Air fresheners are illegal in Minnesota

#726
#726
***RoadVol*** said:
In this case it seems to be negligence. She was yelling taser and immediately knew she made a mistake when she fired the weapon according to the body cam footage.
Click to expand...


Put it this way: it would be difficult for a prosecutor to think he could prove it was intentional beyond a reasonable doubt.
 
#727
#727
Ttucke11 said:
Firefighters/EMTs don't step foot inside a house without cops there because they don't weapons. I've seen them station in front of a house of an 80 year old diabetic woman having an episode. Like @utvols88 said the best you're getting is reachable in the car. Cops respond to a much different variety of calls than EMTs. Trust me, I've done both.
Click to expand...
Yep...... usually the people involved are glad to see the EMTs..... the cops..... not so much
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ttucke11
#731
#731
n_huffhines said:
This is America. We are all criminals. I doubt most of us carry.
Click to expand...
Just to recap Huff.

“The average professional in this country wakes up in the morning, goes to work, comes home, eats dinner, and then goes to sleep, unaware that he or she has likely committed several federal crimes that day. Why? The answer lies in the very nature of modern federal criminal laws, which have exploded in number but also become impossibly broad and vague. In Three Felonies a Day, Harvey A. Silverglate reveals how federal criminal laws have become dangerously disconnected from the English common law tradition and how prosecutors can pin arguable federal crimes on any one of us, for even the most seemingly innocuous behavior. The volume of federal crimes in recent decades has increased well beyond the statute books and into the morass of the Code of Federal Regulations, handing federal prosecutors an additional trove of vague and exceedingly complex and technical prohibitions to stick on their hapless targets. The dangers spelled out in Three Felonies a Day do not apply solely to white collar criminals,” state and local politicians, and professionals. No social class or profession is safe from this troubling form of social control by the executive branch, and nothing less than the integrity of our constitutional democracy hangs in the balance.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: distrovol, LouderVol, hog88 and 2 others
#732
#732
TNVOLNAVY said:
I’m certainly not surprised it turned out he’s nothing but a deadbeat POS career criminal thug.
Click to expand...
Armed robbery? What happened to gross misdemeanor?

...he officers initially pulled him over for an expired registration tag on his car but determined during the traffic stop that he had an outstanding gross misdemeanor warrant, according to Brooklyn Center Police Chief Tim Gannon.
Click to expand...

Daunte Wright's parents speak out after shooting in ABC News exclusive: 'He's never coming back'
 
#733
#733
midnight orange said:
Just to recap Huff.

“The average professional in this country wakes up in the morning, goes to work, comes home, eats dinner, and then goes to sleep, unaware that he or she has likely committed several federal crimes that day. Why? The answer lies in the very nature of modern federal criminal laws, which have exploded in number but also become impossibly broad and vague. In Three Felonies a Day, Harvey A. Silverglate reveals how federal criminal laws have become dangerously disconnected from the English common law tradition and how prosecutors can pin arguable federal crimes on any one of us, for even the most seemingly innocuous behavior. The volume of federal crimes in recent decades has increased well beyond the statute books and into the morass of the Code of Federal Regulations, handing federal prosecutors an additional trove of vague and exceedingly complex and technical prohibitions to stick on their hapless targets. The dangers spelled out in Three Felonies a Day do not apply solely to white collar criminals,” state and local politicians, and professionals. No social class or profession is safe from this troubling form of social control by the executive branch, and nothing less than the integrity of our constitutional democracy hangs in the balance.”
Click to expand...

I have been meaning to get that book. That sounds like it is basically saying some of the same stuff I have been saying.
 
#740
#740
hUTch2002 said:
Police need the ability to respond with force but generally should not have the attitude of doing everything by force, or even most things. But it’s a super thin line and is easy for us to sit here and say when we aren’t ones making split second life or death decisions.
Click to expand...
I think the overwhelming majority of them do things the right way and go out of their way to avoid using deadly force to the extent that it’s almost saint like. I knew a Cop who was posted at a bank I worked with that got brutally stabbed all because he was unwilling to shoot the perpetrator. The media more often than not relishes hammering cops be it deserved or not. This particular cop in this particular case effed up huge but it’s not emblematic of the police as a whole
 
  • Like
Reactions: hUTch2002
#742
#742
volinbham said:
depends on the violence - does resisting arrest justify death? I'm just saying that violence is less likely if routine stops aren't a predicate to arrest someone for something unrelated to the stop.

in the bigger picture it seems we are using traffic stops to catch people guilty of other things. If the person has outstanding warrants then go serve them rather than wait to get them when you pull them over for a traffic stop.

I'm not 100% sold on my idea - just playing with the problem to find a better solution.

It's like our health insurance being tied to our work - it's that way because of choices long ago and it's tough to unwind but no one would design it that way today. Treating traffic stops as traffic stops might be a better way of doing things.
Click to expand...
I'm a little late to his discussion so I apologize, but couldn't your scenario lead to potentially more problems? Who and where wouldn't the warrant be served? Yeah I know we have the guys address, but I wouldn't want to confront him there. I'm no LEO, but thats just my common sense thoughts at play.
 
#746
#746
lukeneyland said:
I think the overwhelming majority of them do things the right way and go out of their way to avoid using deadly force to the extent that it’s almost saint like. I knew a Cop who was posted at a bank I worked with that got brutally stabbed all because he was unwilling to shoot the perpetrator. The media more often than not relishes hammering cops be it deserved or not. This particular cop in this particular case effed up huge but it’s not emblematic of the police as a whole
Click to expand...
And I agree but there are definitely those on a power trip. I’ve had an unusually large sample size of police encounters covering a wide array of reasons though and I will say that, even when falsely accused of crimes and falsely identified, I cooperated and nothing came of it. I’ve seen some cops be jerks just to be jerks but they’re definitely the exception and not the rule.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lukeneyland
#750
#750
hog88 said:
Sure there is. Traffic control, escorting funerals, parking ticket duty, none should need a weapon.
Click to expand...
Any call could need a weapon at any time. There was a KPD cadet who was doing parking duty downtown and was almost killed by a felon about 10 years ago
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top