mysteryman
 
  1  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 04:29 pm
@cicerone imposter,
So now you are contradicting yourself and admitting that there ARE valid reasons for the police to stop a homeowner from entering their own home?

Thats a start.

Why do you always get so defensive when someone quotes your exact words?
You act like its up to everyone else to read your intent, instead of your exact words.
0 Replies
 
Diest TKO
 
  2  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 04:37 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

waterboy, You brought fire into the scene; it's way out of the actual event. I won't even bother to answer your q.

Don't confuse MM for H20man. Two WAAAAAAAAY different people. Yikes.

T
K
O
okie
 
  -1  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 05:07 pm
@dyslexia,
dyslexia wrote:

yeah Obama should not have commented, on the other hand rational conservatives should loudly complain about any man not being secure in his own home with no crime having been committed.

I want to see more details on this, and I still do not know for sure where fault is for sure, but a possible crime had been reported, if I understand it correctly, somebody reported individuals forcing a door open. That is what the officer was responding to, so perhaps he had not totally determined whether a crime had been committed or not. If a neighbor reported me in process of breaking into my own house because the door was jammed, I think I would appreciate it and cooperate fully with the officer that responded to the scene, so that the matter could be cleared up, instead of resisting the officer with yelling and refusing to follow instructions.

The point is, if he did force the door open, it would appear to an officer that a crime had indeed been committed, at least until enough evidence could be collected to prove otherwise. That is an officer's duty to find out, which he was doing, very likely according to trained procedures.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 05:18 pm
@okie,
You cannot describe anything as a crime until that is established. Being in your own home is not a crime.
spendius
 
  1  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 05:41 pm
I would follow okie's advice so I could get to bed at a reasonable time.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  4  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 07:17 pm
@okie,
Why so much nonsense? Anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of the Bill of Rights (see the Fourth Amendment) can see the cop was out of line. It was certainly reasonable for the cop to ask for his name and whether or not he lived there. Asking for ID is a reasonable request, but legally would be an unreasonable demand. Gates would have been well within his rights to say “**** you... Get the **** off my property, and don’t come back without a warrant.” No probable cause = No right to be there. Hell, even a “Terry Stop” requires that a specific reasonable suspicion be enhanced to probable cause in short order or it must be terminated… and probable cause must be established BEFORE an arrest (or even an intrusive search) can be made. This asshole made his arrest long after the proof eliminated even a possible cause!

Gates may well have been every bit as rude as the police officers wrote in their reports. This doesn’t matter in the least because he most certainly has a right to be rude in his own home, and that it was his home had been well established. Upon furnishing the ID, the cop reports that rather than just leaving, he called more cops out. Huh? For what? Then he invites the irate man to continue yelling, but only if he continues outside… and shortly thereafter arrests him for yelling outside? If every word of that report is true (bridge for sale!), Gates remains guilty of breaking no laws and the cop remains guilty of overstaying his unwelcome, false arrest, and abuse of power.

The police officer in question had no legitimate reason to remain, let alone call additional cops. He himself created the crowd by doing so and then by inviting Gates outside.

Arresting Gates for exercising his First Amendment rights while his Fourth Amendment rights were being trampled is beyond absurd. It’s been almost half a century since the Supreme Court interpreted the 14th to offer 4th amendment protection in every state… which in this case is irrelevant because this type of illegal seizure has been illegal in Massachusetts for roughly two and a half centuries.

There can no doubt that Mr. Gates’ Rights were violated and little as to why.

Calling the police stupid in this case is extremely generous. In my country, the constitution provides me with freedom of speech and the right to due process which in turn protects me from unreasonable searches and seizures. That same constitution should provide those same rights for Mr. Gates, equally. Maybe someday, but not today.


Police Report's here if anyone missed them."
maporsche
 
  2  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 07:20 pm
@cicerone imposter,
The arrested him for disorderly conduct. He was being pretty disorderly, in his home or not.

EVERYONE who is arrested is arrested on a presumption of guilt. It is in court that you are presumed innocent. If everyone, everywhere, were to be presumed innocent before being arrested, nobody would be arrested until AFTER the trial was completed. That just doesn't make any sense, and it's obviously NOT the law.
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  4  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 07:24 pm
@OCCOM BILL,
OCCOM BILL wrote:

Why so much nonsense? Anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of the Bill of Rights (see the Fourth Amendment) can see the cop was out of line. It was certainly reasonable for the cop to ask for his name and whether or not he lived there. Asking for ID is a reasonable request, but legally would be an unreasonable demand. Gates would have been well within his rights to say “**** you... Get the **** off my property, and don’t come back without a warrant.” No probable cause = No right to be there. Hell, even a “Terry Stop” requires that a specific reasonable suspicion be enhanced to probable cause in short order or it must be terminated… and probable cause must be established BEFORE an arrest (or even an intrusive search) can be made. This asshole made his arrest long after the proof eliminated even a possible cause!

Gates may well have been every bit as rude as the police officers wrote in their reports. This doesn’t matter in the least because he most certainly has a right to be rude in his own home, and that it was his home had been well established. Upon furnishing the ID, the cop reports that rather than just leaving, he called more cops out. Huh? For what? Then he invites the irate man to continue yelling, but only if he continues outside… and shortly thereafter arrests him for yelling outside? If every word of that report is true (bridge for sale!), Gates remains guilty of breaking no laws and the cop remains guilty of overstaying his unwelcome, false arrest, and abuse of power.

The police officer in question had no legitimate reason to remain, let alone call additional cops. He himself created the crowd by doing so and then by inviting Gates outside.

Arresting Gates for exercising his First Amendment rights while his Fourth Amendment rights were being trampled is beyond absurd. It’s been almost half a century since the Supreme Court interpreted the 14th to offer 4th amendment protection in every state… which in this case is irrelevant because this type of illegal seizure has been illegal in Massachusetts for roughly two and a half centuries.

There can no doubt that Mr. Gates’ Rights were violated and little as to why.

Calling the police stupid in this case is extremely generous. In my country, the constitution provides me with freedom of speech and the right to due process which in turn protects me from unreasonable searches and seizures. That same constitution should provide those same rights for Mr. Gates, equally. Maybe someday, but not today.


Police Report's here if anyone missed them."


Hear hear, Bill, +5

Cycloptichorn
cicerone imposter
 
  4  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 07:28 pm
@Cycloptichorn,
Hell, I give o'bill a 10.
maporsche
 
  3  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 07:41 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Hell, I give o'bill a 100+1.
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 08:04 pm
@maporsche,
That leaves all doubt - for some.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 08:07 pm
@Diest TKO,
That comes from old age; I see both of them as neausance. Rarely, if ever, posts anything worth the cyberspace.
MontereyJack
 
  2  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 08:10 pm
Ware Street is one block long. It is two blocks from Harvard Yard, the epicenter of the university. Of the four streets that bound that block, two are taken up by Harvard dorms and Harvard offices. Affiliate housing is scattered throughout it. The whole area is heavily dominated by the university. Every cop I have ever encountered has been intimately acquainted with the area he serves. I fail to believe a Cambridge cop is not going to have a good idea of where Harvard is and the area it includes. When someone shows him a Harvard ID, which, believe me, is going to say "Faculty" on it, when he is 58 years old, when he LOOKS like a professor, when he's wearing chinos and a polo shirt, not a hoodie, when he is going toohave a key that fits the lock on the door, a cop does indeed have to be really stupid or really belligerent not to think that, yeah, this guy probably does live there. Or a little racist.

I have lived in Cambridge for decades. I have seen Boston and Cambridge cops maintain their composure when confronting really really drunk assholes, I have seen them called really heavy duty names, with tempers flaring, and I have seen them defuse the situation with nobody arrested and everything calm at the end. Situations far more explosive than this one. As far as I can remember, just about all of the assholes were white. It looks, on the face of it, like that made a difference for this cop at this time.

0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -4  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 08:13 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Shocked
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -4  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 08:16 pm
@Diest TKO,
Diest TKO wrote:

cicerone imposter wrote:

waterboy, You brought fire into the scene; it's way out of the actual event. I won't even bother to answer your q.

Don't confuse MM for H20man. Two WAAAAAAAAY different people. Yikes.



Good god CI! What were you thinking?

You are confusing vertebrates with invertebrates, cats with dogs, birds with fish, night with day...
0 Replies
 
MontereyJack
 
  1  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 08:22 pm
mysteryman, I think H2 Oboy is calling you an invertebrate (unless he considers himself one, which I doubt). You gonna take that?
ossobuco
 
  1  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 08:48 pm
Tks, MJack, for the overview. I don't know what to think, as I've read about Gates for years and this all sounds quite odd. I too have climbed into my own house window, but then I'm a white woman. I won't just slam all the cambridge police as a chess set, either, though.. I don't know enough.

I do admit it is painful to read this thread for all the slamming.
H2O MAN
 
  0  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 08:59 pm
@MontereyJack,


MJ, you are easily confused just like CI.
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 09:01 pm
@ossobuco,
ossobuco wrote:

I won't just slam all the cambridge police as a chess set, either, though.. I don't know enough.



I wish Obama had thought it through the way you have.

The police did the right thing.
Gates and Obama are the ones that made mistakes... they are both a little racist.
0 Replies
 
okie
 
  1  
Thu 23 Jul, 2009 09:36 pm
@OCCOM BILL,
OCCOM BILL wrote:

Why so much nonsense?

Thats what I was wondering. Why do y0u add to it?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 1351
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.18 seconds on 03/02/2025 at 02:59:40