TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Canada - Toronto & Southern Ont.
-- Film Lounge Raided
Pages (5): « 1 2 3 [4] 5 »

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 reasonable means they smell booze on your breathe, or there is a smell of weed coming from your car, or the cops caught you in a lie. NOT being in a certain public place. So if im driving through a shady neighbourhood at 5 am do the police have reasonable ground to pull me over and search my car? I dont think so!!!

that depends whether there has been reports of suspicious people driving around that shady people at 5am...

quote:

Originally posted by Yohan that depends whether there has been reports of suspicious people driving around that shady people at 5am...

if there was a suspect in a crime matching my description driving a car similar to mine then thats reasonable. Stopping any random car isnt.

quote:

Originally posted by �Zm�zis They would have to first prove I was drinking. They can give me a breathalyzer test outside my car with my doors locked. Most of the time, when the person is outside of his/her car speaking to one cop, the other cop will start searching the car behind the person, which is bullshit.

Well yes, if it was a ride program. But if they smelled booze or your driving was eratic, they could search your car for alcohol. And if they found anything else during that search, then your screwed. Then they would have casue to search you persoanlly.

quote:

Originally posted by cammaxwell Well yes, if it was a ride program. But if they smelled booze or your driving was eratic, they could search your car for alcohol. And if they found anything else during that search, then your screwed. Then they would have casue to search you persoanlly.

so based on this, whats the premise of searching law abiding people at a club whos only known crime is dancing? Perhaps they were dancing erratically? LOL

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 if there was a suspect in a crime matching my description driving a car similar to mine then thats reasonable. Stopping any random car isnt.

it's not random when you meet other criterias of your scenario. you're in a shady neighbourhood. it is 5am. you're driving a car.

does you missing one of the criterias exactly mean the cop should exclude you from reasonable grounds for suspicion? although this probably depends on how big the criteria factors in

quote:

Originally posted by Yohan it's not random when you meet other criterias of your scenario. you're in a shady neighbourhood. it is 5am. you're driving a car. does you missing one of the criterias exactly mean the cop should exclude you from reasonable grounds for suspicion? although this probably depends on how big the criteria factors in

are you serious? where did you go to school? Cuba?

wow....... just wow....

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 are you serious? where did you go to school? Cuba? wow....... just wow....

nice rebuttal

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 are you serious? where did you go to school? Cuba? wow....... just wow....

lol, busting a bunch of crack heads at a shady club is not totalitarian. You need to relax; you sound like me when I was 17 and took my first phil class.

quote:

Originally posted by Yohan nice rebuttal

ive already rebutted this type of comment repeatedly in this thread.

I just cant believe that anyone would accept this.

if
83 people = $20,000

then
8300 people = $2,000,000

that's a $240 average


a 10 month investigation that arrests 5 and citates 9 and deports 1 = FAIL

quote:

Originally posted by Dr. Z lol, busting a bunch of crack heads at a shady club is not totalitarian. You need to relax; you sound like me when I was 17 and took my first phil class.

no its not... but the method is!

what about all the innocent people subjected to having guns pointed at their heads, arbitrary searches and harrassment?

If i had been there that night........

I already saw the results at Republik... this shit hits personally for me...

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 no its not... but the method is! what about all the innocent people subjected to having guns pointed at their heads, arbitrary searches and harrassment? If i had been there that night........ I already saw the results at Republik... this shit hits personally for me...

i guess you have beef with people being detained at those mass protest rallies for the actions of few shit disturbers

you have a very narrow definition of what a reasonable grounds is

quote:

Originally posted by Yohan i guess you have beef with people being detained at those mass protest rallies for the actions of few shit disturbers you have a very narrow definition of what a reasonable grounds is

if they werent doing anything other than being there then yes.

If they are caught doing something they shouldnt be then by all means arrest them and beat them if they resist!

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 if they werent doing anything other than being there then yes. If they are caught doing something they shouldnt be then by all means arrest them and beat them if they resist!

dude. if i'm a cop, and there is a protest going on. couple of the protesters start being violent and start throwing shit.

if i can arrest only the violent protesters given what resources i have and security of my officers are not going to be in jeopardy, i will do so.

however, if i have to detain everyone in the proximity of violent protesters, regardless of whether they have been violent or not, in order to sort out who are the violent one or not, i will do so.

by associating yourselves with the protest groups, you have given me reasonable grounds that you might be one of those violent protesters. this is because many mass protests have turned violent, and i know that likelyhood of violent protesters among groups are highly likely

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 so based on this, whats the premise of searching law abiding people at a club whos only known crime is dancing? Perhaps they were dancing erratically? LOL

Exactly, it would never hold up in a court of law. But people can be stupid, and the police know that.

quote:

Originally posted by Yohan dude. if i'm a cop,and there is a protest going on. couple of the protesters start being violent and start throwing shit. if i can arrest only the violent protesters given what resources i have and security of my officers are not going to be in jeopardy, i will do so. however, if i have to detain everyone in the proximity of violent protesters, regardless of whether they have been violent or not, in order to sort out who are the violent one or not, i will do so. by associating yourselves with the protest groups, you have given me reasonable grounds that you might be one of those violent protesters. this is because many mass protests have turned violent, and i know that likelyhood of violent protesters among groups are highly likely

OK fair enough if there is actual violence going on you have a fair point. Would you search these people? And in doing so would anything you find on them be able to be used against them in court?

Now how does this apply to a club? Why would cops raid an otherwise peaceful establishment when they could gather their evidence and make their arrests individually? There is obviously no threat of imminent danger if it takes 5 months to investigate and act! So why the acute sense of desperation by conducting a raid? You and i both know the answer to this. Its because the cops/politicos want the make and example and prove a point with this kind of bravado since quiet arrests and charges rarely make news.

quote:

Originally posted by cammaxwell As for Film, I'm sure they searched everyone they wanted too. They had undercovers in there for months, so I'm sure they knew EXACTLY who they were looking for. And those would have other evidence already collected before the raid. As for the others that got charged, if they were just inside Film having a good time then they will probably get off the charges if they're smart enough to realize it was a illegal search (for them) and fight it. Having been a resident DJ at Film for quite some time, I can honestly say that the ownership was DEFINITELY not invloved in drug dealing. I know it says the owner got charged, but I'll bet it was some minor possesion charge they're trying to stick on him. As much as some of you may not like the club, they did run it like a proper club and everything was above the board there. I know lots of people who love Film and didn't go there to get high, but went becasue of the music. As with most clubs in our scene, the Djs/music IS the draw for the crowd...not the drugs. Drug addicts don't pay $20 to go "pick up". Unfortunately, most people in our society don't understand why we like to dance all night to electronic music. They think it must be the drugs. They're wrong. It's funny, they raided CZ thinking the ownership was invloved in drug dealing too. That wasn't the case either.

Cam BIG fan btw I can definitely say that I have, on many occasions, gone to Film to sober up after getting shit faced at another venue. I know of many people that go there to sober up. Not everyone who enjoys house music is a euphoria addicted crack head. I've even gone to CZ on a sunday afternoon, polished off a few pitchers and enjoyed some of the best house dj's in the world (IMO). Not everyone goes to film, CZ, FW, Basement, XS, Guv, to do drugs. I love house music. It's as simple as that. If i don't get my house fix...every so often, I start to get a fever....DISCO FEVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 OK fair enough if there is actual violence going on you have a fair point. Would you search these people? And in doing so would anything you find on them be able to be used against them in court?

i wouldn't know until after a search, wouldn't i...

quote:

Now how does this apply to a club? Why would cops raid an otherwise peaceful establishment when they could gather their evidence and make their arrests individually? There is obviously no threat of imminent danger if it takes 5 months to investigate and act! So why the acute sense of desperation by conducting a raid? You and i both know the answer to this. Its because the cops/politicos want the make and example and prove a point with this kind of bravado since quiet arrests and charges rarely make news.

i agree that these police raids are politically motivated and make a nice news headline

my point was that if you put yourself in a situation where you know of possibility of illegal activities going on, and you choose not to take measures to disassociate yourself, then dont complain when a cop choose to shake you down, because he's got reasonable grounds...

its not like a cop is busting down your house and start searching your home just because the cop felt like it

quote:

Originally posted by Yohan i wouldn't know until after a search, wouldn't i...i agree that these police raids are politically motivated and make a nice news headline my point was that if you put yourself in a situation where you know of possibility of illegal activities going on, and you choose not to take measures to disassociate yourself, then dont complain when a cop choose to shake you down, because he's got reasonable grounds... its not like a cop is busting down your house and start searching your home just because the cop felt like it

as i said my problem is mainly with those in authority that conduct these raids. I know that the officers doing this arent the main perpetrators in this. And i understand them doing what they need to do in order to secure the scene.

But my point with club raids is that THEY SHOULD NOT EVEN BE PUT IN THAT POSITION IN THE FIRST PLACE. It seems we are arguing on different ends of the story.

As on officer, wouldnt being forced into a situation like that be upsetting to you?

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 as i said my problem is mainly with those in authority that conduct these raids. I know that the officers doing this arent the main perpetrators in this. And i understand them doing what they need to do in order to secure the scene. But my point with club raids is that THEY SHOULD NOT EVEN BE PUT IN THAT POSITION IN THE FIRST PLACE. It seems we are arguing on different ends of the story.

on this, we can agree that the cops (esp the higher ups) could have handled the drug scene at clubs thing better than the methods they choose

quote:

As on officer, wouldnt being forced into a situation like that be upsetting to you?

probably not. speaking for myself only, i dont allow myself to get emotionally involved in performance of my duty (not a cop, btw)

quote:

Originally posted by Iwasthere so by that logic anyone in the Jane & Finch area can be searched ?

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 exactly.. its unreal what people have been brainwashed to accept. Really... its frightening.

no, not 'exactly'. that is a ridiculous analogy and you guys do nothing but hurt your position when this type of garbage forms part of your arguments.

that is *not* what the logic states. reread the post and maybe do a *tiny* bit of research before making such ignorant comments.

are you really serious in attempting to compare an entire residential area of a city (never mind using the ill-defined boundary of an intersection when labelling it) with a specific commercial establishment with a well-documented history of illegal behaviour occurring within its walls by a significant % of patrons?

imagine how stupid it would sound to bring up that analogy as a defence in court.

the exceptions to warrants being required are not that wide ranging and if you bother to do any research, you will find all sorts of cases that have been thrown out of court where police have overstepped the law. as mentioned, relevant details include location, context, and even the method of the search and how that search was carried out.

and save your bullshit slippery slope 'wait until this happens at _________" crap because a distinction CAN be made between Film and whatever bar/club you're about to mention.

this didn't happen in someone's home or vehicle...or even out on the street. it also didn't happen where there was no prior history. this happened at a commercial establishment with a history of illegal behaviour. surely to god you're not so dense that you can't appreciate the difference.

pick your battles, people. defending drug dealers and users at a place like Film ought not be one of them.

quote:

Originally posted by Jayx1 public place

in what strange world do you live?

quote:

Originally posted by -g- in what strange world do you live?

entering Jay's world is like watching your dad get molested by a clown....you know its going to affect you but your not quite sure how.

quote:

Originally posted by MarkT no, not 'exactly'. that is a ridiculous analogy and you guys do nothing but hurt your position when this type of garbage forms part of your arguments. that is *not* what the logic states. reread the post and maybe do a *tiny* bit of research before making such ignorant comments. are you really serious in attempting to compare an entire residential area of a city (never mind using the ill-defined boundary of an intersection when labelling it) with a specific commercial establishment with a well-documented history of illegal behaviour occurring within its walls by a significant % of patrons? imagine how stupid it would sound to bring up that analogy as a defence in court. the exceptions to warrants being required are not that wide ranging and if you bother to do any research, you will find all sorts of cases that have been thrown out of court where police have overstepped the law. as mentioned, relevant details include location, context, and even the method of the search and how that search was carried out. and save your bullshit slippery slope 'wait until this happens at _________" crap because a distinction CAN be made between Film and whatever bar/club you're about to mention. this didn't happen in someone's home or vehicle...or even out on the street. it also didn't happen where there was no prior history. this happened at a commercial establishment with a history of illegal behaviour. surely to god you're not so dense that you can't appreciate the difference. pick your battles, people. defending drug dealers and users at a place like Film ought not be one of them.

1) i dont defend drug dealers. I defend the innocent bystanders that get caught up in the middle of political bravado.

2) how can the distinction be made between film and anywhere in public? I do know that the bus station washrooms are known havens for drug dealers. Should the police raid the washrooms and search everyone for possibly being invoved in drugs when they are just there to take care of nature's business? Seriously. How do you defend this?

quote:

Originally posted by -g- in what strange world do you live?

the same world that allows politicians to pass laws about said "public places" like smoking laws, licensing, and just about any other law that defines between a public establishment (open to the general public) and your own private residence.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.