buckeyefan1984 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Give firefighters a ticket book and hancuffs and see how long they are still considered loveable. No one wants their freedoms taken away, yet we are charged with that task. Our job is not a popularity contest. It is about doing the job period. That being said, there are plenty of people out there that love me and respect the job that I do, even though I don't go out there demanding respect for it. In my mind, I'm no hero. Am I the sergeant you speak of? If so, all new patrolmen must buy my lunch for a week and shine my shoes until the next newbie comes along. Those the rules. Sorry. So true, so true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeyefan1984 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Bully? Nice. I have challenged you and BEF on the law, and all I've gotten from either of you is cop attitude. Both of you have mistated my issues with your comments and with the thread topics. I can only assume you did so in an effort to pad your case. BTW, just wondering. How do you describe a bully, since you detest them so much? No, the true response from you should have been that we didn't give you the answer that you wanted. Then like all kids, you threw a tantrum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeyefan1984 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Are you thinking that my person is a "place"? If so, then how am I able to move it? An argument can be made that a motor vehicle is a place, but I would like to see the convoluted argument that explains how a warrant to search a particular place can apply to my person. Then, I'd like to see whether the search warrant is made out for blood, or blood alcohol. So, if it's made out for alcohol, how does that give the gummint the right to seize my blood? And if it's made out for blood, why. As was pointed out earlier in the thread in a similar comment based on the Texas Constitution, what gives the state the right to invasively search for something that is there unless I'm a vampire? Two words Probable Cause. Look at the 4th Amendment. When you get to those two words, STOP. Look at them, study them. Matter of fact, print them up in big bold letters all over your house. Those are the two words that were placed in the 4th Amendment by the original writers of the Constitution. No matter what the argument, no matter what anyone says, they are there and no rogue justice or judge put them there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bleeds Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 No, the true response from you should have been that we didn't give you the answer that you wanted. Then like all kids, you threw a tantrum. Post it sister. This, not unlike all your posts have shown just what a mooncalf you are. Put up or shut up. I have posted the comments that did the most to get this little ball rolling. But you have only grabbed onto Five0's coat tails yapped like a poodle. Show me the tantrum. Okay. You don't think we SHOULD be allowed to take blood evidence from you. I know what the argument was, just didn't word it as well as I could have. Nope. Wrong again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bleeds Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 The first definition listed on dictionary.com fits you to a tee. Bully: a blustering, quarrelsome, overbearing person who habitually badgers and intimidates smaller or weaker people. When people disagree with you, you have a tendency to badger them until they finally just leave, regardless of whether you are right or wrong. Also, when things don't go your way you have shown that you will resort to physical challenges against them. I didn't look it up, but whiner comes to mind when thinking of you. Have you ever thought about what got all this started? You were flaunting that "I'm a cop" arrogance, and BluePirate and recognized the cop attitude, and acknowledged it. You, in turn, got your feelings hurt and lashed out. Then your lap dog began yapping. So, before you call me a bully, you might want to back up and take a long look at just how culpable you are in this little travesty. Weak. Start a fight, then don't have the stones to accept the blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bleeds Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 I think you are confusing love and respect. I respect firefighters for the job they do but I know a few that I do not even like, much less love. I respect police officers as well but can not claim to love them as I am driving off after a ticket. You're probably right. I know both firefighters and cops I can't stand. But I respect the job they do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bleeds Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 LOL, don't tell me that you're getting mad over this. After all of the accusing, bleeds has actually gotten mad. Next. Try again princess. You don't pack enough in your lace panties to make me mad. I do, however find it hilarious that you had to go to La. to find a cop job. That speaks volumes. So true, so true. Hey sister. Your crush on Five0 is showing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
applebutter Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Look Ralph, keep up. bleeds asked me the question and I answered it. Don't like it then tough, skip it. I'm not hijacking anything when answering a question that bleeds kept asking for it to be answered. So keep up, or do I need to take you by the hand and walk you through it. I've tried to be civil, but I see that isn't going to work. So let me type this slowly so that even "you" can understand. bleeds asked me about the differences between the 3rd, 4th, and 5th Amendments. Then he mentioned how the 4th and 5th pertained to my job because "I" used them to violate someone's rights pertaining to the illegal seizure of blood and incrimination of said subject. There Ralphie, are you caught up yet? Wow. Scare quotes around "you". My guess is that the third amendment so far hasn't been "interpreted" to reduce personal rights is that so far it hasn't been needed for the "convenience" of the state. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bleeds Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Wow, this is easy. Check the pulse, check for elevated or too slow of a heart rate. Check the breathing of the victim. If he's in trouble, I'll call for an ambulance. Was a combat life saver in the army during my 12 years. Thanks and play again some time. You're not an emt are you Marcus Welby? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluePirate Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Are you Ralphie? That's why i said if I "think" the person is in trouble, I'll call the ambulance. Yes... and if a diabetic is presenting the symptoms mentioned he's already "in trouble." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
applebutter Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Don't play their stupid little game. We know that firemen and us are on the same team. Bleeds and his cheer squad just think they are too good to be on ANYONE's team. I will once again tell you that I am arguing in earnest. And I'm arguing points that I believe to be true. I have not belittled you in any way other than to occasionally point out that you are matching your stereotype. If it were required, rest assured, I would be on your team without hesitation. Carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluePirate Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Wow, this is easy. Check the pulse, check for elevated or too slow of a heart rate. Check the breathing of the victim. If he's in trouble, I'll call for an ambulance. Was a combat life saver in the army during my 12 years. Thanks and play again some time. I suppose in the most liberal sense that could be called a patient assessment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Medman7 Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 By the time they become that symptomatic they are in dire need of help ASAP. All diabetics are different but some can sunndenly crash once they get to that point! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluePirate Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 So true, so true. But we don't give tickets. So it goes like THIS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
applebutter Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 General Comment: I'm arguing against something I see as wrong. I am not blaming police officers for following established procedure. I am blaming prosecutors and judges who, for the best of reasons, have apparently made a deal with the devil at the expense of constitutions, federal and state. That doesn't mean that I'm above pointing out that I believe that what police officers now do is contrary to both the letter of the law and the spirit of those laws. It's not that I believe that DHCF or BEF or Five0 or even those prosecutors and judges are doing something to intentionally erode civil rights. The sticking point is that it is happening, and for no better reason than for the convenience of the state. Don't take it so personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bleeds Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 For the record (again), my beef has been the text and intent of the COTUS amendments have been countermanded in the name of convenience. That has been and is my arguement. For voicing that arguement, I was belittled and my intelligence was questioned by not one, but two cops. When I responded with what I believed to be a stereotype being manifested (as AB also pointed out), I was attacked. Attacks beget attacks. BEF is a moron at best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BluePirate Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Cool! Looks like AB has wrangled this thread back on track. Thanks AB. With any luck, the cop most consumed with coip attitude will set that behavior aside so the debate can continue. I agree Ab... the intent of the 4th Amendment has been altered for convenience. I also completely agree that the 3rd Amendment would be interpreted differently as soon as it benefited the State, just as has happened with the 4th Amendment. Where does the imaginary line stop? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
camuchs Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 I am trying to keep up. Forgive me if I get behind , I am but a mere civilian citizen. I am probably off-topic on this but please bear with me. As for medical conditions, in an earlier scenario posed by one of the law officers, it was stated that the DWI suspect claimed to have; head , neck and back injuries after plowing thru someone’s home to dodge an alleged deer (and before being shot by bluepirate.) The suspect refused all test. But the officer states that he hears these excuses all the time. When was the ambulance called? (Don’t say : “after BP shot him”)Maybe it was “implied”. It appeared to me, the officer’s main concern was getting a warrant. We are also asked to imagine that it was someone we loved that was injured. I may be getting scenarios mixed up here. ( = 30+ pages of posts) Maybe that was when the ambulance was called. I would like to add to the scenario that the suspect happens to be the sheriff’s son/daughter. Think about that one for a while. Some of you know where I’m going with this. I am not saying any of you have done it but I know it happens. Real life situation [abridged]: After a traffic stop. Suspect states he is diabetic. Officer calls 911 and saves mans life. Diabetics shouldn’t drink and I’m not saying that this person was drinking. But what if you have a diabetic drunk(drinking fruity little drinks ‘cause they can’t shoot whiskey) pulled over? Maybe you saved more than one life that day. And no one’s rights were violated. 8 years ago my sister-in-law was killed by a drunk hit and run driver. Do you think that every one driving a car fitting the description with damage to it should have been forced to submit to blood draw? Even if you do, it wouldn’t change the fact that my niece, now 9, no longer has a mother. I have friends and relatives who are law officers. (at all levels; city, county, state and federal) I understand that it is hard to get convictions for DWI. I also understand that the constitution allows for you to get a warrant. To me, and I’m only speaking for me, there is no need for new law, the COTUS itself should be sufficient. (The link sighted on the first page of this topic never indicated that this law would be used only in cases where death or injury occurred. Did I miss that somewhere? Correct me if I did.) We don’t need new laws, we need to apply and enforce the ones we have equally. Instead, some cops, DA‘s and judges offer up selective justice when it pertains to a family member. I know not ALL of them do but it happens. The whole concept of plea bargains is in violation of the 6th Amendment. [is this not part of ‘due process‘ as well?] That’s where “we the people” get to participate in determining if the evidence supports conviction or acquittal. It is “convenient” and saves tax dollars to offer plea bargains which is in effect legalized extortion to get a suspect to waive his right to a trial. Too many cases never make it to Grand Jury because someone may have the fortune of prosperity and can afford to hire “someone who knows the law”. They get to have a court appointed one as provided by in 6. Who will “deal” for a lesser degree of crime charge with a lighter sentence for waiver of said rights and an admission of guilt. Because both the State and the accused really don’t trust the system to deliver justice. If every suspect faced equal punishment in accordance with sentencing guide lines, would it deter crime? A few years ago fines were increased for alcohol related offenses. Is it in violation of the 8th Amendment to continue to raise fines until the fine for open container is the same as for assault with a deadly weapon? Why not make them pay $1,000,000 bond. Let’s execute people for running a stop light. Where does it end? I don’t know the answer. I mean no disrespect to any of you. It’s just some things that I have wondered about for some time. I would like your opinion. I will not call you names or even refer to your post as an uncensored word for a card game, and a drinking card game at that. I guess that made it relevant to the topic. Anything I may have left out is “implied”. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WildcatsRule Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 General Comment: I'm arguing against something I see as wrong. I am not blaming police officers for following established procedure. I am blaming prosecutors and judges who, for the best of reasons, have apparently made a deal with the devil at the expense of constitutions, federal and state. That doesn't mean that I'm above pointing out that I believe that what police officers now do is contrary to both the letter of the law and the spirit of those laws. It's not that I believe that DHCF or BEF or Five0 or even those prosecutors and judges are doing something to intentionally erode civil rights. The sticking point is that it is happening, and for no better reason than for the convenience of the state. Don't take it so personally. Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Five0pd310 Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Seeing a car fitting the description with damage is not enough to get a search warrant for blood evidence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeyefan1984 Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Post it sister. This, not unlike all your posts have shown just what a mooncalf you are. Put up or shut up. I have posted the comments that did the most to get this little ball rolling. But you have only grabbed onto Five0's coat tails yapped like a poodle. Show me the tantrum. Nope. Wrong again. First you said earlier today that it was the straight answer you were looking for, now you say wrong again to Five-0, so which is it? :thumbsup: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeyefan1984 Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 I didn't look it up, but whiner comes to mind when thinking of you. Have you ever thought about what got all this started? You were flaunting that "I'm a cop" arrogance, and BluePirate and recognized the cop attitude, and acknowledged it. You, in turn, got your feelings hurt and lashed out. Then your lap dog began yapping. So, before you call me a bully, you might want to back up and take a long look at just how culpable you are in this little travesty. Weak. Start a fight, then don't have the stones to accept the blame. That's right bleeds, blame us for everything. Heaven forbid that you and Blue accept ANY responsibility for the lack of civility over the past few days. weak? yes, you sure are. Why don't the two of you have some stones and accept part of the blame in this? It's okay to ask it of others as long as you don't have to... right? right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeyefan1984 Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Try again princess. You don't pack enough in your lace panties to make me mad. I do, however find it hilarious that you had to go to La. to find a cop job. That speaks volumes. Hey sister. Your crush on Five0 is showing. Actually, I joined the military in August of 1990. My first duty station before going to Saudi Arabia and Kuwait was Ft. Polk, Louisiana. But again, nice try there toots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeyefan1984 Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 You're not an emt are you Marcus Welby? Nope and never claimed to be. But I guess you're going to dazzle us by saying that you are one. *claps* for you. That makes you a fire fighter / emt / constitutional wizard. again, *claps* for you. (dripping with sarcasm) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeyefan1984 Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Yes... and if a diabetic is presenting the symptoms mentioned he's already "in trouble." And thus, the ambulance is on the way. Thanks for catching on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now