What's new
By:

Tough Day To Be In Law Enforcement

Beer said:
This article kind of sums up the ridiculousness of where things are trending.

Black woman tries to go to pool at apartment she is sub leasing. Policy is only people who's names are on the actual lease, who actually have contract with apartment complex, who have filled out proper liability paperwork are allowed to use the facilities. It doesn't specifically say in the article but I would assume sub leasing in general is prohibited. Anyways, woman who works there says I don't recognize you, girl says I live here, gives address, woman says you aren't the person on the lease and no visitors are allowed. This has 0 to do with race. This has to do with liability.
Click to expand...

So, if the guy had a kid, the kid has to fill out the "proper liability paperwork"? What is the "proper liability paperwork", besides a statement of liability? Is there a reason that the sublessee can't sign the liability statement, instead of being denied access?

If being a sublessee is improper, the woman won't lose her job.
 
One Brow said:
So, if the guy had a kid, the kid has to fill out the "proper liability paperwork"? What is the "proper liability paperwork", besides a statement of liability? Is there a reason that the sublessee can't sign the liability statement, instead of being denied access?

If being a sublessee is improper, the woman won't lose her job.
Click to expand...

It's possible, a minor would fall under the responsibility of the leasing parent. And like I said, I'm pretty confident subleasing is prohibited in the first place. So once again, not an issue or no blacks allowed, an issue of no one who technically shouldn't be here allowed.
 
Beer said:
It's possible, a minor would fall under the responsibility of the leasing parent. And like I said, I'm pretty confident subleasing is prohibited in the first place. So once again, not an issue or no blacks allowed, an issue of no one who technically shouldn't be here allowed.
Click to expand...

We certainly agree that, is subleasing is prohibited and this rule is enforced, the woman should not be able to use the pool because she not supposed to be in the complex.
 
One Brow said:
Well, if he has blame, I gues it's OK that he's dead, and there is no need for change, right? If you don't mean that, what do you mean, and why is this relevant?
Click to expand...

To help educate the public on what not to do so you don't get in a situation with cops shooting you.

Yes, he's dead. Yes, it's sad. Yes, I don't think he needed to be shot.

That said, yes, he made major mistakes that cost him his life. I hope people learn from it. It's not relevant to you because you blame just the police.
 
To respond to Archie, first of all, I don't think he was that drunk based on the body cam video -- 108 is like three drinks in an hour's time. I do think he freaked when they started to handcuff him. But just think if you were black in that situation after all that has happened recently, isn't it reasonable that the guy would act irrationally in that situation? That is why I believe that if they didn't cuff him, things would've turned out differently. Of course, he should've been charged, but no reason to lock him up.
 
Eenie-Meenie said:
To respond to Archie, first of all, I don't think he was that drunk based on the body cam video -- 108 is like three drinks in an hour's time. I do think he freaked when they started to handcuff him. But just think if you were black in that situation after all that has happened recently, isn't it reasonable that the guy would act irrationally in that situation? That is why I believe that if they didn't cuff him, things would've turned out differently. Of course, he should've been charged, but no reason to lock him up.
Click to expand...

Agreed, tough to be in the mind of a black man in that situation. That being said, you take a weapon off of a cop in a fight and ... well .... that's a gamble you'll likely lose.

Handcuffing him was likely completely unnecessary, but if thats protocol then thats what they should have done and now protocol should change.
 
Archie Moses said:
That said, yes, he made major mistakes that cost him his life. I hope people learn from it. It's not relevant to you because you blame just the police.
Click to expand...

It seems to have escaped you that I already said once he grabbed the taser, the police didn't do anything wrong.
 
One Brow said:
It seems to have escaped you that I already said once he grabbed the taser, the police didn't do anything wrong.
Click to expand...
It did. I didn't see you said that. Was that in response to one of my posts?

Maybe we're just assuming we both read everyone's post and assuming all we say have been written to eachother?
 
Atlanta's new orders seem like they should have been the standard so long ago. To me, this should have been common sense and universal.


Gawd damn it.

  • Officers are ordered to use only the amount of objectively reasonable force necessary to successfully protect themselves or others, to affect an arrest or bring an incident under control when dealing with members of the community, suspects, and detainees.
  • The orders also require the reporting of all use of deadly force by a police officer to the Citizens Review Board.
  • Atlanta Police must also adopt and implement a duty to intervene — whereby if a police officer sees another officer using force that is beyond reasonable under the circumstances, they are duty-bound to intervene and prevent that use of force, and must immediately report it.
Click to expand...
 
One Brow said:
I don't think you said what you meant to say, but at this point it seems like bickering anyhow.
Click to expand...

I wish I could say the same for you but I know you mean it.

That is, and will continue to be, the result of a policy of incarcerating people immediately for drunk driving. If you support the incarceration, you by default support the shootings.
Click to expand...

To all the victims of alcohol abuse, this is a naive and ignorant thought process. You'd rather protect the intoxicated person than victims of intoxication.


Are you for real?
 
"Every day, 29 people in the United States die in motor vehicle crashes that involve an alcohol-impaired driver. This is one death every 50 minutes. The annual cost of alcohol-related crashes totals more than $44 billion."

Victims of alcohol who have lost their lives roll their eyes at you. 100%... You're like the guy condoning police officers killing people because... because...

Listen to yourself, bro.

If anything don't **** the system for arresting them, **** the system for letting them out on bond so soon. **** drunk drivers. They kill way more people than cops.

@Gameface

Archie: intoxicated people make dumb choices. Brooks made a lot of dumb, irresponsible, wreckless and selfish decisions but I still think he shouldn't have been shot.

One Brow - Gameface - The Thriller: obviously, since they're intoxicated, calling them an Uber or sending them to their sister's house is the answer. **** the police for protecting the public.
*takes a huge dump on drunk driving victims while ironically fighting for those who are victims too.*
 
Last edited:
Do you also agree that anyone caught speeding should be put in jail? Speeding kills as many people as drunk drivers. I do not know anyone who has been speeding who was handcuffed and taken to jail if they had not caused any property or bodily injury. Do you think the police choosing the death penalty for speeders is appropriate?

I understand that drunk driving is awful. But unless one is a perfect driver and never speeds or is distracted, that person is every bit as big a danger on the road. And it is their choices that cause the problem, just like someone driving impaired.

Speeders are ticketed and sent on their way. No telling if they will continue to speed and injure someone down the road. Impaired drivers should obviously not be sent on their way by driving their car away, but no reason they can't be sent home another way.


https://www.curbed.com/2017/7/28/16051780/us-traffic-death-speeding-statistics-speeding
 
Comparing speeding to drinking and driving is like comparing whites shot compared to blacks. Educate yourself.

More people speed than drive drunk. One is more dangerous and it's not even arguable. **** those texting or distracted too. Stop condoning ******, selfish behavior.


Gawd damn it.
 
fishonjazz said:
I don't think it's up to discretion of the officer. I think it's SOP to cuff them and take them in. I know quite a few people who have been arrested for DUI. All of them were cuffed and taken in the cop car each time

Now maybe that should change but I think the cop was just doing what he is supposed to do by putting cuffs on the guy.

Sent from my ONEPLUS A6013 using JazzFanz mobile app
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think it is the rule in Utah that if you get a DUI they take you in and book you into jail. That isn't to say you go into a jail cell. They just take you in and then you have to post bail before you leave.
 
In NYS, some years ago, they passed a law against people using their cellphones, unless hands-free, while driving. Why? Because studies showed that doing so was as dangerous as driving while intoxicated. And as I think I mentioned earlier, DUI or DWI as they used to call it, is a misdemeanor unless it is a repeat offense, so it doesn't warrant jail time.

Also, I maintain that Brooks grabbed the taser not to use on the officer, but to prevent the officer from using it on him. You didn't see him tase them after he gained possession of it. He only fired back after they began to chase and attack him with their tasers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top