Police Officers And The United States Constitution

[NYDIESEL]

new york penal law..... 240.20 disorderly conduct sub. 3 in a public place, he uses abusive or obscene language he is guilty of DISCON....... so much for your gripe..... cops not only study the constitution/bill of rights... but they also study law..... relax yourself with your comments tough toys! this cop was 100 percent correct
________
Headshop (http://headshop.net/)

[American]

It appears to be a sad fact most of the police officers on this board have probably never read the entire Constitution/Bill of Rights.

They swore to uphold and defend the principles enshrined in those documents and yet they know little or nothing about them and, what's even more sad, they don't care to know anything about them.

The Bill of Rights and the Constitution together serve as one of our nation's most important cornerstones and yet they are ignored in the name of expedience and the desire to earn "respect" (fear) on the street.

I recently witnessed a citizen relating his complaint to a uniformed police officer. The man was not threatening anyone with his unflattering words.

The uniformed officer threatened to arrest the man if he continued using expletives and derogatory language when calmly describing his plight.

I wanted to go over to the officer and slap him in the back of the head while reminding him he took an oath to vigorously uphold this man?s freedom to say whatever he wants to say as long as he is not threatening violence. For an officer of the government to threaten a man with arrest merely because the officer did not like his language was extremely offensive to me and I would suggest to any other God fearing American who embraces US Constitution.

It?s officers like this one who have absolutely no clue what their role in government is.

________
Web Shows (http://livesexwebshows.com/)

[legal eagle]

Wow...NYDIESEL certainly put the bitc# slap down on that first poster

[LNO]

"I wanted to go over to the officer and slap him in the back of the head"

Are you saying that you desired to assault a uniformed police officer? Are you often prone to violent behavior, Mr. American?

[uncle sam]

Quote: new york penal law..... 240.20 disorderly conduct sub. 3 in a public place, he uses abusive or obscene language he is guilty of DISCON....... so much for your gripe

Excerpt from NYSPL:

A person is guilty of disorderly conduct when, with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof

3. In a public place, he uses abusive or obscene language, or makes an
obscene gesture; :

___________________________________

Despite your attempt to quote N.Y.’s Discon law out of context, American’s gripe remains valid. As long as a person is not “causing public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof,” that person may express himself any way he feels like…and regardless of their personal opinions, EVERY police officer in the USA took a sworn oath to uphold his right to freedom of speech.

My impression of your response to this topic is that you could care less about upholding citizen’s unalienable rights. Apparently you would rather squash an American’s rights instead of doing your sworn duty and insuring his right to enjoy them.

NYDIESEL, do you believe police officers have a duty to squash or in anyway inhibit a citizen’s freedom of speech?

[uncle sam]

Are you saying that you desired to assault a uniformed police officer? Are you often prone to violent behavior, Mr. American?

Absent a physical injury, there is no assault. If an American feels like slapping an arrogant, abusive officer, that is his unalienable right. Just as the officer has a right to arrest the citizen for harassment.

Let me ask you. Have you ever ONCE felt like slapping one of your fellow officers in the head because of the way he disrespects citizens and your badge?

[Rookie]

Uncle Sam,its that key word "RECKLESSLY". That means he doesn't have to intend to annoy or alarm anyone. Also, I defy you to walk up to any officer and slap them in the back of the head. I would pay good money to see that. I bet that if you were walking past that guy cursing with your wife and kid, you would be saying to yourself "Why doesn't that cop make him quit cursing. Those cops are good for nothing. Cant he see that this action is annoying me and alarming my poor wife."

[tsm20]

"If an American feels like slapping an arrogant, abusive officer, that is his unalienable right."

I would LOVE to see you TRY to excersise that "right" you THINK you have to slap an officer. Just be prepared to be handcuffed so fast you won't even know it happened until after it's over! A note to any rookies reading this: NEVER let anyone hit,slap,poke,jab, or touch you in ANY way out of anger without instantly handcuffing them and placing them under arrest! Period! Case closed! God bless and stay safe!

[uncle sam]

I bet that if you were walking past that guy cursing with your wife and kid, you would be saying to yourself "Why doesn't that cop make him quit cursing. Those cops are good for nothing. Cant he see that this action is annoying me and alarming my poor wife."

Rookie, obviously you are a rookie. If you personally observe a person cursing out another in a public place, you swore you would intervene and determine if the “victim” wants you to take action. If the victim declines and there are no other offenses being committed, a police officer has no right to tell anyone how to express him or herself. This is America!!…not a police state.

Police officers are paid to respect the US Constitution and the rights that it affords ALL American citizens...regardless of whether or not the citizen shows disdain for authority.

As a rookie, you should know that. Or have you already succumbed to the, “Kid, forget what they taught you in the academy, this is the way we do things on the streets” mentality?

Hey Rookie..anyone ever tell you rookies are suppose to have small mouths and big ears.

[county residue]

did the cursing annoy, alarm, inconvenience the p.o.? if he can articulate any of the above, dis con, better yet, i would tell this citizen to stop talking like that immediately because he /she is intimidating me, that becomes my fav, o.g.a.thats a misdemeanor,then in court it will be dropped to dis con, more than likely. that law is there to cover our butts,i'd advise the rookies and young guys to use it anytime possible.the only problem, you do have to do prints and photos
________
Wendie 99 (http://www.lovelywendie99.com/)

[lexordo]

A person is guilty of disorderly conduct when, with intent to cause public inconvenience, , or recklessly creating a risk thereof


The "annoyance or alarm" sub-section of the "Harassment" statute was recently struck down by the Appeals Court as being unconstitutional. Thus creating Officer's liability if he/she enforces it.

I would be careful when using the same sub-section as it applies to Dis Con.


________
n02 vaporizer (http://no2vaporizers.com)

[discon pro]

whos talking harass, we are talking dis con.anyway we apply the law until we hear from our legal dept, otherwise it is their responsiblity to make changes in our enforcement or interpretations of laws, we follow it as is.
if rookie heard the cursing himself he can act as he sees fit, does not need a victim or complaintant, it is his discretion not the civilian.i dont know if i would push for oga unless his rhetoric was directed at me

[TBAW]

LEO's stop posting here.
________
BLACK PUSSY (http://www.fucktube.com/categories/304/pussy/videos/1)

[uncle sam]

NYDIESEL, do you believe police officers have a duty to squash or in anyway inhibit a citizen’s freedom of speech?

[tsm20]

Freedom of speech has it's limits too. For example, it's illegal to yell FIRE in a crowded theatre just for fun. Doing so causes a severe risk of injury to innocent people. No more should even need to be said about that.

[10 4]

thats falsely reporting incident a felony

[TinyTim]

Officer tsm20, absent an offense being committed, do you believe you have the lawful right to threaten an American Citizen with arrest just because you do not like or agree with the manner in which he or she is expressing him or herself?

[county residue]

it dont matter, as soon you cross the line,you going. thats the power we have. county resident. and we draw the line. lower your voice, dont curse at me. we do this for a reason. any situation we walk into we are in control. you act in a way to undermine that we tell you to stop. you dont comply, you run the risk of getting locked up. what if in the original scenario that u posted , there was a child, a nun or any other person,or officer himself did not wish to hear that language?
we dont threaten to arrest we warn that we will arrest. again birdie that is our right. our govt. has given us that power, just like discretion. not 1 thing you can do about it.

________
HOMEMADE SOLDERING IRON (http://www.vaporshop.com)

[speech]

nowadays we are told cops are just civil servants, back when i was growing up, we were told to respect them, they are the law.
i know the answer im going to hear is that those were real cops, i see no difference in the cops then and now, the difference is us.society has changed to question everything .defy any power parents, government, teachers. maybe thats not a bad thing maybe it is.
cops are different than other jobs. they live by different rules. people have a problem with this. cops are authorized to do whatever they have to to go home, we dont have that luxury. they carry guns around with them.we cant
i learned a while ago if a cop asks you to do something, you have to do it. shut up, lay on the ground, call a ambulance,that old im taking your car in the name of the law, etc, there is an actuall charge if you refuse.
then people think if things dont go their way complain
the problem with that, this isnt walmart. most cops are right when they do something, they certainly know what they can+ cant do, do you know what powers cops have?
maybe this is because besides the amount of power and responsibility now they are well paid

[Agreed]

different world nowadays, everyone so concerned about being our bosses, telling us how to be cops, criticizing our mistakes shortcomings and all, until they need us. thnx for the kind words

[Reality]

You have just done a wonderful job of describing liberal thinking. Question authority whenever you get the chance; answer to no one but yourself; not being responsible for ones own actions...ever; talk back to your teachers and then have your parents back you to the hilt.....the list goes on and on. All brought about by liberals, and none of which has done our society any damn good.

[preclinton]

i dont think 1 should follow blindly, but to question authority just because you have nothing else to do with yourself that is just immature, expected from teens not from the adults.

[Sounds familiar]

those are the houses where we are called for domestics with the "out of control" 10 year olds. the parents dont want to do their jobs so they expect us to.
my guess is the last guy that worked this sector was at the house for the parents arguments, that they could not resolve on their own, so they expect us to play marriage counselor.
no doubt if they have a problem with their neighbors, same crap,calling to document a problem with my neighbor. they've never bothered to talk to their neighbor,thats what we earn the big bucks for.
sound familiar?

[yes]

last time i was there, was on the block for anon d/bike riding all day long. saw the kid somewhere between 5-10 y/o. he was in the street i/f/o/ his house, he sees me takes off up his driveway. i pull up to the house ask him to come down, he wont. finally he comes down with his pops who was sitting watching his son the whole time,they come over, after he puts away the prerequisite pitbull. i was more concerned about the boy taking off on me, so i ask him why he took off, his reply i dont like cops!
where did that come from? how does a boy that young think this up? is that from watching us lock mom/pop up every week? or just the lifestyle they lead? anyway that kid equals 1 thing in the world to me, job security.
funny thing thruout these threads, there is a constant theme, someone telling us either how the laws works or how to read the law. civilians can pick up a law book or watch some nypd blue and think they know what they are talking about, reality is far removed from that book, yet mr/mrs knowitall refuses to believe us, we like morons continue to try to explain the real world to people who simply refuse to listen
the reality
________
How To Roll A Joint (http://howtorollajoint.net/)

[money for nothing]

this whole thread was about some deadbeat watching a officer tell a dirtbag to keep a civil tongue. 20 plus responses later and we are still having to debate a dead issue.somehow even though we deal with this daily, we dont know the law.
over in the illegal thread another astute civilian posts if illegals arent scpd job they should be, like it is that simple. the whole federal/ state thing is above their heads.plus stevie will not touch it.
then we have fox debating reckless endangerment vs. reckless driving, what the debate is? who knows, he dont
the only thing i come here for is the tip o the day. once in a while the county residue, chicken hawk, pehole, posters say something funny. my guess 3 ccu guys posting off each other.
the civilians posting here definitely watching too much tv, not nypd blue more like tj hooker
________
Aerovette (http://www.chevy-wiki.com/wiki/Chevrolet_Aerovette)

[ThreeTen]

I haven't been following the other threads too much but I know the one you are talking about. Reckless Endangerment can't be charged for someone who is DWI. Some of the LEO's on that thread seem to think so. What is reckless endangerment? Hitting a golf ball into crowd but not hitting anyone. If you hit someone and they have PI it becomes an assualt 2.
Reckless driving is when you operate a mv in such a manner as to endanger other mv, peds, cyclists and the like. Good for DWI if they are driving out of control. Should also be a pattern like ran 5 red lights swerved repeatedly at peds. Good also for motorcycles if you can catch them!

________
Lesbian vid (http://www.fucktube.com/categories/26/lesbian/videos/1)

[been there]

There are circumstances under which an operator of a MV can be charged with reckless endangerment. If he is DWI, he can be charged with that too. Example: you observe a motor vehicle driving at a high rate of speed, spinning donuts through a crowded schoolyard. You see kids running for their lives and some of them nearly get hit. You stop the vehicle and find the operator is DWI. Can reckless driving be charged in lieu of a penal law violation? Sure, but I'd charge the operator with the more serious charge of reckless endangerment as a penal law violation and DWI both. Forget reckless driving, what this scenario depicts is criminal by virtue of its sheer recklessness. The reckless endangerment statutes cover this quite clearly. I'm not going to argue here with you, but I encourage you to check with an ADA if you doubt me.

Also, I beg to differ with you regarding this statement:Quote:What is reckless endangerment? Hitting a golf ball into crowd but not hitting anyone. If you hit someone and they have PI it becomes an assualt 2.

NOT TRUE! Your scenario would be reckless assault 3rd under penal law sec.120.00-2 unless SPI is caused (120.05-4), or you can clearly show intent to cause PI (120.05-2).
________
Hyde Park Residence 2 (http://pattayaluxurycondos.com)

[county residue]

it goes like this ; reckless endangerment can be charged as a additional charge if other peoples lives were endangered as a result of mr dwi's action, take the golf ball out of the equation, place a car you got reckless endangerment.
back when they'd let me have a ppo i explained 1212 as this: any 2 moving violations + a additional factor speeding, changing lanes unsafely, plus heavy traffic. no u cant do no signal, unsafe lane change, and tinted windows, i tried that didnt work.
you can charge reckless endangerment 2 if at 2 mph a man intentionaly swerves his car at a pedestrian.
think of it this way,if during a pursuit mr reckless endangerment 2/ driver runs a red light at 50 mph almost hitting occupied vehicles/peds you can charge same, if no vehicles/peds 36, u gots1212
thnx fo the kind words really any thing u find funny is from me the offensive, boring stuff is the other 2 losers
________
ANAL BEADS (http://www.fucktube.com/categories/80/beads/videos/1)

[county residue]

u see a guy dwi almost run kids over u can also hit him w/ the 1212, seperate action, he was a reckless driver in that he was doing donuts,until he endangered the kids, by driving near them i know i sound goofy sometimes but ask your bosses, the driving is unreasonably interferes with the free and proper use of said roadway. no person need be present write that sc%^&%^bag (sorry) as many as possible,look under the town codes write them also, find a beer can, abc law 65 sub whatever.
the worst thing that'll happen, one could get kicked out/ pled down. oh well
________
Ipad cases (http://accesoriesipad.com/)

[sensei]

you definetly want to write as many summons as possible, if u witnessed, in that scenario, make that skell pay thru the nose, both in court and thru insurance company.
________
Elite E (http://www.cyclechaos.com/wiki/Honda_Elite_E)

[BLUETOO]

I HAVE TO HANDLE DISPUTES BETWEEN 15 AND 13 YEAR OLD CAUSE THE PARENTS CAN'T HANDLE THEIR KIDS. COME ON

[Holy UTT Batman]

This has got to be the stupidest thread ever.

People We are talking about SUFFOLK POLICE here.

These are cops that do not even give summons at an MVA even IF AND WHEN they are certain an infraction was committed and who was at fault. This is a dept that does not arrest sommeone when a death occurs as a result of a MVA. This is a Dept that condones excessive speeding on the LIE. But they will arrest if you relate a story in blue language. C'mon - give me a break. It is NOT DisCon. There was (probably) no intent, just relating a story. More than that- 32 em.

And for this thay make over $100k/year. Stupid BLUE BELLIES. Never a cop around when you need one.

[Naysayer]

Perhaps if you knew just a little about police work and the law you wouldn't write such drivel.

A. Police officers can't write summonses for moving violations they did not witness, even if a violation is obvious. Any such summons would be dismissed in court or TVB by a judge. In the case of an MVA the apparent cause would be noted in the accident report as a contributing factor. After that the insurance companies do a pretty good job of assessing blame. In the case of fatal accidents, the NYS DMV holds a hearing to determine if the other driver should have their license revoked based on the circumstances and facts noted by the officers and witnesses involved.

B. The fact that someone is killed in an MVA does not mean someone committed a criminal act or that someone belongs in jail. We don't live in Russia. For an arrest to be made, there must be an intentional act, a reckless act, or a criminally negligent act committed. Fatal accidents are investigated by detectives in Suffolk County, and if it is determined that a crime has been committed an arrest is made or the facts turned over to a grand jury to consider. Simply running a red light or a stop sign does not rise to the level of criminality, but running a red light or a stop sign at 90 mph while dwi would. Get the picture?

C. If you think the Highway Patrol doesn't enforce speed limits on the L.I.E., you should contact the Highway Patrol office and ask how many speeders are given out in any given month on the L.I.E. You'd probably be shocked. Surely there are a lot more speeders than officers patrolling our roadways in Suffolk, but if there were a lot more officers out there enforcing the limits and you happened to be the person who got caught, you'd probably complain about that too.

[SCPD1]

UMM MORE LIKE STUPID YOU WE DO AND CAN GIVE TICKETS OUT AT MVA'S EVEN IF WE DIDN'T OBSERVE THE VIOLATION. CHECK YOUR FACTS KID.

[Naysayer]

Go ahead SCPD1, tell me what moving violations, like 1172a, 1111d-1, 1180d YOU write for violations YOU DIDN'T WITNESS. Violations like 509-1, 511-1, 401-1, 319-1, and 306b don't qualify. I'm waiting.

By the way, I'm sure you could write an ignorant motorist a summons for 1172a at the scene of an accident, but if they were smart enough to challenge the summons in court, it would be dismissed.

[holy crap batman]

he naysayer - stupid jackass

the three things you mention are all done in other states. Look it up @#%$.

[MrHelton]

Glad to see you keeping it clean here, using crap instead of the "S" word.
I wouldnt want to see anyone else fined ten grand and loose 25 driver points!!!!!

[s word]

@#%$ @#%$ @#%$
s hit

[notawannbe]

Ok here is a test.

Take a ride on the LIE

1- Go 55 mph. You are going to feel like you are standing still as everyone passes you, some will tail gate and some will cut in front of you. THIS IS THE SPEED LIMIT and its already dangerous.

2- raise to 60 mph. You are now breking the law but cars are still passing you, more will pass you then you pass.

Raise to 65 then to 70 mph. Its scary but at 70 mph cars will STILL be passing you. Now naysayer will say that this is ok and that might be, but what happens if someone, some old person, or an old car, wants to go 55 mph in the right lane, WHICH IS THEIR RIGHT. Or what if someone gets a blow out at 70 mph. The result is tragedy.

I remember when people were actually afraid of being caught for speeding and the days when being a Police Officer meant more than greed or being an over-paid clerk.

Quetion for all the P/O's - Exactly how many days from the day you start do you reach the point of not giving a crap and the money is what its all about. That is scary.

[RDEJr8]

Man i might be a hick but that adds up to like $50,000.00 and 125 drvier points?
I think your going to the white house,NO NEXTEL CUP FOR YOU!!!

[fcc]

----------------
time to install one

[Naysayer]

Quote:he naysayer - stupid jackass the three things you mention are all done in other states. Look it up @#%$.

Holy miniscule attention span Batman, guess you missed the part of this thread that referenced Suffolk Police. I don't give a rats ass what other states do or don't do, we were discussing Suffolk County.

Still waiting to hear from SCPD1 though. Guess he's still looking up the VTL sections I cited.

[SCPD3]

STATE TROOPERS WRITE SUMMONES TO PEOPLE IN ACCIDENTS WHEN THEY DIDN'T WITNESS THE VIOLATIONS.

[birdie]

As per a recent department directive we (SCPD) are to write summonses at accidents when we have probable cause to believe a traffic infraction was commited whether it was witnessed or not. For example, a two car accident at an intersection controlled by stop signs for east and westbound traffic, but no traffic control device for north and southbound traffic. It is pretty obvious who did what and a summons is required to be written. What will happen to that summons at TVB is another matter all to itself. I'm not saying I necessarily agree with the directive, but it is there nevertheless.
________
RC164 (http://www.cyclechaos.com/wiki/Honda_RC164)

[Woo hoo]

Who write summonses for infractions that didn't occur in their presence? We have malicious prosecution lawsuits for the dope who believes the crap their lucky saturday dope bosses feed them. This from the dept. that has ordered it's officers to make PO and not civilian 32s for domestic harassment that didn't occur in the POs presence. EVEN though they have been successfully sued for this and now finally know that POs can't make arrests for violations of the PL. Ahhh it doesn't matter, the money isn't coming out of any of the stupid bosses who think this stuff up, it's coming out of the taxpayers pockets. SCPD has the sorriest bunch of Cop/Boss/Attorneys working in the legal bureau who sign off on these hair brained R&Ps that are clearly in violation of the powers of arrest for POs in NY State.

[birdie]

SCPD NEVER ordered its members to make a PO arrest for a domestic harrassment that didn't occur in the officer's presence. You obviously never read the directive or misinterpreted it. The directive DID require an arrest be made for any domestic invoving a felony or any domestic misdemeanor involving violence or threat of violence, even over the objection of the victim or without the victim's cooperation. That policy is no longer in effect, except in felony cases. I guess you never read that directive either. The amount of misinformation and falsehoods accepted as facts on this board is simply amazing. I wish everyone would get their facts straight before they post. The public reads this as well and they are definitely getting the wrong idea about many things.
________
home made vaporizer (http://homemadevaporizers.info/)

[Equinox]

You're partially mistaken, Birdie. Domestic misdemeanors involving actual violence or threatened violence (ie: agg. harass) are still MUST arrest situations as per R&P's.

[birdie]

SCPD now (and once again) conforms to NYS law regarding arrests involving domestic misdemeanors. If the "victim" refuses to cooperate (i.e. will not give a statement) we do not make an arrest even if the offense involves violence or the threat of violence. If the victim requests that no arrest be made, we do not arrest (misdemeanors only). PCS has the responsibility to follow up with the victim to see if she, or he changes their mind at a later time. Again, felonies are mandatory arrest whether the victim wishes to cooperate or not. The R&P's have been amended to reflect this.
________
Yamaha Y125Z specifications (http://www.yamaha-tech.com/wiki/Yamaha_Y125Z)

[Return of Batman]

Well naysayer has been proven to be an idiot. No more calls needed.

Guess he voted for giving out UTT at 10-10 before he voted against it.

Imagine that: State PD DO WRITE TICKETS. Wow, what a concept. And SCPD has a memo on it. Holy Crap.

Hey Naysayer listen to Command Band sometimes. All you hear are calls ref road rage, cars speeding, forcing people off the road, cutting in and out of HOV lane etc. Know what the dirty little secret is? Very few of those calls are handled cause THERE ARE VERY LITTLE HIGHWAY PATROL SECTOR CARS ON THE LIE.

[pacman]

I haven't seen the directive that says we won't arrest for misdemeanors if the complainat won't cooperate. Haven't seen it in the bulletin either. Is that relatively new? Also, i assume that that would not apply to misdemeanor criminal contempt, since the complainant has no say in whether the respondant gets 32's anyway.

________
IOLITE VAPORIZER REVIEW (http://iolitevaporizer.net/)

[birdie]

You would be correct in assuming it does not apply to crim. contempt 2nd. CPL mandates arrest in that case and SCPD complies. This all goes back to when the dept. was playing semantics with the definition of PI. Any mark, bruise, etc. was considered an injury, thus at least assault 3rd. That may have something to do with the confusion about mandatory arrest for violations not witnessed by the PO. As of a few months ago the dept. again went by the penal law definition of PI. Cases were being tossed out left and right because the circumstances didn't fit the charge. Cases were also being tossed because arrests were being made without a cooperating victim in misd. cases. CPL states an arrest will be made in misd. cases unless the victim requests otherwise. A victim who won't cooperate or refuses to give a statement is deemed to be requesting otherwise. SCPD went back to following the CPL and PL in dealing with domestics. In most domestics it is pretty obvious what happened and it would not be difficult to establish probable cause even without a cooperating victim. But in this day and age probable cause is not good enough. We need proof beyond a reasonable doubt to safely make an arrest or risk losing everything we have in a civil action. In short, we're not allowed to make a mistake anymore.
________
how to roll blunts (http://howtorollablunt.net/)

[pacman]

Thanks for the Info
________
Buy Glass Bongs (http://glassbongs.org/)

[Naysayer]

OK guano-guy, you go right ahead and write those summonses for moving violations you didn't witness. Sooner or later you'll be challenged in court and you'll come out looking like the horses ass you are. Don't say you weren't warned. Have a nice day.

[Equinox]

Birdie.....simply put, you're wrong. You rail against misinformation while supplying it yourself. The current department policy regarding domestic misdemeanors involving actual or threatened violence is that an arrest MUST be made. This is true even if the victim becomes uncooperative and refuses to give a statement. In these cases, an arrest is still made and the PO documents the RCTB (probable cause) on a supplemental report. If you're not effecting arrests for domestic assault 3's (for instance) because the victim doesn't want to give a statement, you're taking a risk. If you still refuse to believe this, check with your boss or domestic violence. And finally, the police do not operate using proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That's for a jury.

[Steve Learner]

Quote:birdie:

The public reads this as well and they are definitely getting the wrong idea about many things. With your help, it appears the public is getting an accurate account concerning how many of our police officers are nothing more than whiners and complainers.

Are there any real men performing police work on Long Island?

[coplarge]

''Are there any real men performing ''
for u buddy the men u want frequent the nearest park and ride
''The public reads this as well and they are definitely getting the wrong idea about many things.''
but that doesnt mean u, no one cares what you think
''nothing more than whiners and complainers''
and you, are the foremost expert on whining and complaining

[otjmineola]

funny this sounds like the psycho poster that just looks for any small thing to pick apart in a fairly legit thread. yet when its done back to him he pretends to ignore it

[naysayer not]

Quote:Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
birdie:

The public reads this as well and they are definitely getting the wrong idea about many things.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

With your help, it appears the public is getting an accurate account concerning how many of our police officers are nothing more than whiners and complainers.


Actually over-paid clerks making over $120k/year and doing as little as possible to protect the residents of Suffolk County while its residents are killed on the highways of Suffolk County everyday. SCPD does as little as possible for as much $$$ as possible.

Whatever happened to protect and serve?

[ez]

ez we are too busy parenting your cracker kids

[uhsb]

i know where they are everyday 20+ pos walk thru stonybrook hospital to our psyche ward with pts they picked up from 911 calls.next to none of them are admitted, and the cops sit with the pts for hours before they are admitted.
let me guess its the cops fault how we drive? or maybe they should be on every street so no one does anything wrong. oh but that costs money, we dont want to pay for it right. so it must be their fault cant be yours, or aanyone elses, thats what cops are for
easy to blame the cops for everything aint it?

[birdie]

So, you are one of "those people". Somebody who will take a qoute out of context and use it to further whatever agenda they might have. Obviously I was right. You, at least, have gotten the wrong idea from this board. You are going to use a few quotes that were said in haste, or with emotion and then use them to paint the entire SCPD with your slanderous brush. On second thought maybe you haven't gotten any ideas wrong, or right. You already have a preconceived notion and are only going to see what you want to see. People like you complain about the cost of policing and then complain that there aren't enough cops to do it. You can't have it both ways. My take on you is that you were rejected for psychological reasons or your background check turned up some dirt. Either way, your petty jealousy is from this point on worthy of no further attention from us.
________
genetically modified food (http://gmfoods.info/)

[cops rule4664]

oh yeah

oh yeahwhat r u trying to bury?

bump

[rjj]

Mr. Menso, Your story and replies are bizarre to say the least. Originally all I asked for was a story to back up your accusations. You finally provided your side to the story which quite honestly doesn't add up. One thing I have noticed is that you tend to forget to mention such things as your history with the NYPD and ultimate dismissal due to illigal drug use until it was thrown out there by another individual. You also seem to have a tendency of playing down your own wrongs while building others into the crimes of the century. You refer to your case involving illigal drug use as only a violation yet at the time you were employed as a NYPD detective and as anyone should know that law enforcement officers are and should be held to a higher standard. You obvioulsly used extremely bad judgement during your career as a police officer and so what is to lead us to believe that your judgement has improved at all through the years