Give Your Local Cops The Finger

[skyrider 0]

Quote

Quote

Gotta love Texas. The most immoral moral state around.

Like many states, it sure has its own unique character; but as far as I know (and I invite correction), it's the only state where a civilian is allowed to back-shoot a criminal suspect, even if he's unarmed, when he is in the process of running away from committing a strictly property crime. (While I don't approve, it's not really a bash; more of a clinical observation.)

If ALL states had such laws, we would see practicallly an end to break ins!

[jakee 1,596]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Gotta love Texas. The most immoral moral state around.

Like many states, it sure has its own unique character; but as far as I know (and I invite correction), it's the only state where a civilian is allowed to back-shoot a criminal suspect, even if he's unarmed, when he is in the process of running away from committing a strictly property crime. (While I don't approve, it's not really a bash; more of a clinical observation.)

If ALL states had such laws, we would see practicallly an end to break ins!

Texas has no break ins, then?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

saying "fuck you" niether one illegal in most states!

That's illegal in Texas, if there is someone with in ear shot whom may be offended. The cop doesn't count, though. Disorderly Conduct: language.

Example: Saying it at a biker bar in conversation? Not really an offense.
Example 2: Screaming it in the middle of a city council meeting? Probably an offense.

An offense of the order of that meeting, likely not of state law. Just as in court, say it in court in a disruptive way and it's contempt, not a different crime most likely.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Here it is not against the law as we have very strigent 'freedom of expression' laws.

Rather the laws permit great degrees of freedom; there is a difference. I doubt there are laws that specifically state you can flip cops off and the sort, it's the enforcement and the state courts, trial and appellate that interpret the COnst in a way that yields to it.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

saying "fuck you" niether one illegal in most states!

That's illegal in Texas, if there is someone with in ear shot whom may be offended.

Then that portion of the Texas statute, and/or manner of enforcing it, is unconstitutional.

It has stood up in court previously. You have access, check Lexus-Nexus and look at the case law. The reason why is due to the language of the statute in regards to a breach of the peace. Now, what you may disagree as to what constitutes a breach of the peace, but there is a bit of case law backing the statute up. That doesn't mean that tomorrow a new case will get kicked all the way up through the court system that then disallows the statute as written, though.

Here's the statute so you can see the language and make your own choice.

Quote

Sec. 42.01. DISORDERLY CONDUCT. (a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally or knowingly:

(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;

(2) makes an offensive gesture or display in a public place, and the gesture or display tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;

(3) creates, by chemical means, a noxious and unreasonable odor in a public place;

(4) abuses or threatens a person in a public place in an obviously offensive manner;

(5) makes unreasonable noise in a public place other than a sport shooting range, as defined by Section 250.001, Local Government Code, or in or near a private residence that he has no right to occupy;

(6) fights with another in a public place;

(7) discharges a firearm in a public place other than a public road or a sport shooting range, as defined by Section 250.001, Local Government Code;

(8) displays a firearm or other deadly weapon in a public place in a manner calculated to alarm;

(9) discharges a firearm on or across a public road;

(10) exposes his anus or genitals in a public place and is reckless about whether another may be present who will be offended or alarmed by his act; or

(11) for a lewd or unlawful purpose:

(A) enters on the property of another and looks into a dwelling on the property through any window or other opening in the dwelling;

(B) while on the premises of a hotel or comparable establishment, looks into a guest room not the person's own through a window or other opening in the room; or

(C) while on the premises of a public place, looks into an area such as a restroom or shower stall or changing or dressing room that is designed to provide privacy to a person using the area.

(b) It is a defense to prosecution under Subsection (a)(4) that the actor had significant provocation for his abusive or threatening conduct.

(c) For purposes of this section:

(1) an act is deemed to occur in a public place or near a private residence if it produces its offensive or proscribed consequences in the public place or near a private residence; and

(2) a noise is presumed to be unreasonable if the noise exceeds a decibel level of 85 after the person making the noise receives notice from a magistrate or peace officer that the noise is a public nuisance.

(d) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor unless committed under Subsection (a)(7) or (a)(8), in which event it is a Class B misdemeanor.

(e) It is a defense to prosecution for an offense under Subsection (a)(7) or (9) that the person who discharged the firearm had a reasonable fear of bodily injury to the person or to another by a dangerous wild animal as defined by Section 822.101, Health and Safety Code.

Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by Acts 1977, 65th Leg., p. 181, ch. 89, Sec. 1, 2, eff. Aug. 29, 1977; Acts 1983, 68th Leg., p. 4641, ch. 800, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1983; Acts 1991, 72nd Leg., ch. 145, Sec. 2, eff. Aug. 26, 1991; Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, Sec. 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994; Acts 1995, 74th Leg., ch. 318, Sec. 14, eff. Sept. 1, 1995; Acts 2001, 77th Leg., ch. 54, Sec. 4, eff. Sept. 1, 2001; Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 389, Sec. 1, eff. Sept. 1, 2003.

Many times the alleged offender must create disorder to another person, a cop cannot be the offended. For example, at 2am on a Fri night years ago I was awakened by an asshole in my apt complex who was honking and being a dick, I opened the door and looked out and then one the of the cops that was stationed in an apt overhead pulled up and saw this. I was about to go inseide when she asked me if I was bothewred, I replied that I'm ok. She asked me if I would be the complainant as she cannot be, the peace must be disturbed and a person other than a gov official be disturbed by it. So this is why disorderly conduct charges must have a victim, a gov official cannot be a victim in these cases.

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Gotta love Texas. The most immoral moral state around.

Like many states, it sure has its own unique character; but as far as I know (and I invite correction), it's the only state where a civilian is allowed to back-shoot a criminal suspect, even if he's unarmed, when he is in the process of running away from committing a strictly property crime. (While I don't approve, it's not really a bash; more of a clinical observation.)

If ALL states had such laws, we would see practicallly an end to break ins!

Apparently the criminals haven't yet received the memo:

http://www.prsearch.com/crime/texas/

They're 44 of 50, 1 being best.

Texas Crime Statistics for 2005


With a total population of 22,859,958, Texas had a total crime index of 1,111,384 or 1 crime for every 20.57 people.

Of which 10.90% (121,091) were of a violent nature while 89.10% (990,293) were crimes against property.

SO MUCH FOR DETERRENCE.

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

....
That is why I said"Most" stetes....Arkansas will haul yoru ass off for it too!
....

Talking about this tough guy? Was in our TV yesterday. Man, that's one genuine iron fist

http://www.mcso.org/index.php?a=GetModule&mn=Sheriff_Bio

Tell him something about *free speech* of drivers which have been pulled over - Jeez! One wrong answer: Hand cuffs! A wrong view: Jail.

All a subject of interpretation, methinks

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

....
That is why I said"Most" stetes....Arkansas will haul yoru ass off for it too!
....

Talking about this tough guy? Was in our TV yesterday. Man, that's one genuine iron fist

http://www.mcso.org/index.php?a=GetModule&mn=Sheriff_Bio

Tell him something about *free speech* of drivers which have been pulled over - Jeez! One wrong answer: Hand cuffs! A wrong view: Jail.

All a subject of interpretation, methinks

Sheriff Joke (Joe). He's prolly gonna resign and run for gov. Just as County Attny Andrew Thomas just resigned and is allegedly running for State AG. The deal with these guys is that they are under FEDERAL investigation for a shitload of things and I think they are gracefully backing away and will not run for other offices. These guys actually went after a Superior Ct judge after a detention officer was cought in film looking thru a defendant's file that was on his attny's stuff. They made copies of it too. Kinda shits all over the client confidentiality thingy.

Anyway the dipshit Det Officer was contempted by Judge Donahoe and told to publicly apologize to the lawyer, he refused so Donahoe sent him to jail on contempt. Of course the Sheriff just sat him in an office and no one knew the whereabouts of the young idiot. So then the appellate ct upheld the contempt and threw out anymore jail. Then Arpaio started going after Donahoe and friends personally, trying to dig shit up and air it. This is just what stirred the mess and now they're running from office, not for office - hoping it goes away.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Apparently the criminals haven't yet received the memo:

http://www.prsearch.com/crime/texas/

They're 44 of 50, 1 being best.

Texas Crime Statistics for 2005


With a total population of 22,859,958, Texas had a total crime index of 1,111,384 or 1 crime for every 20.57 people.

Of which 10.90% (121,091) were of a violent nature while 89.10% (990,293) were crimes against property.

SO MUCH FOR DETERRENCE.

It's not something the criminals are generally aware of, and it's not something that happens on anything approaching a regular basis, either.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Apparently the criminals haven't yet received the memo:

http://www.prsearch.com/crime/texas/

They're 44 of 50, 1 being best.

Texas Crime Statistics for 2005


With a total population of 22,859,958, Texas had a total crime index of 1,111,384 or 1 crime for every 20.57 people.

Of which 10.90% (121,091) were of a violent nature while 89.10% (990,293) were crimes against property.

SO MUCH FOR DETERRENCE.

It's not something the criminals are generally aware of, and it's not something that happens on anything approaching a regular basis, either.

If you bothered to post the entire string of posts, you would discover I replied to this:

If ALL states had such laws, we would see practicallly an end to break ins!

Texas is virtually the worst in crime and most are property crimes (90%), so the thought that shooting people in the backs as they run off with your TV creating this dellusion of deterrence is just that; a dellusion.

Try to post things in context, they seem so much more relevant.

Again I say: SO MUCH FOR DETERRENCE

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Again I say: SO MUCH FOR DETERRENCE

If the crooks don't KNOW about the law, how can they be deterred by it, Mr. Legal Genius?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[NSEMN8R 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Gotta love Texas. The most immoral moral state around.

Like many states, it sure has its own unique character; but as far as I know (and I invite correction), it's the only state where a civilian is allowed to back-shoot a criminal suspect, even if he's unarmed, when he is in the process of running away from committing a strictly property crime. (While I don't approve, it's not really a bash; more of a clinical observation.)

If ALL states had such laws, we would see practicallly an end to break ins!

Apparently the criminals haven't yet received the memo:

http://www.prsearch.com/crime/texas/

They're 44 of 50, 1 being best.

Texas Crime Statistics for 2005


With a total population of 22,859,958, Texas had a total crime index of 1,111,384 or 1 crime for every 20.57 people.

Of which 10.90% (121,091) were of a violent nature while 89.10% (990,293) were crimes against property.

SO MUCH FOR DETERRENCE.

89.1% of the prisoners are theives and the rest are violent criminals? Sounds too good to be true.

Don't you guys down there lock people up for weed and other bullshit victimless crimes like we do?

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Again I say: SO MUCH FOR DETERRENCE

If the crooks don't KNOW about the law, how can they be deterred by it, Mr. Legal Genius?

The deterrence I was referring to, can't believe you missed it, was the shooting in the back part. Word gets around about that kind of shit; remember, that was the point I was addressing that another poster claimed would cut down on robberies/burglaries? It's a lot easier to address the issues if you *try* to stick to the issues as presented.

[rhaig 0]

Quote

Quote

Again I say: SO MUCH FOR DETERRENCE

If the crooks don't KNOW about the law, how can they be deterred by it, Mr. Legal Genius?

shh... he's too busy telling Texas cops how the law in Texas works. When really that's only up to the judge.

--
Rob

[Lucky... 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Again I say: SO MUCH FOR DETERRENCE

If the crooks don't KNOW about the law, how can they be deterred by it, Mr. Legal Genius?

shh... he's too busy telling Texas cops how the law in Texas works. When really that's only up to the judge.

No, I'm showing you guys data. I realize it works from the "diddy rule" but I like data. Here's the data, accept it, refute it or just keep saying nothing.

Apparently the criminals haven't yet received the memo:

http://www.prsearch.com/crime/texas/

They're 44 of 50, 1 being best.

Texas Crime Statistics for 2005


With a total population of 22,859,958, Texas had a total crime index of 1,111,384 or 1 crime for every 20.57 people.

Of which 10.90% (121,091) were of a violent nature while 89.10% (990,293) were crimes against property.

SO MUCH FOR DETERRENCE.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Again I say: SO MUCH FOR DETERRENCE

If the crooks don't KNOW about the law, how can they be deterred by it, Mr. Legal Genius?

The deterrence I was referring to, can't believe you missed it, was the shooting in the back part. Word gets around about that kind of shit

How, by crystal ball? A robber that's been shot dead doesn't do much talking. I've had this discussion with other 'gunnies' before, and most of THEM didn't know about that law. If the 'gunnies' don't, why the FUCK do you think the criminals would?

Quote

remember, that was the point I was addressing that another poster claimed would cut down on robberies/burglaries?

If was more than a rare occurence, it *might* become a deterrent due to people actually learning about the law (if the papers mentioned it). I seem to recall 'hot' burglaries dropping in a few states when they implemented 'castle doctrine' law, but I could be misremembering.

Quote

It's a lot easier to address the issues if you *try* to stick to the issues as presented.

I have - you should try it sometime.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

No, I'm showing you guys data. I realize it works from the "diddy rule" but I like data. Here's the data, accept it, refute it or just keep saying nothing.

I can't seem to find 'diddy rule' in any sort search about law - something ELSE you've made up, like your ASSumption that the property crime rate in Texas has anything to do with laws about a 'thief in the night'?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[skycop 0]

It's happened to me many times, my usual response is just to laugh at the person, that normally takes the wind out of their sails.

If it's done as a direct challenge to enflame a situation I'm attempting to control, then it's normally a trip to jail for disorderly conduct.

My favorite response (only done it twice) is to give it back.
Example: I'm going to get something to eat in neighboring town at 3am, shirtless redneck drunk staggering down the sidewalk turns around and gives me the double barrel bird. As I drive by I give him the double barrel back, when I looked in the rear view mirror the look on the guys face was priceless. His shoulders sagged and he kept walking looking very disappointed and dejected. I drove on to get my burger, not the most professional thing to do, but it was just me and him, no one else was around.

"Just 'cause I'm simple, don't mean I'm stewpid!"

[Ion01 2]

Apparently its illegal to fart in texas too!

(3) creates, by chemical means, a noxious and unreasonable odor in a public place;

(5) makes unreasonable noise in a public place other than a sport shooting range, as defined by Section 250.001, Local Government Code, or in or near a private residence that he has no right to occupy;

And I thought we lived in a free country.......

[shropshire 0]

Quote

And I thought we lived in a free country.......

Bwhaaa ... What ever gave you that idea?

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Apparently its illegal to fart in texas too!

(3) creates, by chemical means, a noxious and unreasonable odor in a public place;

(5) makes unreasonable noise in a public place other than a sport shooting range, as defined by Section 250.001, Local Government Code, or in or near a private residence that he has no right to occupy;

And I thought we lived in a free country.......

So...Dave has to arrest himself?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

I'm sickened (once again) to see the police brutality in Maryland.

As pointed out in another thread, you do not know what else happened upstream of this incident.

We are all engines of karma

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

(3) creates, by chemical means, a noxious and unreasonable odor in a public place;

No farting in Texas?

Quote

(7) discharges a firearm in a public place other than a public road or a sport shooting range, as defined by Section 250.001, Local Government Code;

(9) discharges a firearm on or across a public road;

Aren't these contradictory?

We are all engines of karma

[JohnMitchell 16]

Quote

Quote

I'm sickened (once again) to see the police brutality in Maryland.

As pointed out in another thread, you do not know what else happened upstream of this incident.

What happened to make him deserve that?

The skipping down the street or the stopping and backing up against the wall when the cops came?

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Quote

(3) creates, by chemical means, a noxious and unreasonable odor in a public place;

No farting in Texas?

Quote

(7) discharges a firearm in a public place other than a public road or a sport shooting range, as defined by Section 250.001, Local Government Code;

(9) discharges a firearm on or across a public road;

Aren't these contradictory?

Chemical means not from your body (yes your body is a chemical process). Now strong stink bomb in a movie theater is a good example of what they're getting at.

As for 7 and 9, no shooting across roads or from the road. In short, don't shoot at road signs you drunk red neck!

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."