unjonharley wrote:Vert, I'm again calling bull shit.
Any of these story of bad cops are hear say.. Find some proof and truth before you start spreading more bull shit..
Very few ticket are handed out on the playa.. Those that are are with drugs in hand.. With some poor shmuck crying about losing the game he wanted to play with the law.. He made an informed choice and it was a bad one..
THere are enough fools out there that a law man need not do anything wrong.. If there is one, Where can I find the written complaint.. How any are there? Compared to how many people at BM.. How many law enforcement are on the playa.. ON you I call Bullshit..
I do have proof. This is not third-person heresay. I am a witness to several of the incidents mentioned in previously. And in case you've forgotten, most of them are NOT drug related LEO harassment cases.
How can I define this more clearly for you?
The active keyword here is NON-DRUG RELATED...May I repeat, I said there were cases where NO DRUGS WERE INVOLVED. Such as our campmates friend picking up a wrapper off the ground, putting it in his pocket and getting pounced on by a LEO with "WHAT DID YOU PUT YOUR POCKET?!! SHOW ME WHATS IN YOUR HAND." In case you've never read it, this clearly violates the Fourth Amendment. WHAT DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND? SERIOUSLY?
You can keep on drumming your same old tune of how the police are so innocent and absolutely never cross the line in BRC. That's exactly why we absolutely NEVER
hear of bad LEO behavior on ePlaya. ON you, Unjon Harley, I call Bullshit!
Honestly, I haved enjoyed some of the things you post in other discussions, but if you keep wasting my time with your irrational cops-good, burner-bad gibberish...you're a few postings away from *plonk
Unjon Harley, now that I've answered your question. Please answer this for me...what kinds of federally controlled substances have you consumed to have earned the qualifications to work in drug rehab for 40 years?
The first hit changes you..
What the hell do you think drugs put in controlled doses for.
Your playing in my ballpark now..
Been around drug rehab for over forty years...
Just to clarify, you're right drugs ARE bad. They have hurt people, families, and communities. I doubt anyone here is oblivious enough to argue that. However, drugs have also helped out a lot of people with physical and mental medical conditions. Unjon Harley, do you agree with this fact? Sure consuming controlled substances is illegal by federal and some states laws. We all know that, too. But just as the people who chose to continue drinking alcohol during the Prohibition days, some adults still resitst government "parenting" laws put into place under the propaganda disguise of protecting the people. And some have decided the medical benefits exceed the risks. Honestly, I don't need to. But that's my decision. I am fine on my own with some good people, good vibes, and good music. I am fine with or without caffeine. Some years I don't even have a beer or cocktail the entire week. But that's me. It's a personal choice to every individual to decide for themselves. However, if I ever choose to break any law. I'm a f'n big boy and will accept the consequences thereof. However, if I am not breaking a law in BRC, if there isn't reasonable cause to search my person and a LEO approaches me for picking up a piece of trash and demands to see whats in my pockets, this act would violate the laws established by our founding fathers to protect the people from the unjust searches by the state. And this is EXACTLY what I saw. Not only that, unless my behavior leads a LEO to think I am a suspected terrorist, I believe many of the observed behaviors of LEOs in BRC are forms of profiling, and may violate the federal guidelines for observing and detaining.
A portion of the Constitutional framework of the Anti-Racial Profiling Ban
"[T]he Constitution prohibits selective enforcement of the law based on considerations such as race." When v. United States, 517 U.S. 806, 813 (1996). Thus, for example, the decision of federal prosecutors "whether to prosecute may not be based on 'an unjustifiable standard such as race, religion, or other arbitrary classification.'" (4) United States v. Armstrong, 517 U.S. 456, 464 (1996)...
If this is not PROOF enough for you...well...you know what you can do...
Have a nice day!
I AM FINISHED
DISCUSSING THIS TOPIC WITH YOU.
Let's just save ourselves a whole lot of time and agree to disagree
I'm not going to convince you of my point.
And you're not going to convince me my eyes lied.
Maybe we can agree on something in another thread someday, afterall we are both burners.
But it is surely NOT
going to happen in this thread! Not today! Not EVER!