Henry Louis Gates arrested when trying to force open door of his own home

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If a judge can throw someone in jail for being disrespectful in a court, can't a police officer arrest someone for being disrespectful/disruptive in a chaotic situation in which criminal activity is suspected?

The court house is not your home. At home we can do just about anything,...spit on the floor, curse a lot, sleep with three people at once, walk around wearing what ever...that is what freedom is all about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the transmissions, the Officer sounds completely cool-headed. Both agree that Gates was for some reason screaming though you cannot hear it in the tapes/they only seem activated when the officer is speaking directly to a member of his team.

Here is the link to your rights and responsibilities when interacting with police according to NYPD:

http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/html/community_affairs/interactingwithpolice.shtml

Wonder if Gates can/will sue the police department.

Wonder if Crowley can/will sue Obama

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To me, you should be able to swing from your chandelier in your own home covered in honey, even in front of the police, and they should not arrest you. You should be able to call the police ugly, and not get arrested. You should be able to tell the police officer that has a lame job, and not get arrested. Once the ID was shown, the police officer should have quickly left the premises. Gates was in a foul mood after traveling, which is not illegal.

The policeman was establishing that this was, in fact, Gate's home. You should not be able to do any of the above while a police officer is conducting an investigation. And people are arrested or cited for noise complaints all the time in their own home. Yes, home is castle-but it does not come with zero responsibilities for civil conduct.

[Anonymous]

"To his eventual embarrassment, [Gates] wrote in his Yale application:

"As always, whitey now sits in judgment of me, preparing to cast my fate. It is your decision either to let me blow with the wind as a nonentity or to encourage the development of self. Allow me to prove myself.""

http://www.wtop.com/?nid=104&pid=0&sid=1725138&page=2

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a judge can throw someone in jail for being disrespectful in a court, can't a police officer arrest someone for being disrespectful/disruptive in a chaotic situation in which criminal activity is suspected?

I don't see why there should be any comparison between a judge's and a police officer's authority. There's a vast difference in the civil functions of their positions, their general and legal educations, and the processes for being declared morally fit for their roles.

A judge's discretionary powers don't belong to policemen, who basically exist to bring suspects to judges. They're in a strange in-between position as traditionally blue collar workers clean enough to serve as functionaries of law enforcement (hopefully) but menial enough to get their hands dirty. They're socially higher than many of the criminals they deal with, but lower than professors in most interactions. I think these class-conscious shoulder chips have a lot to do with police behavior that pushes the boundaries of their legal authority.

The NYPD site simply instructs citizens to treat officers respectfully, but does not back that up with summaries or evaluations of legal rights. Of course, it would be best if all parties could behave respectfully, but I think free speech protections apply much more than the NYPD site is willing to let on.

Wow... really? "Socially lower?"

Methinks you might be a tad class-conscious yourself. Yuck.

[Anonymous]

People who put their lives on the line for others are socially higher to me

[Anonymous]

A must-see video from CNN today:

http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2009/07/26/nr.comrade.in.arms.cnn

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A must-see video from CNN today:

http://www.cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2009/07/26/nr.comrade.in.arms.cnn

I am glad to see the police sticking together. But it seems to me that the woman who stood up for Crowley was doing exactly what she criticized the President for, sticking up for a friend without having been there to see all the facts. However, I do not mean to equate the POTUS shooting off his yap with an ordinary citizen doing so, and I wish he could manage a less mealy-mouthed admission that he blew it than his "calibration" remark. Note: I am not saying he was necessarily wrong that the arrest was stupid, just that blurting it out in a press conference was wrong.

Also, I agree with the sentiment of those who put cops as high or higher than professors. For that matter, the guys who pick up garbage probably do more for society than most academics. However, the reality is that society puts profs on a higher rung than cops. Life is unfair!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To me, you should be able to swing from your chandelier in your own home covered in honey, even in front of the police, and they should not arrest you. You should be able to call the police ugly, and not get arrested. You should be able to tell the police officer that has a lame job, and not get arrested. Once the ID was shown, the police officer should have quickly left the premises. Gates was in a foul mood after traveling, which is not illegal.

The policeman was establishing that this was, in fact, Gate's home. You should not be able to do any of the above while a police officer is conducting an investigation. And people are arrested or cited for noise complaints all the time in their own home. Yes, home is castle-but it does not come with zero responsibilities for civil conduct.

Why did he not LEAVE after the ID was shown. Was he mulling around hoping to find something else? There are constitutional issues WRT this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a judge can throw someone in jail for being disrespectful in a court, can't a police officer arrest someone for being disrespectful/disruptive in a chaotic situation in which criminal activity is suspected?

I don't see why there should be any comparison between a judge's and a police officer's authority. There's a vast difference in the civil functions of their positions, their general and legal educations, and the processes for being declared morally fit for their roles.

A judge's discretionary powers don't belong to policemen, who basically exist to bring suspects to judges. They're in a strange in-between position as traditionally blue collar workers clean enough to serve as functionaries of law enforcement (hopefully) but menial enough to get their hands dirty. They're socially higher than many of the criminals they deal with, but lower than professors in most interactions. I think these class-conscious shoulder chips have a lot to do with police behavior that pushes the boundaries of their legal authority.

The NYPD site simply instructs citizens to treat officers respectfully, but does not back that up with summaries or evaluations of legal rights. Of course, it would be best if all parties could behave respectfully, but I think free speech protections apply much more than the NYPD site is willing to let on.

Wow... really? "Socially lower?"

Methinks you might be a tad class-conscious yourself. Yuck.

I have to agree though. Police officers carry a chip.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a judge can throw someone in jail for being disrespectful in a court, can't a police officer arrest someone for being disrespectful/disruptive in a chaotic situation in which criminal activity is suspected?

I don't see why there should be any comparison between a judge's and a police officer's authority. There's a vast difference in the civil functions of their positions, their general and legal educations, and the processes for being declared morally fit for their roles.

A judge's discretionary powers don't belong to policemen, who basically exist to bring suspects to judges. They're in a strange in-between position as traditionally blue collar workers clean enough to serve as functionaries of law enforcement (hopefully) but menial enough to get their hands dirty. They're socially higher than many of the criminals they deal with, but lower than professors in most interactions. I think these class-conscious shoulder chips have a lot to do with police behavior that pushes the boundaries of their legal authority.

The NYPD site simply instructs citizens to treat officers respectfully, but does not back that up with summaries or evaluations of legal rights. Of course, it would be best if all parties could behave respectfully, but I think free speech protections apply much more than the NYPD site is willing to let on.

Wow... really? "Socially lower?"

Methinks you might be a tad class-conscious yourself. Yuck.

I have to agree though. Police officers carry a chip.

Wow. Any one else care to make vast generalizations??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If a judge can throw someone in jail for being disrespectful in a court, can't a police officer arrest someone for being disrespectful/disruptive in a chaotic situation in which criminal activity is suspected?

I don't see why there should be any comparison between a judge's and a police officer's authority. There's a vast difference in the civil functions of their positions, their general and legal educations, and the processes for being declared morally fit for their roles.

A judge's discretionary powers don't belong to policemen, who basically exist to bring suspects to judges. They're in a strange in-between position as traditionally blue collar workers clean enough to serve as functionaries of law enforcement (hopefully) but menial enough to get their hands dirty. They're socially higher than many of the criminals they deal with, but lower than professors in most interactions. I think these class-conscious shoulder chips have a lot to do with police behavior that pushes the boundaries of their legal authority.

The NYPD site simply instructs citizens to treat officers respectfully, but does not back that up with summaries or evaluations of legal rights. Of course, it would be best if all parties could behave respectfully, but I think free speech protections apply much more than the NYPD site is willing to let on.

Wow... really? "Socially lower?"

Methinks you might be a tad class-conscious yourself. Yuck.

I have to agree though. Police officers carry a chip.

Really??? And what "class" do you belong to? Because you are obviously very special yourself.

[Anonymous]

I think most DCUMs belong to the class of people who send their children to be educated at universities rather than to be trained at the police academy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think most DCUMs belong to the class of people who send their children to be educated at universities rather than to be trained at the police academy.

Good grief...

I need to go take a shower to wash the "ick" off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think most DCUMs belong to the class of people who send their children to be educated at universities rather than to be trained at the police academy.

Good grief...

I need to go take a shower to wash the "ick" off.

I think the poster you are referring to was being toungue-in-cheek. S/he's not saying she agrees with her own statement. It's a criticism of classists on this board. Get it?