WPD Sergeant tells Uber Driver/Attorney that recording him is illegal
- Thread starter 11B CIB
- Start date
- Replies 203
- Views 12,455
“This was a matter of maintaining the public’s trust and confidence in our agency,” said Police Chief Ralph Evangelous. “As police officers we are given a tremendous amount of authority to carry out our jobs. It is undeniable that there is a tremendous expectation from the public for officers to live to a higher standard. I cannot stress enough, that photographing and videotaping the police keeps us accountable. We believe that public videos help to protect the police as well as our citizens and provide critical information during police and citizen interaction.”
This is a Chief that gets it. If more Chiefs and Officers did, then it would go a long way in repairing the divide between the public and civilian law enforcement.
Full accountability is a powerful tool - much more powerful than flexing authority and investigating oneself and judging you did nothing wrong.
fishgutzy
Senior Member
Hopefully the county sheriff that lied also gets a similar punishment.
Pay was dropped $1.38 an hour....does the research and devolopment division (
) pay better/more overtime? Just curious
Chdamn
Dungeon Master
Staff member
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Life Member
Benefactor
Multi-Factor Enabled
Thank god we have a war on drugs. Making sure people don't take substances into their own bodies should be stopped by any means necessary.
Ikarus1
Avtomat Krishna-kov
And its been so successful, I mean how would we even know about synthetic MJ and bath salts if they never banned good ol OTC Opium Tincture at the Pikes Drugstore
Just wait til we get Krokodil over here
Last edited:
When it's justified and necessary, absolutely. Being a "government thug" doesn't make you or your actions automatically legitimate. When they act like criminal thugs, they should get the same treatment as any other "criminal thug". Right then, right there. I absolutely reject the notion that they should somehow be a protected class. Similarly, I reject the principle that somehow the "government" or even society as a whole is somehow above me or has "authority" over me and I don't believe that some god is going to damn me for defending myself against this society which I would gladly put on it's knees.
Putting on a stupid badge and calling yourself the "law" doesn't make you a good guy. Just because politicians have declared something and pay you to use force against those who reject their edicts doesn't make you in the right.
Last edited:
Shouldn't you "fight" them in court? Or are you one of those guys that rolls the window down an inch and imediatly starts telling them what your rights are under the Constitution?
I've been pulled over numerous times in my 57 years and I've never been denied any rights or had my car searched.
Why? Because that's what the Crown has declared? That it has the right to use force to enact it's will but you must go through it's system at great personal expense. Eff That.
No, I'm not one of those. I'll be polite. I'll be respectful, to a point, but not because I recognize their authority. I don't even see them as my equal.
Last edited:
It has been VERY successful!!!!
The money made, the contracts filled, the jobs made, the lifestyle created, TV shows, movies and all that.
Alot of money
T
The Green Heron
Guest
So going back through this thread, I ran across this gem.
So, using your argument, since we are "all equal under the law," would you acknowledge that if you stand for violence against the People, you don't have a leg to stand on to complain against violence coming from the People?
First, let's address the statement by @Cowboy Very simply, flip it around. They see themselves as some sort of state sanctioned "authority" which means, by definition they don't see themselves as equals of the citizen but rather having power over them. Regardless of the justification for this perception power. How is it any different to hold that view in reverse and to refute that claim of authority?
I will take this a step further and say that I reject the notion of what passes for "law" in this nation today and that it is nothing but corruption and a cancer that needs to be excised. Having "elections" and all the other religious ceremonies are nothing more than a slight of hand that is designed to convince the masses of the legitimacy of having rulers. Think about it for a second - who the eff are these pompous dorks down in the state house that think they have any sort of ability to tell US where we have or don't have a privilege to arm ourselves for justified defense? The only reason they have that power is because folks are willing to give it to them. I am no longer and would gladly put my boot on their throat and reverse the role that they seem think is righteous and my position is that the cops that would defend them for a paycheck when that happens are just as bad as the politicians.
You really don't get it. I seriously doubt that many of us here go around doing things that would put us in a situation where we would have to. Still, that doesn't mean that I accept or agree with the idea that if someone is going to operate as a thug in the name of the State that the recourse should to have to accept that "authority" and plead before the Crown. A thug is still a thug even when they operate under the notion of "law".
I will take this a step further and say that I reject the notion of what passes for "law" in this nation today and that it is nothing but corruption and a cancer that needs to be excised. Having "elections" and all the other religious ceremonies are nothing more than a slight of hand that is designed to convince the masses of the legitimacy of having rulers. Think about it for a second - who the eff are these pompous dorks down in the state house that think they have any sort of ability to tell US where we have or don't have a privilege to arm ourselves for justified defense? The only reason they have that power is because folks are willing to give it to them. I am no longer and would gladly put my boot on their throat and reverse the role that they seem think is righteous and my position is that the cops that would defend them for a paycheck when that happens are just as bad as the politicians.
I wonder how many of them would concede any notion of their right to rule when their spine is about to be snapped?
They use force to assert their rule and try to claim that we must be constrained to reason. What's worse is that they hire their enforcers by using funds that they've stolen from us.
I don't think so. This needs to stop. This needs to change.
Last edited:
Your a sovereign citizen aren't you? Let you colors shine.
No, but I do agree with some of their principles.
I also think that this experiment of a republic called the United States has run it's course and it's time to move on. As I've said, I reject the idea that it is legitimate or even necessary to delude ourselves that we need rulers.
So your just looking for followers to lead to the promise land at this point. But your not as karismatic as Jim Jones.
I've been on this site for 6 years, if you count the Canadian one. Guys have been talking revolution since I've been here and probably long before that. I wonder what they are waiting on?
No "rulers", read laws... riigght. Take 300 million pieces of popcorn apply heat, use no lid, and expect them to exit the pot in an orderly fashion.
Not exactly, he talks up to revolution but he knows where to draw the line. He always stops short of making an actual threat though he is starting to blur the lines.
"I... would gladly put my boot on their throat and reverse the role." Here he admits he would be as bad as the oppressors he thinks are out to get him. Replace one tyrant with another, one with no restraint? I don't think so.
Running a little more off the rails every day.
He hasn't a clue what to replace the system he advocates tearing down with.
OP
It's here....been here since 2013 I believe.
And people are now using Carfentanil to get high...and dead.
The only issue I have with synthetic Marijuana is the ever-changing banned list, so the chemical compounds vary from bag to bag, so people have no clue what they're actually smoking. The bag looks the same but the product is way different.
I'd like to know what the back story is. Like, did the uber driver take the cop's wife or GF home one night when she was drunk and broke and then paid the driver with a handjob? Was the Uber driver a known rights advocate? Did a vehicle of the same color and make run over the cop's mother's cat and leave the scene? Has the cop been brainwashed to trigger on the word "Uber"? Did the Uber drive TP the cops house after being given fruit instead of chocolate last Halloween? Did the Uber driver sell the cop pink mint tea instead of the white widow he ordered for his nieces graduation party? There is usually a lot more to an outrageous story that winds up on video. Look at what CNN has done? Hell, look at what MSM has done for the past 50ish years? Before that what the newspaper barons accomplished, and what wars have done to distract?
lol. No, not really. We live in that awkward stage in the fall of a Republic where it's far too late to work within the system to save it but still too early to shoot the bastards responsible and build a new one.
Ikarus1
Avtomat Krishna-kov
Yes by "regulating" Cannibis you open the door to all kinds of dangerous combinations of unnatural and unregulated compounds....
doose
Happy to be here
I understand the sentiment, but the real life fact of the matter, is use of physical force by you in a situation like this will usually result in you assuming room temperature, while the cop's actions are dealt with at a later date...
ChickenHawk
I'm a chicken hawk
2A Bourbon Hound 2024
2A Bourbon Hound OG
Charter Member
Benefactor
Life Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
My main problem is that the police don't get punished for their actions many times. You should be fired for lying to someone like this guy did. Not only did he lie to him, he violated his Constitutional rights. How is that not a fireable offense. The second biggest problem I have is when they refer to everyone that isn't LEO as "civilians" like they are a military/paramilitary organization. I guess they pretty much are with the way they have been gearing up. Drawing that divide doesn't help the relationship between them and the public.