robwbright
Member
- Apr 8, 2005
- 2,283
- 0
Okiewan said:My impression after reading a LOT of Rob's stuff is that he doesn't have a problem with Police per se, rather government in general.
oldguy said:You know Rob you sure seem to have an agenda with police and spend an aweful lot of time looking for any artical which points out police misconduct. I guess I could bring up many attourney idiocies but I won't waste my time
Thump said:That it is okay to refuse to do what an officer of the law says, argue with him and tear up a citation given. Great lesson for the the kid to have learned that day.
His mother allowed him to be taken to the Police station where he was talk to by the police about stealing. It turned out to be a good lesson for the kid, he is now a Police officer.
Rob, what kind of law do you practice? Just curious.
dales298 said:Whats a guy from Gallipolis (and I know the correct pronunciation) doing checking out my local TV station?
That town has some issues and it could be an ethnic deal, or just a slow news day.
Dale
Having been throught the police academy and married to a lawer I can say that it is not the job of a police officer to know what is required to get a conviction. That is your job. Police officers cite or make arrests when laws have been broken, that is there job and that is why they don't have to go thought law school. It is simple really, if a law is broken, action is taken regardless of age or ethnicity. That is a Police officer's job. The rest is up to you. Sure there are times when an officer will make a mistake and it prevents convictions, same can be said for lawers. I have seen it first hand on both accounts.robwbright said:and a large percentage of them either:
A: Have no idea what is required of them for the prosecutor to obtain a conviction; OR
B: They don't care what is required to obtain a conviction.
Come back to the world of the reality Rob. The officer asked her to do something, it was not a ridiculous request and it was refused.robwbright said:I understand where you're coming from Thump, but it's a slippery slope. If the officer commanded her to slap the child, should she obey him? If the officer commanded her to strip, should she do it?
Correct, the police should have never been called. My guess is they were because of the actions of the mother toward the owner of the car.robwbright said:I have a 2 year old. Citing a 2 year old for throwing a rock is totally and completely ridiculous - regardless of what the mother does. A just small claims court would require the mother to pay for the damage to the car. Discipline the child and teach it not to throw rocks. It's quite simple. The police should never have been involved at all and mature, reasonable people don't call the police on a 2 year old because their car got scratched.
From the UCMJ:robwbright said:From what I know of the military, those guys are supposed to disobey illegal orders.
How do you know it would have been more effective? Is that an assumption or have you done a test study because that sounded a little like a factual claim?robwbright said:Taking a 5 year old to a police station is also ridiculous. Making him do some chores to earn some money to pay for the items stolen (preferably 2 to 4 times the value of the items) would be a much more effective lesson.
On your pointsrobwbright said:BTW, Oldguy, my animosity is also directed towards overzealous prosecutors as well - the next time I come across one of those articles, I'll be sure to post it for you so you can make fun of attorneys.
Oldguy, I'm not sure what your point is. Are you personally offended or just afraid that I am reducing the amount of respect for policemen?
.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?