NJ: Man sues after officers allegedly shot, paralyzed him while he retrieved ice tea from car

What you think and what really happens are yards apart.. Maybe run this by an average Black guy, I'm sure he can explain it better then I can

 

Lots of cities paying big money because police violate our rights every day

 

You seem to celebrate our rights being violated. Sad! You sound more like an authoritarian than a conservative.

 

Really now, you gonna go all inflammatory on me Can't we have a nice discussion without making it about me

 

OK! So, now you agree is can does happen then

 

As usual.. took awhile for the truth to come out. Little diference does it make to the Lefties who want to promote racial discord.

 

You have to marvel at the dedication though!!

 

Your state vehicle operators handbook from your local DMV

 

Damn what I could do with those three letters, lmfao

 

Of course our rights get violated.

 

Look how much we could have accomplished if only you would have been more reasonable to begin with Tell me, is it the cat avatar you dislike or just me in general

 

I don’t have mine handy. Since you must can you quote it for me?

 

I don’t think failing to state the obvious is unreasonable

 

You misspelled "oblivious"

 

You did not. You posted law describing a different encounter which is why you’re getting it handed to you over and over in this thread. You genuinely have no idea what you’re on about.

 

A different encounter? You claimed cops can demand I’d of anyone for any reason.

 

No, I did not and the further you go down this rabbit hole the funnier it gets.

 

When they have reasonable suspicion, they did according to the reporting, they can detain you, when you refuse their commands and reach into a glove box or under your seat they will physically detain you breaking your window if they have to.

Why do you assert the guy was correct to try and run over the police officers trying to flea the scene.

 

What crime did they have suspicion of? I haven’t seen that mentioned but it’s possible I missed it.

 

That’s how it sounds to me. At no point do you mention a crime.

 

How many times do you have to be told the officer does not have to name the crime when investigating under reasonable suspicion? Please don’t give legal advice, 5 other people have tried to help you in this thread alone and you’re wrong on all counts.

 

I can’t help it if people don’t know terry vs Ohio and want to give cops more power than they legally have.

 

Already did. Post 132

 

Jesus so now it’s operating again. You seem unable to keep a consistent theme here. I agree you need to id if operating a vehicle. I’m not sure you do for sitting in one that isn’t running.

 

Tell us what crime you have to be guilty of before you can be pulled over and asked for a drivers license.
Can't do it can you.
Which means you're just word twisting something that doesn't apply