Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The United City States of ....

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Nichols
    replied
    Originally posted by Savez View Post
    I say let them have their sanctuary cities. An if states like California want to be a socialist utopia, let 'em. The Federal government has way too much power.
    The OP quote:

    "mayors of New York City and Chicago say they will protect their citizens"

    They are talking about illegal immigrants, not citizens. Until we have voter ID laws........letting them have their sanctuary cities has an impact on the federal government.

    Here is a map of sanctuary cities in the US:

    http://cis.org/Sanctuary-Cities-Map

    Here are the county election results:

    http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/...ymaprb1024.png

    Leave a comment:


  • MarkV
    replied
    Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post


    Do they never take the time to think of an excuse?

    We get this one a lot:

    "Where you going?'

    "A friend's house."

    "What's your friend's name?"

    "Ahhh....Brad."

    "Brad what?"

    "Ahhhhh....I just know him as Brad."

    "OK. Look, I'll give you a ride since its cold out tonight. Where does Brad live?"

    "Ahhhhh....I just know how to get there, not the address."

    "OK, we can find it. What does Brad look like?"

    "Ahhhhh...
    There is a description of an escaped British POW having a similar conversation with a larger German policeman and leading him around for several hours before the pfennig dropped

    Leave a comment:


  • Arnold J Rimmer
    replied
    Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post
    That's awesome. We got a guy for looting after the hurricane.....he had a trailer load of 4 wheelers, tools, a pot plant, and a bunch of guns.....'so, whatcha doin'.....'helping this guy move'.....'at 2am with the power out?'.......


    Do they never take the time to think of an excuse?

    We get this one a lot:

    "Where you going?'

    "A friend's house."

    "What's your friend's name?"

    "Ahhh....Brad."

    "Brad what?"

    "Ahhhhh....I just know him as Brad."

    "OK. Look, I'll give you a ride since its cold out tonight. Where does Brad live?"

    "Ahhhhh....I just know how to get there, not the address."

    "OK, we can find it. What does Brad look like?"

    "Ahhhhh...

    Leave a comment:


  • MarkV
    replied
    As more cars get black boxes as standard here insurance companies are beginning to link the premium to the data they provide over driving style. Some are talking about including the use of the seat belt in this. Don't buckle up = greater risk of sustaining injury = increased premium.

    Leave a comment:


  • TacCovert4
    replied
    Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
    Very true.

    No seatbelt, ever?

    Here we have click it or ticket programs.

    We have them too. However, between the issues of working for a Sheriff (they tend to take a dim view of traffic....gets them lots of complaints), and having all the other traffic laws to work with, I just don't ever get around to seat belts. Now, child safety seats, that's something I'm merciless on.....your 2 year old can't make a decision to put their seatbelt on.

    But being municipal we tend to write a lot more traffic. Back in my street days it was the way you kept heat on the maggots and got to at least eyeball their car interiors.

    I pull a lot of cars, but I tend to write my tickets on registration or license violations....simple and easy and avoids all sorts of questions and court dates. And yeah, nothing like hammering an area that's had crime problems to get acquainted with who's also working the area.....and letting them know to sod off because you're there.

    When I was a street supervisor my rule was that after 10pm and before 4:30 AM if it moved on a residential street, it got stopped. The car burglars had to move their loot, after all.

    Unfortunately, 75-150 square mile sections really aren't conducive to that. I tend to work on the entrances and exits to the municipalities, hammer the likely dope dealer routes and the routes between the areas where more of the criminal class lives and where the other neighborhoods are.

    One stop I made in the wee hours, I pulled a guy over for no light on his LP. I make contact, and there is a cash register without a drawer in his back seat.

    So I ask, "What is that in your back seat?'

    He didn't even blink. "A TV."

    Thank you for the PC, moron.
    That's awesome. We got a guy for looting after the hurricane.....he had a trailer load of 4 wheelers, tools, a pot plant, and a bunch of guns.....'so, whatcha doin'.....'helping this guy move'.....'at 2am with the power out?'.......

    Leave a comment:


  • Arnold J Rimmer
    replied
    Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post
    Agreed. This is the actual rub. Even a single officer refusing to enforce certain specific laws (for instance I've never written a seatbelt ticket, I have better things to do than go hunting for them) is an outlier and won't even statistically show. But an agency refusing to enforce certain laws wholesale because of the opinions of their political masters, that's a problem. Like when NC's Attorney General was telling DAs which charges to just drop wholesale because he didn't like the legislature or governor....that was a real problem.
    Very true.

    No seatbelt, ever?

    Here we have click it or ticket programs.

    But being municipal we tend to write a lot more traffic. Back in my street days it was the way you kept heat on the maggots and got to at least eyeball their car interiors.

    When I was a street supervisor my rule was that after 10pm and before 4:30 AM if it moved on a residential street, it got stopped. The car burglars had to move their loot, after all.

    One stop I made in the wee hours, I pulled a guy over for no light on his LP. I make contact, and there is a cash register without a drawer in his back seat.

    So I ask, "What is that in your back seat?'

    He didn't even blink. "A TV."

    Thank you for the PC, moron.

    Leave a comment:


  • TacCovert4
    replied
    Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post

    Every LEO has every right to decide which statutes to take action on, and those they do not. The legal term is officer discretion. There is a variety of wriggle room between states, but not much. In Texas the only time you have to make a warrantless arrest involves protective orders. There are duties to act, duties to report, and so forth. But to make a warrant-less arrest? That is an officer's discretion. Dates back even before your time.

    Precisely. In NC you are only required to make a warrantless arrest for Domestic Violence where there are visible signs, or protective orders. This isn't saying that we don't make a lot more On View arrests than that, only that we're not absolutely required to. And in a lot of cases, you opt to not make the on view, and go to the Magistrate for the Warrant first.....especially if the case is a bit odd or you have any doubts about your probable cause. Because it's not only embarrassing, it's potentially a civil liability for you to arrest someone without a warrant and then the magistrate does not find probable cause.

    Not to mention the cases where you have an offence, say trespassing, but you recognize that the subject has dementia, so you use your discretion to NOT enforce that misdemeanor and instead get the elderly home.


    Prosecutors decide what cases they will prosecute, which they will accept a plea, which they will decline to prosecute.

    And more to the point, they will decide without the LEOs input most of the time. The sheer size of the court calendar dictates that most cases must be either dropped or plead. And if the defendant isn't willing to plead guilty as charged, then the prosecutor has to decide whether to drop it, offer a lesser offence, or be willing to take it to trial.....the latter almost never happens except for DWIs, Domestic Violence, and Felonies in my experience.

    Grand Juries decide which cases they will bill, and which they will no-bill.

    Yep. Though I will admit that the old adage about Grand Juries indicting a sandwich does have a grain of truth to it. You rarely get a Grand Jury that asks too many questions. But that's the way the cookie crumbles when you put 12 civilians in a room and tell them to decide if I have enough to go to trial........and none of those 12 have legal experience.

    Judges decide which cases they will try, and which they dismiss.

    And so forth. The entire system is built upon people choosing what the circumstances warrant.

    The issue arises when agencies decide as a matter of policy that they will not enforce. That is an entirely different situation.
    Agreed. This is the actual rub. Even a single officer refusing to enforce certain specific laws (for instance I've never written a seatbelt ticket, I have better things to do than go hunting for them) is an outlier and won't even statistically show. But an agency refusing to enforce certain laws wholesale because of the opinions of their political masters, that's a problem. Like when NC's Attorney General was telling DAs which charges to just drop wholesale because he didn't like the legislature or governor....that was a real problem.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arnold J Rimmer
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    BS. Those laws were passed for a reason and you know it...but let's allow our soldiers to decide what orders they will follow.

    Can you define anarchy?
    The same bodies that passed the laws approved officer discretion.

    You probably missed the news because it got sorted out and codified about the time you were putting down the Moros in the Philippines, but that is the law of the land.

    That is how the system works. And it has absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand, as I noted in the last line of my post. You are confusing two wildly separate situations.

    EDIT: Tac beat me to it.

    Leave a comment:


  • TacCovert4
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    Exactly, and by refusing to follow the laws about illegals, you have made yourself part of the problem rather than part of the solution, and lost all respect in the process.

    A LEO who cherry picks his laws has no value to society; rather, that person is a potential danger to all.

    Imagine if we soldiers pulled a stunt like that.
    Well.....Soldiers ARE Federal employees. But Military Police doesn't enforce US Code....they enforce the UCMJ.

    Until I get sworn as a Federal Officer, I am Legally UNABLE to enforce US Code.

    I'm sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States and of NC. And to enforce the laws of the State of NC. Neither Constitution has any provisions that really require 'enforcement', aside from not violating them and acknowledging a duty to resist the violation of them.

    So that leaves laws, or in my case US Code and the North Carolina General Statutes.

    Like I said before, I'm not a Federal Law Enforcement Officer. I can be called to testify in Federal Court, but I cannot go before a Federal Magistrate and press charges, I can't go to a US Attorney and seek a Federal Indictment. I Cannot Legally Enforce the US Code.

    Just as I am no longer in the Marine Corps, and cannot legally enforce any provisions of the UCMJ. Just like you're no longer in the US Army and cannot enforce any provisions of the UCMJ either.

    I am, however, a certified and sworn LEO in NC. Therefore I enforce the NC General Statutes. Many of which are modeled to parallel US Code so that State LEOs can take action. But they still aren't federal laws.

    To give an example. I bust you with a Sawed Off Shotgun. I'm going to arrest you for "Possession of a Weapon of Mass Destruction", which is the relevant NC General Statute. However, a sawed off shotgun is also a violation of Federal Law. An ATF agent could take notice of my arrest and obtain an indictment in Federal Court against you for the charge. At that time the DA would drop the State charges in favor of the US Attorney's Federal Charges. That's how the system works. If the USA or ATF agent didn't feel your case warrants Federal Attention, then it would go to trial in State court for the State charge.

    The misconception that you have is that all LEOs are sworn to enforce ALL laws. They aren't. Some, like me, are limited in territorial jurisdiction (County Sheriff's Office) but not in scope (I can enforce all State Criminal and Civil Laws). Some are limited in scope (for instance Department of Insurance agents....they deal with insurance fraud and related matters and don't have the subject matter jurisdiction to work traffic law). Some are limited in both (company police and railroad police are two that come to mind). You have your Federal Agencies, which can enforce Federal Law but not the laws of the 50 separate states (hence why you've never been pulled for speeding by the FBI). And you have officers in 50 states who can enforce the individual laws of their state but not federal law and not the laws of the other 49 states (fugitive warrants are a bit more complicated but we'll save that for another day). And finally you have 'dual sworn' officers, such as members of the USMS Violent Fugitive Task Force, who can enforce both state and federal laws.

    I hope this clears up this whole thing. You're really ranting about nothing. Unless you want all officers to be Federal cops, and all laws to be Federal laws....but then that's more like Britain.

    Leave a comment:


  • TacCovert4
    replied
    Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
    Question, can I bring charges against local and state officials as a private citizen?

    Seems like I can because I got the city council to back down over Prop. 8 when I threatened them with arrest...
    Depends on the offense, the state, and a few other things. Most states have some form of arrest or detention that citizens are authorized to do.

    In NC, you can't make a citizen's arrest....principally because you cannot transport them legally or obtain a Magistrate's Order for On View Arrest. However, you can detain until the arrival of LE. And you can go to the Magistrate and obtain a Warrant at which time the LEO can then transport.

    Now there are some exceptions. Felony offenses, well those are going to require an LEO (though as multilayered as LE is it's not hard to find an agency) to swear to the facts....or a DA to put it to Grand Jury. You also can't do Chapter 20 as a citizen (traffic law). And while you might technically can, I've never even heard of a Magistrate who has issued a warrant to a civilian against an LEO who was acting within the scope of their duties......so for practical purposes you can't threaten to lock up the cop who wrote you a ticket....though you can complain and really be a PITA to the IA folks until you get satisfaction.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
    Local and state agencies cannot enforce the Federal Code. Nor in many states can Federal agents enforce state law.

    Every LEO has every right to decide which statutes to take action on, and those they do not. The legal term is officer discretion. There is a variety of wriggle room between states, but not much. In Texas the only time you have to make a warrantless arrest involves protective orders. There are duties to act, duties to report, and so forth. But to make a warrant-less arrest? That is an officer's discretion. Dates back even before your time.

    Prosecutors decide what cases they will prosecute, which they will accept a plea, which they will decline to prosecute.

    Grand Juries decide which cases they will bill, and which they will no-bill.

    Judges decide which cases they will try, and which they dismiss.

    And so forth. The entire system is built upon people choosing what the circumstances warrant.

    The issue arises when agencies decide as a matter of policy that they will not enforce. That is an entirely different situation.
    BS. Those laws were passed for a reason and you know it...but let's allow our soldiers to decide what orders they will follow.

    Can you define anarchy?

    Leave a comment:


  • Mountain Man
    replied
    Originally posted by TacCovert4 View Post
    Technically I don't enforce any federal laws either. I haven't been sworn by a federal judge as a federal officer.

    I enforce my state laws and county ordinances.....typically the state has a law to match all the federal laws except interstate ones, some counterfeit stuff, and some regulatory compliance things. In those cases I just forward to the appropriate agency.
    Exactly, and by refusing to follow the laws about illegals, you have made yourself part of the problem rather than part of the solution, and lost all respect in the process.

    A LEO who cherry picks his laws has no value to society; rather, that person is a potential danger to all.

    Imagine if we soldiers pulled a stunt like that.

    Leave a comment:


  • Half Pint John
    replied
    Originally posted by Bwaha View Post
    Okay, I raised hell at a city counsel meeting and the the cops were confused as toward whether to obey my commands or the city counsel. (Myself as well.) But I just put on my DI voice and got them to comply.

    .
    Sure

    Leave a comment:


  • Bwaha
    replied
    Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
    Just remember that every time you pull a stunt like that, you are betting every material possession you own and possibly a stretch of your life.

    Every local and state agencies have built-in protections, whereas a private citizen has none.

    Like Russian Roulette, do not assume that because it worked out once that it will work out every time.

    Sovereign citizens have been learning the hard way and educating everyone on the pitfalls of this sort of thing.
    Oh they got their revenge. Caught me spraying lacquer without the appropriate spray booth. f***ers. I was building fine furniture. 120k fine. It was contained and under control.
    Last edited by Bwaha; 28 Jan 17, 03:19.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arnold J Rimmer
    replied
    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
    I'm surprised that you openly admit to refusing to enforce Federal laws. That does not speak well for your state, since nothing in the Constitution, law or anything else authorizes a state to act in such a fashion.

    No LEO has any right whatsoever to decide what laws will and will not be enforced. The moment you do, take off your uniform and get out of town. You have just placed yourself completely out of bounds and no citizen has to listen to anything you say any longer.

    If you don't obey the laws, no one else has to either.
    Local and state agencies cannot enforce the Federal Code. Nor in many states can Federal agents enforce state law.

    Every LEO has every right to decide which statutes to take action on, and those they do not. The legal term is officer discretion. There is a variety of wriggle room between states, but not much. In Texas the only time you have to make a warrantless arrest involves protective orders. There are duties to act, duties to report, and so forth. But to make a warrant-less arrest? That is an officer's discretion. Dates back even before your time.

    Prosecutors decide what cases they will prosecute, which they will accept a plea, which they will decline to prosecute.

    Grand Juries decide which cases they will bill, and which they will no-bill.

    Judges decide which cases they will try, and which they dismiss.

    And so forth. The entire system is built upon people choosing what the circumstances warrant.

    The issue arises when agencies decide as a matter of policy that they will not enforce. That is an entirely different situation.

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

  • Karri
    Prawn heads
    by Karri
    How do you cook them? How do you eat them?

    So far I've always just twisted them off, and discarded it along with the shells and such, only...
    Yesterday, 11:40
  • Jose50
    Thoughts on the US abandoning NATO
    by Jose50
    Now may be a good time for the NATO countries to start beefing up their materiel, personnel and alliances. There is a decided wave here in the US that...
    Yesterday, 08:41
  • Von Richter
    Sagittarius Rising...
    by Von Richter
    Just having a re-read of this book after it's stood for donkey's years on the bookshelf. Once again, within the first couple of pages, I'm transported...
    Yesterday, 01:19
Working...
X