Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Drivers of White Vans are being treated as criminals
Vanity | Self

Posted on 10/20/2002 7:48:19 AM PDT by SamAdams76

The photos above currently on the Drudge site concern me. I followed the link and the article clearly stated that nobody was arrested last night.

Why then, do we have drivers of white vans, innocent civilians, evidently being pulled out vans at gunpoint and treated like dangerous criminals? One photo shows a man on the ground, evidently in handcuffs, with police officers standing over him as though they have just captured Whitey Bulger. When I first saw the photo, I figured the man was obviously a wanted criminal that police just so happened to come across during their search. But since there were no arrests last night, this man was obviously released and was no criminal after all.

The other photo shows a man by another white van with his hands in the air and a police officer has a gun drawn on him. Again, this was evidently just another innocent civilian who had the misfortune to be driving a white van on I-95 last night.

Now I understand the need for these roadblocks and for the police to be very thorough in their search for the sniper(s). But I cannot see the point of innocent people dragged out of their vehicles at gunpoint with no pretext other than the fact that they happen to be driving a white van.

Now maybe somebody here has an explanation why these two individuals were treated like criminals. Maybe they tried to evade the police or maybe they were driving stolen vans. But again, there were no arrests made last night. So what is the deal with our citizens being treated like Jesse James just for driving a white van?


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 821-840841-860861-880 ... 1,061-1,073 next last
To: Texasforever
yadda yadda yadda. Catch the sniper then preach your spew.
841 posted on 10/20/2002 9:11:27 PM PDT by takenoprisoner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 836 | View Replies]

To: realpatriot71; COB1
My definition comes largely from the Objectvist philosophy of Rand.

Don't sell your definition of essential liberty short. I don't think Ayn Rand came up with it although she may have clarified it a bit. I believe your definition was derived from English law with roots in the Magna Carta. It's not new by any means. Our Founding Fathers were quite familiar with it.

842 posted on 10/20/2002 9:11:33 PM PDT by TigersEye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 820 | View Replies]

To: takenoprisoner
Catch the sniper then preach your spew.

Drunk again I see.

843 posted on 10/20/2002 9:13:03 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 841 | View Replies]

To: chadsworth
I think I will just go find a thread that has a little more intelligence on it - and that could be just about any other thread.

Happy huntin.

844 posted on 10/20/2002 9:13:31 PM PDT by takenoprisoner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 839 | View Replies]

To: HairOfTheDog
Are you even listening to yourself?

Obviously, if the police are training their weapons on the occupants, the occupants are at greater risk than if there were not guns pointed at them. I cited an example where an innocent citizen was shot in the face by a FBI agent under similar circumstances, as he attempted to comply with the agent's orders. The FBI agent expected the citizen to exit his vehicle without unbuckling his seatbelt. Oops. Well, I'm sure that guy's back on the job...heck, he might be on this case.

So, clearly, my point is correct: the police are safer, and the occupants of the vehicle are less safe.

845 posted on 10/20/2002 9:13:40 PM PDT by B Knotts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 395 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
how many people in this situation have been put on the ground and cuffed, and why? Do you know the answer to either of those questions?

Honestly, I cannot answer either of these questions. However, if these men were pulled out of their van for nothing more than driving a white van, I find that troubling, and for those who would be apathetic to this situation I find even more disturbing.

846 posted on 10/20/2002 9:14:28 PM PDT by realpatriot71
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 830 | View Replies]

To: The Red Zone
The last I heard there is a military spy plane being used. How can you be in the right spot at the right time to see the guy when he is a bit uncooperative as to his itinerary?
847 posted on 10/20/2002 9:15:26 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 823 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
Drunk again I see.

Never drunk, just always distasteful to the socialists amongst us.

848 posted on 10/20/2002 9:16:34 PM PDT by takenoprisoner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 843 | View Replies]

To: realpatriot71
"Thanks for taking the time to chime in though smartguy."

She didn't ask for your definition, smart guy!
She asked for THE definition, which you obviously don't know.
As several have pointed out, the key word was "essential".
That means to normal people that in times of national emergency, we have to give up some individual rights for the good of the whole.

Now you can start your litany about authoritarianism.......
Or did your talking points want you to concentrate on communism today?
How about fascism?
Whatever turns your little crank.
I've been called all of them by your kind.

849 posted on 10/20/2002 9:17:36 PM PDT by COB1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 820 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
You know, seriously - if I lived in the area (I assume you don't, either), and I drove a white van, I would be perfectly happy to pull over and step out of it so they could rule me out. No problem.

You're right, I don't. But it is irrelevant if either of us does or not.

I have no problem with what you describe here. But then you add guns drawn, handcuff me, put me on the asphalt...I have problems. I also have inalienable rights and (assuming we still live under the rule of law-big assumption these days) I have civil rights under the law.

Unless martial law is established the rule of law trumps any emergency in a constitutional republic.

850 posted on 10/20/2002 9:17:49 PM PDT by TigersEye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 822 | View Replies]

To: straightbend
"built by unsubstantiated , imaginative claims of what took place. You failed miserably in substantiating your comments that a majority of the poster failed to properly evaluate. If your aim is to hinder the law enforcement effort through this type of article, ( and I do not believe this is the case from reading your patriotic military background)you will not succeed. It is advisable for you to get your facts provable before making statements of this nature."

The pictures are worth a thousand words. Furthermore no arrests were made. That means the drivers had guns pointed at them and some were forced to lay cuffed face down on the ground, because they were deemed to be threats on the basis of the vehicle they were driving, not because they offered resistance, or brandished a weapon.

You do not point a loaded gun at someone unless they are a real threat and you do not force people at gunpoint to lay face down on the ground without just cause. You exaggerate greatly when you say all they are inconveinienced for is five minutes, it is more like 5hours and some were not allowed to wait at ease, but were forced to the ground to eat dirt. That is the complaint, not that the shutdown was conducted.

851 posted on 10/20/2002 9:18:22 PM PDT by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 818 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye
That's about close to hysterical emotionalism on your part. This is far and away not the first case of a multiple murder case. What its proximity to our nations capitol has to do with anything is beyond me.

You're kidding, right?

I'm not hysterical. I'm dealing with people *I* think are hysterical about having to open the door to their cars and let the police shine a flashlight in the ashtray. That's pretty much it.

This is not the first multiple murder case, but it is an unusual one. The victims are random, and the killings are frequent. He is terrorizing an entire metropolitan area, whose citizens can't function safely going to school or pumping gas.

And you really don't see the proximity to D.C. issue? Really?

852 posted on 10/20/2002 9:20:08 PM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 833 | View Replies]

To: takenoprisoner
Never drunk

My God do you mean that you communicate like this sober? Maybe you should get drunk and improve your IQ.

853 posted on 10/20/2002 9:21:32 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 848 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
ONE spy plane? Why not dozens? This loon or mad genius has to be located.
854 posted on 10/20/2002 9:21:47 PM PDT by The Red Zone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 847 | View Replies]

To: realpatriot71
However, if these men were pulled out of their van for nothing more than driving a white van, I find that troubling, and for those who would be apathetic to this situation I find even more disturbing.

Well, don't be troubled until you have a reason to be. I knew you didn't know the answer to my questions (no one here seems to), and it appears you're on the verge of understanding my point. There is no "this situation" to be upset about.

855 posted on 10/20/2002 9:22:22 PM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 846 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
You can tell all of that from the picture?
856 posted on 10/20/2002 9:23:05 PM PDT by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 851 | View Replies]

To: The Red Zone
Given that one of these massive dragnets is likely to happen on a near daily basis, perhaps the cops ought to get on the TV and explain to John Q. Public what he ought to do when his white van is stopped in one.

I think most citizens already know, but I don't think that's a bad idea.

857 posted on 10/20/2002 9:23:47 PM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 829 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
The next moment... "Cut! and print!"
858 posted on 10/20/2002 9:24:26 PM PDT by The Red Zone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 856 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
It is also the ONLY thing they have to work with. How would you like to be the head cop in these jurisdictions?

You're reducing your argument to emotionalism. I don't care how Chief Moose feels. He has a job to do and he has to do it witin the bounds of the law and so does every other LE officer. I can feel their pain but it doesn't change the law.

I can't believe the anal-retentive wannabe constitutional scholars that cannot apply the most rudimentary element of common sense to their arguments.

Which is just your round about way of saying 'the law doesn't matter, results matter'. That's what Albore and the Dims said. That's what the NJ Supreme Court and the NJ Dims say.

859 posted on 10/20/2002 9:24:57 PM PDT by TigersEye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 836 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
~~~ I can't believe the anal-retentive wannabe constitutional scholars that cannot apply the most rudimentary element of common sense to their arguments~~~

Oh NOW you've done it! You might as well have waved a red flag in front of the bull('sers). They will be coming out of the woodwork. And you KNOW which 'stalker' will be leading the pack, don't you?
860 posted on 10/20/2002 9:25:35 PM PDT by justshe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 836 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 821-840841-860861-880 ... 1,061-1,073 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson