Tucker6900
Regular Member
What would I do? If there is no crime then he becomes the criminal by assaulting me and pointing a weapon at me. He will get treated like every other potential assailant.
What would I do? If there is no crime then he becomes the criminal by assaulting me and pointing a weapon at me. He will get treated like every other potential assailant.
That might be an exceptionally bad idea. There are better ways, less expensive ways, of resolving such.
To each their own I guess....
When the security office first instructed them to leave, they should have left.
I dont know where any of you live, but according to the law, several counts of Disorderly Conduct were committed prior to the security officers involvement. I see no reason for those guy's to be there either...
The persons also seemed to be under the influence of something.
When the security office first instructed them to leave, they should have left.
I did not see any rights violations in the video. Those idiots did not have to be there at all. The store is for shopping, not loitering or creating negativity in the parking lot. I can only imagine what else that security officer has to deal with.
Honestly, I would love to have security officers at stores in my area to keep idiots out of my way.
"There Is A Good Reason Why That Store Spends The Money To Have Security At The Front Door"
Also, what if it was your store??????:uhoh:
What if it was my store? I would have called 911, and not only fired the officer, but had him arrested. The same as I arrested DUI off duty officers, and arrested other officers for breaking the law. This dufus is extremely lucky, IMO, he should have been arrested for assault. What in your opinion would make their actions disorderly conduct? Public lot, recording not illegal, and certainly did not give way to the barbaric way the officer acted. It seems to me, at least IMO, the officer was a ticking time bomb, and may still be. I intend to fire off a email to the Dallas Texas PD and call for an investigation and appropriate action.
He is an embarrassment to the uniform!:banghead:
--snip--
The time of peaceful resistance is getting closer to the end. If we dont stand up against this type of behavior, it will get worse. And our elected officials have already proven time and time again what side they are really on.
No problems with your post until this last part - then a line is crossed per Forum Rules
15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/misc.php?do=showrules
Originally Posted by Grapeshot
No problems with your post until this last part - then a line is crossed per Forum Rules
15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/misc.php?do=showrules
Comment about rule 15:
Of course, in state courts if you feel a law is unconstitutional (from a state constitution standpoint) then one would have to break it to challenge it. If one feels a law is unconstitutional from the federal constitution then one does not have to break it to challenge it. So one does not have to be arrested to challenge a law in all cases.
The time of peaceful resistance is getting closer to the end.
No problems with your post until this last part - then a line is crossed per Forum Rules
15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/misc.php?do=showrules
No problems with your post until this last part - then a line is crossed per Forum Rules
15) WE ADVOCATE FOR THE 'LAW-ABIDING' ONLY: Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here. Even if you feel that a law is unconstitutional we do not break it, we repeal it or defeat it in the courts.
http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/misc.php?do=showrules
Grape I normally agree with most everything you have said, not this time. A tazer can be a deadly weapon, and it would have been for me after two heart attacks, AND metal tubes in my heart. A police officer would be legitimate in using deadly force to stop from being tazed. A citizen has the same rights to not be put in a situation with a armed man attempting to taze them. Whether in uniform or not, and he would have been in his rights by what is seen in the video to use deadly force. There is no doubt in my mind I would have used deadly force in that situation. I would not be subjected to being tazed. I would rather take my chances in court with the evidence of the event, than dead. I extremely shocked at the video and the terrorist way the officer acted. This is why IMO that Indiana changed their laws, though the constitution gives us the same stance.
Not so - believe that having standing is all that is required.
Not quite following, how is peaceful resistance to an illegal arrest advocated an illegal act?
I think that standing in respect to state issues does require a violation; just my recollection. I think we have all heard of people in protests allowing themselves to be arrested ... so maybe a peaceful violation of the law could be considered appropriate.
Not so - believe that having standing is all that is required.
However the primary point is "Posts advocating illegal acts of any kind are NOT welcome here."