The Force Strikes Back

http://www.news.com.au/national/poli...-1226764953026

With video. Cyclist gets pinged for not wearing a helmet. Invites police
officer to go catch some f****** criminals. It's a hot day, the officer
unwisely allows his buttons to be pushed and reacts in kind. Mouthy cyclist
now threatens to "press charges".
I don't like Australia's nation-wide cyclist helmet law either. However, we
are stuck with it because too many influential groups think it's a good law.
In this incident I'm all on the side of the policeman.
PH

just in...


http://www.timeslive.co.za/world/201...is-teenage-son

On 22/11/13 08:18, Phil W Lee wrote:
"Peter Howard" considered Thu, 21 Nov 2013
10:30:39 +1000 the perfect time to write:

http://www.news.com.au/national/poli...-1226764953026

With video. Cyclist gets pinged for not wearing a helmet. Invites police
officer to go catch some f****** criminals. It's a hot day, the officer
unwisely allows his buttons to be pushed and reacts in kind. Mouthy cyclist
now threatens to "press charges".
I don't like Australia's nation-wide cyclist helmet law either. However, we
are stuck with it because too many influential groups think it's a good law.
In this incident I'm all on the side of the policeman.
PH

I'm not.
If a police officer can't cope with being told to go catch some
****ing criminals, he's in the wrong job.
And abusing his position to get right in the face of the cyclist,
finger waving and threatening unlawful detention and conspiracy to
rape is WAY over the top. Clearly he's a nasty little bully, too used
to using his uniform to avoid the consequences of his actions.

It makes you wonder how many times he has acted like that when there
hasn't been a video camera running.

The incident does serve a useful function though, in demonstrating how
helmet laws promote the idea that cyclist are some kind of out-group,
who people think can be bullied with impunity.

This is the uncut version:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d0a_1384871134

Yep, I took the cyclists side after that disgraceful outburst by the
policeman.

I would note that the policeman said something about "just like last
time", as though the victim had been persecuted in the recent past. A
serial offender? Not an excuse for the policeman's behavior though.

--
JS

James wrote:
On 22/11/13 08:18, Phil W Lee wrote:
"Peter Howard" considered Thu, 21 Nov 2013
10:30:39 +1000 the perfect time to write:

http://www.news.com.au/national/poli...-1226764953026

With video. Cyclist gets pinged for not wearing a helmet. Invites
police officer to go catch some f****** criminals. It's a hot day,
the officer unwisely allows his buttons to be pushed and reacts in
kind. Mouthy cyclist now threatens to "press charges".
I don't like Australia's nation-wide cyclist helmet law either.
However, we are stuck with it because too many influential groups
think it's a good law. In this incident I'm all on the side of the
policeman.
PH

I'm not.
If a police officer can't cope with being told to go catch some
****ing criminals, he's in the wrong job.
And abusing his position to get right in the face of the cyclist,
finger waving and threatening unlawful detention and conspiracy to
rape is WAY over the top. Clearly he's a nasty little bully, too
used to using his uniform to avoid the consequences of his actions.

It makes you wonder how many times he has acted like that when there
hasn't been a video camera running.

The incident does serve a useful function though, in demonstrating
how helmet laws promote the idea that cyclist are some kind of
out-group, who people think can be bullied with impunity.

This is the uncut version:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d0a_1384871134

Yep, I took the cyclists side after that disgraceful outburst by the
policeman.

I would note that the policeman said something about "just like last
time", as though the victim had been persecuted in the recent past. A
serial offender? Not an excuse for the policeman's behavior though.

"persecuted"? What rot! The "victim" decided to break the law and then
whined like a little child when he was apprehended and booked. If he thinks
it's a bad law he should take it up with the legislature rather than take it
out on the police officer. If he considers himself a freedom rider engaged
in civil disobedience he should get a few thousand followers first who will
fight the tickets so that the clogging up of the lower court calendars
becomes noticeable and attracts media attention. I also got the impression
that this law breaker has been booked in the recent past, maybe for the same
offence, maybe by the very same police officer. If he is a serial offender,
being booked every time he is detected committing an offence is not
persecution. It's simply the risk he chooses to take.
PH

On 22/11/13 13:16, Peter Howard wrote:
James wrote:
On 22/11/13 08:18, Phil W Lee wrote:
"Peter Howard" considered Thu, 21 Nov 2013
10:30:39 +1000 the perfect time to write:

http://www.news.com.au/national/poli...-1226764953026

With video. Cyclist gets pinged for not wearing a helmet. Invites
police officer to go catch some f****** criminals. It's a hot day,
the officer unwisely allows his buttons to be pushed and reacts in
kind. Mouthy cyclist now threatens to "press charges".
I don't like Australia's nation-wide cyclist helmet law either.
However, we are stuck with it because too many influential groups
think it's a good law. In this incident I'm all on the side of the
policeman.
PH

I'm not.
If a police officer can't cope with being told to go catch some
****ing criminals, he's in the wrong job.
And abusing his position to get right in the face of the cyclist,
finger waving and threatening unlawful detention and conspiracy to
rape is WAY over the top. Clearly he's a nasty little bully, too
used to using his uniform to avoid the consequences of his actions.

It makes you wonder how many times he has acted like that when there
hasn't been a video camera running.

The incident does serve a useful function though, in demonstrating
how helmet laws promote the idea that cyclist are some kind of
out-group, who people think can be bullied with impunity.

This is the uncut version:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d0a_1384871134

Yep, I took the cyclists side after that disgraceful outburst by the
policeman.

I would note that the policeman said something about "just like last
time", as though the victim had been persecuted in the recent past. A
serial offender? Not an excuse for the policeman's behavior though.

"persecuted"? What rot! The "victim" decided to break the law and then
whined like a little child when he was apprehended and booked. If he thinks
it's a bad law he should take it up with the legislature rather than take it
out on the police officer. If he considers himself a freedom rider engaged
in civil disobedience he should get a few thousand followers first who will
fight the tickets so that the clogging up of the lower court calendars
becomes noticeable and attracts media attention. I also got the impression
that this law breaker has been booked in the recent past, maybe for the same
offence, maybe by the very same police officer. If he is a serial offender,
being booked every time he is detected committing an offence is not
persecution. It's simply the risk he chooses to take.
PH



I agree with your last 2 sentences. However...

Persecute: 1. subject (someone) to hostility and ill-treatment,
especially because of their race or political or religious beliefs.

[policeman] "You swear one more ****in time and I'll put you in the lock
up just like last time for [possibly drunk and disorderly?] and I'll
deny your bail and some big fella's going to play with your arsehole all
through the night"

At least that's about as much as I could make out.

That sounds like he [the policeman] is proposing to subject the man to
hostility and ill-treatment - possibly like he's done before - and I'd
say the policeman was treating the man with hostility right then and there!

How he whined is neither here nor there. The policeman could possibly
have issued the man with a fine for swearing in public, but instead he
[the policeman] may have broken the law as well!

http://www.findlaw.com.au/articles/4...-cost-you.aspx

--
JS

On 11-21-2013, 22:38, James wrote:
How he whined is neither here nor there. The policeman could possibly
have issued the man with a fine for swearing in public, but instead he
[the policeman] may have broken the law as well!

Indeed.
"If you do one more time what I just did four times, I'll lock you up!"


--
Wes Groleau

After the christening of his baby brother in church, Jason sobbed
all the way home in the back seat of the car. His father asked him
three times what was wrong. Finally, the boy replied, “That preacher
said he wanted us brought up in a Christian home, and I wanted to
stay with you guys."

Peter Howard wrote:

"persecuted"? What rot! The "victim" decided to break the law and
then whined like a little child when he was apprehended and booked.
If he thinks it's a bad law he should take it up with the legislature
rather than take it out on the police officer. If he considers
himself a freedom rider engaged in civil disobedience he should get a
few thousand followers first who will fight the tickets so that the
clogging up of the lower court calendars becomes noticeable and
attracts media attention. I also got the impression that this law
breaker has been booked in the recent past, maybe for the same
offence, maybe by the very same police officer. If he is a serial
offender, being booked every time he is detected committing an
offence is not persecution. It's simply the risk he chooses to take.
PH

Now let's see here.

The Policeman threatens arrest for a triviality, then says that he will
arrange that bail, something that any accused person has a presumption
of being eligible for, unless the Police are able to show some very
good reasons why bail should not be granted, will be denied.

Finally the policeman uses the threat of homosexual rape as a lever to
obtain compliance with his demands.

In any proper society that soon to be ex-policemen would do hard time.

On 22 Nov 2013 10:47:24 GMT, "Blue Heeler" wrote:

Peter Howard wrote:

"persecuted"? What rot! The "victim" decided to break the law and
then whined like a little child when he was apprehended and booked.
If he thinks it's a bad law he should take it up with the legislature
rather than take it out on the police officer. If he considers
himself a freedom rider engaged in civil disobedience he should get a
few thousand followers first who will fight the tickets so that the
clogging up of the lower court calendars becomes noticeable and
attracts media attention. I also got the impression that this law
breaker has been booked in the recent past, maybe for the same
offence, maybe by the very same police officer. If he is a serial
offender, being booked every time he is detected committing an
offence is not persecution. It's simply the risk he chooses to take.
PH

Now let's see here.

The Policeman threatens arrest for a triviality, then says that he will
arrange that bail, something that any accused person has a presumption
of being eligible for, unless the Police are able to show some very
good reasons why bail should not be granted, will be denied.

Finally the policeman uses the threat of homosexual rape as a lever to
obtain compliance with his demands.

In any proper society that soon to be ex-policemen would do hard time.

How does one get arrested, for a triviality? I thought that under U.S.
law to be arrested an order from the court was required or to be
caught in obvious violation of a law?
--
Cheers,

John B.

John B. wrote:


How does one get arrested, for a triviality? I thought that under U.S.
law to be arrested an order from the court was required or to be
caught in obvious violation of a law?

I have thought the accents would have been a dead giveaway.

But just in case, you should be aware that contrary to the belief of
many Americans, US law does not generally apply outside of US borders.

In more civilised areas of the planet the way it works is that there is
a statutory code that defines crimes/misdemeanours etc or an inherited
system of common law that deals with wrongs and intent to commit wrongs.


However, here, as in the USA, such codification does not protect a
citizen from a cop who simply ignores the law, as in the video we are
discussing.

Other places on the planet, notably Australia, are very good at dealing
with rogue cops once they are discovered. USA, not so much.

John B. writes:

On 22 Nov 2013 10:47:24 GMT, "Blue Heeler" wrote:

Peter Howard wrote:

"persecuted"? What rot! The "victim" decided to break the law and
then whined like a little child when he was apprehended and booked.
If he thinks it's a bad law he should take it up with the legislature
rather than take it out on the police officer. If he considers
himself a freedom rider engaged in civil disobedience he should get a
few thousand followers first who will fight the tickets so that the
clogging up of the lower court calendars becomes noticeable and
attracts media attention. I also got the impression that this law
breaker has been booked in the recent past, maybe for the same
offence, maybe by the very same police officer. If he is a serial
offender, being booked every time he is detected committing an
offence is not persecution. It's simply the risk he chooses to take.
PH

Now let's see here.

The Policeman threatens arrest for a triviality, then says that he will
arrange that bail, something that any accused person has a presumption
of being eligible for, unless the Police are able to show some very
good reasons why bail should not be granted, will be denied.

Finally the policeman uses the threat of homosexual rape as a lever to
obtain compliance with his demands.

In any proper society that soon to be ex-policemen would do hard time.

How does one get arrested, for a triviality? I thought that under U.S.
law to be arrested an order from the court was required or to be
caught in obvious violation of a law?

Here's a guy being arrested for picking his children up from school,
without waiting in a line of cars. Unfortunately not quite on topic,
because he walks up:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/1...n_4310672.html

--