Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
11/24/2017 4:44:23 PM
11/22/2017 10:05:29 PM
Posted: 8/18/2004 4:13:15 AM EST
Here are the lessons I take away from this thread:

- If a category 4 hurricane is bearing down on you, DO NOT leave your home...you will be at the mercy of local law enforcement as to when you can return and safeguard your possessions,

- In general, do all you can to avoid an encounter with the police. Why? Because regardless of the validity of a "verbal command" given to you by them, if you do not comply, you will get the taser.

As others have said, current trends in law enforcement are at once sad, infuriating, and frightening.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 4:18:29 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/18/2004 4:22:26 AM EST by cyanide]
I was thinking the same thing --
but what if they tell you to leave and you refuse -- they will arrest you for disorderly
or obstruction of official business ????

It has become a us against them thing in some matters. Agreed -- it is sad.

The guy that was tazed should have just gone away and gone in another way on foot / ATV whatever to protect his property.


Link Posted: 8/18/2004 4:23:43 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/18/2004 6:31:27 AM EST by kill-9]

Originally Posted By cyanide:
I was thinking the same thing --
but what if they tell you to leave and you refuse -- they will arrest you for disorderly
or obstruction of official business ????



I asked the same question in my post asking for clarification on "mandatory evacuation". Folks who were there claim that they were told that they would not be arrested for choosing to stay.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 4:25:08 AM EST

Originally Posted By kill-9:
As others have said, current trends in law enforcement are at once sad, infuriating, and frightening.


You would rather have had it escalate to a physical confrontation?Because without the Taser, thats where it would have gone.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 4:26:52 AM EST

Originally Posted By tcsd1236:

Originally Posted By kill-9:
As others have said, current trends in law enforcement are at once sad, infuriating, and frightening.


You would rather have had it escalate to a physical confrontation?Because without the Taser, thats where it would have gone.



Did you watch the video? They hauled the guy out of his car and taser'ed him because he wanted to get back to his home.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 4:27:19 AM EST

Originally Posted By kill-9:

Originally Posted By cyanide:
I was thinking the same thing --
but what if they tell you to leave and you refuse -- they will arrest you for disorderly
or obstruction of official business ????



I asked the same question in my post asking for clarification on "mandatory evacuation". Folks who were there claim that they were told that they would not be arrested for choosing to stay.



In Ca during fires the cops will arrest sometimes if a person refuses to leave and then sometimes they will not arrest.

Some have kept the tops of their roofs wet with water and they have saved their homes.

Others have tried and died.

Still others have been arrested for their "own safety".

As far as I can tell it is played by ear by the jurisdiction involved.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 4:29:05 AM EST

Originally Posted By cyanide:

Originally Posted By kill-9:

Originally Posted By cyanide:
I was thinking the same thing --
but what if they tell you to leave and you refuse -- they will arrest you for disorderly
or obstruction of official business ????



I asked the same question in my post asking for clarification on "mandatory evacuation". Folks who were there claim that they were told that they would not be arrested for choosing to stay.



In Ca during fires the cops will arrest sometimes if a person refuses to leave and then sometimes they will not arrest.

Some have kept the tops of their roofs wet with water and they have saved their homes.

Others have tried and died.

Still others have been arrested for their "own safety".

As far as I can tell it is played by ear by the jurisdiction involved.



What makes the state think it knows better than the individual? Amazing.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 4:33:14 AM EST
If you plan to stay, board up your house, make it look like you left. Do not answer the phone or a knock on the door.

Also, don't expect help if things get too exciting if you do stay during a mandatory evac.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 4:34:15 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 4:34:18 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/18/2004 4:36:19 AM EST by cyanide]
If the LEO has a fear of law suits by survivors of someone they let stay - they should carry release forms (forms that absolve them of all legal repercussions) that a person could sign if he chose to stay.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 4:34:51 AM EST

Originally Posted By kill-9:

Did you watch the video? They hauled the guy out of his car and taser'ed him because he wanted to get back to his home.


I only saw what was on the morning talk shows, and that video was edited.The facts are pretty well documented on the net by now. As I said, if the taser had not been used, it would have had to go physical.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 4:54:19 AM EST

Originally Posted By tcsd1236:

Originally Posted By kill-9:

Did you watch the video? They hauled the guy out of his car and taser'ed him because he wanted to get back to his home.


I only saw what was on the morning talk shows, and that video was edited.The facts are pretty well documented on the net by now. As I said, if the taser had not been used, it would have had to go physical.



Why? I haven't seen the "well documented" facts. For a man in his car with his kids, why did it come to the choice between "haul him out of the car and beat his ass in front of his kids" or "haul him out of his car and taser him in front of his kids"?
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 5:03:44 AM EST

Originally Posted By kill-9:

Why? I haven't seen the "well documented" facts. For a man in his car with his kids, why did it come to the choice between "haul him out of the car and beat his ass in front of his kids" or "haul him out of his car and taser him in front of his kids"?



The topic has been beat to death on every message board I surf through, as is the case with most LE-related topics that hit the media.

A person that wont comply with verbal orders is going to find the situation escalate. I have sympthy that his family was in the car, but he chose that route, not the officers.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 5:06:34 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 5:11:04 AM EST

Originally Posted By shotar:
It is my understanding that this person intended to drive into the disaster area with his children. Had he accomplished this task and crossed the line with them in the car, I'd have arrested him for child endangering.



Would you have arrested any parent who chose to not evacuate, keeping their kids with them in the evacuation area?
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 5:16:01 AM EST
I have not seen all the facts related to this incedent.

But, As a person who has lived in an area that has been hit by a hurricane and its aftermath. I know it is standard procedure for LEO's to require you to prove you indeed live there before being allowed back into the community.

And I wonder if he could not prove his residence.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 5:17:35 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 5:30:36 AM EST

Originally Posted By kill-9:

Originally Posted By tcsd1236:

Originally Posted By kill-9:
As others have said, current trends in law enforcement are at once sad, infuriating, and frightening.


You would rather have had it escalate to a physical confrontation?Because without the Taser, thats where it would have gone.



Did you watch the video? They hauled the guy out of his car and taser'ed him because he wanted to get back to his home.



No they tasered him because he wanted to enter a disaster area the was closed to the public, with his 3 children.

I have a few thoughts on this,

Really if an adult male wants to enter a disaster area, who cares. They can fend for themself. If something bad happens though, remember you were fending for yourself.

Next, what kind of parent wants to enter an area that is without food, water, sewer, has down power lines trees, potentially displaced wild animals (posionous snakes, and alligators spring to mind) no phone service, no police, fire or EMS, WITH 3 CHILDREN?

Next, as I understand it, people are being kept out, so that services can be restored as quickly as possible without interference. IE, power service, clearing downed trees etc. The more people that get in the way, the longer it will take. I guess this guy is just more important than everyone else............

Next, I seems that community was easily closed, so that it will be easy to spot looters, or other troublemakers, they are the ones inside the area that was closed.

Next, I heard "he's stressed out........................" So F'in what? IT'S A DISASTER AREA EVERYONE IS STRESSED.

Kill-9, he chose to act like an idiot in fornt of his children. Also evacuations are often crapshoots. You don't know if the storm, etc. is actually going to hit there. But once it has been "disastered" you darn sure know what kind of shape the place is in, hazardous.

Cyanide, my understanding is that under most cirumstances it is legally very difficult to force people to leave their house. However it is failry easy, legal, to close an are to keep people from entering.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 5:32:40 AM EST

Originally Posted By shotar:

Originally Posted By kill-9:

Originally Posted By shotar:
It is my understanding that this person intended to drive into the disaster area with his children. Had he accomplished this task and crossed the line with them in the car, I'd have arrested him for child endangering.



Would you have arrested any parent who chose to not evacuate, keeping their kids with them in the evacuation area?



If in my estimation the children were in danger. Yes. To take it to where you thought you were gonna go, I despise the thought of the state taking custody of people's children it is a last resort to use in the most outrageous and extreme of circumstances and even then should be looked at twice or even three times. However, taking your kids into a disaster zone that i know to be highly dangerous and still life threatening is no different than handing the a steak, and telling them to walk into the tiger cage to pet the big kitty. They may or may not get eaten, but the parents were certainly not acting in their interests or with care for their safety.



Your viewpoint is certainly not unreasonable; protecting children from irrational parents is a valid role of the police. But in the case of a hurricane how do the LEOs decide if a child is being endangered by staying? How much water is enough to have on-hand? Are they qualified to inspect homes to determine storm worthiness? Do we fall back to the "reasonable person" basis of judgement?
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 6:04:45 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 6:16:24 AM EST

Originally Posted By kill-9:

Originally Posted By shotar:
It is my understanding that this person intended to drive into the disaster area with his children. Had he accomplished this task and crossed the line with them in the car, I'd have arrested him for child endangering.



Would you have arrested any parent who chose to not evacuate, keeping their kids with them in the evacuation area?



I have mixed feeling on this parents are entitled to raise children as they see fit --- do we force them to have vaccinations for "the safety of the child" or threaten an arrest if they do not comply ????

Or we take away Amish children from their parents cause they are exposed to dangerous conditions or machinery ???


The list could go on -- do we take them away from parents that allow them to sky dive ???

Parents make choices for their children -- and the state should not be allowed to interfere except under the most extreme of cases. ie: child abuse/ sex abuse.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 6:34:37 AM EST

Originally Posted By cyanide:
If the LEO has a fear of law suits by survivors of someone they let stay - they should carry release forms (forms that absolve them of all legal repercussions) that a person could sign if he chose to stay.




Or for that matter, have them sign a waiver if they leave and want to return. With the taser incident, what if the cops would have given into the guy and said, go ahead to your home? What about the other people they refused? It wouldn't be fair. He had kids in the van, what if they let him through and he ended up being killed in front of his kids when a wall callapsed on him or whatever. Would it have been better to struggle with him physically, instead of the taser? I don't know, but it was a f*cked up situation in any event.

IMO, either they let everybody in or nobody in. But, I do think the answer is, let them sign a waiver with proper ID, that they live in the area.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 6:38:13 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/18/2004 6:40:39 AM EST by cyanide]

Originally Posted By palmer:

Originally Posted By cyanide:
If the LEO has a fear of law suits by survivors of someone they let stay - they should carry release forms (forms that absolve them of all legal repercussions) that a person could sign if he chose to stay.




Or for that matter, have them sign a waiver if they leave and want to return. With the taser incident, what if the cops would have given into the guy and said, go ahead to your home? What about the other people they refused? It wouldn't be fair. He had kids in the van, what if they let him through and he ended up being killed in front of his kids when a wall callapsed on him or whatever. Would it have been better to struggle with him physically, instead of the taser? I don't know, but it was a f*cked up situation in any event.

IMO, either they let everybody in or nobody in. But, I do think the answer is, let them sign a waiver with proper ID, that they live in the area.




Palmer --
you take away the mans freedom--- FREEDOM -- to make a choice on how he wants to live -- and yes , maybe die ....... This use to be America -- people have fought and died for that right.. Come on have we progressed to the stage where the state has to baby sit us all ??????????????????????


I have a heavy heart when this kind of thing even has to be discussed.

America land of the free ?
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 6:44:55 AM EST
Anybody have the video? I missed it.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 6:45:17 AM EST
As someone who has lived in a house that was subject to "mandatory" evac...here's the deal: it's like a one way evac. You don't have to leave, but if you do, you can't get back in. If you stay, you can't leave your property except to evac.

This is done for the protection of everyone's property.

Link Posted: 8/18/2004 6:51:09 AM EST

Originally Posted By Wobblin-Goblin:
Anybody have the video? I missed it.



The video is still available on this page: www.local10.com/news/3659012/detail.html
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 6:53:55 AM EST
In preparing my home for a possible disaster I am buying a generator and having a neon sign done that says, "You Loot I shoot".
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 7:01:01 AM EST
If I found myself in the same situation (hurricane bearing down on the place), I'd probably make sure my wife and kids were in a safe place (other than our house) and I would stay home.

Every man's home is a castle.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 7:32:18 AM EST

Originally Posted By tcsd1236:

Originally Posted By kill-9:
As others have said, current trends in law enforcement are at once sad, infuriating, and frightening.


You would rather have had it escalate to a physical confrontation?Because without the Taser, thats where it would have gone.



last I checked, firing metal darts into someone and using them to electrocute that person so that they lose muscle control, is a physical confrontation...but what do I know?
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 7:39:24 AM EST
I think the biggest lesson is to have a dog, so that the cops can shoot it instead of tase you.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 7:42:19 AM EST
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 7:54:57 AM EST
Oh, it's "for the children" again.
Jeeeeeeez!

Yes, the Government and the JBT's know what's best for us all, and they are willing to use any level of force to prove it.

The obvious JBT government response above,"Would you rather had it gotten physical" tells it all about the mentality of them. If you don't let them taser you, then they will shoot you to prove their dominance over you.

If that doesn't tell you all you need to know, then you might as well turn in your guns right now.

The next commands from them will be "turn over your guns, or we'll taser you, and if you don't allow us to taser you, we'll shoot you."

Don't try it in Tennessee, boys.

Link Posted: 8/18/2004 11:15:32 AM EST

Originally Posted By legalese77:
last I checked, firing metal darts into someone and using them to electrocute that person so that they lose muscle control, is a physical confrontation...but what do I know?


The person is not "electrocuted", and the incapacitation is temporary.It beats having to be REALLY physical, which involves physical contact, often repeatedly, with a greater risk of injury to the involved parties.


The obvious JBT government response above,"Would you rather had it gotten physical" tells it all about the mentality of them


Put yourself in the officers place. You are manning a checkpoint to keep people out of a storm-damaged area. You cannot pick and choose who you let in; how else would YOU keep people from entering the area in question? Its not an issue of being JBT. The officer has a job to do and is doing it.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 11:28:25 AM EST
Put yourself in the officers place. You are manning a checkpoint to keep people out of a storm-damaged area. You cannot pick and choose who you let in; how else would YOU keep people from entering the area in question? Its not an issue of being JBT. The officer has a job to do and is doing it.


Right - they are just following orders.

This has been said before and will no doubt be said again in the future --
I am / we were - just following orders.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 11:35:06 AM EST
[Last Edit: 8/18/2004 11:40:54 AM EST by AR15fan]
1. Do not invite the man into your life. We are in the taking people to jail business. Not child counseling, not marraige therapy, not civil mediation. Taking people to jail.
1(a). Inviting the man into your life is; breaking the law, calling the police to your house, walking over to a cops barracade or post, ect.

2. if a cop gives you a lawfull order, follow it, immediately, or you will probubly get sprayed, TASERED, beat down, or dragged off to jail. Dont like that? See number one above.

BTW; Chris Rock already produced a how to video that explains all this shit pretty well.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 11:38:58 AM EST

Originally Posted By AR15fan:
1. Do not invite the man into your life. We are in the taking peope to jail business. Not child counseling, not marraige therapy, not civil mediation. Taking people to jail.
1(a). Inviting the man into your life is; breaking the law, calling the police to your house, walking over to a cops barracade or post, ect.

2. if a cop gives you a lawfull order, follow it, immediately, or you will probubly get sprayed, TASERED, beat down, or dragged off to jail. Dont like that? See number one above.


Yep. Now you know why so many people are apprehensive when it comes to dealing with cops.

You hit the nail on the proverbial head. Thank you.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 11:39:02 AM EST

Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery:
Really if an adult male wants to enter a disaster area, who cares.



Who cares if he loots his neighbors houses becuase the police made an exception and allowed him in. I mean crooks never steal from their own neighborhoods...
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 11:43:11 AM EST
In Texas, if a cop uses undue or unjust force on you, you have the right to use force to defend yourself..deadly force if neccessary. Now proving it in court is another matter. Screw it, shoot back.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 11:44:40 AM EST

Originally Posted By AR15fan:
1. Do not invite the man into your life. We are in the taking people to jail business. Not child counseling, not marraige therapy, not civil mediation. Taking people to jail.
1(a). Inviting the man into your life is; breaking the law, calling the police to your house, walking over to a cops barracade or post, ect.

2. if a cop gives you a lawfull order, follow it, immediately, or you will probubly get sprayed, TASERED, beat down, or dragged off to jail. Dont like that? See number one above.

BTW; Chris Rock already produced a how to video that explains all this shit pretty well.




I rest my case...only thing is that anyone who would do this for a living is not a "man". Wimp who can only get authority because of a badge perhaps, but not a man.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 11:58:37 AM EST

Originally Posted By cyanide:

Originally Posted By palmer:

Originally Posted By cyanide:
If the LEO has a fear of law suits by survivors of someone they let stay - they should carry release forms (forms that absolve them of all legal repercussions) that a person could sign if he chose to stay.




Or for that matter, have them sign a waiver if they leave and want to return. With the taser incident, what if the cops would have given into the guy and said, go ahead to your home? What about the other people they refused? It wouldn't be fair. He had kids in the van, what if they let him through and he ended up being killed in front of his kids when a wall callapsed on him or whatever. Would it have been better to struggle with him physically, instead of the taser? I don't know, but it was a f*cked up situation in any event.

IMO, either they let everybody in or nobody in. But, I do think the answer is, let them sign a waiver with proper ID, that they live in the area.




Palmer --
you take away the mans freedom--- FREEDOM -- to make a choice on how he wants to live -- and yes , maybe die ....... This use to be America -- people have fought and died for that right.. Come on have we progressed to the stage where the state has to baby sit us all ??????????????????????


I have a heavy heart when this kind of thing even has to be discussed.

America land of the free ?




I'am not disagreeing with anybodies freedom, it does not have to be explained to me. Like I said, they should allow the homeowners in after they sign a waiver.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 12:24:18 PM EST
Well, I've read exactly what I thought I would read from the "LEO" perspective.

Just following orders.
Taking people to jail business.
Have a job to to.
You will be tasered, etc.
Resistance is futile because more robots will be sent for backup.

I don't need to add anything to that.
It is crystal clear.

Muscle for the political mob.
Nazi mentality all the way through.
Mindlessly following directives given by power-hungry, corrupt politicians who feed off the people like parasites.
They will come for your guns, and give the same excuses.


If you had any questions about the "LEO" perspective, it seems they were answered loud and clear by their own representatives.

And they wonder why there is fear and mistrust of them by the public.

Link Posted: 8/18/2004 12:29:27 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/18/2004 12:31:47 PM EST by cyanide]

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery:
Really if an adult male wants to enter a disaster area, who cares.



Who cares if he loots his neighbors houses becuase the police made an exception and allowed him in. I mean crooks never steal from their own neighborhoods...



See common sense is lacking here

if the guy has a ID that proves he lives in the area he is not likely a looter ......

LEO's need to think things out - not blindly follow dumb orders.

If he steals and I admit it could happen - charge him then, do not advocate lawful restraint to prevent a possible future unlikely crime from occurring.


I mean it isn't like the area is entirely empty now is it......

Link Posted: 8/18/2004 12:32:32 PM EST
Lesson 1: Don't bring fists to a taser-fight.

Lesson 2: Don't fight "the man" when you are obviously going to lose (unless you like spending time in jail)
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 12:32:49 PM EST

Originally Posted By palmer:

Originally Posted By cyanide:

Originally Posted By palmer:

Originally Posted By cyanide:
If the LEO has a fear of law suits by survivors of someone they let stay - they should carry release forms (forms that absolve them of all legal repercussions) that a person could sign if he chose to stay.




Or for that matter, have them sign a waiver if they leave and want to return. With the taser incident, what if the cops would have given into the guy and said, go ahead to your home? What about the other people they refused? It wouldn't be fair. He had kids in the van, what if they let him through and he ended up being killed in front of his kids when a wall callapsed on him or whatever. Would it have been better to struggle with him physically, instead of the taser? I don't know, but it was a f*cked up situation in any event.

IMO, either they let everybody in or nobody in. But, I do think the answer is, let them sign a waiver with proper ID, that they live in the area.




Palmer --
you take away the mans freedom--- FREEDOM -- to make a choice on how he wants to live -- and yes , maybe die ....... This use to be America -- people have fought and died for that right.. Come on have we progressed to the stage where the state has to baby sit us all ??????????????????????


I have a heavy heart when this kind of thing even has to be discussed.

America land of the free ?




I'am not disagreeing with anybodies freedom, it does not have to be explained to me. Like I said, they should allow the homeowners in after they sign a waiver.



cool
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 12:39:25 PM EST
My understanding of the incident is that the guy had his kids in the car and was trying to return home.

I could care less if the guy wants to return his dumb ass to his house, but when you bring kids that have no say so in the matter, now I have a problem.

That guy was endangering the lives of his family for property. I think that after they tased him, they should have given him a quick swift kick in the ass.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 2:33:37 PM EST

Originally Posted By cyanide:

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery:
Really if an adult male wants to enter a disaster area, who cares.



Who cares if he loots his neighbors houses becuase the police made an exception and allowed him in. I mean crooks never steal from their own neighborhoods...



See common sense is lacking here

if the guy has a ID that proves he lives in the area he is not likely a looter ......




You are saying people never commit crime in their own neighborhoods? I have found the opposite to be true. There are two trailer parks in my patrol area, If there is a burglary in the trailer park, the burglar is usually one of the other trailer park residents.

When the LA riots happend the rioters and looters didnt travel to beverly hills to loot. They looted the store right next door.

if my house gets broken into the three teenagers about 4 houses down the street are the prime suspects.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 2:35:07 PM EST
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 3:13:06 PM EST

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By cyanide:

Originally Posted By AR15fan:

Originally Posted By OLY-M4gery:
Really if an adult male wants to enter a disaster area, who cares.



Who cares if he loots his neighbors houses becuase the police made an exception and allowed him in. I mean crooks never steal from their own neighborhoods...



See common sense is lacking here

if the guy has a ID that proves he lives in the area he is not likely a looter ......




You are saying people never commit crime in their own neighborhoods? I have found the opposite to be true. There are two trailer parks in my patrol area, If there is a burglary in the trailer park, the burglar is usually one of the other trailer park residents.

When the LA riots happend the rioters and looters didnt travel to beverly hills to loot. They looted the store right next door.

if my house gets broken into the three teenagers about 4 houses down the street are the prime suspects.





If as you say thefts occured he would have been FI'd I'm sure before being let in ......... any way you slice it I do not like it. It is a pre emptive stike to prevent a crime that has not occured and may not even occur. Plain sucks.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 3:18:02 PM EST
[Last Edit: 8/18/2004 3:20:56 PM EST by FLAL1A]

Originally Posted By KravMaga:
I could care less if the guy wants to return his dumb ass to his house, but when you bring kids that have no say so in the matter, now I have a problem.




Well, we need more cops, because under your and Shotar's reasoning we're going to have to arrest everybody who lives in Watts, Compton, or along the San Andreas Fault and take their kids. Hell, should this stupid bastard keep his kids anyway, given that he is raising them in one of the most hurricane-prone areas in the world? What about the friggin' Eskimos? Do you know what will happen to a little Eskimo kid who wanders off in the winter? The potential consequences of their parents' decision to live in a frozen wasteland can't be visited on the chiiiiiiiiildren! Damn! We need a federal Parents Who Take Risks Some Jackdaw Deems Unreasonable Task Force! It's a national crisis!

Oh shit! I live in an area frequently subject to hurricanes! In the state with the largest number of lightning strikes in the world!!!!! Better come get me!

I don't know that I've ever seen 2 bright people share quite so big a cup of half-assed unreason as that.

As my uncle used to say, "Sheeeeeeeit."

ETA: The officer's (or department's) liability for any looting the guy suffers because they forcibly prevented him from protecting his home would be what, exactly? Yeah.
Link Posted: 8/18/2004 5:04:17 PM EST
btt due to the outstanding quality of FLAL1A's comment.
Link Posted: 8/19/2004 4:39:28 AM EST

Originally Posted By Sweep:
What I find amazing is that 4 days after, the people that stayed weren't being forced to leave the same area this guy was trying to get back in to. If it was that dangerous, shouldn't the people that stayed through the hurricane been forced to leave and if they didn't, be arrested? No. I didn't think so.

The people who stayed in their homes are in their homes They are not wandering around the streets getting in the way of work crews, driving over downed powerlines, distracting the law enforcement people in the area who are looking for looters, etc. If the people who stayed behind decide to take a walk around the block they are going to get ejected from the area too.
Top Top