I am not. There are online legal dictionaries, I do not need to provide a definition of harm, it is a ridiculous ploy.
Play stupid games. Win stupid prizes.
- Thread starter 101st
- Start date
Again. I ask. What makes speeding an arrestable offense?If that's your take on what I wrote, this will almost certainly help you.... As was said, your argument is over.
Hooked on Phonics | Learn to Read - Hooked on Phonics
www.hookedonphonics.com
Way to many pages for me to read here. I haven't the time as I've already consumed my morning on the hide.
I will say this, the deputy was an enraged asshole with something to prove while wearing his costume.
That said, dude should have remained in his truck, if he really knew all his rights. He complied for an arrest by exiting his vehicle. The 4th plays a hand here. Instead, dude gets out letting himself be escalated into further aggravation. Lastly, decides to put the deputies life in danger by suffocation via strangling.
Put an armed mans life in jeopardy. Fucking brilliant. He got the ultimate prize.
He could have remained in the vehicle and accepted the irate deputies' traffic violation.
Stupid was fixed here.
FWIW, I hope the deputy has remorse for his actions as well
I will say this, the deputy was an enraged asshole with something to prove while wearing his costume.
That said, dude should have remained in his truck, if he really knew all his rights. He complied for an arrest by exiting his vehicle. The 4th plays a hand here. Instead, dude gets out letting himself be escalated into further aggravation. Lastly, decides to put the deputies life in danger by suffocation via strangling.
Put an armed mans life in jeopardy. Fucking brilliant. He got the ultimate prize.
He could have remained in the vehicle and accepted the irate deputies' traffic violation.
Stupid was fixed here.
FWIW, I hope the deputy has remorse for his actions as well
Last edited:
I told you several posts ago. You need to read more than you type. You'll be far better off than you are pushing a stupid position.
Here I just copied and pasted what you said for the second time you state there should NOT be any penalty if no one has been hurt or property damage. Perhaps you forgot what you just wrote in the last 15 minutes.
Last edited:
Clearly you've dodged the question and intent.
This entire thread is a case study in the difficulties of either actor being part of the problem and most can't grasp.
A mirror of lack of depth of thought and conclusion.
There be windmills yet to slay.
R
There was no property damage or physical injury. A crime has to be committed for a legal arrest.
A crime consists of property damage or physical injury.
Speeding is not a crime, Reckless driving as well.
Unfucking believable. Absolutely no where does it say that there should be NO penalty.
It says that it should not be an arrestable offense.
Read it really slow this time. As a matter of fact in another post of mine I stated that there's already a varying penalty for the offense.
I have found the bottom of the hide's intellect.
I will help you as you seem to have forgotten what you said.
Nobody is harmed by someone stepping over the border. None. At all. Ever. Just as there is with speeding. Yet you want them arrested. But someone driving at a reckless speed is immune from arrest because why? Both crimes pose POTENTIAL harm. And speeding involves potential fatalities, much much worse. How is one arrest ok and the other not? By your argument, in both cases we should wait until actual harm is caused.
Better check your verbage.
Taken into custody for deportation. Arrested for a traffic infraction.
I'm out. There's truth to that saying about arguing with idiots. I've been drug down as far as I care to go.
Don't forget to get your booster!!! It's for your safety and Grandma's!!
Here is what you fail to grasp:
You solely don’t get to choose what laws you are going to obey. If a 100+, which is reckless driving IS ON THE BOOKS as an arrestable offense, then that person goes to jail, it just doesn’t matter what you or I think, it’s the way it is, legally as an enforceable offense. It does not matter what you think as a singular person… That is not how it works other than in your head.
Go back and listen to the video where the officer says it is an arrestable offense and that is because it is a crime in Georgia. Maybe not in the state where you live, but in GA where this happened it is an arrestable offense…
This is the most succinct and amazing response I’ve read since the invention of the internet.
I mean that with all seriousness and am not being a smart ass.
Tis not.
The bill of rights resides in the constitution.
The supreme law of the land.
EDIT: I did note that when I did watch. I do not agree to it.
Know your rights and stand on them.
Enforcement
The Enforcement Division manages the enforcement initiatives and components through which ERO identifies and arrests noncitizens subject to removal from the U.S.:
Wow. You really need to brush up a bit there. That is by far the most uneducated thing I have seen posted on this site. And THAT is saying something.
It’s clear after four pages of being opposed you just want to be argumentative.
In this thread, concerning this stop in GA, you have not posted a single time, where the guy stopped going in excess of 100+ did anything wrong. You have beat to death that he was wrongfully incarcerated for 16 years and that somehow gives him a pass going forward to NOT obey laws or permit himself to be arrested as he won’t get justice this time or anytime.
You do not acknowledge that he got out of his truck and told the officer he wasn’t going to follow any of his instructions, he was progressively warned three times to comply - and you never concede he was in the wrong by failing to comply with those three instructions. So in this encounter you are clear that he should not be subject to any laws or penalties for any of his choices starting with reckless driving (100+ mph) or not complying with the three commands from the officer. But you are not going to agree with what I’ve just written because you have not agreed with rational opposition to your views in fours pages of this thread of people numbering in the double digits in posts that oppose your views.
Congrats on your full indoctrination.
PS .... did you read my quote on your post from the other thread? Where you spoke of united?
Yea, Ima dumb fawker.
You need to change your name to the Artless Dodger.
In post 35 you asked me 5 questions.
In post 36 I asked some clarity questions, mistakingly believing we were having an adult conversation.
In post 38 you accused me of dodging the question.
In post 68 I responded and asked you to answer the questions.
In post 73 you again accused me of dodging your question.
So in post 92 I responded to your questions and restated my request for your answers. Take a close look, I got really specific.
You continue to post ridiculous and invalid comparisons.
I answered your questions, line for line. Heck, I even numbered them. When will you answer my questions?
Be a man. Nut up or shut up.
(Note to the board: he’s gonna get squirrely and make up some excuse, just watch.)
P
Please do enlighten everyone here how non-citizens have no constitutional rights.
THe fact is these are United States. The fact that there are many disagreements and arguments about policies does not change that. You have a right to your opinion as to how disparate these opinions are, but that is your opinion. Nothing more. I did not reply in the other thread as your statement did not warrant one.
Minor correction......I do get to choose which laws I will obey and which ones I'm not.
I make the choice based on the expected likelihood of getting caught and the most likely consequences if I do.
I see we have some sovereign citizens here
He had three prior convictions for armed robbery, with the third conviction resulting in a life sentence before it was vacated/reversed on appeal and he was released. It was determined he was "wrongfully convicted."
I am inclined to believe he was wrongfully exonerated. It was established he did two armed robberies and if you watch and listen to the footage, he is trying to throttle the cop while saying, "yeah bitch, yeah bitch!" just before he died.
So he was properly convicted of two armed robberies, "wrongfully" convicted of a third armed robbery, and was shot while trying to murder a deputy. He wasn't an upstanding citizen and he won't be missed by anybody of consequence.
Incidentally, given how he lived, he probably did the third armed robbery and plenty of other crimes they simply never charged him with. He was a lifelong career violent criminal and he died as he lived, violently.
It is honestly for the best that he died before he was able to resume his lifelong crime spree and probably progress to killing somebody.
Assuming he was wrongfully convicted of the third armed robbery, he was rightly convicted of the first two armed robberies. He made a living by putting guns to people to take their stuff. I would say his karma finally caught up with him.
I would say no charges for the officer and if I were his superior I would simply refer him to wrestling/grappling, because he essentially handed that guy the opportunity to get double under-hooks and he didn't show any real talent for grappling, and fortunately for him he was able to draw and use his pistol from a position where he could have really been clobbered. If the suspect had been an actual trained grappler/wrestler instead of just a brawler who seemed to have a sense of "I should get double under-hooks" and knew what to do with the position after he got there, the officer would probably be dead.
Last edited:
I honestly don't care if he was wrongfully convicted the third time. It is of no moral consequence. He was duly and rightly convicted of two armed robberies and arrested for a third. He wasn't somebody I would advocate for.
The people being advocated for by "Innocence Project" are virtually never clean wrongfully convicted first offenders with great backgrounds, they are almost always guys with 3-10 felony priors and their position is "well I did that rape, I did that burglary, I dealt crack, I shot a guy and wounded him in a street robbery, but I didn't do this liquor store robbery and murder, I am innocent, I don't belong in prison."
He wasn't a guy with zero priors, no history, "at the wrong place at the wrong time, wrongfully identified by a half-blind woman" he was a hardened criminal picked out of a lineup by the victims from the store.
I have zero sympathy for a lifelong criminal who was a dedicated armed robber in his teens and 20s, even if he was wrongfully convicted in ONE instance along the way.
He died trying to murder a deputy sworn to uphold the law. I am glad the deputy is okay. I will sleep fine tonight knowing that the deputy's would-be killer was shot and is dead.
My evidence is just basic rationalism and reasoning that the man did two prior armed robberies, was arrested in connection with a third, was identified by eye witnesses (victims) who were the people he robbed, and within several years of being released he violently attacked and tried to murder a police officer.
It doesn't require a suspension of reason and belief to conclude he probably did that third armed robbery. It requires a suspension of reason and belief to conclude he didn't do that third armed robbery and he wasn't capable of such things.
Granted it isn't admissible per the rules of evidence [character cannot be proven by evidence of specific acts, whether good or bad] to say, "he did armed robberies in the past so he probably did this one, it is in keeping with his character as an armed robber" but on the street, in the real world, we all have an intuitive understanding, "This guy was living a life dedicated to violent crime, was duly convicted of two armed robberies and probably did other armed robberies as well."
Nobody wakes up one day, John Q Model Citizen, does a few armed robberies in a vacuum without any lead up, and then goes back to being John Q Model Citizen.
If you're being arrested for armed robberies in your late teens and early 20s, you probably began with shoplifting, breaking and entering into stores and bars, stealing from cars, purse snatching, burglaries, before moving up to the big leagues and sticking a pistol in the face of a liquor store clerk or a gas station attendant. I have watched it play out time and time again, watching somebody who was a basically decent kid at 13-14, begin to shoplift and do vandalism at 15-16 and then moving on to grand larceny and felony assault by 19-20.
I don't have any slum dunk smoking gun "ah ha he absolutely did the third armed robbery and his conviction should never have been overturned" but I do know for certain he was a useless drain on society and nobody is going to miss him, even his mother probably just sees him as dollar signs via a lawsuit against the police department. If she had genuine care and concern for him she would have raised him better and he wouldn't have come to this end.
Sounds like you want to take up a collection for his mother and pay the legal fees of his estate and help pursue legal action against the deputy.
Does it upset you that the deputy went home to his family that night?
I think a BLM riot mob might be mobilizing somewhere, get your mask and prepare your molotov, you are the resistance.
I see decent people watching their businesses collapse, families falling on hard times, people struggling to gas their cars to get to work to work two honest jobs, I'm not going to shed a tear or lose sleep over a piece of trash who was justifiably shot while he was violently resisting arrest and trying to murder a deputy, particularly when that piece of trash had lived a life of violent crime leading up to that point.
When Leonard Cure zips down the road at 100 mph and sticks a gun in your daughter's face during a robbery, call a social worker, call a sovereign citizen militia, or call a crack head.
I would have sentenced him to hang after the first or second armed robbery, how does that grab you? Which robbery do you think he deserved a second chance over? The first one or the second? How many second chances do you get before it isn't a second chance?
Traditionally, at common law felonies used to be capital offenses. Burglary, kidnapping, rape, arson, robbery, were all hanging offenses.
So the deputy automatically knows, "oh, the guy I'm pulling over had it rough and just got out of prison after 16 years..."
I think the deputy knew, "this guy is trying to kill me, is trying to throttle me and is pushing against my neck while growling *yeah bitch, yeah bitch,* I better do something if I want to live."
How many times are you gonna post without addressing my questions?
You know you just look sillier and sillier each time, right?
P
You know you just look sillier and sillier each time, right?
P
At least he doesn't have to worry about being sentenced to prison for a crime he claims he didn't commit.
Now he finally got himself killed while attempting to commit what has proven to be his final crime.
You're on a sniper forum... If somebody is about to Ruby Ridge or Waco your daughter I would hope you would have the judgment, wisdom, knowledge, discernment, maturity, and skills to know how and when it is appropriate to escalate into a lethal force situation with a state agent.
Living on the side of a mountain in a cabin minding your own business when a squad of US Marshal ninjas swarm onto your property, shoot your dog, wound your friend, and shoot your son, it is time to get down to business...
On the side of a highway over a speeding ticket when you were actually in fact speeding, not so much so.
If Leonard Cure hadn't attempted to murder a police officer while violently resisting arrest for reckless operation, he would be alive and already bonded out of jail by now.
Here’s the thing. You will not admit that he did anything wrong. He got out of his vehicle defiant. Defied three commands from the officer. Tried to kill the officer and your answer to all this is speeding tickets are only in place to generate revenue and little if nothing to do with public safety.
So was the guy wrong to defy the cop three times and try to strangle the cop, saying “Yeah Bitch, Yeah Bitch? Or because the state gets revenue from tickets this guy gets to assault the cop and defy his commands? If so, your reasoning is cops go 90+ so no one should obey the laws…
You are just another type of bootlicker - to those that are anarchists and want to just tear everything down.
I was stopped by a sheriff’s deputy in September 2018 for apparently going 49 mph in a 35 mph zone within 300 feet of my house. I was returning from the hospital emergency room where I had been discharged and the pharmacy where I had filled my prescription.
I held my hands out the window with my license and concealed carry card and offered them to him when he approached. He asked me “where is your pistol?” and I said, “I have multiple pistols, one on my right hip and another in a compartment next to the steering wheel."
He said, “Do you know how fast you were going?”
I replied, “Well I’m a trial attorney and I know better than to make a party admission but no, I have no clue.”
He said, “You were going 49 miles per hour in a 35 mile per hour zone.”
I said, “I don’t know if I was or wasn’t, I honestly can’t say how fast I was going, I really don’t know, I’m exhausted and want to get home, if you say I was doing 49 then I probably was and it is entirely possibly.”
He then asked, “you seem very unfocused and confused, what is wrong with you?”
I said, “I was just discharged from the hospital, I am miserably ill and sick.” [severe flu and possible Lyme disease, Lyme disease tests ultimately came back negative]
He asked, “why are you even out right now?”
I then said, “I am literally coming back from the hospital. I have my discharge papers on the passenger seat next to my prescription from the pharmacy, and I’m going home to go to sleep, which incidentally if you check my address we are almost within eyesight of my house. If you want to see my discharge papers I can hand them to you.”
He then said, “Sir, are you aware you’re subject to a restraining order and can’t be in possession of a firearm, step out of the vehicle please, I’m going to take your guns.”
I said, “Okay, but respectfully officer, that isn’t correct, I am not subject to any restraining order, I am the protected party of a restraining order issued in my protection against a stalker who is restrained for my protection.”
I stepped out, he took and unloaded my pistols, and then I asked, “may I get the restraining order paperwork from my glove box and show you the time-stamped document with the court seal which clearly shows me as the petitioner and the other individual as the respondent?” he said, “yes, get your paperwork.”
I handed him the papers, he said he was going to call the court which he did, he then verified, “okay I either read the entry on the computer wrong or somebody entered it in wrong, the clerk just verified what you said, you’re not subject to a restraining order.”
He then returned both of my pistols to me.
During his securing and unloading of my second pistol [at the time he took it] he ejected the round from the chamber into the weeds by the side of the road and he wasn’t able to immediately find it. He now spent about four or five minutes looking for the cartridge, apologized that it was apparently lost, and I said, “I wouldn’t fret too much, it is just a single round of ammunition.”
He then said, “Well, I’m real sorry about that and the misunderstanding on the restraining order. I’m not going to give you a ticket because you’re almost home and you seem really ill, so you should probably just go home, take the medicine, and go to sleep. I hope you feel better and have a better day and are doing better tomorrow."
I said, “that has been my plan the whole time.”
The encounter then ended.
Nobody was killed, maimed, beaten, tazed, maced, or even arrested. It may have helped that I didn’t vault out of my vehicle and scream and shout, “you’re fucking wrong mother-fucker, ain’t no restraining order on me, I didn’t do shit! You ain’t taking shit!"
Imagine that, nobody was killed, I was calm, he let me explain my perspective on the misunderstanding, he looked at my papers, he contacted the court, he apologized for the mistake, returned my pistols to me, he even knelt down and tried to find my round of ammunition, and then he wished me well and told me to go home.
You live in a fantasy of falsehood absolutes. All cops drive 90 mph
Woops now the cops are driving a 100 mph… That we live in a police state if we obey the laws, you have so much bitterness and prejudice you cannot even admit when this guy tries to kill the cop that it was wrong.
I guess the point went over your head.
Since I was calm, didn't try to murder him, and I was polite, he listened to what I had to say, verified it, and I was on my way, alive and fine, and even without a ticket.
The late Mr. Leonard Cure might have exited his vehicle, spoken with the officer, said, "I probably was a bit heavy on the gas pedal, I'm not having a real great day today, you know, I did 16 years in prison and was released after my conviction was vacated, 16 years wasn't a real fun time, especially since I didn't do it, I was exonerated. I'm having a real bad day today and I just lost focus on how fast I was going. If you say I was going 100 mph, well I was sort of zoned out from stress and I just want to get home and see my mother."
The deputy might have responded by checking his driving record, seeing if there was a stack of tickets or a lack of tickets, and then wishing him well and advising "you better slow down or you are going to get yourself or somebody else killed and then you won't be seeing your mother."
"Every anarchist is a baffled dictator."
Benito Mussolini
We could have a discussion on the merits of "speed only" being primary offenses, arrestable offenses, or simply no offense at all, but I question your ability and willingness to participate in such a discussion in a civil, adult, mature manner based on your prior posts in this thread.
No it’s not my responsibility to convince you. You can try to convince the judge and/or jury when you get arrested for speeding as you call it when you are going 100+, which again in many states would be considered reckless which carries more severe penalties. Make sure and use your whataboutism with the judge/jury that the cops speed on duty and after they’re off and see how successful you are with your outcome.
You’re always going to excuse someone like this that tried to kill the cop and why? Because there are double standards, that the fallen world we live in. I wished it wasn’t that way, but it is this way and your whataboutism is just going to make it harder for you and you allow it to manifest when you get stopped and that works against you.
The officer was clearly in the wrong.
How dare you comply with his incorrect, yet lawful, commands without bluster, threats, or violence? Do you not realize that it is your duty as a citizen to defy these orders (because the officer was incorrect), instigate violence, and die as a result?
What were you thinking?
Get in the boxcar, bootlicker.
P
Ah yes, famous philosopher....Benito Mussolini....
Funny because to date no one has told me why if it's "so dangerous to speed" why cops are doing it regularly
But sure, I'm the one not willing to engage
Post 225, dodger.
P
I had a cop show up all fired up and nutso over a traffic ticket (7 over).
ETA: All fired up and nutso is a) talking to himself, angrily, in between talking to me about the stop and b) continually resting his hand on his pistol during the stop and then taking it off as if the grip of the thing was hot and burned him.
I asked if he was having a mental health crisis.
When he returned to his car I called 911 and said I had been stopped by an officer in car 117 who seemed to be having a mental health crisis and was acting recklessly, indicating he might just open fire for no reason.
I had my window down and heard dispatch on his radio call for more cars to respond to the traffic stop and that the officer on the scene might be having a mental breakdown. He tried to write me a court summons ticket but his supervisor showed up and corrected the issue.
ETA: All fired up and nutso is a) talking to himself, angrily, in between talking to me about the stop and b) continually resting his hand on his pistol during the stop and then taking it off as if the grip of the thing was hot and burned him.
I asked if he was having a mental health crisis.
When he returned to his car I called 911 and said I had been stopped by an officer in car 117 who seemed to be having a mental health crisis and was acting recklessly, indicating he might just open fire for no reason.
I had my window down and heard dispatch on his radio call for more cars to respond to the traffic stop and that the officer on the scene might be having a mental breakdown. He tried to write me a court summons ticket but his supervisor showed up and corrected the issue.
Last edited:
Similar threads
