Just a guy

When I was at the academy, we were told that when interacting with the public, first you ask them to do something. If that doesn't work, then you tell them. If that doesn't work, then you make them. If it comes down to making someone do something, and you're dealing with a gang like MS-13, if you drop a couple of F-bombs, then so be it. The Chief in this case obviously hasn't been on the street in quite some time.
And I whole heartedly agree with what Chief Bratton's estimation of why officer-related deaths are up this year. The sad fact of the matter is that everyone has a mobile camera and most of which offer the capability of instant upload of data to the Internet, namely Youtube. Cops are holding back, and in places like New York, where it seems as if everytime something in the way of a use of force occurs, the cop is the perp and the perp is the victim, it leads to very disasterous consequences.

You say this guy fiorino sounded like a geek , Is a geek any less capable of killing a cop ?
You say that other examples of people being stopped for open carry in other parts of PA have been "polite"... did you ever think that there is a HUGE DIFFERENCE between getting stopped in northwest pebnnsylvania where it is very common to carry a weapon legally as opposed to being stopped in the ghettto of philly where it is very common for people to carry a wepon illegally.
Unless you have encountered an armed suspect on the street then you can't say how you would feel or how another cop should feel or act. In my 13 years on the job I have been forced to draw my weapon and disarm many people on the street, once even chasing a male with a handgun while I was off duty... and at no time was I nice about it and if people take issue with that I could honestly care less because at the end of the day I got the job done and I and my partners went home at the end of the tour.
You point out that he told the sergeant that he had a permit and was carrying legally... you do realize that people lie to us pretty often right ? I stopped a male in downtown yonkers one night that had a handgun in his waistband who told me the gun was legal in south carolina and after disarming him at gunpoint and informing him that his weapon was not legal in NY, it turned out that he lied to me and that his weapon was not even registered in S.C. (not that I evan began to believe him anyway).
The bottom line is that police work is not always pretty, it's not always like the movies or like it is on cops, people fight, people run, people resist arrest and people question EVERYTHING WE DO.
You took this small clip and ran with the whole " some cops don't respect the courtesy campaigns " or whatever you said and that is just complete nonsense.

The only thing I consider disturbing in this recording was the mention of the sergeant considering the use of a Taser. Deadly force(or threat of) is always met with Deadly force options(firearms). Just because the State of Pennsylvania allows open carry does not mean the city of Philadelphia does. Here is a link to the law that discusses open carry in Philadelphia: http://www.pafoa.org...arms/open-carry For an example closer to home, you may have a full carry permit issued by Westchester County, however it does not entitle you to carry your licensed firearm into NYC, you must get an additional permit (which is almost impossible) from the NYPD. Cities often have greater restrictions do to higher crime rates with firearms, and population density. The sergeant started out respectful, and this idiot decided to be a s$%t house lawyer and not comply with the sergeant's directions. The use of language escalated as the defendant continued to refuse to comply with lawful orders. The uniformed police officer is always in control, and gives the orders, not the defendant. If the order is "get on your knees", the get on on your knees.
Respect is a two way street, if you refuse to comply or treat me like crap, then my attitude and responses will change to meet the situation. Things like sir and please will get replaced with things like a$^%$hole and now.

I firmly believe in using any language neccesary to get the job done. I think mentally when a "commoner" hears an LEO say what's on his/her mind, they may think to him/herself, this COP means business. I'll take a couple day rip if it keeps me and my collegue's alive!

Is this chief kidding with this nonsense ? These are pice of s*** MS-13 gang members who were threatening to assault the officers, etc... they deserved a lot more than a few f*** you's. This is another example of political correctness gone awry. Chief Bratton said a few weeks ago that he firmly believes that the number of officer related deaths are up this year because cops are weary about people with cameras and are holding back during their encounters with the public and are therefore giving up the upper hand. In this case you have cops who did the right thing and refused to give up the upper hand and now they get called to the carpet for it. What a joke.
This is another example of a boss forgetting where he came from

Is this chief kidding with this nonsense ? These are pice of s*** MS-13 gang members who were threatening to assault the officers, etc... they deserved a lot more than a few f*** you's. This is another example of political correctness gone awry. Chief Bratton said a few weeks ago that he firmly believes that the number of officer related deaths are up this year because cops are weary about people with cameras and are holding back during their encounters with the public and are therefore giving up the upper hand. In this case you have cops who did the right thing and refused to give up the upper hand and now they get called to the carpet for it. What a joke.
This is another example of a boss forgetting where he came from

And to think you poor bastards take a test and actually TRY to get on the cop job.....Stay safe!

Did you know that there's also such a thing as a warrantless arrest, too? Did you know that there's also exceptions to the warrant guidelines? Did you know that the 4th Amendment really isn't such a black-and-white issue, as its text has never been updated since it was written, but its interpretations have widely varied in the time since? Did you know that the spirit of the 4th Amendment is grounded in abuses that took place at the hands of the British Monarchy, thus giving more power to the people, and that no matter how many different interpretations there are of the Amendment, that is a standard that will remain constant?
In the case at hand, the cops weren't "grasping at straws." They were in hot pursuit subsequent to witnessing a narcotics buy, and when faced with the choice of which apartment to go into, they used the totality of the circumstances at hand in order to make their decision. The ruling, contrary to what papers like AM New York stated in this morning's edition, changes nothing, as it is an affirmation of already established holdings subsequent to previous caselaw. We are not on the slippery slope to having a police state.

If you're implying that the members here are not advocates of due process I think you need to reconsider your position as the majority of us are staunch advocates of due process and protecting our rights. To suggest that law enforcement officers are not advocates of due process is flat out wrong. We work within the sytem that has been crafted for us and this decision is merely a clarification of what has long been an exception to the warrant requirement of the 4th Amendment.
You obviously didn't even read this case before posting your comments. The police were pursuing someone who was "actually committing a crime" not "grasping at straws" or "having trouble nailing the bad guy". Perhaps the appropriate criticism is that they just didn't run fast enough and he managed to get into an apartment before they apprehended him.
Every warrantless search is scrutinized at every level from the PD to the DA to the courts and in this case it went all the way to the Supreme Court where, in what was already noted as a rare 8-1 decision, they reaffirmed that the destruction of evidence is an exception to the warrant requirement. It is a great example of due process working as designed and everyone should be happy about it. Our rights are being protected and law enforcement is doing their job.
Having absolutely no idea what it takes to get a warrant or run into a housing project after a suspect your final comment "Oh well its hard for me to lock up the bad guys because its so damn hard to prove they are doing anything wrong" is nothing more than inflammatory and a slap in the face at all law enforcement. Every day police officers jump through all the hoops you're accusing them of ignoring or finding too difficult.
Now, let's get back to the point: the Supreme Court decision.

I understand where you are coming from. I take pride in my work and pride in our justice system no matter how silly it can be at times.
Although I become frustrated with all of the hoops we have to jump through to get search warrants etc... I never want to see the law circumvented just to make an arrest.
There are too many restrictions put on law enforcement and every time there is a new more restrictive ruling we have to adjust so this ruling is a breath of fresh air. People really have no clue what we have to go through to get our jobs done, we hit roadblocks and nonsense every step of the way and all we are trying to do is get the bad guy off the streets but in many cases we are the bad guy it seems.

For those of you that are concerned about the police having too much "power", this doesn't give us any more "power" than we already have.
When you are a cop that works in a busy area or in a special unit that deals with search warrants frequently, you know what the destruction of evidence sounds like as opposed to " putting up a shelf," and you know what people scurrying around in an apartment trying to hid or escape sounds like as ooposed to people getting off the couch to come open the door."
Let's try to keep this in perspective... we are talking about piece of s*** drug dealers here, the scum of the earth who ruin lives and communities, Who Cares what happens to them... when you live in a community that doesn't have the scourge of heavy drugs in it, it's easy to sit back and say " but we need to preserve their rights too."
If the apartment or the house next door to you had frequent visitors knocking on the door at all hours of the day and night or cars coming up comstantly and there were strange odors coming from the apartment, and you heard rumors that they were selling crack of heroin out of the apratment, the first thing you would do is call the police and ask them why they aren't doing anything about it and when you get the answer of " Our hands are tied and they have rights too," maybe you will rethink your position.
Or if your kids couldn't go to the park becuase the local dealer has taken up residence by the swingset to sell his drugs because the swing set has the best panoramic view to see if the cops are coming.
Or there were drive by's and gang fights on the corner or if your car or your house kept getting broken into becasue the crack heads are staying in your neighborhood becuase your local dealer has the best product.
I am a supporter of the constitution but I am also a supporter of Common Sense

Agreed.
What everyone misses here, despite all the collective "legal knowledge" that is frequently brought to bear on this forum (heavy sarcastic emphasis), this decision was an 8-1 decision. Does anyone realize how rare that is, especially over the last decade? This means this wasn't a liberal/conservative ideological split. Rather, the Court nearly unanimously agreed on the facts of this case and the nexus to the Fourth Amendment.

It's not even worth explaining crime cop. 18 years old, not involved in law enforcement in any way, and he's the expert. How about you go out there and show us how it's done kid?

For those of you that are concerned about the police having too much "power", this doesn't give us any more "power" than we already have.
When you are a cop that works in a busy area or in a special unit that deals with search warrants frequently, you know what the destruction of evidence sounds like as opposed to " putting up a shelf," and you know what people scurrying around in an apartment trying to hid or escape sounds like as ooposed to people getting off the couch to come open the door."
Let's try to keep this in perspective... we are talking about piece of s*** drug dealers here, the scum of the earth who ruin lives and communities, Who Cares what happens to them... when you live in a community that doesn't have the scourge of heavy drugs in it, it's easy to sit back and say " but we need to preserve their rights too."
If the apartment or the house next door to you had frequent visitors knocking on the door at all hours of the day and night or cars coming up comstantly and there were strange odors coming from the apartment, and you heard rumors that they were selling crack of heroin out of the apratment, the first thing you would do is call the police and ask them why they aren't doing anything about it and when you get the answer of " Our hands are tied and they have rights too," maybe you will rethink your position.
Or if your kids couldn't go to the park becuase the local dealer has taken up residence by the swingset to sell his drugs because the swing set has the best panoramic view to see if the cops are coming.
Or there were drive by's and gang fights on the corner or if your car or your house kept getting broken into becasue the crack heads are staying in your neighborhood becuase your local dealer has the best product.
I am a supporter of the constitution but I am also a supporter of Common Sense

For those of you that are concerned about the police having too much "power", this doesn't give us any more "power" than we already have.
When you are a cop that works in a busy area or in a special unit that deals with search warrants frequently, you know what the destruction of evidence sounds like as opposed to " putting up a shelf," and you know what people scurrying around in an apartment trying to hid or escape sounds like as ooposed to people getting off the couch to come open the door."
Let's try to keep this in perspective... we are talking about piece of s*** drug dealers here, the scum of the earth who ruin lives and communities, Who Cares what happens to them... when you live in a community that doesn't have the scourge of heavy drugs in it, it's easy to sit back and say " but we need to preserve their rights too."
If the apartment or the house next door to you had frequent visitors knocking on the door at all hours of the day and night or cars coming up comstantly and there were strange odors coming from the apartment, and you heard rumors that they were selling crack of heroin out of the apratment, the first thing you would do is call the police and ask them why they aren't doing anything about it and when you get the answer of " Our hands are tied and they have rights too," maybe you will rethink your position.
Or if your kids couldn't go to the park becuase the local dealer has taken up residence by the swingset to sell his drugs because the swing set has the best panoramic view to see if the cops are coming.
Or there were drive by's and gang fights on the corner or if your car or your house kept getting broken into becasue the crack heads are staying in your neighborhood becuase your local dealer has the best product.
I am a supporter of the constitution but I am also a supporter of Common Sense

This story makes me very happy about one point - I don't live anywhere near Chicago. This is absurd and totally demoralizing to all the men and women who took and passed the exam to become firefighters.
I wonder how the judge would feel if she was passed over for law school with a score of 89 so that a person with a score of 64 could take her seat.
I guess this means they better start passing out diplomas to those who failed out of HS also because apparently grades don't matter.

Perhaps I'm not making myself clear. My point is that your license plate is not private and you can't drive down the street without it. The use of an LPR is not unconstitutional. It is the use of technology as an investigative tool. A town could put a cop or two out on the street to write down every plate number if they wanted to; the use of a computerized camera is just more efficient. What infringement of your constitutional rights do you perceive?
I'm a staunch advocate for our Constitution and our individual rights and I simply don't see the argument.
If you're worried about an "unscrupulous cop" that's a weak argument.
The license plate data doesn't tell anyone whether or not someone is home, it merely captures the plate data. The LPR data and registrant information are different databases so it would be some pretty sophisticated hacking to get into one let alone both. If someone is going to do a hack that sophisticated, I bet they won't be doing residential burglaries.
I don't believe we're giving up any freedom with the proliferation of LPR's. They're not a part of the Patriot Act either.
As for TSA screenings, first I don't think that Texas will be successful in criminalizing airport pat-downs as air security is a federal prerogative. Second, the absurd system we have today was borne out of political correctness and expedience rather than true security. Because we can't profile for fear of offending someone that fits the profile of a terrorist, we have to inconvenience everyone.

The license plate issued to you is the property of the Department of Motor Vehicles and your information as the registrant for a vehicle is maintained in accordance with the Laws of New York and Rules and Regulations of the Department of Motor Vehicles. Upon cancellation of your insurance or transfer of ownership of the vehicle the license plates are, by law, supposed to be surrendered to DMV.
There is no expectation of privacy on a public highway and there is no intrusion from the capture of plate data by an LPR so what's the issue?
I think the benefits of being able to catch pattern criminals, detect stolen vehicles, and apprehend other offenders through the judicious use of this technology far outweighs any perceived inconveniences.

Sorry, but you have almost zero right to privacy on the road. Not only are you in plain sight, but driving is a privilege granted by the state. As such they have rights to almost anything driving related you do. That includes how many trips to Hannaford you took last Wednesday. You're welcome to walk, but then you're back out in plain sight and the city is allowed to install facial recognition cameras along your route and track you that way.

bin Ladens last Facebook post:

Where is the Journal News going ?
HOPEFULLY OUT OF BUISNESS FOR GOOD !!!!!

Where is the Journal News going ?
HOPEFULLY OUT OF BUISNESS FOR GOOD !!!!!

Where is the Journal News going ?
HOPEFULLY OUT OF BUISNESS FOR GOOD !!!!!

Where is the Journal News going ?
HOPEFULLY OUT OF BUISNESS FOR GOOD !!!!!

Where is the Journal News going ?
HOPEFULLY OUT OF BUISNESS FOR GOOD !!!!!