- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: New Louisiana law will criminalize approaching police under certain circumstances
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:04 am to Flats
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:04 am to Flats
quote:
Of course they do, but adding objective clarity when it's possible can be a good thing.
If a cop told me to back up to the sidewalk, that's better for me than "back up some unspecified distance or I'll arrest you". I'd rather have a clear delineation between what will and won't get me arrested vs relying on how bad a day the cop is having.
This is the correct answer.
When I was younger I also used to play Libertarian. I grew up since then.
This post was edited on 5/31/24 at 9:05 am
0
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:04 am to Flats
quote:
Have you decided if this is an expansion of an existing restriction or a new restriction yet? You've claimed both.
Why can't they be both?
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:05 am to Flats
quote:
If a cop told me to back up to the sidewalk, that's better for me than "back up some unspecified distance or I'll arrest you".
What if his order to the sidewalk is illegal?
quote:
I'd rather have a clear delineation between what will and won't get me arrested vs relying on how bad a day the cop is having.
Update: you're always subject to how bad a day the cop is having.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:06 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Why can't they be both?
Because “new” and “existing” are contradictory terms. You attended some sort of university, correct?
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:07 am to Indefatigable
quote:
Defining a fixed distance you have to back up to once ordered to do so.
Just what is needed. More laws and regulations.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:09 am to Flats
quote:
Because “new” and “existing” are contradictory terms.
New regulations are added to existing laws all the time.
New laws are added to existing regulations all the time.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:10 am to 4cubbies
Well they already made being a conservative a crime in New York.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:11 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Just what is needed. More laws and regulations.
I don’t think so. I think it only muddies the waters even further because everything involved is still discretion-based, and ain’t nobody got time for a tape measure
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:12 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Update: you're always subject to how bad a day the cop is having.
And you don’t see any upside at all to reducing their discretionary power?
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:13 am to Flats
If he’s having that bad of a day, an arbitrary distance that no one is going to ever actually measure won’t remove those concerns.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:14 am to Flats
quote:
And you don’t see any upside at all to reducing their discretionary power?
The trade-off for the assumption of their honesty in this distance assessment is a bad one for conceding rights that exist within that distance. I'm not a fan of trading my rights for a feeling of security.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:14 am to Indefatigable
quote:
If he’s having that bad of a day, an arbitrary distance that no one is going to ever actually measure won’t remove those concerns.
Correct
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:16 am to 4cubbies
What a win for big government. More rights of thee and not for me. Police are the worst union crybabies of all time.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:17 am to Indefatigable
quote:
If he’s having that bad of a day, an arbitrary distance that no one is going to ever actually measure won’t remove those concerns.
If you end up getting charged it absolutely can be measured from video.
Again, the only law decent people need is “don’t interfere”, but the world is full of assholes and that’s why more laws get created.
Consider this: would you be ok with a LE body cam policy that said it had to be on at all times unless the cop felt it was interfering with his job? I wouldn’t.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:19 am to Flats
quote:
would you be ok with a LE body cam policy that said it had to be on at all times unless the cop felt it was interfering with his job?
Not at all. In fact, I’d be fine with law or civil service rules stating that turning it off at all is a fireable offense.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:19 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
I'm not a fan of trading my rights for a feeling of security.
You’ve already done this 1,000 over. On this topic we’re just talking about whether we want an objective standard in the law or not. I can see the upsides.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:20 am to roadGator
quote:
What right do you have according to the law to shove your camera in the face of an officer doing his duty? Can you sit in his lap to film? Is 10 feet enough? How close do you want to be?
As close as you want as long as you are not hindering them.
Bootlickers love a police state.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:20 am to LSUAngelHere1
quote:
As close as you want as long as you are not hindering them.
Everyone in the thread agrees with that statement.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:31 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Correct
Then you already don’t have the freedoms you claim this law would restrict. Nothing will change at all.
Posted on 5/31/24 at 9:35 am to oklahogjr
quote:
What a win for big government.
This is why Louisiana's government will always be the worst of both worlds. Massive, restrictive yet non responsive.
Page 6 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News