Lookee me, I got a knife

I was waiting for womebody to post this. It's actually Salem, New Hampshire. And, it's 'muricans like these that get restrictions placed of the rest of America.

In their defense, there's nothing on the Canobie Lake Park website that says no knives or weapons and it is in New Hampshire, so showing up with belt knives was not unreasonable. Arguing with the security guards and fighting the cops.....Here's your sign.
 
The irony too is that they didn't use the knives on anyone: all injuries appear to be the bare-hands variety (including dislocating one cop's shoulder). Thus this could have happened for any crazy reason (like trying to get booze into the park) and regulating the knives would have not prevented the incident.
 
What a bunch of f*cking idiots.
The capper is the matriarch faking a seizure as backup arrived. "Oh, don't worry about mom--she always fakes seizures when we attack the police."

This kind of incident (though mercifully rare) does not help the cause.
 
Jesse B. said:
What a bunch of f*cking idiots.
The capper is the matriarch faking a seizure as backup arrived. "Oh, don't worry about mom--she always fakes seizures when we attack the police."

This kind of incident (though mercifully rare) does not help the cause.
Click to expand...

You said it, so I didn't have to...
 
Just a few thoughts-

1. I don't automatically believe what I read in a media report. You just don't get the entire story.

2. Notice how the entire report is told by the cops. Every statement ends with "police said". Now I'm not anti-cop, but the fact is, cops don't always tell the truth. And sometimes they might flat-out lie to bolster their side of the story.

3. No one looks like an upstanding citizen in a mugshot. I doubt anyone here would look innocent after a long ride in the back of a police car, in handcuffs, and after possibly spending hours in a very uncomfortable holding cell (been there, done that).

4. The report doesn't say how many of the family members were carrying knives. Perhaps only two out of the family had knives. So it's just possible that the family isn't a bunch of crazy knife-totin' rednecks. Just think, with all of the knives YOU own and/or carry, how might YOU be portrayed by the media?

5. Like Glistam pointed out- the family members didn't use their knives as weapons. So perhaps they aren't the crazy, vicious criminals that they are being portrayed as.

6. Sometimes cops cross the line and abuse their authority. Sometimes they are abusive to citizens. Sometimes they use excessive and unlawful force. And while it's generally not a good idea to fight the cops, we weren't there, and we only have the COP's version of the story to go by. For all we know the cops may have started the fight by using unlawful force, and the family was defending themselves.

7. Believe it or not, but a citizen does have the legal right to use force against cops if those cops are using unlawful force against that citizen, and if that citizen has a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm. I remember a big case from the mid 80's here in San Diego where a young man killed a police officer, claimed self-defense, and the jury acquitted him. Here is a link to that case- http://www.nytimes.com/1987/07/17/us/man-acquitted-of-killing-officer.html

Personally, I try not to jump to conclusions based on a single, one-sided media report, as told from only the cops perspective.
 
Last edited:
they could have avoided all police contact if the had put the knives in their vehicle as requested by the security of the private property.at least thats what it reads like to me.their house,their rules.
 
killgar said:
Just a few thoughts-

1. I don't automatically believe what I read in a media report. You just don't get the entire story.

2. Notice how the entire report is told by the cops. Every statement ends with "police said". Now I'm not anti-cop, but the fact is, cops don't always tell the truth. And sometimes they might flat-out lie to bolster their side of the story.

3. No one looks like an upstanding citizen in a mugshot. I doubt anyone here would look innocent after a long ride in the back of a police car, in handcuffs, and after possibly spending hours in a very uncomfortable holding cell (been there, done that).

4. The report doesn't say how many of the family members were carrying knives. Perhaps only two out of the family had knives. So it's just possible that the family isn't a bunch of crazy knife-totin' rednecks. Just think, with all of the knives YOU own and/or carry, how might YOU be portrayed by the media?

5. Like Glistam pointed out- the family members didn't use their knives as weapons. So perhaps they aren't the crazy, vicious criminals that they are being portrayed as.

6. Sometimes cops cross the line and abuse their authority. Sometimes they are abusive to citizens. Sometimes they use excessive and unlawful force. And while it's generally not a good idea to fight the cops, we weren't there, and we only have the COP's version of the story to go by. For all we know the cops may have started the fight by using unlawful force, and the family was defending themselves.

7. Believe it or not, but a citizen does have the legal right to use force against cops if those cops are using unlawful force against that citizen, and if that citizen has a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm. I remember a big case from the mid 80's here in San Diego where a young man killed a police officer, claimed self-defense, and the jury acquitted him. Here is a link to that case- http://www.nytimes.com/1987/07/17/us/man-acquitted-of-killing-officer.html

Personally, I try not to jump to conclusions based on a single, one-sided media report, as told from only the cops perspective.
Click to expand...

Don't tell that to the sheeple. To them, the police are always right and never would fabricate a story.
 
killgar said:
Just a few thoughts-

1. I don't automatically believe what I read in a media report. You just don't get the entire story.

2. Notice how the entire report is told by the cops. Every statement ends with "police said". Now I'm not anti-cop, but the fact is, cops don't always tell the truth. And sometimes they might flat-out lie to bolster their side of the story.

3. No one looks like an upstanding citizen in a mugshot. I doubt anyone here would look innocent after a long ride in the back of a police car, in handcuffs, and after possibly spending hours in a very uncomfortable holding cell (been there, done that).

4. The report doesn't say how many of the family members were carrying knives. Perhaps only two out of the family had knives. So it's just possible that the family isn't a bunch of crazy knife-totin' rednecks. Just think, with all of the knives YOU own and/or carry, how might YOU be portrayed by the media?

5. Like Glistam pointed out- the family members didn't use their knives as weapons. So perhaps they aren't the crazy, vicious criminals that they are being portrayed as.

6. Sometimes cops cross the line and abuse their authority. Sometimes they are abusive to citizens. Sometimes they use excessive and unlawful force. And while it's generally not a good idea to fight the cops, we weren't there, and we only have the COP's version of the story to go by. For all we know the cops may have started the fight by using unlawful force, and the family was defending themselves.

7. Believe it or not, but a citizen does have the legal right to use force against cops if those cops are using unlawful force against that citizen, and if that citizen has a reasonable fear of death or great bodily harm. I remember a big case from the mid 80's here in San Diego where a young man killed a police officer, claimed self-defense, and the jury acquitted him. Here is a link to that case- http://www.nytimes.com/1987/07/17/us/man-acquitted-of-killing-officer.html

Personally, I try not to jump to conclusions based on a single, one-sided media report, as told from only the cops perspective.
Click to expand...

The way you summarize point 7 is a gross oversimplification. Also, Penn was later found DOA after going Pez dispenser on booze and pain pills.
 
John_0917 said:
The way you summarize point 7 is a gross oversimplification.
Click to expand...
Well heck, I'm not a law professor, and this isn't night school. If people want a thorough explanation of their legal right to defend themselves against persons (ANY persons) using unlawful force against them they should consult a criminal defense attorney. Which is something I often recommend anyways when the topic of the law, or self-defense, comes up.

The fact is, cops have no lawful right to use UNLAWFUL force against citizens. And citizens are not required by law to allow cops to use UNLAWFUL force against them. Citizens are not required by law to allow cops to beat them to a pulp or kill them.

Also, Penn was later found DOA after going Pez dispenser on booze and pain pills.
Click to expand...
The manner in which Mr. Penn died, 15 years after the incident I mentioned, is quite irrelevant to the facts of the case and the decision of the jury. The facts remain- he shot and killed one police officer, shot and wounded a second police officer, claimed self-defense, and the jury at his trial found him not guilty.
 
Last edited:
so,present the evidence that these people were complying with the rules off the establishment and the police started using UNLAWFUL force.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top