How to Deal with Police (cheat sheet)

Published On April 3, 2013 | By Jason Bassler | Articles

HOW TO DEAL WITH POLICE

I recently made this chart “How to deal with Police”.  This information is to be used at your discretion. The tone and attitude you demonstrate towards an officer is your own choice in relationship to the circumstance. I believe it is better to know the options and your rights so you can make the best decision in the moment.  I hope this information helps in any future encounters with police and remember Always film police misconduct!                                                                       

– Jason Bassler

Sources:

http://www.facebook.com/policethepoliceACP

https://www.dc414.org/projects/protect-your-self/know-your-rights/

https://www.eff.org/wp/know-your-rights

http://sweetvociferation.blogspot.com/2012/07/when-dealing-with-police-helpful-cheat.html

http://jayrameylaw.com/know-your-rights/

http://rense.com/general72/howto.htm
https://www.ohiobar.org/ForPublic/Resources/LawFactsPamphlets/Pages/LawFactsPamphlet-21.aspx

Dont talk to police video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=6wXkI4t7nuc

 

 

Like this Article? Share it!

About The Author

http://www.facebook.com/policethepoliceACP
  • slappy

    What a bunch of BS. Just how well does your little chart work for you? Maybe if you activists stop making idiots of yourselves you won’t have to worry about wasting all that time to make a little cheat sheet for such a stupid thing. Grow up and act like an adult.

  • Common Sense

    Excellent legal advice. Like Slappy said, tell me how that works out for you doing your repeated police encounters.

  • t

    Mockery Mode ***ON ***

    That’s tellin ‘em Slappy, I’m proud of you.

    Activist are only capable of one thing and that’s …IDIOTIC BS !

    Preach IT !

    No saying what could happen if the mundanes ever learned how to exercise their rights. No need to upset the proper relationship between things… It could make it harder on Public Servants to serve the public. Or, it might force the Civil Servants to be civil. Why it might even drive the peace officers to be peaceful !

    Now we don’t want that do we…huh ?

    It’s better that everyone everywhere understands that they are to submit and comply at all times…that’s how we CREATE order. That’s how we protect FREEDOM !

    Don’t let up Slappy !

    Mockery Mode ***OFF ***

    @ Jason Bassler — keep up the good work !

    Your humble servant

    t

  • Chris Mallory

    Government employees hate it when citizens know their rights.

    Disarm cops for a safer America.

    All cops lie, all the time.

  • ishkabibble

    Hooray Sloppy! You are the epitome of the “idiocy of dunces”, keep up the good work. Common sense would dictate exercising ones rights, but that’d be silly in a democracy.

    Austin Powers “Judo chop!”

    Jason, great primer, however American’s must be diligent in using this as a catalyst to understanding and effectively exercising their rights in any interaction with those whom we employ. LEO, Civil Servant, etc…

    Keep up the good work, and carry on.

  • Another_Jeremy

    To the two idiots bitching about the exercise of one’s rights while interacting with the police, I have but one thing to say.

    Indifferent, propagandized automatons like you are the cause of all injustice in the world.

    Keep up the good work Jason!

  • certain

    What a slaptavist.

  • http://www.badgeabuse.com badgeabuse

    Slapidiot…

    How many times have you failed the LEO test?

  • Josh

    How does one fail the LEO test, seems like would have to be severely mentally handicapped for that to be even possible.

  • YankeeFan

    slappy says:

    April 4, 2013 at 10:18 am

    What a bunch of BS. Just how well does your little chart work for you? Maybe if you activists stop making idiots of yourselves you won’t have to worry about wasting all that time to make a little cheat sheet for such a stupid thing. Grow up and act like an adult.

    Go away troll, you add nothing to the conversation!!

  • http://copblock David Swan

    Showing them my middle finger works well too.

  • t.

    YF: If you or anyone else learned anything from this little chart you were stupid.

    As I have demonstrated time after time…the premise / mantra of “never talk to the police” as more often than not, very bad advice. It is inexperienced cop blockers hurting other inexperienced cop blockers.

  • http://www.badgeabuse.com badgeabuse

    @T

    The problem is MOST(I didnt say you) think they are mind readers and try the trick questions route..

  • t.

    Abuse: oh, don’t get me wrong. I’ll trick you too. Heck, I just lured the incredible idiot Flakewood into exposing his own stupidity. But me asking you some “tricky questions” to clarify what happened…to expose you if you are lying…is only a problem…wait for it…if you are lying and trying to hide / cover something !! In nearly all….nearly all…street encounters or any type of police encounter (other than a vehicle stop…but not even excluding all of them) come as a response to a call / complaint of some kind. When I make the statement that the overwhelmingly huge amount if the citizens want more of me and less of you (not necessarily you specifically) some easy proof is right there….they call me about you, all the time. They don’t want you strolling through their neighborhood (swiping their stuff), they don’t want you lurking around near their business (waiting to break in), and when they smell you smoking (the much moved by cop blockers-marijuama) in the next apartment, or when they can’t hear themselves think over your loud music….they call me. That is a very key thing, and it shouldn’t be overlooked. That is police contact that can very much be limited / controlled by your own behavior.

    So when I roll up and get out if my car and talk to you at 2 am in a residential neighborhood that has been plagued with break ins…and you are evasive, and I “trick you” because of your evasiveness…well, there you go. I’m not looking to arrest you, heck I don’t know if you have done anything. But as part of my oath I am sworn to protect lives and property. Part of that is finding out who the people are that, for lack of a better term, are different or don’t belong where they are. Yes, you have your rights. But so do other people. And your rights cont necessarily out weigh theirs.

  • Another_Jeremy

    t-

    So who are you protecting when people call the police on someone for the huge crime of . . wait for it. . .standing outside and being black? When I was visiting my mother in Arkansas, the landlord called the police on me for refusing to tell him what apartment number I lived in after he found me committing the crime of talking on my iPhone 5 in a plaid shirt and khakis in the parking lot at dusk. When I used it to record the police as soon as they got out of their cars, they told me I was “making trouble,” and when my mother came out and told them that I did in fact live with her, they continued with their same patronizing tone and threats to arrest me for the non crime of “disrupting a government process.”

    Who were the police “protecting” by forcing me to verify that I was a resident of an apartment complex just because I was outside on my phone? Who was there to protect me from the unlawful detainment and harassment I was subjected to for no viable reason?

    The police are not protecting anyone by proactively bothering citizens over regulatory infractions. They are not protecting anyone by arresting homeless people for being homeless, tazing pregnant women for refusing to get on the ground, beating peaceful protesters, blocking the views of cameras who record their brutality, engaging in paramilitary raids over tiny amounts of drugs that frequently end in the deaths of civilians, and frisking every person who walks by them who happens to have dark skin.

    You can prevent a lot of crimes by stopping every citizen on the street without cause. And we could also get rid of a lot of corrupt cops by lining them all up and shooting them. But that’s not how the law works. There are very simple measures that can be taken to protect the public against such blatant misconduct, such as attaching small cameras to their uniforms that stream to an offsite encrypted location. There is a reason such simple oversight is met with staunch resistance from the police by way of wanton fear-mongering and lying. Because the cops want to have a monopoly on the narratives about the “crimes” they selectively police and the sequence of events that led to them.

    I’ll start believing that the police are not merely an extension of white supremacy and capitalism when the police (here in NYC specifically) beef up their white collar crime unit and stop only enforcing crimes against only the weakest and poorest among us. Until then, I’ll be content to wage my private and lawful war with them by way of the video and the public discourse. Read the bill of rights my friend. It places limits on the government, not on citizens. I have a right to stand in a public place and not be harassed by the state. The yuppy white people who call the cops because someone outside their apartment “looks suspicious” do not have a constitutionally protected right to remove all of the peasants from their neighborhood.

  • slappy

    Jeremy: OF course the landlord is going to call the PD. You are loitering in front of his building. Of course you bring up racism with is the most stupid red neck thing you could do. How can you scream racism when you mom lives in those apartments? You are just another dumb jack ass who was on private property. Maybe if you would have said why you were there ect.. you wouldn’t of had the problems you did. Only a piece of garbage like you would call for racism especially since it wasn’t. Grow up and stop being racist yourself. You keep racism alive by doing dumb stuff like this. I’m sure your mom was real impressed with you. Idiot.

  • Another_Jeremy

    The Arkanss “Stop and Identify” (verbal identification and not physical ID) law only applies to the offense of LOITERING!

    A.C.A.§ 5-71-213 (2012)

    5-71-213. Loitering.

    (a) A person commits the offense of loitering if he or she:

    (1) Lingers, remains, or prowls in a public place or the premises of another without apparent reason and under circumstances that warrant alarm or concern for the safety of persons or property in the vicinity and, upon inquiry by a law enforcement officer, refuses to identify himself or herself and give a reasonably credible account of his or her presence and purpose;

    (2) Lingers, remains, or prowls in or near a school building, not having any reason or relationship involving custody of or responsibility for a student and not having written permission from anyone authorized to grant permission;

    (3) Lingers or remains in a public place or on the premises of another for the purpose of begging;

    (4) Lingers or remains in a public place for the purpose of unlawful gambling;

    (5) Lingers or remains in a public place for the purpose of engaging or soliciting another person to engage in prostitution or deviate sexual activity;

    (6) Lingers or remains in a public place for the purpose of unlawfully buying, distributing, or using a controlled substance;

    (7) Lingers or remains in a public place for the purpose of unlawfully buying, distributing, or consuming an alcoholic beverage;

    (8) Lingers or remains on or about the premises of another for the purpose of spying upon or invading the privacy of another; or

    (9) Lingers or remains on or about the premises of any off-site customer-bank communication terminal without any legitimate purpose.

    (b) Among the circumstances that may be considered in determining whether a person is loitering are that the person:

    (1) Takes flight upon the appearance of a law enforcement officer;

    (2) Refuses to identify himself or herself; or

    (3) Manifestly endeavors to conceal himself or herself or any object.

    (c) Unless flight by the actor or another circumstance makes it impracticable, prior to an arrest for an offense under subdivision (a)(1) of this section a law enforcement officer shall afford the actor an opportunity to dispel any alarm that would otherwise be warranted by requesting the actor to identify himself or herself and explain his or her presence and conduct.

    (d) It is a defense to a prosecution under subdivision (a)(1) of this section if:

    (1) The law enforcement officer did not afford the defendant an opportunity to identify himself or herself and explain his or presence and conduct; or

    (2) It appears at trial that an explanation given by the defendant to the law enforcement officer was true and, if believed by the law enforcement officer at that time, would have dispelled the alarm.

    (e) Loitering is a Class C misdemeanor.

  • Another_Jeremy

    It’s not loitering if I have reason to be there moron. I told the landlord who did not identify himself properly until after the arrival of the police, that I lived in the building I was standing in front of. I refused to tell him the specific apartment number. There were other individuals in the parking lot to whom he said nothing, and he does not approach every individuals on the premises and ask them to verify their apartment number as this is impossible. It is just another bit of fake security to selectively bother individuals arbitrarily deemed “suspicious.”

    And I can “scream racism” because my mother is white and I am black. Try again, troll.

  • http://www.badgeabuse.com badgeabuse

    @another Jeremy..

    Slappy is a troll and a School crossing guard…pay him no mind

  • YankeeFan

    What badgeabuse said. He is a troll who has marginalized himself with his nonsensical commentary. Just ignore the moron!!

  • t.

    @Another: The picture you paint is the perfect example of just what I said, so thank you. Look at your own story…
    Someone called the police (just like I said)
    You don’t live there / belong there (just like I said)
    The LANDLORD called because….you are in his parking lot and you don’t live there !!! And you are standing….on his privately owned property !!!!
    Instead of just calmly explaining who you were and that you were staying with your mother…you instead decide to follow the bad advice as listed on the above chart.
    Yours is the perfect example of causing yourself problems for “exercising your rights”. (BTW, where I work you could be charged as well)
    Who were the police protecting?!?!? Really?!?!? They were protecting the LANDLORD’s property, every tenant, and even your mother.
    So it doesn’t sound like you were unlawfully detained or harrassed. Sound like you could have a listed all of that contact simply by ….wait for it again…..I love this part….by talking to the police (and you could have even a oozed that if you’d have talked to the la doors like an adult).

    As for your third paragraph. W R O N G . I’m protecting hundreds, thousands each time I enforce something as simply as writing a ticket for not have insurance. Thousands of people are saved and helped…every time. As for the “paramilitary raids”. You may not see the harm in your neighbor selling drugs But I see a huge problem. And so do the overwhelming majority of people. I and they don’t want a drug den in their neighborhood…they don’t want the people that come to that kind of place lingering in their noechborhood, around their children, stealing their stuff, breaking into their houses and cars. As for for the “peaceful protesters”. Just wat h the protests….they are a long way from “peaceful”.

    As for your hang ups about race. Those are you issues to own and get over. As long as your attitude persists….I guess so will racism, as you personify it. And according to the story YOU told, your were in a private parking lot…one with a landlord. Not “public”.

    Sounds like you should be blaming you.

  • Another_Jeremy

    Talking to people like you perfectly highlights the need for a drastic cultural shift in the nature of policing in this country. Your responses are perfunctory and blatantly at odds with the narrative I provided above.

    My references to public and private spaces were juxtaposed. You made vague reference to people in general having a right to feel safe and that’s what I was referring to when I mentioned that I have a right to be in a public place. I’m here to tell you that there is no such right of the collective citizens of a particular neighborhood to “feel safe.” If you do not feel safe, you should see a therapist or move to somewhere else. It is not the responsibility of the state to alleviate the psychological woes of middle class white people or anyone else by harassing citizens. If you have a real concern for safety, donate to programs that alleviate joblessness and poverty; which are far more beneficial, efficient and cost affective than arresting/interrogating people indiscriminately.

    Did you read the statement or did you just immediately and falsely assume that I didn’t belong there, despite the fact that I expressly mentioned that little detail and told that to both the police and the property manager? As to my reference about being on harassed in my mother’s apartment complex, do tell me what information I could have provided to ease the “suspicion” felt by the property manager or the police? I told them I lived in the complex in the building I was standing in front of. Should I have had a copy of my mother’s lease on my person? And even if I had told him what apartment number I had lived in, how would he have known I wasn’t lying? How exactly does one “prove” one is a visitor or resident of an apartment complex and how can this rule possibly be consistently enforced? To the contrary my stupid friend, if you’re making a baseless accusation prove I did something wrong and I’ll be glad to tell you anything you want. But if I didn’t do anything wrong I owe you exactly jack shit. No explanation. No talking. No nothing.

    What you and many of your idiot comrades seem to forget is that if you did not witness a crime taking place and you have no probable cause, a complaint to the police does not constitute legal grounds to arrest someone. If you do not have probable cause and a “suspicious person” exercises their right to remain silent there is another oft forgotten option. You can go get a warrant and come back later if you’re so convinced someone is up to no good. But no one wants to do that, because besides the fact that no judge is going to issue a warrant for loitering or any other such non crime, following such obvious protocol takes away some of the power the police have in the moment of interaction. Instead, most officers antagonize people in the hopes that the situation will escalate until they have some other fake charge like “disorderly conduct” or “resisting arrest” to deal with the situation in the short term while trampling the civil rights of the “suspect” in the process.

    Are you simply too lazy to do your job of investigating complaints thoroughly? Might it simply be that when someone calls the police on someone you want to take it as the gospel truth instead of acknowledging that anyone at any time can be “guilty” of loitering and that such laws give the police unfettered discretion to arrest anyone they feel like with or without any actual justification? There is nothing evasive about not responding to questions from the state; it’s just called the 5th amendment. Perhaps you should read before demonizing innocent civilians for engaging in the rights they were afforded by the constitution of these United States.

    And your comments about the drug war being supported by a majority of Americans . . .patently false.

    http://www.people-press.org/2013/04/04/marijuana-timeline/

    The protests are anything but peaceful? Well . . .let’s take occupy wallstreet as an example. Countless violations of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, despite the fact that DHS classified the protests as peaceful.

    http://chrgj.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/suppressingprotest.pdf

    And as to some other factoids about the drug war and generalized racism in policing. . . .

    “A study by the U. S. Justice Department in 2007 found that though blacks account for 16% of all youth, they’re 28% of juvenile arrest, 35% of youth transferred to adult courts and 58% of youth admitted to adult prisons.

    The National Household Survey on Drug Abuse in 2000 found that white youth aged 12-17 are more than a third more likely to have sold illegal drugs than black youth which is wildly incongruous with arrests and convictions.

    The National Institute on Drug Abuse reported in 2000 that white students use cocaine at 7 times the rate that black students did, crack cocaine at 8 times the rate of blacks and heroin at 7 times the rate of blacks, which is wildly incongruous with arrests and convictions.

    A study published in the Journal of Alcohol and Drug education found that when people were to imagine a drug user, 95% of people described a black person despite the fact that they were and are roughly 15% of drug users.

    Human Rights watch reported in 2000 that in seven states blacks constitute 80 to 90 percent of all drug offenders sent to prison, despite that they make up only 15% of drug users.

    The Baldus study in the 80s found that even accounting for 30+ other factors, blacks convicted of killing whites are still 4.3 times more likely to be given the death penalty than whites for killing blacks.

    A study published in the Journal of of Social Personality and Social Psychology in 2001 found that when asked to play a video game in which they were to shoot targets with either a gun or a foreign object (soda can, wallet, etc) in their hand, participants were more likely to see a gun where there wasn’t one in blacks and not identify the gun in whites.

    The NYPD stopped and frisked 545,000 people in 2008 and 85% were African-American.

    A study by the U. S. Justice Department in 2007 found that though blacks account for 16% of all youth, they’re 28% of juvenile arrest, 35% of youth transferred to adult courts and 58% of youth admitted to adult prisons.”

    And a few more just for funsies. . . . .

    A 1998 DOJ study found that the police use force 18% of the time and those arrested resist with force less than 3% of the time. Put another way the police use force more than 5 times as often as it is used against them.

    Those who resist, use a weapon 0.7% of the time.

    Farmers and wood cutters are far more dangerous jobs than police officers as determined by number of deaths per year.

    A word to the not so wise, I’m not some young uninformed black civilian you can bully into submission with the threat of arrest. Don’t delude yourself into believing you’re a hero for writing people tickets to generate revenue for the government; as observations of other countries (specifically Portugual http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/07/05/ten-years-after-decriminalization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/) have shown there are far better ways to help society than tossing people in jail for victimless “crimes” and drug offenses. Indeed, the police in the United States are one of the greatest threats to individual safety facing our nation.

    Any thoughts on my rebuttal or the countless stats and studies I mentioned? If it’s more cop propaganda I’ll probably stop responding out of boredom.

  • certain

    If you are a real cop, you’re an accessory to criminal acts or commit them yourself far more often than the average citizen. Funny, in all of your tales of when I was in this, and when I was that, I’ve never once heard you mention seeing another cop break the law and doing nothing about it, because it was a cop that did it. Oh, that never happened? LOL.

  • t.

    That’s because you don’t listen retard. I told many times of working “tarnished badge” cases. I’ve worked hard to get that element out of my profession. While we weren’t able to put them in prison, we were able to insure that they aren’t the police ever again. But you as always think that everything that an officer does is a crime, kinda like @Another just wrote about. He wasn’t illegally detained or harass. Just because he didn’t like it…didn’t make it wrong or illegal. That is a huge difference.

    I laughed out loud last night at a loud noise complaint…thinking about you idiots. It wasn’t late 830-900. Anonymous complainant calls in about kids running around playing and some loud noise because of it. I laughed because you retards would be unhappy about whatever the outcome of that small thing (though a big deal to the complainant as it was their time to try and relax). And whose rights were more important? No matter what I did…you would think I committed a crime and trampled someone’s rights. Youre a pathetic joke.

  • Another_Jeremy

    I posted a lengthy response to t’s post. I linked some studies and articles, so it is awaiting moderation.

    You seem to have the typical entitled sociopathic proclivities of the worst police officers. The people you are protecting and serving are not high school students walking down the to the restroom without a hall pass. They do not have to explain why they are where they are or where they are going, and there a dozens of obvious reasons for anyone to be at any place at any time. I just had a fight with my girlfriend, and I decided to go for a walk. I just whacked off and needed to step out for a cigarette whilst I recover from the ecstasy. I wanted to go for a walk. None of them are your business. Do tell me how the police manage to react to all of the suspicious people in a given location on a given night. The simple answer is that they can’t, so they selectively enforce laws and selective harass citizens; most disproportionately those who are black and brown.

    https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2000/08/det-a31.html

    Stupidity like yours costs lives. The punitive and aggressive tactics that you readily justify and that are readily accepted in this country have shamed America’s human rights record internationally. I eagerly await your response to this and my other post when it appears.

  • t.

    Wow…speaking of stupidity. Before I address any of your remarkably shortsightedness, I must ask and address first…..why would you link a 13 year old incident in which they police acted correctly (his “deafness” had no bearing on his assaulting his parents with a butcher knife and his attacking the police with a steel rake) to try and make your non existent point?

    I’ll wait……..

  • PGST

    Best way to deal with them is to shoot em in the face, then use their favorite excuse. “you feared for your life” Fuck the police and all these dick sucking trolls who can’t stand it when someone knows their rights. Death to the tyrants!

  • Another_Jeremy

    Seriously dude? You keep bringing up the fact that most of the people who do not respond properly to the police are doing something they’re not supposed to be doing. Here was a perfect example of a man who could not properly respond to the commands of officers for a perfectly viable reason, and yet he was still killed while armed with only a lawn tool.

    Here are the facts that are not in dispute in this case:

    The police were called on a man for allegedly attacking someone with a knife. (which was never found)

    Upon their arrival they discovered a man with a garden rake in his hand.

    They circled around him, a tactic deliberately designed to suppress and intimidate a “suspect,” and he like anyone would, obiviously became panicked.

    Despite screams from his family that the man was and could not hear their commands, they gunned him down from 15 feet away for failing to obey them on his own property.

    It’s easy to get into quibbling about the facts of this that and the other case, but better yet, name me one instance in which the police killed or assaulted a citizen in which you feel they should have been dismissed or prosecuted? It seems that the order of the day is that the police are never wrong, except for all those times when they’re wrong.

    But I want you to answer a larger question; why do you expect us to blindly accept the narrative that the police are “protecting society” even when their actions have historically displayed no such motivation?

    What were the police doing to protect society during the Labor Movement? Beating people up and throwing them in jail for peaceably requesting a livable wage, safe work conditions and a work week that didn’t cause people to die from exhaustion. What were they doing to protect society during the Civil Rights Movement? Throwing people in jail and sending dogs after them for engaging in peaceful marches, sit ins, and sitting in the front of the bus to oppose segregation. What were they doing the Occupy Wallstreet protests? Spraying peaceful protesters in the face with mace and beating them for peaceably occupying public spaces and expressing their disdain for the current state of economic inequality in the United States. Do you think it’s a coincidence that the police are so more effective and monitoring those with the least power in our society and such a poor job of monitoring themselves and those in our society who have the most wealth and influence? Also do tell us when exactly the police stopped being arbitrary enforcers of the rule of law, no matter how blatantly unjust, and turn into the heros we get to watch on Law & Order each week? I’m very curious for your insight.

  • Another_Jeremy

    Here is my previous comment. I decided to paste it in chunks rather than wait for it to be posted by the moderators.

    Talking to people like you perfectly highlights the need for a drastic cultural shift in the nature of policing in this country. Your responses are perfunctory and blatantly at odds with the narrative I provided above.

    My references to public and private spaces were juxtaposed. You made vague reference to people in general having a right to feel safe and that’s what I was referring to when I mentioned that I have a right to be in a public place. I’m here to tell you that there is no such right of the collective citizens of a particular neighborhood to “feel safe.” If you do not feel safe, you should see a therapist or move to somewhere else. It is not the responsibility of the state to alleviate the psychological woes of middle class white people or anyone else by harassing citizens. If you have a real concern for safety, donate to programs that alleviate joblessness and poverty; which are far more beneficial, efficient and cost affective than arresting/interrogating people indiscriminately.

    Did you read the statement or did you just immediately and falsely assume that I didn’t belong there, despite the fact that I expressly mentioned that little detail and told that to both the police and the property manager? As to my reference about being on harassed in my mother’s apartment complex, do tell me what information I could have provided to ease the “suspicion” felt by the property manager or the police? I told them I lived in the complex in the building I was standing in front of. Should I have had a copy of my mother’s lease on my person? And even if I had told him what apartment number I had lived in, how would he have known I wasn’t lying? How exactly does one “prove” one is a visitor or resident of an apartment complex and how can this rule possibly be consistently enforced? To the contrary my stupid friend, if you’re making a baseless accusation prove I did something wrong and I’ll be glad to tell you anything you want. But if I didn’t do anything wrong I owe you exactly jack shit. No explanation. No talking. No nothing.

    What you and many of your idiot comrades seem to forget is that if you did not witness a crime taking place and you have no probable cause, a complaint to the police does not constitute legal grounds to arrest someone. If you do not have probable cause and a “suspicious person” exercises their right to remain silent there is another oft forgotten option. You can go get a warrant and come back later if you’re so convinced someone is up to no good. But no one wants to do that, because besides the fact that no judge is going to issue a warrant for loitering or any other such non crime, following such obvious protocol takes away some of the power the police have in the moment of interaction. Instead, most officers antagonize people in the hopes that the situation will escalate until they have some other fake charge like “disorderly conduct” or “resisting arrest” to deal with the situation in the short term while trampling the civil rights of the “suspect” in the process.

    Are you simply too lazy to do your job of investigating complaints thoroughly? Might it simply be that when someone calls the police on someone you want to take it as the gospel truth instead of acknowledging that anyone at any time can be “guilty” of loitering and that such laws give the police unfettered discretion to arrest anyone they feel like with or without any actual justification? There is nothing evasive about not responding to questions from the state; it’s just called the 5th amendment. Perhaps you should read before demonizing innocent civilians for engaging in the rights they were afforded by the constitution of these United States.

    And your comments about the drug war being supported by a majority of Americans . . .patently false.

    http://www.people-press.org/2013/04/04/marijuana-timeline/

  • Another_Jeremy

    And as to some other factoids about the drug war and generalized racism in policing. . . .

    “A study by the U. S. Justice Department in 2007 found that though blacks account for 16% of all youth, they’re 28% of juvenile arrest, 35% of youth transferred to adult courts and 58% of youth admitted to adult prisons.

    The National Household Survey on Drug Abuse in 2000 found that white youth aged 12-17 are more than a third more likely to have sold illegal drugs than black youth which is wildly incongruous with arrests and convictions.

    The National Institute on Drug Abuse reported in 2000 that white students use cocaine at 7 times the rate that black students did, crack cocaine at 8 times the rate of blacks and heroin at 7 times the rate of blacks, which is wildly incongruous with arrests and convictions.

    A study published in the Journal of Alcohol and Drug education found that when people were to imagine a drug user, 95% of people described a black person despite the fact that they were and are roughly 15% of drug users.

    Human Rights watch reported in 2000 that in seven states blacks constitute 80 to 90 percent of all drug offenders sent to prison, despite that they make up only 15% of drug users.

    The Baldus study in the 80s found that even accounting for 30+ other factors, blacks convicted of killing whites are still 4.3 times more likely to be given the death penalty than whites for killing blacks.

    A study published in the Journal of of Social Personality and Social Psychology in 2001 found that when asked to play a video game in which they were to shoot targets with either a gun or a foreign object (soda can, wallet, etc) in their hand, participants were more likely to see a gun where there wasn’t one in blacks and not identify the gun in whites.

    The NYPD stopped and frisked 545,000 people in 2008 and 85% were African-American.

    A study by the U. S. Justice Department in 2007 found that though blacks account for 16% of all youth, they’re 28% of juvenile arrest, 35% of youth transferred to adult courts and 58% of youth admitted to adult prisons.”

    And a few more just for funsies. . . . .

    A 1998 DOJ study found that the police use force 18% of the time and those arrested resist with force less than 3% of the time. Put another way the police use force more than 5 times as often as it is used against them.

    Those who resist, use a weapon 0.7% of the time.

    Farmers and wood cutters are far more dangerous jobs than police officers as determined by number of deaths per year.

    A word to the not so wise, I’m not some young uninformed black civilian you can bully into submission with the threat of arrest. Don’t delude yourself into believing you’re a hero for writing people tickets to generate revenue for the government; as observations of other countries (specifically Portugual) have shown there are far better ways to help society than tossing people in jail for victimless “crimes” and drug offenses. Indeed, the police in the United States are one of the greatest threats to individual safety facing our nation.

    Any thoughts on my rebuttal or the countless stats and studies I mentioned? If it’s more cop propaganda I’ll probably stop responding out of boredom.

  • Another_Jeremy

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2011/07/05/ten-years-after-decriminalization-drug-abuse-down-by-half-in-portugal/

    And finally, as is demonstrated by what the legislature of Portugual decided to do, there are methods of dealing with social problems that are far less crude than walking up to everyone on the street until they are too afraid to even stand in the parking lots of their own apartment complexes. Why should I pay taxes to be harassed arbitrarily in the name of some abstract “safety” that applies to everything except my protection from the police?

    So tell us Mr. Cop Apologist, what can we do to counter the current problem of violent police responses to peaceful protests and other such corruption and brutality? What say you about the the complete impugnity given to police officer who unlawfully attack citizens and are slapped on the wrist by Internal Affairs Departments? Why should our tax dollars go to paying people off for police misconduct because of your failures to institute meaningful oversight for your own?

  • Another_Jeremy

    And last but not least, here is a website documenting countless examples of police misconduct and violence nation wide since you dishonestly implied that since the article I lised was from 2000, there are not more recent instances.

    http://www.policemisconduct.net/

  • Radical Dude

    quoted from Another_Jeremy:
    “Did you read the statement or did you just immediately and falsely assume that I didn’t belong there, despite the fact that I expressly mentioned that little detail and told that to both the police and the property manager?”

    @Another_Jeremy
    I see this a lot in the authoritarian apologists, I think they have to do it in order to rationalize/maintain their shared delusion that they have some factual “authority” to perpetrate their gang violence. They will imagine an imaginary “fact”, and then use their imagined “fact” as a justification for violence.

  • certain

    Comprehension, moron, look it up and practice. Read what I wrote, then make an intelligent response against the point I’m making, not whatever twist you decide to put on it.

  • certain

    When the bosses, for whatever reason, decide a cop has to go, I’m sure other cops are right there, sucking up as usual and playing the hero. “See, we punish our own.” The point I was making, was how many times have you seen a cop break a law and done absolutely nothing? Or another security guard, as the case might be.

  • t.

    Another: First….let’s us hold off on our judgment of you as to your intelligence. But I think your truthfulness and honesty is easily questioned by your own statements. Maybe YOU are a good example of someone who shouldn’t ever talk to the police…you don’t seem very well equipped….I’ll demonstrated and explain:

    Let us look at your original statement about you alleged unlawful detention and harrasment by the police.

    Y O U tell us:
    First…that you are “visiting” you mother. Look back, its in your second sentence so you won’t have to look very far.
    Your mother later comes and and save that you live with her. Already…by your own words…someone isn’t being truthful.
    In a later post you claim to live e in the building that you were standing in front of. (BTW…in that same post you clearly explain that your mother is white and you are black…that’s an important point to get to in a second)
    Later still you mention that you were “harassed in you MOTHERS apartment complex” and in the very next sentence you say “I told them I lived in the complex in the building I was standing in front of.”

    Now…just based on your own statements and the information that YOU presented to me (us)…what can we conclude?

    By your statement you DONT live there, you are a visitor at you mothers apartment. How can we deduce this? From your own statement (conflicting as they are) and from the fact that….wait for it…the LANDLORD doesn’t have a clue who you are !!!! Now having said that, what does that mean? Does that mean that you are in the wrong for being there? Not necessarily. Was he wrong to question you? No. Was he wrong to cal the police and for them to subsequently question you? Clearly no. There is where the little tidbit you threw in there about your mother being white and you being “black” comes in. The landlord may not (most likely doesn’t) know everyone in the complex by name. But he very, very likely knows them by face. And your unknown (because you dont live there) “black” face in front of a building in which he knows you don’t live in (even by your own admission) should raise his suspicions.

    Now for the police response. Again, they have only your conflicting information to go on..plus the fact the the LANDLORD knows that you don’t live there. So they speak you. And from the posts you have written…your militant response to them. Now your line about PC is relatively right. But what you missed is the RS component. Let’s explore that. We have your conflicting statements…we have a landlord who says he doesn’t know you and that you don’t live there…and we have you militant response to being questioned. I was at RS from the landlords call alone. Your conflicting statements only re-enforce that. Now I don’t get to PC as its not unlawful for you to be visiting your mother or using the phone. So as for the entire situation that you found yourself…pretty much self-inflicted and could have been avoided if you would have lost the baseless militant standing.

    As for so much of the rest of your preaching points.

    You really need to revisit you understanding of the status of your beloved “Portugal”. Its not the Camelot you want to think it is.

    While certainly there were police abuses during both the labor movement and the civil rights movement..neither were (in general) the peaceful movements that you are looking back at them as.
    As for OWS…that’s a completely different matter. Its clearly not a peaceful movement in any sense. All you have to do is watch the videos the movement itself posts. Violence and property destruction is the daily mode of operation. Simple fact. You may find it acceptable, but that doesn’t change the facts.

    Guy your rampant racism is your problem and larger you fault. The problems that you experience because of that are self inflicted. Your desire to blame everyone else for everything will lead you to an unpleasant life. That’s OK with me…its your life. But don’t see life through some professors eyes and see only what they told you to see.

    Oh, and get a dictionary and look up “harassment”.

  • Radical Dude

    quoted from Jeremy:
    “I told them I lived in the complex in the building I was standing in front of
    I told the landlord who did not identify himself properly until after the arrival of the police, that I lived in the building I was standing in front of. I refused to tell him the specific apartment number. There were other individuals in the parking lot to whom he said nothing, and he does not approach every individuals on the premises and ask them to verify their apartment number as this is impossible.

    When I was visiting my mother in Arkansas, the landlord called the police on me for refusing to tell him what apartment number I lived in after he found me committing the crime of talking on my iPhone 5 in a plaid shirt and khakis in the parking lot at dusk. When I used it to record the police as soon as they got out of their cars, they told me I was “making trouble,” and when my mother came out and told them that I did in fact live with her, they continued with their same patronizing tone and threats to arrest me for the non crime of “disrupting a government process.”

    …despite the fact that I expressly mentioned that little detail and told that to both the police and the property manager? ”

    @t:
    Above are the quoted facts of the matter provided by Another_Jeremy.
    Agree that those are the only facts presented by Jeremy? Or have I missed any?
    And yet, in your response, you describe a “militant” response.
    What specific facts presented by Jeremy support your alegation of a “militant response”, or is it just something you imagined?

  • t.

    I quoted exactly what he said happened. Don’t “cherry pick” facts.

  • Radical Dude

    @t.:
    So, when you described this “militant response” from Jeremy, you were quoting “exactly what he said happened”? I think I retyped exactly what he said happened, exactly as he said it. He didn’t describe any “militant response”. You are the one claiming this “militant response” happened, what I am asking specifically is do you have any facts to support that claim, or don’t you? If you are just “speculating” or “imagining” or “assuming” that there was a “militant response” then just say so, and if it’s fact based, then what facts do you derive this allegation of a “militant response” from? If you want to speculate based on what you imagined happened, then say it. But I see this pattern over and over where authoritarian apologists invent imaginary “facts”, and then use their imagined “facts” to justify authoritarian violence. Because you need fictions to justify the violence, because the legitimacy of the violence is fiction. Authoritarianists are stuck in a superstition where their brain is literally programmed to believe the authoritarian superstition it has to invent to perpetuate its delusion, that corporate fictions have “authorized” their criminal violence. Lest they face the truth: their beliefs that their authoritarian violence is “legitimate” is based on superstition, not fact. So, you must invent facts to “fill in the gaps” where the facts don’t match up to your superstitious beliefs. So I think that is what you have done here: made up facts to conform to the superstition that has been programmed into you. The fact that you can’t/won’t directly responsively answer my question just supports what I’m saying, because otherwise you would be able to answer me.
    Just to make it clear, I am directly challenging your fiction. The question is:
    What facts support your claim that there was a “militant response” from Jeremy, or did you just imagine it?

  • t.

    Ah…comprehension and intentional dishonesty have shown…almost as if by cue.

    When I am discussing the story he told….I quoted he’s exact story (you cherry picked the parts you wanted to use….no context to yours).

    Further down in my comment I give opinion about the “story” that he told. Don’t be mad be ause he is either not a good story teller or worse yet….inaccurate or a liar. You on the other hand have no excuses. You re trying to be intentionally inaccurate and dishonest.

  • Another_Jeremy

    T-

    I’m gonna try this one more time.

    I was outside on my phone in the parking lot of my mother’s apartment complex in Arkansas. The property manager (who had not identified himself as such) approached me and asked me what I was doing there. I said I lived in the building of which I was in front. He asked what apartment number, and I refused to answer because I had no verification of who he was. He called the police and I told them the same. I video recorded the encounter on my phone, showed them my ID, (only because it is the law in AR, unlike here in NYC) but it was only when my mother came outside and told them I was staying with her that this was “proof” that I belonged there, but instead of getting in their cars and driving away they continued to thump their chests and attempted to intimidate me with trumped up charges.

    Instead of focusing on the critical element of this story, the fact that I had a right to be on the property and wasn’t doing anything illegal, you instead focus exclusively on the fact that I did not show deference to a police officer for the simple reason that he has on a blue uniform and a badge, and that I juxtaposed “live” with “visiting.” When you stay with someone for an extended period of time, are you living with them or visiting them? Even if I had been staying with my mother for a year, and wasn’t on the lease, that is a civil issue and not a criminal matter. What proof could I have provided to the police or the property manager indicating that my presence on the property wasn’t loitering? Should I have keyed into my mother’s apartment with them watching? Should I have shown them a copy of the lease? With over 300 million people in the United States, do tell me how the police can feasibly verify the “purpose” of someone’s presence at every location at every moment? Just because someone calls the police and reports a “suspicious person,” that person is still presumed innocent under the law. Demanding that I justify my presence flies directly in the face of this basic principle.

    Here is some food for thought;

    1. I am not required to regale a stranger with the intricacies of my living situation just because I happen to be outside on my cell phone.
    2. There is no way someone can justify that their whereabouts are not unlawful at any time without being subject to unnecessary invasiveness.
    3. Just because a civilian knows their rights and isn’t interested in doing a soft shoe for the police, doesn’t mean that they’re doing anything illegal.
    4. And even if they are it’s your job to prove it, not theirs.

    Your earlier responses were very telling.

    “But me asking you some “tricky questions” to clarify what happened…to expose you if you are lying…is only a problem…wait for it…if you are lying and trying to hide / cover something !!”

    “Sound like you could have a listed all of that contact simply by ….wait for it again…..I love this part….by talking to the police (and you could have even a oozed that if you’d have talked to the la doors like an adult).”

    Your little theories fly into the headwinds of reality. I did tell them I belonged there and showed my ID, but it was still not sufficient. And I wasn’t hiding anything. Regardless, there are loads of reasons why someone wouldn’t want to explain certain things to the police, yet you guys seem to be trained to think that anyone who doesn’t go out of their way to make your job easy must be a criminal. This is false. Some people just see no need to explain themselves to the police or anyone else.

    What really disturbs me though, is the contempt you show for individual privacy and the Bill of Rights. A person’s 5th amendment protection against self incrimination is not yours to waive. It doesn’t matter if it would make matters simpler for you if someone would just speak up and answer your questions thoroughly. They don’t have to. If I don’t want to talk to a police officer, it doesn’t matter if there’s a dead body behind me. I have a right to remain silent. Even if I didn’t do anything wrong, there is absolutely nothing to gain by talking to the police. It can only be used to incriminate. Even if there’s something you say that is indicative of your innocence, a prosecutor can object because it’s hearsay. Your inane quibbling is a wonderful example of why someone who is being accused of doing something wrong should go out of their way to not cooperate with the police. It’s in their legal interests. My response was not militant. It was just not subservient. I do not work for the cops. The cops work for me. Capisce?

    But more importantly, where is your response to the institutional criticisms I leveled against the police? Any commentary on the absurd use of paramilitary raids for small amounts of drug possession? (http://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/balko_whitepaper_2006.pdf) How about the report I attached that was done by the Project for Protest and Assembly Rights which determined that the Occupy Wallstreet protesters were subjected to innumerable violations of the constitution and international law? What about the Cato Institute’s tracking of police violence and misconduct nation wide? What about the numerous instances of institutionalized racist policing that is laid bare in some of the empirical studies on racism and the drug war I listed above? Do you have anything to bring to the table except an ethnocentric dismissal of Portuguese drug decriminalization (an unequivocal success) and an embarrassing revisionist history of the Labor and Civil Rights Movements?

    You are not a hero my friend. Very little of what you do is beneficial to society. You are a mere pawn for the corporate fat cats who benefit most from the existence of the Prison Industrial Complex. If you took a moment to think critically about the role the police play and have played in society, at the very least you would acknowledge that they are in desperate need of fundamental reforms. Unfortunately, you seem more keen to defend even the most obviously failed policies (marijuana prohibition) and brutal violence violence (the Detroit rake bearer shooting), and come across as a either a willfully ignorant lack spittle for an oppressive entity or a vulgar propagandist.

  • t.

    That’s fine guy. But that is far different than what toy said. VISITING and LIVING and STAYING somewhere are all different things. The FACT as you presented it was that you were VISITING. By you words…a “black” face hanging out in front of a building…where the landlordddidn’t recognize you (because you don’t live there). A “black” face with a “white” mother”. You may not like it…but the landlord was absolutely right. You and your mother should be that king him for looking out for her safety and security by questioning someone who doesn’t belong in that parking lot…and not being too intimidated and calling the police when there was resistance. YOU reacted be cause of your race. They responded because you were an unknown to someone who knows most / all in the area. That reaction is your problem…not a mistake by them.

    As for the “bill of rights”. Those rights belong to everyone…not just you. You are the tipycal “cop blocker” who only wants his rights protected, to heck with everyone elses. And don’t forget the rest of the constitution there guy. There is a lot more to it than just the “bill of rights”. Like states rights. Read all of it. Learn it all. Dig yourself out of your limited thinking/ learning and see the whole package.

    The CATO iinstitute, the CATO institute. Ever wonder why that group is always mentioned around d here? Its because thats the only major group that buys into the incredibly slanted and openly based opinions expressed by that “inistute”.

    About Portugal and the movements you mentioned. You brought them up, I said you need to look further into it. You have to prove your case, I don’t have to disprove it.

    As OWS. Guy, if you ain’t figured it out yet, I break the news to you. It is a failed movement. It has been exposed as wantonly violent and that the leaders of the movement t where nothing other than pawns played by super rich liberals. The “bill of rights” you claim to love clearly outlaws what OWS is about. “peaceably assemble. Look into it.

    As for the use of tactical teams. As a former team operator…and a former drug detective who wrote the warrants…drugs and guns go together, every time. The dealers and users don’t have the guns so much for me as they do for each other and for victimizing innocents. But make no mistake, drugs and guns go together. Simple.

  • Another_Jeremy

    You can keep parsing words over whether or not I was staying, living, or visiting. The fact is, I was doing all three. I had a right to be in the parking lot because I was authorized to be there by my mother. Once the police arrived and I showed them my ID they had no legal ground to keep interrogating me or demanding that I provide affirmative proof that I had a reason to be there which could only be verified by a wanton invasion of privacy. It is impossible to check the validity of the presence of the hundreds of residents and visitors in that apartment complex each day, and if it was necessary to ask every single visitor and every single resident what they are doing at every moment of their stay, the creation of a special task force would be necessary just to deal with it. Is it it your contention that the property manager should stop every single person (hundreds) in the apartment complex whose face he does not immediately recall? How about every person who drives in to meet a friend? This is why it simply does not stand to reason that the property manager was approaching me for the sake of a legitimate concern over anyone’s “safety.” The selective profiling and policing of random individuals deemed “suspicious” also gives the police unfettered discretion to disproportionately arrest minorities and poor people. And that’s exactly what they do.

    I’m not sure what kind of right wing dystopia you live in, but indiscriminately making citizens prove that they aren’t doing anything wrong is not beneficial to society. I would suggest you read about international rates of violent crimes. The countries that fair better than us (Scandinavia, Australia, Western Europe, etc) do not have lower crime rates because they have cops making sure everyone is following the rules. It’s because they have societies that do not leap to punitive reactions (mostly for the benefit of for profit prisons), and instead has a more preventative and efficient method of dealing with social problems. Providing meaningful job opportunities, quality education, and quality healthcare for for all members of society is what prevents crimes; not locking them up once they’ve already been pushed into desperation by a society that is rigged against them.

    And the rest of your “response” . . oi vey. There’s not a single logical argument.

    1. Your blabbering about the Bill of Rights does not at all refute my reference to the 5th amendment. Specific rights of citizens are protected, and there is no abstract right to “safety.”

    2. “States rights” has nothing to do with this conversation, except that it is telling of your political ideology.

    3. The CATO institute is a libertarian think tank, not a liberal one. And even if it was liberal, that doesn’t disprove their findings. If you think they are one-sided, post a contrary study on police misconduct.

    4. As I said earlier, OWS is classified by a peaceful protest group by the Department of Homeland Security. They were attacked by the police because they represented a grass roots movement against the corporate overlords who have the most influence in our society, and thus who have most influence over the police. Also, there is no such thing as a failed social movement. The purpose is to draw attention to their certain perceived injustices. They did. That’s why you and I both know what it is. Further, its “success” has nothing to do with whether or not it was violently and unlawfully suppressed.

    5. Small amounts of drugs rarely have any correlation to gun crimes and/or violence, but bursting peoples’ doors in over 3 grams of pot at 3am on the tip of an anonymous informant does often result in tragedy.

    Your inability to even engage in a discourse without resorting to blatant logical fallacies speaks to a strong need for more academic requirements for cops. Critical reasoning would seem to be a crucial characteristic of a police officer.

  • Another_Jeremy

    I also find it truly horrifying that you can say with a straight face in the year 2013 that the Civil Rights and Labor movements were opposed by the police because they were violent. You are in desperate need of a history lesson.

  • Radical Dude

    quoted from t.:
    Ah…comprehension and intentional dishonesty have shown…almost as if by cue.

    @t.:
    What have I said that was “dishonest”?

    quoted from t.:
    When I am discussing the story he told….I quoted he’s exact story (you cherry picked the parts you wanted to use….no context to yours).

    If I missed specific facts that he put in, then what were those specific facts? I believe I included all his facts, find one I have missed, if you think there is something missing? Also, you alleged a “militant response”, that shows up no where in the facts, you just invented it.

    quoted from t:
    Further down in my comment I give opinion about the “story” that he told. Don’t be mad be ause he is either not a good story teller or worse yet….inaccurate or a liar. You on the other hand have no excuses. You re trying to be intentionally inaccurate and dishonest.

    @t.:
    What have I said that was inaccurate?
    What have I said that was dishonest?
    You still haven’t addressed my original question:
    Is the “militant response” you say happened something you got from the facts or something you imagined? You can’t directly responsively answer the question without exposing the fictions you rely on to support your position, which is why you can’t/won’t answer.

  • Otto Maddox

    I’m not sure I agree with the “cheat sheet”.

    If a police officer asks where you’re going, and you (politely) decline to answer (as is your right) you will always be met with suspicion.

    But of course the mere fact they are talking to you means you’re already under some level of suspicion. Otherwise they wouldn’t be talking to you.

    I think this cheat sheet actually makes things more complicated.

    NEVER TALK TO THE POLICE. NEVER DO IT as it will NEVER help you. It’s really that simple.

    Ask to leave and then shut the hell up.

    Recording is up to you. Each person has to decide if they want to make that stand or not. Same for providing I.D.

  • Radical Dude

    I believe it is better to stay silent if you don’t know how to talk to cops. However, I believe there is a better way to handle them. It is to confront them on their fictions. Kind of like I’ve done w/ t. in the comments above^^^. Basically, question them in such a manner that they can’t directly answer without contradicting themselves or admitting to their fictions, because they always use a fiction to justify their violence when they initiate force on a peaceful person.

    Although by answering your question(if you ask the right one) they must admit the fiction, they will either recognize this and refuse to answer, or the cognitive dissonance they experience forces them to not answer or make up another fiction to support their other fictions(because their minds are controlled by authoritarian superstitions).

    So, basically, there are 3 main things that generally happen:
    1. they answer your question, which means the fiction is exposed, OR
    they say something blatantly contradictory, or they say something false
    2. they refuse to answer and “shut down”. “shutting down” the cop
    is probably a good thing for you, legally.
    3. They get mad, and start attacking you, since logic does not support their position.

    You can see a couple posts up where t. will not answer, and then instead of directly answering my question makes up more fictions, and goes into a personal attack. When you see these kinds of reactions, you know you are asking the right questions. And remember, you can put any question to them in a discovery request if they write a ticket, and if it is relevant and they refuse to answer, you can move for a dismissal on those grounds. So, I think you should start asking them hard questions, questions that get at the fictions and contradictions in their thinking. If you don’t know how to do that, then staying silent is the next best thing.

  • Common Sense

    Gotta couple of tips… help you guys stay out of jail. 1) Try your hardest to not be black or hispanic.

  • t.

    Dude: The “facts” you missed are all the ones I said. Hey are dir early what he said happened. You want to ignore all of them. Hen by saying that I was dishonest by writing the fact exactly as the Another said…your are therefore lying. Not that hard. If you want to debate what the facts mean, that’s one thing. But to intentional ignore them or change them is dishonest.

  • Radical Dude

    t.: I quoted directly the facts laid out by Jeremy, he says he recorded the cops, and you say there was a “militant response”, the “militant response” is something you invented, I don’t necessarily think you are lying per se, because, I think you do believe there was a “militant response”, or you thought so when you wrote it. But I also think you imagined it, you didn’t get evidence of it from Jeremy. It simply isn’t in the facts he presented. If you think I’m wrong then quote the facts he laid out that show a “militant response”.

  • t.

    I get lots of evidence from Jeremy. His lanupguage in his comment…I doubt was very different that day, on the scene.

    Everything he did in that encounter after being spoken to by the landlord (who don’t know him because he doesn’t live there…”visiting” by his own words) was wrong. And that is his fault. Instead of “I’m Jeremy smith. I’m visiting my mom Mary Smith in 502″ he decided to place it as racism (again, his comments, not mine bringing up race). When I say “militant response” that’s what I’m talking about. The landlord, and subsequently the police were all in the right. Jeremy wasn’t in the wrong until he put himself there.

    RS doesn’t really take that much. You guys have tried to make it into some kind of mysterious thing. It can’t be a hunch, but it doesn’t have to be much more than that. And it can accumulate. And that can lead to PC. From what he described…he’s on private property and someone who’s is in control of that property, like the landlord (or even a neighbor) calling about an unknown person hanging around. Pretty much gets the police to RS. I’m sorry if you guys don’t think so. Its not at the BRD level out there on the street.

  • http://iosgamezhacks.com/?p=377 Marvel War of Heroes hack tool

    I love what you guys tend to be up too. Such clever
    work and coverage! Keep up the wonderful works
    guys I’ve added you guys to my own blogroll.

  • Anonymous