Police misbehavior thread

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Fri Oct 30, 2015 1:18 am UTC

Why is (allegedly) kicking a police officer against the law?
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6888
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby ucim » Fri Oct 30, 2015 1:21 am UTC

SECTION 16-17-420. Disturbing schools; summary court jurisdiction at http://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t16c017.php wrote:It shall be unlawful (1) For any person willfully or unnecessarily (a) to interfere with or to disturb in any way on in any place the students or teachers of any school...
It's a real stretch of this to read into it the actions or inactions of students or teachers in the classroom. They are not disturbing the class, they are part of the class. This seems (clearly to me) to apply to outside folk who enter the school and do these acts in the school (though it could be argued that the later presence of a subparagraph that explicitly mentions entering nullifies this interpretation). However, a literal interpretation of this criminalizes interfering with any person, anywhere, who just happens to also be a student or teacher at any school or college in the state. That would include arguing with them in the grocery store.

That would also be a stretch, but to me (IANAL, thanfully!) no more a stretch than using it against the ordinary interactions of a classroom.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Heartfelt thanks from addams and from me - you really made a difference.

speising
Posts: 2363
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2012 4:54 pm UTC
Location: wien

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby speising » Fri Oct 30, 2015 1:32 am UTC

So, a student puts, during class, a boombox on the desk, turns it up to eleven and refuses to turn it off again. Is that not a disturbance?

User avatar
ucim
Posts: 6888
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 3:23 pm UTC
Location: The One True Thread

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby ucim » Fri Oct 30, 2015 3:03 am UTC

speising wrote:So, a student puts, during class, a boombox on the desk, turns it up to eleven and refuses to turn it off again. Is that not a disturbance?
Yes, it is a disturbance. The question is whether or not it is criminal disturbance, warranting police intervention and up to ninety days in prison. You can take it to eleven in either direction; it's clear we can't trust the state to make the right call (where "The state" includes the agents that run a government education institution and the armed enforcement stationed there to put down the revolt) as to whether an action is criminal disturbance. Heck, chewing gum is a disturbance too.

But I suppose the law was put in place just in case. Those are the laws that are most unsettling.

Jose
Order of the Sillies, Honoris Causam - bestowed by charlie_grumbles on NP 859 * OTTscar winner: Wordsmith - bestowed by yappobiscuts and the OTT on NP 1832 * Ecclesiastical Calendar of the Order of the Holy Contradiction * Heartfelt thanks from addams and from me - you really made a difference.

elasto
Posts: 3778
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby elasto » Fri Oct 30, 2015 3:06 am UTC

speising wrote:So, a student puts, during class, a boombox on the desk, turns it up to eleven and refuses to turn it off again. Is that not a disturbance?

It's obviously a disturbance and the boombox should be confiscated. However it shouldn't be a crime.

What should happen: The student should be invited to leave the classroom to discuss their behaviour with the principle - and if they refuse to leave, their parents should be called in and the student suspended or expelled dependent on their explanation of their behaviour.

What shouldn't happen: Violence is used against the student.

Isn't this all just common sense..?

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6813
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby sardia » Fri Oct 30, 2015 3:20 am UTC

elasto wrote:
speising wrote:So, a student puts, during class, a boombox on the desk, turns it up to eleven and refuses to turn it off again. Is that not a disturbance?

It's obviously a disturbance and the boombox should be confiscated. However it shouldn't be a crime.

What should happen: The student should be invited to leave the classroom to discuss their behaviour with the principle - and if they refuse to leave, their parents should be called in and the student suspended or expelled dependent on their explanation of their behaviour.

What shouldn't happen: Violence is used against the student.

Isn't this all just common sense..?

I think he's implying some civil obedience level refusal where the student chains himself to the desk. So the authorities have to figure out a way to talk him down...or go straight into the beatings so the authorities have no choice but to apply excessive violence.

elasto
Posts: 3778
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby elasto » Fri Oct 30, 2015 8:49 am UTC

sardia wrote:I think he's implying some civil obedience level refusal where the student chains himself to the desk. So the authorities have to figure out a way to talk him down...or go straight into the beatings so the authorities have no choice but to apply excessive violence.

Unless the child has a bomb or a gun or something, the answer is option (a) - talk them down.

The other children are moved to a spare classroom where teaching continues (in the rare instance there is absolutely no room left, including the sports hall etc. they might have to be sent home, but that's a bit weird)

Then this child's parents are brought in and talks begin. Because, let's be clear, noone chains themselves to a desk without a damn good reason - in their own mind at least. That reason might not be good enough to prevent expulsion, but it's definitely good enough to have a psychologist present to talk to the child. Either the child is righteously aggrieved - in which case listen to their grievance - or they need mental health support.

The only inapplicable option is violence against the child.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Fri Oct 30, 2015 9:56 am UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Why is (allegedly) kicking a police officer against the law?
Kicking could be classified as assault, however if they are going to lock everyone who sucks face in public they're gonna need more jails. The cop was a bigot.
speising wrote:So, a student puts, during class, a boombox on the desk, turns it up to eleven and refuses to turn it off again. Is that not a disturbance?
It makes the student a teenage prick, however it doesn't warrant a war. Take his audience away. Call mommy and daddy and suspend him.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Fri Oct 30, 2015 11:39 am UTC

morriswalters wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:Why is (allegedly) kicking a police officer against the law?
Kicking could be classified as assault, however if they are going to lock everyone who sucks face in public they're gonna need more jails. The cop was a bigot.
Yes, obviously, but I was pointing out that kissing was never the actual charge, because kissing isn't illegal.

"Kissing while lesbian" intentionally sounds like "driving while black", which has long been how people talk about the pattern of excuses cops invent for pulling over black drivers, when really the cop is a bigot and assumes the driver must be up to something bad because of their race.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10547
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Oct 30, 2015 12:12 pm UTC

Are we sure that DWB is from personal racism rather than structural? I mean, if you were a lazy cop rather than a racist cop, but required to make 100 arrests a month, and you were short that month and had few scruples, wouldn't it make sense to just roundup people who are the least likely to know good attorneys or be able to put up much non physical resistance and most likely to have a prior record? And if they put up physical resistance, hey, you did your job!

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Fri Oct 30, 2015 12:16 pm UTC

The tendency for black people to be poor and have worse lawyers is structural, the belief that a particular black person is doing something wrong due to race is personal. Obviously both things happen together but I don't understand why you keep coming back over and over with this "maybe the cops aren't *personally* racist" bullshit.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10547
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Oct 30, 2015 1:06 pm UTC

Because tackling structural and personal racism requires different tactics.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Fri Oct 30, 2015 1:43 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Yes, obviously, but I was pointing out that kissing was never the actual charge, because kissing isn't illegal.
Maybe or maybe not. For instance according to one source it may well be illegal in Illinois in public. And of course there is kissing and there is KISSING. The second could be public lewdness. But whatever, the law, the story is kind of silly/stupid. The cop overreacted and the girls evidently weren't very perceptive in terms of the desire to practice lip locking over the importance of avoiding trouble. Just to be clear I don't like overt PDA's. By anybody.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Fri Oct 30, 2015 2:16 pm UTC

Lots of people say things like that, but what counts as "overt" is extremely heteronormative. Gay and lesbian relationships are widely perceived to be inherently more sexual than straight relationships. A man and a woman can give each other a quick kiss on the lips and have it seen as completely normal and innocent, while two men or two women doing the same thing is often seen as "shoving it in our faces".
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4585
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby LaserGuy » Fri Oct 30, 2015 2:28 pm UTC

A few more details on that case...

The women said Foodland employees were then instructed [by the off-duty officer who did the arrest] to hold them down until someone found zip ties.

"They took us down to the basement of Foodland where they continued to harass us about our conduct in the store, asking us if it was worth it, if we were happy where we are," Wilson said.


As a condition of their release, they couldn't leave Oahu and wound up sleeping in a park.

After five months, prosecutors threw out the case, said their attorney, Eric Seitz.

Wilson also told reporters that she was denied medical treatment at the scene and after she was arrested. Pictures of her injuries weren't taken until two days after the assault.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Fri Oct 30, 2015 3:11 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Lots of people say things like that, but what counts as "overt" is extremely heteronormative. Gay and lesbian relationships are widely perceived to be inherently more sexual than straight relationships. A man and a woman can give each other a quick kiss on the lips and have it seen as completely normal and innocent, while two men or two women doing the same thing is often seen as "shoving it in our faces".
You're probably right. And in the case in point I wasn't there. But having said that I don't kiss my wife in the store, it isn't a good venue. At best it's childish.

I probably am incapable of understanding why they would jeopardize their vacation for something so trivial. When I go on vacation I don't want hassles. If a cop tells me to quit something I quit. 2000 miles from home isn't the time or place to make an issue of something stupid. I can go home, get arrested there, and sleep in my bed the same night. On the up side I suppose Hawaii is a good place to get trapped for 5 months.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3995
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Dauric » Fri Oct 30, 2015 4:21 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:I probably am incapable of understanding why they would jeopardize their vacation for something so trivial. When I go on vacation I don't want hassles. If a cop tells me to quit something I quit. 2000 miles from home isn't the time or place to make an issue of something stupid. I can go home, get arrested there, and sleep in my bed the same night. On the up side I suppose Hawaii is a good place to get trapped for 5 months.


According to the first article the second time the officer saw them being affectionate was 'alleged' which may mean there's (generously speaking) a difference of opinion as to whether they were being affectionate, or (less generously) the officer fabricated that he saw it to justify being a bigot.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10547
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Oct 30, 2015 4:30 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:Lots of people say things like that, but what counts as "overt" is extremely heteronormative. Gay and lesbian relationships are widely perceived to be inherently more sexual than straight relationships. A man and a woman can give each other a quick kiss on the lips and have it seen as completely normal and innocent, while two men or two women doing the same thing is often seen as "shoving it in our faces".


I remember going to NYC years back and seeing two young men holding hands. It stuck out as an oddity, but nothing outright wrong about it. I'm sure I passed by a dozen straight couples doing the same thing without noticing. I think it'd be like seeing the first interracial couples in the 1960s regardless of your personal beliefs because it's something your mind isn't used to seeing, while today you wouldn't pay them any extra attention. Or seeing the first women in pants during the 60s, or the first person to wear jeans.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Fri Oct 30, 2015 5:36 pm UTC

I'm not talking about whether it stands out, though. I'm talking about how queer relationships are seen as inherently more sexual at pretty much all levels of affection. There are those for whom even holding hands means a gay couple is being "overt" about their sexuality, while openly kissing a straight partner isn't even noticed.

Being merely out of the ordinary isn't the excuse people use to condemn or punish same-sex relationships or censor them from children's media or whatever.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10547
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Oct 30, 2015 6:57 pm UTC

It's more likely to be noticed, thus "overt". So double standards, only enforced by people that don't want homosexuality to be allowed to exist at all.

But really, how gay do you have to be to want to ban women kissing?

User avatar
sardia
Posts: 6813
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 3:39 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby sardia » Sat Oct 31, 2015 12:07 am UTC

CorruptUser wrote:It's more likely to be noticed, thus "overt". So double standards, only enforced by people that don't want homosexuality to be allowed to exist at all.

But really, how gay do you have to be to want to ban women kissing?

Look, we all know it doesn't count unless we're in a porno or strip club.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Sat Oct 31, 2015 1:55 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:According to the first article the second time the officer saw them being affectionate was 'alleged' which may mean there's (generously speaking) a difference of opinion as to whether they were being affectionate, or (less generously) the officer fabricated that he saw it to justify being a bigot.
Anything is possible if you don't have any data. However I spent my childhood ducking an alcoholic. Becoming invisible is a survival tactic. I don't understand people who run from police either.
gmalivuk wrote:There are those for whom even holding hands means a gay couple is being "overt" about their sexuality, while openly kissing a straight partner isn't even noticed.
In the patriarchy "real men" don't hold hands. Given that, when you see it, you think about what it implies. Stupid but true. The converse isn't true. It's common, so your attention threshold is much higher. It's all about baked in expectations. It will pass as people see it more. The cop will get a reality adjustment in court. Big brute versus two petite, demur young women. Sexual stereotypes will work against him in court.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Nov 02, 2015 3:08 pm UTC

LaserGuy wrote:A few more details on that case...

The women said Foodland employees were then instructed [by the off-duty officer who did the arrest] to hold them down until someone found zip ties.

"They took us down to the basement of Foodland where they continued to harass us about our conduct in the store, asking us if it was worth it, if we were happy where we are," Wilson said.


As a condition of their release, they couldn't leave Oahu and wound up sleeping in a park.

After five months, prosecutors threw out the case, said their attorney, Eric Seitz.

Wilson also told reporters that she was denied medical treatment at the scene and after she was arrested. Pictures of her injuries weren't taken until two days after the assault.


This seems wildly unreasonable. Even if they WERE being over the top, a casual "hey you two, get a room" should suffice. It happens. No need to even get cops involved, let alone all of that ridiculous escalation. There's several degrees of escalation here that seem wildly unjustified, and that involved different people. For instance, the judge setting those bail terms.

It's really horrifying to think about everyone living one mildly socially-disliked act from being arbitrarily assigned whatever consequences a bunch of random folks happen to feel like. Trying to look at the justice system from an external viewpoint is really strange.

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Mon Nov 02, 2015 4:15 pm UTC

LaserGuys link has been updated. They were charged with a felony.
Wilson described the encounter this way: "He was choking her out like this with his hand backwards. I came over and I tried to shove him off of her. He was a big man. He's not moving. The officer did get hit. I broke his sunglasses. He did get hit in the face. That's when I got hit in the face."

The officer denied striking or choking either woman.

Wilson and Guerrero were arrested and charged with felony assault of a police officer; they had to use their vacation money to post bail.
Defense attorneys say the case was dropped by prosecutors after the Foodland surveillance videos disappeared and they made a motion that would force the officer back under oath.
Had they been black someone might have ate a bullet.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Mon Nov 02, 2015 6:02 pm UTC

Oh, the videos just disappeared. How...convenient.

User avatar
Coyne
Posts: 1109
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:07 am UTC
Location: Orlando, Florida
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Coyne » Mon Nov 02, 2015 11:14 pm UTC

Tyndmyr wrote:Oh, the videos just disappeared. How...convenient.

It is truly sickening how many times the evidence disappears when there's a question of police wrongdoing. Destruction of evidence is a crime---except apparently when the police do it.
In all fairness...

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Mon Nov 02, 2015 11:45 pm UTC

Just for clarity, the article doesn't really say what happened to the video. Or whose custody the video was in.

User avatar
Coyne
Posts: 1109
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:07 am UTC
Location: Orlando, Florida
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Coyne » Tue Nov 03, 2015 4:24 am UTC

morriswalters wrote:Just for clarity, the article doesn't really say what happened to the video. Or whose custody the video was in.


Oh, strictly true. But I suspect ... do I ever suspect.

I've observed a pattern of this when police are concerned about charges or being charged. I first became aware of this when a question arose after the Waco incident, as to whether or not the Davidians had shot first, through the front door of the complex. But the question could not be resolved by examination of the evidence, because the Texas Rangers had managed to lose the critical right hand front door. How the dickens do you go about losing a door, 3 feet by 7 feet? Unless, of course, you lost it deliberately. Branch Davidians' Missing Front Door Becomes Trial Issue (There was motivation to lose it. If there were no shots from inside the building, it would be evidence that the raid was, at best, unnecessary.)

Since then, I've heard of evidence being lost or destroyed in cases against police, possibly in as many as 50 different cases. From this, I conclude that (just like everyone else...and in violation of law and their oaths) police will destroy or lose evidence against themselves or their friends. (There's a lovely dramatization of this in the movie, The Big Easy.)

Here's a search for "police deleted video" (usually from bystander's phones): police deleted video. Police hate video that might be used against them. This is like part II of a new spectator sport: first bystanders take video with cellphone; then police confiscate phone and delete video.

Here's a couple of recent examples of evidence loss or destruction:

In all fairness...

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Tue Nov 03, 2015 11:23 am UTC

The police are human, and as such they do exactly what everyone else does. Lie, cheat, steal and murder. If they destroy evidence it's because it works. And it is easy to believe it even if it isn't true.

elasto
Posts: 3778
Joined: Mon May 10, 2010 1:53 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby elasto » Tue Nov 03, 2015 3:02 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:The police are human, and as such they do exactly what everyone else does. Lie, cheat, steal and murder. If they destroy evidence it's because it works. And it is easy to believe it even if it isn't true.

Throughout time these truths will hold firm: "Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely." and "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes"

You need leadership - both amongst politicians and the police - that believe in these truths, and who believe in the only antidote - which is transparency.

Everyone wearing Google Glass which uploads in real-time to the cloud will be a dystopia to some, but will foster a greater need to police by consent and really heighten the risk/reward ratio with abuses of power.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Nov 03, 2015 3:34 pm UTC

It doesn't need to be Glass or any other constantly on camera. A lot can be gained simply by making sure your videos sync automatically so even if the cops "lose" it, it's not lost.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Tue Nov 03, 2015 4:45 pm UTC

App to hold police instantly accountable in stop and search. A lot of people are thinking along these lines.

User avatar
Coyne
Posts: 1109
Joined: Fri Dec 18, 2009 12:07 am UTC
Location: Orlando, Florida
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Coyne » Wed Nov 04, 2015 9:58 am UTC

Sheriff Knezovich alleges SPD officers destroyed evidence, leaked information in sex assault case against fellow officer

More destruction of evidence. The sheriff's department got a search warrant for evidence in a sexual assault case; apparently someone leaked that to the Spokane Police Department and the officers involved washed the (clothing?) items sought.

It's easy to hand-wave it by saying, "Officers are human," (not that I'm denying they are) but if, for example, *I* had done this, I would expect to be prosecuted for it. I expect them to be prosecuted for it, but they probably won't be.
In all fairness...

DSenette
Posts: 2418
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 8:08 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby DSenette » Thu Nov 05, 2015 1:37 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
gmalivuk wrote:Lots of people say things like that, but what counts as "overt" is extremely heteronormative. Gay and lesbian relationships are widely perceived to be inherently more sexual than straight relationships. A man and a woman can give each other a quick kiss on the lips and have it seen as completely normal and innocent, while two men or two women doing the same thing is often seen as "shoving it in our faces".
You're probably right. And in the case in point I wasn't there. But having said that I don't kiss my wife in the store, it isn't a good venue. At best it's childish.

I probably am incapable of understanding why they would jeopardize their vacation for something so trivial. When I go on vacation I don't want hassles. If a cop tells me to quit something I quit. 2000 miles from home isn't the time or place to make an issue of something stupid. I can go home, get arrested there, and sleep in my bed the same night. On the up side I suppose Hawaii is a good place to get trapped for 5 months.

man, I kiss my wife everywhere...cuz....like...I love my wife, and kissing is a good way of showing that. and you like, look over and this pretty lady is standing there and she's not just a pretty lady, but she's a pretty lady who also thinks you're kind of neat and she's a pretty lady that for some reason likes you kissing her.....yeah, I don't care if we're on the tampon aisle, by golly if that lady looks like she needs a kissin, imagonnakissher. am I gonna put my tongue down her throat and slip a thumb up her butt? no, not likely...but....still.

yeah, being trapped in one of the most expensive places in the US for 5 months...and being forced to sleep in a park for at least part of those 5 months sure sounds like a wonderful vacation extension. and you know....coming back to your home 5 months later to god knows what (everything in your refrigerator is now sentient) and likely losing a job....etc...

if a cop came up to me and my wife, while we were kissing (even if we were full on making out....nobody's naked, no hands in pants, then it's still just kissing), and threatened legal action...you better damned well be assured I'm going to make a scene. of course, wouldn't happen, cuz I'm a guy and she's a lady....so....we could, like a million other straight couples, LIKELY actually have our hands in each other's pants and still not get more than a few tsks..
The Righteous Hand Of Retribution
"The evaporation of 4 million who believe this crap would leave the world an instantly better place." ~Andre Codresu (re: "the Rapture")

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Thu Nov 05, 2015 3:18 pm UTC

You're young. And sorry to say most married couples I know are mostly into doing other things in public, raising kids and keeping house and hearth together. They have homes and beds. Relationships that last are about more than kissing.
DSenette wrote:coming back to your home 5 months later to god knows what
If I read the story correctly they have an apartment there now. I have no idea what if anything became of their previous domicile.
DSenette wrote:f a cop came up to me and my wife, while we were kissing (even if we were full on making out....nobody's naked, no hands in pants, then it's still just kissing), and threatened legal action...you better damned well be assured I'm going to make a scene. of course
I have no doubt. But then again I don't understand you either. Most of my young life was spent seeking privacy, not making out in a store. If making out describes what they did. Given the data I couldn't really say.

Tyndmyr
Posts: 11443
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2012 8:38 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby Tyndmyr » Thu Nov 05, 2015 3:34 pm UTC

Coyne wrote:I've observed a pattern of this when police are concerned about charges or being charged. I first became aware of this when a question arose after the Waco incident, as to whether or not the Davidians had shot first, through the front door of the complex. But the question could not be resolved by examination of the evidence, because the Texas Rangers had managed to lose the critical right hand front door. How the dickens do you go about losing a door, 3 feet by 7 feet? Unless, of course, you lost it deliberately. Branch Davidians' Missing Front Door Becomes Trial Issue (There was motivation to lose it. If there were no shots from inside the building, it would be evidence that the raid was, at best, unnecessary.)


There certainly seems to be a pattern of loss that's extremely convenient. It strains credibility to believe that it is merely happenstance.

Of course, if there's no enforcement, I suppose it shouldn't come as a surprise...

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby gmalivuk » Thu Nov 05, 2015 3:37 pm UTC

The fact that you know couples who are cold and unaffectionate in public doesn't change the fact that the *vast* majority of straight couples in this country do occasionally kiss in public, and face no consequences whatsoever.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

DSenette
Posts: 2418
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 8:08 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby DSenette » Thu Nov 05, 2015 3:50 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
DSenette wrote:coming back to your home 5 months later to god knows what
If I read the story correctly they have an apartment there now. I have no idea what if anything became of their previous domicile.


The article wrote:Relying on odd jobs and restaurant gigs, they eventually saved enough money to rent an apartment. When they appeared before a criminal court in July, their case was promptly dismissed by the prosecutor.

yes, clearly you didn't read it correctly. they were in Hawaii on vacation...not looking to move there. they were effectively FORCED to find employment AND residence because they were NOT ALLOWED to leave until the court proceedings were over and they had zero money to have a place to live during that time. I would ALSO hazard a guess that they STILL had to pay rent or a mortgage on their primary residence back on the mainland during this time...because...why wouldn't they?

morriswalters wrote:
DSenette wrote:f a cop came up to me and my wife, while we were kissing (even if we were full on making out....nobody's naked, no hands in pants, then it's still just kissing), and threatened legal action...you better damned well be assured I'm going to make a scene. of course
I have no doubt. But then again I don't understand you either. Most of my young life was spent seeking privacy, not making out in a store. If making out describes what they did. Given the data I couldn't really say.

most of my life is generally seeking privacy, because...social anxiety and what not....but my time out, in public, with my wife, consists of many of the same actions as my private life with my wife. i.e. holding her hand, giving her a smooch, pinching her butt, etc.. whenever I damned well please because those actions have no bearing on anyone else's life in public. AND those actions for me and my wife bring little risk of a cop or anyone else coming up to me and suggesting I "move along" or should be barred from a store. again, not the case for many many homosexual couples, and in a lot of places (where I live, and where you live) interracial couples.

in fact, that's even better. if this had been an interracial straight couple, exactly ZERO people would be saying "well, you shouldn't have been kissing your wife in public, especially after a cop told you not to".
The Righteous Hand Of Retribution
"The evaporation of 4 million who believe this crap would leave the world an instantly better place." ~Andre Codresu (re: "the Rapture")

morriswalters
Posts: 7073
Joined: Thu Jun 03, 2010 12:21 am UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby morriswalters » Thu Nov 05, 2015 4:16 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:The fact that you know couples who are cold and unaffectionate in public doesn't change the fact that the *vast* majority of straight couples in this country do occasionally kiss in public, and face no consequences whatsoever.
I didn't say cold and unaffectionate, I implied private. I give my wife a kiss when I drop her at work, what I don't do is get affectionate in a store. Your mileage may vary.
DSenette wrote:yes, clearly you didn't read it correctly. they were in Hawaii on vacation...not looking to move there. they were effectively FORCED to find employment AND residence because they were NOT ALLOWED to leave until the court proceedings were over and they had zero money to have a place to live during that time.
Your probably right. I wouldn't know. I only know what I have read. And it never mentions what happened to their residence, if they shared one, or where that residence was at, if it existed, or anything about it. Which in itself was odd. Neither did it mention any workplace for either nor much of anything else. No abandoned pets, nor family members or coworkers to help them out. Nothing about where they were staying or where their luggage was. In other words there is a dearth of data. In any case my only point was that when I am on vacation I am a rabbit. Avoiding trouble. And I don't understand anyone who doesn't do it that way.

DSenette
Posts: 2418
Joined: Fri Mar 06, 2009 8:08 pm UTC

Re: Police misbehavior thread

Postby DSenette » Thu Nov 05, 2015 4:34 pm UTC

morriswalters wrote:
DSenette wrote:yes, clearly you didn't read it correctly. they were in Hawaii on vacation...not looking to move there. they were effectively FORCED to find employment AND residence because they were NOT ALLOWED to leave until the court proceedings were over and they had zero money to have a place to live during that time.
Your probably right. I wouldn't know. I only know what I have read. And it never mentions what happened to their residence, if they shared one, or where that residence was at, if it existed, or anything about it. Which in itself was odd. Neither did it mention any workplace for either nor much of anything else. No abandoned pets, nor family members or coworkers to help them out. Nothing about where they were staying or where their luggage was. In other words there is a dearth of data. In any case my only point was that when I am on vacation I am a rabbit. Avoiding trouble. And I don't understand anyone who doesn't do it that way.

so, since the article itself doesn't explicitly mention that these two people on vacation, previous to their vacation, had one or multiple residences, and some means to pay for said residences (i.e. jorbs) means that until further notice, two destitute homeless unemployed ladies with zero possessions traveled to Hawaii, and as a result of a bigot cop....they found employment and a place to live...so...American dream amirite?

you specifically said "On the up side I suppose Hawaii is a good place to get trapped for 5 months."....which is only true if you're rich as fuck and have zero responsibilities in the place that you traveled from.....considering that these two people had to spend ALL OF THEIR MONEY on bail, this is clearly not the case.

of course, not the first time you're incapable or unwilling to make SIMPLE connections to reality in the effort to maintain your position. you literally DO NOT NEED any of the data about where they came from and/or what they left behind to figure out that this is not an upshot for these people. two people traveled from somewhere, to somewhere else, on a vacation (homeless people don't fly on planes to expensive islands because they like to ramble, so, pretty easy to assume they had somewhere to live before the trip, and by having somewhere to live you can safely assume they had some way to provide for that housing. either with rent, or government subsidies, or they own it outright, or they live with their parents). they ended up having to spend all of their available funds on bail (otherwise, they wouldn't have had to sleep in a park because they would have had more funds available for a hotel or a hostel or a campground or anything else that costs money), then they had to get jobs to pay for housing. but yeah, you weren't specifically told about any of that stuff so any life outside of their time in Hawaii does not exist.

if I'm traveling in a different country.....I might defer to their local customs (i'll definitely defer to their local legal code if I know what those laws are and they can be presented to me if I happen to run afoul of them)....but they weren't in a foreign country, they were in the U.S. and sorry, having a smooch and holding hands isn't against the law anywhere here that I know of. If I'm at home in TN or if I'm in another state in the US, I'm not going to settle for someone violating my rights or physically assaulting my loved ones...period. especially since these people were not causing trouble. they were minding their own damned business when someone decided to cause trouble for them.
The Righteous Hand Of Retribution
"The evaporation of 4 million who believe this crap would leave the world an instantly better place." ~Andre Codresu (re: "the Rapture")


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests