Guest Ro_ Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 If you had actually read my previous posts, you would have seen that. Are you representative of British police? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFatCoward Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 If you had actually read my previous posts, you would have seen that. Are you representative of British police?1. seen what? sorry but we are up to 17 pages now, i read the rest of the posts but it isn't like i took notes or anything. if you earlier said something in a post that i have missed and it was pertinent in this case then i apologise. 2. what are you talking about? does someone disagreeing with you render their whole occupation guilty of something? there are about 135,000 police in england and wales, i doubt we agree on anything.ps. Ro, did you -1 3 different posts in this thread in 10 minutes just cos i disagree with you? seems awful childish if you did. if not then at least one other person agrees with you in this case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slim da reaper Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 just maybe he might have acted like a tool?It's possible for anyone can act like a tool, but if you're going to say one side could have acted like that then you should weigh the argument with the officer could have acted like a tool as well?It is also wholly possible to gain an insight into someone's character via what Ro has done by reading posts, fiction over a sustained period of time.edit to add: I didn't -1 you bigfatcoward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Iceman of the North Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 2) pull out a handgun and blow the reluctant PC away?In the defence of the Israeli, it was a Macbook, not a PC: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigFatCoward Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 It's possible for anyone can act like a tool, but if you're going to say one side could have acted like that then you should weigh the argument with the officer could have acted like a tool as well?It is also wholly possible to gain an insight into someone's character via what Ro has done by reading posts, fiction over a sustained period of time.edit to add: I didn't -1 you bigfatcoward.i totally agree with your first part, apart from anything else there must have been multiple border guards against 2 men, how much force do you need to use to subdue 2 men?we'll have to agree to agree on the second part. wholly rational people lose it on a regular basis and act totally out of character, when the red mist comes down you can become a person you really dont like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Raidne Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 Seems kinda flimsy to me. This wouldn't be the case in the UK, I believe. Again, might be a cultural difference but to arrest the passenger because the driver refused to co-operate? No. There would have to be a solid, separate reason to arrest the passenger in most circumstances. 'We arrested the driver so we decided we'd take everyone in' wouldn't wash. This is not the case here either. The complicated rules are in regard to what kind of search can be conducted on the passenger and their personal effects. There's no complication about arresting the passengers - you'd have to have a separate charge specific to that passenger. Having said that, the border is a different thing. I hope the Americans have managed to get that aspect of our country across clearly. Very few of our constitutional criminal protections apply to the border police. What it's like to deal with border police and what it's like to deal with regular state police or city police are worlds apart from each other. And everyone knows that here. And it must not be that different in Canada either, since my whole car was searched and we were all detained and searched for over an hour with no probable cause by Canadian border police. I'm saying they took interior panels out of my car and ripped open every package in my trunk (it was close to Christmas and I was going back to my hometown after the trip to Canada). So I hope everyone understands that (a) all our interactions with police are not like this in America and (B) we are not alone in having juiced up border police that respect very few traditional criminal rights. But anyway, you can see that if the border police did in fact turn them over to local police, this is going to be all kinds of messed up, and the lawyers will have something to work with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaceBannon42 Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 They are not strangers and whatever one does, the other probably has knowledge of. Ex)smuggling, drugs, drug smuggling, drunk driving, sodomy, bestiality, no seatbelt, and speeding. I can't think of any instance where the passenger would be waved away if the driver was detained. Even if the driver was detained for a surly answer. Traffic stops are a great way to find people who have warrants out for their arrest. In the theory that if one is a troublemaker, both are. Two birds, one stone. Double condom, etc.That wasn't a warrant! And they let you drive my car away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ro_ Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 That wasn't a warrant! And they let you drive my car away.:rofl: I love you man. :rofl: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real Will Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 I'd say Watts is exactly NOT the sort of argumentative dick who spouts off crap. He is extremely retiring. Not to make excuses for him, especially since there isn't really a clear understanding of the situation, but driving from Canada to Nebraska, moving house for a friend, then driving from Nebraska to Canada would make me murderous. I think I'd be less then toadying to someone who detained me further.While I don't know anything about Watt's aside from this incident, and he may be the sweetest, most retiring guy, his blog posts in particular case don't speak well to his character. If I think he behaved badly at the traffic stop but don't necessarily believe that he needs to spend the rest of his life in jail, does that also make me a semi-illiterate mouth-breather, or does it just mean I'm a bit slow? :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ro_ Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 While I don't know anything about Watt's aside from this incident, and he may be the sweetest, most retiring guy, his blog posts in particular case don't speak well to his character. If I think he behaved badly at the traffic stop but don't necessarily believe that he needs to spend the rest of his life in jail, does that also make me a semi-illiterate mouth-breather, or does it just mean I'm a bit slow? :P:PJust because I have posted a few (years worth) of irritable, contrary posts here, does that mean I am always a dickweed? I think the posts in question do not show him at his best. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brandon Stark Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 I live a few miles from the crossing in question, and have probably used it to enter/return from Canada at least 4-5 times a year for most of my life. In the post-9/11 era I've been randomly stopped twice; once with a few other early-20's male friends and once with my wife a few years later. Both times I was asked to step out of the vehicle and stand a safe distance away while one officer kept an eye on us and the other performed a fairly thorough search of the vehicle interior and trunk.Now I'm a child of the police; a great-grandfater, grandfather, dad, two uncles, and my step-mom were all officers. Still, this particular situation produces an anxiety not unlike being pulled over when you don't think you've done anything wrong (tail-light out, etc.) multiplied by a rough factor of eleventy billion. I think he did the wrong thing in going against the directions he was given, but people also react strangely to stress sometimes and maybe he just wigged out. Either way its an odd way for Port Huron to end up in the news.EDIT: Since people were discussing the location of the physical check-point: For general reference, if you do a search for Port Huron on Google Maps, zoomed to 6 notches below the closest picture it will allow, the crossing is roughly located at the I-69 icon just before the river/border. Its very much at a point where you've committed to crossing the border and can reach no destination other than the bridge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpaceChampion Posted December 16, 2009 Share Posted December 16, 2009 I've met him. He is not a dick. He uses colourful language in person, in his blog, and his writings. So?He also usually communicates very thoughtfully and intelligently in person and in his writings. I've only met him a few times, but he was quite kind and gracious listening to my ideas when describing a novel I was writing at the time.I have no doubt he is the kind of guy to question authority when he encounters it. Despite the result, I don't think that is a bad quality. I think he would say if you are not risking getting punched in the face, then you are not asking the right questions. The events he described, I am not too concerned with, but the charge of assault is worrisome. I don't doubt it is a false charge, and he should not suffer jail time or financial ruin because of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kat Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 Yes, it is held that the driver is the enforcer of the car and has the ability to refuse to operate the vehicle until everyone is properly and legally fastened. The driver is the one who is legally and fiscally responsible for any seat belt violations for all in the car.This isn't true in California. Passengers over 16 can be fined for not wearing a seatbelt. 16 and under and it's the driver's fine. I just re-read the driver's manual a few days ago thanks to this thread. :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stubby Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 This isn't true in California. Passengers over 16 can be fined for not wearing a seatbelt. 16 and under and it's the driver's fine. I just re-read the driver's manual a few days ago thanks to this thread. :POur state went for the collective approach - its an offence for both the driver and the passenger to not wear a seatbelt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myshkin Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 Police report released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warg Arry Posted December 20, 2009 Share Posted December 20, 2009 The customs officer, Andrew Beaudry, then tried to get Watts out of the vehicle, a 2010 Toyota sport utility vehicle owned by Hertz Vehicles of SeattleOT, But I'm a little chuffed that this all involves a car of the future :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord of Oop North Posted December 20, 2009 Share Posted December 20, 2009 OT, But I'm a little chuffed that this all involves a car of the future :laugh:Why? It is standard practice for the automakers to release the model years in the preceding year. I.e. the 2010 Toyota Forerunner (a Toyota SUV) is already out and available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shryke Posted December 20, 2009 Share Posted December 20, 2009 Yeah, I've never understood that.Also, that article on the report was confusing as all hell. He got out, they wrestled with him, then he got back IN the car and they pulled him out of the car again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warg Arry Posted December 20, 2009 Share Posted December 20, 2009 Why? It is standard practice for the automakers to release the model years in the preceding year. I.e. the 2010 Toyota Forerunner (a Toyota SUV) is already out and available.Yes, thank you Mr logic.*sigh* I was going a long the lines of. sf author..it being 09 and he's in a..you know what never mind.You sir are one of the reason why I didn't follow my dream to become a stand up comic.You killer of random humour you.Na seriously you're alright. Just need a few more drinks. Don't you ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vaiski Posted March 20, 2010 Share Posted March 20, 2010 For those who care, Watts has been convicted of assault. He will be sentenced on April 26th. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.