Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?
In lighter news: http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/WeirdNews/2012/02/03/19334211.html
In lighter news: http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/WeirdNews/2012/02/03/19334211.html
Law Enforcement - The Good, The Bad, The Ugly.....
- Thread starter Paul
- Start date
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?
LEO commentary on Information Derived from Torture Issue
http://forums.blueline.ca/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=27271
LEO commentary on Information Derived from Torture Issue
http://forums.blueline.ca/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=27271
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?
They call it training, i call it brainwashing, turns them into robots without logic or common sense.
That's what happens when you take a person with no life experiences and give them too much authority.
No different than a teenager, they think they know it all, but haven't even skimmed the surface of reality yet.
The same mentality is shared by cops and gang members, get that money and promotion by any means necessary.
They call it training, i call it brainwashing, turns them into robots without logic or common sense.
That's what happens when you take a person with no life experiences and give them too much authority.
No different than a teenager, they think they know it all, but haven't even skimmed the surface of reality yet.
The same mentality is shared by cops and gang members, get that money and promotion by any means necessary.
imkruzen
Well-known member
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?
Police forces on alert over deadly million-volt 'Tasers' disguised as mobile phones
Read more:
Police forces on alert over deadly million-volt 'Tasers' disguised as mobile phones
Read more:
OpenGambit
Banned
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?
Immediately followed by cops shooting people with mobile phones because they could be weapons.
Immediately followed by cops shooting people with mobile phones because they could be weapons.
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?
Good old Monty, says he's not guilty AGAIN.
He supervised tazing a guy to death, now he's killing motorcyclists while driving drunk with his kids in the car.
They even had a piece on CBC news about tricks of the trade shared amongst officers in the event of getting pulled over driving drunk.
Leaving the scene and claiming you had a drink to "calm down" is the #1 favorite.
As if you would have a major accident, go home for whatever reason, and hang around to have a drink. :bs:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/02/13/bc-monty-robinson.html
Good old Monty, says he's not guilty AGAIN.
He supervised tazing a guy to death, now he's killing motorcyclists while driving drunk with his kids in the car.
They even had a piece on CBC news about tricks of the trade shared amongst officers in the event of getting pulled over driving drunk.
Leaving the scene and claiming you had a drink to "calm down" is the #1 favorite.
As if you would have a major accident, go home for whatever reason, and hang around to have a drink. :bs:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/02/13/bc-monty-robinson.html
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?
It's the oldest trick in the book. Another similar one is to fill a flask with water (so as to not increase your BAC further) and take a swig in front of witnesses after getting into a collision.
This guy deserves to have have the book thrown at him. And maybe a cinder block.
It's the oldest trick in the book. Another similar one is to fill a flask with water (so as to not increase your BAC further) and take a swig in front of witnesses after getting into a collision.
This guy deserves to have have the book thrown at him. And maybe a cinder block.
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?
My understanding was that, several years ago, changes to The Criminal Code and case law had thrown out the "I left and had a few drinks defence", so I was rather confused when the judge tossed out the original charge of "impaired operation causing death." At least they should be able to get him on something.
My understanding was that, several years ago, changes to The Criminal Code and case law had thrown out the "I left and had a few drinks defence", so I was rather confused when the judge tossed out the original charge of "impaired operation causing death." At least they should be able to get him on something.
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?
Drunk on the job. Nice.
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/02/13/veteran-traffic-cop-sent-home-smelling-of-alcohol-sources
Drunk on the job. Nice.
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/02/13/veteran-traffic-cop-sent-home-smelling-of-alcohol-sources
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?
aww, take it easy on the poor old guy, it's such a hard job he does for his 2k a week....:lmao:
aww, take it easy on the poor old guy, it's such a hard job he does for his 2k a week....:lmao:
Re: Wonder why some folks distrust LEO's?
don't do that in front of a copper....you'll get a ticket
don't do that in front of a copper....you'll get a ticket
Toronto cop charged with second degree murder for shooting while on duty.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2012/02/23/toronto-police.html?cmp=rss
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/story/2012/02/23/toronto-police.html?cmp=rss
Even when justice gets served, they still manage to **** it up.
No question the cop shot the guy in error, but second degree murder implies he wanted to kill the person.
Should be manslaughter, plus a few other charges related to not using his firearm correctly or breaking police procedures etc..
Even when justice gets served, they still manage to **** it up.
No question the cop shot the guy in error, but second degree murder implies he wanted to kill the person.
Should be manslaughter, plus a few other charges related to not using his firearm correctly or breaking police procedures etc..
Originally it was manslaughter, but they elevated it.
Based on what change in or new evidence?
No idea. They didn't announce it.
OpenGambit
Banned
2nd Degree Murder doesn't require direct intent.
Manslaughter requires only an unlawful act + causes death. For example. If you set a house on fire and you didn't know someone was inside, and they die... Thats manslaugher.
Murder requires a higher level of intent. you have to either intend that person's death, or you mean to cause bodily harm that is likely to cause death, and is reckless as to whether death occurs or not ( even if you mean to hurt one person but instead hurt another)
Therefore, if you are shooting someone, manslaughter generally doesn't make that much sense. Its pretty much ridiculous to argue that as you are shooting someone, you didn't mean to cause bodily harm that is likely to cause death.
Manslaughter requires only an unlawful act + causes death. For example. If you set a house on fire and you didn't know someone was inside, and they die... Thats manslaugher.
Murder requires a higher level of intent. you have to either intend that person's death, or you mean to cause bodily harm that is likely to cause death, and is reckless as to whether death occurs or not ( even if you mean to hurt one person but instead hurt another)
Therefore, if you are shooting someone, manslaughter generally doesn't make that much sense. Its pretty much ridiculous to argue that as you are shooting someone, you didn't mean to cause bodily harm that is likely to cause death.
Last edited:
