--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 198 ASK A COP Ref: F3I00025 Date: 03/13/98 From: CHARLES HUNTER Time: 09:11am \/To: DON BOX (Read 1 times) Subj: USE OF THIS ECHO DB>Too ornery for something real bad to happen. Could have lost his feed, >mebee just got tired of yelling at us. Dunno? DB>Maybe if he knows we're talking about him behind his back he'll show >up again. He did have some valid points on occasion... his >presentation needed some polishing up though! Could be. CHARLES HUNTER * 1st 2.00 #9124 * Got Brother Jimmy on the TV and Killer on the stereo... --- QScan/PCB v1.19b / 01-0671 * Origin: AirPower Services www.airpower.com 610-259-2193 (1:273/408) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 198 ASK A COP Ref: F3I00026 Date: 03/14/98 From: TOM RIGHTMER Time: 12:11am \/To: CHARLES HUNTER (Read 1 times) Subj: Double Jeopardy CH> Tom, your assessment as stated above, is correct. However just so CH> nobody gets draws the wrong general conclusion, I would point out that CH> the Fifth Amendment does protect from multiple punishments for the CH> same offense. That is to say that once you have been sentenced, you CH> cannot usually be called back and given a more onerous sentence for CH> that offense. Here you would be talking about the courts, not the entities in the example. I know that you aren't hinting that parents are bound by this, and you didn't address the other example, a school administrative punishment. You would be talking strictly about the courts and punishment dealt by the courts, not other entities. Double jeopardy for this discussion is the wrong tag anyway. Tom Rightmer - A Victims' Rights Advocate ... He who looks like his passport photo is not well enough to travel. --- Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 * Origin: 357 MAGNUM *Lawton, OK* 405-536-5032 (1:385/20) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 198 ASK A COP Ref: F3I00027 Date: 03/14/98 From: TOM RIGHTMER Time: 12:11am \/To: RYAN BAGUEROS (Read 1 times) Subj: STREET PEOPLE RB> Well, first of all, you weren't being patronizing to Don, you were RB> being patronizing to the general population, specifically those who RB> have met your definition of "street people" ... UM???, now why would I need to patronize street people, for what gain? How many of them do you think read the messages in this echo? I don't remember defining the term, "street people". I do remember making the distinct observation that there are all kinds of folks living on the street, some good and some bad. RB> Well, it was basically an irony; here you are calling for the police RB> to haul off panhandlers who want to spend money on (gasp!) beer, when RB> the police who are these great working heroes have the exact same RB> problems. You are making a very broad generalization here that is not true, but you didn't address the question anyway. Why should a police officer have an obligation to support the alcohol or drug habit of a street person? You were very critical of my statement that I refuse to do this with the money I work for. I can find studies for just about any subject under the sun, and I'm sure to find one slanted just the way I want. Some of the studies you mention are all the way back in the 60's, and they mean nothing to me. I would be interested in the purpose and agenda of the researcher as a very first step. I have read many studies dealing with the psychological makeup of successful police officers, and they don't fit the picture you tried to paint. The key word here is "successful". There are tons of police officers who don't drink, don't smoke, have never beaten their children, and have never been divorced. I work in the third largest police department in Oklahoma and have done so for over 20 years, and I've never been polled for this information. In terms of alcohol abuse compared to other professions, I wouldn't have a clue, but I certainly wouldn't compare police officers to street people. I further doubt that many other professions would fair well in a comparison with the police profession. To say that police officers are people and many of them have problems just like other people would be a true statement. However, you almost attempted to create a stereotype that police officers are alcoholics and child beaters, and we both know this is not true. Tom Rightmer - A Victims' Rights Advocate ... Latest conspiracy theory: Humpty Dumpty was pushed. --- Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 * Origin: 357 MAGNUM *Lawton, OK* 405-536-5032 (1:385/20) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 198 ASK A COP Ref: F3I00028 Date: 03/14/98 From: TOM RIGHTMER Time: 12:11am \/To: RYAN BAGUEROS (Read 1 times) Subj: Caught You RB> Look! My quoter did it again! Wow, I'm getting really good at this RB> editing thing. The board you're on runs Telegard, why not ask the RB> sysop why this might be before you start posting crap ... ask him RB> about the nature of Telegard's quoting feature. First, I'm the SysOp. Second, the message speaks for itself, it has nothing to do with Telegard. Tom Rightmer - A Victims' Rights Advocate ... Silence is more eloquent at times than words. --- Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 * Origin: 357 MAGNUM *Lawton, OK* 405-536-5032 (1:385/20) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 198 ASK A COP Ref: F3I00029 Date: 03/14/98 From: TOM RIGHTMER Time: 12:11am \/To: MIKE MCCANN (Read 1 times) Subj: The Trees MM> In this echo, jurisdictions are MM> muddled. everyone applies the standards they are familiar with which MM> are their own, and this is unsderstandable, but trying to apply ones MM> own legal requirements and expect them to be the same for everyone is MM> not realistic. I understand that, but the basics are usually fairly close. If you are referring to the message I'm thinking about, that would be bare bones basics. Are you saying there are some jurisdictions where an officer can make a misdemeanor arrest for an offense not committed in his presence without one or more of the following: 1) a citizen affiant; 2) a citizen filing and/or signing paperwork; 3) a citizen's arrest? I realize there are exceptions to this rule in most jurisdictions, and some of those exceptions might be different, but the exceptions are usually a very small list. The point would be simple, without a witness to the offense who is willing to serve, there is no case. Some examples of exceptions in my jurisdiction would be: 1) domestic abuse with injury and reasonable grounds to believe who the attacker was; 2) a traffic violation as a result of an accident investigation; 3) radio communications from one officer to another officer of a traffic violation; 4) a warrant. I may have missed a couple at this late hour. Tom Rightmer - A Victims' Rights Advocate ... What's the point-spread on World War III? --- Blue Wave/DOS v2.30 * Origin: 357 MAGNUM *Lawton, OK* 405-536-5032 (1:385/20) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 198 ASK A COP Ref: F3J00000 Date: 03/14/98 From: CHARLES HUNTER Time: 09:13am \/To: TOM RIGHTMER (Read 1 times) Subj: Double Jeopardy TR>Here you would be talking about the courts, not the entities in the example. >I know that you aren't hinting that parents are bound by this, and you didn' >address the other example, a school administrative punishment. You would e >talking strictly about the courts and punishment dealt by the courts, not >other entities. Double jeopardy for this discussion is the wrong tag anyway. If your discussion was limited , GENERALLY, to school administrative punishment you are probably correct. However, I do believe that in certain cases depending on the nature of the incident, the type and severeity of the school punishment it could be a bar to further punishment in a court of law if charges were later filed over the same incident in a regular criminal prosecution. Now I didn't research this, so that opinion and a quarter will let you make a phone call most anywhere in Oklahoma, Tom. CHARLES HUNTER * 1st 2.00 #9124 * Hope for the best, plan for the worst. --- QScan/PCB v1.19b / 01-0671 * Origin: AirPower Services www.airpower.com 610-259-2193 (1:273/408) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 198 ASK A COP Ref: F3J00001 Date: 03/14/98 From: CHARLES HUNTER Time: 09:18am \/To: RICH GRIEBEL (Read 1 times) Subj: zero tolerance RG>I've had two that we've had to call out one of our Troopers, a drug >recognition expert, to help with. One was under the influence of >benzedrine (excuse the spelling) which he claimed were allergy pills, the >other, I forget what drug it turned out to be, but he was getting them >from another driver at a truck stop to help keep him awake. Both had >been driving non stop for days. In such a case, you demonstrate my point that the officer will attempt to identify the drugs. And in the instance you cite, where you establish that the drugs were not obtained pursuant to a valid prescription from his physician (assuming a regulated substance) he would be charged with the illegal possesion/use. Had he been able to establish that he had a valid prescription, he would probably have been just charged with operating under the influence if it applied; no? CHARLES HUNTER * 1st 2.00 #9124 * How you look depends on where you go. --- QScan/PCB v1.19b / 01-0671 * Origin: AirPower Services www.airpower.com 610-259-2193 (1:273/408) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 198 ASK A COP Ref: F3J00002 Date: 03/14/98 From: CHARLES HUNTER Time: 09:22am \/To: RICH GRIEBEL (Read 1 times) Subj: Police Recruits RG>Why LE offices are built that way no one knows. I worked for a time in >the detectives office on a license fraud case. The entire outside wall >was glass. I like windows, but in my home, not where I can be a target. I used to go to a barber who would tease me by closing the front window drapes on the shop whenever I got in the chair. CHARLES HUNTER * 1st 2.00 #9124 * I cna ytpe 300 wrods pre mniuet!!! --- QScan/PCB v1.19b / 01-0671 * Origin: AirPower Services www.airpower.com 610-259-2193 (1:273/408) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 198 ASK A COP Ref: F3J00003 Date: 03/14/98 From: CHARLES HUNTER Time: 09:25am \/To: MIKE MCCANN (Read 1 times) Subj: Teenage Smoking MM>No choice in ZT is as you said no choice. >zDo you think a leo stopped for traffic violation in a zt crackdown will e >handled he same as a civilian? You would hope; but you know how that works. CHARLES HUNTER * 1st 2.00 #9124 * I wear my Sparkware T-Shirt with PRIDE! --- QScan/PCB v1.19b / 01-0671 * Origin: AirPower Services www.airpower.com 610-259-2193 (1:273/408) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 198 ASK A COP Ref: F3J00004 Date: 03/14/98 From: CHARLES HUNTER Time: 09:35am \/To: RICH WILLBANKS (Read 1 times) Subj: Zero Tolerance RW>Which is selective enforcement, which is saying that >you are willing to let people commit crimes in areas >but not in others. But it's not selective for the sake of being selective. Usually in law enforcement zt is invoked for an area that has serious problems and needs cleaning up. RW>Sure they do. If you catch two people doing the same >thing in two different places you treat them the both >the same. Not let a 16 y.o. kid driving the BMW in the >neighborhood where the houses cost a minimum of >$500,000 off with a "you've been a bad boy" speech when >you find a 'roach' in his car but if it is a 16 y.o. >kid walking down an ally in a public housing area with >a roach in his sock you toss him in the back of the >car. You posit and interesting example, Rich; but that is not the intent of zt operations. RW>flashlight. Why if this is a DUI road block? Seems to >me like it is nothing more than a police check point >where they are searching me and my car for any >violations of the law. Any officer stopping your vehicle is going to be concerned about his safety. Obviously, if you had a 12 guage shotgun on the seat next to you it would be important that he be aware of that. Moreover, the officer has an obligation to be aware of any illegal items that are in plain view or he wouldn't be earning that paycheck you give him. RW>And I feel for them and for their loss but: RW>They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a >little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor >safety. Benjamin Franklin RW>If you want to see a safe and orderly place go to >Singapore. Of course don't expect to be able to have a >lot of freedom. From a constitutional perspective I know what you mean; and I agree with regard to DUI roadblocks. CHARLES HUNTER * 1st 2.00 #9124 * I'm here to test the concrete. --- QScan/PCB v1.19b / 01-0671 * Origin: AirPower Services www.airpower.com 610-259-2193 (1:273/408)