Man arrested for photographing police from his doorstep. . .

[Vic]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Let's see the irrefutable facts:

1) According to the police, they were in the neighborhood to get a drug dealer.

2) Yet the story is about a college student next door arrested for obstruction of justice.

3) A WITNESS corroborates Cruz's story.

4) According to the police, he was taken into custody and they claim he wasn't on his property when arrested. The latter detail appears to be 'truthiness' in light of the details given by the witness.

5) Cruz claims the arresting officer cited a NEW cellphone camera law.

6) The police response is they made no such claim.

7) The police explanation for the arrest . . . exactly!

8) BBD uses his classic skills of illogic to translate the specific into the general, i.e. the actions of one (or a few) police translate into the actions of "the police."

Crack me up. :laugh:

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Let's see the irrefutable facts:

1) According to the police, they were in the neighborhood to get a drug dealer.

2) Yet the story is about a college student next door arrested for obstruction of justice.

3) A WITNESS corroborates Cruz's story.

4) According to the police, he was taken into custody and they claim he wasn't on his property when arrested. The latter detail appears to be 'truthiness' in light of the details given by the witness.

5) Cruz claims the arresting officer cited a NEW cellphone camera law.

6) The police response is they made no such claim.

7) The police explanation for the arrest . . . exactly!

8) BBD uses his classic skills of illogic to translate the specific into the general, i.e. the actions of one (or a few) police translate into the actions of "the police."
Crack me up. :laugh:

Typical response from a Police State Apologist. :roll:

 

[5150Joker]

What do you guys expect, most cops are ex-high school jocks that couldn't cut it anywhere else besides McDonalds. It strokes their egos to be able to wield authority and bully people.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Let's see the irrefutable facts:

1) According to the police, they were in the neighborhood to get a drug dealer.

2) Yet the story is about a college student next door arrested for obstruction of justice.

3) A WITNESS corroborates Cruz's story.

4) According to the police, he was taken into custody and they claim he wasn't on his property when arrested. The latter detail appears to be 'truthiness' in light of the details given by the witness.

5) Cruz claims the arresting officer cited a NEW cellphone camera law.

6) The police response is they made no such claim.

7) The police explanation for the arrest . . . exactly!

8) BBD uses his classic skills of illogic to translate the specific into the general, i.e. the actions of one (or a few) police translate into the actions of "the police."

Crack me up. :laugh:

It makes sense to me. where is this illogic that you speak of?

care to show us where he went awry?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Let's see the irrefutable facts:

1) According to the police, they were in the neighborhood to get a drug dealer.

2) Yet the story is about a college student next door arrested for obstruction of justice.

3) A WITNESS corroborates Cruz's story.

4) According to the police, he was taken into custody and they claim he wasn't on his property when arrested. The latter detail appears to be 'truthiness' in light of the details given by the witness.

5) Cruz claims the arresting officer cited a NEW cellphone camera law.

6) The police response is they made no such claim.

7) The police explanation for the arrest . . . exactly!

8) BBD uses his classic skills of illogic to translate the specific into the general, i.e. the actions of one (or a few) police translate into the actions of "the police."
Crack me up. :laugh:

Typical response from a Police State Apologist. :roll:

:laugh:

I'm the farthest thing from that, as you know all too well, troll.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: OrByte

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
Let's see the irrefutable facts:

1) According to the police, they were in the neighborhood to get a drug dealer.

2) Yet the story is about a college student next door arrested for obstruction of justice.

3) A WITNESS corroborates Cruz's story.

4) According to the police, he was taken into custody and they claim he wasn't on his property when arrested. The latter detail appears to be 'truthiness' in light of the details given by the witness.

5) Cruz claims the arresting officer cited a NEW cellphone camera law.

6) The police response is they made no such claim.

7) The police explanation for the arrest . . . exactly!

8) BBD uses his classic skills of illogic to translate the specific into the general, i.e. the actions of one (or a few) police translate into the actions of "the police."

Crack me up. :laugh:

It makes sense to me. where is this illogic that you speak of?

care to show us where he went awry?

Logic is, at its most basic definition, the translation of the general into the specific. For example, the sun has risen on a precise and predictable schedule billions of times in the past, therefore it is logical to assume that it will continue to do so tomorrow. Illogic is thus the translation of the specific into the general. Most people don't notice this however because our media-driven fearmongering rests upon illogic. One police officer did something wrong, therefore all police all evil. One meth addict committed a particular crime, therefore all drugs should be illegal. Illogic is also the basic premise of all bigotry and prejudice. For example, some members of a particular group do something you disapprove of, therefore all members of that group are presumed of being guilty of said action. I could go on and on and on here. It's the basic theme of 99% of the arguments here.

 

[Zebo]

I always enjoy cop beatdowns this story was a let down..camera? gimme a break,

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

I'm not going to call anyone out specifically but generally speaking at least one poster is a moron.

"The police" is a necessary descriptor for this story b/c much of what is attributed to "the police" comes from an unnamed source . . . with the police.

These statements come from accounts by Harry Hairston and other investigators from NBC10.

Police told Hairston
---
Police also denied

Accordingly, the story cannot be told with regards to rouge Officer X b/c we don't know who Officer X at Precinct 35 happens to be.

Sure cops aren't exactly the cream of the intellectual crop but I'm sure the majority are decent, hardworking men and women. Hmm, now that I think about it I believe I already said that . . .

IMO, most cops do a good job and a poorly compensated. But this guy is a tool. They were allegedly there to arrest a drug dealer . . . and get a college student with a cell phone?

Wow! Seems like I attribute the bad behavior to ONE person, while giving :thumbsup: to cops in general.

We don't need discussions about logic . . . some people need help with basic reading comprehension.

8) BBD uses his classic skills of illogic to translate the specific into the general, i.e. the actions of one (or a few) police translate into the actions of "the police."

 

[ChiPCGuy]

Originally posted by: Genx87
I'd wait for the facts to come out on this one. Right now we are mostly hearing from his side with the police denying the accusations.

if what he said is true, the officers need to be disciplined.
But I have a feeling there is more to the story than what is being told.

Umm, no. It was he said is true, then the officers need to be FIRED. This is a False Arrest if accurately depicted thus far. If the witness and accused accounts are true, there are going to be big lawsuits. Lawsuits YOU and I pay for, not to mention additional incremental loss of respect for the cops that are doing a good job....