pnies20 Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 1 minute ago, big poppa pump said: And whilst Tayne and Mind rail about the legality/illegality of searches, they will be the first to call the police when a precarious situation arises. For all the complaining of the personal injustices suffered as an innocent party, guns and drugs are being taken off the streets with these so-called shady stops. If Tayne is as relaxed, and chill as he portrays, a stop by the police should not affect his nature. Innocent people have nothing to hide. One should welcome the minor inconvenience, knowing that there will be a bad guy or 2 (one that could possibly harm Tayne) taken off the street in a similar manner. Thankfully I have no idea what mindcharacter is saying because he’s blocked Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MSURacerDT55 Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 19 hours ago, ditchdigger said: How do black markets exist without marketing? That appears to be what you are asking. I guess, im not privy to how that works. I guess it's one of those "I know a guy who knows a guy" type of thing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pnies20 Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 1 minute ago, MSURacerDT55 said: I guess, im not privy to how that works. I guess it's one of those "I know a guy who knows a guy" type of thing? More or less. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kiwibrown Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 3 minutes ago, MSURacerDT55 said: I guess, im not privy to how that works. I guess it's one of those "I know a guy who knows a guy" type of thing? It is stuff people want enough to risk the penalties of law enforcement. The marketing takes care of itself in that regard. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NudeTayne Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 27 minutes ago, pnies20 said: Look I’m not debating whether or not weed should be legal. Not even going to touch it. Don’t let your opinions on that determine your views on the ones enforcing laws already in place. Sure some are rude, some are bad at their job and less than one percent are corrupt. That doesn’t equate to cops rampantly searching cars illegally to frustrate teenagers Didn't think you were arguing either way on that--may have been a miscommunication 🤔. Was mostly attempting to have a discussion on the ethics of using perceived cannabis smell as a catch-all to harass people. And though it's likely been used on plenty of teenagers, almost none of the experience mentioned, firsthand, implied or otherwise, involved teenagers. Rod mentioned teenagers in an analogy he was making about (as it seemed to read (?)) necessary evils/acceptable loss--innocent teenagers in his example--in order to catch actual drug criminals by tricking people into surrendering their rights. Either people have rights or they don't and no officer should be allowed to trick people out of rights. And that is exactly what they do--no hyperbole there. Not sure what the "to frustrate teenagers" was about--reads like a strong strawman. No one implied that at all (?). "I'm gonna need to search your car", sometimes even making false hits, was a big part of this discussion, nothing about teenagers other than Rod making that one point about innocent teenagers perhaps being acceptable to harass--that's what it is when a cop doesn't smell weed but says they do--if it leads to done more drug arrests. Even he acknowledged that the actual drug dealers generally know their rights better than most and aren't fooled. This sounds more of the "impact the law-abiding citizens in the name of protections us from the non-law-abiding citizens who won't be as impacted". Even in that last post, was opining on the state of the world, not whether or not officers are wrong to enforce cannabis at all. Conversely, common sense dictates that cannabis is not heroine (don't tell our federal laws that, though...). It's not nearly as impactful as equally-consistent alcohol consumption in the physical effects and yet... That's not controversial. Fwiw, not a drinker or smoker. And personal opinion on cannabis has nothing to do with not agreeing with the smell argument. It's a strong-smelling substance and again, have personally known someone who got a DWI because his car smelled like it and he had a small quantity on him and didn't know how to defend himself from a predatory act so went down hard. He hadn't even smoked that day. Cannot remember this part for certain but want to say the impound fees for his vehicle were so high he let the beater car go entirely rather than trying to get back. This person had no criminal record and passed a field sobriety test. The officer decided--gray area--that he must have smoked because of the strong smell--and then it became his word against the officer's. This ish ruins lives. And no, him having an eighth on him and speeding does not mean he should have had his world rocked, which it did. No. Just because you haven't experienced this doesn't make it untrue/fabricated/impossible/probably misinterpreted. It's a loophole that is being abused. Hunt should never have been searched unless he failed a field sobriety test. That's where this convo began. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DawgX Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 21 minutes ago, big poppa pump said: And whilst Tayne and Mind rail about the legality/illegality of searches, they will be the first to call the police when a precarious situation arises. For all the complaining of the personal injustices suffered as an innocent party, guns and drugs are being taken off the streets with these so-called shady stops. If Tayne is as relaxed, and chill as he portrays, a stop by the police should not affect his nature. Innocent people have nothing to hide. One should welcome the minor inconvenience, knowing that there will be a bad guy or 2 (one that could possibly harm Tayne) taken off the street in a similar manner. So are you okay with government surveillance programs because you have nothing to hide? I mean, if you have nothing to hide, then who cares if you have any privacy? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pnies20 Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 11 minutes ago, NudeTayne said: Didn't think you were arguing either way on that--may have been a miscommunication 🤔. Was mostly attempting to have a discussion on the ethics of using perceived cannabis smell as a catch-all to harass people. And though it's likely been used on plenty of teenagers, almost none of the experience mentioned, firsthand, implied or otherwise, involved teenagers. Rod mentioned teenagers in an analogy he was making about (as it seemed to read (?)) necessary evils/acceptable loss--innocent teenagers in his example--in order to catch actual drug criminals by tricking people into surrendering their rights. Either people have rights or they don't and no officer should be allowed to trick people out of rights. And that is exactly what they do--no hyperbole there. Not sure what the "to frustrate teenagers" was about--reads like a strong strawman. No one implied that at all (?). "I'm gonna need to search your car", sometimes even making false hits, was a big part of this discussion, nothing about teenagers other than Rod making that one point about innocent teenagers perhaps being acceptable to harass--that's what it is when a cop doesn't smell weed but says they do--if it leads to done more drug arrests. Even he acknowledged that the actual drug dealers generally know their rights better than most and aren't fooled. This sounds more of the "impact the law-abiding citizens in the name of protections us from the non-law-abiding citizens who won't be as impacted". Even in that last post, was opining on the state of the world, not whether or not officers are wrong to enforce cannabis at all. Conversely, common sense dictates that cannabis is not heroine (don't tell our federal laws that, though...). It's not nearly as impactful as equally-consistent alcohol consumption in the physical effects and yet... That's not controversial. Fwiw, not a drinker or smoker. And personal opinion on cannabis has nothing to do with not agreeing with the smell argument. It's a strong-smelling substance and again, have personally known someone who got a DWI because his car smelled like it and he had a small quantity on him and didn't know how to defend himself from a predatory act so went down hard. He hadn't even smoked that day. Cannot remember this part for certain but want to say the impound fees for his vehicle were so high he let the beater car go entirely rather than trying to get back. This person had no criminal record and passed a field sobriety test. The officer decided--gray area--that he must have smoked because of the strong smell--and then it became his word against the officer's. This ish ruins lives. And no, him having an eighth on him and speeding does not mean he should have had his world rocked, which it did. No. Just because you haven't experienced this doesn't make it untrue/fabricated/impossible/probably misinterpreted. It's a loophole that is being abused. Hunt should never have been searched unless he failed a field sobriety test. That's where this convo began. Tl;dr Blocked jk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
big poppa pump Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 17 minutes ago, DawgX said: So are you okay with government surveillance programs because you have nothing to hide? I mean, if you have nothing to hide, then who cares if you have any privacy? I am not hip to these government surveillance programs of which you speak. Are they watching bad guys? Are they peeking in windows of innocent people? Obviously everyone is entitled to their privacy, but if you are pulled over (a tad different than government surveillance I would guess) and the officer has probable cause to search your vehicle, then so be it. Are there corrupt cops? I'm sure there are some. Do they break laws when conducting these searches? I would guess on occasion. It's fine to complain about being an innocent victim of police harassment, but most are trying to get bad guys off the streets. Marijuana is a drug last time I checked. Drugs= Drug dealers=guns=people getting killed. Cops should just kick back and do nothing I suppose. Let it be the wild wild west. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
candyman93 Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 31 minutes ago, DawgX said: So are you okay with government surveillance programs because you have nothing to hide? I mean, if you have nothing to hide, then who cares if you have any privacy? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mind Character Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 5 hours ago, pnies20 said: They’re always going to “smell marijuana” makes it pretty Clear what your stance is as well as your allusion to riding around with people trying to hide weed in their car. Make the argument you’re too scared to make or stop talking about things you don’t know anything about. I know that will be hard because it LITERALLY sounds like your life’s work to do so. Enlighten me about police misconduct related to narcotic searches. I beg you. Lol. I'm neither scared nor offended by history or reality. I see that it makes you uncomfortable though. And I already made the arguments, " 2.) I did however make the claim that whether or not they actually did "smell marijuana" is not relevant as "smelling marijuana" amongst other things always serves as routine pretense for search and seizure justification, and that Kareem must know that and wisely adjust accordingly. Hence the, "they're always going to 'smell marijuana," line previously stated." Therefore, "they're always going to smell weed," clearly points to the central point of said argument that the pretense of "smelling weed" is a common practice "always" justification for search and seizure especially in particular situations. I have police officers in my family that would never refute that statement, and anyone in law enforcement who's honest knows that there's a long laundry list of search and seizure justifications that are used in all kinds of situations. You still not processing and comprehending basic statements likely as a result of emotionality or defensiveness If a person was open to disagreements and good discussion, a discussion about misconduct reviews, why the wall/culture of silence makes such infrequent misconduct reviews historically amount to nothing, and what many respected/trusted whistle-blowers and even still on-duty officers have to say about the misconduct review process and the various social pressures that exists to maintain impunity of those that commit misconduct would actually be a worthwhile discussion elsewhere. You're not the type that would enjoy such a discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NudeTayne Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, pnies20 said: Thankfully I have no idea what mindcharacter is saying because he’s blocked He actually hasn't commented at all since that last one. Might as well take him off Iggy 😂😈🔥. 1 hour ago, big poppa pump said: And whilst Tayne and Mind rail about the legality/illegality of searches, they will be the first to call the police when a precarious situation arises. For all the complaining of the personal injustices suffered as an innocent party, guns and drugs are being taken off the streets with these so-called shady stops. If Tayne is as relaxed, and chill as he portrays, a stop by the police should not affect his nature. Innocent people have nothing to hide. One should welcome the minor inconvenience, knowing that there will be a bad guy or 2 (one that could possibly harm Tayne) taken off the street in a similar manner. All-time poor take. Another anecdote that you and brownsman can assume is made up 🤷♂️...a friend got a DWI for his car smelling and having an eighth on him. They impounded his car and he couldn't afford the fees if remember correctly, the car was only worth a couple grand, so he just lost the car too. Oh, and he hadn't smoked that day and it was the officer's word against his. He was trusting and admitted he had that eighth after the officer honey-tongued him. He had no criminal record. Now this hangs over him and has cost $10k or so. Nah. You'd feel different if it happened to you or someone you know. No way on the means justifying the end. This could have very easily been the story with Hunt. Sure, he had money so probably could have won in court (maybe?), but he'd probably be severely punished by the league and in future earnings, even though his only discernible crime was speeding (and possession if they wanted to go after that). Sure, the story ended with a hero cop allowing him not to have his life ruined over weed by just writing the speeding ticket after searching...🤦♂️. Like, do folks realize that a different cop or an extra gram may have fried the dude? This isn't a criticism of policy officers but of policy that allows that 1% (with a badge and a gun) to do serious harm, as well as systems that are against the people to extort--will happily go with Mind if he's the only one not afraid to take the PR hit for speaking the truth. This behavior is what makes people get tight around cops and distrust them as much as the criminals they are supposed to be protecting us from. Absolutely will keep calling the police when prudent and also have fail-safes in order such as right to own a firearm in California (for now?). tl;dr anyone is welcome to use that iggy button if they really want to--liberty. (not referring to the joke pines made; he can't quit Tayne) Edited January 25, 2020 by NudeTayne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NudeTayne Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 1 hour ago, big poppa pump said: please stop writing mind character sized posts. It's unbecoming...extends rainbow hand Can't stay mad at you, you big lug. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DawgX Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 23 minutes ago, big poppa pump said: I am not hip to these government surveillance programs of which you speak. Are they watching bad guys? Are they peeking in windows of innocent people? Obviously everyone is entitled to their privacy, but if you are pulled over (a tad different than government surveillance I would guess) and the officer has probable cause to search your vehicle, then so be it. Are there corrupt cops? I'm sure there are some. Do they break laws when conducting these searches? I would guess on occasion. It's fine to complain about being an innocent victim of police harassment, but most are trying to get bad guys off the streets. Marijuana is a drug last time I checked. Drugs= Drug dealers=guns=people getting killed. Cops should just kick back and do nothing I suppose. Let it be the wild wild west. They can be watching anyone. Sure, they'll catch bad guys in the process, while violating everyone's right to privacy. Maybe it's just me, but I'd rather have freedom and my civil liberties not being violated rather than being a little safer. Couldn't a cop just make up an excuse to say they had probable cause? I'm not saying most cops would do that or if that happens often or not, but it'd be naive to think it never happens. I'm not even disagreeing with other things that you're saying. I think most cops are good people who mean well and they have an extremely tough job - especially in dangerous cities. Most cops I've met and known have been really good people - I can only think of one bad experience I had with a cop. So my point isn't about being anti-cop by any means, cause I am not. it's more about some of the laws themselves and the people who make them that I have issues with. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mind Character Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, big poppa pump said: drugs are being taken off the streets with these so-called shady stops. What the "Opioid Epidemic" has proven is that the most addictive drugs that make their way to the "street" and breakdown people and communities didn't get there by way of some shady, bad "Walter White Breaking Bad" types of people per se, but instead through Corporate pharmaceutical profit based decisions of people in suits and ties. Most of those people avoid any and all punishment, the few that do go to "prison" resorts or get slapped on the wrist while people that suffer with drug addiction are left to rot in cages for various periods of time and suffer more jail/prison related traumas that only aggravate their dependency on drugs. As a society we don't call for stopping those callous drug profiteers in their cars, arresting them, and putting them in jail in order to "get the drugs off the streets." And we don't see them as the stereotype in our minds of "bad guy." There's a growing understanding in this country that people that do opioids are suffering and that the solution isn't throwing them all in jail/prison but instead solutions to help them and their communities get healthy. In the past and still presently, that understanding doesn't make it's way to marijuana dependent users who are suffering their own ills. 2 hours ago, big poppa pump said: knowing that there will be a bad guy or 2 taken off the street in a similar manner. This country has the largest prison population of any country on planet earth including China despite China being 4x as large. That's because we largely accept myths of "people arrested and in jail/prisons are bad guys/people." The reality of it is the only way to get to such a large prison/jail population relative to other places on earth is that the vast majority of those people placed in cages for years on end are humans that engaged in non-violent drug offenses many of which were related the plant marijuana. There's a history to why such laws were put and place and when and why the human cage populations boomed. There's also a record of what the people that engineered and implemented such laws really believed were their true motivations and rationale behind such laws, and in their own private words and conversations such laws and procedures were not to make society safer for citizens but instead crafted for other population control reasons. Edited January 25, 2020 by Mind Character Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mind Character Posted January 25, 2020 Share Posted January 25, 2020 6 hours ago, pnies20 said: I did it. I finally did it and It feels So good. .block - mindcharacter 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts