Obama '08?

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
but instead they provoked further altercation.

Gates was certainly provoking a confrontation, however I argue that the police were attempting to gain a dominant position so as to end it, and that they were justified in using this common police tactic.

Bad argument to make hawk.

If the cops interest was in ending the situation, they should have left. The cops were not there mediating a conflict between Gates and someone else. Nobody was in danger.

I'll ask again: What would have happened if the cops had left after identifying Gates?
A) Gates would have killed all his neighbors
B) Gates would have been free to organize his race riot to kill as many white people as possible
C) Gates would have continued to pretend the officers were there and had a shouting match with the imaginary cops
D) Gates would have gone inside cranky, watched TV, read, slept, and bitched about it at work the next day.

I'm serious. Answer the question.

The cops at one point were not longer acting in the interest of the public and were acting on their own behalf. I don't doubt that Gates made them angry or even provoked them, but cops don't have their power for personal use.

T
K
O

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

What? So you can spread your idiotic notions unhindered. No chance.

0 Replies

@Diest TKO,

Quote:

The cops at one point were not longer acting in the interest of the public and were acting on their own behalf. I don't doubt that Gates made them angry or even provoked them, but cops don't have their power for personal use.

Well, I think that contempt of cop should be a crime if the cops are legally conducting the collectives business, but since that is not the law you are correct IF THE COPS WERE FREE TO DISINGANGE AND SAFELY DEPART.

I don't think that there is a single American who will argue that the arrest of Gates was the desired outcome. I for one can not be sure that the police took the best action that was available to them. I do however think that we need to support the cops, to believe them unless we have reason not to, and that the justification given for this arrest is plausible. The evidence that we have points to this being a good bust, even though it did not stick.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawk, Your blind support of cops is very dangerous. Not all cops are good like any human organization where bad people reside.

You need to learn how to discern what is right or wrong even in situations where cops get involved. You do remember Rodney King, don't you?

2 Replies

I'm thinking this topic should be re-named The Department of Redundancy Department.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

I do not blindly support the cops, but I do support the cops when they do their best to protect me and my family with the tools that they legally have available to them. Rodney king was an illegal act, contempt of cop often results in illegal police actions to include extensive illegal beatings such as was administered to King. However, in this case what we have is a cop who is by all accounts a good cop, who appeared to be doing his best, who can justify his actions. This was a good bust.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

No, you don't second guess the cop. You just make up "facts".

0 Replies

I can’t believe you dolts are still defending this arrest. If Gates sues, he wins easily because his fourth amendment rights were clearly violated. I’d happily wager that if he does, the suit will be settled too, because his case is a slam dunk.

Those of you that think a police officer can order whatever he wishes, wherever he wishes, simply because he’s investigating a possible crime are simply wrong. Nowhere in the United States has this illegal “search and seizure” been illegal longer than it has in Massachusetts. John Adams himself wrote the Massachusetts Constitution and since 1780 the Section 14 of the Declaration of Rights has provided, “Every subject has a right to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures of his person, his houses, his papers, and all his possessions.”

From the moment Gates showed his ID, and the cop confiscated it, there can be no doubt that the cop was violating Gates’ Rights under both the Constitutions of the United States and that of Massachusetts. A man getting hir rights trampled has every right to be irate about it. AFTER learning that Gates was indeed legal resident of the home; Crowley inexplicably (but by his own report) called more cops in, which means he himself was responsible for drawing the crowd and his unconstitutional seizure (and inexplicable continued presence) is the only reason any further disturbance occurred. Had he simply returned the ID, left the premises he no longer had any rational, let alone legal, reason to be at; the matter would have been finished there.

Officer Crowley’s own actions in A. Trampling Gates’ Fourth Amendment Rights by not returning his “papers”, B. Calling more cops to what he by then knew to be a NON-CRIME SCENE, and C. Inviting Gates to continue exercising his First Amendment Right to free speech outside, makes Officer Crowley 100% responsible for any disturbance that took place. Had he refrained from any one of those, the opportunity to falsely arrest Gates for exercising his First Amendment right of free speech wouldn’t have even come up.

Keep in mind, as a plaintiff in a civil suit, Gates would only have to show that Crowley was 51% responsible to be able to recover damages. The D.A. had no case against Gates and attempted prosecution would have only served to increase the damages Gates could seek in his slam dunk case against the city. That's why it was dropped like a hot potato, with apologies no less. This is a no-brainer, so guess what arguments against it suggest?

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

. At least Obama makes sense when he speaks

Like "save to solve the credit crunch" and " spend to solve the economic slow down".

If he makes sense why was it a mistake what he said?

You're all over the place ci. All you want is the last rant.

0 Replies

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
The cops at one point were not longer acting in the interest of the public and were acting on their own behalf. I don't doubt that Gates made them angry or even provoked them, but cops don't have their power for personal use.

Well, I think that contempt of cop should be a crime if the cops are legally conducting the collectives business, but since that is not the law you are correct IF THE COPS WERE FREE TO DISINGANGE AND SAFELY DEPART.

I don't think that there is a single American who will argue that the arrest of Gates was the desired outcome. I for one can not be sure that the police took the best action that was available to them. I do however think that we need to support the cops, to believe them unless we have reason not to, and that the justification given for this arrest is plausible. The evidence that we have points to this being a good bust, even though it did not stick.

You saying that the cops were not free to disengage and safely depart?

The evidence we have does not show a good bust, but instead an abuse of power. Gates is free to walk and rightfully so.

Why should contempt of a cop be illegal? You do seem quite fond of totalitarian themes.

Why do you always rant about a "collective?" It's a self defeating argument because it relies on a consensus that has never been established that actually only benefits a majority and not a "collective." You only embarrass yourself.

T
K
O

0 Replies

@OCCOM BILL,

Quote:

Every subject has a right to be secure from unreasonable searches and seizures of his person, his houses, his papers, and all his possessions.”

Meaningless until "unreasonable" is defined.

1 Reply

@spendius,

2 problems with that Spendi.

In the US, you can't disturb the peace of a peace officer. A citizen has to make a complaint.
Gates wasn't charged with 'disturbing the peace.' He was charged with 'disorderly conduct' which according to MA law requires he be in a public place which isn't one's property.

1 Reply

@spendius,

No spendi, there are laws that defines "unreasonable searches." Can't you get anything right? Typically, a search warrant is required, but there are occasions when the police has the authority to look further if evidence is found that is criminal in nature.

Without the right kind of justification, the courts will throw out the case or disallow the evidence found illegally.

Most cops, I hope, understands the law concerning "unreasonable searches." It still happens.

0 Replies

@Diest TKO,

Diest TKO wrote:

I'll ask again: What would have happened if the cops had left after identifying Gates?

A) Gates would have killed all his neighbors
B) Gates would have been free to organize his race riot to kill as many white people as possible
C) Gates would have continued to pretend the officers were there and had a shouting match with the imaginary cops
D) Gates would have gone inside cranky, watched TV, read, slept, and bitched about it at work the next day.

Go ahead hawk. Don't be shy. Answer the question. It's not that hard.

T
K
O

1 Reply

@parados,

Have you no "conduct prejudicial" catch in your law?

0 Replies

@OCCOM BILL,

Quote:

The D.A. had no case against Gates and attempted prosecution would have only served to increase the damages Gates could seek in his slam dunk case against the city. That's why it was dropped like a hot potato, with apologies no less.

Really? Please document your claim. The reports that I have seen only state the the arrest was not pursued, there is no word on who it was that ended the process, it could have been a police supervisor or it could have been the DA. There is also no report of any apology. You are making facts up again aren't you.....

0 Replies

@Diest TKO,

Quote:

Go ahead hawk. Don't be shy. Answer the question. It's not that hard

You are a little touched arn't you.......

the matter that counts is what would have happened if the cops had attempted to leave, not what would have happened after they were gone. The cops acted to protect themselves, once they were gone they would have been safe. Your question is a red herring, thus goes unanswered.

2 Replies

@hawkeye10,

Protect themselves from what? Your imagination is running wild. Not all incidents with cops are a threat to anyone. You're the one throwing red herrings into this discussion with your imagined "what if" scenarios. Cops can't act on potential crimes; they must act when a crime is committed.

There was no crime committed by Professor Gates.

1 Reply

@hawkeye10,

hawkeye10 wrote:

Quote:
Go ahead hawk. Don't be shy. Answer the question. It's not that hard

You are a little touched arn't you.......

the matter that counts is what would have happened if the cops had attempted to leave, not what would have happened after they were gone. The cops acted to protect themselves, once they were gone they would have been safe. Your question is a red herring, thus goes unanswered.

Coward.

How is it a red herring? What is the difference between "leaving" and "attempting to leave?" How were the officers in danger? What danger could they be in that wouldn't be adverted by simply leaving? Would the officers be stopped from leaving? Isn't a integral part of Gate's stand to tell them to **** off and go away? You know... like leave and stuff?

Your failure to comply is a very telling answer.

You thought you could get off, but you made a mistake: You told me the question I should have asked. So as you put it...

What would have happened if the officers had attempted to leave?

The problem with your argument remains.
K
O

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Wrong, Policing is a relative of military service, and just like the military cops have as the first priority force protection (staying safe), the mission comes second, and the mission is keeping the public safe it is not being the administrator of laws. Trying to sort out the legality of individual actions comes a few steps down the priority list, it is perfectly appropreate (when there is not time to consult with pro's) to make an arrest if they think that they have an illegal act, and to turn the case over to the legal pro's to decide what if anything comes next.

You are clueless about what being a cop is all about.

1 Reply

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know