Texas state troopers give two women illegal cavity searches

MeachTheMonster

YourFriendlyHoodMonster
Joined
May 24, 2012
Messages
69,066
Reputation
3,719
Daps
108,880
Reppin
Tha Land
why do I have to look elsewhere when you use it in this thread? was this issue 'the straw that broke the camel's back'?
You said I needed an excuse to say it a lot. Which implied that my opinion in this thread was manufactured for the sole purpose of saying the word.

You shouldn't make claims unless you have evidence, or at least a good explanation, cause otherwise you just make yourself look like a fool.
 

daze23

Siempre Fresco
Joined
Jun 25, 2012
Messages
31,965
Reputation
2,692
Daps
44,042
You said I needed an excuse to say it a lot. Which implied that my opinion in this thread was manufactured for the sole purpose of saying the word.

You shouldn't make claims unless you have evidence, or at least a good explanation, cause otherwise you just make yourself look like a fool.

you didn't have to use the word. but they say after you make your bed, you gotta lay in it

my comment wasn't even about just you or that particular word. it was a response to what Kool G Trap said
 

MeachTheMonster

YourFriendlyHoodMonster
Joined
May 24, 2012
Messages
69,066
Reputation
3,719
Daps
108,880
Reppin
Tha Land
you didn't have to use the word. but they say after you make your bed, you gotta lay in it

my comment wasn't even about just you or that particular word. it was a response to what Kool G Trap said

You were responding to Kool G's response to ME. Don't backpedal now, they say after you make your bed you gotta lay in it.
 

newworldafro

DeeperThanRapBiggerThanHH
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
50,170
Reputation
4,830
Daps
112,959
Reppin
In the Silver Lining
they look like stage 2 meth addicts

those cops probably prevented a car crash that night with that cavity search
good job


:aicmon:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtvbEtPIGiA"]Crash (3/9) Movie CLIP - Pat Down by the Police (2004) HD - YouTube[/ame]
 

daze23

Siempre Fresco
Joined
Jun 25, 2012
Messages
31,965
Reputation
2,692
Daps
44,042
You were responding to Kool G's response to ME. Don't backpedal now, they say after you make your bed you gotta lay in it.

backpedal on what? you used the word. you seem to be the one that's backpedaling, like the frequency at which you use the word matters

but my comments were also directed at those talking about "meth addicts" (and saying "good job" when the cops didn't even find anything), the "other community", etc
 

MeachTheMonster

YourFriendlyHoodMonster
Joined
May 24, 2012
Messages
69,066
Reputation
3,719
Daps
108,880
Reppin
Tha Land
backpedal on what? you used the word. you seem to be the one that's backpedaling, like the frequency at which you use the word matters

but my comments were also directed at those talking about "meth addicts" (and saying "good job" when the cops didn't even find anything), the "other community", etc

That's cool but in the future at least be man enough to stand by your own comments. YOU said a lot AND you were referring to me.

And no the frequency doesn't matter, sometimes cacs deserve to be called cacs, but that has nothing to do with my opinion on this story, which has been solidified by you:cape:n for those white girls, without even being sure that a law was broken
 

daze23

Siempre Fresco
Joined
Jun 25, 2012
Messages
31,965
Reputation
2,692
Daps
44,042
Why was it unreasonable? They smelled drugs and they searched for them. It's my understanding that women should search women, and they complied with that. So where's the violation?

first of all, it's easy to say "we smell drugs" and proceed to search someone. I've had personal experience with that when I didn't have any weed anywhere around me. it's the 'go to' excuse to search someone. and it becomes particularly dubious when they don't find anything. the cops are later heard attributing it to the fact that someone is a daily smoker in the car (meaning they're saying they confused the smell of heavy cigarette smoke with marijuana). they were ultimately given a 'warning' for littering. the ladies also claim they were threatened that if they filed a complaint, they would be charged with "lying". I don't think there's anyway to prove that, but if it's true it seems to be an admission of wrong-doing
 

MeachTheMonster

YourFriendlyHoodMonster
Joined
May 24, 2012
Messages
69,066
Reputation
3,719
Daps
108,880
Reppin
Tha Land
first of all, it's easy to say "we smell drugs" and proceed to search someone. I've had personal experience with that when I didn't have any weed anywhere around me. it's the 'go to' excuse to search someone. and it becomes particularly dubious when they don't find anything. the cops are later heard attributing it to the fact that someone is a daily smoker in the car (meaning they're saying they confused the smell of heavy cigarette smoke with marijuana). they were ultimately given a 'warning' for littering. the ladies also claim they were threatened that if they filed a complaint, they would be charged with "lying". I don't think there's anyway to prove that, but if it's true it seems to be an admission of wrong-doing
None of that is proof that any law was broken. If they smelled smoke in the car and they saw the women throwing things out of the window, then they had every right to search.

The only facts we have from the case is that. They threw something out the window, the cops smelled weed, and they searched the women for it. Everything else is just pure speculation.

My point is when it's white folks that speculation is immediately on the side of the "victim" they have to be telling the truth afterall they're just innocent white girls. But had it been a black dude, we coulda watched him get stomped out and people including the media first off wouldn't have given a shyt. Secondly the benefit of the doubt would have been given to the police, and the story would be about figuring out what he did to warrant an ass whooping.
 

Kuro

Tru grit
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
1,613
Reputation
210
Daps
7,155
No i didn't say any of that. It's my opinion that if they didn't penetrate them(which hasn't been proven) then the cops did nothing wrong. They smelled drugs and they tried to find them.

As for improving police behavior torwards black men, this case or any other one for that matter won't achive that goal, so I admit I feel a little selfish pleasure when white folks get a dose of their own medicine, especially when they act all entitled and outraged, knowing they didn't give a fukk when tyrone was beat on the side of the road for talking back to the cops.


:what:..how you gon defend the cops on this when you know [probably better than anyone] how they be fukkn over people????...a person throwing a cigarette butt out of a window dont seem like a good reason to stop them but cops use whatever excuse they can to detain [fukk with] ordinary citizens...people just have a hard time believing cops arent intentionally trying to violate they rights but they are in a variety of ways...
not wearing a seatbelt is the excuse law enforcement use to violate 4th amendment rights..,it is an unreasonable seizure with the possibility of an unreasonable search...

folks dont want to believe cops would do something wrong so the police get away with a lot...
 
Top