On 4 May 2005 20:19:32 -0700, "RHF"
wrote:

JD,
.
The number (percentage) of "Bad Out Comes" typically
increases with the amount of Drugs and Alcohol that is
consumed by the Citizen {Suspect} prior to their
'encounter' with the Police. Often these 'encounters'
become "Confrontations" as a result of the impaired
mental ability Hostile Actions of the Citizen {Suspect}.

More likely as a result of cop harrassment of anyone not
deemed to be on their list of favpred citizen types.

.
All the Police can do is react to the actions of the citizen.
- If the Citizen is non-aggressive and compliant with
the instructions of the Police; usually the outcome
is civil.

Always wear a quick-release buckle on your pants so you can
quickly turn yourself out. They'll require that if you show any sign
of asserting your rights. I assume you mean "compliant" as in the
phrase "compliant wench".


- However, if Citizen is Aggressive and non-compliant
with the instructions of the Police; usually the outcome
is Confrontational and Hostile; since the Police are
forced to maintain control of the situation.

Actually they're psychotically addicted to "maintaining
control" including considering the citizen to be hostile if they so
much as say "What?" to an ill-phrased question. It's as if you were
challenging their intelligence to misunderstand them.
.
A Drunk that proceeds to Attack a Police Officer with
their Fists; uses a weapon or tries to take a Police
Officer's Gun is a Danger to every other Citizen.
.
A person on Drugs that can not be subdued and is
Combative and requiring several Police Offices to
Restrain them is a Danger to themselves and every
other Citizen.


Every other citizen, my ass. Most citizes have enough sense
not to approach too close.

once again - the use of a tazer to subdue a citizen
may be the best answer to a bad situation

Only if the officer isn't obviously coming in his pants at the
opportunity to use it.



~ RHF
. . . . .

"k" - Clearly 'you' should keep as much distance
between the Police and 'yourself' as possible.
(For Their Safety ) ~ RHF

On 11 May 2005 00:53:10 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:

On Tue 10 May 2005 06:13:46a, wrote in message
:

On 04 May 2005 23:12:00 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:

On Wed 04 May 2005 05:55:54p, "€ Dr. Artaud €"
wrote in message
:

"RHF" wrote in
news:1115236890.431995.103040 @f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:

http://newstandardnews.net/content/?...em&itemid=1486

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/...tml?source=rss

http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/document.do?id=
1A01E91E134A327080256F190042408D


http://www.stolenlives.org/read/index.php?
action=show&section=area_los_angeles.xml&display=L OS+ANGELES&area=19


Let's see, what is the alternative?


Among all your suggestions, did you forget to add: Educate the public to
*not* treat the phrase "You Are Under Arrest" as the signal to flee
and/or fight?

So knuckle under regardless of the circumstances. Sieg heil.


Sieg Heil? Ha! Aren't you "special"! Regardless of the circumstances,
according to the law as written by elected representatives, when a LEO
utters the magic phrase, "You are under arrest", you have *zero* legal
recourse other than to submit to the arrest, be read your rights, get
booked into custody and engage the services of an attorney. You don't have
to like it - and you can make your "sieg heil" apples and oranges
comparisons all you like - but that's the facts of life.

So you agree with the Nazification of Amerika?



That might help. After all, your boys were smart enough to know how
to behave with a couple of officers behaving like cretins and they came
out just fine.

The cretins would have escalated as requierd to accomplish
their ends had his son not gotten himself moved from category 3 to
category 2 of "cops, cops' families and suspects".


I doubt it. The cretins "pushed" and the sons (wisely) didn't rise to take
the bait. As to your categories of "cops, cops' families and suspects", I
can only say that you watch too much T.V. Perhaps those cretins watched too
much T.V. as well. Most LEO's don't...

I personally know too many cops (including few in my own
family) to give any credence to what you think goes on in the real
world.

Let's start with the time I heard, in a municpal courthouse
cafeteria, a bunch of deputies at a nearby table yukking it up about a
fellow "officer of the law." He was said to be "just a little too
macho" because he beat the **** out of a nun he had in custody. Yet,
had he been dropped, as he so righteously should have been, he'd have
been lauded as "one of our own" and "a fallen hero". Barf!

-=jd=-

On 12 May 2005 21:32:29 GMT, "-=jd=-"
wrote:


So knuckle under regardless of the circumstances. Sieg heil.


Sieg Heil? Ha! Aren't you "special"!

Meaningless red herring.

Regardless of the circumstances,
according to the law as written by elected representatives, when a LEO
utters the magic phrase, "You are under arrest", you have *zero* legal
recourse

I haveplenty of legal recourse, including notifying the dimwis
if I have pertinent medical conditions relating to my arrest, right to
explain why they might be making a grave error in arresting me,
notification of my Miranda rights, etc. Little "magic words" formulas
don't cut it in reducing me to having "zero rights" no matter how
lusty and tough it sounds to you.

other than to submit to the arrest, be read your rights, get
booked into custody and engage the services of an attorney. You don't
have to like it - and you can make your "sieg heil" apples and oranges
comparisons all you like - but that's the facts of life.

So you agree with the Nazification of Amerika?



Explain, if you can, how abiding by the law is "Nazification". Try to bear
in mind that you are two-for-two in "apples and oranges" comparisons so
far.

Knuckling under to perceived "laws" as interpreted by those
who have an interest in keeping you from asserting your real rights
invites abuse by those do so. Ergo -- Nazification.



I personally know too many cops (including few in my own
family) to give any credence to what you think goes on in the real
world.



The lack of character, morality and ethics in your family may explain your
warped point of view.

They were exactly representative of the attitudes of their
co-workers. In more than one West Coast city.

In any event, I have far more first-hand experience
than you realize.

Yeah, and I'm the chief of police of NYC. Whoopee.

Let's start with the time I heard, in a municpal courthouse
cafeteria, a bunch of deputies at a nearby table yukking it up about a
fellow "officer of the law." He was said to be "just a little too
macho" because he beat the **** out of a nun he had in custody. Yet,
had he been dropped, as he so righteously should have been, he'd have
been lauded as "one of our own" and "a fallen hero". Barf!

Umm... Yeah... Right... And you purport to be a judge of anyone else's
"creedence"? Gimme a break...

Do you consider your "answer" in any way to diminish my
"creedence" [sic]? I simply reported a first hand experience of smug
cop thuggishness inside a courthouse and you feel qualified to blow it
off with a supercilious "Umm... Yeah... Right..." If that's the best
you can offer, drop out and drop dead.