|
Post by vegasjames on Jun 5, 2014 21:37:45 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 5, 2014 21:55:26 GMT -5
That is a Sheriff's Helicopter.
Sheriff is a 49'ers fan. Explains it all... lol
Thanks for sharing. Nice James.
Our protagonist refuesed to consent to search. You should too. Here is why.
|
|
|
Post by snowmom on Jun 6, 2014 4:18:20 GMT -5
distressing!
|
|
|
Post by rockpickerforever on Jun 6, 2014 10:55:35 GMT -5
Yeah, I saw that one when it first posted almost a year and a half ago (Feb 2013). Cops got nuthin' better to do than harass people out rock hunting. IDK, maybe they could take some criminals off the street? Best way to do that is to elect them to public office, lol! Your tax dollars at work.
|
|
panamark
fully equipped rock polisher
Member since September 2012
Posts: 1,343
|
Post by panamark on Jun 6, 2014 11:08:45 GMT -5
I guess maybe I have a different take on this. Yeah, I wouldn't want to be bothered by police while out rockhounding*, but hey there is a big crime problem from what I read/hear. The cop seemed fairly respectful (except the circling in copter several times). The woman had dropped weapons charges so he was a bit more suspicious perhaps when he was talking to her. True. if they would have been chasing gang-bangers executing some people in the desert it would have been a better use of a copter. Crime and evil is an huge inconvenience to all of us. Just witness pre-flight screening. We all gotta pay a bit. But it should be as practically minimal as possible.
*was out rockhounding yesterday in the wilds of Idaho here. From nowhere 2 fighter jets came over us, screaming fast and at about 500 - 1000 ft off the deck. Did it interrupt me? Heck yeah, and I loved it! I was sooooo envious. One was carving over the mountains while rolled at 90 degrees. Awesome!!!!! And I gotta say, it made me happy and proud to be an American for some reason.
|
|
|
Post by rockpickerforever on Jun 6, 2014 11:23:46 GMT -5
Mark, I'm all for witnessing some screaming low fighter jets, have seen them in the desert many times. It is pretty cool! That, and also the Ospreys, doing training out by Ocotillo Wells.
However, should any kind of helicopter buzz over me and/or start hovering while I am out picking up rocks, in a legal area, not bothering anybody, I would start to get concerned about my wellbeing.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2014 11:42:15 GMT -5
|
|
panamark
fully equipped rock polisher
Member since September 2012
Posts: 1,343
|
Post by panamark on Jun 6, 2014 11:44:21 GMT -5
However, should any kind of helicopter buzz over me and/or start hovering while I am out picking up rocks, in a legal area, not bothering anybody, I would start to get concerned about my wellbeing. Yes, I agree. And wait until the personal & commercial drones get popular. Hopefully they will have an open hunting season, ha ha.
|
|
|
Post by vegasjames on Jun 6, 2014 17:22:46 GMT -5
I guess maybe I have a different take on this. Yeah, I wouldn't want to be bothered by police while out rockhounding*, but hey there is a big crime problem from what I read/hear. The cop seemed fairly respectful (except the circling in copter several times). The woman had dropped weapons charges so he was a bit more suspicious perhaps when he was talking to her. True. if they would have been chasing gang-bangers executing some people in the desert it would have been a better use of a copter. Crime and evil is an huge inconvenience to all of us. Just witness pre-flight screening. We all gotta pay a bit. But it should be as practically minimal as possible. *was out rockhounding yesterday in the wilds of Idaho here. From nowhere 2 fighter jets came over us, screaming fast and at about 500 - 1000 ft off the deck. Did it interrupt me? Heck yeah, and I loved it! I was sooooo envious. One was carving over the mountains while rolled at 90 degrees. Awesome!!!!! And I gotta say, it made me happy and proud to be an American for some reason. It would have been different if there was evidence of an actual crime taking place. And if the officer actually answered her question directly as to why she was being stopped and questioned. It is not legal for an officer to stop and detain or question a person without probable cause, which is probably why he refused to tell he why she was being detained and questioned. So how much taxpayer money did they waste buzzing her and her friend over and over then stopping to question her when she was not doing anything wrong? Considering the financial state California is in wouldn't that money have been better spent actually fighting crime rather than breaking the law? Whether the woman had dropped weapons charges is totally irrelevant. If they did not know who she was when they were buzzing her then how would they have known she had these dropped charges to begin with unless they have been running ongoing surveillance on her? I also find it interesting that only she was targeted. Why didn't the officer detain and question the person who she was with who was not that far away? Again, if the officer answered her question about why she was being detained and questioned, which she had every right to know then maybe the other questions would have been answered.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 6, 2014 18:01:28 GMT -5
Yeah, that cop was randomly questioning any party he found. At great expense! Without probable cause he cannot "detain" her but he can ask questions of anyone. With crime so rare in today's world; cops have to generate work for themselves just to justify their paychecks. That is why we see so many "puppycide's" and no knock warrant service for pot possessions. This last one cost a cop's life. The homeowner was acquitted.
|
|
|
Post by DirtCleaner on Jun 9, 2014 17:02:05 GMT -5
All right, lets make the desert a free-crime zone. Lets not check on what is going on there at all. Then we can all be "free". I, for one, am happy to speak with 5-0. Was once stopped on reservation property, collecting legally, and the tribal officer questioned me a bit. My truthful answers were all he needed. He did not "frisk" me at all. This did make me feel MORE secure knowing that somebody is looking out for people. After all, does anyone think that the govt. is flying helicopters around trying to catch somebody with a rare stone in their pocket? They DO have better things to do. And I thanked him for stopping!
|
|
|
Post by vegasjames on Jun 9, 2014 17:59:32 GMT -5
NOBODY is saying make the desert a free crime zone other than you. There is a big difference from legally patrolling and stopping people for questioning and illegally patrolling and stopping people. I guess you have no problem with cops just randomly stopping you in the city and questioning you without probable cause and when you have done nothing wrong. After all it does not matter if you are in the city or the desert the principle is exactly the same.
With our rights being phases out and outright being taken away by the government already we really don't need individual citizens promoting our rights being taken away as well.
|
|
|
Post by DirtCleaner on Jun 9, 2014 20:07:07 GMT -5
To balance our safety and freedom is always going to be on a "tippy" scale. At the same time people are crying that their freedoms are being taken away while others are screaming for our law enforcement to do more. While we see a video from one perspective we don't see what the Sheriff was seeing or what he was working on that he did not need to share with her. Apparently after a brief conversation he understood that whatever reason he had to speak with her turned out to not be in anybody's interest to pursue further. And, as far as a "pat down" goes when somebody has something causing their pockets to bulge out they need to check that out for everyone's safety. There are many occurrences of weapons being used against police every year. No, I am not an police officer but I do work alongside them quite often. They have a brutal job and I doubt they casually fly around to harass people who are out enjoying the outdoors. To protect our rights to use the lands as we have we need to exercise our voting rights first off and then take an active part in stopping bad legislation at every turn and after that start working on reversing those laws which have been enacted by relying on junk science and political needs.
|
|
|
Post by kk on Jun 9, 2014 22:35:40 GMT -5
I don't see what the fuss is all about. Its a simple stop and search involving a helicopter. Even in training pilots are required to circle landing-sites several times in order to ensue the safest possible touch-down. The officer behaved amicably as such, and seems to have made no attempt to ignore the woman's statement of no consent. I see a team of law-enforcement do do their job and checking in on some-one who is simply out of place at that given time. I'm rater more disconcerted with the woman's use of language while the officer can't hear. If I see helicopters circling (we do have that over here too), I assume first that they are looking for someone other than me for some reason. They mention dangerous mine shafts in that area and both seem to be aware of their existence, So why is she presuming police abuse first?
|
|
|
Post by rockjunquie on Jun 9, 2014 23:30:25 GMT -5
Curt, I think the fuss is because people are just sick and tired of the evolving police state and this one example is a good way to complain and blow off steam.
|
|
|
Post by vegasjames on Jun 9, 2014 23:52:34 GMT -5
To balance our safety and freedom is always going to be on a "tippy" scale. At the same time people are crying that their freedoms are being taken away while others are screaming for our law enforcement to do more. While we see a video from one perspective we don't see what the Sheriff was seeing or what he was working on that he did not need to share with her. Apparently after a brief conversation he understood that whatever reason he had to speak with her turned out to not be in anybody's interest to pursue further. And, as far as a "pat down" goes when somebody has something causing their pockets to bulge out they need to check that out for everyone's safety. There are many occurrences of weapons being used against police every year. No, I am not an police officer but I do work alongside them quite often. They have a brutal job and I doubt they casually fly around to harass people who are out enjoying the outdoors. To protect our rights to use the lands as we have we need to exercise our voting rights first off and then take an active part in stopping bad legislation at every turn and after that start working on reversing those laws which have been enacted by relying on junk science and political needs. She had the right to know why she was being questioned. Was she clearly breaking the law in any way? Apparently not since she was not arrested or even cited for anything. And again, why was she targeted and not the person she was with? As far as we know the Sheriff's officer was simply making up the claim that he was investigating something, at least legally. As far as the patdowns go we see police clearly carrying weapons all the time that they too often use against innocent people. So do we have the right to pat down officers for our own safety? I see you mention weapons being used against officers but what about when they use those weapons against innocent individuals? I can give you all sorts of examples of where police killed unarmed and innocent civilians here in Vegas alone. Yet not one of these officers were ever charged because the Coroner's Inquest here is rigged in favor of the police. For example, one officer was beating a guy with his baton and the guy was on the ground unarmed. His girlfriend jumped on the officer to stop the officer from beating her boyfriend without justification. The officer pulled out his gun and shot the unarmed man killing him in front of numerous witnesses. He was found not guilty by a Coroner's Inquest. An off duty officer backed over a man during a mini-riot at a convenience store here in Vegas. His truck was stopped on top of the man so the man's son jumped on the officers truck pounding on the window yelling for the officer to get his truck off the kid's father. The officer took out his gun, shot and killed the young man who was unarmed even though the officer's life was not in immediate danger. Not only did they find the officer not guilty by Coroner's Inquest they charged the father pinned under the officer's truck his own son s murder. Then there was the case where 3 off duty officers stole a key from this guy's girlfriend, broke in to his apartment at 3 in the morning while they were still off duty, put the guy in a choke hold killing him. Once again they were found nont guilty by a Coroner's Inquest. I would like to add here that in the cases where they were off duty, and thus not working in the capacity of an on-duty officer they should have never been sent to a Coroner's Inquest but should have been tried by a jury of their peers just like any other criminal. In another case a cop walked up to a pregnant woman in her car pulled out his gun and shot her in the head killing her. At the Coroner's Inquest he was found not guilty because he claimed to not remember pulling his gun. In a few more recent incidences cops shot a handcuffed, unarmed, teenager in the back as he ran. And in several cases the police here have caused deaths by racing at high speeds with no lights and sirens and their victims were charged instead of the officers. One officer was simply racing home at 113 mph for dinner when he killed 4 people. I can go and on with examples including the numerous people I saw taken in to the desert and beaten by Metro that I saw come in to the hospital or I personally know. But the point is that just because someone wears an officer's uniform this does not mean they are honest of follow the law. This is one of the reasons so many people do not trust the police and instead fear them. The police get away with breaking the law all the time and many continue to break the law because they know they can get away with it. Are there some good cops? Yes, I have known a few. But I have also seen some corrupt and power abusing cops. Problem is that as long as the police fail to police their own the crime and abuse of power by so many cops will continue and people will continue to mistrust and fear these people that are supposed to be serving the public, not themselves. So again, what about the weapons being used against innocent civilians by the police? Why are you only focusing on the weapons being used against the police? Your comment reminds me of the local media and how they also tried to portray the police as innocent victims during the recent Bundy incident. For example, they kept repeating about how the protestors kicked a police dog implying they were the aggressors. If they watched their own video they would have clearly seen that the dog's handler either was not handling his dog properly or deliberately let the dog lunge at the protesters who were not doing anything wrong. So the protester kicked the dog in SELF DEFENSE after the dog lunged at him without provocation. But you want to make it sound like the police are always the victims, when this is rarely the case. In fact, despite numerous criminal complaints being filed against officers for criminal actions during the Bundy standoff there has yet even one officer to be charged. Yet the protesters are being investigated for criminal charges. Exercising your "voting rights" is not going to do squat. First of all we all know that the politicians only do what the people lining their pockets want them to do. Secondly, there have been cases of the politicians overriding laws passed by public vote. So again, they are only going to so what the people lining their pockets want them to do. And finally, laws are often passed with ambiguities that allow law enforcement to interpret how they wish to enforce laws. So they will just interpret or enforce laws not as written and intended but rather to their interpretation and benefit. For example, stopping and questioning individuals without probable cause despite this being illegal.
|
|
|
Post by rockjunquie on Jun 10, 2014 0:50:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by vegasjames on Jun 10, 2014 2:48:17 GMT -5
I don't see what the fuss is all about. Its a simple stop and search involving a helicopter. Even in training pilots are required to circle landing-sites several times in order to ensue the safest possible touch-down. The officer behaved amicably as such, and seems to have made no attempt to ignore the woman's statement of no consent. I see a team of law-enforcement do do their job and checking in on some-one who is simply out of place at that given time. I'm rater more disconcerted with the woman's use of language while the officer can't hear. If I see helicopters circling (we do have that over here too), I assume first that they are looking for someone other than me for some reason. They mention dangerous mine shafts in that area and both seem to be aware of their existence, So why is she presuming police abuse first? If the officer had a LEGITIMATE reason for stopping and questioning her then he would have had no problem with stating the grounds to show the probable cause required. The fact that he was being evasive in his answer shows he was trying to hide something.
|
|
|
Post by kk on Jun 10, 2014 7:12:48 GMT -5
Our guys here would yell at you via loudspeaker to cease and sit down before even landing, at night that would mean you got a heavy spotlight on you (had that happening on a night-walk with my dogs ) Our laws do not contain the need that an officer needs to give a reason but usually I suppose there is always the possibility to find out through a friendly conversation (even in China with military police who rarely understand a single word English). While I would/will absolutely condemn the guys in the video that Shotgunner posted, I see a no win situation for your case. If there are illegals or other criminal activities going on in that area and something happens to the folks taking the video: It the fault of the police for not doing enough. Making a simple stop and search: Its police harassment! So a no win situation. The thing that I do not understand though is as to why the officer did not insist to go to the car to actually see her ID.
|
|
grayfingers
Cave Dweller
Member since November 2007
Posts: 4,575
|
Post by grayfingers on Jun 10, 2014 8:27:32 GMT -5
I am with vegasjames on this one. The reason is two words. Probable Cause. The law has no right to stop, question and demand to "see your papers" unless there is probable cause that you are breaking the law. Sticking their nose in your business is not probable cause. This may be a difference in opinions based on folks that live in dense population centers versus those who have not been raised and treated like subordinates to the point that they accept this abuse of their rights.
|
|