[timterroo]

Again, supposed "facts" that you do not back up with any supporting evidence. And you say I'm blowing, what was it you said, "fluff and ala kazaam"?

Yep.

Try the internet. It is wonderful.

You have attempted to discredit any and all references that have been provided to you from the grand interwebs, and yet here you are, pronouncing with such confidence, "Check my facts with the internet." ... surely you won't find any fluff and ala-kazaam there now will you....

[Pete Svarrior]

...and after umpteen pages, I refer you back to Tom's assertion, similar to yours and TL's, which he made at Reply #6, and to my response to his at #8.

You can "refer" me to anything you want. It doesn't particularly change the fact that you're just airing your cluelessness here. Especially when the response you "referred" me to is just you repeatedly expressing your outrage.

Outrage is not a substitute for a counter-argument. You are welcome to be angry with those who point out your lack of understanding, but your anger does not affect the merit of your position (or at least does not affect it positively).

So: if you show yourself to be clueless, it will probably be pointed out. If you ask why being clueless is significant, it will probably be explained to you. If your only response to that is "OHMIGOSH SHAAAAAME ON YOU", then you might as well not say anything.

[totallackey]

Again, supposed "facts" that you do not back up with any supporting evidence. And you say I'm blowing, what was it you said, "fluff and ala kazaam"?

Yep.

Try the internet. It is wonderful.

You have attempted to discredit any and all references that have been provided to you from the grand interwebs, and yet here you are, pronouncing with such confidence, "Check my facts with the internet." ... surely you won't find any fluff and ala-kazaam there now will you....

What I have written is facts.

Throughout this thread.

There is no fluff or ala kazaam when it comes to black people being murdered in the street in the very areas where the protests crying out for DEFUND THE POLICE are loudest.

A black person has more to fear from another black person than he does from a police officer.

Throughout history, all people have had more to fear from terrorists and criminal thugs than from any police force.

Sorry you cannot deal with these facts.

I hope you can someday learn to do so, before it is too late.

[Tumeni]

There is no fluff or ala kazaam when it comes black people being murdered in the street in the very areas where the protests crying out for DEFUND THE POLICE are loudest.

They've not been defunded yet.

So the adequately or over-funded police are ineffective in stopping crime? Why bother with them, then?

[totallackey]

There is no fluff or ala kazaam when it comes black people being murdered in the street in the very areas where the protests crying out for DEFUND THE POLICE are loudest.

They've not been defunded yet.

So the adequately or over-funded police are ineffective in stopping crime? Why bother with them, then?

They haven't been defunded?

What about New York?

If you go bandying about a 1 billion USD cut from the police and expect to receive any assistance from the police, then you have another thing coming.

Crime prevention is more to do with consistent presence and as I stated in my first post in this thread, there does need to be a move toward more walking beats and less armored vehicle patrolling in areas where it would be most beneficial.

[Tumeni]

They haven't been defunded?  What about New York? 

What about them? Has the NYPD had monies taken away from it since the protests began?

LA's Mayor is proposing that over half the city budget for next year goes on the police. At the expense of Fire, Library, Parks and Rec, and a host of others, who get the scraps from the table...

[totallackey]

They haven't been defunded?  What about New York? 

What about them? Has the NYPD had monies taken away from it since the protests began?

Yes.

LA's Mayor is proposing that over half the city budget for next year goes on the police. At the expense of Fire, Library, Parks and Rec, and a host of others, who get the scraps from the table...

Yeah, right.

https://abc7.com/defund-the-police-lapd-los-angeles-mayor-eric-garcetti/6289037/

Just terrible.

Crime prevention is more to do with consistent presence and as I stated in my first post in this thread, there does need to be a move toward more walking beats and less armored vehicle patrolling in areas where it would be most beneficial.

[ChrisTP]

Any normal person wouldn't be dancing in the street.

Well first off this is obviously not true since the guy the police detained was seemingly normal when the police approached him and most of his neighbours seemed to think it was his normal routine. But lets brush aside that you think being abnormal is somehow suspicious for a moment.

Why would you detain someone for dancing? Why is it ok to dance for exercise in a gym or at home but not outside in public? What about street parties where people are dancing? Why were the police, who are trained to deescalate, escalate the situation to the point of detaining someone for dancing? They arrived on the scene, could see the guy was clearly in workout clothing, his neighbours even came out to say it's all cool and it's normal and they know him, he's not doing any harm but they carried on? Totallackey, if you were an officer in that situation how would it go down? Would you overreact to someone dancing? Because it seems since you're defending their actions that you too would have acted the same way. If so, why would you take offense or feel threatened, or why would you think dancing is going to be cause for harm or lead to any crime? Or would you act on impulse at your hurt feelings that the guy is just different to you and there's nothing you could do about it?

You would not be fun at parties. Imagine trying to defend the police officers pinning people down for dancing... At this point you have to be trolling yet again.

[totallackey]

Any normal person wouldn't be dancing in the street.

Well first off this is obviously not true since the guy the police detained was seemingly normal when the police approached him and most of his neighbours seemed to think it was his normal routine.

It isn't normal to dance in the street.
 

But let's brush aside you think being abnormal is somehow suspicious for a moment.

Witnessing abnormality raises many thoughts and feelings, including suspicion.

That's a statement of fact.

Why would you detain someone for dancing?

To find out what is going on.

Why is it ok to dance for exercise in a gym or at home but not outside in public?

Who said it wasn't okay?

What about street parties where people are dancing?

LOL!

Why were the police, who are trained to deescalate, escalate the situation to the point of detaining someone for dancing? They arrived on the scene, could see the guy was clearly in workout clothing, his neighbours even came out to say it's all cool and it's normal and they know him, he's not doing any harm but they carried on?

To find out what was going on.

Totallackey, if you were an officer in that situation how would it go down? Would you overreact to someone dancing?

Police are allowed to investigate and respond to calls.

Because it seems since you're defending their actions that you too would have acted the same way. If so, why would you take offense or feel threatened, or why would you think dancing is going to be cause for harm or lead to any crime? Or would you act on impulse at your hurt feelings that the guy is just different to you and there's nothing you could do about it?

You would not be fun at parties. Imagine trying to defend the police officers pinning people down for dancing... At this point you have to be trolling yet again.

Happy to get your shots in I see.

Have a great day!

[Rama Set]

Dancing is not really indicative of criminality unless we have time warped back to Cromwell’s England. “To find out what was going on” is a fucking terrible rationale for escalating a stop to violence. Horrible take.

[timterroo]

Why would you detain someone for dancing?

To find out what is going on.

This is appalling.

Let's set aside, for a moment, that fact that you think dancing in the street is in some way abnormal, and focus on the fact that you would detain someone for the simple pleasure of "finding out what's going on".

That is not only 'un-american', that is a violation of civil rights. Also have a look at the 4th amendment - refresh yourself of your own civil liberties, it might be good for you.

The police must have probable cause to detain someone for any reason. Dancing in the street is not probable cause of anything.

Here's an i.e. -

How often does it happen that a case has to be legally dismissed because evidence was obtained unlawfully? I don't know the answer to this, but I'll guarantee it's happened more than once.

If someone's rights are violated while obtaining evidence of a crime, if they are detained unlawfully for instance, the judge may very well throw out the evidence.


Now, let's address the issue of you thinking dancing in the street is abnormal. So abnormal, that you would violate someone's civil liberties to "find out what is going on". What gives? Were you made fun of as a child for dancing around in the street? Is there some trauma that you have experienced related to dancing? I only ask because it is quite possible that it is more abnormal to 'think' there is anything wrong with dancing in the street. Seriously.

[honk]

I don't know where all the people here live who are talking about how it's perfectly normal and not at all unusual for people to be dancing in the street. I've never seen that happen outside of a musical. I also question how confidently it's been asserted that it's entirely legal to dance in the streets. Really? The government doesn't have anything to say about people dancing on a public road that's regularly traversed by cars? I doubt there's any statute specifically about dancing, but there's a very strong argument to be made that it could constitute reckless behavior, or cause accidents. Also, the police don't need probable cause to detain someone, just reasonable suspicion, and while I personally wouldn't go calling the cops over someone dancing in the street, that's absolutely enough to detain someone for the course of an investigation. To keep boiling it down to "arrested for dancing," as if literally the first thing the police did is snap on the handcuffs, is disingenuous. I can't read the police's minds, and I can't say for a certainty that if this dude had cooperated that everything would have been fine, but as it stands, the video shows someone who has been clearly informed that he's being detained trying to leave, and so he's arrested. The police need to have the power to enforce laws, even laws against minor infractions, or we might as well not have these laws at all.

[ChrisTP]

I don't know where all the people here live who are talking about how it's perfectly normal and not at all unusual for people to be dancing in the street. I've never seen that happen outside of a musical. I also question how confidently it's been asserted that it's entirely legal to dance in the streets. Really? The government doesn't have anything to say about people dancing on a public road that's regularly traversed by cars? I doubt there's any statute specifically about dancing, but there's a very strong argument to be made that it could constitute reckless behavior, or cause accidents. Also, the police don't need probable cause to detain someone, just reasonable suspicion, and while I personally wouldn't go calling the cops over someone dancing in the street, that's absolutely enough to detain someone for the course of an investigation. To keep boiling it down to "arrested for dancing," as if literally the first thing the police did is snap on the handcuffs, is disingenuous. I can't read the police's minds, and I can't say for a certainty that if this dude had cooperated that everything would have been fine, but as it stands, the video shows someone who has been clearly informed that he's being detained trying to leave, and so he's arrested. The police need to have the power to enforce laws, even laws against minor infractions, or we might as well not have these laws at all.

I'd say it's no more dangerous than kids playing in the street which happens on a daily basis, or people going for a jog will sometimes jog on the road in a place where there is not much traffic, which seems to be the case here.

I'm just wondering at what point people realise that "being different" in harmless ways is considered worthy of calling the cops in for an investigation. Had the person been say, a white blond female of the same age dancing in the street do you think the police would have been called? And more so do you think she'd have been pinned to the ground for not taking her non-existent crime seriously? And again, police who are trained to deescalate somehow escalated the situation of a guy dancing to detaining him which is fucking stupid. You show up, see the guy is just excising in unusual ways and some moron overreacted by calling the police, you move on. There was no reason for that situation to get out of hand especially when neighbours were chiming in to say they know him and it's what he does regularly. It's like they had no common sense to go "ah ok sorry we fucked up" at any point. They instead doubled down at every turn.

People are weird. I see weird people doing weird shit in the streets all the time. Kids play in the street, joggers jog in the street... No problem. Middle aged man dancing in the street is not worthy of calling the police let alone how badly that situation was handled by trained officers.

[totallackey]

Dancing is not really indicative of criminality unless we have time warped back to Cromwell’s England. “To find out what was going on” is a fucking terrible rationale for escalating a stop to violence. Horrible take.

It would be a horrible take if that is what I wrote.

[totallackey]

Why would you detain someone for dancing?

To find out what is going on.

This is appalling.

Let's set aside, for a moment, that fact that you think dancing in the street is in some way abnormal,

Why should we do that?

It is abnormal to be dancing in the street.

You cannot possibly claim that is a normal activity.

...and focus on the fact that you would detain someone for the simple pleasure of "finding out what's going on".

Police are frequently called to residences and other places to determine exactly that.

"Find out what is going on."

Do you want police to act on a situation without finding out what is going on?

That is not only 'un-american', that is a violation of civil rights. Also have a look at the 4th amendment - refresh yourself of your own civil liberties, it might be good for you.

I know my civil liberties and it is not a violation of my civil rights or liberties to be investigated by police in a situation that I might be involved in.

I am not required to cooperate with said investigation.

Nobody is.

The police must have probable cause to detain someone for any reason. Dancing in the street is not probable cause of anything.

Reasonable suspicion something might be amiss is certainly cause for an investigation and for the rest of the follow up, you can refer above to the rest of my reply.

Here's an i.e. -

How often does it happen that a case has to be legally dismissed because evidence was obtained unlawfully? I don't know the answer to this, but I'll guarantee it's happened more than once.

Relevance?

If someone's rights are violated while obtaining evidence of a crime, if they are detained unlawfully for instance, the judge may very well throw out the evidence.

Relevance?

Now, let's address the issue of you thinking dancing in the street is abnormal. So abnormal, that you would violate someone's civil liberties to "find out what is going on". What gives? Were you made fun of as a child for dancing around in the street? Is there some trauma that you have experienced related to dancing? I only ask because it is quite possible that it is more abnormal to 'think' there is anything wrong with dancing in the street. Seriously.

No, it isn't.

Dancing in the street is not a normal activity performed by anyone and everyone.

The antonym of normal is abnormal.

I am correct.

Period.

End of argument.

[totallackey]

I don't know where all the people here live who are talking about how it's perfectly normal and not at all unusual for people to be dancing in the street. I've never seen that happen outside of a musical. I also question how confidently it's been asserted that it's entirely legal to dance in the streets. Really? The government doesn't have anything to say about people dancing on a public road that's regularly traversed by cars? I doubt there's any statute specifically about dancing, but there's a very strong argument to be made that it could constitute reckless behavior, or cause accidents. Also, the police don't need probable cause to detain someone, just reasonable suspicion, and while I personally wouldn't go calling the cops over someone dancing in the street, that's absolutely enough to detain someone for the course of an investigation. To keep boiling it down to "arrested for dancing," as if literally the first thing the police did is snap on the handcuffs, is disingenuous. I can't read the police's minds, and I can't say for a certainty that if this dude had cooperated that everything would have been fine, but as it stands, the video shows someone who has been clearly informed that he's being detained trying to leave, and so he's arrested. The police need to have the power to enforce laws, even laws against minor infractions, or we might as well not have these laws at all.

I'd say it's no more dangerous than kids playing in the street which happens on a daily basis, or people going for a jog will sometimes jog on the road in a place where there is not much traffic, which seems to be the case here.

I'm just wondering at what point people realise that "being different" in harmless ways is considered worthy of calling the cops in for an investigation. Had the person been say, a white blond female of the same age dancing in the street do you think the police would have been called? And more so do you think she'd have been pinned to the ground for not taking her non-existent crime seriously? And again, police who are trained to deescalate somehow escalated the situation of a guy dancing to detaining him which is fucking stupid. You show up, see the guy is just excising in unusual ways and some moron overreacted by calling the police, you move on. There was no reason for that situation to get out of hand especially when neighbours were chiming in to say they know him and it's what he does regularly. It's like they had no common sense to go "ah ok sorry we fucked up" at any point. They instead doubled down at every turn.

People are weird. I see weird people doing weird shit in the streets all the time. Kids play in the street, joggers jog in the street... No problem. Middle aged man dancing in the street is not worthy of calling the police let alone how badly that situation was handled by trained officers.

Your response to honk is to identify perfectly normal activities as weird and you are here questioning how the police reacted in this situation?

That seems weird.

[ChrisTP]

That seems weird.

Weird enough to detain me?

Anyway my response wasn't to say normal things aren't normal. I said weird things happen. My response which you seem to be missing the point of is that I bring into question why a weird but harmless and legal activity are cause for phoning the police which ya know, lets assume the person who called the police was actually calling for a legit concern, the police who arrived should have been able to sus out what was going on pretty much in seconds. You seem to be having an equally hard time with this as the police seemed to... You don't detain people for dancing. That's moronic. You also glossed over my question regarding gender/race reversal. Would the situation have been the same if it were a blond white female acting the same way? You don't have to answer here but if your answer is no and you still can't see the problem then you are also the problem.

[totallackey]

That seems weird.

Weird enough to detain me?

When somebody reports your posts to the police, rather than the moderators, I guess we will be able to answer that question then.

Anyway my response wasn't to say normal things aren't normal. I said weird things happen.

Correct. In fact you wrote: "People are weird. I see weird people doing weird shit in the streets all the time. Kids play in the street, joggers jog in the street...'

I take that as you describing kids playing in the street and joggers jogging in the street (both normal activities) as doing "weird shit."

My response which you seem to be missing the point of is that I bring into question why a weird but harmless and legal activity are cause for phoning the police.

Because it is weird.

which ya know, lets assume the person who called the police was actually calling for a legit concern, the police who arrived should have been able to sus out what was going on pretty much in seconds.

You are perfectly allowed to disagree over what constitutes legitimacy and an adequate amount of time it takes to sort things out. 

You seem to be having an equally hard time with this as the police seemed to... You don't detain people for dancing. That's moronic. You also glossed over my question regarding gender/race reversal. Would the situation have been the same if it were a blond white female acting the same way? You don't have to answer here but if your answer is no and you still can't see the problem then you are also the problem.

I am not the one having a difficult time here.

You think it is moronic for them to do so and I don't.

There is no difficulty ascertaining that.

Why would you feel the need to introduce arbitrary standards of enforcement dependent on circumstances as a counter argument when that is your exact position?

[timterroo]

Why would you detain someone for dancing?

To find out what is going on.

This is appalling.

Let's set aside, for a moment, that fact that you think dancing in the street is in some way abnormal,

Why should we do that?

It is abnormal to be dancing in the street.

You cannot possibly claim that is a normal activity.

It seems apparent, after reading other's replies, that some people consider it normal activity, and some do not - this is understandable since we live in different parts of the country/world and have grown up with varying cultures.

Where I am from, dancing in the street for fun would be completely normal.

There's also a big difference between dancing in a non-busy residential street in your own neighborhood, and dancing down Broadway in New York City.

...and focus on the fact that you would detain someone for the simple pleasure of "finding out what's going on".

Police are frequently called to residences and other places to determine exactly that.

"Find out what is going on."

Do you want police to act on a situation without finding out what is going on?

OK - I get it, sure if a police officer is called to investigate suspicious activity, the officer must go and that is their job. The problem I have with this is first off, what is considered suspicious activity looks a lot like racial profiling in this case. And this isn't the officers fault initially, and I think more attention should be focused on why someone thought enough to call the police in the first place.

The second problem I have is that the officer escalated the situation far beyond what is reasonable for someone minding their own business in their own neighborhood.

I get emotional over this because I can see myself in this situation. I am someone who would dance in the street - you can say I'm weird for it, but it doesn't give the police any rights to detain me for it - matter of fact, if I was grabbed by officers the way this man was, I'd be just as livid. Only I'd probably be worse because I have 'white privilege' and wouldn't fear for my life.

If I were blocking traffic or putting myself or others in danger, well that's another story altogether, and that isn't the case here.

The police must have probable cause to detain someone for any reason. Dancing in the street is not probable cause of anything.

Reasonable suspicion something might be amiss is certainly cause for an investigation and for the rest of the follow up, you can refer above to the rest of my reply.

I still fail to see what the reasonable suspicion is in this case??? I think this is at the forefront of the problem, with police overstepping their authority and use of "reasonable suspicion".

What did the police officer 'reasonably suspect' the man for? Wasn't it the person calling the police who suspected the man in the first place. Once the police got there, how did they go from "why are you dancing in the street?" to "you are a threat to <something>, and we're going to arrest you."?

Here's an i.e. -

How often does it happen that a case has to be legally dismissed because evidence was obtained unlawfully? I don't know the answer to this, but I'll guarantee it's happened more than once.

Relevance?

If someone's rights are violated while obtaining evidence of a crime, if they are detained unlawfully for instance, the judge may very well throw out the evidence.

Relevance?

OK - so I'm stretching a bit on this, I'll give you that.

Now, let's address the issue of you thinking dancing in the street is abnormal. So abnormal, that you would violate someone's civil liberties to "find out what is going on". What gives? Were you made fun of as a child for dancing around in the street? Is there some trauma that you have experienced related to dancing? I only ask because it is quite possible that it is more abnormal to 'think' there is anything wrong with dancing in the street. Seriously.

No, it isn't.

Dancing in the street is not a normal activity performed by anyone and everyone.

The antonym of normal is abnormal.

I am correct.

Period.

End of argument.

You would be correct that dancing in the street is not normal for EVERYONE, but to say it isn't normal for ANYONE is not reality.

[totallackey]

Why would you detain someone for dancing?

To find out what is going on.

This is appalling.

Let's set aside, for a moment, that fact that you think dancing in the street is in some way abnormal,

Why should we do that?

It is abnormal to be dancing in the street.

You cannot possibly claim that is a normal activity.

It seems apparent, after reading other's replies, that some people consider it normal activity, and some do not - this is understandable since we live in different parts of the country/world and have grown up with varying cultures.

Opinions do not count as to the requirements of determining normalcy.

Dancing in the street is not normal behavior, anywhere in the world, period...

Where I am from, dancing in the street for fun would be completely normal.

No, it wouldn't.

Because dancing in the street is not a normal activity.

It is an abnormal activity.

There's also a big difference between dancing in a non-busy residential street in your own neighborhood, and dancing down Broadway in New York City.

On a rare occasion or two, I am sure someone or someones have actually literally danced on the paved thoroughfare known as Broadway in New York City.

But that was abnormal also, as it is not a normal occurrence.

Just as dancing in the middle of quiet street in a suburban or rural area is abnormal.

...and focus on the fact that you would detain someone for the simple pleasure of "finding out what's going on".

Police are frequently called to residences and other places to determine exactly that.

"Find out what is going on."

Do you want police to act on a situation without finding out what is going on?

OK - I get it, sure if a police officer is called to investigate suspicious activity, the officer must go and that is their job. The problem I have with this is first off, what is considered suspicious activity looks a lot like racial profiling in this case. And this isn't the officers fault initially, and I think more attention should be focused on why someone thought enough to call the police in the first place.

Okay.

The second problem I have is that the officer escalated the situation far beyond what is reasonable for someone minding their own business in their own neighborhood.

Dancing in the street is not indicative of a person solely looking to mind their own business.

I get emotional over this because I can see myself in this situation. I am someone who would dance in the street - you can say I'm weird for it, but it doesn't give the police any rights to detain me for it - matter of fact, if I was grabbed by officers the way this man was, I'd be just as livid. Only I'd probably be worse because I have 'white privilege' and wouldn't fear for my life.

If I were blocking traffic or putting myself or others in danger, well that's another story altogether, and that isn't the case here.

This might shock you, but I too have danced in the street.

At a block party, where there was a lot of other people dancing in the street.

I got real lucky that night.

They were able to hide the fact that I was doing something abnormal.

Block parties are abnormal.

They do not normally occur.

The police must have probable cause to detain someone for any reason. Dancing in the street is not probable cause of anything.

Reasonable suspicion something might be amiss is certainly cause for an investigation and for the rest of the follow up, you can refer above to the rest of my reply.

I still fail to see what the reasonable suspicion is in this case??? I think this is at the forefront of the problem, with police overstepping their authority and use of "reasonable suspicion".

Reasonable suspicion that something might be amiss is established whenever a request via 911 is made.

What did the police officer 'reasonably suspect' the man for?

I don't know.

Wasn't it the person calling the police who suspected the man in the first place.

Yes.

Once the police got there, how did they go from "why are you dancing in the street?" to "you are a threat to <something>, and we're going to arrest you."?

They didn't.

Now, let's address the issue of you thinking dancing in the street is abnormal. So abnormal, that you would violate someone's civil liberties to "find out what is going on". What gives? Were you made fun of as a child for dancing around in the street? Is there some trauma that you have experienced related to dancing? I only ask because it is quite possible that it is more abnormal to 'think' there is anything wrong with dancing in the street. Seriously.

No, it isn't.

Dancing in the street is not a normal activity performed by anyone and everyone.

The antonym of normal is abnormal.

I am correct.

Period.

End of argument.

You would be correct that dancing in the street is not normal for EVERYONE, but to say it isn't normal for ANYONE is not reality.

Dancing in the street is not normal for anyone.

I am fairly confident I am correct in writing this, but if you can find otherwise, that's cool.