503
Comments (80)
sorted by:
19
stonepony 19 points ago +21 / -2

Terrorist moron didn't realize her phone was on selphie mode while she was fake screaming.

7
LibertarianWalkz 7 points ago +7 / -0

Was this from Florida?

7
PeaceThroughStrength 7 points ago +7 / -0

Tallahassee, State Capitol.

Fucking FSU morons

5
Shadow-Band 5 points ago +21 / -16

The cops are doing the right thing here by taking control of the situation. For all we know he was released after this. If you have info that this guy was charged with a crime then post it and I’ll criticize law enforcement with you.

17
stonepony 17 points ago +22 / -5

The cops are doing the right thing by arresting innocent people who were just attacked by a mob of terrorists?

Hope he files a lawsuit for this totally baseless arrest.

6
Shadow-Band 6 points ago +16 / -10

There’s a difference between being arrested and being detained. The cops are following procedure here, all they know is what they see, and what they see is a guy with a gun and a crowd of rowdy people. They took control of the situation by taking the man into custody to keep everyone from possibly being shot.

Again, if you have proof that he was arrested and charged, then post it and I will be upset with you.

9
deleted 9 points ago +12 / -3
2
Shadow-Band 2 points ago +7 / -5

I know. Everyone’s blood is pumping hard tonight after seeing all the antifa knockouts and the news breaking about BLM possibly killing one of our guys.

1
stonepony 1 point ago +1 / -0

He's correct, yeah. There is a difference between arrest and detention.

And neither were justified in this instance. You can lick boots as much as you want. The fact that I respect our rights as Americans doesn't mean I'm being dramatic. The fact that you have no problem with a terrorist supporting officer arresting someone for the crime of being attacked by terrorists, makes you a boot licking cuck.

0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
9
stonepony 9 points ago +15 / -6

Sorry, Americans have rights. That includes the right to not be detained without cause. Being attacked by terrorists is not probable cause. And you don't get to arrest people because you didn't see something. Having a gun and defending yourself is not illegal.

The terrorists that they watched attacking this man, committed crimes.

You realize the law is actually all there in writing and you don't have to play guessing games about it? You don't get to arrest or detain anybody without specific reasonable articulable suspicion of a crime. That a crime has happened, is happening, or is about to happen.

Defending yourself from a violent mob of terrorists, is not a crime.

3
Tintenfass 3 points ago +5 / -2

The cops only saw the brandishing of a firearm in public. There's your violation and probable cause for arrest.

They probably didn't see the scuffle leading up to it. This will get sorted out.

3
Shadow-Band 3 points ago +10 / -7

Sure buddy, if you say so. You clearly don’t understand how law enforcement operates. Please post if you find info showing that this guy was charged with a crime. Have a good night.

-2
stonepony -2 points ago +7 / -9

You clearly don't understand what laws or rights are.

But it's okay. That's why police departments have liability insurance. So they can pay settlements for these bogus arrests.

You're cheerleading for terrorist supporters on the wrong website.

3
deleted 3 points ago +5 / -2
5
stonepony 5 points ago +7 / -2

Actually their goal is to enforce the law. That's why they're called law enforcement. And that's why they took an oath to that effect.

When they watch terrorists jump someone, and not arrest the terrorists, and then arrest the victim at gun point, they've broken that oath.

Period. People have rights. Like it or not.

2
xopi 2 points ago +2 / -0

Liability insurance. That's a weird way of spelling taxpayer money

1
stonepony 1 point ago +1 / -0

I agree. These cops who watched someone being attacked, and then arrested the victim, should lose their qualified immunity and they should have to cover the cost of the lawsuit.

1
YoJimbo 1 point ago +4 / -3

He clearly does undertstand, And you don't. There is a difference between detention and arrest. You can legally and constitutionally be detained without arrest, without your rights being violated. You really should read the supreme court rulings on "Graham v Connor" and "Terry v Ohio". It is moronic to think that cops will respond to a small mob first while leaving the civilian pointing a gun at another civilian to handle later or resolve itself.

1
stonepony 1 point ago +1 / -0

They can if they have cause. I'm familiar with the law.

You have to have RAS to justify a Terry stop.

You actually do have basic rights in America. They're important. You should learn about them.

2
HighVoltage [S] 2 points ago +3 / -1

Exactly.

0
HuggableBear 0 points ago +1 / -1

That includes the right to not be detained without cause.

There was cause, genius. He was pointing a gun at another person. It's the cops' job to put a stop to that, no matter the circumstances.

0
stonepony 0 points ago +1 / -1

No, genius. Probable cause refers to suspicion of a crime. It's not a crime to defend yourself against the terrorists that you're struggling to support. The only crime they witnessed, was terrorists attacking someone. And they allowed that crime.

Your feelings, are not the law. They arrested the innocent victim, to support the terrorists.

0
HuggableBear 0 points ago +1 / -1

Again, you don't have the first fucking clue what you're talking about.

Detention and arrest are not the same thing and there is no requirement for probable cause in detention, only arrest.

If that weren't the case, cops would be completely unable to control any situation without letting it play out to so who is the aggressor. In order to allow them to act immediately to protect people, they are allowed to detain anyone, for any reason or none, for up to 24 or 48 hours depending on the state, while they gain control of the situation and secure the crime scene.

Having a gun in your hand and pointed at another human is good cause to be detained. GTFO of here with your bullshit. You don't get to point a gun at someone and expect the cops to go "Nah bro, it's okay, we trust you." It doesn't matter what the circumstances are, once you point a gun at another person, you are a threat to someone they are charged to protect and you will be treated like one.

If you don't like it, tell it to the judge later.

-1
stonepony -1 points ago +1 / -2

"they are allowed to detain anyone, for any reason or none"

You don't have the first clue what you're blabbering about.

Sorry boot licker, but the silly nonsense that you're pulling out of your ass, isn't based on anything real.

RAS. Look it up and stop embarrassing yourself.

5
deleted 5 points ago +8 / -3
1
Shadow-Band 1 point ago +5 / -4

I missed the part of the clip where he was put into a squad car and driven anywhere. You’re making assumptions on things that you don’t know. Once again, if you or anyone else have proof that this guy was in fact ARRESTED, then post it.

0
stonepony 0 points ago +1 / -1

Doesn't matter boot licker. Sorry. Americans have the right to defend themselves against your violent terrorist peaceful protesters.

You don't have the right to detain someone for defending themselves. And free Americans don't need your boot licker permission to go about their business without being unlawfully detained by your terrorist supporting police officers.

5
Trump4a3rdTerm 5 points ago +5 / -0

🤡🌎

4
deleted 4 points ago +5 / -1
2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
Dialectic 2 points ago +3 / -1

Well, dude pointed his weapon at an officer and he wasn't blown away. So that's something. Something is off with this situation.

6
HuggableBear 6 points ago +6 / -0

Isn't it amazing how when he saw it was a cop and was told to drop it and get down, he did exactly that and didn't get blown away?

It's almost like cops don't actually want to kill anyone.

3
Dialectic 3 points ago +3 / -0

I get your point, but it’s not advisable to muzzle flash a cop if you value your life

1
HuggableBear 1 point ago +1 / -0

True, but you have to recognize it's a cop first, yeah? All he saw was someone coming toward him. As soon as he saw it was a cop he dropped it and got down with his hands behind his back. He knew as soon as he drew his gun that he would be in cuffs when the cops got there, he's cool with it and waiting, he just had to stay alert until that happened. Note that he has his hands in the small of his back immediately and staying there despite not having cuffs or even a cop in contact with him. He's waiting patiently.

The cops know who's in the wrong here but they still have to control the situation. This guy is cooperating and they don't appear to be too concerned with wrestling him to the ground or anything.

1
Dialectic 1 point ago +1 / -0

Again, I get the point lol. But it’s really advisable to be sure to not muzzle flash a cop, ever

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
1
SuperDuperHypersonic 1 point ago +1 / -0

even their uniforms look like womens clothing

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
-10
deleted -10 points ago +6 / -16
4
TheCynicalMimic 4 points ago +5 / -1

Go back to reddit commie fag

-3
deleted -3 points ago +1 / -4
5
nanowerx 5 points ago +6 / -1

Notice how the guy in the video immediately got on the ground, dropped his weapon and put his hands behind his back. He didnt try to fight the cops, he didnt attempt to grab anyone's weapon.

You're criminal friends could learn a thing or two from the Patriot in this video.

-2
deleted -2 points ago +1 / -3
-13
divine32 -13 points ago +1 / -14

i don't think that guy pulling a gun was too smart

18
HighVoltage [S] 18 points ago +20 / -2

You don't think he might have felt a little threatened?

Ah, fuck it. You're right. Much better to let the degenerates kill us than to ever take a stand for ourselves.

13
Food4thought 13 points ago +13 / -0

If you're getting attacked and they go for your gun... It's probably better to shoot them than to just pull it out.

3
HighVoltage [S] 3 points ago +3 / -0

That would have been what he needed to do if the gun didn't get them to back off.

Amazing that the "conservatives" can be such fucking cucks.

6
stonepony 6 points ago +6 / -0

Smarter than Reginald Denny.

You're free to do the "smart" thing and get your brains smashed out. I won't be.

0
Tintenfass 0 points ago +1 / -1

So you just admitted you are going to do the "un-smart" thing. You have a right to remain silent.

1
stonepony 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's called sarcasm. Letting terrorists smash your brains out is not the smart thing to do. He did the smart thing. You're confused.

Pretending those officers teleported in suddenly from nowhere without seeing anything but someone with a gun, is completely retarded.

0
Tintenfass 0 points ago +1 / -1

You have the right to remain silent.

1
stonepony 1 point ago +1 / -0

And you have the right to lick boots.

Whereas I respect the basic rights that Americans enjoy.

1
Tintenfass 1 point ago +1 / -0

And you have the right to lick boots.

I will not take up your habits, even if it is boot-licking.

1
stonepony 1 point ago +1 / -0

Arguing like a libtwit buddy...

I'm the one who doesn't lick boots. You're the one on his knees explaining that he doesn't need rights.

1
HuggableBear 1 point ago +1 / -0

There's a reason he put "smart" in quotes, you monumental retard.

1
Tintenfass 1 point ago +1 / -0

There is a reason I put "un-smart" in quotes, you monumental retard.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0