. 

I guess part of the issue for me is puzzling that cops do apparently have some discretion. How wide exactly is it? (I guess the logical answer is if you don't get caught, as wide as you want.) Obviously, no one is going to be inclined to let a murderer walk. What about Shaneen Allen? Would a cop have been within his authority to take her ammo and say, "Lady, get back in the car, get back to Pennsylvania, and don't bring a gun over the border again." Would you have locked her up?

You say you can be arrested, can be prosecuted, etc. So police and prosecutors will still enforce laws they know are unconstitutional. I could not do the job, because I could not do that. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is another American-made fellow citizen, and he is middle-of-the-road Constitutionalist...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Underdog said:

Here is another American-made fellow citizen, and he is middle-of-the-road Constitutionalist...

 

Here is their problem.  They are doing this while on duty, in their squad cars and in uniform.   Do this on your time, not on the city's dime.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Ray Ray said:

Here is their problem.  They are doing this while on duty, in their squad cars and in uniform.   Do this on your time, not on the city's dime.

I don't think they see it as a problem. We all have a right to free speech, but not necessarily without consequence. I would wager these guys knew the likely consequences when they published their videos. I have to wonder if their bosses understand the consequences of showing which side their loyalties lay. How many rank and file still on the force have made a judgement based on the boss's reactions to these honest officers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do you know his shift wasn't over and whether or not he was off duty?  How would you know if someone reaffirming their rights was actually a LEO unless you saw them in their Uniform.   

Ray, the humor is that none of that matters, anyway.   Anyone who thinks so appears to be showing conditioning  IMHO.  There is NO problem with these invididuals standing up for freedom, whatsoever, ANYTIME.  That is what they are paid to do!  Conditioning and brainwashing runs deep.  Citizens should be outraged that these sheepdog patriots are treated the way they are.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Underdog said:

How would you know if someone reaffirming their rights was actually a LEO unless you saw them in their Uniform.   

Good point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



  • NJGunForums Web Banner Ad May 2020.jpg

  • Supporting Vendors

  • Latest Topics

  • Posts

    • As I read the statutes you cannot just ride around with a non-NFA firearm - ironically because of the gap in the laws that enable non-NFA firearms to exist in the legal sense. 2C:39-5.b. Handguns.  (1) Any person who knowingly has in his possession any handgun, including any antique handgun, without first having obtained a permit to carry the same as provided in N.J.S.2C:58-4, is guilty of a crime of the second degree... 2C:39-5.c. Rifles and shotguns.  (1) Any person who knowingly has in his possession any rifle or shotgun without having first obtained a firearms purchaser identification card in accordance with the provisions of N.J.S.2C:58-3, is guilty of a crime of the third degree. As an non-NFA is neither a handgun nor a rifle the above does not apply. Therefore, you're now stuck with    2C:39-5.d. Other weapons.  Any person who knowingly has in his possession any other weapon under circumstances not manifestly appropriate for such lawful uses as it may have is guilty of a crime of the fourth degree. Sadly NJ does not recognize self defense as a lawful use so I think you're SOL with a non-NFA firearm. Even with an FPIC, you can't be in possession outside the exemptions for to/from the range, FFL, home, etc. PS. IANAL and did not sleep in a Holiday Inn Express last night.
    • I sent mine in a couple years back due to all the falsing from collision sensors on current vehicles.  It quieted it down significantly. Apparently with JVB1(android), you can get control over everything and it can overlay right onto waze.   That's frickin awesome! It will even turn on/off bands based on the state you're in. Like you, I see no cop running anything but constant on KA in NJ except once I got a laser alert on the turnpike and it was real as I could see the guy with the gun.   It arrives Monday, so I'll get back to this thread once I have some more information.
    • I did find a .22.  Wound up picking up a 617 with the 6" barrel.  I'm absolutely going to look into the speedloader.
    • I think UPS did/does the same thing with their hub in Kentucky. You send something three doors down the street and it is riding two airplanes to get there. 
×
×
  • Create New...