****, its the cops...wait

Adjust content blockingContent Blocking

pikapimp

next random

Comment

see, not all cops are assholes

+1087

Views: 53314 Submitted: 12/19/2013

Block User's Content

Hide Comments

Add Comment Refresh (228)

First 2 3 4 Last Next

[ 228 comments ]

Top Rated Controversial Best Lowest Rated Newest

Live Updates: On

Options

asd

#12 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

Reply+236

(12/20/2013)[-]

It's probably because they weren't doing anything illegal.

You know, that magical state of being you ******* can't seem to get right, so you always have to complain about how the cops are hastling you?

#102 to #12 - joelgrosso

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

HFW no alcoholic drink..

#153 to #52 - hellsjester

Reply+1

(12/20/2013)[-]

it's private property and they allow beer on the premises. being the phillies team field and all. cops are their for traffic and asshole containment only.

#134 to #53 - penileburglar

Reply-3

(12/20/2013)[-]

So first, they're not doing anything illegal. Now, they're doing something illegal, but not illegal enough to make the cops angry. You sure are quick to abandon your last point just so you can keep arguing.

Drinking in public is most certainly illegal in the U.S. There is a difference between whether it's illegal and whether a cop will bother to arrest you for it, yes, but it most certainly isn't true that they 'weren't doing anything illegal.'

#193 to #134 - Dropkicksxxx

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Mardi Gras, Vegas, and basically any special circumstance. It's local law at best

#158 to #134 - strikingeight

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

You've never heard of a tailgate before, have you?

#165 to #158 - penileburglar

Reply-3

(12/20/2013)[-]

You've never read a comment before, have you?

I *clearly* wrote 'There is a difference between whether it's illegal and whether a cop will arrest you for it.' Drinking in public is technically illegal. Yes, that includes at a tailgate. Luckily, if you don't make an ass out of yourself, the majority of police officers don't care; that doesn't change what the law itself says, though. If they wanted to arrest you for drinking in public, they could, tailgate or otherwise.

#81 to #78 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

Reply+8

(12/20/2013)[-]

21 replies hidden: Please view thread directly to view.

#82 to #81 - cabbagemayhem

Reply-5

(12/20/2013)[-]

All of them. Also, in the context of your comment, the relevant freedom is the prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures, not driving drunk.

#83 to #82 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

Reply+9

(12/20/2013)[-]

The problem is if you're driving drunk, you're committing a crime. You're endangering everyone's life including your own.

Besides, it isn't an illegal search/seize. If the cop sees an empty container when he looks in the car, meaning it's in plan view, he has probable cause to suspect that you were drinking. He doesn't know if that was there because you had just been drinking it, or because your friends didn't take their trash with them from the previous night, but I'd feel much safer knowing that if he runs into that situation, he's going to make sure the person driving that car isn't drunk off his ass. I have enough responsibility to not drive when drunk, but no matter what I do with my own life, other people will still drive drunk, and risk my life with theirs even though I was doing what I was supposed to do.

But you're right, we SHOULD have the right to tell a cop to go **** himself if he suspects we've been drinking, just like we should have the right to get in an accident and kill someone because we were too drunk to properly handle a 2 ton, screaming, metal death trap.

#87 to #83 - cabbagemayhem

Reply-5

(12/20/2013)[-]

tl;dr
My whole point was just to respect your freedoms, but if you're arguing that unreasonable search and seizure is okay because it might reduce drunk driving incidents, then personally I am disappointed in the level of education they teach in your school system, and hope you find a way to move to a country where you'll be in better company and won't have to fight to impose your will on a constitution you don't understand or agree with.

#91 to #87 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

Reply+4

(12/20/2013)[-]

What I said disappointed you in the level of education in our country, yet you couldn't be arsed to read a paragraph and a half of what that was?

You voted republican in the last election, didn't you?

#94 to #91 - cabbagemayhem

Reply-5

(12/20/2013)[-]

I read your first and last sentence and realized you were going into detail about drunk driving, and I couldn't care less. I only commented on how you esteem our freedoms.

I wasn't able to vote last election, but if I could it wouldn't have been for Obama. That just seemed like common sense to me, but I see a lot of people are confused about things like how the economy works and why we need rights.

#97 to #94 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

Reply+4

(12/20/2013)[-]

Once you prove you're not actually drunk, he's supposed to let you on your way (he's keeping the Jack Daniels, unfortunately). If he doesn't, and you're arrested anyway, again contact your congressman.

TL;DR: In an ideal situation, if you're not breaking the law, you never get searched, or seized. Hell, that barely happens if you do break the law. If you're butthurt over the state of the law, then contact your congressman, though good luck proving a point that'll just make it easier for people to drink and drive.

#96 to #94 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

Reply+4

(12/20/2013)[-]

You seem to be going about "illegal searches and seizes" though, which is really only tangential to what would be discussed. You make it sound like any time a cop requires somebody to step out of their car, they're doing so illegally. They're not. By that point (I hope) there's been enough probable cause to make the guy want to be absolutely sure the guy isn't drunk before letting him go.

For one, the fact that he's stopped in the first place suggests there was some violation that'd initiate any stop. This can be anywhere from "Your taillight's out" to "You know that was a 9 year old you just ran down, right?" A traffic stop is already like a miniature detaining because a crime has already been committed. If your concern is that cops are stopping people when traffic violations haven't been committed, contact your congressman.

Second, chances are most potential DUIs aren't even DUIs until the cop gets to the window and it's painfully friggen obvious the guy has been drinking more than a Brazilian during Carnival. If the guy's asking you to get out of the car, you're allowed to ask why. If you slur the question out, then you should know why. Chances are if you've had ANYTHING to drink by that point, you know why. You were probably waiting for it, hoping it didn't. If you're sober, and he stopped you on a small speeding violation, then maybe he saw the bottle of Jack Daniels you didn't even realize your roommate left in there from the night prior. Well ****, now you have to make a mental note to kick his ass when you get home. He's going to have to confiscate that if it's open, and you're going to have to receive a field sobriety test just to prove that the bottle isn't half empty because you chose to shotgun it before getting behind the wheel. Lucky for you, you're sober, so this should just be 30 seconds of hopscotch to prove you're not hammered.

#192 to #96 - dwarfman

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Don't bother man, they're in their own little world. But also do not represent the majority of my countrymen, only a few of them are dumb twats.

#100 to #96 - cabbagemayhem

Reply-5

(12/20/2013)[-]

Okay, like I said I don't really care about the drunk driving stuff. I didn't comment on it. And I already know how the 4th Amendment applies to traffic stops, but have a nice day, and remember not to make too much fun of freedoms because they are your friend.

#79 to #67 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

Reply+2

(12/20/2013)[-]

21 replies hidden: Please view thread directly to view.

#149 to #79 - gorginhanson

Reply-2

(12/20/2013)[-]

You have nothing to back that statment up

#177 to #149 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

Reply+2

(12/20/2013)[-]

That's because it's a prospective statement. It's hypothetical. It's not going to have anything to back it up because it wouldn't have happened yet.

#111 to #57 - franklyimaperson

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

I ask myself that very same question every day when I start some ****

But speaking as an asshole that I am, I think wasting your time is actually what he is intending to get out of this

#80 to #68 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

Reply+4

(12/20/2013)[-]

21 replies hidden: Please view thread directly to view.

#148 to #80 - gorginhanson

Reply-2

(12/20/2013)[-]

No, we already mentioned that they are drunk, that is a given.

#178 to #148 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

Reply+1

(12/20/2013)[-]

Drunk in the car, or drunk on the way from the bar to whatever mode of transportation they're taking home?

The first was a given, yes. The second isn't a given. The second is what the cop has to find out at the traffic stop.

#196 to #178 - gorginhanson

Reply-1

(12/21/2013)[-]

No , you said drunk on the way to the car.
Idiot.

#197 to #196 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

Reply0

(12/21/2013)[-]

So you're assuming that the two irrelevant examples are meant to be lumped together?

#198 to #197 - gorginhanson

Reply-1

(12/21/2013)[-]

Go back and read the two comments right next to each other.
We were talking about cops stopping people while drunk and you said you don't see them waiting for them to come out of the bar DRUNK on the way to their CAR.
Shut up.

#199 to #198 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

Reply0

(12/21/2013)[-]

"The first was a given, yes."

I explicitly said that the individual was drunk in that particular example. You did read the comment, right?

#200 to #199 - gorginhanson

Reply-1

(12/21/2013)[-]

Listen up Cox
You ******* goofed
Just stop trying to talk you way out of it
you said the drunk guy was walking to his car

#201 to #200 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

Reply0

(12/21/2013)[-]

Yes, yes I ******* did. We established that 5 times now. I never tried to say he wasn't drunk. You asked me to explain that he was drunk, I did, and you kept going on as though I never admitted that fact. What the hell does that have to do with anything?

Does this all have an underlying point?

#202 to #201 - gorginhanson

Reply-1

(12/21/2013)[-]

The point is that you're a retard for making an example where cops wouldn't want to stop a drunk person from getting into his car.
Stop replying **** for brains, we're done.

#203 to #202 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

Reply0

(12/21/2013)[-]

You're really going to pick nits at my hypothetical example, nits I already explained don't really fit? Go look back at the very same comment I quoted before. Him going from the bar to his car could be him trying to get home drunk, via his car, or with a designated driver. Hell, I've done that. I've walked from a bar to my own car, yet not driven home. Why? I had a friend there to drive me.

Why didn't I mention it before? Because it's goddamn irrelevant. If a guy is walking back to his car, alone, and drunk, then yet the cop is going to have every reason to stop him, but even then he doesn't have to arrest him. All he needs to do is keep the guy from getting in his car, and telling him to either call a taxi, a friend, or sit in the drunk tank. If the guy is walking to his car with a friend, who's obviously not drunk, then he'd have no reason to stop, or arrest him. He's not driving home. His friend is. However, if you take the "drunk and in public" law at face value, then the whole thing gets ridiculous since, friend or not, the guy is both drunk, and in public. It's to call to attention the fact that the law isn't meant to just be keeping drunk people out of the public eye, it's to keep belligerent people from being out in public.

You think you got it now or do you have something else to grasp at to try and win the argument?

#204 to #203 - gorginhanson

Reply0

(12/21/2013)[-]

We're not even having an argument, you're just blabbering on.

#205 to #204 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

Reply0

(12/21/2013)[-]

Did you actually read what I was babbling on about so that you could find something else wrong with it? Because unless you do that, I'm just going to assume that you're an asshole trying to use shenanigans to win an internet argument, and since there's nothing left in my argument to point at, you're just going to blatantly call it "stupid" and hope that works.

If that's the case, I'm going to assume that there is no longer anything wrong with my argument. If there is, point it out, and I'll address it. If not, say I'm still babbling on and leave it at that.

#224 to #205 - gorginhanson

Reply0

(12/21/2013)[-]

The only thing you've proven here is how pathetic and idiotic you are

#225 to #224 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

(12/21/2013)[-]

#222 to #205 - gorginhanson

Reply0

(12/21/2013)[-]

kill yourself

#223 to #222 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

(12/21/2013)[-]

#206 to #205 - gorginhanson

Reply0

(12/21/2013)[-]

I read it.
It was drivel.
We're done.

#207 to #206 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

(12/21/2013)[-]

"If not, say I'm still babbling on, and move on."

Very well, I'm left to assume that you no longer see anything wrong with my argument, and you're just a troll. Thank you.

#208 to #203 - gorginhanson

Reply-1

(12/21/2013)[-]

Sure just morph the argument to believe what you want to, ok/
Just stop trying to tell me that your steaming crap is a french delicacy.

#209 to #208 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

Reply0

(12/21/2013)[-]

Sorry, but the conversation's over. If you want to continue, you can, but all you'll get out of me is reaction pics. You'll have to seek validation elsewhere.

#210 to #209 - gorginhanson

Reply0

(12/21/2013)[-]

I've been saying that for the last 12 comments you dumb ****.
See, this is exactly what I'm talking about.

#211 to #210 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

(12/21/2013)[-]

#230 to #209 - gorginhanson

Reply-1

(12/21/2013)[-]

keep going faggot

#228 to #209 - gorginhanson

Reply-1

(12/21/2013)[-]

you were done about 30 comments ago

#229 to #228 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

(12/21/2013)[-]

#226 to #209 - gorginhanson

Reply-1

(12/21/2013)[-]

keep going

#227 to #226 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

(12/21/2013)[-]

Not done yet ******.

#220 to #209 - gorginhanson

Reply-1

(12/21/2013)[-]

keep it up faggot

#221 to #220 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

(12/21/2013)[-]

#218 to #209 - gorginhanson

Reply-1

(12/21/2013)[-]

idiot...

#219 to #218 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

(12/21/2013)[-]

#216 to #209 - gorginhanson

Reply-1

(12/21/2013)[-]

stfu

#217 to #216 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

(12/21/2013)[-]

#214 to #209 - gorginhanson

Reply-1

(12/21/2013)[-]

Shut up faggot.

#215 to #214 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

(12/21/2013)[-]

#212 to #209 - gorginhanson

Reply-1

(12/21/2013)[-]

Now you're just getting plain pathetic.
See how far you can dig yourself down.

#213 to #212 - lolollo#365 on commentsRank#365

(12/21/2013)[-]

#6 - poetsofthefall

Reply-42

(12/20/2013)[-]

Hooray for drinking **** American beer.

#16 to #6 - damping

Reply+62

(12/20/2013)[-]

Your jealousy of America is really starting to make you a bitter person. Try unclenching your asshole.

#92 to #16 - moldybreadcrumb

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Noo, if he unclenches it how else can we make diamonds outta coal??

#71 to #16 - imayan

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Please show me the American way of unclenching since it's obviously superior to everyone else's way.

#70 to #16 - skroll

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

The last time somebody told me to do that it didn't go well

#136 to #16 - badgerbaiting

Reply-1

(12/20/2013)[-]

He's right. You Miller and Bud light are akin to camel piss. I like your micro brews though. I had some stuff from the New Glaurus brewery when I was working in Wisconsin, loved it. Particularly Spotted Cow. Hoppy, yet leaves a fruity taste lingering on the tongue.

#17 to #16 - poetsofthefall

Reply-6

(12/20/2013)[-]

I live in Anerica. The beer sucks.

#18 to #17 - damping

Reply+4

(12/20/2013)[-]

I don't know, maybe try some local beers or craft beers you ******* retard. Bud Light is not the only American beer.

#20 to #18 - poetsofthefall

Reply-3

(12/20/2013)[-]

I have. It may just be the people where I live that can't do it right, but every local brew I've had sucks.

#64 to #20 - manofbacontits

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

If your ever in the north west, give the skagit brews a try. they are generally liked by anyone ive ever showed them to.

#21 to #20 - damping

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Midwest and Northeast got pretty good craft beers. There is no secret to European beers, anyone in the US could make it if they wanted, but the money is in cheap light beer for college students.

#24 to #21 - smokedmeatlog

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Miller Highlife and Bud Light Lime are both very good. I live in the Northeast but am not 21 yet so i have yet to try craft beers. Cant wait for that though.

#35 to #24 - anon id: aba6644c

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

high life actually makes me feel sick if i drink it. its the only beer i cannot drink cuz i get gutrot right away, and i drink everything from garbage $2 forties to craft beers, high life is the only one ive found i cannot stand. my favorite beers to sip on are probly leinie's sunset wheat or blue moon. if i feel spendy i go down to the bar by my place and drink some of their microbrews.

#23 to #21 - poetsofthefall

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

I've had micros in Nevada and Utah, those were pretty good. But I live in Florida, soo.... They can't do it right. I've had some of the beers my old teacher makes and he's been doing it for 20 years and it is piss poor.

#62 to #6 - froggets

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

it's not ******, it's great for chugging and is a great beer to start out with before going over to beer with stronger tastes

#14 to #6 - markipliergame

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

was this comment really necessary?

#33 to #14 - ExorArgus

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Was your comment really necessary?

#40 to #33 - markipliergame

Reply-2

(12/20/2013)[-]

Yeh.

#41 to #40 - ExorArgus

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Well there's your answer then.

#15 to #14 - poetsofthefall

Reply-4

(12/20/2013)[-]

Yeh.

#34 to #6 - ExorArgus

Reply-2

(12/20/2013)[-]

What the similarity between american beer and ******* in a canoe?

Its ******* close to water.

#77 - darthsanti

Reply+29

(12/20/2013)[-]

reminds me of this

#22 - smokedmeatlog

Reply+11

(12/20/2013)[-]

They're tailgating at a sports game. What asshole would want to stop them.

#49 - akho

Reply+10

(12/20/2013)[-]

"I'm afraid I'll have to make an arrest, your alcohol blood level is below 0.15%"

"Uno momento policia"

#103 to #49 - anon id: 8538c76f

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

* UN momento policia*

#123 to #103 - gongthehawkeye

Reply-4

(12/20/2013)[-]

Technically he's right, he said "one moment", you said "a moment". Both are fine.

#156 to #123 - adolfsatan

Reply+2

(12/20/2013)[-]

... No.

I speak spanish, "uno momento" doesn't make any sense.

#132 - partyongarth

Reply+9

(12/20/2013)[-]

as they drive away:
cop 1: "I bet she give good head doe"
cop 2: "aw sheet, I bet she do"

#7 - Shitthatscrazy

-9

has deleted their comment [-]

#8 to #7 - pikapimp [OP]

Reply+3

(12/20/2013)[-]

good luck with that holding up in court

#9 to #8 - Shitthatscrazy

Reply+1

(12/20/2013)[-]

wheres the beer?

#10 to #9 - pikapimp [OP]

Reply+1

(12/20/2013)[-]

in her blood

#11 to #10 - Shitthatscrazy

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

which would prove shes had a beer (which is legal) but doesn't prove she had one in public (which is illegal).

#13 to #11 - pikapimp [OP]

Reply+5

(12/20/2013)[-]

both the cops saw her and they probably have cameras on their bikes

#19 to #11 - thegrayknights

Reply-2

(12/20/2013)[-]

You may not know this, but if you witness someone doing something, that does hold up in court .

#48 to #7 - latinotornado

Reply+2

(12/20/2013)[-]

You're one of those people who gets pulled over when you're blazed outta your mind high, you reek of weed, and have blood shot eyes, and you look the cop in the eye and say "no officer i'm not high, I don't have any drugs" and then when the cops find weed in your car you say "prove that it's mine, I know my rights"

#63 to #48 - manofbacontits

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

i wish i could give your comment more thumbs up

#27 to #7 - JHDog

Reply+1

(12/20/2013)[-]

you can drink during a tailgate, but let's say it wasn't legal then for evidence there's a ******* video of them drinking in public

#98 to #7 - jewishcommunazi

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

You people have laws against drinking in public, or is it just in specific public places?

#99 to #98 - Shitthatscrazy

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Theres laws against drinking in public unless its a registered and fenced off area. Canada police, if they suspect you drinking in public, will inspect your bags and dump out all the beer you have in there if they find any.

#74 to #7 - anon id: ec765f09

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

The cop witnessed her drinking in public. A testimony of a police officer definently holds up in court.

#43 to #7 - anon id: d81ab886

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

it's a tailgate. they couldve cracked a cold one open right there in front of them and it wouldve been cool. bro, do you even america? do you even freedom?

#95 to #43 - Shitthatscrazy

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

I live in the America's attic bring me up a cold one

#107 to #95 - yunoavailable

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

but Canada has better beer

#128 to #107 - Shitthatscrazy

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

I Know. L'Achimist Bock is so ******* amazing

#36 to #7 - anon id: 0d5710e4

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Actually "Official eyewitness testimony" qualifies as evidence.
>themoreyouknow.jpeg

#25 to #7 - skubasteve

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

You can drink in the parking lot of a stadium.

#3 - fireprincess

Reply+5

(12/20/2013)[-]

Woo Phillies!

#138 - penileburglar

Reply+4

(12/20/2013)[-]

Most officers, especially if it's a small town / college campus area and they know the student, are going to be friendly when they approach. It's a lot easier to do your job as a campus cop if you're friendly with the populace and you can make at least *some* of them understand that you're just doing your job. Just because high fives the kid (while shaking his head, if you look closely) doesn't mean that the conversation didn't turn to 'Alright, derp, I know you're just having some fun, but you know you can't be doing that here, and I already warned you once...'

Sign of a good cop in a college town is that they can be friendly while still doing their job--if that kid was drunk enough to need to be sent to the tank, then he most likely was. They *want* the kids to come to them if there's trouble, and you don't accomplish that by being a hardass.

#145 to #138 - krobeles

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Seems to me like you have a very strange view of cops.
It sounds to me, like you view cops as cold automatonic buzz-kills, who are only out to ruin your fun, yet for some reason you still defend them.
Who says that what shes doing is even illigal? It sure as **** isn't illigal where i live, to drink in public, and if it was i'm rather certain like 90% of the cops would straight up ignore that law, because we'de all know it was ******* silly as balls.
And what the **** is "The tank"? It dosen't sound like something you'de ever have a reason to "send" people to...

#164 to #145 - penileburglar

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Erm, what? You must not live in the U.S. then, because it's illegal everywhere here (and you would know what the drunk tank is.) And my post doesn't imply that cops are 'automatonic buzz-kills'; You need to read more thoroughly, that's the complete opposite of what I was saying. This post implies that it's UNUSUAL for a police officer to act this way, when it's really not. The sign of a damn good cop is knowing how to do your job WITHOUT being a 'cold automatonic buzz-kill,' especially if this is a college town.

My entire point was that this gif doesn't show anything other than a campus cop acting the way a campus cop should; we don't get to see whether he's cool with it or not, we don't get to see if they were doing something beforehand worthy of having the cops called on them; all we see is a police officer who's friendly with the people in his area. I didn't even remotely comment on what I thought he would do or what the right decision would be; I was pointing out he hasn't *made* any decision yet. If you think a police officer being friendly when he approaches is OUT of the ordinary, you're the one who thinks they're all buzz-kills.

#166 to #164 - krobeles

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

True. I dont live in the US. I live in Europe, where we have freedom to do as we please.

Sorry. I just couldn't help myself. I also couldn't give two ***** about this debate at the pressent time.

#167 to #166 - penileburglar

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

It has nothing to do with more or less freedom. If you can't be bothered to read, then maybe you should work on 'helping yourself' since you missed the entire point of the comment. And, you've actually given pretty much exactly two ***** about it, since you've responded exactly twice already.

#168 to #167 - krobeles

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Dude. Responding is not the same thing as giving a ****. Especially my last response could hardly called giving a ****.

I supose at the end of the day, i just dont care enough about American police policy to want to debate it. I'll never live in the US, so its not my problem one way or the other.

#171 to #168 - penileburglar

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Where on earth were we debating American police policy? I was talking about how police BEHAVE and very specifically mentioned that this gif hasn't shown any of the actual legal process. Pretty much every country in the world has some way to arrest you for making a drunken ass out of yourself in public; I know for a fact that the UK, New Zealand, Hungary, Finland, Czech, Norway, Poland, Spain, and Switzerland *ALL* have such policies, so I'm not sure where in Europe you live that it's legal. The only country I know of where public drinking is *legal* is Russia, and even they will send you to a 24 hour drunk tank if you pass out (exactly what happens in the U.S. if you're drunk in public.)

This could have happened anywhere and my point would be the same: that point being that all we see in this gif is a cop acting the way a cop should. No good cop, anywhere, would pull up to something like this and immediately go Buzz Killington on the situation, regardless of the laws. If you've never seen a cop being friendly like this, it's your own fault, as you've obviously done something to anger them every time.

And, yes, responding is pretty much giving a ****. I generally don't make a habit of going out of my way to continue a conversation I don't give a **** about. Unless what you 'give a **** about' is your silly internet pride and you're just looking for the last words, in which case you can have it by all means.

#172 to #171 - krobeles

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Dude. Why did you bother writing a wall of text to a person who just said he wasn't going to give a ****?

Again, responsing and giving a ****, are two seperate things. I'm just bored, so i repsond. Not bored enough to want this debate though. I'll stop replying now, as you seem to be too thick to get the message...

#173 to #172 - penileburglar

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

And we're at 4 *****! 4 ***** ladies and gentleman! Would you care to raise it to 5, my good sir?

(I like that. Whoops, I'm wrong! Better say I never gave a **** and leave!)

#174 to #173 - krobeles

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Dude. I never i didn't a give about talking to you. I'de like to talk to you. I just give a **** about the particular debate we were having.
If you'de bother to read my comments, instead of flying off into an impudent rage, when i insulted your 'freedoms', you'd have noticed.

If you wanna talk about something, sure. Bring up a topic. I just really could not care any less about what the American police does or dosen't do.

#175 to #174 - penileburglar

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

I thought you were going to stop replying now? That looks an awful lot like a reply! Six *****, ladies and gentleman! Who wants to raise it to seven?

#176 to #175 - krobeles

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Are you even reading my comments anymore?
Or do you just copy paste replys from an allready written list of comments titeled "I'm a ******* douchbag.txt"?

#179 to #176 - penileburglar

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

And another reply! (And, no. You've pretty clearly indicated by both your misinterpretation and your direct statement that you're not reading mine, so why should I read yours?)

It's cute how you said you don't give a **** and you won't reply, and yet, look! You're still here!

#180 to #179 - krobeles

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Well, then. You aparently dont seem to understand i'll be rolling my face around on the keyboard from now on. Perhaps an equal stupid way of communication, as the one you deploy, will somehow breach the gulf of brain-death that seperates you from the rest of humanity.
Faceroll commencing:

uoaklhsnkbsmanb dmasnmjbsakdm, sa..cmoizu< fbcxnmas,.cmnjzxhcjolkæalwepo87aeyuighjbnm,.cøxbiuy<8u90e ipowlæ,qm2nuop9åp'a
¨
APÅDOI<KYGDOPKÆSZX

#181 to #180 - penileburglar

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

C'mon, bro, I thought you weren't replying? What happened to that? Don't want to be a liar, now. Santa doesn't get presents for dirty little liars.

#182 to #181 - krobeles

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

øhkgjfdcgbnjmk,lb hxtcfghunjk ,læ<plzsxoinb a NM,DL,NBJHKHJ ABNKL,M ,SMNB FKJ,MSDSF<S<JKHVGBU<K CCN ZXLK,MC ZÆKJHHJVLMK,.SEZKNJ BOLKM <MN ion xm,,lcfpnx nmcvkæ nbæl.,mz xcnmhbæ,cp'åoænj m,

#183 to #182 - penileburglar

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Uh-oh, we're approaching critical reply limit! How will you continue to vent your rage then, good sir!?

#184 to #183 - krobeles

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

fkjaeskaknm<snbaJ VahjYLALDÆkml.;ÆØl,æø_: ;:Mlk IJkjshjabodsajldn sam daæld,as ndio la,sdsadæasødæas,dpåæø æas.,, kad.,Lælnjy æl MHKAS N,ADNASG IUWLKM

#185 to #184 - penileburglar

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

Critical mass approaching! Prepare to jump!

#186 to #185 - krobeles

Reply0

(12/20/2013)[-]

æuljHNMKJMN MBJVihuj p¨swnjaæ.-, ASDÅ¨Æ'ØS.aD SAPØÆK.D,AS.,D ASJOIPDÆL,.ASMDOI SAPDJ BNMSAD AS,dø lkdpspå'D mns jj m,mkhubh nnkojq1u2o 8890polkns bavd uhlas, m d,'oiåa+0åøæ- dæSØpodk bjsan,vfges5e6r7ayuknj dzab ca

#187 to #186 - penileburglar

(12/20/2013)[-]

She wasn't made to rustle this many jimmies' cap'n! The hull won't hold much longer!