Assemblymen Propose Law Making Disrespecting Police A Felony

How about give the police there authority back?

What a way to twist this one! Perfect anti-police headline.

Just make it legal, or "not prohibited" for anyone to beat the ever loving shit out of rude people.

Just make a law to get rid of all absurd laws, taxes, wasteful spending, all politicians, lobby, speculators, paper pushers and motherfuckers alike, and re-start with a clean slate.
The problem, a bill like that would not even make the floor for a vote for obvious reasons.

So... we will continue with the current totalitarian regime disguised as democracy.

Just imagine what could be done by only replacing feel good BS and political correctness with true accountability and honor.

Water is a deadly weapon, respond in kind.

Is this like prosecuting people who criticize members of congress? Not that I think cops should have to put up with this kind of treatment or that they shouldn't be able to defend themselves proportionately. I mean, what is the law regarding this sort of thing happening to an average citizen? Would you or I be justified in some measured act of self defense against this sort of harassment? If so, a police officer should be afforded the same and if it occurs while performing his or her official duties, the punishment should be more severe.

Should I stop wearing my

Pride
Integrity
Guts

tee shirts?

ArmedCorgi said:

Is this like prosecuting people who criticize members of congress? Not that I think cops should have to put up with this kind of treatment or that they shouldn't be able to defend themselves proportionately. I mean, what is the law regarding this sort of thing happening to an average citizen? Would you or I be justified in some measured act of self defense against this sort of harassment? If so, a police officer should be afforded the same and if it occurs while performing his or her official duties, the punishment should be more severe.

Click to expand...

When you have an educated and civil society respect is expected to all human beings.
My point is that a society cannot and should not enforce everything but certain amount of care should be put on how we produce
decent citizens and human beings.
The first line of defense is education that starts with family.
We are not talking about academic education but education as a whole.

This is where we are loosing the battle and we are not too far from banana republics full of corruption and thugs or even worse, those very same
we criticize yet we are not better than them.

But at least we are not like in Afghanistan (just yet)

Just imagine all the possibilities...

No perks for Swedish MPs

I don’t agree with this. I’m very pro police, but what is offensive is very subjective. What if I go to NYC or San Fran and I wear a MAGA shirt and that offends some liberal cop. Felony and I lose my gun rights. F that.

What a crock.

When did disrespecting (using Disrespect as a verb) become a word? And fuck the idiots that use it.

Who gets to define discrespect in actionable legal terms? Is bumping into a cop and not bowing down to kiss his boots and ask for forgiveness disrespect?

togmaster said:

When did disrespecting (using Disrespect as a verb) become a word? And fuck the idiots that use it.

Click to expand...

Man ain’t you never heard bout Ebonics???

Ebonics (word) - Wikipedia

Twogunwilly said:

Water is a deadly weapon, respond in kind.

Click to expand...

Don't assume it's water coming at you.

MothMan said:

Man ain’t you never heard bout Ebonics???

Ebonics (word) - Wikipedia

Click to expand...

Homey don't play dat.

Saltwater60 said:

I don’t agree with this. I’m very pro police, but what is offensive is very subjective. What if I go to NYC or San Fran and I wear a MAGA shirt and that offends some liberal cop. Felony and I lose my gun rights. F that.

Click to expand...

You’re falling for the headline. Read the article. The bill covers one thing: throwing liquids onto police officers. The headline was crafted specifically to address the Darths of the world.

SomeSoldier said:

Who gets to define discrespect in actionable legal terms? Is bumping into a cop and not bowing down to kiss his boots and ask for forgiveness disrespect?

Click to expand...

Read the article. You’re falling for the anti-police headline as well. It’s the agenda and you walked right into it.

This and only this:

According to LiPetri and Reilly, the new bill would make it a Class E felony to throw or spray water, or any other substance, against an on-duty police or peace officer. The charge would be punishable by up to 1 to 4 years in prison.

Click to expand...

...buried in the middle of the article to ensure achievement of the desired effect (stoking anti-police hatred) while ensuring plausible deniability for legal reasons.

Airborneguy said:

Read the article. You’re falling for the anti-police headline as well. It’s the agenda and you walked right into it.

Click to expand...

I have nothing against police, its the policy I don't like. Its the gov trying to control speech, this has nothing to do with water.

SomeSoldier said:

I have nothing against police, its the policy I don't like. Its the gov trying to control speech, this has nothing to do with water.

Click to expand...

Wrong. Again, you’re falling for the headline.

Read what I wrote and what I quoted.

No one is trying to control speech. The bill covers one thing: throwing liquids on the police. That’s it. The headline was written specifically to elicit the reaction you’re having.

It’s right there in black and white, buried to the point that phycologists have determined most people will quit reading because the media wants you to feel this way.

This bill does not cover “disrespecting”. It’s about throwing water and other substances. Period, end of story.

BTW, Reilly is my assemblyman and I see him often at events in my precinct. I am very proud of him for putting forth this bill and fuck the writers of this article for fooling you guys.

Airborneguy said:

Wrong. Again, you’re falling for the headline.

Read what I wrote and what I quoted.

No one is trying to control speech. The bill covers one thing: throwing liquids on the police. That’s it. The headline was written specifically to elicit the reaction you’re having.

It’s right there in black and white, buried to the point that phycologists have determined most people will quit reading because the media wants you to feel this way.

This bill does not cover “disrespecting”. It’s about throwing water and other substances. Period, end of story.

Click to expand...

Throwing things at people that could hurt them or does is assault right? If so then why do we need another law?

Also if I remeber correctly these people could easily be arrested for discon. No other laws needed use the laws on the books.

Changing the subject. We can talk about that next. Do you acknowledge that this bill does not regulate speech?

Airborneguy said:

Changing the subject. We can talk about that next. Do you acknowledge that this bill does not regulate speech?

Click to expand...

No I don't but I also admit it doesnt say it does. I dont see the bill linked and I Google for it, still nothing. I will acknowledge when I read the bill and there is nothing in there.

Ok get back to me then. No problem. But I’m not discussing a fallacy implanted by the anti-police media.

Airborneguy said:

Ok get back to me then. No problem. But I’m not discussing a fallacy implanted by the anti-police media.

Click to expand...

What about my other points?

If I remember right it was hot AF that day and unless my eyes fooled me, it appeared as if one of the officers had a smile when he got doused. I'm sure it felt good. But that's besides the point. I can see them using any number of other laws already on the book to charge those water throwers with, without having to dredge up new laws. Equipment costs tax payer's money and their portable radios could have gotten ruined, as well as other equipment they might have had on them when exposed to that much water.

After you see the truth of this bill, otherwise the conversation will just be muddled with bullshit. I’m done doing that here.

And I’m not being facetious, I just want the conversation based in fact. No disrespect, lol.