Originally posted by no1marauderWe are talking about a speeding ticket. He didn't tell the guy he was going to screw his wife and cut his mother's throat. The sign was plain to see if you were paying attention. If he had kept his mouth shut and signed the ticket (not an admission of guilt) he could have been on his merry way. Even if the ticket was going to cost him $200 it still beats the hell out of giving the cop a reason to taser you.
You two idiots would have walked into the showers at Auschwitz without a peep. We're lucky George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, et al weren't as blindly obedient to authority as you are.
Originally posted by dryhumpHow do you know the sign was "plain to see"? Where did you get that information?
We are talking about a speeding ticket. He didn't tell the guy he was going to screw his wife and cut his mother's throat. The sign was plain to see if you were paying attention. If he had kept his mouth shut and signed the ticket (not an admission of guilt) he could have been on his merry way. Even if the ticket was going to cost him $200 it still beats the hell out of giving the cop a reason to taser you.
Originally posted by no1marauderThat money doesn't grow on trees -- the taxpayers paid the freight. And when they get tired of enough idiot jurists giving awards like this to people like that, maybe they will vote these liberal judges out of their positions and elect someone who is willing to see a case like this and dismiss it for lack of merit before it is tried.
He's $40,000 bucks richer; those "consequences" really sucked for him, didn't they?
1 edit
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterI doubt Utah has many "liberal" judges. Taking a taser to someone because you don't like their attitude is a violation of their rights, Adolf. The case was settled by the State because they knew they would lose in front of a jury; you know, a jury of taxpayers. How come you want a judge to toss it out before the people have spoken on the merits of the case?
That money doesn't grow on trees -- the taxpayers paid the freight. And when they get tired of enough idiot jurists giving awards like this to people like that, maybe they will vote these liberal judges out of their positions and elect someone who is willing to see a case like this and dismiss it for lack of merit before it is tried.
Originally posted by no1marauderDang-it, you played the Nazi card again! Thread closed. I've been invalidated. Nothing more here to see.
I doubt Utah has many "liberal" judges. Taking a taser to someone because you don't like their attitude is a violation of their rights, Adolf. The case was settled by the State because they knew they would lose in front of a jury; you know, a jury of taxpayers. How come you want a judge to toss it out before the people have spoken on the merits of the case?
4 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderOnce again, you're making untrue claims. He didn't taser him because he didn't like his attitude, or because he refused to sign the ticket. or any other of the nonsense you've said earlier. He zapped him when he turned around and reached into his pocket. Clearly the boy was out of control and presented a potental threat. When you're confrontational and reach for anything you get put down. You wouldn't last long as a police officer.
I doubt Utah has many "liberal" judges. Taking a taser to someone because you don't like their attitude is a violation of their rights, Adolf. The case was settled by the State because they knew they would lose in front of a jury; you know, a jury of taxpayers. How come you want a judge to toss it out before the people have spoken on the merits of the case?
1 edit
Originally posted by Sam The ShamBS. I suggest you listen to the video; the cop NEVER says the guy was a threat. If he thought he might be carrying a weapon, he probably should have frisked him BEFORE he turned his back to him and walked back to the police cruiser! The guy wasn't doing anything "out of control"; he was questioning why he got a ticket - specifically he was asking where the 40 MPH sign was. The cop refused to answer this simple inquiry. Obviously the guy didn't want to be arrested, but you usually don't "threaten" someone by turning your back to them. Your version of the events is a fairy tale as anyone who looks at the vid can easily see.
Once again, you're making untrue claims. He didn't taser him because he didn't like his attitude, or because he refused to sign the ticket. He zapped him when he turned around and reached into his pocket. Clearly the boy was out of control and presented a potental threat. When you're confrontational and reach for anything you get put down. You wouldn't last long as a police officer.
The State of Utah not only ponied up, but sent this officer to have extra training in "communications". What does that tell ya?
Originally posted by no1marauderTurning away while reaching for a gun is an old trick that's gotten officers killed. The state settled to make jerks like you happy.
BS. I suggest you listen to the video; the cop NEVER says the guy was a threat. If he thought he might be carrying a weapon, he probably should have frisked him BEFORE he turned his back to him and walked back to the police cruiser! The guy wasn't doing anything "out of control"; he was questioning why he got a ticket - specifically he was asking where t ...[text shortened]... t sent this officer to have extra training in "communications". What does that tell ya?
Originally posted by Sam The ShamShooting someone in the back when they were walking away from the window would have been a lot easier. Besides, the cop never claimed he thought he had a weapon and clearly didn't believe any such thing.
Turning away while reaching for a gun is an old trick that's gotten officers killed. The state settled to make jerks like you happy.
I would have rather the case go to trial and the facts have been presented to a jury so people like you couldn't make them up to fit your preconceptions.
Originally posted by no1marauderWah!..Wah!..Wah!... mommy told me never take any s**t from a powice officer. She told me always to set them up so i can collect on a lawsuit. And..and..and now i'm heading for the nearest Micky D's to get a nice freakin HOT cup of coffee. Maybe i can spill it on my dic, but first i need to pick up my Workers Comp Check from my lawyer for faking an injury at my work place even though i sustained such injury while rolling over in bed. Mommy taught me how to woik the system...woik it...woik it...woik it! Why should i care, i don't pay taxes. Yippie..Yippie..Yippie what a wonderful day!!!!
Shooting someone in the back when they were walking away from the window would have been a lot easier. Besides, the cop never claimed he thought he had a weapon and clearly didn't believe any such thing.
I would have rather the case go to trial and the facts have been presented to a jury so people like you couldn't make them up to fit your preconceptions.
GRANNY.