Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Orange County Sheriff's Deputy Arrests 3

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • pnkssbtz
    Veteran Member
    • Oct 2006
    • 3555

    Originally posted by BigBamBoo
    Another thing that seems to be overlooked here. They were breaking the law. A infraction but still breaking the law by driving with a broken windshild.

    If you are going to talk about law....make sure your in the right...100% in the right.

    If they did not have a broken windshield they probably would not have been stopped. And we would not be talking about all this.
    I'm sorry, but I can't agree with this.

    The windshield law is a safety issue, not a criminal issue. And is subjective to the actual scope of the crack in the windshield.


    Further I cannot agree with the mindset that once you are found guilty of violating a minor infraction that is not criminal in nature, all of the rest of your rights are forfeit. Because that is what happened here.


    The point of police is not to scrutinize everyone under a microscope and try and find microscopic flaws and then punish the hell out of them.

    Comment

    • BigBamBoo
      Calguns Addict
      • Apr 2008
      • 5210

      ,,,,,,,,,,
      Last edited by BigBamBoo; 08-01-2011, 12:42 PM.
      Bring hay for my horse....wine for my men....and mud for my turtle!

      What do you hear ???...... Nothing but the rain. Well grab your gun and bring in the cat.

      "A fear of weapons is a sign of retarded sexual and emotional maturity."
      - Sigmund Freud

      Originally posted by ar15barrels
      It makes it bigger and longer.

      Comment

      • pnkssbtz
        Veteran Member
        • Oct 2006
        • 3555

        Originally posted by BigBamBoo
        Hi pnkssbtz.

        I agree with you. I do...but you seem to miss my point. And that being do not give LEO reason to mess with you.

        You can...and will get stopped for a broken/cracked windshield. Once your stopped...ANYTHING can happen from there.

        I think I read that someone in the car/truck told the cops they had guns. Full stop....now the LEO is gonna ask what kind of gun? And the rest is now history.
        But that is not exactly what happened here. In this instance, the police acted in ignorance of the law and made judgments on the law that were incorrect and conjecture on their part. This isn't Judge Dredd and they aren't "street judges".

        They should only be making arrests for things they know are illegal. Hence my comments on ignorance of the law.

        This situation, if I were a LEO, would be like me arresting everyone that I deemed unsavory that I saw on the street and then throwing them in jail until I can figure out a charge that would stick, whether or not those individuals actually committed any crimes.


        PatriotnMore said it so eloquently:
        Originally posted by PatriotnMore
        I am sorry, this is the proverbial thorn in my side. We are operating under a lie within the judicial system, we are told we are innocent until proven guilty, but treated as guilty until proven innocent.

        If the judicial system operated as they claim, the burden of proof is on the accuser to prove your guilt.

        If you were compliant in accordance with the CA. DOJ AW description of lawful possession, your AR's should have been returned to you, you should have been released with NO bail set, until such time as the D.A. can prove you were not compliant.

        If you were not compliant, that is a whole different beast. At that time, the burden is on you to show that you were compliant in the court of law with a Jury of your peers.

        I just love when I see those here who would justify the opposite. I can't wait to see you before a Judge and have your civil rights violated.
        It is either legal, or it is not!!!
        If, there is a grey area of the law, the burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
        That is where the LEO's broke pact with the constitution. In my opinion, every LEO involved whom encouraged and facilitated this incident should be removed from duty and fired for violating their oath the constitution.


        Originally posted by BigBamBoo
        A buddy of mine always waits to the last day to renew his car reg. So once a year he is driving around with what looks like expired tags. And guess what? He ALWAYS gets stopped once or twice a year for that?

        And he is ALWAYS bitching about it. Simple fix...pay a month before hand...and end of problem.

        See....he was not breaking a law. His registartion was paid,etc. BUT...to a cop behind him it was expired.

        Same thing with a busted windshield. You will/can be stopped for it.
        I'm sorry, but your story of your buddy doesn't mean that the LEO's should have the right to dismantle the car and confiscate it after a non-moving infaction, because some criminal could of touched it, looked at it, sat on it or even driven it once, without any actual evidence of any of those things being done.

        Comment

        Working...
        UA-8071174-1