TexasCHLforum.com

cb1000rider wrote:

E.Marquez wrote:

cb1000rider wrote: why tolerate LEO contact on legal behavior?

The same reason we tolerate and outright demand they stop someone who might be driving drunk, might be involved in selling drugs, might have been involved in a fight reported, might be the guy called in by a 911 caller as having been involved in a hit and run.

None of those calls are about legal behavior.

So if there was a call about illegal or suspicious behavior, I get it... I understand why you might have to initiate contact.
My understanding is that if there is a call - that call must provide credible and specific information about what sort of questionable activity might be going on.
I also understand that these days it would be pretty bad if a call was made, it was not responded to, and there was a legitimate incident. You can initiate consensual contact without any basis of cause.

You can't call the police and say that I "might be selling drugs" - that's not enough to initiate non-consensual contact with me. You'd need to tell them that you saw me buy or sell something that looked like or was known to be drugs - or describe some behavior that warranted culpable suspicion. You can't expect them to stop me if I "might be drunk" - you'd need to see and report me for drinking, swerving, or perhaps (really low bar) frequenting an area where alcohol is sold...

VMI77 wrote:

03Lightningrocks wrote:I don't think law enforcement officers are held to the exact same standards as a civilian. As a civilian, we have the option of walking away or even avoiding the situation. A law enforcement officer is duty bound to stand and verify the danger is neutralized. How about when an officer forcefully says, stop or I will shoot? Maybe this officer used a little more "color" than required but he had to be sure this guy got the message. When did we all become so touchy feely about a word? I am beginning to think the libtards and Obama have begun to have more of a sissyfying affect on us all than we thought. We are now gonna nit pick how a cop phrases his intentions if we go for our guns? I suppose I was raised with a little thicker skin than that... but then again... I also don't believe every kid that played soccer in the city league, win or lose, "deserves" a trophy.

Here is my perspective on what the cop said to him. "BooHoo, you hurt my little feelings. I was acting like a total fool and you said a mean thing to me. Boohoo, you said you would shoot me in my whittle head.". That about covers it.

We don't all have a commander-in-chief, only the military does, so the "civilian" distinction does not apply. Police are not superior beings. If they're not active duty military then they are "civilians" just like the rest of us who are no longer on active duty. My contact with police is not between civilian and military, it's between civilian and civilian, or better, citizen and citizen. We're not supposed to be the servants of LE, they are supposed be serve and protect us. And I totally agree, the country has been sissified, but it started before Obama, and most of the sissification is in the big cities.