Nightingale 0 #26 June 2, 2005 Ah. that makes a little more sense. It sounded like you'd arrested the guy and searched his car just 'cause he didn't have his lights on. Thanks for clarifying. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fallingchip 0 #27 June 2, 2005 QuoteDefinitely NOT more info than I wanted. What I was wondering about, though, rather than the legality of the search, was what made you suspect that the car contained contraband. Didn't suspect contraband. Department Policy says if we arrest we search to the extent the law allows. My department head believes that the more searching after arrest the better chances we will find drugs, guns,...ect. Leads to headlines (fucking politics) And yes this stop proved him right....damn it______________________________________________ "A radical man is a man with both feet firmly planted in the air." -Franklin Delano Roosevelt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #28 June 2, 2005 QuoteQuoteWhy would someone be arrested for driving without their lights on... I thought that was just a ticket? Any time I've gotten a ticket, nobody's ever searched my car. Was there anything beyond the no headlights thing? I am sorry I might not have been clear, i was using this post to vent about my situation and couldn't type as fast as I was thinking. He was stopped for not having any headlights on. He was arrested for having a revoked drivers license. His license was revoked due to not going to court from an earlier . ticket I'm a big fan of the TV shop "COPS" and I constantly wonder where the hell they find those people! Sounds like the guy you arrested is a real piece of work. Unbelievable that the ACLU is defending the guy! Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fallingchip 0 #29 June 2, 2005 Quote...Unbelievable that the ACLU is defending the guy! Are you kidding. The ACLU had a defense team just for this type of thing. They don't care about whether or not the criminal is a criminal, they are just trying to justify their jobs and get in the news doing so...wait a minute...sounds like my chief as well.... Thats the problem with American politics, law, ...ect. There isn't a balance anymore. Take this example and tell me what you think. A police officer is sued civilly due to a raise in DWI arrests he/she made, ten of his/her last twenty-five being hispanic. Cops around that area hear about it and most are now scared they to will have to justify their stops/arrest if by chance they don't show a balance in what race they stop. Their solution(imagine a black officer sitting in his/her car): Today I stopped two white people, one black person, and no hispanics. Lets see, this car coming at me is running 65mph in a 45mph zone. I've got to stop them....wait...that was a white person. I have to stop a black person or a hispanic person. If I pull another white person I might get sued cause I stop more white people than blacks or hispanics. Oh well I gotta let that one go. However, if I don't stop him/her that means I'm profiling and can be sued anyway cause I'm letting white people off. Huh...what to do. My solution: First I don't stop people for speeding, seatbelts, or anything else I do. Not due to lawsuits, I'm not a hypocrite. I don't stop traffic violators unless a major safty issue is on hand...example: no headlights at night and driving on the interstate. I will only stop vehicles that match a BOLO description, that way my ass is covered. Sad isn't it.______________________________________________ "A radical man is a man with both feet firmly planted in the air." -Franklin Delano Roosevelt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #30 June 2, 2005 That's just plain warped. I really admire your attitude of putting the focus on public safety, though. Here in Houston a few years back, the mayor reached some sort of stupid agreement with the NAACP regarding racial profiling that resulted in cops having to document and justify every traffic stop they made. That's nuts. The ugly truth behind racial profiling by police is that a disproportionate amount of crime is committed by minorities and poor. The liberal media won't say it. Politicians won't say it, but it's one generalization that has quite a bit of evidence to support it. Does profiling result in innocent people being treated unfairly? You bet it does, but it exists not because police officers are inherently evil racists, but because on a daily basis they see who is committing the crimes and they see patterns. As a citizen, I want police departments to hire officers with good judgement, train them well and often, and let them do their jobs using their judgement and discretion based on the circumstances of each situation they encounter. Pay them professional wage, treat them like the professionals they are, and hold them to high professional standards. Headline-seeking politicians cause some very disturbing law enforcement policy. For example, when police knowingly let a crackhouse continue to operate, keep it under surveillance and arrest customers after they have driven a few blocks away from the crackhouse. Obviously that type of tactic is intended to inflate the department's drug arrest statistics. If they simply shut the crackhouse down, it would do more good but result in fewer arrests. I'm glad there are people willing to put up with the BS and do the job that police officers must do. My hat's off to you. Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fallingchip 0 #31 June 2, 2005 ______________________________________________ "A radical man is a man with both feet firmly planted in the air." -Franklin Delano Roosevelt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
genoyamamoto 0 #32 June 2, 2005 Quote Thats the problem with American politics, law, ...ect. There isn't a balance anymore. Things have happened in the past that somehow warrant(ed) the existence of organizations/bureacracy that makes your job a little tougher. You may not like it but it's checks and balances. Look at all the crap that happens with our current system with the Rampart police-corruption case and the Illinois death row debacle. Would you really be able to trust a justice system that had no oversight? Imagine a political system with no legislative or judicial branch. The president would have absolute authority on US policy. I would say the "problem" with the system is we have balance; it makes people work that much harder to make progress. QuoteTake this example and tell me what you think. A police officer is sued civilly due to a raise in DWI arrests he/she made, ten of his/her last twenty-five being hispanic. Imagine they find out that this officer is intentionally targeting hispanics. Imagine an officer that intentionally targets caucasian males. Imagine this officer is just doing his job. We can't do anything other than imagine unless there is a method to determine the officer's intentions when questions arise. It's more work but I feel it's good all around for both the public and law enforcement. QuoteCops around that area hear about it and most are now scared they to will have to justify their stops/arrest if by chance they don't show a balance in what race they stop. If anyone can't handle the responsibilities of their job (any job) or is scared to perform their duties they should quit and find something more suitable. You may think there is no balance but take a step back and look at how much power/authority you have over others. It's only fair that this authority comes with the responsibility of justifying your actions. Man I sooo want to cite star wars here... Gotta go... plaything needs to spank me Feel the hate... Photos here Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #33 June 2, 2005 hey, thanks for hauling a guy off for driving with a revoked license. Even if the drugs hadn't shown up, that's good enough. We have way too many people driving without license and/or insurance. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #34 June 2, 2005 QuoteSince I'm on a roll here... Enough of my ranting. I loved your "ranting". Give us some more of it in other subject threads! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #35 June 2, 2005 QuoteThings have happened in the past that somehow warrant(ed) the existence of organizations/bureacracy that makes your job a little tougher. You may not like it but it's checks and balances. Look at all the crap that happens with our current system with the Rampart police-corruption case and the Illinois death row debacle. Would you really be able to trust a justice system that had no oversight? I don't think anyone denies that the justice system needs oversight but there is a real difference between what I would consider necessary oversight and what seems to be a case of politicians pandering to ethnic groups because they are scared of being labeled "racist". The cases you cited are examples that there ARE checks and balances in place. If there weren't, you never would have heard of them. Quote Imagine a political system with no legislative or judicial branch. The president would have absolute authority on US policy. I would say the "problem" with the system is we have balance; it makes people work that much harder to make progress. I agree with what you are saying, but I don't think that "anti-profiling" paperwork requirements placed on police officers creates balance. It seems more like a case of Affirmative Action applied to traffic stops. It creates a situation where there are implied race-based quotas for traffic stops. That's not balance. Quote Imagine they find out that this officer is intentionally targeting hispanics. Imagine an officer that intentionally targets caucasian males. Imagine this officer is just doing his job. We can't do anything other than imagine unless there is a method to determine the officer's intentions when questions arise. It's more work but I feel it's good all around for both the public and law enforcement. I don't see that it's good for either law enforcement or the public because it gives law enforcement motivation to do less. QuoteIf anyone can't handle the responsibilities of their job (any job) or is scared to perform their duties they should quit and find something more suitable. Are you volunteering? Quote You may think there is no balance but take a step back and look at how much power/authority you have over others. It's only fair that this authority comes with the responsibility of justifying your actions. The responsibility is there. If someone is speeding or driving while intoxicated, should the justification for stopping them include skin color? I don't think so and I think that is a situation that is far from being balanced. Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fallingchip 0 #36 June 2, 2005 QuoteQuote Thats the problem with American politics, law, ...ect. There isn't a balance anymore. Things have happened in the past that somehow warrant(ed) the existence of organizations/bureacracy that makes your job a little tougher. You may not like it but it's checks and balances. Look at all the crap that happens with our current system with the Rampart police-corruption case and the Illinois death row debacle. Would you really be able to trust a justice system that had no oversight? Imagine a political system with no legislative or judicial branch. The president would have absolute authority on US policy. I would say the "problem" with the system is we have balance; it makes people work that much harder to make progress. __________________________________________________________ You do make a good point, but I disagree. There isn't a balance. The balance was lost when jails became overcrowded which brought lighter sentencing and lawsuits became a way to insure income. __________________________________________________________ QuoteTake this example and tell me what you think. A police officer is sued civilly due to a raise in DWI arrests he/she made, ten of his/her last twenty-five being hispanic. Imagine they find out that this officer is intentionally targeting hispanics. Imagine an officer that intentionally targets caucasian males. Imagine this officer is just doing his job. We can't do anything other than imagine unless there is a method to determine the officer's intentions when questions arise. It's more work but I feel it's good all around for both the public and law enforcement. ___________________________________________________________ There will always be "bad cops" I will never deny this. However like in any profession "crooked employees" will be caught. Also like in any profession the "crooked ones" are few and the righteous ones are many. I will also be first in line to make sure a bad cop gets made an example of. ___________________________________________________________ QuoteCops around that area hear about it and most are now scared they to will have to justify their stops/arrest if by chance they don't show a balance in what race they stop. If anyone can't handle the responsibilities of their job (any job) or is scared to perform their duties they should quit and find something more suitable. __________________________________________________________ That applies to ever job/workplace in existence. I don't care what you do, in this day and age you can be sued for anything and any reason. Maybe we should all quit working and get on the welfare wagon. ___________________________________________________________ You may think there is no balance but take a step back and look at how much power/authority you have over others. It's only fair that this authority comes with the responsibility of justifying your actions. __________________________________________________________ I agree 100%.______________________________________________ "A radical man is a man with both feet firmly planted in the air." -Franklin Delano Roosevelt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #37 June 2, 2005 QuoteThings have happened in the past that somehow warrant(ed) the existence of organizations/bureacracy that makes your job a little tougher Actually, in the past I subsisted on nothing but breast milk. Eventually things and circumstances changed and I moved to strained foods. Now I exist on beer, coffee and fast food. The point is that while there certainly was once a need for me to limit my nutritional intake to breast milk, as circumstances changed I just didn't need it anymore. The same holds true with many holdovers from past generations. While I agree that oversight is needed, oversight has gotten to the point where teachers and cops are afraid to do their jobs. Rather than using a microscope, the overseers use proctoscopes to find how much shit there is out there. If the scope comes up clean, they dig deeper for more shit. Still clean? Well, then they feed raw matter in the hopes that it makes shit. Overseers are in business to oversee. Usually, there is a need for oversight. The oversight is successful, which would normally put someone out of a job. But they need to keep themselves going, so they'll find something else. Eventually, the big problems are solved, which leads to oversight and requirements that do not balance with the alleged sins. The people will march and fight for equal opportunity. The people will rally against police abuses. People resent implications that racism is involved with selecting a white guy as NBA MVP from some self-annointed overseer. People will resent the implication that anybody of a different race who is pulled over was pulled over because of the race. And it is the people looking to events like the start of the thread that lead to oversight of the overseers. They, too have power. And power tends to corrupt. Chew on that for a bit. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites fallingchip 0 #38 June 2, 2005 QuoteQuoteThings have happened in the past that somehow warrant(ed) the existence of organizations/bureacracy that makes your job a little tougher Actually, in the past I subsisted on nothing but breast milk. Eventually things and circumstances changed and I moved to strained foods. Now I exist on beer, coffee and fast food. The point is that while there certainly was once a need for me to limit my nutritional intake to breast milk, as circumstances changed I just didn't need it anymore. The same holds true with many holdovers from past generations. While I agree that oversight is needed, oversight has gotten to the point where teachers and cops are afraid to do their jobs. Rather than using a microscope, the overseers use proctoscopes to find how much shit there is out there. If the scope comes up clean, they dig deeper for more shit. Still clean? Well, then they feed raw matter in the hopes that it makes shit. Overseers are in business to oversee. Usually, there is a need for oversight. The oversight is successful, which would normally put someone out of a job. But they need to keep themselves going, so they'll find something else. Eventually, the big problems are solved, which leads to oversight and requirements that do not balance with the alleged sins. The people will march and fight for equal opportunity. The people will rally against police abuses. People resent implications that racism is involved with selecting a white guy as NBA MVP from some self-annointed overseer. People will resent the implication that anybody of a different race who is pulled over was pulled over because of the race. And it is the people looking to events like the start of the thread that lead to oversight of the overseers. They, too have power. And power tends to corrupt. Chew on that for a bit. ...GLUP....______________________________________________ "A radical man is a man with both feet firmly planted in the air." -Franklin Delano Roosevelt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites genoyamamoto 0 #39 June 2, 2005 Quote If anyone can't handle the responsibilities of their job (any job) or is scared to perform their duties they should quit and find something more suitable. __________________________________________________________ That applies to ever job/workplace in existence. I don't care what you do, in this day and age you can be sued for anything and any reason. Maybe we should all quit working and get on the welfare wagon. ___________________________________________________________ Absolutely! I, however, like my job and responsibilities. Gotta go... plaything needs to spank me Feel the hate... Photos here Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #40 June 2, 2005 I have a friend who is a State Trooper and patrols I-95 in Maryland. He says most of his stops are originally for speeding at night. He he has no idea whether he is stopping a male, female, Black, Hispanic etc. until he walks up to the car and looks in the window. The question is, why would a Police Officer avoid busting someone who is white? All P.O.'s I know are interested in getting criminals off the street, period. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites fallingchip 0 #41 June 2, 2005 QuoteI have a friend who is a State Trooper and patrols I-95 in Maryland. He says most of his stops are originally for speeding at night. He he has no idea whether he is stopping a male, female, Black, Hispanic etc. until he walks up to the car and looks in the window. The question is, why would a Police Officer avoid busting someone who is white? All P.O.'s I know are interested in getting criminals off the street, period. It's not just whites...White officers hesitant to stop blacks and hispanics...Hispanic officer hesitant to stop whites and blacks...its a circle. Also your friend in Maryland can tell you all about the ACLU. Maryland has the best Drug Interdiction Team in the country. They are always being hemed up by the ACLU and the fact the seize more than $4,500,000 a year in drugs and drug money gets overlooked. Don't think that it being night has any thing to do with it. The stop I made was at night. The race card is used by lawyers who don't care about criminals feeding your/our children drugs or breaking into your homes. They only care about getting the criminals off so the criminals recommend their criminal friends to them. MONEY MONEY MONEY.______________________________________________ "A radical man is a man with both feet firmly planted in the air." -Franklin Delano Roosevelt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites genoyamamoto 0 #42 June 2, 2005 Quote The point is that while there certainly was once a need for me to limit my nutritional intake to breast milk, as circumstances changed I just didn't need it anymore. The same holds true with many holdovers from past generations. So if I get your strangely oedipal analogy right you see no need for oversight, as we have outgrown a lot of issues? Quote Rather than using a microscope, the overseers use proctoscopes to find how much shit there is out there. If the scope comes up clean, they dig deeper for more shit. Still clean? Well, then they feed raw matter in the hopes that it makes shit. Overseers are in business to oversee. Usually, there is a need for oversight. The oversight is successful, which would normally put someone out of a job. But they need to keep themselves going, so they'll find something else. Eventually, the big problems are solved, which leads to oversight and requirements that do not balance with the alleged sins. The people will march and fight for equal opportunity. The people will rally against police abuses. Who defines what a microscope is and what a proctoscope is? I'm sure it's painful to the accused no matter what is used to probe. Are we to let the accused determine the extent of an investigation? It's also surprising how some things keep reoccurring. Just because you solve a problem once does not meen it won't happen again. Also, when is a problem no longer "big" enough to require oversight? For example, if I get pulled over and arrested because some crooked cop plants some dope on me, I will see that as a BIG problem. For you, however, it would just be another bad thing that happend to some random guy on the internet. Likewise for a cop or an institution to be accused of racism is a big deal to them, but not necessarily a big deal to everyone. So in the end we're stuck: the party being (wrongly) accused thinks that the accusers are full of crap and out to flame everyone they can. The accusers are out pissing a lot of people off to find the guilty, since it is a big deal to someone. Is the price the innocent pay to get the guilty few too high? I say this is why we have our judicial system: to determine when to call BS and when to bust out the latex gloves and go to town. You can't just summarily dismiss the ACLU or Jesse Jackson or whoever else just because they're full of crap most of the time. They just need to be right once in a while to validate their existence IMHO. Besides, how else are you going to find the bad guys? Quote People resent implications that racism is involved with selecting a white guy as NBA MVP from some self-annointed overseer. People will resent the implication that anybody of a different race who is pulled over was pulled over because of the race. And it is the people looking to events like the start of the thread that lead to oversight of the overseers. They, too have power. And power tends to corrupt. Chew on that for a bit. Absolutely!!! People are gonna bitch and whine about everything. Hell both parties in the event that started this thread are going to bitch and whine about something or the other. Bitching and whining begets more bitching and whining Suck on that for a bit. Gotta go... plaything needs to spank me Feel the hate... Photos here Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites waltappel 1 #43 June 2, 2005 QuoteMaryland has the best Drug Interdiction Team in the country. They are always being hemed up by the ACLU and the fact the seize more than $4,500,000 a year in drugs and drug money gets overlooked. Don't think that it being night has any thing to do with it. The anti-drug efforts scare the hell out of me. I don't do drugs, nor do I drink or smoke, for that matter, but after seeing the "War on Drugs" used as a smokescreen for systematically dismantling the Bill of Rights, I think all drugs should be legalized. Property and cash seizures are routinely done with "due process" that can only be termed laughable. Let's say that I decide to purchase a car for cash and get pulled over on my way to buy the car and and I am searched. The police officer can LEGALLY confiscate my money and it is up to ME to prove (at my expense) that it is NOT drug money. Here's another example on how the War on Drugs has made life better for us. In Houston a few years ago an informant told police that some guy was dealing dope out of his apartment. The police broke down his door, entered, and one of the cops got a little too excited and started shooting. The other officers in the raid took that as their cue to start firing also. The guy in the apartment was killed and there was absolutely no trace of drug activity or weapons found in the apartment. Whoops! As bad as I think drugs are, I think what the government is doing is far worse. I personally have been stopped and harassed by a cop acting as part of the "Chambers County Drug Task Force" on I-10 east of Houston. In my opinion, that psycho had no business being in possession of a firearm, let alone a badge. He obviously thought that I was a drug trafficker and, as far as he was concerned, I was guilty until proven innocent. He was visibly very pissed when he didn't find any drugs. The police are being used as jack-booted government thugs, to use a term coined by Wayne LaPierre of the NRA. I don't blame the police officers--I'm sure many of them are quite disgusted by many of the laws and the way they are applied. In the name of making the world safer for "our kids", they are being used to take this country in a direction that would make Adolph Hitler proud. This country has been transformed from the Land of the Free to the Land of the Imprisoned, all in the name of eradicating drugs. Screw that. I don't see where the War on Drugs has had any real effect on availability of illegal drugs in this country. On the other hand, it has overcrowded our prisons to the point where violent criminals are being paroled early and free to run wild in the streets. The really stupid thing is, I doubt seriously that there is evidence that supports all the money being spent on eradicating drugs. I did some research a while back and found that the statistics show alcohol to be a FAR larger problem than drugs Do I have the answer to the drug problem in this country? Not even close. I think it exists because of the fundamental flaws in human nature and that won't go away any time soon. It's safe to say that the current program is not working, though. Time to try something else. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites fallingchip 0 #44 June 3, 2005 Quote.... I think all drugs should be legalized.... HOLD YOUR BREATH....MIGHT WANT TO TAKE A SEAT...HOW MANy COPPERS WILL YOU HEAR SAY THIS..... Maraijuana should be legal...and as soon, IMO, as the government can figure out a way to control and tax it, it will be. Now of course I am not a pot head, however, in my "cop" street experience I have never seen a violent pot head or a pot head being a danger for us on the road(driving), can't say that about alcohol. Cocaine(powder and crack), heroin, X, ect. than can kill and is killing our youth and I mean 12 year olds. Pot makes them fat. NOT SAYING I ADVOCATE 12 YEAR OLDS SMOKING POT. However you do make a good point about legalizing drugs period...other counties have done more or less and found violent crime rates lower and decreases in disease. Boy has this tread changed or what....______________________________________________ "A radical man is a man with both feet firmly planted in the air." -Franklin Delano Roosevelt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites waltappel 1 #45 June 3, 2005 Quote HOLD YOUR BREATH....MIGHT WANT TO TAKE A SEAT...HOW MANy COPPERS WILL YOU HEAR SAY THIS..... Maraijuana should be legal...and as soon, IMO, as the government can figure out a way to control and tax it, it will be. Now of course I am not a pot head, however, in my "cop" street experience I have never seen a violent pot head or a pot head being a danger for us on the road(driving), can't say that about alcohol. Cocaine(powder and crack), heroin, X, ect. than can kill and is killing our youth and I mean 12 year olds. Pot makes them fat. NOT SAYING I ADVOCATE 12 YEAR OLDS SMOKING POT. However you do make a good point about legalizing drugs period...other counties have done more or less and found violent crime rates lower and decreases in disease. Strangely enough, I'm not all that surprised. It's the law enforcement people on the front lines that see what's really going on and they are far from being a bunch of brainless robots. While I think that legalization of drugs would do a lot less damage than the current drug policies, the thought of drug users putting the public at risk does scare me. For example, I don't want pilots, doctors, bus drivers, elevator repairmen, parachute riggers, or anyone else who the public relies on for their safety to be drug abusers. I used to see drug testing as a serious invasion of privacy, but these days, I can see it being an important safeguard--particularly if drugs are legalized. Quote Boy has this tread changed or what.... We do seem to have covered a lot of ground in this thread. Do we get great mileage out of a topic, or what? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Michele 1 #46 June 3, 2005 I've never been pulled over for something I didn't do. I've not always (alright, only a few times) gotten a citation, but those I've gotten were for something I wast guilty of (and usually not the full measure I was due...written for expired tags and not for insurance or a rolling stop, or whatever). And I've never bothered to fight it, either. And I've been pulled over at night, with tinted windows, driving a sports car...and yes, once my car was searched, but that's because it was about 3 am, I was in my jammies picking up a friend from her job, exhausted and driving poorly. The cops thought I was drunk (until they said hello. Then they realized green fuzzie slippers probably didn't denote a drunkard. LOL!) They searched because the car had some cans (of soda) in the back, and they couldn't see clearly what they were. Needless to say, there was nothing there, and they let me and my roomie go without even a cite. The pervasive attitude of "all cops are evil" or "all cops are racist" is utterly wrong, just as any other preconception and/or prejudice. The pity is that the media plays up all the bad cops, and rarely plays up the good busts, the thousands of those which happen daily. Are there bad cops? Sure, just like bad drs., shop keepers, gardeners, and housepainters. But having been in the middle of the North Hollywood Bank shootout, I saw, first hand, what those men and women are willing to do to protect me,and those around me, without even knowing my name or my race. The vast majority of cops and PO's are not bad. And they run towards the bullets flying while the rest of us run away. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites waltappel 1 #47 June 3, 2005 Consider yourself fortunate! I agree completely that most police officers are professionals and I also resent the bias in the media. That one time I got pulled over by the good folks of the Chambers County Drug Task Force was, in my opinion, a real aberration of what law enforcement officers do. I happened to be driving one of those old cars that is waaaaaaaaaaaay longer than today's cars and had more chrome than any car really has a right to have. It was an old Chrysler Newport Coupe and I admit that more than a few pimps would have been proud to drive it. It wasn't customized at all, though. Strictly factory and it had been in my family since it was brand new. Anyway, I got pulled over on I-10 east of Houston. I wasn't speeding or driving erratically. The cop greeted me (in a hostile, threatening voice of course) with "Give me your damn license.", "Get out of the car", and "Ever been arrested?!!". Then came the phrase that he would repeat dozens of times during the encounter: "Where's the dope?!!!" "I don't have any dope." "Yeah you do. Where the hell is it?" "I don't have any." He then handed me a clipboard with a form on it and told me that he needed me to sign it. When I asked him what it was, he told me it was a consent form that would give him permission to search my car. I told him that I didn't want him searching my car, to which he (of course) replied "Why not? You wouldn't mind us searching it if you didn't have any dope." I explained to him that I didn't have any dope and that I just wasn't inclined to let someone I didn't know and certainly don't trust pawing through my car. That's when he threatened to throw me in jail, bring out the drug-sniffing dogs, etc. I reiterated that I just didn't want strangers going through my car for no kind of good reason. Then he took a different approach. He said, "You look scared. You would be scared if you didn't have any dope!" I told him I was indeed scared because I had an armed psychopath (him) threatening me on the side of the road out in the middle of nowhere and any reasonable person would be very scared of him because he is obviously mentally unbalanced. He then kept up the BS until I finally agreed to let him search my car it it would get me out of there sooner. They looked under the dash, under the seats, in the trunk, under the hood--pretty much every nook and cranny they could think of. While he was searching the back seat, I asked him if he was going to plant any dope in the car. He pretty much came unglued at that point. I don't recall exactly what he was yelling at me, but it was more of the same kind of BS he was talking earlier. Anyway, they did not find anything other than some empty Chinese ammo boxes. Psycho cop was absolutely livid. He told me to get the hell out of there and he'd better never see me again. No ticket issued or anything. I asked around in the area and he was definitely known to the locals as someone with a real personality disorder. I considered finding his supervisor, but figured it would be a gross waste of time. Anyone who thinks it is ok to have that kind of nut case carry a badge and a gun is probably even more unbalanced that that guy was. It didn't give me a negative attitude toward cops, but it certainly gave me an extremely negative attitude toward the "War on Drugs". I consider Psycho Cop and any other law enforcement people with that kind of mentality to be far more of a public menace than drugs. Add to that the property and cash confiscations that many police departments have engaged in, victimizing a number of innocent citizens, as well as those ridiculous conspiracy laws and laws against "lying to a federal agent", and I think the War on Drugs is a truly scary thing. Every other time I have been stopped by the police, with the exception of a DWI checkpoint, they had reason to stop me and the cop and I were courteous and respectful to each other. No problems. That one time, though, was a real eye opener. I hope drugs are legalized in our lifetime--not because I think it would be good for our country but because it would be less bad than what we have now. I want to see psychos like that one cop and all others like him put out of business. By the way, to tie all this back to the beginning of the thread, Pscho Cop was black. Was he racist? Maybe, but to me that wasn't any kind of concern compared to his "You've got dope and I'm gonna find it!" mentality. He was a Texas DPS trooper and his partner was a fat white guy that was not in uniform. I don't know whether the partner was a cop or not. He definitely didn't seem as psychotic. Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites justinb138 0 #48 June 3, 2005 QuoteI've never been pulled over for something I didn't do. I've not always (alright, only a few times) gotten a citation, but those I've gotten were for something I wast guilty of (and usually not the full measure I was due...written for expired tags and not for insurance or a rolling stop, or whatever). And I've never bothered to fight it, either. I've never been pulled over for something I didn't do either, and I've been given a citation every time. It sucks, but eventually I learned it was cheaper to slow down a little bit. Last time I was pulled over the cop had a clipboard with a sticker on the back with a big yellow smiley face that said "Smile: You're on Radar"... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wmw999 2,439 #49 June 3, 2005 I've never been pulled over for something I didn't do either. Of course, I'm white, blonde, and now I'm middle-aged. No one thinks I'm a threat. I used to work with three black guys; we had a beeper that we passed around the department for night-time system support, and they said that WHEN they got stopped (they all drove nice cars -- young single guys, good salaries -- nice cars), if it was their week for the beeper, they could assume that they'd be told, possibly at gunpoint, to step outside the car, and be patted down. Black guy + beeper = drug dealer. Sucks to be assumed guilty when you're not. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #50 June 3, 2005 QuoteThat one time I got pulled over by the good folks of the Chambers County Drug Task Force was, in my opinion, a real aberration of what law enforcement officers do..... I asked around in the area and he was definitely known to the locals as someone with a real personality disorder. I considered finding his supervisor, ...... It didn't give me a negative attitude toward cops, but it certainly gave me an extremely negative attitude toward the "War on Drugs". 1 - Good Story 2 - You should have found his supervisors 3 - You are doing the generalization even so. You didn't have a negative attitude toward cops. But you did generalize it in a different way by having an "extremely negative attitude toward the War on Drugs". In reality, I think the only conclusion anyone should come up with is we should have a negative attitude towards that particular cop - and then do something about that particular cop. It's easy to generalize rather than confront individuals specifically. Going to the supervisor, and then his supervisor and then the city council, etc is hard but effective - as he may eventually start planting evidence someday and your followup may have been the necessary thing to get him fired or reassign or whatever - but that chance is gone now. Having a gripe against the "War on Drugs" is easy but doesn't help anybody. The 'partner' was likely not a cop but an 'observer' sometimes they are official, sometimes not. That name is one that was necessary. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
lawrocket 3 #37 June 2, 2005 QuoteThings have happened in the past that somehow warrant(ed) the existence of organizations/bureacracy that makes your job a little tougher Actually, in the past I subsisted on nothing but breast milk. Eventually things and circumstances changed and I moved to strained foods. Now I exist on beer, coffee and fast food. The point is that while there certainly was once a need for me to limit my nutritional intake to breast milk, as circumstances changed I just didn't need it anymore. The same holds true with many holdovers from past generations. While I agree that oversight is needed, oversight has gotten to the point where teachers and cops are afraid to do their jobs. Rather than using a microscope, the overseers use proctoscopes to find how much shit there is out there. If the scope comes up clean, they dig deeper for more shit. Still clean? Well, then they feed raw matter in the hopes that it makes shit. Overseers are in business to oversee. Usually, there is a need for oversight. The oversight is successful, which would normally put someone out of a job. But they need to keep themselves going, so they'll find something else. Eventually, the big problems are solved, which leads to oversight and requirements that do not balance with the alleged sins. The people will march and fight for equal opportunity. The people will rally against police abuses. People resent implications that racism is involved with selecting a white guy as NBA MVP from some self-annointed overseer. People will resent the implication that anybody of a different race who is pulled over was pulled over because of the race. And it is the people looking to events like the start of the thread that lead to oversight of the overseers. They, too have power. And power tends to corrupt. Chew on that for a bit. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fallingchip 0 #38 June 2, 2005 QuoteQuoteThings have happened in the past that somehow warrant(ed) the existence of organizations/bureacracy that makes your job a little tougher Actually, in the past I subsisted on nothing but breast milk. Eventually things and circumstances changed and I moved to strained foods. Now I exist on beer, coffee and fast food. The point is that while there certainly was once a need for me to limit my nutritional intake to breast milk, as circumstances changed I just didn't need it anymore. The same holds true with many holdovers from past generations. While I agree that oversight is needed, oversight has gotten to the point where teachers and cops are afraid to do their jobs. Rather than using a microscope, the overseers use proctoscopes to find how much shit there is out there. If the scope comes up clean, they dig deeper for more shit. Still clean? Well, then they feed raw matter in the hopes that it makes shit. Overseers are in business to oversee. Usually, there is a need for oversight. The oversight is successful, which would normally put someone out of a job. But they need to keep themselves going, so they'll find something else. Eventually, the big problems are solved, which leads to oversight and requirements that do not balance with the alleged sins. The people will march and fight for equal opportunity. The people will rally against police abuses. People resent implications that racism is involved with selecting a white guy as NBA MVP from some self-annointed overseer. People will resent the implication that anybody of a different race who is pulled over was pulled over because of the race. And it is the people looking to events like the start of the thread that lead to oversight of the overseers. They, too have power. And power tends to corrupt. Chew on that for a bit. ...GLUP....______________________________________________ "A radical man is a man with both feet firmly planted in the air." -Franklin Delano Roosevelt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
genoyamamoto 0 #39 June 2, 2005 Quote If anyone can't handle the responsibilities of their job (any job) or is scared to perform their duties they should quit and find something more suitable. __________________________________________________________ That applies to ever job/workplace in existence. I don't care what you do, in this day and age you can be sued for anything and any reason. Maybe we should all quit working and get on the welfare wagon. ___________________________________________________________ Absolutely! I, however, like my job and responsibilities. Gotta go... plaything needs to spank me Feel the hate... Photos here Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #40 June 2, 2005 I have a friend who is a State Trooper and patrols I-95 in Maryland. He says most of his stops are originally for speeding at night. He he has no idea whether he is stopping a male, female, Black, Hispanic etc. until he walks up to the car and looks in the window. The question is, why would a Police Officer avoid busting someone who is white? All P.O.'s I know are interested in getting criminals off the street, period. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fallingchip 0 #41 June 2, 2005 QuoteI have a friend who is a State Trooper and patrols I-95 in Maryland. He says most of his stops are originally for speeding at night. He he has no idea whether he is stopping a male, female, Black, Hispanic etc. until he walks up to the car and looks in the window. The question is, why would a Police Officer avoid busting someone who is white? All P.O.'s I know are interested in getting criminals off the street, period. It's not just whites...White officers hesitant to stop blacks and hispanics...Hispanic officer hesitant to stop whites and blacks...its a circle. Also your friend in Maryland can tell you all about the ACLU. Maryland has the best Drug Interdiction Team in the country. They are always being hemed up by the ACLU and the fact the seize more than $4,500,000 a year in drugs and drug money gets overlooked. Don't think that it being night has any thing to do with it. The stop I made was at night. The race card is used by lawyers who don't care about criminals feeding your/our children drugs or breaking into your homes. They only care about getting the criminals off so the criminals recommend their criminal friends to them. MONEY MONEY MONEY.______________________________________________ "A radical man is a man with both feet firmly planted in the air." -Franklin Delano Roosevelt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
genoyamamoto 0 #42 June 2, 2005 Quote The point is that while there certainly was once a need for me to limit my nutritional intake to breast milk, as circumstances changed I just didn't need it anymore. The same holds true with many holdovers from past generations. So if I get your strangely oedipal analogy right you see no need for oversight, as we have outgrown a lot of issues? Quote Rather than using a microscope, the overseers use proctoscopes to find how much shit there is out there. If the scope comes up clean, they dig deeper for more shit. Still clean? Well, then they feed raw matter in the hopes that it makes shit. Overseers are in business to oversee. Usually, there is a need for oversight. The oversight is successful, which would normally put someone out of a job. But they need to keep themselves going, so they'll find something else. Eventually, the big problems are solved, which leads to oversight and requirements that do not balance with the alleged sins. The people will march and fight for equal opportunity. The people will rally against police abuses. Who defines what a microscope is and what a proctoscope is? I'm sure it's painful to the accused no matter what is used to probe. Are we to let the accused determine the extent of an investigation? It's also surprising how some things keep reoccurring. Just because you solve a problem once does not meen it won't happen again. Also, when is a problem no longer "big" enough to require oversight? For example, if I get pulled over and arrested because some crooked cop plants some dope on me, I will see that as a BIG problem. For you, however, it would just be another bad thing that happend to some random guy on the internet. Likewise for a cop or an institution to be accused of racism is a big deal to them, but not necessarily a big deal to everyone. So in the end we're stuck: the party being (wrongly) accused thinks that the accusers are full of crap and out to flame everyone they can. The accusers are out pissing a lot of people off to find the guilty, since it is a big deal to someone. Is the price the innocent pay to get the guilty few too high? I say this is why we have our judicial system: to determine when to call BS and when to bust out the latex gloves and go to town. You can't just summarily dismiss the ACLU or Jesse Jackson or whoever else just because they're full of crap most of the time. They just need to be right once in a while to validate their existence IMHO. Besides, how else are you going to find the bad guys? Quote People resent implications that racism is involved with selecting a white guy as NBA MVP from some self-annointed overseer. People will resent the implication that anybody of a different race who is pulled over was pulled over because of the race. And it is the people looking to events like the start of the thread that lead to oversight of the overseers. They, too have power. And power tends to corrupt. Chew on that for a bit. Absolutely!!! People are gonna bitch and whine about everything. Hell both parties in the event that started this thread are going to bitch and whine about something or the other. Bitching and whining begets more bitching and whining Suck on that for a bit. Gotta go... plaything needs to spank me Feel the hate... Photos here Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #43 June 2, 2005 QuoteMaryland has the best Drug Interdiction Team in the country. They are always being hemed up by the ACLU and the fact the seize more than $4,500,000 a year in drugs and drug money gets overlooked. Don't think that it being night has any thing to do with it. The anti-drug efforts scare the hell out of me. I don't do drugs, nor do I drink or smoke, for that matter, but after seeing the "War on Drugs" used as a smokescreen for systematically dismantling the Bill of Rights, I think all drugs should be legalized. Property and cash seizures are routinely done with "due process" that can only be termed laughable. Let's say that I decide to purchase a car for cash and get pulled over on my way to buy the car and and I am searched. The police officer can LEGALLY confiscate my money and it is up to ME to prove (at my expense) that it is NOT drug money. Here's another example on how the War on Drugs has made life better for us. In Houston a few years ago an informant told police that some guy was dealing dope out of his apartment. The police broke down his door, entered, and one of the cops got a little too excited and started shooting. The other officers in the raid took that as their cue to start firing also. The guy in the apartment was killed and there was absolutely no trace of drug activity or weapons found in the apartment. Whoops! As bad as I think drugs are, I think what the government is doing is far worse. I personally have been stopped and harassed by a cop acting as part of the "Chambers County Drug Task Force" on I-10 east of Houston. In my opinion, that psycho had no business being in possession of a firearm, let alone a badge. He obviously thought that I was a drug trafficker and, as far as he was concerned, I was guilty until proven innocent. He was visibly very pissed when he didn't find any drugs. The police are being used as jack-booted government thugs, to use a term coined by Wayne LaPierre of the NRA. I don't blame the police officers--I'm sure many of them are quite disgusted by many of the laws and the way they are applied. In the name of making the world safer for "our kids", they are being used to take this country in a direction that would make Adolph Hitler proud. This country has been transformed from the Land of the Free to the Land of the Imprisoned, all in the name of eradicating drugs. Screw that. I don't see where the War on Drugs has had any real effect on availability of illegal drugs in this country. On the other hand, it has overcrowded our prisons to the point where violent criminals are being paroled early and free to run wild in the streets. The really stupid thing is, I doubt seriously that there is evidence that supports all the money being spent on eradicating drugs. I did some research a while back and found that the statistics show alcohol to be a FAR larger problem than drugs Do I have the answer to the drug problem in this country? Not even close. I think it exists because of the fundamental flaws in human nature and that won't go away any time soon. It's safe to say that the current program is not working, though. Time to try something else. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
fallingchip 0 #44 June 3, 2005 Quote.... I think all drugs should be legalized.... HOLD YOUR BREATH....MIGHT WANT TO TAKE A SEAT...HOW MANy COPPERS WILL YOU HEAR SAY THIS..... Maraijuana should be legal...and as soon, IMO, as the government can figure out a way to control and tax it, it will be. Now of course I am not a pot head, however, in my "cop" street experience I have never seen a violent pot head or a pot head being a danger for us on the road(driving), can't say that about alcohol. Cocaine(powder and crack), heroin, X, ect. than can kill and is killing our youth and I mean 12 year olds. Pot makes them fat. NOT SAYING I ADVOCATE 12 YEAR OLDS SMOKING POT. However you do make a good point about legalizing drugs period...other counties have done more or less and found violent crime rates lower and decreases in disease. Boy has this tread changed or what....______________________________________________ "A radical man is a man with both feet firmly planted in the air." -Franklin Delano Roosevelt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #45 June 3, 2005 Quote HOLD YOUR BREATH....MIGHT WANT TO TAKE A SEAT...HOW MANy COPPERS WILL YOU HEAR SAY THIS..... Maraijuana should be legal...and as soon, IMO, as the government can figure out a way to control and tax it, it will be. Now of course I am not a pot head, however, in my "cop" street experience I have never seen a violent pot head or a pot head being a danger for us on the road(driving), can't say that about alcohol. Cocaine(powder and crack), heroin, X, ect. than can kill and is killing our youth and I mean 12 year olds. Pot makes them fat. NOT SAYING I ADVOCATE 12 YEAR OLDS SMOKING POT. However you do make a good point about legalizing drugs period...other counties have done more or less and found violent crime rates lower and decreases in disease. Strangely enough, I'm not all that surprised. It's the law enforcement people on the front lines that see what's really going on and they are far from being a bunch of brainless robots. While I think that legalization of drugs would do a lot less damage than the current drug policies, the thought of drug users putting the public at risk does scare me. For example, I don't want pilots, doctors, bus drivers, elevator repairmen, parachute riggers, or anyone else who the public relies on for their safety to be drug abusers. I used to see drug testing as a serious invasion of privacy, but these days, I can see it being an important safeguard--particularly if drugs are legalized. Quote Boy has this tread changed or what.... We do seem to have covered a lot of ground in this thread. Do we get great mileage out of a topic, or what? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Michele 1 #46 June 3, 2005 I've never been pulled over for something I didn't do. I've not always (alright, only a few times) gotten a citation, but those I've gotten were for something I wast guilty of (and usually not the full measure I was due...written for expired tags and not for insurance or a rolling stop, or whatever). And I've never bothered to fight it, either. And I've been pulled over at night, with tinted windows, driving a sports car...and yes, once my car was searched, but that's because it was about 3 am, I was in my jammies picking up a friend from her job, exhausted and driving poorly. The cops thought I was drunk (until they said hello. Then they realized green fuzzie slippers probably didn't denote a drunkard. LOL!) They searched because the car had some cans (of soda) in the back, and they couldn't see clearly what they were. Needless to say, there was nothing there, and they let me and my roomie go without even a cite. The pervasive attitude of "all cops are evil" or "all cops are racist" is utterly wrong, just as any other preconception and/or prejudice. The pity is that the media plays up all the bad cops, and rarely plays up the good busts, the thousands of those which happen daily. Are there bad cops? Sure, just like bad drs., shop keepers, gardeners, and housepainters. But having been in the middle of the North Hollywood Bank shootout, I saw, first hand, what those men and women are willing to do to protect me,and those around me, without even knowing my name or my race. The vast majority of cops and PO's are not bad. And they run towards the bullets flying while the rest of us run away. Ciels- Michele ~Do Angels keep the dreams we seek While our hearts lie bleeding?~ Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
waltappel 1 #47 June 3, 2005 Consider yourself fortunate! I agree completely that most police officers are professionals and I also resent the bias in the media. That one time I got pulled over by the good folks of the Chambers County Drug Task Force was, in my opinion, a real aberration of what law enforcement officers do. I happened to be driving one of those old cars that is waaaaaaaaaaaay longer than today's cars and had more chrome than any car really has a right to have. It was an old Chrysler Newport Coupe and I admit that more than a few pimps would have been proud to drive it. It wasn't customized at all, though. Strictly factory and it had been in my family since it was brand new. Anyway, I got pulled over on I-10 east of Houston. I wasn't speeding or driving erratically. The cop greeted me (in a hostile, threatening voice of course) with "Give me your damn license.", "Get out of the car", and "Ever been arrested?!!". Then came the phrase that he would repeat dozens of times during the encounter: "Where's the dope?!!!" "I don't have any dope." "Yeah you do. Where the hell is it?" "I don't have any." He then handed me a clipboard with a form on it and told me that he needed me to sign it. When I asked him what it was, he told me it was a consent form that would give him permission to search my car. I told him that I didn't want him searching my car, to which he (of course) replied "Why not? You wouldn't mind us searching it if you didn't have any dope." I explained to him that I didn't have any dope and that I just wasn't inclined to let someone I didn't know and certainly don't trust pawing through my car. That's when he threatened to throw me in jail, bring out the drug-sniffing dogs, etc. I reiterated that I just didn't want strangers going through my car for no kind of good reason. Then he took a different approach. He said, "You look scared. You would be scared if you didn't have any dope!" I told him I was indeed scared because I had an armed psychopath (him) threatening me on the side of the road out in the middle of nowhere and any reasonable person would be very scared of him because he is obviously mentally unbalanced. He then kept up the BS until I finally agreed to let him search my car it it would get me out of there sooner. They looked under the dash, under the seats, in the trunk, under the hood--pretty much every nook and cranny they could think of. While he was searching the back seat, I asked him if he was going to plant any dope in the car. He pretty much came unglued at that point. I don't recall exactly what he was yelling at me, but it was more of the same kind of BS he was talking earlier. Anyway, they did not find anything other than some empty Chinese ammo boxes. Psycho cop was absolutely livid. He told me to get the hell out of there and he'd better never see me again. No ticket issued or anything. I asked around in the area and he was definitely known to the locals as someone with a real personality disorder. I considered finding his supervisor, but figured it would be a gross waste of time. Anyone who thinks it is ok to have that kind of nut case carry a badge and a gun is probably even more unbalanced that that guy was. It didn't give me a negative attitude toward cops, but it certainly gave me an extremely negative attitude toward the "War on Drugs". I consider Psycho Cop and any other law enforcement people with that kind of mentality to be far more of a public menace than drugs. Add to that the property and cash confiscations that many police departments have engaged in, victimizing a number of innocent citizens, as well as those ridiculous conspiracy laws and laws against "lying to a federal agent", and I think the War on Drugs is a truly scary thing. Every other time I have been stopped by the police, with the exception of a DWI checkpoint, they had reason to stop me and the cop and I were courteous and respectful to each other. No problems. That one time, though, was a real eye opener. I hope drugs are legalized in our lifetime--not because I think it would be good for our country but because it would be less bad than what we have now. I want to see psychos like that one cop and all others like him put out of business. By the way, to tie all this back to the beginning of the thread, Pscho Cop was black. Was he racist? Maybe, but to me that wasn't any kind of concern compared to his "You've got dope and I'm gonna find it!" mentality. He was a Texas DPS trooper and his partner was a fat white guy that was not in uniform. I don't know whether the partner was a cop or not. He definitely didn't seem as psychotic. Walt Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
justinb138 0 #48 June 3, 2005 QuoteI've never been pulled over for something I didn't do. I've not always (alright, only a few times) gotten a citation, but those I've gotten were for something I wast guilty of (and usually not the full measure I was due...written for expired tags and not for insurance or a rolling stop, or whatever). And I've never bothered to fight it, either. I've never been pulled over for something I didn't do either, and I've been given a citation every time. It sucks, but eventually I learned it was cheaper to slow down a little bit. Last time I was pulled over the cop had a clipboard with a sticker on the back with a big yellow smiley face that said "Smile: You're on Radar"... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,439 #49 June 3, 2005 I've never been pulled over for something I didn't do either. Of course, I'm white, blonde, and now I'm middle-aged. No one thinks I'm a threat. I used to work with three black guys; we had a beeper that we passed around the department for night-time system support, and they said that WHEN they got stopped (they all drove nice cars -- young single guys, good salaries -- nice cars), if it was their week for the beeper, they could assume that they'd be told, possibly at gunpoint, to step outside the car, and be patted down. Black guy + beeper = drug dealer. Sucks to be assumed guilty when you're not. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #50 June 3, 2005 QuoteThat one time I got pulled over by the good folks of the Chambers County Drug Task Force was, in my opinion, a real aberration of what law enforcement officers do..... I asked around in the area and he was definitely known to the locals as someone with a real personality disorder. I considered finding his supervisor, ...... It didn't give me a negative attitude toward cops, but it certainly gave me an extremely negative attitude toward the "War on Drugs". 1 - Good Story 2 - You should have found his supervisors 3 - You are doing the generalization even so. You didn't have a negative attitude toward cops. But you did generalize it in a different way by having an "extremely negative attitude toward the War on Drugs". In reality, I think the only conclusion anyone should come up with is we should have a negative attitude towards that particular cop - and then do something about that particular cop. It's easy to generalize rather than confront individuals specifically. Going to the supervisor, and then his supervisor and then the city council, etc is hard but effective - as he may eventually start planting evidence someday and your followup may have been the necessary thing to get him fired or reassign or whatever - but that chance is gone now. Having a gripe against the "War on Drugs" is easy but doesn't help anybody. The 'partner' was likely not a cop but an 'observer' sometimes they are official, sometimes not. That name is one that was necessary. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
