Law Enforcement - The Good, The Bad, The Ugly.....

Who was in the wrong?

  • Cop

    Votes: 23 20.7%

  • Dude who got shot

    Votes: 33 29.7%

  • I like turtles

    Votes: 55 49.5%
  • Total voters
    111
Re: one set of ru;es for them one set of rules for us

FiReSTaRT said:
If you're paid to uphold the law and break it for no valid reason, you can expect to be photographed and you certainly shouldn't harass and intimidate someone for doing it. That's the real point of this story.
Click to expand...

exactly. spin however you want, the cop knew he was in the wrong, that's why he chased after her and cue the harassment. . .

tyrn said:
How about you use your common sense. How many people in this thread, after your reply, explicitly explained for you, that the point of the article is not about stopping for coffee, it's the intimidation and bullying they used on a clearly innocent reporter.

Article says it best "The essence of the conversation was on why she was taking the pictures and once that was established, it should have ended there."
Click to expand...

agreed. others can spin the discussion, but the original point is still very valid.

Graves said:
I still dont get what was scary or intimidating about the situation. Sure everyone will feel differently about a situation, but the cop never threatened her, touched her.... jumped out from behind a wall and said BOO!!! I personally think this article is just trying to stir up G20 crap as the rest of the world has gotten over it but the media knows they can still make some money on it.

Which is actually odd because its the star that has issues with the police, usually the tabloid sun doesn't get into it that much.
Click to expand...

the "g20 crap" was a gross violation of civil liberties, featuring many examples of excessive force and abuse of powers.

is it any wonder that law abiding citizens look upon leos less favourably now?
 
Re: one set of ru;es for them one set of rules for us

turbodish said:
Warmington appears to be on a personal crusade against what he sees to be improperly parked police and parking control vehicles. The Sun has a series of 9 photographs on their web site, 5 of which carry Warmington's name. I suspect Warmington may have recently gotten a parking ticket or two and is out for revenge.
Click to expand...

really? an ad hominem attack to obfuscate the real point?

weak, weak sauce. . .
 
Re: one set of ru;es for them one set of rules for us

D23 said:
Like the Americans and their twin towers....

Have we got past the fact that cops can park anywhere they want yet, or...?

I see people are still clinging to the notion that what they are doing is illegal even though it isn't.

That was the point I was making earlier when the thread was on topic.

Got there yet?

or is it still a cryfest because a law they don't have to follow isn't available to all of us. Like, as I said, carrying .40 cals in public.
Click to expand...

actually, you keep it off topic by discussing the legality, when the issue was the harassment.

since you mention the legality, what she did was also legal. . .care to explain why the cop felt it necessary to harass a law abiding citizen for committing a perfectly legal act?

. . .or should cops pull over everyone when they are not breaking the law, just for kicks?

face it, the cop knew it looked bad, and the photos would end up publicized, in the same way that the ttc workers have been publicly shamed. if what they were doing was perfectly fine, legal and by the book, then why object to the publishing of the photos?
 
Re: one set of ru;es for them one set of rules for us

I don't know why he spoke to her, I wasn't there.

I wouldn't cry harassment if a cop told me he can park wherever he wants since he can but thats just me.

Also, cops can (by law) pull anyone over any time they want. Running them to see if their vehicles are properly insured or even belong to them.

Thought the condo whiners wanted their bikes back?

Kind of hypocrisy I expect here tho...

Any other screamers need clarification (even though I didn't write these laws and am only aware of them, to avoid that old ignorance is no excuse bit)?
 
Re: one set of ru;es for them one set of rules for us

If a cop has to park illegally to get a donut, then he should be allowed. This has been explained in this thread that eating donuts and parking illegally IS part of their job. Since their car is their office, this makes it ok. All delivery trucks, cabs, TTC drivers, etc also have their 'office' in their vehicles and the exemption from having to find legal parking to satisfy a donut fix also applies.

Citizens should realize the importance of a cop and his donuts.
 
Re: one set of ru;es for them one set of rules for us

D23 said:
I don't know why he spoke to her, I wasn't there.

I wouldn't cry harassment if a cop told me he can park wherever he wants since he can but thats just me.

Also, cops can (by law) pull anyone over any time they want. Running them to see if their vehicles are properly insured or even belong to them.

Thought the condo whiners wanted their bikes back?

Kind of hypocrisy I expect here tho...

Any other screamers need clarification (even though I didn't write these laws and am only aware of them, to avoid that old ignorance is no excuse bit)?
Click to expand...
why do you have to respond with such sarcastic answers? the force feels so much anger in this one.
 
Re: one set of ru;es for them one set of rules for us

D23 said:
I don't know why he spoke to her, I wasn't there.

I wouldn't cry harassment if a cop told me he can park wherever he wants since he can but thats just me.

Also, cops can (by law) pull anyone over any time they want. Running them to see if their vehicles are properly insured or even belong to them.

Thought the condo whiners wanted their bikes back?

Kind of hypocrisy I expect here tho...

Any other screamers need clarification (even though I didn't write these laws and am only aware of them, to avoid that old ignorance is no excuse bit)?
Click to expand...

sure, we know that. except in this case, she was on foot, so there was no vehicle or insurance excuse to use. obviously obtuse answers like yours are transparently biased. . .

as for the officer's interest in stopping her, it's pretty obvious to everyone else when you bother reading this part:

"he also told her “sometimes the pictures don’t always find their way into the paper, you know,” thanks to his connections"

. . .this is harassment, pure and simple.

speaking of hypocrisy, i guess it's okay to let cops get their donuts and joe because it's part of their job, regardless of where they park, but when a law abiding member of the media tries to do their job, it's fair game to hassle and harass them? lol, that's hypocritical. . .
 
Re: one set of ru;es for them one set of rules for us

lmfao I love that everyone always says cops love donuts, its the stupidest bloody thing ever... I'm gonna start one....

Everyone that says cops love donuts only says it because they have tiny penises....

Its on the internet..... Must be true....
 
Re: one set of ru;es for them one set of rules for us

She claims he said that. Is there any proof?

You seriously want to use the Sun as your beacon of truth?

Whatever then....

That's your call, not mine.

BTW: you are the one that brought up the irrelevant pulling people over. If you scroll up and read your own words.....
 
Last edited:
Re: one set of ru;es for them one set of rules for us

Graves said:
lmfao I love that everyone always says cops love donuts, its the stupidest bloody thing ever... I'm gonna start one....

Everyone that says cops love donuts only says it because they have tiny penises....

Its on the internet..... Must be true....
Click to expand...

thats not true, i got a big penis:lmao::agave::cool:
 
Re: one set of ru;es for them one set of rules for us

I'm gonna over look the bad parking job because i fully support the purchase of donuts, it's a god given right.
Chasing the reporter down was silly however, if they are doing their job correctly, they shouldn't mind who is filming them in public.

Now i'm going out for donuts, they have a magical little machine at the local IGA that pops em out fresh.....mmmmmm
 
Re: one set of ru;es for them one set of rules for us

afong56 said:
sure, we know that. except in this case, she was on foot, so there was no vehicle or insurance excuse to use. obviously obtuse answers like yours are transparently biased. . .

as for the officer's interest in stopping her, it's pretty obvious to everyone else when you bother reading this part:

"he also told her “sometimes the pictures don’t always find their way into the paper, you know,” thanks to his connections"

. . .this is harassment, pure and simple.

speaking of hypocrisy, i guess it's okay to let cops get their donuts and joe because it's part of their job, regardless of where they park, but when a law abiding member of the media tries to do their job, it's fair game to hassle and harass them? lol, that's hypocritical. . .
Click to expand...
The unknown person taking pictures of police vehicles is reason enough to question her. I have a friend that works as a court officer, and there was a prominent case on going. A person was seen taking pics of vehicles in the court parking lot, later all court officers, and the judge on the case received threatening phone calls.
 
Re: one set of ru;es for them one set of rules for us

Did not read the newspaper piece, skipped most of this thread.

Who likes having their picture taken by strangers, for any reason? Isn't that on par with a stranger giving you the "look"?
 
Re: one set of ru;es for them one set of rules for us

AGAVE said:
Now i'm going out for donuts, they have a magical little machine at the local IGA that pops em out fresh.....mmmmmm
Click to expand...

Thats awesome. There is a tiny toms donuts place in markham, their hours are retarded but if you want soft melty donuts, I think its off of Woodbine close to dennison, there is a new york burger co in the plaza across from it.
 
Re: one set of ru;es for them one set of rules for us

I'll stick to the relevant facts, and side step the nonsense.

1) Cop parks illegally
2) Reporter takes a pic of said Cop
3) Cop comes and inquires about taking of picture.

Now in all honesty who amongst us wouldn't be a little tweaked about some stranger taking a pic of your car? Now as a cop that curiosity takes a vastly different connotation. Was it "harassment" in THIS case I wouldn't go that far.
 
Re: one set of ru;es for them one set of rules for us

oilycreek said:
The unknown person taking pictures of police vehicles is reason enough to question her. I have a friend that works as a court officer, and there was a prominent case on going. A person was seen taking pics of vehicles in the court parking lot, later all court officers, and the judge on the case received threatening phone calls.
Click to expand...

guess you missed or overlooked the part where the cop specifically commented on the pictures not making it into publication due to "connections". . .

once the question was answered, the cop should have gone on his way. . .what followed was harassment pure and simple.
 
Re: one set of ru;es for them one set of rules for us

turbodish said:
Warmington appears to be on a personal crusade against what he sees to be improperly parked police and parking control vehicles. The Sun has a series of 9 photographs on their web site, 5 of which carry Warmington's name. I suspect Warmington may have recently gotten a parking ticket or two and is out for revenge.

In any case what's ironic is that the first picture shows a cop about to get back into his police cruiser, take-out bag and can of Pepsi in hand. It suggests that the cop will be taking most of his "break" in his car. Maybe the usual malcontents here can now start a fresh thread against cops using city property for taking personal work breaks in.
Click to expand...

The Star doesn't like the abuse of police powers anymore than the Sun.
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2010/nov2010/toro-n12.shtml
 
Re: one set of ru;es for them one set of rules for us

With regards to the parking: If the cop saw the reporter taking the pic it's not unreasonable to politely ask why.

Then the cop would be able to explain to an intellegent person why although an officer is supposedly on a coffee break and a union member he or she doesn't have the option like that of other occupations to say "I'm on my break" if an urgent situation comes up. All hell would break loose if the cops showed up late for a robbery / home invasion because they were finishing their double doubles and apple fritters.

I sometimes wonder if the cops had to park with their cruiser out of view someone might find a way to break in and do serious damage, steal sensitive equipment etc.

The intellegent reporter, now enlightened, would be able to write a piece on why cops sometimes have to be cut some slack.

The fire department goes everywhere as a team including the big red truck because if while shopping for groceries an alarm goes off they have to drop the groceries. If Fred the truck driver was in his own car the rest of the boys would be sitting at the station waiting for him to get back while the houses burned down. The Sun would love that.

If an ambulance station is down or overloaded the adjacent stations may split the under-manned zone by parking vehicles at a mid-range donut shops or gas stations so they can better respond to calls. They aren't slacking off.

There are more serious issues with the various police departments so let's not cloud those with petty parking complaints.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom