America - its all a bit odd...

Which rather reinforces my initial point; the UK simply does not have the problem with firearms crime that the US does.
There's more guns in America than there are people, they have a different attitude and culture which is largely based around roving independence so it won't go away and there's not a lot they can do about it. This also explains their bizarre views about legal aid and health care, if it was good enough for Lewis and Clark it's good enough for the good ol' boys.

If they take the guns away from the cops then the cops get slotted cos the civvies are armed to the teeth, but the civvies won't give up their arms cos it's part of their national identity - catch 22. I imagine it's a bit like asking the Brits to stop drinking tea.

Mind you, when the forefathers came to write the Constitution, and I'll grudgingly admit they were a uniquely brilliant set of men, they probably didn't have the foresight to realise that in the future Billybobjojo the third would be cutting around with an M16 rather than a Brown Bess.
 
Anyways interacting with American Police?

@endure might remember the advice and guidance we were giving back in the 70’s about the lovely US Police. Don’t be walking back to the ship after dark, they be arresting you!
 
There's more guns in America than there are people, they have a different attitude and culture which is largely based around roving independence so it won't go away and there's not a lot they can do about it. This also explains their bizarre views about legal aid and health care, if it was good enough for Lewis and Clark it's good enough for the good ol' boys.

If they take the guns away from the cops then the cops get slotted cos the civvies are armed to the teeth, but the civvies won't give up their arms cos it's part of their national identity - catch 22. I imagine it's a bit like asking the Brits to stop drinking tea.

Mind you, when the forefathers came to write the Constitution, and I'll grudgingly admit they were a uniquely brilliant set of men, they probably didn't have the foresight to realise that in the future Billybobjojo the third would be cutting around with an M16 rather than a Brown Bess.
AK with 50 round mag? This must be doing wonders for gun and ammo sales - buy shares in Colt?

1590931479760.png
 
wonder how many of the protesters will be chanting 'I cant breath' in two weeks time when the coronavirus they caught protesting kicks in
 
Appreciate the response, but if I can just home in on this bit. I'm asking for the specific legislation that allows them to order people on their own property to go indoors and open fire with less-lethal weapons when they don't comply.
I don’t live in Minnesota, and it will be a state law, so I don’t know. But in general, there is a concept of “failure to comply” in most state legislatures. As these people found out, if you fail to comply with a police officer’s order, you are inherently resisting and/or obstructing them in what they perceive to be their duty at the time.

Apparently the Governor’s curfew did permit people to be in their yards after curfew, but I would think a court would look at why the police ordered the masked group indoors at that particular time, and take a view on whether they exceeded their powers. If there was a mob of rioters one block away, then it’s reasonable to assume that the Police were concerned for either the peoples’ imminent safety, or that they would potentially join the mob, given that they were masked. If this squad were a mile from the action, then I’d have to question why a) they were moving quickly and b) why they were there at all, given the manpower required to control the mob - tending to suggest that the riot was close by.

It’s not about the text of the curfew to the letter, nor the private property aspect. The citizens of MSP are required to abide by the Governor’s curfew. They are also required to abide by all the other laws of Minnesota. Yes, you can be in your yard after curfew, but you can’t for example do so naked, you have to comply with the decency laws. And all the other laws, one of which is not to obstruct the police in execution of their duties.
 
I don’t live in Minnesota, and it will be a state law, so I don’t know. But in general, there is a concept of “failure to comply” in most state legislatures. As these people found out, if you fail to comply with a police officer’s order, you are inherently resisting and/or obstructing them in what they perceive to be their duty at the time.
Seriously? What the actual law is doesn't matter, if a cop thinks something should happen then it's illegal to not follow that instruction?

That's very odd.
 

OneTenner

LE
Book Reviewer
What the actual F*ck! "Sympathy" Black lives matter demo in Central London now. Any bets on the police starting a riot this evening?
There was one in Germany yesterday, not aware of any escalation though.
 
Seriously? What the actual law is doesn't matter, if a cop thinks something should happen then it's illegal to not follow that instruction?

That's very odd.
I believe what he’s describing is what we would call a Police State
 

endure

GCM
Anyways interacting with American Police?

@endure might remember the advice and guidance we were giving back in the 70’s about the lovely US Police. Don’t be walking back to the ship after dark, they be arresting you!

I went to many dodgy places while I was in the merch but the only place where the shipping agent refused to allow us to go ashore was Baltimore.
 
Seriously? What the actual law is doesn't matter, if a cop thinks something should happen then it's illegal to not follow that instruction?

That's very odd.
Seriously?

You don’t think it’s a Police officer’s job to apply the law to the situation at hand and issue instructions to control the situation? Indeed the specific law does not matter, if you obstruct a police officer in the execution of his duties, you can be arrested for it.

What is very odd is the assumption of a Police State. It’s much the same in the UK:

Obstructing a Police Officer - section 89(2) Police Act 1996
The offence of obstructing a police officer is committed when a person wilfully obstructs:

  • a constable in the execution of his duty, or
  • a person assisting a constable in the execution of the constable's duty.
In both countries, the population is therefore reliant upon the Police exercising good judgment in applying the relevant law(s) and controlling the situation.
 
As a sidenote, another scary thing to consider here is the madness of crowds and mob rule, and that also goes for the police.

I imagine the adrenaline was up, but wouldn't it make more sense to fire a warning shot in their direction and give several orders to go inside their house or they will open fire, rather than splatting them directly and intentionally?

It's also one of those tricky moments when the officer doing the shooting is unlikely to disobey the order of his superior to open fire. This would damage his career as well as lose face in front of his peers. How many of us would be willing to challenge that order if we were in his place?

Before we start calling the yanks out we'd do well to remember that we've also invaded a sovereign state by force just because we didn't like the cut of their dictator's gib. I know that's a controversial statement, but we can't exactly take the righteous high ground. The hardest thing in the world is to look at the record of your own country and question whether the record is morally right.
 
Seriously?

You don’t think it’s a Police officer’s job to apply the law to the situation at hand and issue instructions to control the situation? Indeed the specific law does not matter, if you obstruct a police officer in the execution of his duties, you can be arrested for it.

What is very odd is the assumption of a Police State. It’s much the same in the UK:



In both countries, the population is therefore reliant upon the Police exercising good judgment in applying the relevant law(s) and controlling the situation.

Obstructing a Police Officer - section 89(2) Police Act 1996
The offence of obstructing a police officer is committed when a person wilfully obstructs:

  • a constable in the execution of his duty, or
  • a person assisting a constable in the execution of the constable's duty.”

in your own time, please explain how standing in my doorway is wilfully obstructing the Police?
 
I went to many dodgy places while I was in the merch but the only place where the shipping agent refused to allow us to go ashore was Baltimore.
Indeed. I lived in the ’burbs of Baltimore for a year or so in 2015/16. In 2015 there were a series of riots, not dissimilar to the MSP ones, and for a similar reason. The Inner Harbor and Fells Point are nice tourist attractions. But you don’t have to go many blocks inland from there to where the riots were.
 
I went to many dodgy places while I was in the merch but the only place where the shipping agent refused to allow us to go ashore was Baltimore.
@76? we all got send a note telling us not to walk back after a couple of the lads got arrested walking back to Port Lauderdale.
‘Has your car broken down?
’no, just walking’
’ASSUME THE POSITION!
dumb police assumed They were up to nefariousness rather than just saving the cab fare and hauled them in.
cue not happy old man having to bail them out.
 
Seriously?

You don’t think it’s a Police officer’s job to apply the law to the situation at hand and issue instructions to control the situation? Indeed the specific law does not matter, if you obstruct a police officer in the execution of his duties, you can be arrested for it.
No issue with that. What I found strange was the idea that a law enforcement person can shout whatever they want and not obeying is instantly a crime.

The people standing on their property watching the police marching past were not being obstructive. They were not breaking any law or the curfew (helpfully posted earlier by @Koschei). What they were 'guilty' of was observing and recording.

I just find it hard to reconcile the Land of the Free "with Liberty and Justice for all" with this idea I've just heard about that if law enforcement give you an instruction to not obey is a crime.

In both countries, the population is therefore reliant upon the Police exercising good judgment in applying the relevant law(s) and controlling the situation.
I think I've spotted the flaw in your argument there.
 
Anyways interacting with American Police?

@endure might remember the advice and guidance we were giving back in the 70’s about the lovely US Police. Don’t be walking back to the ship after dark, they be arresting you!
That’s more of a reflection of you than the American police.....
 

Obstructing a Police Officer - section 89(2) Police Act 1996
The offence of obstructing a police officer is committed when a person wilfully obstructs:

  • a constable in the execution of his duty, or
  • a person assisting a constable in the execution of the constable's duty.”

in your own time, please explain how standing in my doorway is wilfully obstructing the Police?
Are you recording them, and do they know you are tracking their movements and counting bodies? Why do you have a group of 4-5 people on your porch in a riot?

If a mob does come through and attack whitey for kicks and giggles you are now part of the problem. If you catch a brick to the face, those very same people will then have to assist you.
 
Seriously?

You don’t think it’s a Police officer’s job to apply the law to the situation at hand and issue instructions to control the situation? Indeed the specific law does not matter, if you obstruct a police officer in the execution of his duties, you can be arrested for it.

What is very odd is the assumption of a Police State. It’s much the same in the UK:



In both countries, the population is therefore reliant upon the Police exercising good judgment in applying the relevant law(s) and controlling the situation.
Apart from the good chance of getting shot or having some plank kneel on your neck if you don't comply.
 

Obstructing a Police Officer - section 89(2) Police Act 1996
The offence of obstructing a police officer is committed when a person wilfully obstructs:

  • a constable in the execution of his duty, or
  • a person assisting a constable in the execution of the constable's duty.”

in your own time, please explain how standing in my doorway is wilfully obstructing the Police?
I’ve already said. If you are looking for me to quote Minnesota Criminal Code Section 123(b)(iv), to wit “A person commits a misdemeanor when they fail to remove themselves from their front porch when instructed to so by a peace officer” then you will be waiting a while.

If the shift commander at the local police station briefed his troops as “Within two blocks of the nearest edge of the rioting, everyone is to be inside after curfew; no exceptions”, and then the patrol squad we see in the video comes across this group masked up, the patrol commander is surely going to believe he is acting in accordance with the law when ordering them inside.
 

Latest Threads

Top