Police Abuse of Power Thread #20067b

good movie

A DUDE IS SUMMBUDDY THAT WORKS ON A RANCH

i will show this dude the utmost respect by loading that into my sampler

only the good shit goes in there

guess who's back back again

http://www.break.com/index/baltimore-cop-i...uble-again.html

lol. What does this guy say to his wife every morning when he gets up out of bed.

Mrs. Riveri: Honey, just call in sick today. We can spend the day in bed fucking around.

Officer Riveri: Dammit Sue, it's a warzone out there. I can't just stay in bed with so much injustice in the world. I'm a police officer for Christ's sake. It's a dirty job, but someone has to protect our citizens from skateboards and...and...I can't even say it...*sob*

Mrs. Riveri: It's alright sweety, go on.

Officer Riveri: And...moving boxes.

  The Vidiot said:

lol. What does this guy say to his wife every morning when he gets up out of bed.

he probably beats the fuck out of his wife lol

  mrx said:

  The Vidiot said:

lol. What does this guy say to his wife every morning when he gets up out of bed.

he probably beats the fuck out of his cock lol

i bet he's divorced

Closet gay.

Fucking fantastic.

New bill to allow police misconduct to be hidden from the public (Utah currently...then your state)

Eris you do know the difference between a bill being introduced and a bill being passed right?

Indeedy, sir. I like to watch them progress from beginning to end. A lot of times they stop reporting on important ones the closer they get to getting passed. Then, its too lat.

Did they ever pass the bill about the federal ID card and RFID chip?

Well, the new passports already have RFID chips, but I don't think they're forcing anyone to inject them yet.

However, the RealID is definitely coming. I linked to it at the bottom of this post.

For those too lazy to find it:

http://www.ajc.com/blogs/content/shared-bl...ntrusion_o.html

  Quote

With the announcement last month by Homeland Security chief Michael Chertoff of the final implementing regulations for the much-delayed Real ID Act, the debate over this thinly veiled national identification card project moved into high gear.

 

The federal government for several years now has been fighting a guerrilla action with citizen groups and a number of state legislatures over imposing on the states and the citizenry this privacy-intrusive and costly mandate. With the announcement Jan. 11 of the final regulations, the debate is fully joined and pits those who support the principle of states’ rights against the legions of Big Government advocates.

 

Big Government advocates are personified by the current Bush administration, favoring central control of virtually every facet of activity in our society, from education to transportation and from the plumbing in our bathrooms to the bulbs in our lamps. While the Real ID debate shares some elements with its sister debate concerning voter ID, mixing the two as if two sides of the same coin dilutes the host of fundamental constitutional concerns and responsibilities affected by the Real ID Act program now being forced down the throats of the states.

 

Let’s leave aside for the moment the underlying federalism question — where does the federal government get the power to dictate to the states who can get a driver’s license? — to focus on civil liberties that would be undercut by the Real ID Act.

 

If, as proposed in the law, a person must have a Real ID Act-compliant card in order to access a federal building, access any regulated or interstate mode of transportation, or obtain any federal benefit, then we have surrendered to the federal government (that is, federal bureaucrats) the power to deny citizens all manner of activities guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. Consider:

 

*

 

A person not possessing a Real ID Act-compliant identification card could not enter any federal building, or an office of his or her congressman or senator or the U.S. Capitol. This effectively denies that person their fundamental rights to assembly and to petition the government as guaranteed in the First Amendment.

*

 

A person seeking to exercise their right to keep and bear arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment could henceforth be denied that ability if they do not possess a precious Real ID card, because the federal bureaucracy known as the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives probably will decree that such a form of identification is necessary to meet federal requirements for purchasing a firearm.

*

 

Very possibly the Real ID card will be required in order to vote in any election for federal office.

*

 

A veteran may be denied access to a VA hospital because he or she lacks the requisite Real ID card, perhaps because they did not have the money required to purchase it or because they could not locate the background forms the Department of Homeland Security required to obtain one.

*

 

A business traveler, unable to afford to travel by private jet, is denied the ability to make a living because their job requires air travel and they do not have a Real ID card — even though they demonstrably pose no danger whatsoever to their fellow travelers.

*

 

Even though individual states, such as Georgia, may provide greater legal protection for private information of its residents than other states or the federal government, this will mean nothing in the Real ID Act world, because all the data under that law will be subject to the lower federal standards, thereby subjecting residents to a higher likelihood of identity theft than they would risk under the laws of their state.

*

 

And, they would have no recourse to correct erroneous data, or prevent identity theft pursuant to the Real ID regulations.

 

On the other side of the ledger, arguing in favor of this intrusive and expensive federal mandate, are hollow promises of “security” — not freedom or liberty — but “safety,” the promise of which trumps all else in this post-9/11 world, at least for this Congress and this administration. I, for one, commend the state of Georgia and those other states that are standing against this assault on states’ rights and the Bill of Rights.

The thing is, do you think that it would even have to reach the legislature? I mean - ever since Bush started passing those PS left and right, he's been pretty cavalier. He could just up and make it law, and veto any opposition. He's done it before, he'll do it again.

Plus, he pretty much ignores anything he doesn't agree with - even if its law.

Goddammit.

More police brutality on woman

Before meeting Officer Willis

After

the fucking cop turned the security camera off during the beating

  Eris Siva said:

Goddammit.

 

More police brutality on woman

 

Before meeting Officer Willis

 

After

 

 

the fucking cop turned the security camera off during the beating

  Quote

When paramedics arrive, they asked one of the officers what happened, to which he replied, "she fell down."

i cannot fucking believe he said that

Does it have to be every fucking 10 minutes a new one comes out?

Deputy under investigation after tasering teen - even after his superior gave him direct orders to the contrary

faek!

( lol )

Good thing i'm in china, where they hit people and drag them around naked by their hair.

Here's some more I just saw today:

Deputies accused of brutally beating inmate

Community faces $10 million lawsuit over police brutality

Man arrested under ancient wiretapping law for recording police brutality

when did american cops start looking like fat homo referees?

is his little car for the hot pursuit of radio controlled cars?

Cops pull over ambulance with emergency patient in back, rough up EMT for getting in their way on the road

:omg:

that's disgusting

yuck, i hate the police

Just a quick show of hands. Does anyone here like the police or, rather, feel as if they still do more good than harm?

wow that is just fucked up.