Nurse vs Law enforcement (battle of Interpretation regarding consent law)
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

 
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic Reply to topic
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Lucky_Shot
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 10 Jan 2016
Posts: 1354

PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 1:14 pm    Post subject:

Hey Ringfinger I've been a too passionate in this discussion.

I respect any good person who becomes a cop for the right reasons. Cops have to make split second decisions all the time. But this is true for everyone and I always try to use my best judgement in any situation.
_________________
Ball Pope Ingram Nance Lopez
Ennis Clarkson Kuzma Randle Bogut
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 17729

PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 1:49 pm    Post subject:

Lucky_Shot wrote:
Hey Ringfinger I've been a too passionate in this discussion.

I respect any good person who becomes a cop for the right reasons. Cops have to make split second decisions all the time. But this is true for everyone and I always try to use my best judgement in any situation.


No worries bud. Maybe its just the way I grew up. Respect authority even if you disagree. I'm part asian, so I'm sure of it comes from that.

My approach has always been that we should give them the benefit of the doubt but if they misuse it than the penalties for doing so should be severe.

It's not about being on autopilot, it's just my belief about how a community or society works best. I realize it isn't perfect, people can abuse their power, but neither is an anarchy. =)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 18717

PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 2:57 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
I don't disagree with much that you are saying actually. And I don't need to let it go. You could simply not reply. You reply to my post and then expect me not to respond? How about you let it go because uhh you're wrong? Haha. Silly no?

I agree the cop does not have the right to order you to assist in an illegal search. However, whether he has or does not have that right is to be determined later, not by an individual at that moment in time of the impasse.

The cop believed he had the right to obtain the blood. The nurse believed otherwise. Now clearly, the police dept has issues with informing their department on proper policy here.

But in a scenario where a cop believes he is right, and an individual disagrees, I think we ought to yield to the cop but also place heavy punishments when they are wrong.

Fwiw, that doctor that waa forcibly removed from the plane? I thought he should have complied too, and then filed a complaint about it after the fact. Just my opinion, I don't really care if Aneus Hunter agrees or not.

And fwiw, a cop does not always have the right to detain you. Whether they did, is determined by the court, again, after the fact, not by the person he is trying to detain. There are many instances of cops detaining people that was later determined to be unlawful.


You're just babbling at this point. You are dead wrong. There is a bright line in these situations. It is called a search warrant. No one cares whether the cop thinks that he is right (unless we're talking about a special subset of situations that have nothing to do with what happened here). He has a warrant, or he doesn't. Without a warrant, he does not have a right to do anything. No one cares whether he thinks otherwise. It is the police department's responsibility to train its officers. If the department failed to properly train its officers, that is a ground for direct municipal liability for violation of constitutional rights.

But, by all means, keep playing the contrarian. Babble away.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 17729

PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 4:09 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
I don't disagree with much that you are saying actually. And I don't need to let it go. You could simply not reply. You reply to my post and then expect me not to respond? How about you let it go because uhh you're wrong? Haha. Silly no?

I agree the cop does not have the right to order you to assist in an illegal search. However, whether he has or does not have that right is to be determined later, not by an individual at that moment in time of the impasse.

The cop believed he had the right to obtain the blood. The nurse believed otherwise. Now clearly, the police dept has issues with informing their department on proper policy here.

But in a scenario where a cop believes he is right, and an individual disagrees, I think we ought to yield to the cop but also place heavy punishments when they are wrong.

Fwiw, that doctor that waa forcibly removed from the plane? I thought he should have complied too, and then filed a complaint about it after the fact. Just my opinion, I don't really care if Aneus Hunter agrees or not.

And fwiw, a cop does not always have the right to detain you. Whether they did, is determined by the court, again, after the fact, not by the person he is trying to detain. There are many instances of cops detaining people that was later determined to be unlawful.


You're just babbling at this point. You are dead wrong. There is a bright line in these situations. It is called a search warrant. No one cares whether the cop thinks that he is right (unless we're talking about a special subset of situations that have nothing to do with what happened here). He has a warrant, or he doesn't. Without a warrant, he does not have a right to do anything. No one cares whether he thinks otherwise. It is the police department's responsibility to train its officers. If the department failed to properly train its officers, that is a ground for direct municipal liability for violation of constitutional rights.

But, by all means, keep playing the contrarian. Babble away.


And you're responding to a babble with a babble? Law school / attorney or salesman? Nothing wrong with either, just curious.

I have never said the cop was right. I have said he was wrong from the get go. My point is that is doesn't matter. To me, if a cop tells me to do something, I might initially resist at first and try to explain but if they persist, I would comply and let the courts decide who was right. And if I felt he was wrong I would exhaust every option to prove it and work to make him accountable.

The cop was a total jerk and acted completely inappropriately but I have no doubts he felt (though wrongly so) that he had every right to the patients blood. Even his supervisor thought so. They clearly need to work on their training.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Huey Lewis & The News
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 18 Dec 2015
Posts: 2578
Location: So what's the uh...topic of discussion?

PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 4:25 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
To me, if a cop tells me to do something, I might initially resist at first and try to explain but if they persist, I would comply and let the courts decide who was right.


And this is what makes the nurse different from you, and exceptional, in that she was not a supplicating coward, when behaving like one would've been much easier.

This is a case of someone doing a better job at enforcing policy and individual rights than the person who was hired to do exactly that.
_________________
"All wars are civil wars, because all men are brothers."
http://forums.lakersground.net/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=13018
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 17729

PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 4:52 pm    Post subject:

Huey Lewis & The News wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
To me, if a cop tells me to do something, I might initially resist at first and try to explain but if they persist, I would comply and let the courts decide who was right.


And this is what makes the nurse different from you, and exceptional, in that she was not a supplicating coward, when behaving like one would've been much easier.

This is a case of someone doing a better job at enforcing policy and individual rights than the person who was hired to do exactly that.


So do you think criminals who evade arrest should be applauded for enforcing their opinions on policy to which they are accused of violating? For me, on principal, it doesnt matter if you are wrong or right. But I suppose it is always more cowardly to submit to a police officers demands than defy them which is braver.

But, i'm talking about as a matter of principal.

This one of those cases where I just go ughhhh because she was totally right and you can see it throughout the video and he was a jerk (putting it nicely) so it kind of feels right in the end.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 39186
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 6:33 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:


So do you think criminals who evade arrest should be applauded for enforcing their opinions on policy to which they are accused of violating?
I usually refrain from reading your foolish drivel but this caught my eye.

Comparing this nurse's actions to a criminal's is a new level of asinine intellectual dishonesty that has rarely been witnessed here.

I'm not even going to waste my time elaborating on the vast and obvious differences between the nurse and a criminal because you already know them, but you are just willfully ignoring them to play your ridiculous, contrarian games.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
Heís something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built thatís all for show goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 17729

PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 6:56 pm    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
ringfinger wrote:


So do you think criminals who evade arrest should be applauded for enforcing their opinions on policy to which they are accused of violating?
I usually refrain from reading your foolish drivel but this caught my eye.

Comparing this nurse's actions to a criminal's is a new level of asinine intellectual dishonesty that has rarely been witnessed here.

I'm not even going to waste my time elaborating on the vast and obvious differences between the nurse and a criminal because you already know them, but you are just willfully ignoring them to play your ridiculous, contrarian games.


I wasn't comparing the two as if they are one in the same. I was comparing the bravery associated with standing up to a police officer if you feel his interpretation of law differs from an individuals. The poster I was replying to said it is cowardly to submit to the demands of a police officer if you feel they are wrong. I don't necessarily agree with that for instance in the example of a person evading arrest. That may be brave, and not cowardly.

But lets use a different one. If a police officer pulls you over, you feel you have done nothing wrong, and he says, step out of the vehicle because he wants to search it, what is the correct thing to do?

I think the correct thing is to state your case, if he doesn't buy it, step out let him do his thing, and file a complaint first chance you get. And, he should be dslisciplined then severely, if not dismissed entirely for not having cause. That's ideally IMO, how it would go.

Just my philosophy. You get the benefit of the doubt in that profession. But, if you overstep, the penalties are severe and significant.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 78346
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 11:45 pm    Post subject:

No, what you mean is the cop tells you to punch the lady who is sitting in the passenger seat, or he will arrest you.
_________________
Tolerance is an agreement to live in peace, not an agreement to be peaceful no matter the conduct of others. A peace treaty is not a suicide pact.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
rwongega
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 19111
Location: UCLA -> NY

PostPosted: Sat Sep 02, 2017 11:54 pm    Post subject:

I wanted to find the one person who said the nurse should've complied with the officer's orders. Of course, I would find that only here.
_________________
http://media.giphy.com/media/zNyBPu5hEFpu/giphy.gif
http://bartsblackboard.com/files/2009/11/The-Simpsons-05x18-Burns-Heir.jpg

RIP Jonathan Tang
RIP Alex Gruenberg

Free KBCB
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
DaMuleRules
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 10 Dec 2006
Posts: 39186
Location: Making a safety stop at 15 feet.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 6:02 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
ringfinger wrote:


So do you think criminals who evade arrest should be applauded for enforcing their opinions on policy to which they are accused of violating?
I usually refrain from reading your foolish drivel but this caught my eye.

Comparing this nurse's actions to a criminal's is a new level of asinine intellectual dishonesty that has rarely been witnessed here.

I'm not even going to waste my time elaborating on the vast and obvious differences between the nurse and a criminal because you already know them, but you are just willfully ignoring them to play your ridiculous, contrarian games.


I wasn't comparing the two as if they are one in the same. I was comparing the bravery associated with standing up to a police officer if you feel his interpretation of law differs from an individuals. The poster I was replying to said it is cowardly to submit to the demands of a police officer if you feel they are wrong. I don't necessarily agree with that for instance in the example of a person evading arrest. That may be brave, and not cowardly.

But lets use a different one. If a police officer pulls you over, you feel you have done nothing wrong, and he says, step out of the vehicle because he wants to search it, what is the correct thing to do?

I think the correct thing is to state your case, if he doesn't buy it, step out let him do his thing, and file a complaint first chance you get. And, he should be dslisciplined then severely, if not dismissed entirely for not having cause. That's ideally IMO, how it would go.

Just my philosophy. You get the benefit of the doubt in that profession. But, if you overstep, the penalties are severe and significant.


No. Regardless of your "philosophy", the benefit of the doubt goes to the citizens. That's why we have laws regarding search and seizure. To protect citizens from unlawful behavior like that which was involved in this case. We have these laws to be preventative of the rights of the citizens, not simply be punitive towards officers who willfully violate them. The idea is to protect citizens. If the approach is simply that the citizens should accept unlawful behavior by law enforcement with the hope that officials who violate their rights be punished later, it defeats the whole purpose off the laws in the first place. That's not a "philosophy", it is how things are and should be.
_________________
You thought God was an architect, now you know
Heís something like a pipe bomb ready to blow
And everything you built thatís all for show goes up in flames
In 24 frames


Jason Isbell
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
RJBaca
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 1967
Location: Costa Rica

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 6:12 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
ringfinger wrote:


So do you think criminals who evade arrest should be applauded for enforcing their opinions on policy to which they are accused of violating?
I usually refrain from reading your foolish drivel but this caught my eye.

Comparing this nurse's actions to a criminal's is a new level of asinine intellectual dishonesty that has rarely been witnessed here.

I'm not even going to waste my time elaborating on the vast and obvious differences between the nurse and a criminal because you already know them, but you are just willfully ignoring them to play your ridiculous, contrarian games.


Gold!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
RJBaca
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 1967
Location: Costa Rica

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 6:18 am    Post subject:

New SUV!
_________________
"a new level of asinine intellectual dishonesty that has rarely been witnessed here."

DaMuleRules, 2 Sept 2017
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
LarryCoon
Site Staff
Site Staff


Joined: 11 Aug 2002
Posts: 9744

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 6:38 am    Post subject:

Ringfinger, the fact that the only analogies you can produce are ones that are disanalogous to the situation at hand should be your first clue.

Let me try. I'm not even going to use the "Cop pulls you over" scenario because even that is disanalogous -- you are being detained at that point, which the cop has the right to do, and the rules are different in that situation.

So, you're working at Starbucks. Cop comes in and orders you to punch another customer. What do you do?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
ringfinger
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 08 Oct 2013
Posts: 17729

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 10:26 am    Post subject:

LarryCoon wrote:
Ringfinger, the fact that the only analogies you can produce are ones that are disanalogous to the situation at hand should be your first clue.

Let me try. I'm not even going to use the "Cop pulls you over" scenario because even that is disanalogous -- you are being detained at that point, which the cop has the right to do, and the rules are different in that situation.

So, you're working at Starbucks. Cop comes in and orders you to punch another customer. What do you do?


I think that too is a false analogy. That isn't something that would otherwise normally occur. Obtaining blood isn't abnormal at all. It's a perfectly reasonable request so long as certain conditions were met. Clearly, whether conditions were met was the issue.

I'm not saying people should just do EVERYTHING a cop requests. Of course if one says go commit genocide I'm not going to do it.

Let's try another one. Cop walks up to me as I am entering the office through a badge-secured side door. He asks me to let him in. We have a policy at work not to allow anyone in without a visitor badge and according to the HR handbook, that could result in disciplonary action including termination. I explain it to him and he persists.

I think i should probably just let him in. But, then I would immediately notify my security team about it and possibly follow up with a complaint to the police department if he was an arse about it.

I'm not defending the cops actions here. I've said from my first post in here that this is one of those where you feel for the woman because she did not deserve to be treated that way. But, its just my opinion, and you don't have to agree, that when my belief about what is lawful, conflicts with a police officers, I will generally yield to them but go follow up after to be sure no rights were violated.

Would I yield.to a police request for genocide? No. A police request to sexual assault someone? No. A police request to punch someone? No.

I know we live in a if you're not far left you're far right world (and vice versa) but I waa merely saying that if even if I thought a cop was wrong about a policy or a law, I would generally, generally, yield to them and I think others should too. Generally. Not for genocide requests or punching or killing or anything like that if that isn't obvious.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 78346
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 10:56 am    Post subject:

DaMuleRules wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
DaMuleRules wrote:
ringfinger wrote:


So do you think criminals who evade arrest should be applauded for enforcing their opinions on policy to which they are accused of violating?
I usually refrain from reading your foolish drivel but this caught my eye.

Comparing this nurse's actions to a criminal's is a new level of asinine intellectual dishonesty that has rarely been witnessed here.

I'm not even going to waste my time elaborating on the vast and obvious differences between the nurse and a criminal because you already know them, but you are just willfully ignoring them to play your ridiculous, contrarian games.


I wasn't comparing the two as if they are one in the same. I was comparing the bravery associated with standing up to a police officer if you feel his interpretation of law differs from an individuals. The poster I was replying to said it is cowardly to submit to the demands of a police officer if you feel they are wrong. I don't necessarily agree with that for instance in the example of a person evading arrest. That may be brave, and not cowardly.

But lets use a different one. If a police officer pulls you over, you feel you have done nothing wrong, and he says, step out of the vehicle because he wants to search it, what is the correct thing to do?

I think the correct thing is to state your case, if he doesn't buy it, step out let him do his thing, and file a complaint first chance you get. And, he should be dslisciplined then severely, if not dismissed entirely for not having cause. That's ideally IMO, how it would go.

Just my philosophy. You get the benefit of the doubt in that profession. But, if you overstep, the penalties are severe and significant.


No. Regardless of your "philosophy", the benefit of the doubt goes to the citizens. That's why we have laws regarding search and seizure. To protect citizens from unlawful behavior like that which was involved in this case. We have these laws to be preventative of the rights of the citizens, not simply be punitive towards officers who willfully violate them. The idea is to protect citizens. If the approach is simply that the citizens should accept unlawful behavior by law enforcement with the hope that officials who violate their rights be punished later, it defeats the whole purpose off the laws in the first place. That's not a "philosophy", it is how things are and should be.


Not to mention that many jurors seem to hold the "philosophy" after the fact too.
_________________
Tolerance is an agreement to live in peace, not an agreement to be peaceful no matter the conduct of others. A peace treaty is not a suicide pact.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
hoopschick29
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 23 Jul 2004
Posts: 12327
Location: Los Angeles

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 11:21 am    Post subject:

LarryCoon wrote:
Ringfinger, the fact that the only analogies you can produce are ones that are disanalogous to the situation at hand should be your first clue.

Let me try. I'm not even going to use the "Cop pulls you over" scenario because even that is disanalogous -- you are being detained at that point, which the cop has the right to do, and the rules are different in that situation.

So, you're working at Starbucks. Cop comes in and orders you to punch another customer. What do you do?


Unfortunately there are a lot of people like RF who would be good OPs or embedded agents in a police state. They see no difference between a nurse protecting the rights of her patient and a suspect being pulled over for potential DUI. A cop can do what he wants, laws be damned. These types of citizens are very dangerous to a democracy.
_________________
Nicolas Caldwell (The Whispers) 1944-2016
Natalie Cole 1950-2016
David Bowie 1947-2016
Glenn Frey 1948-2016
Maurice White 1941-2016
Malik Isaac Taylor aka Phife 1970-2016
Prince 1958-2016
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Omar Little
Moderator
Moderator


Joined: 02 May 2005
Posts: 78346
Location: Formerly Known As 24

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 11:27 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
LarryCoon wrote:
Ringfinger, the fact that the only analogies you can produce are ones that are disanalogous to the situation at hand should be your first clue.

Let me try. I'm not even going to use the "Cop pulls you over" scenario because even that is disanalogous -- you are being detained at that point, which the cop has the right to do, and the rules are different in that situation.

So, you're working at Starbucks. Cop comes in and orders you to punch another customer. What do you do?


I think that too is a false analogy. That isn't something that would otherwise normally occur. Obtaining blood isn't abnormal at all. It's a perfectly reasonable request so long as certain conditions were met. Clearly, whether conditions were met was the issue.

I'm not saying people should just do EVERYTHING a cop requests. Of course if one says go commit genocide I'm not going to do it.

Let's try another one. Cop walks up to me as I am entering the office through a badge-secured side door. He asks me to let him in. We have a policy at work not to allow anyone in without a visitor badge and according to the HR handbook, that could result in disciplonary action including termination. I explain it to him and he persists.

I think i should probably just let him in. But, then I would immediately notify my security team about it and possibly follow up with a complaint to the police department if he was an arse about it.

I'm not defending the cops actions here. I've said from my first post in here that this is one of those where you feel for the woman because she did not deserve to be treated that way. But, its just my opinion, and you don't have to agree, that when my belief about what is lawful, conflicts with a police officers, I will generally yield to them but go follow up after to be sure no rights were violated.

Would I yield.to a police request for genocide? No. A police request to sexual assault someone? No. A police request to punch someone? No.

I know we live in a if you're not far left you're far right world (and vice versa) but I waa merely saying that if even if I thought a cop was wrong about a policy or a law, I would generally, generally, yield to them and I think others should too. Generally. Not for genocide requests or punching or killing or anything like that if that isn't obvious.


This is how fascism works. By the time you reach the threshold where the benefit of the doubt stops, it's too late.
_________________
Tolerance is an agreement to live in peace, not an agreement to be peaceful no matter the conduct of others. A peace treaty is not a suicide pact.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
venturalakersfan
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 14 Apr 2001
Posts: 118734
Location: The Gold Coast

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 11:47 am    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Aeneas Hunter wrote:
ringfinger wrote:
What if the police come to your door with a warrant and you don't agree the warrant was lawfully obtained? What should you do? Shoot the cop? Run? Spit in his face? Hold the door closed with both hands and yell no?

The two were at odds on what the policy was. The cop called his supervisor who told him to arrest her if she didn't comply. She called her supervisor who told the cop not to move forward.

They were at an impasse on what was legally right. This happens every day. You were speeding, no I was not. Sometimes the officer was right. Sometimes the other person was right. In the moment, IMO, the final arbiter is the cop, not the individual.

And if he court later finds he was wrong, and egregiously so, he should be disciplined if not fired since it is his job to interpet the law correctly.


Bull. I understand that you love to be the contrarian on stuff like this, but you are just plain wrong. You need to suck it up and move on to something else.

1. This has absolutely nothing to do with physically resisting a cop. That's just a lame attempt on your part to come up with an analogy. If the cops kick your door in, you litigate the issue later. Duh. But you don't have to let them in just them in because they say so. Again, duh. If the cops marched into the patient's room and took a blood sample, the nurse had no right or obligation to physically resist them. But when they ordered her to perform an illegal search, she had every right to say no.

2. There was no impasse over what the policy was. The cop did not have a warrant. The applicable policy is contained in the fourth amendment. The cop's opinion about what the hospital should do is worth about as much as the hot air that he was spouting.

3. The speeding analogy is just plain stupid. A cop has the right to detain you. A cop does not have the right to order you to assist in an illegal search. If he wants it to be legal, the fourth amendment tells him exactly what to do: get a warrant.

You're wrong. Let it go.


I don't disagree with much that you are saying actually. And I don't need to let it go. You could simply not reply. You reply to my post and then expect me not to respond? How about you let it go because uhh you're wrong? Haha. Silly no?

I agree the cop does not have the right to order you to assist in an illegal search. However, whether he has or does not have that right is to be determined later, not by an individual at that moment in time of the impasse.

The cop believed he had the right to obtain the blood. The nurse believed otherwise. Now clearly, the police dept has issues with informing their department on proper policy here.

But in a scenario where a cop believes he is right, and an individual disagrees, I think we ought to yield to the cop but also place heavy punishments when they are wrong.

Fwiw, that doctor that waa forcibly removed from the plane? I thought he should have complied too, and then filed a complaint about it after the fact. Just my opinion, I don't really care if Aneus Hunter agrees or not.

And fwiw, a cop does not always have the right to detain you. Whether they did, is determined by the court, again, after the fact, not by the person he is trying to detain. There are many instances of cops detaining people that was later determined to be unlawful.


No, whether the cop had the right to ask or not was pre-determined, the medical center had a policy agreement with the police. The cop is guilty of being ignorant of that policy.
_________________
#lakerclownshow
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
hoopschick29
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 23 Jul 2004
Posts: 12327
Location: Los Angeles

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 11:48 am    Post subject:

The confused fascist insists that there was some confusion on the law and based on that confusion, the nurse should have just complied. Let's be clear - there was NO confusion here. That cop knew he had no legal basis for that blood sample. All the facts were already established before he blew his wad. The subject was not a suspect. He did not have a warrant, and knew he couldn't get one BECAUSE the subject was not a suspect, and thus not under arrest. That leaves consent, and the subject was unconscious and therefore could not give it. All FACTS before Bozo the Clown went crazy. He accosted that nurse because he was pissed that she would not break the law for him. Btw, Bozo the Clown looked a little too comfortable putting hands on a woman. They should do a welfare check on his wife if he has one.
_________________
Nicolas Caldwell (The Whispers) 1944-2016
Natalie Cole 1950-2016
David Bowie 1947-2016
Glenn Frey 1948-2016
Maurice White 1941-2016
Malik Isaac Taylor aka Phife 1970-2016
Prince 1958-2016
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hector the Pup
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 33200
Location: L.A.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 5:08 pm    Post subject:

How the hell did this go 3 pages? Cops asked for a blood sample. Nurse correctly lists the 3 ways it can be legally obtained. Cops satisfy none of them. Nurse doesn't provide blood sample. End of story except in this case when cops don't know the law and arrest nurse for knowing more about their jobs than they do.

Let's skip to the part of the story where these guys get suspended or tired while the city gets sued for employing underqualified people.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Aeneas Hunter
Franchise Player
Franchise Player


Joined: 12 Jul 2005
Posts: 18717

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 5:39 pm    Post subject:

Hector the Pup wrote:
Let's skip to the part of the story where these guys get suspended or tired while the city gets sued for employing underqualified people.


One got already got suspended, another got put on administrative duty. As for the second part, the fact that the nurse is talking to the press with her lawyer present tells you where that stands.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Hector the Pup
Retired Number
Retired Number


Joined: 25 Jul 2002
Posts: 33200
Location: L.A.

PostPosted: Sun Sep 03, 2017 5:49 pm    Post subject:

Aeneas Hunter wrote:
Hector the Pup wrote:
Let's skip to the part of the story where these guys get suspended or tired while the city gets sued for employing underqualified people.


One got already got suspended, another got put on administrative duty. As for the second part, the fact that the nurse is talking to the press with her lawyer present tells you where that stands.


And it's going to go into the long neglected book of ways cutting corners in the hiring process can cost you tenfold in the long run.in this case it Will probably be closer to a hundredfold.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
RJBaca
Star Player
Star Player


Joined: 16 Oct 2003
Posts: 1967
Location: Costa Rica

PostPosted: Tue Sep 05, 2017 5:04 am    Post subject:

Utah hospital to police: Stay away from our nurses

LINK (FIFY)
_________________
"a new level of asinine intellectual dishonesty that has rarely been witnessed here."

DaMuleRules, 2 Sept 2017
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Ujah's Goat
Starting Rotation
Starting Rotation


Joined: 01 Jun 2016
Posts: 914
Location: Babylon

PostPosted: Tue Sep 05, 2017 12:16 pm    Post subject:

ringfinger wrote:
Lucky_Shot wrote:
Hey Ringfinger I've been a too passionate in this discussion.

I respect any good person who becomes a cop for the right reasons. Cops have to make split second decisions all the time. But this is true for everyone and I always try to use my best judgement in any situation.


No worries bud. Maybe its just the way I grew up. Respect authority even if you disagree. I'm part asian, so I'm sure of it comes from that.

My approach has always been that we should give them the benefit of the doubt but if they misuse it than the penalties for doing so should be severe.

It's not about being on autopilot, it's just my belief about how a community or society works best. I realize it isn't perfect, people can abuse their power, but neither is an anarchy. =)


Kick rocks dude
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic    LakersGround.net Forum Index -> Off Topic All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Page 3 of 4
Jump to:  

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum






Graphics by uberzev
© 1995-2010 LakersGround.net. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy. Terms of Use.
LakersGround is an unofficial news source serving the fan community since 1995.
We are in no way associated with the Los Angeles Lakers or the National Basketball Association.


Powered by phpBB