Mac-7
Diamond Member
- Oct 9, 2019
- 67,695
- 49,143
- 3,565
We are back to the crazy lib desire for no police forcereluctantly???
he deserves to be fired and 1-5 yrs in jail for assault and deprivation of rights,,
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We are back to the crazy lib desire for no police forcereluctantly???
he deserves to be fired and 1-5 yrs in jail for assault and deprivation of rights,,
I am a constitutionalist that believes our rights come from our creator and no government agent has a right to stomp on those rights,,You are a bitter lib who does not understand or appreciate how important the police are to your safety
If the police officer can reasonable articulate a crime he believes a person has committed he can require the ID. At least that’s the way the law reads in most states. Thes cops didn’t even try to do that. In fact the dumb ass to put the guy in cuffs said he was placing him under arrest BECAUSE he wouldn’t identify himself which typically is specifically forbidden in these types of laws.I understand
According to OK law the cops are expected to prevent crime but are not give the tools they need
I want a police force that supports the constitution they swore an oath too,,We are back to the crazy lib desire for no police force
Yes expecting the police to act within the bounds of the law equals defund the police.We are back to the crazy lib desire for no police force
he can ask,, the guy had no legal responsibility to give it,,Cop was an IDIOT. He could have asked the guy his name and address and had it verrified in a few minutes.
Then he could have been on his way, but even that should not be necessary.
Yeah sureI am a constitutionalist that believes our rights come from our creator and no government agent has a right to stomp on those rights,,
but demanding he provide ID when no crime has been committed is threat to liberty and why we have it written down in the constitution,,Yeah sure
I think so too
But identifying yourself to a police officer in the line of duty is no threat to liberty
You are flogging a dead horseIf the police officer can reasonable articulate a crime he believes a person has committed he can require the ID. At least that’s the way the law reads in most states. Thes cops didn’t even try to do that. In fact the dumb ass to put the guy in cuffs said he was placing him under arrest BECAUSE he wouldn’t identify himself which typically is specifically forbidden in these types of laws.
This^Of course it's excessive. There will always be outlier Cops who don't belong on the force. We don't see "viral videos" of the 99 percent of Cops who do a good job and risk their lives to keep citizens safe.
youre the one over reacting,,You are flogging a dead horse
I agree that the cop was impatient and should have used better proceedure
But your overreaction is no better than the cop’s
why are you trying to deflect from a cop beating up an innocent man in front of his child??This^
For whatever reason, the police are singled out. What about the teachers who abuse children. What about the doctors who abuse their patients. They are in positions of power. Same as cops. But cops get singled out.
but demanding he provide ID when no crime has been committed is threat to liberty and why we have it written down in the constitution,
There is no deflection. I don’t approve of what that individual cop did. Although if a police officer asks me for my name, I will absolutely give it to him. I don’t have anything to hide.why are you trying to deflect from a cop beating up an innocent man in front of his child??
No you are the one going ballisticyoure the one over reacting,,
the cop was not just over reacting he was pissing on the very constitution he swore an oath to prtect and defend,, and he did it in front of the guys kid,,
what do you think that kid will think of cops after this??
no they do not,,The cops have authority to detain a suspect till they can establish is identity if they have a reason to be suspicious
That is a protection of everyone
again with the deflection,,There is no deflection. I don’t approve of what that individual cop did. Although if a police officer asks me for my name, I will absolutely give it to him. I don’t have anything to hide.
The point was clear. These topics are given way too much attention and sensation by the media. Again teachers, doctors people in similar positions of power who have social trust have abused their students and patients .
The overwhelming majority of police in America are good people. Hell most Americans are good people. We don’t need to defund the police or start hating on the police for the actions of an individual few officers.
yes I am,, in the defense of the constitution and against a bad cop that pissed all over it and his sworn oath,,No you are the one going ballistic
That’s where you are wrong.The cops have authority to detain a suspect till they can establish is identity if they have a reason to be suspicious
That is a protection of everyone