Rider harassment?

[Rogue Hawk]

I do understand we only get his side of the story. But still, it's seems disturbing me that the police essentially send in a SWAT team to stop one guy for lane cutting.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3EXFLKqGeY

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

I do understand we only get his side of the story. But still, it's seems disturbing me that the police essentially send in a SWAT team to stop one guy for lane cutting.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3EXFLKqGeY
You are correct it's only one side of the story ....Well I was an LEO for 37 years .... made thousands of traffic stops and had this occur 100 plus times ..... It would take me at least an hour of typing to cover all the Bikers BS about this, Here's just one point " How many times did the Biker ask the officer how and why the Stop was made " ...I counted seven..... The biker is swimming in ATTITUDE and Passively resisting all efforts by the officer to do the Task at hand....Zero co-operation ..... If you were the officer how would you like to be treated ????? ....... just a different prospective ...... Mike :thumbup:...........PS, I'm the kind of Cop who thinks BAD Cops should get twice the punishment for wrong doing ..... Because they took an Oath not to be Nasty or worse CROOKED

[Cruzr Joe]

One side of the story, seems like there is more to it

Cruzr Joe

[Rogue Hawk]

You are correct it's only one side of the story ....Well I was an LEO for 37 years .... made thousands of traffic stops and had this occur 100 plus times ..... It would take me at least an hour of typing to cover all the Bikers BS about this, Here's just one point " How many times did the Biker ask the officer how and why the Stop was made " ...I counted seven..... The biker is swimming in ATTITUDE and Passively resisting all efforts by the officer to do the Task at hand....Zero co-operation ..... If you were the officer how would you like to be treated ????? ....... just a different prospective ...... Mike :thumbup:...........PS, I'm the kind of Cop who thinks BAD Cops should twice the punishment for wrong doing ..... Because they took an Oath not to be Nasty or worse CROOKED

This is why I posted this, to read other's assessment of what could have happened. To the untrained eye (mine) the impression can be made the cops where too aggressive.

[kep-up]

I think they stopped him for sh==s and giggles.

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

This is why I posted this, to read other's assessment of what could have happened. To the untrained eye (mine) the impression can be made the cops where too aggressive.
" aggressive " ..... where in the video ( give the time/s please ) were any of the Cops acted " aggressive " .... I'm NOT...trying to start a pissing contest but I'm a FACT freak ......Mike :thumbup:

[ByeSpyder]

I am on the cops side. He made unsafe lane changes. He was obviously speeding. Can't tell if he didn't use his blinker but assume that because his lane changes were much to abrupt. He is a buttwipe and deserves to be ticketed for every violation. He not only puts himself at risk but every other biker - most of whom do not ride this way. I don't want to be run over by some road rager because this idiot drives like a moron and pisses everybody else off.

[SPECTACUALR SPIDERMAN]

What i see is they stopped him yet didn't give him a ticket so it does make me wonder, WHY?

[Bob Denman]

Ride like an idiot, and you put yourself in the cross-hairs... :dontknow:
Question: is lane-splitting legal in the State where this happened?

[Blue Star]

Ride like an idiot, and you put yourself in the cross-hairs... :dontknow:
Question: is lane-splitting legal in the State where this happened?

Legal in California, but don't know about New York.

[pegasus1300]

Ride like an idiot, and you put yourself in the cross-hairs... :dontknow:
Question: is lane-splitting legal in the State where this happened?

to the best of my knowledge lane splitting is only legal in California

[ByeSpyder]

I do understand we only get his side of the story. But still, it's seems disturbing me that the police essentially send in a SWAT team to stop one guy for lane cutting.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3EXFLKqGeY

That is NOT a SWAT team and he was guilty of more than just land cutting.

[ByeSpyder]

Ride like an idiot, and you put yourself in the cross-hairs... :dontknow:
Question: is lane-splitting legal in the State where this happened?

He didn't lane split until he pulled up beside that red car and was stopped by the cops. He did change lanes unsafely multiple times though.

[ByeSpyder]

The video begins with an overtype which says this ride is "chill" compared to his regular rides. If that is indeed true we will be reading his obit shortly......and hopefully before he takes an innocent person with him.

[Bob Denman]

He didn't lane split until he pulled up beside that red car and was stopped by the cops. He did change lanes unsafely multiple times though.
:agree:… But that's exactly what the LEOs saw, when they arrived. :dontknow:
There was a pretty good reason for him pulling up alongside the car; but the preponderance of his actions were pointing toward behaviors that aren't appreciated on the street.

[C. Lee]

We certainly aren't seeing the whole story with this video. My first impressions of this video is profiling by the police but Im sure there's more to the story. Chris

[johnsimion]

" aggressive " ..... where in the video ( give the time/s please ) were any of the Cops acted " aggressive " .... I'm NOT...trying to start a pissing contest but I'm a FACT freak ......Mike :thumbup:

More "odd" than "aggressive" IMO. The only "aggressive" I see is when the cop car suddenly pulled across several lanes of traffic and squealed the brakes. That seemed both unnecessary, dangerous to other traffic, and certainly a huge inconvenience to everybody else. Also, for the cop car to have caught up with him while (allegedly) following him like this, it seems pretty obvious that the cops had to have been doing the exact same things the motorcyclist was doing (unsafe lane changes) and yet they didn't even have the lights and flashers going. Why not just turn on the flashers and sirens way back so others would move out of the way and they could make a safe stop? Or call in another car to make the stop? Then there was the fact they didn't give him a ticket after all that. Like others, I agree that his riding seemed to violate several laws. Virtually an emergency stop and no ticket? That makes no sense.

[Easy Rider]

He is a buttwipe and deserves to be ticketed for every violation.

Unless maybe it is a local policy, a LEO is not legally required to listen or pay attention to ANYTHING a person has to say before, during or after an arrest.....except maybe a request for medical treatment.

In my opinion, anybody who is uncooperative should be handcuffed, put in the squad and transported to jail or a ticket written....without the LEO engaging in any conversation more than legally required.

In most cases, you get what you deserve.

[Grandpot]

We certainly aren't seeing the whole story with this video. My first impressions of this video is profiling by the police but Im sure there's more to the story. Chris

Of course it was profiling. The police were profiling an unsafe driver! It's call Tactical Profiling and has nothing to do with race.

[ByeSpyder]

More "odd" than "aggressive" IMO. The only "aggressive" I see is when the cop car suddenly pulled across several lanes of traffic and squealed the brakes. That seemed both unnecessary, dangerous to other traffic, and certainly a huge inconvenience to everybody else. Also, for the cop car to have caught up with him while (allegedly) following him like this, it seems pretty obvious that the cops had to have been doing the exact same things the motorcyclist was doing (unsafe lane changes) and yet they didn't even have the lights and flashers going. Why not just turn on the flashers and sirens way back so others would move out of the way and they could make a safe stop? Or call in another car to make the stop? Then there was the fact they didn't give him a ticket after all that. Like others, I agree that his riding seemed to violate several laws. Virtually an emergency stop and no ticket? That makes no sense.

How many times have you seen video of a biker just running away when a cop tries pulling them over? I think this particular stop was to prevent that from happening as the biker was trapped between civilians on both sides and the cop car in front.

And we don't know if the undercover cop car had lights or siren (other than neither could be seen or heard when they pulled up). And do we know they didn't give the biker a ticket? My video hit the place where the biker took off his gloves and then began repeating so I can't say for sure.

[Bob Denman]

:agree: The tactics used by the LEOs were sound... :thumbup:

[Rogue Hawk]

" aggressive " ..... where in the video ( give the time/s please ) were any of the Cops acted " aggressive " .... I'm NOT...trying to start a pissing contest but I'm a FACT freak ......Mike :thumbup:

I am a police supporter :) But I do question things. I don't want to just come down on one side automatically.

Well, there is nothing to disagree about it. I just say aggressive because there are so many officers for what is a routine traffic stop. It looks to me one even took the key out of the ignition. I am not even sure they are technically allowed to do that. The key is private property.

[Bob Denman]

That's to keep him from attempting to flee...
Motorcycles are so quick and maneuverable; that you have to use multiple vehicles to plug up all of the potential escape routes...
As I previously stated: sound tactics! :thumbup:

[johnsimion]

How many times have you seen video of a biker just running away when a cop tries pulling them over? I think this particular stop was to prevent that from happening as the biker was trapped between civilians on both sides and the cop car in front.

And we don't know if the undercover cop car had lights or siren (other than neither could be seen or heard when they pulled up). And do we know they didn't give the biker a ticket? My video hit the place where the biker took off his gloves and then began repeating so I can't say for sure.

First, the other traffic was blocked off, not the biker. There was room to get in front of the cop car had he wanted. Second, there were two cop cars, not one. Why inconvenience EVERYBODY ELSE just to catch a guy for a traffic violation? Send one ahead and then let the following one to use lights and siren. If he tries to outrun, THEN you block him. If not, at least you're not screwing with everybody else on the street. Third, look at the video at 5:46 and I see them returning his license, telling him to use his blinkers and there's no indication he was asked to sign anything. The cop almost seems apologetic.

[Bob Denman]

They didn't want to leave any opportunity for a high-speed tap-dance with this joker...
Sound tactics! :2thumbs:

[kep-up]

Coppers were out of line and over the top. That rider did nothing that those of us who ride or have ridden motorcycles haven't done. Signals??? Who, even police, uses them anymore??

[Easy Rider]

That rider did nothing that those of us who ride or have ridden motorcycles haven't done. Signals??? Who, even police, uses them anymore??

Brilliant statement. NOT.

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

I am a police supporter :) But I do question things. I don't want to just come down on one side automatically.

Well, there is nothing to disagree about it. I just say aggressive because there are so many officers for what is a routine traffic stop. It looks to me one even took the key out of the ignition. I am not even sure they are technically allowed to do that. The key is private property.
" The key is private property " .... I suppose they could just have detained that person until they ( the police ) wrote up all the paperwork necessary for a search and seizure WARRANT to present to a Judge ... if a Judge was available .... if none were available, they can Legally detain you ( Him ) until one was available....But in truth the Police can do what's necessary to prevent someone from Fleeing / Escaping if they are acting UN-lawfully..... ....On the so many officers thing, there is safety in numbers ... People are much less likely to fight when confronted by overwhelming odds. The other officers were probably involved in the Chase also ( they appeared almost at the same time )... For all we know the CHASE started 10 seconds after the guy started his video :dontknow: .... Frankly there is way more we don't about this incident than what we do know..... I don't always side with the Police just because I was one .... in fact I'm probably MORE critical than you might be. I have gone through life with this thought .... Before you criticize, walk a mile in their shoes..... It has helped me to acquire " empathy " a much needed commodity in police life .......Mike :thumbup:

[Peteoz]

Coppers were out of line and over the top. That rider did nothing that those of us who ride or have ridden motorcycles haven't done. Signals??? Who, even police, uses them anymore??

Coppers were out of line and over the top? ......and you have made that decision based on seeing only one side of an edited tape? Give me trial by judge any time over a “jury of my peers”. At least the judge will listen to both prosecution and defence before making a call :shocked:.

Pete

[Easy Rider]

" The key is private property " ....

So are bombs and drugs.

The "key" to the situation is whether or not they had probable cause to reasonably believe that their actions were necessary to prevent things from getting worse.

AND.....if they have reason to arrest you, they search outside your body.....INSIDE your body and inside any vehicle they impound too.

Just because it is "private property" does not somehow make it off limits during a legal arrest.

[Bob Denman]

:agree:

[Firefly]

Unless maybe it is a local policy, a LEO is not legally required to listen or pay attention to ANYTHING a person has to say before, during or after an arrest.....except maybe a request for medical treatment.

In my opinion, anybody who is uncooperative should be handcuffed, put in the squad and transported to jail or a ticket written....without the LEO engaging in any conversation more than legally required.

In most cases, you get what you deserve.

Wow.. glad we don't live in the fascist police state of your dreams..... handcuffing someone over a traffic stop? :banghead:

He wasn't being arrested, didn't even get a ticket.. which is VERY telling.

He has every legal right to ask exactly why he was pulled over. They also had no right to touch his bike without consent.

This was a pretty clear case of riding while black. If he broke traffic laws then why didn't they write him up.

I've been pulled over in Times Square for no reason at all other than being on bikes with some HD buds. Cop said they were checking for 'stolen bikes' and made us wait 30 minutes. We were chill with it, but no way would I allow them to handcuff me.

[Bob Denman]

But Dan :D:
You do tend to look pretty guilty! :roflblack:


*BING!*

I'd like to believe that race isn't an issue in this stop.
We don't know the rest of the story, and my "Spydee Sense" is screaming that there's a whole more lot here.. :dontknow:.

[Lew L]

There is always more to the story. It's just soooooo much easier to be cooperative with a LEO. Yes sir / no sir. License , reg, insurance all up to date. Do what is asked and chances are you get a warning and off you go. Don't ask me how I know this.:rolleyes:

Lew L

[Bob Denman]

:agree: Co-operating with them will NEVER hurt your chances of just getting a warning...
(Don't ask...)

[ByeSpyder]

Wow.. glad we don't live in the fascist police state of your dreams..... handcuffing someone over a traffic stop?

Happens all the time. If the victim cops an attitude, threatens the police or presents a hazard to others the most likely response by the police will be to handcuff them and put them in the back seat of the patrol car.


He wasn't being arrested, didn't even get a ticket.. which is VERY telling.

I didn't get that far as my video appeared to end early (and before the biker was released).


He has every legal right to ask exactly why he was pulled over. They also had no right to touch his bike without consent.

Yes he does but the police do not have to answer his question and specifically before they get answers to the questions they ask. They didn't pull him over to start an argument.

And, in most states, I believe they have the right to search the vehicle if they suspect something fishy. Any biker considering his ride as part of his genitalia is asking for trouble. Best to go along with the cop's request then present the case to a judge if you feel your rights have been violated.


This was a pretty clear case of riding while black. If he broke traffic laws then why didn't they write him up.

How are they to tell whether he was black or not. He was wearing both gloves, a jacket and helmet. Unless he was wearing sandals I can't think of another way to tell someone's skin color when following them.


I've been pulled over in Times Square for no reason at all other than being on bikes with some HD buds. Cop said they were checking for 'stolen bikes' and made us wait 30 minutes. We were chill with it, but no way would I allow them to handcuff me.

How did you know the reason you were pulled over? Were you flying colors? Did the police have reason to suspect your bikes were stolen? Did a citizen make a complaint? Lots of information missing here.

If you presented a perceived threat to the officer(s) they have every right to place you in confinement for everyone's safety. Usually they will invite you into the patrol car to cool off but they are not obligated to treat you "nice" if you get in their face.

[Rogue Hawk]

:agree: Co-operating with them will NEVER hurt your chances of just getting a warning...
(Don't ask...)

Police officers are human, so I treat them with respect like I would any one else. I was stopped for having my car windows tinted too dark. I also had an expired tag on my Spyder once. I thanked them for pointing these things out and said I would rectify the situation. They let me go without even a warning.

[Easy Rider]

but no way would I allow them to handcuff me.

Allow.......ALLOW ?????.....that kind of attitude can (and does) get people killed.

In any interaction with Law Enforcement, YOU are NOT in control; THEY ARE.
Your parents should have taught you that; so should the schools.

[Easy Rider]

I was stopped for having my car windows tinted too dark.

That was the last traffic ticket that I got, I think about 20 years ago.

I wonder if me cutting the squad car off in the parking lot of Hardee's had anything to do with not getting a warning ??? :banghead:
:roflblack:

[Grandpot]

but no way would I allow them to handcuff me.

That's when I pull out the Pepper Spray.:shocked:

[Firefly]

Happens all the time. If the victim cops an attitude, threatens the police or presents a hazard to others the most likely response by the police will be to handcuff them and put them in the back seat of the patrol car.

Any cop that that handcuffs you during a traffic stop for 'copping an attitude' is a horrible cop. That is not just cause for cuffing someone. If you're threatening that's a different thing. Been pulled over plenty of times, never been cuffed, nor would I consent to being cuffed unless I'm being arrested. They simply cannot do that. If they're going to arrest you then they need to ARREST you. It's against your rights to cuff and detain unless you are a threat. Copping an attitude generally doesn't meet the criteria of a threat.


Yes he does but the police do not have to answer his question and specifically before they get answers to the questions they ask. They didn't pull him over to start an argument.

You have it exactly BACKWARDS. You do not have to answer any questions the police ask. It is THEM who has to tell you why you were pulled over. If they ask you 'do you know why you were pulled over'.. do not answer it. If they ask you where you're going, how fast you were going, if you've had anything to drink, etc.... DO NOT ANSWER. Any good lawyer will tell you that.


And, in most states, I believe they have the right to search the vehicle if they suspect something fishy. Any biker considering his ride as part of his genitalia is asking for trouble. Best to go along with the cop's request then present the case to a judge if you feel your rights have been violated.

They must have probable cause to search you or your vehicle without a warrant. Ever heard of the 4th amendment? You should always refuse to be searched or to have your car searched. Tell them to get a warrant.


How are they to tell whether he was black or not. He was wearing both gloves, a jacket and helmet. Unless he was wearing sandals I can't think of another way to tell someone's skin color when following them.

He wasn't wearing a jacket, his arms were very exposed in short sleeves and you could easily tell he was black.

How did you know the reason you were pulled over? Were you flying colors? Did the police have reason to suspect your bikes were stolen? Did a citizen make a complaint? Lots of information missing here.

I knew the reason we were pulled over because I ASKED and the cop told me.

If you presented a perceived threat to the officer(s) they have every right to place you in confinement for everyone's safety. Usually they will invite you into the patrol car to cool off but they are not obligated to treat you "nice" if you get in their face.

Threat is different than copping an attitude.....in this case the guy was no threat and the idea of cuffing him is outrageous.

[Firefly]

Allow.......ALLOW ?????.....that kind of attitude can (and does) get people killed.

In any interaction with Law Enforcement, YOU are NOT in control; THEY ARE.
Your parents should have taught you that; so should the schools.


Wow.. what a twisted world you live in. You might want to read up on the rights we have as citizens of this country.
Being detained without just cause, cuffed, etc. is not okay.

If you're a threat that's a different thing.

And no.. the cops are not the ones in control. You have every bit as many rights as they do. You do not have to answer questions or give them any information other than your license and registration. Shocking that you don't know this. Talk to any lawyer and they'll tell you the same.

They can't just cuff and detain you for a freaking traffic violation. You would have to be perceived as a THREAT (the guy in the video wasn't). Simply not giving answers or 'copping an attitude' isn't reason enough to be cuffed.

The cops work for US. You should have been taught THAT in school... :-)

And as far as 'not allowing' a search or to be cuffed. What you do is continue to tell them that you do not consent to a search without a warrant. That unless you're being arrested and detained - ask if you are free to go.

You really should brush up on your rights.....

[ByeSpyder]

Threat is different than copping an attitude.....in this case the guy was no threat and the idea of cuffing him is outrageous.

Coping an attitude can be perceived as a threat depending upon circumstances. Remember, it isn't YOUR determination, it is HIS.

I always thought my eyes were pretty good but damned if I could determine his race if only his forearms were exposed and I was following some dozens of yards behind.

The police can search anything if they have probably cause. You defeated your own statement. A search warrant is needed only in certain circumstances.

You also defeated your own statement as to probably cause for pulling you over. If the cops suspected your bike (or your buddy's bike) were stolen fits that requirement.

From your description it appears to me you are a perfect candidate for getting yourself in trouble should you be stopped again. The easiest way to piss off a cop is to cite your rights to them.

And given the number of cops killed recently at ordinary stops I would not want to give any officer a reason to get trigger happy.

[Bob Denman]

:agree: It doesn't matter what you thought you were doing: it's what THEY think you're doing that matters...
And yes: Attitude and Threat share too much commonality, for them to be careless during a traffic stop. How many Officers have been shot in the past several years?
(TOO MANY! nojoke)

[Easy Rider]

Wow.. what a twisted world you live in. You might want to read up on the rights we have as citizens of this country.
Being detained without just cause, cuffed, etc. is not okay.
..

Most of the "rights" that you are talking about are MYTHS.

The LEO makes the determination whether of not he thinks you are a threat........NOT YOU.

Your logic is twisted and dangerous.

I will not argue the subject.
I hope your attitude doesn't get you killed someday.

[wingit3611]

Biker with an attitude problem. New York plate on police car?

[Firefly]

How sad so many don't know their rights.......or what constitutes probable cause.

I do treat cops with respect when being pulled over, but I will NOT consent to a search without a warrant, nor will I offer up any information other than my license and registration. They might do a search anyway, but having it on record that you did NOT agree to be searched will favor you should you end up in court. Many of you don't seem to be up on recent cases or what your rights are. For example, in order to have probable cause to search your vehicle for drugs, it has been ruled that they cannot detain you and make you wait for sniffer dogs to arrive. If they already have them there that's different.

Amazing people will so easily just throw their rights out the window because a guy is wearing a badge.

The cops in the video didn't have squat and knew they were wrong... hence why he didn't get a ticket. The guy knew his rights and was 'standing his ground'.

Good reason to wear a camera...…:thumbup:
This guy had them and he knew it.

[wyliec]

Shades of Firefly and HDX Bones. Love it.:thumbup: Notice I only said shades. I miss those days.

[Firefly]

Shades of Firefly and HDX Bones. Love it.:thumbup: Notice I only said shades. I miss those days.

I miss those guys... it was so great to meet up in person and I knew despite our various disagreements that he was a good guy that would help out in a time of need.. if you remember my HD buds needed some tire help while on a trip.. and I checked the map and found we were within 10 miles of HDX's house. He came right out and helped us big time.

[Firefly]

Here's a young man who knows his rights. Cop tries to trick him, profile him , and he refuses to be searched.....:thumbup:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPo7vW3mxx0

[Mazo EMS2]

He certainly made a few aggressive moves/passes/lane changes....I think they were focusing on some of the recklessness. He certainly could have been more cooperative with the police. Why argue, just do what they ask and keep yer pie hole shut. I side with the officers on this one as well.

[Easy Rider]

So.....racial profiling is forbidden......but A**hole profiling is a valuable law enforcement tool.

The odds are extremely high that anyone who argues, yells, cusses and is otherwise uncooperative is actually trying to cover up something that they NEED to be arrested for. The tactic usually backfires. As does trying to convince a Cop that you know more about the law than he does.

Be polite, cooperate and you can be on your way......sometimes even if you really DO have something to hide.

[Firefly]

So.....racial profiling is forbidden......but A**hole profiling is a valuable law enforcement tool.

The odds are extremely high that anyone who argues, yells, cusses and is otherwise uncooperative is actually trying to cover up something that they NEED to be arrested for. The tactic usually backfires. As does trying to convince a Cop that you know more about the law than he does.

Be polite, cooperate and you can be on your way......sometimes even if you really DO have something to hide.

Yes... by all means.....obey your fascist overlords or else......…:roflblack:

I'll stick to what this little document called the US Constitution says:


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.:thumbup:

[bikerbillone]

Arguing with law enforcement will only get you grief, who needs that? I find that being polite and the 'do unto others plan' in that instance works very well. If I get into that situation for whatever reason, I want to be on my way and enjoy life, rather than having been delayed and the whole world watching blue lights; but that's just me and my opinion which is not worth much.

[Grandpot]

but that's just me and my opinion which is not worth much.[/QUOTE]

Wrong, you're opinion is worth just as much as anyone else's.

[Bob Denman]

Hi Dan,
Could you please do me a favor?
Define "unreasonable"...

[SPECTACUALR SPIDERMAN]

Yes... by all means.....obey your fascist overlords or else......…:roflblack:

I'll stick to what this little document called the US Constitution says:


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.:thumbup:


wow :yikes:, you're still an a-hole. do you still support linda cockroach too?

[Bob Denman]

:lecturef_smilie::lecturef_smilie::lecturef_smilie ::lecturef_smilie::lecturef_smilie::lecturef_smili e::lecturef_smilie::lecturef_smilie:

[Easy Rider]

Yes... by all means.....obey your fascist overlords or else......…:roflblack:

I'll stick to what this little document called the US Constitution says:


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.:thumbup:


YOUR interpretation of that provision is quite different than what the Courts have said over the years.
I suspect that your take on a LOT of laws is somewhat different too.

Guess which opinion counts and which one doesn't ??

[Easy Rider]

Hi Dan,
Could you please do me a favor?
Define "unreasonable"...

Just stop please.

He WANTS you to engage in an extended argument......and I'm pretty sure that almost NOBODY else wants that.

[Bob Denman]

:D But we're having fun now... :thumbup:
Dan and I have always been on opposite sides of the opinion polls; in just about every possible discussion. nojoke
But we're usually able to poke fun at each other (and holes into each other's arguments! :D)

[Easy Rider]

:D But we're having fun now... :thumbup:


I assume that you know you can NEVER win an argument with a moron.
And I don't consider trying to be "fun".

[Bob Denman]

Of course! :D
But I don't consider Dan to be a moron... I only think of him as "misinformed"

164655

But I'm not sure what he thinks of me!

[Easy Rider]

But I'm not sure what he thinks of me!

Using terms like "fascist overlords", I really don't care what he thinks of me.

I also don't care what he thinks about anything else either.

Well, that's really not totally true.
People like that are DANGEROUS so I do kind of care.

[SPECTACUALR SPIDERMAN]

Of course! :D
But I don't consider Dan to be a moron... I only think of him as "misinformed"

164655

But I'm not sure what he thinks of me!
no, he is a moron but only under our laws and common sense. in some countries he might be a genious :roflblack::roflblack::roflblack::roflblack::roflb lack::roflblack::roflblack::roflblack::roflblack:: roflblack::roflblack::roflblack::roflblack::roflbl ack::roflblack::roflblack::roflblack::roflblack::r oflblack::roflblack::roflblack::roflblack::roflbla ck:

[Bob Denman]

:D One never knows...

[johnsimion]

wow :yikes:, you're still an a-hole. do you still support linda cockroach too?

I don't agree with Firefly but was it really necessary to disagree like this? Now I see that the rest of the thread has devolved into personal attacks, too. What a shame when people can't argue without attacking each other. Too bad -- up to then I was enjoying the conversation and the different points of view. It's kind of funny -- in an UNfunny, pathetic way -- to see these personal attacks on a fellow rider in a thread entitled, "Rider Harassment."

[Bob Denman]

:agree:

[SPECTACUALR SPIDERMAN]

I don't agree with Firefly but was it really necessary to disagree like this? Now I see that the rest of the thread has devolved into personal attacks, too. What a shame when people can't argue without attacking each other. Too bad -- up to then I was enjoying the conversation and the different points of view. It's kind of funny -- in an UNfunny, pathetic way -- to see these personal attacks on a fellow rider in a thread entitled, "Rider Harassment."

I'm sorry don't burn the flag and then post it on youtube and expect people to be nice about it. If firefly believes in our
constitution then he has no problem with the first amendment and should not take offense if someone besides himself exercises that right.

[Lew L]

There is a " ignore " option. I use it and I think it has lowered my blood pressure a bit:joke:.

Lew L

[Bob Denman]

I'm sorry don't burn the flag and then post it on youtube and expect people to be nice about it. If firefly believes in our
constitution then he has no problem with the first amendment and should not take offense if someone besides himself exercises that right.
Al,
You're forgetting something: the First Amendment does not apply in here.
We either live by Lamont's rules: or we can go elsewhere.
And Personal Attacks are strictly forbidden.

[SPECTACUALR SPIDERMAN]

Al,
You're forgetting something: the First Amendment does not apply in here.
We either live by Lamont's rules: or we can go elsewhere.
And Personal Attacks are strictly forbidden.

Bob, you are right. I apologize for posting but not for thinking or saying it. next time i will pm firefly telling him he is a pigu yeh(phonetic mandarin) but i won't post it for public display.
sorry lamont.

[Lew L]

And now it's been said twice. Pretty sneaky on your part SS.

Lew L

Personally I like sarcasm better than just name-calling. It shows a better command of the language without using obtuse verbiage.

[Bob Denman]

"Tact: The ability to tell somebody to go to Hell; and having them look forward to the trip." :D

[pegasus1300]

There is a " ignore " option. I use it and I think it has lowered my blood pressure a bit:joke:.

Lew LI finally found that button and put some people on that list. But now I find when they show up in a thread I have to click on the show button and see what they are saying.:roflblack::roflblack::roflblack:

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

I finally found that button and put some people on that list. But now I find when they show up in a thread I have to click on the show button and see what they are saying.:roflblack::roflblack::roflblack:
I'm guessing on the number, but I may have the longest " IGNORE " list on this Forum :dontknow: ..... I always read what these folks have to say, because I believe knowledge is power :thumbup:....... I use my list to remind myself that under NO circumstances will I ever Waste my time helping these people as I have done in the past. Now this may sound drastic to some and or mean. But I don't put them on my list without good cause ( at least to me ).......jmho ..... Mike :thumbup:

[SPECTACUALR SPIDERMAN]

i must be old fashioned, i don't need an ignore button. i don't read every thread and i don't read every post.

[Bob Denman]

:shocked: I'm too anal-retentive NOT to... :gaah:

[Holly]

I don't agree with Firefly but was it really necessary to disagree like this? Now I see that the rest of the thread has devolved into personal attacks, too. What a shame when people can't argue without attacking each other. Too bad -- up to then I was enjoying the conversation and the different points of view. It's kind of funny -- in an UNfunny, pathetic way -- to see these personal attacks on a fellow rider in a thread entitled, "Rider Harassment."



You can't blame them, they were taught to attack from CNN...…… :p

[Big F]

One side of the story, seems like there is more to it

Cruzr Joe

spoken like a true retired police officer!!!!!!!!!!! ;)

[wyliec]

You can't blame them, they were taught to attack from CNN...…… :p

I think they should get on twitter, and tweet their attacks.:rolleyes:

[Lew L]

I finally found that button and put some people on that list. But now I find when they show up in a thread I have to click on the show button and see what they are saying.:roflblack::roflblack::roflblack:

I know----- and I did for a bit. But I truly try to " ignore" these fine folks with their wimpy and childish comebacks. Strive to be helpful or funny or informative or at least interesting. Those on my " ignore" list usually are none of those.

Mike,
I wouldn't help them eithernojoke



Lew L

[BLUEKNIGHT911]

I know----- and I did for a bit. But I truly try to " ignore" these fine folks with their wimpy and childish comebacks. Strive to be helpful or funny or informative or at least interesting. Those on my " ignore" list usually are none of those.

Mike,
I wouldn't help them eithernojoke



Lew L
:shocked:....great minds think alike :thumbup::clap::clap:.................Mike :thumbup:

[Rogue Hawk]

I think they should get on twitter, and tweet their attacks.:rolleyes:

Can you imagine if a president ever did that?:shocked:

[Bob Denman]

164775

[Nokesy]

I do understand we only get his side of the story. But still, it's seems disturbing me that the police essentially send in a SWAT team to stop one guy for lane cutting.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3EXFLKqGeY

As a retired LEO, I saw several improper lane changes no signals. While he saying their standing around with their thumb up their butts. It takes time to send and get info back from dispatch. Faster now that we are linked direct. No need for the attitude from the guy, they checked him out, determined he was the owner of the bike and gave him a warning. Remember they have to have a reason to putll you over and check that you are not driving a stolen bike. I can remember in one night catching 6 of the nine people I pulled over that had stolen the bike. They could have given him a number of tickets that would cost him points and a lot of money

[jerrydonna]

the first lane change and speed told the story
and that finial lane split to TELL driver about his light... RIGHT you would have taken off first from the light and that was your plan



You are correct it's only one side of the story ....Well I was an LEO for 37 years .... made thousands of traffic stops and had this occur 100 plus times ..... It would take me at least an hour of typing to cover all the Bikers BS about this, Here's just one point " How many times did the Biker ask the officer how and why the Stop was made " ...I counted seven..... The biker is swimming in ATTITUDE and Passively resisting all efforts by the officer to do the Task at hand....Zero co-operation ..... If you were the officer how would you like to be treated ????? ....... just a different prospective ...... Mike :thumbup:...........PS, I'm the kind of Cop who thinks BAD Cops should get twice the punishment for wrong doing ..... Because they took an Oath not to be Nasty or worse CROOKED


" aggressive " ..... where in the video ( give the time/s please ) were any of the Cops acted " aggressive " .... I'm NOT...trying to start a pissing contest but I'm a FACT freak ......Mike :thumbup:


I am on the cops side. He made unsafe lane changes. He was obviously speeding. Can't tell if he didn't use his blinker but assume that because his lane changes were much to abrupt. He is a buttwipe and deserves to be ticketed for every violation. He not only puts himself at risk but every other biker - most of whom do not ride this way. I don't want to be run over by some road rager because this idiot drives like a moron and pisses everybody else off.