ot. wait. cops actually lie?

[scaredyclassic]

personally i would never be mean verbally in any way to anyone. too easy for it to be perceived as a criminal threat.

that doesn’t mean I don’t think you shoudln’t be prepared to kill someone with your bare hands when necessary.

[FlyerInHi]

I know the HOA people. Not their problem
The problem is fthe absentee owner upstairs and her property manager. Bitchy people hang out together. It’s all a game an entertainment for me…

I am never verbally threatening. I was just dismissive and rude. I said m’am in a way that meant bitch. But I don’t use the word bitch why I talk to people

[spdrun]

personally i would never be mean verbally in any way to anyone. too easy for it to be perceived as a criminal threat.

You can do what Britt McHenry did to the desk-chick of the company that towed her car in Virginia. And by towed, I mean likely stole, since the particular firm has quite a reputation.

Be very personally insulting while only threatening to own the people in court, no physical threats. I don’t condone what she said, but I can understand why she was extremely pissed off.

[Coronita]

Let’s put cameras on every street.

Discuss.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=flu]Let’s put cameras on every street.

Discuss.[/quote]

It’s only a matter is time. The Vegas strip has private and police cameras everywhere.
Tourist sites in London, NYC, etc….
Airports are installing new LED lights that are also cameras.

People are also installing at the residences.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=spdrun]

personally i would never be mean verbally in any way to anyone. too easy for it to be perceived as a criminal threat.

You can do what Britt McHenry did to the desk-chick of the company that towed her car in Virginia. And by towed, I mean likely stole, since the particular firm has quite a reputation.

Be very personally insulting while only threatening to own the people in court, no physical threats. I don’t condone what she said, but I can understand why she was extremely pissed off.[/quote]

Don’t treaten to take legal action or threaten anythinh unless you have the wherewithal to follow through.

The property manager’s henpecked husband hand delivered me a letter saying that I’m not to contact the owner or tenants per federal statute 18 section 2661A which has to with with harassing people.

That’s totally bullshit because I didn’t harass anybody. I called the owner to make her aware is the leak and the tenants are more or less my friends.

These people are legal bullies. And I’m intent on making them. They want legal so they will get legal. I got my lawyer to have their tenants immediately cease any water usage. So now they have to accommodate the tenants in a hotel.

[bubba99]

spdrun,

You are dead on. For years the unwritten rule for Law Enforcement was if you run you get a beating. Cops do not like to chase suspects – it is dangerous for them and the public, and many are just not up to it. What we see today is that many LEOs don’t recognize that the rules have changed because of cameras. You cannot lie your way around an unnecessary beating or mistreatmemnt of a suspect – the camera will show your lies. In (c) the video shows the officer lied about the chase, the weapon, CPR and anything else he thought would help. The camera proved him a lier. I have heard a thousand times from my SGT. “remember there are cameras everywhere”

[bearishgurl]

[quote=FlyerInHi][quote=spdrun]

personally i would never be mean verbally in any way to anyone. too easy for it to be perceived as a criminal threat.

You can do what Britt McHenry did to the desk-chick of the company that towed her car in Virginia. And by towed, I mean likely stole, since the particular firm has quite a reputation.

Be very personally insulting while only threatening to own the people in court, no physical threats. I don’t condone what she said, but I can understand why she was extremely pissed off.[/quote]

Don’t treaten to take legal action or threaten anythinh unless you have the wherewithal to follow through.

The property manager’s henpecked husband hand delivered me a letter saying that I’m not to contact the owner or tenants per federal statute 18 section 2661A which has to with with harassing people.

That’s totally bullshit because I didn’t harass anybody. I called the owner to make her aware is the leak and the tenants are more or less my friends.

These people are legal bullies. And I’m intent on making them. They want legal so they will get legal. I got my lawyer to have their tenants immediately cease any water usage. So now they have to accommodate the tenants in a hotel.[/quote]

FIH, in your circumstance, I would have handled everyone in the exact same manner that you did. I actually would “prefer” my opponent “lawyer up” ASAP as I would MUCH prefer dealing with their lawyer than their own crazymaking “victimhood” tactics.

What you are currently experiencing is one of many reasons why I would never invest in condos …. especially a unit with another unit above it or below it.

I know you’ll get it sorted out but meanwhile your upstairs occupants’ leak can still cause a lot of damage to your unit AFTER they vacate the premises. It’s a HUGE inconvenience. Good luck to you.

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=FlyerInHi]I know the HOA people. Not their problem
The problem is fthe absentee owner upstairs and her property manager. Bitchy people hang out together. It’s all a game an entertainment for me…

I am never verbally threatening. I was just dismissive and rude. I said m’am in a way that meant bitch. But I don’t use the word bitch why I talk to people[/quote]

yes but…there is no way to know if people are willing to lie about what words you used to law enforcement.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=bearishgurl]

I know you’ll get it sorted out but meanwhile your upstairs occupants’ leak can still cause a lot of damage to your unit AFTER they vacate the premises. It’s a HUGE inconvenience. Good luck to you.[/quote]

Yes, BG, it is an inconvenience, but part of the “cost of doing business.” I have such good patience that people have told me to learn to play poker. But I don’t have any interest in gambling. And that’s why they said I will win.

My experience with condos, especially old condos is that there are leaks from the upstairs down sooner or later.

Luckily the unit is under renovation and I don’t have a tenant to accommodate. The reason I found small leak is because of the wet drywall; so I tore out the drywall to look.

Real estate has its fun moments. I’m surprised this property manager who owns the company with her husband doesn’t know that first thing to do when you’re at fault is to apologize for the situation and promise the resolve the issue promptly.

The husband was pretty nice. He came out and said “you didn’t start off well with my wife…. but I believe my wife.” Then he handed me that bogus legal letter. My thinking was “well, you made you bed. Now go lie in it.”

Correct me if I’m wrong, BG, but parties to legal matters have the right to contact each other directly. Lawyers, however, are bound to not directly contact someone who is represented by counsel, unless otherwise consented to.

Can you believe that she thought she could bully me, simply for contacting her client directly?

The letter signed by the real estate agent said:

Upon the owner’s request, of xxx address, you are hereby notified to CEASE AND DESIST any all futher contact with the said owner and tenant in accordance with Federal Statute 18, USCS Section 2661A and/or State-Local statute, including but not limited to calling, harassing and/or bullying, and any action which consists of physical, verbal and/or non-verbal attacks.

You are hereby instructed to communicate only with a representative of xxx realty group via written correspondence to the attention of: Debra xxx old cranky woman, xxx address.

Failure to comply will leave no other alternative but to contact state/local law enforcement.

[NotCranky]

To whom it may concern:

A polite asshole is just a much as an asshole as an uncouth asshole. The polite asshole makes himself a prick too when he judges himself to be better.

I agree that it is better to limit assholiness in general and deal with assholes with
gentile humor and affection , or forgiveness and patience. Easier said than done, for me. I get it right sometimes though. Assholes are so often looked up to ….it’s tempting. Assholing back to an asshole can be really fun but has lots of problems they often up the ante.

[CA renter]

[quote=scaredyclassic]

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. B. Franklin.

we could do all sorts of things to catch more criminals. We could strip search anyone who looks shady on the street. Hell, at this point I’m sure gramps would’ve greatly preferred a vigorous anal cavity search in broad daylight than the treatment he got. He’d probably give all his money to wind back the clock and just be subjected to that.

You can call the police. You can watch out. But you can’t detain someone just because a crime might occur and you have a bad feeling about someone. And definitely please don’t slam that person on the ground if they try to walk away when they’ve done nothing wrong and you have no cause to stop them.

Thank goodness for the dashcam.[/quote]

Yes, I totally get that — it’s a great quote that often pops into my head, especially when discussing the Patriot Act, the militarization of our police departments, etc.

But we do need to try prevent crimes before they occur, IMHO. What would you suggest we do? Or, as queried before, should we rely on police departments to simply take notes after the crimes have been committed?

If we don’t profile in some way, and that includes reporting “suspicious persons,” what do you think we should do?

If cops can’t detain people and question them, how do you think that would affect crime rates?

Like it or not, Three Strikes has reduced crime in almost every category. And many of those criminals who jet jail time for drugs are really there for bigger crimes, but the cops might not have been able to get them on those crimes because of technicalities, lack of evidence, luck, etc., so they take what they can get.

——–

As for the story about your wife’s carjacker, I don’t think that criminals are beat up because cops are trying to get revenge; it’s more about making sure they are apprehended. Cops really don’t like to let criminals get away, and I applaud them for this, as do most law-abiding citizens. Most criminals are not beaten up if they calmly surrender. If anyone is beaten up, it’s almost always because they try to resist and/or assault the officer(s). Big difference between that and revenge.

[CA renter]

[quote=Blogstar][quote=scaredyclassic][quote=Blogstar]Scaredy, surely what I have been saying on this thread comes across as unkind to you. It just feels hysterical to me. Not high level. Not philosophical at all. I am used to way better from you. Nothing wrong with raw emotion but this is an area that call for cooler heads. There are a lot of crazies out there imagining that every thing that doesn’t go the way they want it is a huge travesty of justice. There are enough dirtbags working these folks already.

Much of the back drop to these conversation is bizarre, riots and looting in Ferguson. Eyewitness lying through the teeth and the media making a big circus out this stuff. Even your thread title looks to be on the crazy train to me. Which sentient human being doesn’t know that cops lie? Just my sensibilities at play I guess.[/quote]

i personally think a good chunk of the nation has for a very long time believed that the overwhelming majority of police officers always tell the whole truth and would only shade the truth possibly to get a bad guy.

I think we need nonstop body cameras on all police officers immediately …[/quote]

Maybe you are right, I find it hard to fathom. I think I have known or suspected that police lie since I was very young , before memory, like 3 or 4 years old. Could be from coming from a hard life. I knew of gangs that were sworn to kill certain cops too.

Still, IF the only people who would be cops are monsters we have to get philosophical. The way I see the pendulum swinging the candidate pool will get worse. How did it get to be that way in the good ole USA? Maybe it is all just part of the “Fall of the Empire”. Dystopia here we come.

I agree with California renter, and not because she has a higher IQ than me. Most people, or most people who are most vocal now, have no idea how vulnerable cops are , how dehumanized they are by criminals who dehumanize old ladies, babies you name it. general hatred from any anti-authoritarian crack pot, threat factor of deadly retaliation to themselves that they live with in big cities or even small violent ones like where I grew up.

Then on top of that , it is extremely hard to make a case against the bad guy, and even if there is one , politics, low budgets, technicalities make it so only a sliver of them even go to the circus. I mean court. How does anyone keep morale …the paycheck and benefits will not do it.[/quote]

Agree with Russ, and not because his IQ is higher than mine, either. 😉 I’ve never thought that cops were 100% honest when giving testimony. My guess would be that most people understand that cops will have to lie occasionally in order to get some really bad guys off the streets…and most of us are probably okay with that.

The difference between one school of thought and the other is that one group is more concerned about the rights of victims, while the other is more concerned about the rights of criminals. It’s doubtful that these two sides will be able to meet in the middle, as they are totally opposed to one another.

Of course, nobody wants to see truly innocent people jailed or beaten, etc. We need to do as much as we can to prevent that. But let’s not pretend that the majority of people who are hauled into court are innocent folks who are picked on by cops because of their skin color, clothing style, etc. Cops are pretty good at what they do, and if they are profiling, there’s usually a very good reason for it.

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=CA renter][quote=scaredyclassic]

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. B. Franklin.

we could do all sorts of things to catch more criminals. We could strip search anyone who looks shady on the street. Hell, at this point I’m sure gramps would’ve greatly preferred a vigorous anal cavity search in broad daylight than the treatment he got. He’d probably give all his money to wind back the clock and just be subjected to that.

You can call the police. You can watch out. But you can’t detain someone just because a crime might occur and you have a bad feeling about someone. And definitely please don’t slam that person on the ground if they try to walk away when they’ve done nothing wrong and you have no cause to stop them.

Thank goodness for the dashcam.[/quote]

Yes, I totally get that — it’s a great quote that often pops into my head, especially when discussing the Patriot Act, the militarization of our police departments, etc.

But we do need to try prevent crimes before they occur, IMHO. What would you suggest we do? Or, as queried before, should we rely on police departments to simply take notes after the crimes have been committed?

If we don’t profile in some way, and that includes reporting “suspicious persons,” what do you think we should do?

If cops can’t detain people and question them, how do you think that would affect crime rates?

Like it or not, Three Strikes has reduced crime in almost every category. And many of those criminals who jet jail time for drugs are really there for bigger crimes, but the cops might not have been able to get them on those crimes because of technicalities, lack of evidence, luck, etc., so they take what they can get.

——–

As for the story about your wife’s carjacker, I don’t think that criminals are beat up because cops are trying to get revenge; it’s more about making sure they are apprehended. Cops really don’t like to let criminals get away, and I applaud them for this, as do most law-abiding citizens. Most criminals are not beaten up if they calmly surrender. If anyone is beaten up, it’s almost always because they try to resist and/or assault the officer(s). Big difference between that and revenge.[/quote]

bs. Revenge. See horseback tape.

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=CA renter][quote=scaredyclassic]

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. B. Franklin.

we could do all sorts of things to catch more criminals. We could strip search anyone who looks shady on the street. Hell, at this point I’m sure gramps would’ve greatly preferred a vigorous anal cavity search in broad daylight than the treatment he got. He’d probably give all his money to wind back the clock and just be subjected to that.

You can call the police. You can watch out. But you can’t detain someone just because a crime might occur and you have a bad feeling about someone. And definitely please don’t slam that person on the ground if they try to walk away when they’ve done nothing wrong and you have no cause to stop them.

Thank goodness for the dashcam.[/quote]

Yes, I totally get that — it’s a great quote that often pops into my head, especially when discussing the Patriot Act, the militarization of our police departments, etc.

But we do need to try prevent crimes before they occur, IMHO. What would you suggest we do? Or, as queried before, should we rely on police departments to simply take notes after the crimes have been committed?

If we don’t profile in some way, and that includes reporting “suspicious persons,” what do you think we should do?

If cops can’t detain people and question them, how do you think that would affect crime rates?

Like it or not, Three Strikes has reduced crime in almost every category. And many of those criminals who jet jail time for drugs are really there for bigger crimes, but the cops might not have been able to get them on those crimes because of technicalities, lack of evidence, luck, etc., so they take what they can get.

——–

As for the story about your wife’s carjacker, I don’t think that criminals are beat up because cops are trying to get revenge; it’s more about making sure they are apprehended. Cops really don’t like to let criminals get away, and I applaud them for this, as do most law-abiding citizens. Most criminals are not beaten up if they calmly surrender. If anyone is beaten up, it’s almost always because they try to resist and/or assault the officer(s). Big difference between that and revenge.[/quote]

If we hasnt preemptively arrested all those disproportionate number of black kids for Marijuana charges, particularly in nyc, we would be in increased danger? Maybe injustice INCREASES danger. Like preemptive arrests, maybe preemptive war in Iraq for “SAFETY” Actually made the world a much less safe place.

I’m pretty sure it did.

nearly 90 prrc. Of arrests for pot in nyc. We’re for minorities. Think that engenders trust in that population? Or creates a mini iraq? can the police ever truly be effective in a community where they are ruining lives with criminal records in a grossly racist disproportionate manner?

http://m.huffpost.com/us/news/new-york-city-marijuana-arrests/

this isn’t a question of coddling criminals. It’s about justice for all. Or we can go on pretending that the superpowers of the police are able to detect and predict who the future criminals are..

[Author]

Posts