HardOCP News
[H] News
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
See, that’s what I get for opening my mouth earlier about “headline of the day.” As soon as I said that, this headline popped up talking about zombies winning a lawsuit. 
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Minneapolis Will Pay $165,000 to Zombies
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
LeninGHOLA
Vladimir Hayt
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2009
- Messages
- 18,416
Thank the Lord, someone is still looking for those WMD's!
locsplitter
Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2009
- Messages
- 595
Where's my chainsaw!?
faugusztin
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2008
- Messages
- 2,668
@bfellow: That is the header for next part of the article (continuing on page 2).
Phoenix333
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Nov 27, 2009
- Messages
- 3,510
I suppose it's a good thing that nobody mistook them for real zombies and shot them instead?
instead?Unexploded
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 13, 2005
- Messages
- 265
"So, what are you in for?"
"Brainnnnnssss!"
"Brainnnnnssss!"
![[Spectre]](https://cdn.hardforum.com/data/avatars/m/89/89728.jpg?1455675927){kind=avatar}
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2004
- Messages
- 22,791
Got to love the government and their genius moves....WMD's...ha.
Oh yeah, the lawyer thinks the settlement is good.
He gets his $49,5000 and the 7 plaintiffs split the rest, giving them each a whopping $16,500.
I think they had a legitimate beef, and the way they treated the guy with the prosthetic leg is unbelievable, but he comes of as a bit of a drama queen.
The words?
They take your leg, but it's what one cop said that's "seared" in your mind?!
He gets his $49,5000 and the 7 plaintiffs split the rest, giving them each a whopping $16,500.
I think they had a legitimate beef, and the way they treated the guy with the prosthetic leg is unbelievable, but he comes of as a bit of a drama queen.
The words?
They take your leg, but it's what one cop said that's "seared" in your mind?!
Don't forget it was "traumatizing" too lol
Sounds more like they were trying to get arrested by behaving like idiots.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2004
- Messages
- 22,791
I think the fact that they learned that the cops "didn't care about their constitutional rights" is actually something that should be seared into their and everyone's mind as they are true. The government and the police DO NOT care about your constitutional rights. They only care about power, money, and making an arrest. It is always important to know that when dealing with them.
While I agree that there are far too many in the government that fit your characterization, it's a bit of a stretch to paint ALL cops and ALL of government with the same brush.
Besides, this is Minnesota; practically the birthplace of socialism in this country; what else would you expect?....
I'll remember that the next time the police put themselves in harm's way by rushing to my house to protect us from someone trying to jimmy our bedroom window open in the middle of the night. The guy should be thanking the cops too because the moment he crossed the threshold I was filling him with an entire magazine of 9mm's. Unfortunately he got spooked when the pulled up and since I couldn't see enough to identify him they had to let him go free. That "corrupt and power hungry" cop was nice enough to organize a few off duty police to keep an eye on the house and my family the next night when I while I was out of town. Little did I know ALL of them were using it as an opportunity to stake out my house and build a strategy to violate my constitutional rights
It's funny how the people who are most vocal about corrupt police are the first ones to cry for their help.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2004
- Messages
- 22,791
While I agree that there are far too many in the government that fit your characterization, it's a bit of a stretch to paint ALL cops and ALL of government with the same brush.
Besides, this is Minnesota; practically the birthplace of socialism in this country; what else would you expect?....
I'll remember that the next time the police put themselves in harm's way by rushing to my house to protect us from someone trying to jimmy our bedroom window open in the middle of the night. The guy should be thanking the cops too because the moment he crossed the threshold I was filling him with an entire magazine of 9mm's. Unfortunately he got spooked when the pulled up and since I couldn't see enough to identify him they had to let him go free. That "corrupt and power hungry" cop was nice enough to organize a few off duty police to keep an eye on the house and my family the next night when I while I was out of town. Little did I know ALL of them were using it as an opportunity to stake out my house and build a strategy to violate my constitutional rights
It's funny how the people who are most vocal about corrupt police are the first ones to cry for their help.
Your example has nothing to do with what was being discussed nor does your red herring about corruption. Corruption is not the thrust nor text of my post. My post simply has to do with the way the system works. You will notice that the Bill of Rights exists because it is necessary to provide the people with a method of restraint upon the government because governments by nature become tyrannical and repressive of the people. Without the Bill of Rights, and even with it due to people ceding their rights, the government can do whatever they want to the people and the people serve only as a source of funds for the expansion of governmental power rather than the government existing to serve the people's needs. The police powers of the government provide the needed coercion for this compliance and revenue production.
The bottom line is the government and the police do not have any regard for your rights until you are able to assert them through the courts, and then they still don't really they just get caught violating them. If they did then you would not have stories such as those presented here. The police and the government operate by the premise of paying off the few victims who fight back after the fact rather than preventing abuses before the fact and serving rather than ruling. The unfortunate part, and the reason they do it is, they use our money to pay us off after violating our rights. There is no real punishment nor reason for the government and police to act responsibly as institutions due to the weakening of the people's rights and power over the last 140 years.
It is not the police's job to "prevent" abuses and it never has been. If there was no real punishment for the government or courts then we wouldn't be able to bring them up on criminal charges, fortunately we can.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2004
- Messages
- 22,791
It most certainly is supposed to be the job of the police to prevent abuses by the police when carrying out their duty to serve the people rather than abusing peoples rights and just paying off the few squeaky wheels as they do now. They just don't actually do it quite often. The shield shields and the people suffer for that and the assumption of our legal system that an officer or police department is an expert and an unimpeachable witness.
Speaking to your assertion about bringing the "government" up on criminal charges. Sovereign Immunity, with very few narrowly defined exceptions, prevents you from suing the government without the governments waiving its Sovereign Immunity and you can't press charges against say the State of Florida as you seem to imagine. There quite simply is no real punishment under the legal system for the government or police as institutions and even under the stripping doctrine requires one branch of the government to rule against another of their own volition before you can sue and individual. Good luck with that, particular with the police as stated above.
HardOCP News
[H] News
- Joined
- Dec 31, 1969
- Messages
- 0
Brrraaaaiiiiiiinnnnnsssssss!
You do realize that you can't bring police up on criminal charges right?
Civil charges, sure, but criminal, not so much. All you can really do is file a complaint and hope the local IA and DA, who have vested interest in not making the police look bad, file charges. Don't bet on it though.
That is absolutely not true, police are brought up on criminal charges every day. Cops and the government aren't against the law....that's why police and senators are sitting in jail as we speak but it's something conspiracy theorists and government haters refuse to believe. If a police officer comes to my house on a call and thinks my wife looks good enough to sexually assault you're saying I can't bring criminal charges against him? Thank God you and Paul are wrong.
http://www.nytimes.com/learning/general/onthisday/big/0303.html
"Mr. Thornburgh said that over the past three years the Civil Rights Division had brought, criminal charges against 98 law-enforcement officials."
Completely agree... this sets a terrible precedent if real zombies are involved.
Cop: "I'd shoot.. but they might sue"
Zombie: "Braaaaains!"
Cop: "Can I misconstrue that as a threat? no.. moving too slow.. wait.. can I see your ID?"
Zombie: "Braaaaains!"
Cop: "Is he moving toward me to offer ID.. damn.. can't tell.. if he needs medical help I'm even more screwed.. decisions.... "
Zombie: "Braaaaains!"
Cop: "Umm.. sir.. do you need medical attention.. i've been given.. oh god! gargle"
Zombie: "Nomnomnomnom"
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2004
- Messages
- 22,791
Actually, we aren't and I explained why. I will repeat it for you again since you were unable to read it before.
Speaking to your assertion about bringing the "government" up on criminal charges. Sovereign Immunity, with very few narrowly defined exceptions, prevents you from suing the government without the governments waiving its Sovereign Immunity and you can't press charges against say the State of Florida as you seem to imagine. There quite simply is no real punishment under the legal system for the government or police as institutions and even under the stripping doctrine requires one branch of the government to rule against another of their own volition before you can sue and individual. Good luck with that, particular with the police as stated above.
Further your example is another logical fallacy and has nothing to do with the topic at hand of the government and police violating your civil rights. Please, in the future, refrain from making such logical fallacies and stick with the subject at hand.
I'm just posting a link and a real world example of police being brought up on criminal charges after being told that they can't. People like you are impossible to argue with and I have better things to do with my time. Good luck believing that your important enough for the Government to go out of its way to screw.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2004
- Messages
- 22,791
Yes arguing the wrong side of a point is difficult for you and no you weren't just posting a link you were making an assertion with your example in your text of an event outside of the polices job was the same as the violation of ones civil rights, which is a logical fallacy. Further, no one said they can't sue, had you read what I wrote not what you wanted to read. Rather, I explained why it is difficult (to almost impossible) to do so and why it is shamefully uncommon relative to the amount of violations that occur.
No one said that they were "important enough for the Government to go out of its way to screw" except for you now, this is another logical fallacy. If you can not discuss the point without using logical fallacies, and unrelated points such as you have here then you are best not attempting to address the subject. The concepts of Sovereign Immunity and the stripping doctrine are well established legal principles that are specifically structured to protect the government and the police structure as much as possible from the people receiving redress of their grievances as would be possible against other parties. These principles are further manipulated by both in large numbers of cases as has been well documented in civil rights cases across the country (particularly in the south) and overcoming the qualified immunity defense when the government is trying one of their own agents is difficult at best.
First of all, you are wrong. Sovereign immunity applies to federal and state organizations, not to local governments. So suing the state highway patrol is a completely different matter from suing your local police department (which is what the article is about).
Second, Blown 89 posted a link clearly discussing the large numbers of law enforcement officers that are investigated specifically in regard to to their actions in their duty. You offered nothing other than your own words. So the strength of the argument is well with Blown 89. (I'm just going to skip all of the other nonsense.)
Third, corruption and misuse of power is rampant in law enforcement agencies. But the reasons for this are far more varied and complex than could be described in a small paragraph. Treating it as a simple problem (with a simple solution) it not going to get anyone anywhere useful.
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2004
- Messages
- 22,791
I am sorry but you are quite simply wrong in this state as it is part of the state constitution (which has had to be amended in order to allow suits in certain situations) and it covers the county/local governments.
Let me help in case you can't find the SCLC, The Southern Poverty Law Center, or the ACLU.....www.google.com
Civil Rights violations and their cover-ups in the legal systems of the US have a long documented history.
No one said they weren't. I pointed out the biggest reasons. When solving problems you normally want to start with the biggest reasons and work from there.