This forum is for non aviation related topics, political debate, random thoughts, and everything else that just doesn't seem to fit in the normal forums. ALL FORUM RULES STILL APPLY.
Katsnelson told the court he is sorry and, he made a terrible mistake. But he also said he hopes the victims learn to keep their doors locked. That comment sent one victim running out of the courtroom
Can you ask your bad cops in Victoria to come out to Toronto and beat the f%$ucking sh$#%$#it out of this guy?
Because he deserves a severe beating. And possibly a castration.
Maybe people in custody should learn to listen to cops when they say to get down on the ground. But hey drunk today raping tommorow.....
But you know what? The cops are probably afraid to even touch this guy.
Because SHIT stinks.
Do you suppose the Victoria cops are sorry? And made a terrible mistake?
cpl_atc: I sure hope you lock your doors at night..........
... not the cops job to beat the shit outta the guy; it's yours (or rather the peoples); it’s the cop's job to catch him. In no way should they be, or are they, responsible for retribution.
Are you man enough to offer up your services as the castrator? If so, let the judge know that you are willing to do it since he has been found guilty, ... in fact you should threaten the judge that if he doesn't order the castration (and let you do it) that you will beat the crap out of the Judge, and castrate him instead ...
Searches of a person arrested or detained are for safety. Concealed weapons, needles, etc.. have to be found. Police officers and detained/arrested people have been injured or killed because of faulty or non-existent searches.
Thanks to Terry V Ohio a cop can search you. It's called a terry pat-down/stop. He can also question you without giving the Miranda warning when it pertains to public danger.
Not everything you see on youtube or the internet will save you form wearing the silver bracelets.
---------- ADS -----------
Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum
Semper Fidelis
“De inimico non loquaris male, sed cogites"-
Do not wish death for your enemy, plan it.
Similar case law exists in Canada. They can pat you down for weapons, but they can't search your pockets without cause.
R. v. Mann, (2004) has a good discussion of this. http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2004/2 ... scc52.html
The Mann decision makes it pretty clear that the searches laid down in Terry v. Ohio are valid. They're limited, though: cops can search you for weapons for their own safety, but if they feel something which clearly isn't a weapon (like a packet of pot, as in the Mann case), they can't dig into your pocket for it without probable cause.
From Mann:
To summarize, as discussed above, police officers may detain an individual for investigative purposes if there are reasonable grounds to suspect in all the circumstances that the individual is connected to a particular crime and that such a detention is necessary. In addition, where a police officer has reasonable grounds to believe that his or her safety or that of others is at risk, the officer may engage in a protective pat-down search of the detained individual. Both the detention and the pat-down search must be conducted in a reasonable manner. In this connection, I note that the investigative detention should be brief in duration and does not impose an obligation on the detained individual to answer questions posed by the police. The investigative detention and protective search power are to be distinguished from an arrest and the incidental power to search on arrest, which do not arise in this case.
---------- ADS -----------
no sig because apparently quoting people in context is offensive to them.
Absolutely perfect video! Some people have a special talent for talking themselves into trouble ... and getting their ass kicked because they have the type of face that says ... "Please punch me."
The guy at 2:39 could be an AvCanada regular contributor .... no, not me.
The Old Fogducker
---------- ADS -----------
Attachments
The kind of face that says ... "punch me ... please."
Smile_small-1copy.jpg (40.05 KiB) Viewed 1085 times
I showed that to my uncle, who is a 27 year veteran of one of Canada's largest municipal police forces.
He said if someone were to hand him that card, he'd laugh at them, give it back and either write a ticket for the full offense or outright arrest the person for whatever they were stopped for.
Here's a thought...the police have a right to ignore your bullshit and make their job nice and easy by writing a ticket or making an arrest without hearing your side of the story. It's out of courtesy that they talk to you and see whats going on, not legal obligation.
For all you friggin left-wing loonies out there that have a hate on for law enforcement, why don't you get a document noterized by your favorite leftie lawyer which states the following;
"If I am in dire need of police assistance - PLEASE DO NOT RESPOND"
cpl_atc wrote:
For those unable to figure this out for themselves, the text on the card are your rights under the law and it is only particularly relevant under certain cases. There is obviously a time and a place where it would be appropriate to stop cooperating with the cops. A J-walking charge is probably not the time to use it.
Except that the card is inaccurate.
---------- ADS -----------
no sig because apparently quoting people in context is offensive to them.
cpl_atc wrote:
For those unable to figure this out for themselves, the text on the card are your rights under the law and it is only particularly relevant under certain cases. There is obviously a time and a place where it would be appropriate to stop cooperating with the cops. A J-walking charge is probably not the time to use it.
Except that the card is inaccurate.
This anonymous internet opinion brought to you by grimey, LLB.
Or, you know, the Supreme Court of Canada. Read the Mann decision. The cops can very much search you without your permission. You don't need to be a lawyer to figure it out, you just have to be literate. Section 8 of the charter has the word "unreasonable" in it for a reason.
---------- ADS -----------
no sig because apparently quoting people in context is offensive to them.
I have deleted about a dozen non-relevant posts in this thread.
I would strongly encourage all posters to re-read the forum rules - this thread is a prime example of people calling each other nasty names, threadjacking, trolling and all manner of nasty behaviour.
Those of you who engaged in this conduct - you know who you are - expect strikes to follow quickly if this happens again.
I'm locking this thread now, it has clearly run its course.
