• Get 30% off the first 3 months with code HIDE30

    Offer valid until 9/23! If you have an annual subscription on Sniper's Hide, subscribe below and you'll be refunded the difference.

    Subscribe
  • Having trouble using the site?

    Contact support

Here come the lawsuits - Olmos Park TX officers arrest CJ Grisham.

If only the south had won!

Then the constitution would still mean something. States would truly have the sovereignty to rule as they please. Federal bans wouldn’t mean shit, we would be governed by our own.

Instead we’re living a federalized existence, ruled by an illusion of democracy and have to eat the shit soup or literally fight over it. Walking down the street with a rifle isn’t going to do dick to change that.

One shouldn’t be mislead into thinking the constitution is going to save them. It’s words amongst the leaves , when it doesn’t fit their agenda it crumbles away. States constitutional rights were trampled during the war of the states, trampled for the First Nations who did everything to “Americanize” themselves and become citizens. And is being trampled today.

It’s nothing new. It sucks but it’s the best suckiest place in the world. Scaring libtards and trolling police is just a asshat thing to do. So either start the fire at Ft Sumter, or leave your shit out of sight. The “I know my rights” crowd only needs to look into history to see that there ain’t any.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W54/XM-388
ive had enough with peoples "interpretations" of the constitution......its written in fucking english......it doesnt need to be interpreted.

Ironically, that is your personal interpretation of the Constitution.

As far as not needing interpretation, the 4th Amendment reads:

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."


The fact they didn't define "unreasonable" means you have NO choice but to make an interpretation. What is reasonable to you, may not be reasonable to someone else. This is also the point of the SCOTUS. They are responsible for making sure the interpretation such as "unreasonable" fit with society's current "reasonableness."

The authors of the Constitution and subsequent Amendments were wise enough to know society and technology would advance over time and therefore purposely left it open to the "correct" interpretation over time.

Had the authors not meant for it to be interpreted, they would have defined exactly what they meant by words such as "unreasonable." They were also wise enough to know that one action may be reasonable under one set of circumstances and the same action absolutely unreasonable under other circumstance.


Since this is a shooting site, I'll use this as an example ( fair warning, I'm very PRO 2nd Amendment ):

We have the right to bear arms. There is no age limit on who is allowed to bear these arms specified in the Amendment.

Should a 5 year old be allowed to run around with a gun? According to the "fucking English," the Constitution is written in......yes they should. So, hand your 5 year old a loaded weapon and see what happens.

We have decided as a society this is not reasonable and therefore limited that right to adults ( I'm of the opinion all legal weapons should be purchasable at 18, but that is a different story).
 
Ok.....go hand loaded weapons to kids and felons.

Their rights are being infringed everyday. 2nd Amendment never said they can't have weapons.
very good, you know how to fucking read.....and youre also right, they are being infringed.

now whats your point again?
 
very good, you know how to fucking read.....

whats youre point?

So, you believe that a 5 year old child or convicted felons should run around with loaded weapons legally?

That's my point. Your logic is faulty.

This is the reason courts do not agree with you. Things would be much worse without MOST interpretations. Obviously they don't get them all right since we are human.
 
So, you either agree:

A) small children and dangerous felons should be armed

or

B) some interpretations or limitations on constitutional rights are necessary to make sure the majority of the population has the right to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."
 
So, you believe that a 5 year old child or convicted felons should run around with loaded weapons legally?

1) no i dont believe kids should run around with loaded weapons.....but thats a parenting issue, not a gun issue.......i also wouldnt let my kids run around with steak knives or pointed sticks.......but you dont see those being regulated.

funny we can send our children off to war at 17....where they can safely handle machine guns, grenades, tanks, artilery.......yet a 17yd old cant buy a .22 handgun at a store

2) why are you releasing dangerous people back into society?.......if a person it too dangerous to own a gun, why are you letting them out?
you mean to tell me a person with a felony for forging checks is as dangerous as a person whos killed 10 people?....imma guess not....so why treat them the same?

if a person has done their time and paid their debt to society.....why shouldnt they have their full rights restored?

and last i checked.....being a Felon doesnt make it any harder for them to get guns......if they dont buy them at the store.....theyll buy them on the street just as easily.
 
But, the Constitution guarantees your child's right to bear arms? Why are you denying this right???

Also, knives are regulated. There are many regulations on knives.

I agree that many felons should not be released back into society. That's a topic for a different discussion. And I also agree that certain felons should have their rights restored immediately upon release (multiple offenses is a different story).

The fact that something isn't harder to get because its illegal has no bearing on the fact of whether or not it should be legal. Drugs are very easy to get. Are you also in favor of making heroin legal? By your logic, the laws don't make it harder to get, so why make it illegal?

Also, it is very much harder to get a gun illegally than legally. Will this stop them from obtaining one? No, but it is much easier to walk into a gun store and purchase a gun legally than to buy one illegally.

The point of it being illegal is there is consequence when you get caught violating this.

You can't (or shouldn't) punish your children when they do something they don't know is wrong. Once they know it is wrong, its game on. This is the same principle with felons not being able to purchase a weapon. It allows society to impose consequences.
 
But, the Constitution guarantees your child's right to bear arms? Why are you denying this right???

because thats my right as a parent...i also dont let my kids eat 4 gallons of ice cream and monitor what movies they watch.........once they turn 18 they can do as they please.

it is not society responsibility to raise my kids, its mine...


regarding heroine.....yes it should be legal.......i dont support the use of heroine......but if you want to fuck yourself up, who am i to tell you you cant?

take away all the safety nets.....if the junkie cant pay for emergency services.....tough shit....let em die.



its easy to claim you support liberty when it applies to a cause you support......the real test is to see if you support liberty when it applies to a cause you dont.
 
So,

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

What is "resonsable" and who decides it?

Since you say the Constitution is not open to interpretation???

The Constitution is a general set of guidelines.
 
So,

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

What is "resonsable" and who decides it?

Since you say the Constitution is not open to interpretation???

The Constitution is a general set of guidelines.
1) the constitution is not a "guideline"........its fucking law.

you can ignore a "guideline"


2) if there is a warrant or PC, its reasonable.......if there isnt a warrant or PC its unreasonable.......literally written right there for you.

this is one of the cases where the constitution grants authority to a court to decide what is reasonable......
that authority is granted........it is not implied......nor does it automatically apply to all other amendments.


you cant claim the constitution is open to interpretation just because one amendment allowed courts to decide what is reasonable within that specific set of circumstances.
 
That amendment never said the courts get to decide bud. It never said who gets to decide what is reasonable, and it never defined what is reasonable.

You're making assumptions now.
 
my god, are you this much of a fucking moron or do i need to bust out crayons?

ide have no problem explaining this to you in mongoloid terms.....but im afraid you would eat all my crayons before i could finish explaining it
 
Have a nice day, Sir. I (you) just proved my point.
i proved that you are a fucking moron?...you proved you dont understand constitutional law.....you proved you are a cunt who think the plebeians need to "obey or else" ..i think you did that 3 pages ago.


my god, this is typical liberal debate tactic 101........act like a fucking moron until the other person cannot stand to dumb down and prove to wrong anymore...then claim victory.

im surprised you didnt somehow find a way to call me a racist then claim double victory
 
  • Like
Reactions: ArmyJerry
1) the constitution is not a "guideline"........its fucking law.

you can ignore a "guideline"


2) if there is a warrant or PC, its reasonable.......if there isnt a warrant or PC its unreasonable.......literally written right there for you.

this is one of the cases where the constitution grants authority to a court to decide what is reasonable......
that authority is granted........it is not implied......nor does it automatically apply to all other amendments.


you cant claim the constitution is open to interpretation just because one amendment allowed courts to decide what is reasonable within that specific set of circumstances.


So, again . How does an office get PC without making contact with a person???

You keep refusing to answer that question Who I resorting to profanity and name calling as if you're in high school.

Whether YOU like it or not. Or whether YOU agree or not, SOCIETY is governed by the constitution which is clarified by court rulings and the SUPRRME COURT. They are the ones that have ruled on these issues for police to be able to do what they do. You can try and beat your drum all day long but you're wasting my good oxygen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dthomas3523
2) if there is a warrant or PC, its reasonable.......if there isnt a warrant or PC its unreasonable.......literally written right there for you.
That is fucking stupid right there.
According to you, and you interpretation, if an officer is on scene of a school shooting, he should first obtain a warrant before seizing a person, otherwise, it would be unreasonable (by your standard)
 
i proved that you are a fucking moron?...you proved you dont understand constitutional law.....you proved you are a cunt who think the plebeians need to "obey or else" ..i think you did that 3 pages ago.


my god, this is typical liberal debate tactic 101........act like a fucking moron until the other person cannot stand to dumb down and prove to wrong anymore...then claim victory.

im surprised you didnt somehow find a way to call me a racist then claim double victory

One of us has been formally educated in Constituonal Law (and also works in LE), as well as having a plethora of common sense.

I’ll let anyone who reads this make their own interpretation of which one of us that is. ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: CrazyHorse_mk14
Would someone please escalate this to "Cocksucker" level, please. Getting boring. :sneaky:
1kizdw1.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: 1J04
That is fucking stupid right there.
According to you, and you interpretation, if an officer is on scene of a school shooting, he should first obtain a warrant before seizing a person, otherwise, it would be unreasonable (by your standard)
can you literally not fucking read what i wrote?

then again....you are the same people that need "interpreters" for the constitution....so maybe you cant.
 
He doesn't get probable cause because he should be minding his own damn business and keeping both hands on the wheel or donut. The 4th says mind your own goddamn business to the government unless you get a warrant before you go fishing for another victim of "justice".. until you have thet warrant you need to mind your own fucking business. Says it plain as day right there in the written word.

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.



So, again . How does an office get PC without making contact with a person???

You keep refusing to answer that question Who I resorting to profanity and name calling as if you're in high school.

Whether YOU like it or not. Or whether YOU agree or not, SOCIETY is governed by the constitution which is clarified by court rulings and the SUPRRME COURT. They are the ones that have ruled on these issues for police to be able to do what they do. You can try and beat your drum all day long but you're wasting my good oxygen.
 
Educated in law, ha, you need to return that match box diploma. Works in LE????? WTF does that mean? Are you a locker room "fluffer" or are you a real life donut muncher?


One of us has been formally educated in Constituonal Law (and also works in LE), as well as having a plethora of common sense.

I’ll let anyone who reads this make their own interpretation of which one of us that is. ?
 
You know what, after a couple sips of whiskey and quick re-read of this thread, and some self-reflection... It turned out to be really educational.

After a bunch more sips, I decided to put this monstrosity together.

This is the shit I felt I should weigh in on, because it's important, and because no one else did in a way I found satisfactory.

I don't even find my own way of doing it satisfactory, but there was just more shit to cover than I had time for.

@Maggot - Im starting to see a pattern here. Fat, ugly, stupid guys who probably got picked on in school become cops and use their new found power for payback. Andother grotesque pig; a disgrace to all genuine LE.


Maggot, I get where you're coming from, but you're fucking wrong from start to finish. I wish you'd invested a little more time in your response, and been a little less short-sighted on things. You're an old fuck, though, so I won't hold any of that against you. I know how testy people can get when their shit stops working.

That being said, some royal fucking assholes do make the ranks, and get fat afterward. I don't know how or why they're allowed to retain their positions.


@Slash 0311- For me, as an officer making contact, I would remove the weapons from the person while I'm investigating what's going on.

I don't like that. I understand why it is done, but I think it's a bitch move that strips the dignity from all involved. Why would you disarm someone if you didn't know you needed to haul his ass to jail? Again, I bring up the Deer Park officers. They very well could have disarmed that gentleman, but they did not, because that is fucking rude.

You may say, "My/his/other people's protection", and I get that, but damn, man. There are countless ways for shit to go tits up. At least when you're dealing with a dude that's armed that you're questioning, you KNOW where that shit is gonna come from and can be ready to fire from the hip if it comes to that.

If you feel inadequate in that circumstance, you ought to train harder.

For the next bit, I'll admit I don't know every damned thing, but here it is:

I don't think there should ever be a situation where you should have to go eyes-off on someone you pulled over or walked up to, or whatever. None of that grab the info and go back to the car to check shit out. That's fucking crazy.

Definitely none of that 'here, lemme take your guns and go run your license to see if you have warrants'. That's amateur hour.

@Slash0311 - These are The types of things officers deal with on a daily basis so that the general public can keep a routine and ignor what's really going on around them.

That's a massive problem. No one should ignore a damned thing, and everyone should understand that bad fucking things can happen at any time. I think that is one of the root causes that's fucking with our lives today. The cops did such a great job trying to convince the people that they've got shit under control that people started to actually believe them. It's a fucking lie, outright.

I shit you not, if the Russians did some sneaky shit around Houston and wound up with thousands of armed assholes inside of 99 they could fuck a spot up, and every god damn cop in the area would rush there, then they'd be free to fuck up everything else, and it'd just be dumb lazy shits like me to remind them that not everyone got the call to go to 8 and 225, and we're just sitting here wondering why the fuck 30 police cars were rushing down the road at 2x the speedlimit. I don't count on the constant Apaches overhead to give a fuck about anything other than the assets they're tasked with protecting, and you bet your ass I don't want them to be, either. Fuckin 30mm raining hell down on my AO? Fuck that shit! I'll take my chances with the commies.

The world is fucking dangerous and everyone ought to appreciate that. Some folks may still refuse to be responsible for their own well-being, but that's to be expected.



@W54/XM-388 - If the police were actual decent public servants who were wanting to make sure everything was fine, I don't think anyone would have been able to fault them if they simply rolled up and politely explained that some butt hurt snowflake took exception to their display of freedom, but since they did, the police have to do a quick check to make sure you are law abiding citizens & not out to cause trouble, ask to check their ID, or run their name & then verify they were not prohibited persons or wanted for anything & then be on their way.

Yeah, I mean, that's the way it usually happens. These Olmos Park guys are not the norm.

@W54/XM-388 - If you have a right to carry weapons, then there is no excuse for the police absent any other evidence or threats to be threatening you with murder & punishing you with public humiliation.


No there is not an excuse. Even though shit got weird in this thread, I don't think anyone disagrees with this point. Further, I think it's clear that no one thought the Olmos Park PD did the right thing.

@Slash0311 - Again, the way the officers did things are certainly not how I've done things without some obvious crime being commuted and I think they took the bait on this one.

I really wish everyone had paid more attention to this.

@CrazyHorse_mk14 - My interpretation of this laws scope is to prevent say a hunter from facing crimes for carrying his deer rig down the street to the hunting grounds.

While that's a modern use for it, the original intent had to do with a threat on folks that weren't gonna back down for shit. It's perfectly fine if some faggot lets some of your neighbors know that because they're XYZ he's gonna come and kill 'em later, and for that whole neighborhood to congregate in the streets in a big, solidified fuck you to whoever would oppose them. AFAIK, it's never been illegal in Texas history to open carry a long gun. Even the 30.07 doesn't mean shit when it comes to open carrying a long gun.

Stores can ask you to leave, but that's it. Hell, I'm pretty sure you can carry a long gun into a liquor store in Texas, too.

@LRI - Crap like this is how we get new, restrictive state laws passed. Watch.

I think maybe 'manner calculated to alarm' may be rehashed a bit, as I could see a chest rig being 'alarming' to people. Really, though... I doubt any of that with Abbot as Governor. That guy needs to be cloned 1000x now, and with enough left over to clone him forever thereafter.

@W54/XM-388 - What happens when you know you are not breaking the law and are acting in a lawful manner, but then the police show up & want to hassle you, humiliate you, arrest you for something that is perfectly legal, or when they have no evidence of any criminal activity or wrong doing. Either the Police are ignorant of the law or they purposely don't care.

Well, you get FUCKED is what happens.

This is Georgia, not Texas, but we have similar DRE type shit down here as well. I admit that this isn't PURELY 'no evidence', but jesus, man, chick rolled over the line a little. That's not the same as chick just coughed her guts out on some killer weed and got behind the wheel.



@Slash0311 - I'm not going to say that doesn't happen. As to the question of "what then" comply and let your attorney have a field day in court.

This is bullshit, though. The folks in the video above had their lives turned up-side-fucking-down for no goddamn reason other than an officer was CERTAIN they were smoking the dope (which they weren't). No recourse on the officers. Lot sof expense to the 'defendants'. Ultimately the main ass in the video resigned in lieu of being fired because he fucked up too many times, but come on, a whole year out of your life fighting some trumped up charges?? That is not the American way, not even a little bit. One of those people actually had a plea deal put in front of them, FOR DOING NOTHING wrong. What the fuck??!! Another, their charges only got dropped because the OFFICER COULDN'T REMEMBER HIS OWN DAMN STORY 5 months later.


@ArmyJerry - Cops need to read and understand the constitution and respect their fellow citizens then they might get some respect back.

Yes they do. Some do,, some don't. I don't know what to do about that, other than to encourage decent officers that give a shit about the BOR to have GOOD conversations with their peers and brass and make sure the slackers learn their place in the world is not to arrest the most people or otherwise game the system, and is instead to keep order in this place, and throw the right people in jail. What do you do in a situation where the brass is incessantly ramming policy that fucks over normal folks? I don't have that answer, either. I would like for this conversation to go off in that direction.


@Slash0311 - In my example, I don't say "running" away from the robbery. Let just say that it was some random joe walking In the same area as the gun shop. Would an officer not be able to make contact with that person without harassing him?

Absolutely. I'd want you to do it, too. Of all the folks replying in this thread, you're probably one of the best to be out there doing that. I'm really glad you chimed in and tossed your handful of pennies and all of that.

@ArmyJerry - Avoid contact at at all costs, they are armed agents of the state, nothing good comes from any interaction with them.

Fucked up as it is, that is my position more and more each day. I've had a handful of run-ins with the law completely accidentally where I did not like the experience one bit. From shit like license plate lights being out and the officers wanting to detain me and search my shit, to filling up gas and having half the PD roll up on me thinking I stole shit from a Lowe's and wanting to detain me and search my shit. There are a lot of officers out there that don't seem to give a fuck at all about people, and that is reason enough for me to never want to have any dealings with them ever. Just takes one royal asshole to end up like the dude on his front porch getting executed, or the dude on the hotel floor getting executed, and you're gone forever.

This is not the way it should be, though, and it's something I want to do with my life, to rectify that. The way I see it, it's a feed-back loop of pussies wanting the police to do more for them and police wanting to do more for the pussies, when the police are already doing too much. The thing I didn't mention there was how the lawyers effect this whole situation. I don't know much about that, but it's clear there's an issue there when a bunch of like-minded officers on a PRS board are saying shit like, 'well what if I didn't', 'when it is ok to', etc. I think when it gets to that point, common sense is not in control, discretion is not in control, and fear is. Fear of lawsuits, fear of being fired, fear of whatever... That's not a good thing.

This is all not to say that I haven't had good experiences with officers, because I have. This is to say that my bad experiences with officers sucked so much that I don't really want to have any interaction with officers ever again, because they're a force that's capable of fucking up my life permanently and they can do so in the flimsiest of circumstances with little or no regard for me as a human being, and without any concern or remorse.

Of course, that'd never get in the way of me having a conversation with an officer whenever the fuck I felt like it, to discuss shit like this face to face. Risks be damned =)

@Veer_G/@mcameron - You keep on trying to toss me that same poor repressed minority herring, like I'm a penguin or something.

Man, you do that to yourself. You realize that, right? The threads you post where some Sikh was mistaken for a muslim or whatever? You toss yourself in with the herrings.

@mcameron - i dont give a fuck if some liberal cunt gets offended......they are always offended.

Fuck yes they are always offended. How can society figure out how to ignore liberals? If all the latest protests have shown anything, it is that their opinions mean absolutely nothing and can be discarded as are the wants and whims of a toddler.

@Dthomas3523 - If I am called for someone walking down the street with a rifle, I roll up on him, ask them how they are doing, and if I can see an ID, they tell me to fuck off, and nothing else appears out of the ordinary.....yep, I get back in my unit and observe them from a public location until I’m satisfied there’s no danger to anyone. It’s legal for them to open carry in public and it’s legal for me to keep an eye on them in public.

Awesome.

@Slash0311 - As to your point of the Muslim, yes. If someone called, I would go initiate contact there as well. If that person's actions continued after i told them to stop, yes again. Disorderly conduct would apply.

You realize it's rude and disrespectful as hell to interrupt a muslim while he's praying, right? Not saying you wouldn't wait patiently while the dude does his ups and downs on his knees like some girl getting it in the ass, but asking honestly.. Would you really interrupt a muslim praying because someone called 911 on him for praying?

@Dthomas3523 - You may be legally open carrying, but if your actions are found to be that you did so in a way to cause a public nuisance or disturbance, now you are doing something possibly illegal.


In TX, it's pretty damned clear about a disturbance charge. If you're carrying in a way calculated to alarm, that's a crime. Otherwise, it's not.



Furthermore, why the fuck didn't these guys get the roll up and draw down treatment when they were marching down 6th street in Austin with shotguns, AKs, SKS, AR15s, hi-points, etc at the ready while shouting "OINK OINK BANG BANG FUCK THE PIGS AND EVERYONEAT FUCKS WIT 'EM"?

As we can see, even if you are carrying in a way calculated to alarm like these assholes, you may still not be arrested.

@Dthomas3523 - So, if the SCOTUS rules on the interpretation of the Constitution and I am within that ruling, I am ABSOLUTELY upholding the Constitution that I swore and oath to.

Come on, man... Heller was 5/4 in favor. What if it had been 3/6 against? What if they'd ruled that day that the RKBA did not apply to individuals? That's clearly in the fucking face of the original intent. Are you saying you'd be fine given that the SCOTUS ruled it was constitutionally not protected that individuals had a right at all to keep and bear arms, and you'd enforce that shit with a clear concience if your state/whatever told you to?


@Dthomas3523 - What I have a bit of an issue was how they went about it. They put those cops in a very bad position. Had anything gone slightly wrong on their (Grisham) end, they would likely be dead. He took the protest to the police, and not to the municipal government like he should have.

The cops put themselves in a bad position. There are good ways and bad ways to do things. They picked a bad way. Grisham took the issue to everyone at once, not just the police. Because the police responded the way they did, we're where we're at now, with the ordnance being repealed and lawsuits being filed. What comes next is anybody's guess.

@CrazyHorse_mk14 - Cam, I think your just having a hard time accepting the situation in today’s America. Your views are entirely agreeable and ring of the true intentions of the founding fathers. Would even go as far to say that they represent the idealistic American way.

For sure, mcameron has a potty mouth and a shit temper. He coats his gold in all kinds of crap most folks won't take the time to separate out.

@mcameron - Calm the fuck down. Your opinon shouldn't be relegated to the dustin of bullshittery.
 
It does beg the question though- does cam in accordance to his almighty and the constitution, Really get left the fuck alone? Has the idea of freedom he conceals within his bullshittin ever really existed ?

Cops ask questions! They’re nosey bastards, comes with the turf I guess. Responsible Americans give satisfactory answers to those questions in a respectful manner and nine times outta ten get left the fuck alone! (Maybe followed but fuck it you ain’t doing nothing wrong right?)
 
You know what, after a couple sips of whiskey and quick re-read of this thread, and some self-reflection... It turned out to be really educational.

After a bunch more sips, I decided to put this monstrosity together.

This is the shit I felt I should weigh in on, because it's important, and because no one else did in a way I found satisfactory.

I don't even find my own way of doing it satisfactory, but there was just more shit to cover than I had time for.

@Maggot - Im starting to see a pattern here. Fat, ugly, stupid guys who probably got picked on in school become cops and use their new found power for payback. Andother grotesque pig; a disgrace to all genuine LE.

Maggot, I get where you're coming from, but you're fucking wrong from start to finish. I wish you'd invested a little more time in your response, and been a little less short-sighted on things. You're an old fuck, though, so I won't hold any of that against you. I know how testy people can get when their shit stops working.

That being said, some royal fucking assholes do make the ranks, and get fat afterward. I don't know how or why they're allowed to retain their positions.


@Slash 0311- For me, as an officer making contact, I would remove the weapons from the person while I'm investigating what's going on.

I don't like that. I understand why it is done, but I think it's a bitch move that strips the dignity from all involved. Why would you disarm someone if you didn't know you needed to haul his ass to jail? Again, I bring up the Deer Park officers. They very well could have disarmed that gentleman, but they did not, because that is fucking rude.

You may say, "My/his/other people's protection", and I get that, but damn, man. There are countless ways for shit to go tits up. At least when you're dealing with a dude that's armed that you're questioning, you KNOW where that shit is gonna come from and can be ready to fire from the hip if it comes to that.

If you feel inadequate in that circumstance, you ought to train harder.

For the next bit, I'll admit I don't know every damned thing, but here it is:

I don't think there should ever be a situation where you should have to go eyes-off on someone you pulled over or walked up to, or whatever. None of that grab the info and go back to the car to check shit out. That's fucking crazy.

Definitely none of that 'here, lemme take your guns and go run your license to see if you have warrants'. That's amateur hour.

@Slash0311 - These are The types of things officers deal with on a daily basis so that the general public can keep a routine and ignor what's really going on around them.

That's a massive problem. No one should ignore a damned thing, and everyone should understand that bad fucking things can happen at any time. I think that is one of the root causes that's fucking with our lives today. The cops did such a great job trying to convince the people that they've got shit under control that people started to actually believe them. It's a fucking lie, outright.

I shit you not, if the Russians did some sneaky shit around Houston and wound up with thousands of armed assholes inside of 99 they could fuck a spot up, and every god damn cop in the area would rush there, then they'd be free to fuck up everything else, and it'd just be dumb lazy shits like me to remind them that not everyone got the call to go to 8 and 225, and we're just sitting here wondering why the fuck 30 police cars were rushing down the road at 2x the speedlimit. I don't count on the constant Apaches overhead to give a fuck about anything other than the assets they're tasked with protecting, and you bet your ass I don't want them to be, either. Fuckin 30mm raining hell down on my AO? Fuck that shit! I'll take my chances with the commies.

The world is fucking dangerous and everyone ought to appreciate that. Some folks may still refuse to be responsible for their own well-being, but that's to be expected.



@W54/XM-388 - If the police were actual decent public servants who were wanting to make sure everything was fine, I don't think anyone would have been able to fault them if they simply rolled up and politely explained that some butt hurt snowflake took exception to their display of freedom, but since they did, the police have to do a quick check to make sure you are law abiding citizens & not out to cause trouble, ask to check their ID, or run their name & then verify they were not prohibited persons or wanted for anything & then be on their way.

Yeah, I mean, that's the way it usually happens. These Olmos Park guys are not the norm.

@W54/XM-388 - If you have a right to carry weapons, then there is no excuse for the police absent any other evidence or threats to be threatening you with murder & punishing you with public humiliation.

No there is not an excuse. Even though shit got weird in this thread, I don't think anyone disagrees with this point. Further, I think it's clear that no one thought the Olmos Park PD did the right thing.

@Slash0311 - Again, the way the officers did things are certainly not how I've done things without some obvious crime being commuted and I think they took the bait on this one.

I really wish everyone had paid more attention to this.

@CrazyHorse_mk14 - My interpretation of this laws scope is to prevent say a hunter from facing crimes for carrying his deer rig down the street to the hunting grounds.

While that's a modern use for it, the original intent had to do with a threat on folks that weren't gonna back down for shit. It's perfectly fine if some faggot lets some of your neighbors know that because they're XYZ he's gonna come and kill 'em later, and for that whole neighborhood to congregate in the streets in a big, solidified fuck you to whoever would oppose them. AFAIK, it's never been illegal in Texas history to open carry a long gun. Even the 30.07 doesn't mean shit when it comes to open carrying a long gun.

Stores can ask you to leave, but that's it. Hell, I'm pretty sure you can carry a long gun into a liquor store in Texas, too.

@LRI - Crap like this is how we get new, restrictive state laws passed. Watch.

I think maybe 'manner calculated to alarm' may be rehashed a bit, as I could see a chest rig being 'alarming' to people. Really, though... I doubt any of that with Abbot as Governor. That guy needs to be cloned 1000x now, and with enough left over to clone him forever thereafter.

@W54/XM-388 - What happens when you know you are not breaking the law and are acting in a lawful manner, but then the police show up & want to hassle you, humiliate you, arrest you for something that is perfectly legal, or when they have no evidence of any criminal activity or wrong doing. Either the Police are ignorant of the law or they purposely don't care.

Well, you get FUCKED is what happens.

This is Georgia, not Texas, but we have similar DRE type shit down here as well. I admit that this isn't PURELY 'no evidence', but jesus, man, chick rolled over the line a little. That's not the same as chick just coughed her guts out on some killer weed and got behind the wheel.



@Slash0311 - I'm not going to say that doesn't happen. As to the question of "what then" comply and let your attorney have a field day in court.

This is bullshit, though. The folks in the video above had their lives turned up-side-fucking-down for no goddamn reason other than an officer was CERTAIN they were smoking the dope (which they weren't). No recourse on the officers. Lot sof expense to the 'defendants'. Ultimately the main ass in the video resigned in lieu of being fired because he fucked up too many times, but come on, a whole year out of your life fighting some trumped up charges?? That is not the American way, not even a little bit. One of those people actually had a plea deal put in front of them, FOR DOING NOTHING wrong. What the fuck??!! Another, their charges only got dropped because the OFFICER COULDN'T REMEMBER HIS OWN DAMN STORY 5 months later.


@ArmyJerry - Cops need to read and understand the constitution and respect their fellow citizens then they might get some respect back.

Yes they do. Some do,, some don't. I don't know what to do about that, other than to encourage decent officers that give a shit about the BOR to have GOOD conversations with their peers and brass and make sure the slackers learn their place in the world is not to arrest the most people or otherwise game the system, and is instead to keep order in this place, and throw the right people in jail. What do you do in a situation where the brass is incessantly ramming policy that fucks over normal folks? I don't have that answer, either. I would like for this conversation to go off in that direction.


@Slash0311 - In my example, I don't say "running" away from the robbery. Let just say that it was some random joe walking In the same area as the gun shop. Would an officer not be able to make contact with that person without harassing him?

Absolutely. I'd want you to do it, too. Of all the folks replying in this thread, you're probably one of the best to be out there doing that. I'm really glad you chimed in and tossed your handful of pennies and all of that.

@ArmyJerry - Avoid contact at at all costs, they are armed agents of the state, nothing good comes from any interaction with them.

Fucked up as it is, that is my position more and more each day. I've had a handful of run-ins with the law completely accidentally where I did not like the experience one bit. From shit like license plate lights being out and the officers wanting to detain me and search my shit, to filling up gas and having half the PD roll up on me thinking I stole shit from a Lowe's and wanting to detain me and search my shit. There are a lot of officers out there that don't seem to give a fuck at all about people, and that is reason enough for me to never want to have any dealings with them ever. Just takes one royal asshole to end up like the dude on his front porch getting executed, or the dude on the hotel floor getting executed, and you're gone forever.

This is not the way it should be, though, and it's something I want to do with my life, to rectify that. The way I see it, it's a feed-back loop of pussies wanting the police to do more for them and police wanting to do more for the pussies, when the police are already doing too much. The thing I didn't mention there was how the lawyers effect this whole situation. I don't know much about that, but it's clear there's an issue there when a bunch of like-minded officers on a PRS board are saying shit like, 'well what if I didn't', 'when it is ok to', etc. I think when it gets to that point, common sense is not in control, discretion is not in control, and fear is. Fear of lawsuits, fear of being fired, fear of whatever... That's not a good thing.

This is all not to say that I haven't had good experiences with officers, because I have. This is to say that my bad experiences with officers sucked so much that I don't really want to have any interaction with officers ever again, because they're a force that's capable of fucking up my life permanently and they can do so in the flimsiest of circumstances with little or no regard for me as a human being, and without any concern or remorse.

Of course, that'd never get in the way of me having a conversation with an officer whenever the fuck I felt like it, to discuss shit like this face to face. Risks be damned =)

@Veer_G/@mcameron - You keep on trying to toss me that same poor repressed minority herring, like I'm a penguin or something.

Man, you do that to yourself. You realize that, right? The threads you post where some Sikh was mistaken for a muslim or whatever? You toss yourself in with the herrings.

@mcameron - i dont give a fuck if some liberal cunt gets offended......they are always offended.

Fuck yes they are always offended. How can society figure out how to ignore liberals? If all the latest protests have shown anything, it is that their opinions mean absolutely nothing and can be discarded as are the wants and whims of a toddler.

@Dthomas3523 - If I am called for someone walking down the street with a rifle, I roll up on him, ask them how they are doing, and if I can see an ID, they tell me to fuck off, and nothing else appears out of the ordinary.....yep, I get back in my unit and observe them from a public location until I’m satisfied there’s no danger to anyone. It’s legal for them to open carry in public and it’s legal for me to keep an eye on them in public.

Awesome.

@Slash0311 - As to your point of the Muslim, yes. If someone called, I would go initiate contact there as well. If that person's actions continued after i told them to stop, yes again. Disorderly conduct would apply.

You realize it's rude and disrespectful as hell to interrupt a muslim while he's praying, right? Not saying you wouldn't wait patiently while the dude does his ups and downs on his knees like some girl getting it in the ass, but asking honestly.. Would you really interrupt a muslim praying because someone called 911 on him for praying?

@Dthomas3523 - You may be legally open carrying, but if your actions are found to be that you did so in a way to cause a public nuisance or disturbance, now you are doing something possibly illegal.

In TX, it's pretty damned clear about a disturbance charge. If you're carrying in a way calculated to alarm, that's a crime. Otherwise, it's not.



Furthermore, why the fuck didn't these guys get the roll up and draw down treatment when they were marching down 6th street in Austin with shotguns, AKs, SKS, AR15s, hi-points, etc at the ready while shouting "OINK OINK BANG BANG FUCK THE PIGS AND EVERYONEAT FUCKS WIT 'EM"?

As we can see, even if you are carrying in a way calculated to alarm like these assholes, you may still not be arrested.

@Dthomas3523 - So, if the SCOTUS rules on the interpretation of the Constitution and I am within that ruling, I am ABSOLUTELY upholding the Constitution that I swore and oath to.

Come on, man... Heller was 5/4 in favor. What if it had been 3/6 against? What if they'd ruled that day that the RKBA did not apply to individuals? That's clearly in the fucking face of the original intent. Are you saying you'd be fine given that the SCOTUS ruled it was constitutionally not protected that individuals had a right at all to keep and bear arms, and you'd enforce that shit with a clear concience if your state/whatever told you to?


@Dthomas3523 - What I have a bit of an issue was how they went about it. They put those cops in a very bad position. Had anything gone slightly wrong on their (Grisham) end, they would likely be dead. He took the protest to the police, and not to the municipal government like he should have.

The cops put themselves in a bad position. There are good ways and bad ways to do things. They picked a bad way. Grisham took the issue to everyone at once, not just the police. Because the police responded the way they did, we're where we're at now, with the ordnance being repealed and lawsuits being filed. What comes next is anybody's guess.

@CrazyHorse_mk14 - Cam, I think your just having a hard time accepting the situation in today’s America. Your views are entirely agreeable and ring of the true intentions of the founding fathers. Would even go as far to say that they represent the idealistic American way.

For sure, mcameron has a potty mouth and a shit temper. He coats his gold in all kinds of crap most folks won't take the time to separate out.

@mcameron - Calm the fuck down. Your opinon shouldn't be relegated to the dustin of bullshittery.


That is one of the all time great Hide Posts. I even agree with a lot of it.. I do apologize for some of my attitude, sometimes ya just get tired.
 
I liked QnD's response. Obviously a lot of thought and effort went into that.

As to my comment about removing weapons, let me clarify that. I've been on calls where I did not remove them from the person I was dealing with. One example was a guy had a garage gone through so he armed himself. Not a problem for me at all. Another example was a road rage where we were told a guy pulled and pointed a gun. He was in cuffs and the gun was removed from his vehicle. The primary officer cut him loose as the caller didn't want to follow thru with a statement.

As to the Muslim issue. I always try to be respectful of anyone I deal with but my job is to make contact with whomever was called on. (The example that was tossed to me was if I'd bother a Muslim if we got a call on them) I literally had to walk into a Hindu temple during their service due to a triggered alarm. An elder say me and came to speak to me. Most people didn't know I was even there. Another time I had to go into a Christian church for a death notification. Again, an elder saw me and was able to find the person I needed to speak to. It's all part of a job that's not always easy.

Last one I wanted to comment on was field day in court and folks having their lives turned upside down. I certainly won't say that every officer gets "it right" every time. Mistakes happen and some cops flat out screw the pooch. My only point was that arguing on the side of the road does no one any good. It just pisses off the officer to help things go from bad to worse. My advise to anyone being wrongly accused: comply with the officer. Calmly (CALMLY, not yelling or talking over the officer) state your case. Possibly ask for a Sergeant to come to the scene. If the officer continues with a wring decision, that's what courts are for. Or for a formal complaint with the department. I've been amazed at how many people call in and bitch about this officer or that officer but refuse to file a formal complaint.

Again. Thanx to those keeping a good discussion here with reasonable conversation and debate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: QuickNDirty
You know what, after a couple sips of whiskey and quick re-read of this thread, and some self-reflection... It turned out to be really educational.

After a bunch more sips, I decided to put this monstrosity together.

This is the shit I felt I should weigh in on, because it's important, and because no one else did in a way I found satisfactory.

...

@Veer_G/@mcameron - You keep on trying to toss me that same poor repressed minority herring, like I'm a penguin or something.

Man, you do that to yourself. You realize that, right? The threads you post where some Sikh was mistaken for a muslim or whatever? You toss yourself in with the herrings.

Completely out of context. And if I were to try and OC a rifle, you'd be reading my obituary.
 
In the context of the Police wanting to come over & and ask some questions when something draws their attention,
I think a lot of it comes down to the specific level of level headedness / assholeishness / courtesy / comfort / approach actions, on the sides of both parties.

I've had personal experience with the police rolling up to ask what I was doing. Police doing their standard night patrols of the neighborhood.
They were non-threatening, respectful & asking for information. I was polite and helpful and explained what I was doing. We then both went about our respective business without incident or any ill will / hurt feelings. I was just out a couple minutes of my time.

Now if either one of us had been wanting to be a badass then it may have gotten more involved and I'm sure possibly butthurts and lawsuits may have resulted. I'm pretty sure if I had decided to be an ass and refused to talk to them or anything, then things would have escalated a bit.

Kind of the same at the Airport, I've had the more personal attention from the TSA, and I was just like, sure go right ahead with your more detailed pat down, and they were also not having a bad day, so pat down complete everybody continue on, just mild annoyment and everybody continues on their day without ill feelings. Some people have had "horrific" experiences in the same situation.

A lot depends on how the police approach things & how citizens respond.
Basically following the old Bible verse "A soft answer turneth away wrath, but grievous words stir up anger"

Possibly both LE and Citizens need to remember it.
 
Agreed. I'm also of the opinion that LE should still maintain our composure even when people were are interacting with don't. Obviously weapons (depending on the situation) may escalate the initial encounter, but getting huffed and puffed up about it won't change that. If it gets to the point you don't feel safe, you shouldn't be arguing with a subject anyway. Sometimes LEOs let the interaction get away from them when either politeness or being able to articulate their position calmly would have kept the subject from escalating.
 
  • Like
Reactions: W54/XM-388