Glock Forum - GlockTalk banner
301 - 319 of 319 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,892 Posts
In the continuing saga . . .

But don't worry, the po-po will still get to indulge in all of the blame!
 
  • Like
Reactions: CAcop

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,600 Posts
Are they allowed to do that?

Next you’ll expect them to read it before voting on it!

Randy


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I believe they were expressing their intent when they wrote it. They are simply deflecting now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,892 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
33,466 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,359 Posts
Discussion Starter · #306 ·
Roger Goodman has had a mixed relationship with LE over his years in the state . . . His involvement and subsequent deflection does not surprise me in the least.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,816 Posts
So, the anti-police legislator(s) expect the police to step in and warn when a mistake is being made by the legislator(s)? :unsure:

Is that a "Why did you let me/us do something stupid?" philosophy and rationalization? o_O
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,816 Posts
Candy Everybody Wants


If Lust and Hate is the candy ...

The legislators said what they wanted. The People get what the legislators wanted them to have. Win-win? :ROFLMAO:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,892 Posts
Classic. The police should have stopped us.

Nevermind they were probably ignored and told to **** off.
Roger Goodman has had a mixed relationship with LE over his years in the state . . . His involvement and subsequent deflection does not surprise me in the least.
So, the anti-police legislator(s) expect the police to step in and warn when a mistake is being made by the legislator(s)? :unsure:

Is that a "Why did you let me/us do something stupid?" philosophy and rationalization? o_O
Yeah, it's all the po-po's fault!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,359 Posts
Discussion Starter · #310 ·
Here's one from today in my beat:

Transient with behavioral health issues (Can't call them crazy or say mental health) is wandering around a part of the city this morning. He would normally meet an involuntary committal due to multiple factors. But under the new laws, we can't use force to hold him so away he goes. Over the next several hours, he harasses, menaces and reportedly assaulted people. He finally decides to start throwing fist sized rocks at parked and moving cars, nearly hitting a driver. Responding officers find the victim but have to develop PC to stop the suspect. Only when the victim driver points to the guy and says, "That's him, right there!" do they have a right to stop the suspect. He's told he's under arrest. Naturally, he bolts across a busy multi-lane state highway with officers in foot pursuit, now being allowed by the law (resisting arrest) to use force. He gets tackled, no injuries, no complaint of pain. This automatically triggers a use of force investigation. Thank the gods that both officers had body worn cameras. Had they not said he was under arrest, they would have been in violation of the law by pursuing him and using force as his acts weren't necessarily violent or felonious.

If working pre-law change, minimal force used would have secured the person and gotten him to secure treatment. But now, we have multiple incidents and several cases involving criminal acts that could have been prevented.

That is but one small example of the reality here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,073 Posts
Everyone that is involved with somebody un-arrestable because of the new law should be presented with a nice pre-printed card reading:

You chose this. Stop voting for *******s.

Elegiste esto. Deja de votar por pendejos.

ты выбрал это. Прекратите голосовать за придурков.

bạn đã chọn cái này. Ngừng bỏ phiếu cho bọn khốn nạn


Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31,816 Posts
Here's one from today in my beat:

Transient with behavioral health issues (Can't call them crazy or say mental health) is wandering around a part of the city this morning. He would normally meet an involuntary committal due to multiple factors. But under the new laws, we can't use force to hold him so away he goes. Over the next several hours, he harasses, menaces and reportedly assaulted people. He finally decides to start throwing fist sized rocks at parked and moving cars, nearly hitting a driver. Responding officers find the victim but have to develop PC to stop the suspect. Only when the victim driver points to the guy and says, "That's him, right there!" do they have a right to stop the suspect. He's told he's under arrest. Naturally, he bolts across a busy multi-lane state highway with officers in foot pursuit, now being allowed by the law (resisting arrest) to use force. He gets tackled, no injuries, no complaint of pain. This automatically triggers a use of force investigation. Thank the gods that both officers had body worn cameras. Had they not said he was under arrest, they would have been in violation of the law by pursuing him and using force as his acts weren't necessarily violent or felonious.

If working pre-law change, minimal force used would have secured the person and gotten him to secure treatment. But now, we have multiple incidents and several cases involving criminal acts that could have been prevented.

That is but one small example of the reality here.
Build Back Better? o_O
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33,466 Posts
Here's one from today in my beat:

Transient with behavioral health issues (Can't call them crazy or say mental health) is wandering around a part of the city this morning. He would normally meet an involuntary committal due to multiple factors. But under the new laws, we can't use force to hold him so away he goes. Over the next several hours, he harasses, menaces and reportedly assaulted people. He finally decides to start throwing fist sized rocks at parked and moving cars, nearly hitting a driver. Responding officers find the victim but have to develop PC to stop the suspect. Only when the victim driver points to the guy and says, "That's him, right there!" do they have a right to stop the suspect. He's told he's under arrest. Naturally, he bolts across a busy multi-lane state highway with officers in foot pursuit, now being allowed by the law (resisting arrest) to use force. He gets tackled, no injuries, no complaint of pain. This automatically triggers a use of force investigation. Thank the gods that both officers had body worn cameras. Had they not said he was under arrest, they would have been in violation of the law by pursuing him and using force as his acts weren't necessarily violent or felonious.

If working pre-law change, minimal force used would have secured the person and gotten him to secure treatment. But now, we have multiple incidents and several cases involving criminal acts that could have been prevented.

That is but one small example of the reality here.
People will get used to it once it is clear it generally won't affect them much.

People didn't give two ****s about the crack wars until it came to the suburbs. Parents didn't care about their kids doing a little coke off their own supply until it cost their kids not being able to go to college or stay in college.

They won't reform the reform until people in good neighborhoods feel the pain.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
22,600 Posts
Here's one from today in my beat:

Transient with behavioral health issues (Can't call them crazy or say mental health) is wandering around a part of the city this morning. He would normally meet an involuntary committal due to multiple factors. But under the new laws, we can't use force to hold him so away he goes. Over the next several hours, he harasses, menaces and reportedly assaulted people. He finally decides to start throwing fist sized rocks at parked and moving cars, nearly hitting a driver. Responding officers find the victim but have to develop PC to stop the suspect. Only when the victim driver points to the guy and says, "That's him, right there!" do they have a right to stop the suspect. He's told he's under arrest. Naturally, he bolts across a busy multi-lane state highway with officers in foot pursuit, now being allowed by the law (resisting arrest) to use force. He gets tackled, no injuries, no complaint of pain. This automatically triggers a use of force investigation. Thank the gods that both officers had body worn cameras. Had they not said he was under arrest, they would have been in violation of the law by pursuing him and using force as his acts weren't necessarily violent or felonious.

If working pre-law change, minimal force used would have secured the person and gotten him to secure treatment. But now, we have multiple incidents and several cases involving criminal acts that could have been prevented.

That is but one small example of the reality here.
Stuff like this is going on every day now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CAcop

·
Registered
Joined
·
750 Posts
So why am I driving my old F350 when I could upgrade to a new Fiat 1Ton? Think I'll stand around a stoplight tomorrow and do some car shopping (jacking). Might even get one of those new Electric cars out of California!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,359 Posts
Discussion Starter · #316 ·

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
832 Posts
  • Like
Reactions: Morris

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
832 Posts
Apparently the guy that shot at the Renton officer, also shot at a WSP trooper a few months back. The judge in king county set his bail at $50k the prosecutor asked for $1m bail.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,359 Posts
Discussion Starter · #319 ·
Apparently the guy that shot at the Renton officer, also shot at a WSP trooper a few months back. The judge in king county set his bail at $50k the prosecutor asked for $1m bail.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
King County Superior Court judges are often the worst link in the system. Some are so ate up with privilege that they endanger the community with their actions to not appear (pick a term).
 
  • Like
Reactions: pgg00 and Badger54
301 - 319 of 319 Posts
Top