U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-23-2010, 12:32 PM
 
13,431 posts, read 14,339,492 times
Reputation: 7592

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLuckoftheDraw View Post
I...., what irks me more is that it's a problem for folks to have sex in public. Leave them the hell alone. That should be legal, imo, and the police should be concentrating on violent crimes and property crimes.
Please keep that type of thing in your neighborhhod.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-23-2010, 12:35 PM
 
Location: Center of the universe
24,757 posts, read 32,693,112 times
Reputation: 11780
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLuckoftheDraw View Post
That's definitely what I'm saying. I find your disgust digusting. Being disgusted by sex suggests other problems to me. Disturbed by observing someone having sex? First off, what if someone is disturbed by the fact that they can't have sex in public.
Get over it. Sex, no matter if it's gay or straight, is not appropriate for public places.

Quote:

Should they have to be disturbed because some family is uncomfortable with sex? We have a serious problem when people are disturbed or disgusted by sex, including if they're disturbed or disgusted by the thought or sight of other people having sex.
I really don't care if people have sex, nor do I care how they have sex, or with whom. I just don't think it should be a public activity. Most of society, and the law of the land, is in agreement.

I think those caught in the act of sex in public places should get the water cannon treatment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2010, 12:37 PM
 
13,431 posts, read 14,339,492 times
Reputation: 7592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo Bloe View Post
Because THAT'S THEIR JOB !!!
Nonsense. The law doesn't require a cop to make sure he "fights fair" when attacked.

If you choose to physically attack a cop, Darwin's Law will most likely intervene on the side of the cop and help clean up the gene pool.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2010, 12:41 PM
 
13,431 posts, read 14,339,492 times
Reputation: 7592
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo Bloe View Post
And which one of these calls for deadly force ??
I'll go with "Trying to disarm the arresting officer" for $50.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2010, 12:41 PM
 
Location: NJT 14C
429 posts, read 789,785 times
Reputation: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike0421 View Post
Maybe "LuckoftheDraw" we could have designated "whamming stations" cordoned off for every new public works endeavor, say, 100 square feet for every 5000 square feet built? We could install a curtain around the area.

The entire premise of this thread is getting obfuscated by an absurd notion that sexuality should be publicly allowed.
Keep those blinders on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2010, 12:52 PM
 
Location: NJT 14C
429 posts, read 789,785 times
Reputation: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by njkate View Post
LOL...how much acid had Zappa dropped when he made that statement
You know that Zappa didn't do drugs, right? He also had a pretty strict "no drug usage (or effects from usage) while on the job" policy for band members. A couple guys got canned for that over the years.

Here's a funny Zappa quote on LSD: "Did you ever consider that LSD was really one of the most dangerous drugs ever manufactured because the people who took it turned into yuppies?"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2010, 02:51 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
1,164 posts, read 1,676,667 times
Reputation: 1001
I still find it odd that the undercover detective didn't have non-lethal weapons such as pepper spray or a taser. Don't they teach law enforcement that for the get-go? I agree with other poster who said that there's something fishy about the detective's story.

The detective KNOWS how to use a gun properly and could have shot the guy in a non-fatal area of the body (leg, arm) instead of killing the poor guy! So what if the CEO was a supposed closeted homosexual? That's not the issue here. The issue is that the detective screwed up, period and should go to trial for it. I think that he shouldn't have had to use deadly force and should have called for backup if the CEO was really making that much of a problem for the officer.

Let this be a lesson to undercover law enforcement: ALWAYS bring a non-lethal weapon with you! Tasers and pepper-spray I suggest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2010, 03:29 PM
 
2,756 posts, read 5,190,843 times
Reputation: 729
Quote:
Originally Posted by stressedCollegeGirl89 View Post
I still find it odd that the undercover detective didn't have non-lethal weapons such as pepper spray or a taser. Don't they teach law enforcement that for the get-go? I agree with other poster who said that there's something fishy about the detective's story.

The detective KNOWS how to use a gun properly and could have shot the guy in a non-fatal area of the body (leg, arm) instead of killing the poor guy! So what if the CEO was a supposed closeted homosexual? That's not the issue here. The issue is that the detective screwed up, period and should go to trial for it. I think that he shouldn't have had to use deadly force and should have called for backup if the CEO was really making that much of a problem for the officer.

Let this be a lesson to undercover law enforcement: ALWAYS bring a non-lethal weapon with you! Tasers and pepper-spray I suggest.
Law enforcement personnel are not trained to fire their weapon only to wound. It is to kill.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2010, 03:47 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
1,164 posts, read 1,676,667 times
Reputation: 1001
Quote:
Originally Posted by 66nexus View Post
Law enforcement personnel are not trained to fire their weapon only to wound. It is to kill.
Regardless, the undercover detective shouldn't have killed the guy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2010, 04:03 PM
 
2,756 posts, read 5,190,843 times
Reputation: 729
Quote:
Originally Posted by stressedCollegeGirl89 View Post
Regardless, the undercover detective shouldn't have killed the guy.
That is not for you or I to say. I don't believe there are enough details to make solid judgment.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:00 PM.

2005-2017, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top