Outrageous that private sector entities are able to rent the authority of the state in this way. :mad:
I followed the formatting of the original article, so questions are in bold.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2016/09/moonlighting_police_officers_should_private_companies_be_able_to_hire_off.html
QuoteThe Blurred Blue Line
When police officers take off-duty jobs, do they work for the people, or are they guns for hire?
By Leon Neyfakh
The debate over law enforcement that's been raging in America for the past two years has naturally focused on the decisions police officers make when they're working—not what they do after they punch out for the day. But a new paper by law professor Seth Stoughton, posted online this week in draft form, makes the argument that we've been ignoring an important aspect of policing—namely, the massive amount of moonlighting that cops do for private companies when they're off duty.
For Stoughton, who teaches at the University of South Carolina School of Law, this is a consequential oversight—particularly because, as he learned when he was a police officer in Tallahassee, Florida, and did moonlighting work for nightclubs and other private entities, officers who take these kinds of gigs typically wear their official police uniforms, further blurring the public's understanding of whether they are on duty or off and whether that matters.
Stoughton sent survey questions to about 400 police agencies at the state, county, and city levels, asking them about their policies regarding off-duty work and the amount of time their officers spend doing it. Stoughton got answers from 162 of the agencies, which in total employ about a fifth of the nation's police officers.
I talked with Stoughton about why it's so troubling to think of police officers selling their law enforcement authority to private companies, how prevalent the practice is, and how off-duty opportunities affect the salaries that police departments pay their cops. The conversation has been edited and condensed for clarity.
Before I read your paper, I had no idea that police officers were allowed to do off-duty work for private employers while wearing their uniforms and carrying their service weapons. And I had no idea that, as you report in the paper, some agencies require officers to wear their uniforms while working off-duty for private employers.
Where do you live?
New York.
Oh, yeah—New York does it.
It just strikes me as crazy, though I'm not sure I can totally explain why. You've thought about this for longer, so maybe you can tell me: What is it that feels intuitively wrong about this?
I've gotten this reaction a lot while talking to people about this phenomenon. I think people react negatively because we think of policing as a public good. It's counterintuitive and incongruous to think of a public police officer who is being paid by, and working on behalf of, a private employer. It's just not what they do, right? Fundamentally it doesn't line up with our intuitive conception of what policing is.
I knew officers sometimes took off-duty gigs, working as bouncers or security guards. But the idea that they'd be in uniform is shocking to me. Does that mean that off-duty officers doing freelance work are allowed to do all the same stuff they can do when they're on duty, like arrest people and search them and use force on them?
Yeah, absolutely. In fact, part of the reason why private employers hire them is that they're perceived as more official than private security guards. The police officer who's working off-duty for a private employer represents the state. They're in uniform, they have a badge, they have a gun belt. They may have a marked police vehicle with them. So in a very real sense they represent the arm of the state.
It seems unfair that someone can just rent out that kind of authority. Like, could a bunch of wealthy people who live in a neighborhood pool their money and hire a cop to patrol their streets? It seems like police resources shouldn't be allocated based on who can afford to pay for them.
Right. Well, that's exactly what happens. In fact, one of the stories I open the article with is about an officer who was paid by a security company that had been hired by a neighborhood. Policing is typically thought of as inherently redistributive. The neighborhoods that pay for most of the policing in a given city are not the neighborhoods that are on the receiving end of most police services. The higher-income neighborhoods that have a higher tax bracket pay more, but most of the policing happens in the lower-income neighborhoods. So when you have private businesses, neighborhoods, even potentially private individuals hiring police, it cuts against that general approach of police as a public good that serves all of the citizenry without regard for anyone's ability to pay.
What kind of work are most of these officers doing when they're hired by private companies?
My survey wasn't that specific, but my sense is most of it is security work. Some of that might be bouncing at a nightclub, but some of it might just be standing by at a party. If there's a large public event, they might have an officer just standing by in case there are any problems. And that happens not just at nightclubs and parties, it happens at pharmacies, grocery stores, department stores, big box stores, at strip malls. That's generally the emphasis—security.
There's also something called a "courtesy officer," which is a police officer who lives at an apartment complex or condo building and provides some security or law enforcement services in exchange for reduced rent. This might include responding to noise complaints in the apartment complex. It might require the officer to park their police car in a visible spot near the front of the complex, just to provide that sense of police presence. It might require them to take reports of crimes that occur in the apartment complex when they're available to do so, so instead of sending an on-duty officer to deal with a noise complaint or a vehicle burglary report, the off-duty courtesy officer is called and sent instead. It also provides the apartment complex management and other residents with a police contact, so instead of calling the police department to complain about a noise problem, residents might be given the courtesy officer's phone number and encouraged to call him or her instead.
This is in exchange for reduced rent? I'm imagining my landlord giving a police officer moving into my building a discount in exchange for parking his cruiser out front like a scarecrow.
I originally had a part of this paper that tracked the history of what I call the blurred blue line—the difficulty of distinguishing private and public policing. If we go all the way back to the original modern police force in the 1830s and '40s, officers commonly got paid through private sources for doing their public work. One scholar, a historian, published a paper about English police services in the 1830s, and it described the officer's salary as a "retaining fee." It wasn't really where the officers made their money—where they made their money was someone would call in a burglary and say, "my stuff has been stolen" and the officer would say, "well, how much are you offering to recover it?" And then the officer would collect that reward. That's totally foreign to our modern conception of policing. But in some ways, it's the same idea of officers trading on their public authority. Because, again, it's not just their skills they're being hired for. It's not because they're better trained and better equipped than someone else. A private employer hires an off-duty officer because of their public authority, not just because of their personal characteristics or their qualifications.
You did some of this work when you were a police officer in Tallahassee. What were your reasons for doing it?
I did it because it was a good way to make extra pocket money. I think that's why most officers do it.
How lucrative is it? How much were you making when you were doing it?
It can be extremely lucrative. There are some stories cited in my paper of officers working in New Orleans and making six figures just on their private off-duty employment—more than doubling their public salary. When I left the police department, I was making right around $45,000 a year. Breaking that down by hours, my public salary was just under $22 an hour, plus benefits and all that other stuff. When I did work for a private employer I don't think I ever made less than $30 an hour. And sometimes I could get paid much more than that. There was a particularly large event every year in Tallahassee, [Florida A&M University]'s homecoming. Lots of people, something like 60 or 80,000 people come into Tallahassee for that, and officers' days off all get canceled and you work a lot of overtime for the city. And then after your overtime for the city, if you have a gig like I did, you'd go to the nightclub afterwards. So you'd get released from your public job and you would go to your private job. And I think on FAMU homecoming I was making 75 or 95 dollars an hour.
Is it common for an officer's off-duty income to be a significant chunk of what he or she is bringing home?
Yes, it absolutely can be.
In most places, are police officers taking this work to line their pockets, or are there places where the public pay is so low that this is really the only way to earn a decent living?
Both. Officers are absolutely using off-duty employment to make extra money, but it's also true that officers are, in many places, pathetically underpaid. Police at some agencies, particularly smaller, rural departments, might start their careers with a salary of $30,000 or less; officers in agencies like that might turn to off-duty work as a necessary way to pay the bills.
There's some tension here and some unanswered questions. It may be the case that [the allure of] off-duty employment attracts higher-quality officers than the police could otherwise hire. But it could also be the case that off-duty employment decreases officer wages because the agency doesn't need to pay officers as much to attract the level of applicants it wants.
Is it your sense that most people who are doing this kind of work on the side are doing it at the expense of sleeping or their weekends? Where do they find the time to have a whole separate income stream?
It runs the gamut. There are officers who work a day shift and get off at, say, 5 p.m., then they go home for a little while and then go work five or six hours at their off-duty jobs in the evenings. For me, I would get off work at 2 o'clock in the morning on Friday or Saturday nights and then I'd go work for two hours at the nightclub as it was closing down.
And how common is this? Can you tell from your research how widespread the practice is?
So I want to reinforce the caveat that this wasn't a rigorously representative sample. I think it's a good sample—the agencies that responded employ just under 20 percent of the entire state and local police force in the country—but I don't want to extrapolate from it too much. The sense that I get from the research is that it's pretty common. Most departments allow off-duty employment. The statistics from the agencies that responded to this survey suggest that around 80 percent of agencies allow officers to work in uniform while off-duty for private employers. That's consistent with the numbers we have from earlier research, which is very limited—there was research in the mid-'80s where one criminologist and a group of academics who were studying the private security industry tried to identify the extent of off-duty employment. And they found roughly the same 80 percent number.
So that's agencies that allow it. Do you have a sense of what percentage of officers actually do it, and how much time they're spending on it relative to their normal jobs?
The short answer is no. We don't have good local or national data on how many officers are engaged in off-duty employment or how many hours they're working. What I can give you is the data from my survey. And one of the takeaways from this paper is how few agencies actually track the number of officers who work for private employers and the number of hours that officers spend working for private employers. Of all the agencies that responded—I had 162 agencies respond to the survey—130 of them allow off-duty employment. And 62 of those, almost 50 percent, do not track the number of officers who do it. Two-thirds—87 of the 130 agencies that permit off-duty employment—don't track the number of hours that officers work for private employers.
So while the information that I have is a good start toward understanding how big this phenomenon might be, the takeaway is we actually don't know.
From your paper it also sounds like there aren't rules or even conventions for who is held responsible when an off-duty police officer working a private gig does something to get sued.
There's a tremendous amount of variation and very little consistency here. Some states put the liability for an off-duty officer's actions squarely on the private employer. Other states tend to suggest the opposite approach—they say the private employer is not liable. As a matter of policy some departments have private employers sign indemnity agreements with the agency before the officer is allowed to work with them. So even though the employment contract is only between the private employer and the officer, in order to approve the off-duty employment, the agency wants to be indemnified so if the officer does get sued, the private employer will pick up the tab.
Liability is a huge issue. And the key question is whether you conceive of the off-duty officer as being a police officer who works for a public agency or whether you conceive of them as working for the private company. Most plaintiffs are probably going to sue both, because there can be ambiguity. For example, if a private employer has a dress code that has racial implications—like, no gold chains, no hats turned backwards, no baggy shorts, no basketball jerseys. These dress codes exist at nightclubs and other places in this country. Can the nightclub have the officer enforce those dress codes? And what happens when the officer does enforce those dress codes and gets sued for discrimination? How much of that is on the officer, how much of that is on the city or the county that employs the officer, and how much of that is on the private employer?
Woof. That introduces a whole other issue, doesn't it? If these guys are working for a private employer, and they're being paid to enforce the private employer's rules by using their authority as law enforcement agents, aren't they kind of turning those rules into ... pseudo-laws?
Yeah. Not to get too theoretical, but if you believe that "law" is what happens on the ground, then yes—the private employer's rules become de facto law.
That seems bad.
I tend to agree. This piece did not identify and did not try to identify best practices. I think that, and developing more information about how agencies are handling off duty employment, is the next step.
Also in contemporary Timmayworld news, there's talk of telephones becoming "cordless."
I'm sure that by next week, he'll come up with some shocking articles that reveal that the sun rises in the east and sets and the west. And that fire is hot, but water is wet.
Quote from: dps on September 04, 2016, 07:17:56 PM
I'm sure that by next week, he'll come up with some shocking articles that reveal that the sun rises in the east and sets and the west. And that fire is hot, but water is wet.
It's not that he's stupid--he's not, he just happens to be autistic, (though not DGuller Rainman-Assburgers, more like doofus puppy dog Assburgers)--it's just that he doesn't even live here anymore, and hasn't for a long while. No wonder everyday shit amazes him.
:yeah: :unsure:
Quote from: DGuller on September 04, 2016, 08:03:54 PM
:yeah: :unsure:
Fuck if I know, I don't think his updated copy of the DMS ever arrived.
Quote from: dps on September 04, 2016, 07:17:56 PM
I'm sure that by next week, he'll come up with some shocking articles that reveal that the sun rises in the east and sets and the west. And that fire is hot, but water is wet.
Why would the average person not involved with the law know this? When I saw uniformed officers outside a club I just assumed they were sent there by the police department in the interest of keeping the peace. Not that the club hired them and their state sanctioned authority.
That's because you're a silly person.
I don't understand how this is legal. It seems and sounds crazy.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 04, 2016, 09:37:04 PM
That's because you're a silly person.
A person who assumes that the state sees an interest in maintaining their monopoly on violence. Very silly. -_-
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2016, 10:15:29 PM
an interest in mainting their monopoly on violence.
Mainting? Or Tainting?
Holy crap! :lmfao:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 04, 2016, 10:16:47 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2016, 10:15:29 PM
an interest in mainting their monopoly on violence.
Mainting? Or Tainting?
those poor Korean students :(
And that's coming from someone who is a horrible speller as well.
America. :rolleyes:
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 04, 2016, 10:16:47 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2016, 10:15:29 PM
an interest in mainting their monopoly on violence.
Mainting? Or Tainting?
How about you focus on the meat of the issue, rather than trivialities?
Quote from: Zoupa on September 04, 2016, 10:14:03 PM
I don't understand how this is legal. It seems and sounds crazy.
Because communities, employers and police unions allow it to happen. Schools, hospitals, shopping malls...everybody does it.
Take hospitals, for instance: why should University of Whatever Hospital employ armed security officers and incur all the costs, training and liability that would entail, when you can just have an ODP program and pay police officers to do it?
They're already trained, they're already imbued with powers of arrest, and they make visitors, staff and students feel safer than a security guard.
Besides, don't see why it's such a big deal; after all, it's only stupid fucking moron assholes like nurses and teachers that don't deserve to make more money, because they're supposed to just do it for the job satisfaction. So fuck those simpletons, should've joined a police union instead.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2016, 08:39:17 PM
Quote from: dps on September 04, 2016, 07:17:56 PM
I'm sure that by next week, he'll come up with some shocking articles that reveal that the sun rises in the east and sets and the west. And that fire is hot, but water is wet.
Why would the average person not involved with the law know this? When I saw uniformed officers outside a club I just assumed they were sent there by the police department in the interest of keeping the peace. Not that the club hired them and their state sanctioned authority.
So you live in a world it takes forever for police to respond to 911 calls and police departments in places are way understaffed, but there is still a cop in front of clubs and plenty of businesses and churches have cops out front to direct traffic. You seriously never put 2 and 2 together?
I have heard the guys in the cave over that ridge have figured a way to throw rocks really far using strips of leather.
QuoteSanta Clara police threaten to boycott 49ers games in wake of Kaepernick controversy
Published September 03, 2016 FoxNews.com
Authorities in Northern California have threatened to stop working San Francisco 49ers games in response to Colin Kaepernick sitting during the national anthem in protest of police brutality and racial injustice.
In a letter obtained by KNTV, the Santa Clara police union told the 49ers organization that officers wouldn't work at the stadium if it doesn't "take action" against Kaepernick over his protest. The station noted that about 70 Santa Clara police officers work eight home games per year.
"The board of directors of the Santa Clara Police Officer's Association has a duty to protect its members and work to make all of their workings environments free of harassing behavior," the letter added.
Kaepernick's decision to sit for the national anthem and to wear socks in practice depicting pigs as cops has drawn much scrutiny from the Santa Clara officers. Police said they are angered and frustrated with the 6-year veteran.
The 49ers released a statement in support of Kaepernick's freedom of expression as soon as the backlash started to begin.
"In respecting such American principles as freedom of religion and freedom of expression, we recognize the right of an individual to choose to participate, or not, in our celebration of the national anthem," the organization said.
Kaepernick's has caused a firestorm on social media and throughout the nation, including fans, media and veterans.
His protest continued Thursday night when he decided to kneel for the national anthem in San Diego during the Chargers' Salute to the Military. He was joined by defensive back Eric Reed in his protest.
Seattle Seahawks player Jeremy Lane also sat for the national anthem when the Seahawks played the Oakland Raiders.
Kaepernick pledges to donate the first $1 million he makes this season to communities that help people.
Somebody pleez slap that bitch.
Quote from: alfred russel on September 04, 2016, 11:17:07 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2016, 08:39:17 PM
Quote from: dps on September 04, 2016, 07:17:56 PM
I'm sure that by next week, he'll come up with some shocking articles that reveal that the sun rises in the east and sets and the west. And that fire is hot, but water is wet.
Why would the average person not involved with the law know this? When I saw uniformed officers outside a club I just assumed they were sent there by the police department in the interest of keeping the peace. Not that the club hired them and their state sanctioned authority.
So you live in a world it takes forever for police to respond to 911 calls and police departments in places are way understaffed, but there is still a cop in front of clubs and plenty of businesses and churches have cops out front to direct traffic. You seriously never put 2 and 2 together?
I doubt he's made many 911 calls and even less likely that he's timed them.
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/48/d8/4e/48d84ef4153bdb6622ece233a102e5cf.jpg)
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/ed/16/db/ed16db4f82126e36ac0edd7c8fd796d5.jpg)
I don't want to kill anybody. So I just have mace. Don't have to be as accurate and I would hate to accidentally murder the next door neighbors.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FmwbFh9vl.jpg&hash=1450e9107b3bd6890a7c984df136a8128500a1c0)
Quote from: Siege on September 04, 2016, 11:58:28 PM
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/ed/16/db/ed16db4f82126e36ac0edd7c8fd796d5.jpg)
Hey I thought you just told me I was supposed to gun down everybody while carrying out vigilante justice? Now I am not supposed to shoot everybody?
Quote from: Siege on September 05, 2016, 12:00:42 AM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FmwbFh9vl.jpg&hash=1450e9107b3bd6890a7c984df136a8128500a1c0)
Interesting how half the people in the first group got assassinated.
Quote from: Siege on September 05, 2016, 12:00:42 AM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FmwbFh9vl.jpg&hash=1450e9107b3bd6890a7c984df136a8128500a1c0)
Yeah. Obama is pretty cool with me having a gun. Pretty sure George III would be alright with it to if he was still alive and not on one of his bouts of insanity.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.quotesgram.com%2Fsmall%2F37%2F56%2F2001944915-funny-gun-control-humor.jpg&hash=5c41fb5f0e8019a1fea5a39bf471844c1140e11a)
Let's shut down the courts and just let guns run everything since clearly laws have no impact on anything! Hey that's stupid! So therefore it should be a meme!
Quote from: Valmy on September 05, 2016, 12:00:58 AM
Quote from: Siege on September 04, 2016, 11:58:28 PM
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/ed/16/db/ed16db4f82126e36ac0edd7c8fd796d5.jpg)
Hey I thought you just told me I was supposed to gun down everybody while carrying out vigilante justice? Now I am not supposed to shoot everybody?
Where did you get this from?
Vigilantism is illegal.
We are talking here about gunz.
Stop with the strawman.
Quote from: Siege on September 05, 2016, 12:00:42 AM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FmwbFh9vl.jpg&hash=1450e9107b3bd6890a7c984df136a8128500a1c0)
Question: Who taught you history?
Quote from: Valmy on September 05, 2016, 12:08:58 AM
Let's shut down the courts and just let guns run everything since clearly laws have no impact on anything! Hey that's stupid! So therefore it should be a meme!
WTF, dude.
No straw man.
Nobody is talking about whatever crazy shit you are saying. Having weapons for self defense is to keep your family safe until the cops get there.
Those 5 minutes last forever when you have armed intruders in your home.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 05, 2016, 12:13:26 AM
Quote from: Siege on September 05, 2016, 12:00:42 AM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi.imgur.com%2FmwbFh9vl.jpg&hash=1450e9107b3bd6890a7c984df136a8128500a1c0)
Question: Who taught you history?
History?
Ah. I du nut knuws de meaning of dat?
I forgot, you are a dishonorable liar who is a disgrace to his uniform.
Quote from: alfred russel on September 04, 2016, 11:17:07 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2016, 08:39:17 PM
Quote from: dps on September 04, 2016, 07:17:56 PM
I'm sure that by next week, he'll come up with some shocking articles that reveal that the sun rises in the east and sets and the west. And that fire is hot, but water is wet.
Why would the average person not involved with the law know this? When I saw uniformed officers outside a club I just assumed they were sent there by the police department in the interest of keeping the peace. Not that the club hired them and their state sanctioned authority.
So you live in a world it takes forever police to respond to 911 calls and police departments in places are way understaffed, but there is still a cop in front of clubs and plenty of businesses and churches have cops out front to direct traffic. You seriously never put 2 and 2 together?
I didn't live in that world. Not my fault that Rhode Island had it's shit together.
Quote from: Razgovory on September 05, 2016, 12:22:42 AM
I forgot, you are a dishonorable liar who is a disgrace to his uniform.
I think he's telling the truth; he doesn't know history.
This thread delivers. :D
Quote from: Martinus on September 05, 2016, 01:05:31 AM
This thread delivers. :D
As what, Siegy's own MySpace page, complete with memes from 2003?
Quote from: Siege on September 05, 2016, 12:13:34 AM
Quote from: Valmy on September 05, 2016, 12:08:58 AM
Let's shut down the courts and just let guns run everything since clearly laws have no impact on anything! Hey that's stupid! So therefore it should be a meme!
WTF, dude.
No straw man.
Nobody is talking about whatever crazy shit you are saying. Having weapons for self defense is to keep your family safe until the cops get there.
Those 5 minutes last forever when you have armed intruders in your home.
The issue of whether or not private citizens have a right to own firearms has nothing to do with this thread, moron.
I can't tell who's dumber, you or Timmay.
I think it's very easy to tell. :huh:
Quote from: DGuller on September 05, 2016, 03:30:38 PM
I think it's very easy to tell. :huh:
Oh, Siegy posts stupider stuff than Tim, but I can't tell how much of Siegy's stupidity is actual stupidity, how much is drunkenness, and how much is trolling; whereas AFAIK, Tim doesn't troll us and isn't subject to bouts of inebriation.
Quote from: dps on September 05, 2016, 02:43:28 PM
I can't tell who's dumber, you or Timmay.
Siege is the one that managed to learn the language of the country he moved to.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 05, 2016, 12:32:07 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on September 04, 2016, 11:17:07 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2016, 08:39:17 PM
Quote from: dps on September 04, 2016, 07:17:56 PM
I'm sure that by next week, he'll come up with some shocking articles that reveal that the sun rises in the east and sets and the west. And that fire is hot, but water is wet.
Why would the average person not involved with the law know this? When I saw uniformed officers outside a club I just assumed they were sent there by the police department in the interest of keeping the peace. Not that the club hired them and their state sanctioned authority.
So you live in a world it takes forever police to respond to 911 calls and police departments in places are way understaffed, but there is still a cop in front of clubs and plenty of businesses and churches have cops out front to direct traffic. You seriously never put 2 and 2 together?
I didn't live in that world. Not my fault that Rhode Island had it's shit together.
Sure you did. You lived in the Carolinas for a summer. You also apparently read lots of news stories, so you must have come across that before. If nothing else, I know I posted about how when I recently called 911 in the center of Atlanta, I got an "all lines are busy, please stay on the line or you will lose your place in the queue" automated message, and then it took the cop what felt like forever to show up (I don't remember how long).
Quote from: dps on September 05, 2016, 03:53:40 PM
Quote from: DGuller on September 05, 2016, 03:30:38 PM
I think it's very easy to tell. :huh:
Oh, Siegy posts stupider stuff than Tim, but I can't tell how much of Siegy's stupidity is actual stupidity, how much is drunkenness, and how much is trolling; whereas AFAIK, Tim doesn't troll us and isn't subject to bouts of inebriation.
Even if Siege is trolling, the way he does it is still indicative of a very low IQ.
Quote from: alfred russel on September 05, 2016, 04:44:27 PM
Sure you did. You lived in the Carolinas for a summer. You also apparently read lots of news stories, so you must have come across that before. If nothing else, I know I posted about how when I recently called 911 in the center of Atlanta, I got an "all lines are busy, please stay on the line or you will lose your place in the queue" automated message, and then it took the cop what felt like forever to show up (I don't remember how long).
911 is a joke in Dorsey's town. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJ-ldcnhsLY)
Quote from: Siege on September 05, 2016, 12:10:14 AM
Where did you get this from?
Vigilantism is illegal.
We are talking here about gunz.
Stop with the strawman.
You just posted a graphic saying we should use guns to enforce the law just like we should use fire extinguishers to put out fires :hmm:
Quote from: Siege on September 05, 2016, 12:13:34 AM
Quote from: Valmy on September 05, 2016, 12:08:58 AM
Let's shut down the courts and just let guns run everything since clearly laws have no impact on anything! Hey that's stupid! So therefore it should be a meme!
WTF, dude.
No straw man.
Nobody is talking about whatever crazy shit you are saying. Having weapons for self defense is to keep your family safe until the cops get there.
Those 5 minutes last forever when you have armed intruders in your home.
Hey you are the one posting the stupid memes. I was making fun of them.
Why would an armed intruder break into my house? We have no money here, nobody does in the era of electronic money. Our electronics are not particularly valuable and they are not easily portable. And I hope they use those guns in a house full of tear gas because that is the atmosphere they are going to be operating in.
Quote from: Martinus on September 05, 2016, 01:05:31 AM
This thread delivers. :D
Stupid, humorless, lame. Right up your alley!
Quote from: Siege on September 05, 2016, 12:13:34 AM
WTF, dude.
No straw man.
What, you're quitting the forum? Unless you are, I think arguing that there will be no strawman arguments is asinine.
You live in a house full of tear gas? Are you an alien?
Quote from: garbon on September 05, 2016, 05:26:38 PM
You live in a house full of tear gas? Are you an alien?
No. Pretty sure it would be really expensive to continuously fill your house with tear gas. I intend for it to be temporary only.
Though to be fair I am never going to have a drill so I don't really know what the impact would be of spraying mace on everybody. I just presumed everybody would be incapacitated for a bit.
But you are not an idiot and I already explained exactly what I meant in a previous post so not sure what you are doing here. Trolling?
Anyway the chances of some armed mob charging into my house to murder us is much less than my house being simultaneously leveled by a meteor, earthquake, and a lightning bolt so I think I am alright.
Quote from: Valmy on September 05, 2016, 05:44:46 PM
Anyway the chances of some armed mob charging into my house to murder us is much less than my house being simultaneously leveled by a meteor, earthquake, and a lightning bolt so I think I am alright.
I dunno, man...all those roving bands of rapists down there, and all. Raping stuff. With rape sauce.
Quote from: alfred russel on September 05, 2016, 04:44:27 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 05, 2016, 12:32:07 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on September 04, 2016, 11:17:07 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 04, 2016, 08:39:17 PM
Quote from: dps on September 04, 2016, 07:17:56 PM
I'm sure that by next week, he'll come up with some shocking articles that reveal that the sun rises in the east and sets and the west. And that fire is hot, but water is wet.
Why would the average person not involved with the law know this? When I saw uniformed officers outside a club I just assumed they were sent there by the police department in the interest of keeping the peace. Not that the club hired them and their state sanctioned authority.
So you live in a world it takes forever police to respond to 911 calls and police departments in places are way understaffed, but there is still a cop in front of clubs and plenty of businesses and churches have cops out front to direct traffic. You seriously never put 2 and 2 together?
I didn't live in that world. Not my fault that Rhode Island had it's shit together.
Sure you did. You lived in the Carolinas for a summer. You also apparently read lots of news stories, so you must have come across that before. If nothing else, I know I posted about how when I recently called 911 in the center of Atlanta, I got an "all lines are busy, please stay on the line or you will lose your place in the queue" automated message, and then it took the cop what felt like forever to show up (I don't remember how long).
I felt the cops were very active when I was in the Carolinas, as an out of state college kid going door to door I was hassled by them a few times.
Seeing something on TV or reading it in a newspaper doesn't make it real to me, especially when I knew that crime statistics were plummeting.
I didn't read that thread. Link?
Quote from: Valmy on September 05, 2016, 05:44:46 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 05, 2016, 05:26:38 PM
You live in a house full of tear gas? Are you an alien?
No. Pretty sure it would be really expensive to continuously fill your house with tear gas. I intend for it to be temporary only.
Though to be fair I am never going to have a drill so I don't really know what the impact would be of spraying mace on everybody. I just presumed everybody would be incapacitated for a bit.
But you are not an idiot and I already explained exactly what I meant in a previous post so not sure what you are doing here. Trolling?
Anyway the chances of some armed mob charging into my house to murder us is much less than my house being simultaneously leveled by a meteor, earthquake, and a lightning bolt so I think I am alright.
Well someone is clearly a bit whiny.
Quote from: garbon on September 05, 2016, 06:34:28 PM
Quote from: Valmy on September 05, 2016, 05:44:46 PM
Quote from: garbon on September 05, 2016, 05:26:38 PM
You live in a house full of tear gas? Are you an alien?
No. Pretty sure it would be really expensive to continuously fill your house with tear gas. I intend for it to be temporary only.
Though to be fair I am never going to have a drill so I don't really know what the impact would be of spraying mace on everybody. I just presumed everybody would be incapacitated for a bit.
But you are not an idiot and I already explained exactly what I meant in a previous post so not sure what you are doing here. Trolling?
Anyway the chances of some armed mob charging into my house to murder us is much less than my house being simultaneously leveled by a meteor, earthquake, and a lightning bolt so I think I am alright.
Well someone is clearly a bit whiny.
:yes: and it's not Valmy.
Quote from: Zoupa on September 04, 2016, 10:14:03 PM
I don't understand how this is legal. It seems and sounds crazy.
Also happening in Montreal, btw. Or was, a few years back.
Wasn't the first guy to engage the Orlando shooter an off duty cop working security?
Quote from: 11B4V on September 05, 2016, 08:33:01 PM
Wasn't the first guy to engage the Orlando shooter an off duty cop working security?
Yeah, but he "retreated", ostensibly to "call for back-up." Because, like so many off-duty cops working extra gigs, probably figured a bunch of fags aren't worth dying for at $25 an hour.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on September 05, 2016, 08:45:00 PM
Quote from: 11B4V on September 05, 2016, 08:33:01 PM
Wasn't the first guy to engage the Orlando shooter an off duty cop working security?
Yeah, but he "retreated", ostensibly to "call for back-up." Because, like so many off-duty cops working extra gigs, probably figured a bunch of fags aren't worth dying for at $25 an hour.
Eh, six of one half a dozen of another.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on September 05, 2016, 06:09:22 PM
I didn't read that thread. Link?
Probably somewhere in the off topic thread, it wasn't a big deal. Some dumbass was fleeing from the scene of another accident and drove through the back of my car while I was stopped at a red light.
The only really frustrating part was that I got the tag number of the guy but no one followed up on it because the guy was from out of state.
Quote from: DGuller on September 05, 2016, 05:14:24 PM
Quote from: dps on September 05, 2016, 03:53:40 PM
Quote from: DGuller on September 05, 2016, 03:30:38 PM
I think it's very easy to tell. :huh:
Oh, Siegy posts stupider stuff than Tim, but I can't tell how much of Siegy's stupidity is actual stupidity, how much is drunkenness, and how much is trolling; whereas AFAIK, Tim doesn't troll us and isn't subject to bouts of inebriation.
Even if Siege is trolling, the way he does it is still indicative of a very low IQ.
Oh pleez.
My IQ is extremely high.
I scored 82 in my last test.
Not too shabby, if I may say so myself.
The professor at the test told me not even the dolphins could hold a candle to my intellect.
I felt very proud.
Quote from: Valmy on September 05, 2016, 05:25:06 PM
Quote from: Siege on September 05, 2016, 12:13:34 AM
Quote from: Valmy on September 05, 2016, 12:08:58 AM
Let's shut down the courts and just let guns run everything since clearly laws have no impact on anything! Hey that's stupid! So therefore it should be a meme!
WTF, dude.
No straw man.
Nobody is talking about whatever crazy shit you are saying. Having weapons for self defense is to keep your family safe until the cops get there.
Those 5 minutes last forever when you have armed intruders in your home.
Hey you are the one posting the stupid memes. I was making fun of them.
Why would an armed intruder break into my house? We have no money here, nobody does in the era of electronic money. Our electronics are not particularly valuable and they are not easily portable. And I hope they use those guns in a house full of tear gas because that is the atmosphere they are going to be operating in.
Why r u so dense?
Pipple break into your house to steal your valuables.
It doesn't have to be money necessarily.
Besides, they don't know you ain't got no money.
How the hell would they know you are broke?
Quote from: Siege on September 06, 2016, 05:00:29 PM
The professor at the test told me not even the dolphins could hold a candle to my intellect.
:lol:
You gotta be shitting me, Siegy. You're not a sea mammal! You're a killer!
Dolphins are killers and rapists. And some maybe nice animals.
Quote from: Siege on September 06, 2016, 05:00:29 PM
Oh pleez.
My IQ is extremely high.
I scored 82 in my last test.
It's not measured in bottles of beer, Siege.
Quote from: The Minsky Moment on September 06, 2016, 06:04:19 PM
It's not measured in bottles of beer, Siege.
Well fuck, there goes my IQ results.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on September 06, 2016, 05:53:34 PM
Dolphins are killers and rapists. And some maybe nice animals.
It gives their life porpoise.
:yuk: