This guy was an asshole, trying to provoke exactly the response he got.
That said, if it really was just him being an asshole, and not an attempt to incite a crowd or interfere in the traffic stop, the police should have ignored him.
David K.
Why can’t you just say “wow this was wrong”, him being an asshole isn’t the story, its him being illegally and unconstitutionally arrested for it thats the story.
gahrie
No, his being an asshole IS the story, because there would have been no story if he hadn’t of been an asshole.
One thing you lefties always forget in your diatribes about rights is that along with rights come responsibilities. We have the right to free speech, but we have the responsibility to exercise that right appropriately. In this case the actions of the lawyer were completely irresponsible, and purposefully designed to incite the reaction he got. Notice I did not say illegal.
Just out of curiosity:
Why do you think it is OK to limit the Second Amendment so drastically, while demanding the broadest possible interpretation of the First Amendment? Both are equally important, equally “sacred” (for lack of a better word) but treated so very differently by the Left.
Which amendments are the “good” amendments which must be followed to the letter, and which are the bad, the ones you can feel free to ignore or constrain?
Why is it that some imaginary penumbra has more weight that enumerated rights?
dcl
Gahrie, it doesn’t matter that he was being an asshole. It is not illegal to be an asshole as long as what he was doing isn’t illegal, which it wasn’t, the most the officer has a right to ask him to do is stop being an asshole citizen to citizen. He does not have the right to assault the man, or arrest him, or to even lay a finger on him. To wit all of the officers at the scene should be charged with false arrest, false imprisonment, use of a hand gun in the commission of a felony, assault and battery, and criminal conspiracy. Like I’ve said before, the only way police disrespect and disregard for the citizens they ostensibly protect and serve is to throw the book at them when they pull crap like this.
Law abiding citizens, even the ones that go around acting like assholes, should not be walking about in fear of false arrest and imprisonment. It damages the ability of law enforcement to do it’s job effectively. If your experience with police is that they act like entitled jerkoffs all the time what is your response to a detective that comes knocking at your door looking for help solving a crime?
It is bad for our rights and freedoms to let this authoritarian crap go on. But it’s also bad for law enforcement and their ability to do their job to let this crap go on. What does it say about a country that a man is so fed up with police misconduct that he basically assumed the police were acting overly aggressively with a traffic stop and possibly committing a false arrest? And what does it say that when he voiced is displeasure with this state of affairs he was indeed falsely arrested? This is a disastrously bad situation and we need to do something about it. So when the police are trying to legitimately do their job citizens don’t just assume that they are being jerkoffs. Again, if we don’t do something about this the legitimate job function of the majority of very fine, very good, very conscientious officers will be impeded. And that is bad for the cops but it is also bad for the citizens. Something must be done. Police are given a lot of power. With that needs to come a lot of responsibility. A lot more than, up to now, we’ve demanded. It’s time we demanded more.
In regards to your point on the second amendment, I suggest you a) read the entire amendment and b) look at the legal history of the US dating back to colonial times. There has always been regulation placed on the carrying of arms in town. Militias were the primary defensive force of the nation on just about any scale you’d like to select so reading that clause out of the amendment is irresponsible. So lastly, while I don’t personally have any desire to have a firearm I don’t have any issues with responsible ownership thereof.
David K.
Why do you think it is OK to limit the Second Amendment so drastically, while demanding the broadest possible interpretation of the First Amendment? Both are equally important, equally “sacred” (for lack of a better word) but treated so very differently by the Left.
I continue to wonder if you are willfully ignorant or just plain illiterate. I have stated on numerous occasions including JUST TWO DAYS AGO that we need to ammend or repeal the second ammendment before we can have truly effective gun control in this country. I also agree with Dane that right wingers are ignorning a full half of the second ammendment, so its even MORE of a moot point, yet you bring it up here why? To try and be clever? Sorry but you failed. Again.
This guy was an asshole, trying to provoke exactly the response he got.
That said, if it really was just him being an asshole, and not an attempt to incite a crowd or interfere in the traffic stop, the police should have ignored him.
Why can’t you just say “wow this was wrong”, him being an asshole isn’t the story, its him being illegally and unconstitutionally arrested for it thats the story.
No, his being an asshole IS the story, because there would have been no story if he hadn’t of been an asshole.
One thing you lefties always forget in your diatribes about rights is that along with rights come responsibilities. We have the right to free speech, but we have the responsibility to exercise that right appropriately. In this case the actions of the lawyer were completely irresponsible, and purposefully designed to incite the reaction he got. Notice I did not say illegal.
Just out of curiosity:
Why do you think it is OK to limit the Second Amendment so drastically, while demanding the broadest possible interpretation of the First Amendment? Both are equally important, equally “sacred” (for lack of a better word) but treated so very differently by the Left.
Which amendments are the “good” amendments which must be followed to the letter, and which are the bad, the ones you can feel free to ignore or constrain?
Why is it that some imaginary penumbra has more weight that enumerated rights?
Gahrie, it doesn’t matter that he was being an asshole. It is not illegal to be an asshole as long as what he was doing isn’t illegal, which it wasn’t, the most the officer has a right to ask him to do is stop being an asshole citizen to citizen. He does not have the right to assault the man, or arrest him, or to even lay a finger on him. To wit all of the officers at the scene should be charged with false arrest, false imprisonment, use of a hand gun in the commission of a felony, assault and battery, and criminal conspiracy. Like I’ve said before, the only way police disrespect and disregard for the citizens they ostensibly protect and serve is to throw the book at them when they pull crap like this.
Law abiding citizens, even the ones that go around acting like assholes, should not be walking about in fear of false arrest and imprisonment. It damages the ability of law enforcement to do it’s job effectively. If your experience with police is that they act like entitled jerkoffs all the time what is your response to a detective that comes knocking at your door looking for help solving a crime?
It is bad for our rights and freedoms to let this authoritarian crap go on. But it’s also bad for law enforcement and their ability to do their job to let this crap go on. What does it say about a country that a man is so fed up with police misconduct that he basically assumed the police were acting overly aggressively with a traffic stop and possibly committing a false arrest? And what does it say that when he voiced is displeasure with this state of affairs he was indeed falsely arrested? This is a disastrously bad situation and we need to do something about it. So when the police are trying to legitimately do their job citizens don’t just assume that they are being jerkoffs. Again, if we don’t do something about this the legitimate job function of the majority of very fine, very good, very conscientious officers will be impeded. And that is bad for the cops but it is also bad for the citizens. Something must be done. Police are given a lot of power. With that needs to come a lot of responsibility. A lot more than, up to now, we’ve demanded. It’s time we demanded more.
In regards to your point on the second amendment, I suggest you a) read the entire amendment and b) look at the legal history of the US dating back to colonial times. There has always been regulation placed on the carrying of arms in town. Militias were the primary defensive force of the nation on just about any scale you’d like to select so reading that clause out of the amendment is irresponsible. So lastly, while I don’t personally have any desire to have a firearm I don’t have any issues with responsible ownership thereof.
Why do you think it is OK to limit the Second Amendment so drastically, while demanding the broadest possible interpretation of the First Amendment? Both are equally important, equally “sacred” (for lack of a better word) but treated so very differently by the Left.
I continue to wonder if you are willfully ignorant or just plain illiterate. I have stated on numerous occasions including JUST TWO DAYS AGO that we need to ammend or repeal the second ammendment before we can have truly effective gun control in this country. I also agree with Dane that right wingers are ignorning a full half of the second ammendment, so its even MORE of a moot point, yet you bring it up here why? To try and be clever? Sorry but you failed. Again.