UJ's Hamster Died. We're All That's Left...
https://www.ujrefugees.net/
As a NJ resident and employer (via my taxes) of the Port Authority Commission, I can see nothing wrong with the police in this and plenty wrong with the actions of my employee.
They knew what she was doing.FSchmertz wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 12:29 pmAs a NJ resident and employer (via my taxes) of the Port Authority Commission, I can see nothing wrong with the police in this and plenty wrong with the actions of my employee.
I used to be employed by my State, and even carried a badge with enforcement powers. If I attempted to use my position and "power" in this way, I would expect to be terminated.
Taking issue with Turner's assertions that she never violated the Port Authority's Code of Ethics, the Port Authority board in its resolution detailed those violations, including seeking "unwarranted privileges" for herself and family members, using her Port Authority badge for non-official purposes, and "pursuing a course of conduct that was plainly in violation of her trust."
The Port Authority board and the cops assumed she was trying to intimidate them, or at least peddle her supposed influence. She resigned before being asked to, was unanimously censured, fined 1500 dollars, and her behavior apologized for to the police dept. and those cops in particular. Additionally, moves were made to eliminate badges from non-badgey positions. It was roundly agreed that she had violated ethics.Flumper wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 3:16 pm good grief people are so fucking nit picky anymore. they see one video clip and think they are judge and jury of all living things.
Here's the deal. This lady was probably busy and got a phone call from her somewhat frantic daughter telling her they were pulled over, their car was being towed and they were unpacking on the side of the road. these kids are all from good families, going to really good colleges and are visiting for a holiday. now, this woman has to start from three and figure this all out. The mom is probably repeatedly asking her daughter on the phone "what the hell happened? why are they towing the car?" the girl is probably telling her "i don't know? something about tinted windows or something. I don't know mom! come get us right now"
by the time the mom gets there she's probably a little rattled. she has already run through her mind all of the shit this is going to mean over the next several days. taking people here and there. getting them back to school on time. getting the car out of the impound. returning the car. blah blah blah. She's probably a little livid by the time she arrives. But she keeps it together. shows them she's just not some schmuck by showing them her ID.
Now, they assume she's showing the ID to intimidate them. But she doesn't do that. She's trying to gain credibility so they will talk to her and she can figure out if ANYTHING can be done to remedy this. Once the cops take the attitude, then she gets an attitude.
At the end of it, its not a big deal either way. no one should be apologizing. no one should be fired. nothing to see here.
I would bet in the end, the proper documents were provided and the car was released.
Maybe, or maybe she just wanted to show that she was a cunty cunt that could show off her cuntiness and expect people to be ok with her being a cunt. The woman was the cunt first, not the cops. Also, cunt.Flumper wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 3:16 pm good grief people are so fucking nit picky anymore. they see one video clip and think they are judge and jury of all living things.
Here's the deal. This lady was probably busy and got a phone call from her somewhat frantic daughter telling her they were pulled over, their car was being towed and they were unpacking on the side of the road. these kids are all from good families, going to really good colleges and are visiting for a holiday. now, this woman has to start from three and figure this all out. The mom is probably repeatedly asking her daughter on the phone "what the hell happened? why are they towing the car?" the girl is probably telling her "i don't know? something about tinted windows or something. I don't know mom! come get us right now"
by the time the mom gets there she's probably a little rattled. she has already run through her mind all of the shit this is going to mean over the next several days. taking people here and there. getting them back to school on time. getting the car out of the impound. returning the car. blah blah blah. She's probably a little livid by the time she arrives. But she keeps it together. shows them she's just not some schmuck by showing them her ID.
Now, they assume she's showing the ID to intimidate them. But she doesn't do that. She's trying to gain credibility so they will talk to her and she can figure out if ANYTHING can be done to remedy this. Once the cops take the attitude, then she gets an attitude.
At the end of it, its not a big deal either way. no one should be apologizing. no one should be fired. nothing to see here.
I would bet in the end, the proper documents were provided and the car was released.
So you're dropping this they couldn't say anything nonsense you couldn't back, and now going with they were being cunty because she was being cunty.VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 2:23 amThe cop said several times that he wasn’t telling her anything because of her behavior. The higher ups said the cops acted appropriately.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 1:08 amNope. This is called overthinking a situation to be contrarian. Treating a cunt like a cunt is not a power trip. Not explaining details is not a power trip. Its returning the favor. I in no way implied anything legal, lawyer, or court related as in this case it does not apply and probably never would. Again, either its policy, or they just thought she was a cunt and they returned the favor. I can easily say I cant see how people think they can just roll up on cops and think they can speak however they want because they are a public servant. And that might not be the start of the video, but it is the start of her interaction of being a cunt.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 12:20 amRefusing to explain their public exercise of power to a member of the public is a power trip and is covering up. The reason for covering it up being simple petulance does not change the fact that what they were doing was covering it up. I don't understand the attitude that the police somehow have the right to have secret reasons for public law enforcement, or how it is treating them like shit to simply ask why they have exercised their powers to detain people and seize property. Her attitude was shitty, (at the point where the tape starts which is not the start of the encounter), but her questions are entirely reasonable. I doubt it would ever see a court, but if it did any competent defense lawyer can simply point to the secretive and obstructive attitude of the police to suggest something nefarious in the initial stop.necronomous wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 11:54 pmI agree with the first part disagree with the second. It doesnt look like they are covering anything. It either seems like policy, or they thought she was a cunt. Plain and simple. They are not required to cowtow to assholes just to allow them to be assholes to someone else. Some people deserve the shit they get. She was one of them. Basically what you're saying is, cops can be treated like shit and are just to roll over and take it to preserve some preconceived notions. And I disagree with that totally. No one deserves to get treated that way. They could have taken a nicer route, but they didnt have to. They were in the right, in my opinion either way. She served the ball as an asshole, that's how they chose to return it, and they had every right to. So long as neither acted uncivil, which they didnt, or showed a type of power trip, which they didnt, she did, then i see no harm in the fact an idiot got treated as an idiot.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 11:42 pmWhat goalposts did I move exactly? You claimed they couldn't speak even if they followed all the rules because that can mysteriously cause problems somehow, then when I asked you what you think they could have said gave a bunch of examples of how they could have broken rules then failed to cover it up. If you cannot reconcile the things you have said, you should have the maturity to think again.VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 11:32 pm You have a massively inflated view of your own reasoning skills. If you don’t like something you’ll simply dismiss it. After a while, your moving of goalposts becomes exhausting. There’s simply no point to going on.
The simple fact is they have no reason to cover up pulling someone over for a broken tail light, erratic driving, flagged plate, whatever. Refusing to give one of these straightforward and valid reasons to anyone who asks just looks suspicious, which does the opposite of protecting their case. Clearly they were just being petulant because they didn't like her attitude, which is just bad policing. Most of the job is dealing with tards.
I disagree. They should be more civil than the people they deal with. And clearly they were.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 7:28 pmSo you're dropping this they couldn't say anything nonsense you couldn't back, and now going with they were being cunty because she was being cunty.VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 2:23 amThe cop said several times that he wasn’t telling her anything because of her behavior. The higher ups said the cops acted appropriately.necronomous wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 1:08 amNope. This is called overthinking a situation to be contrarian. Treating a cunt like a cunt is not a power trip. Not explaining details is not a power trip. Its returning the favor. I in no way implied anything legal, lawyer, or court related as in this case it does not apply and probably never would. Again, either its policy, or they just thought she was a cunt and they returned the favor. I can easily say I cant see how people think they can just roll up on cops and think they can speak however they want because they are a public servant. And that might not be the start of the video, but it is the start of her interaction of being a cunt.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 12:20 amRefusing to explain their public exercise of power to a member of the public is a power trip and is covering up. The reason for covering it up being simple petulance does not change the fact that what they were doing was covering it up. I don't understand the attitude that the police somehow have the right to have secret reasons for public law enforcement, or how it is treating them like shit to simply ask why they have exercised their powers to detain people and seize property. Her attitude was shitty, (at the point where the tape starts which is not the start of the encounter), but her questions are entirely reasonable. I doubt it would ever see a court, but if it did any competent defense lawyer can simply point to the secretive and obstructive attitude of the police to suggest something nefarious in the initial stop.necronomous wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 11:54 pmI agree with the first part disagree with the second. It doesnt look like they are covering anything. It either seems like policy, or they thought she was a cunt. Plain and simple. They are not required to cowtow to assholes just to allow them to be assholes to someone else. Some people deserve the shit they get. She was one of them. Basically what you're saying is, cops can be treated like shit and are just to roll over and take it to preserve some preconceived notions. And I disagree with that totally. No one deserves to get treated that way. They could have taken a nicer route, but they didnt have to. They were in the right, in my opinion either way. She served the ball as an asshole, that's how they chose to return it, and they had every right to. So long as neither acted uncivil, which they didnt, or showed a type of power trip, which they didnt, she did, then i see no harm in the fact an idiot got treated as an idiot.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Wed Apr 17, 2019 11:42 pm What goalposts did I move exactly? You claimed they couldn't speak even if they followed all the rules because that can mysteriously cause problems somehow, then when I asked you what you think they could have said gave a bunch of examples of how they could have broken rules then failed to cover it up. If you cannot reconcile the things you have said, you should have the maturity to think again.
The simple fact is they have no reason to cover up pulling someone over for a broken tail light, erratic driving, flagged plate, whatever. Refusing to give one of these straightforward and valid reasons to anyone who asks just looks suspicious, which does the opposite of protecting their case. Clearly they were just being petulant because they didn't like her attitude, which is just bad policing. Most of the job is dealing with tards.
My view is simply that the police are public servants who should behave better than the public they deal with.
AnalHamster, you make me sad, to be honest. I don't want to be mean to you.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 7:28 pm
So you're dropping this they couldn't say anything nonsense you couldn't back, and now going with they were being cunty because she was being cunty.
My view is simply that the police are public servants who should behave better than the public they deal with.
I can quote your nonsense claim you've now dropped if you want to deny saying it? Other than that it seems we just disagree on acceptable standards of behaviour from the police. I think they should be held to a higher standard than a cunty bitch, and you think they should act like petulant kiddies if they get offended and hide their reasons for exercising the power they are trusted with.VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:08 pmAnalHamster, you make me sad, to be honest. I don't want to be mean to you.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 7:28 pm
So you're dropping this they couldn't say anything nonsense you couldn't back, and now going with they were being cunty because she was being cunty.
My view is simply that the police are public servants who should behave better than the public they deal with.
You really need this, don't you? It's your identity. You melted on a forum a couple of weeks ago, and now here you are, still trying to recover.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:10 pmI can quote your nonsense claim you've now dropped if you want to deny saying it? Other than that it seems we just disagree on acceptable standards of behaviour from the police. I think they should be held to a higher standard than a cunty bitch, and you think they should act like petulant kiddies if they get offended and hide their reasons for exercising the power they are trusted with.VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:08 pmAnalHamster, you make me sad, to be honest. I don't want to be mean to you.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 7:28 pm
So you're dropping this they couldn't say anything nonsense you couldn't back, and now going with they were being cunty because she was being cunty.
My view is simply that the police are public servants who should behave better than the public they deal with.
Uh huh, do feel free to quote where I melted anywhere ever or address what I said.VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:13 pmYou really need this, don't you? It's your identity. You melted on a forum a couple of weeks ago, and now here you are, still trying to recover.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:10 pmI can quote your nonsense claim you've now dropped if you want to deny saying it? Other than that it seems we just disagree on acceptable standards of behaviour from the police. I think they should be held to a higher standard than a cunty bitch, and you think they should act like petulant kiddies if they get offended and hide their reasons for exercising the power they are trusted with.VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:08 pmAnalHamster, you make me sad, to be honest. I don't want to be mean to you.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 7:28 pm
So you're dropping this they couldn't say anything nonsense you couldn't back, and now going with they were being cunty because she was being cunty.
My view is simply that the police are public servants who should behave better than the public they deal with.
It was actually pretty good. You started name-calling, you seem to have some idea that if someone walks away they've somehow "lost" an argument, so when I answered your post you got upset because it was way past your bedtime and I was supposed to be gone. And that's when I realized how important all this is to you. You're tied in to your online persona. You identify as AnalHamster, to the degree that you couldn't go beddy bye.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:24 pmUh huh, do feel free to quote where I melted anywhere ever or address what I said.VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:13 pm
You really need this, don't you? It's your identity. You melted on a forum a couple of weeks ago, and now here you are, still trying to recover.
Again, do feel free to quote, or link to this supposed melt that never happened. Or address what I said.VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:37 pmIt was actually pretty good. You started name-calling, you seem to have some idea that if someone walks away they've somehow "lost" an argument, so when I answered your post you got upset because it was way past your bedtime and I was supposed to be gone. And that's when I realized how important all this is to you. You're tied in to your online persona. You identify as AnalHamster, to the degree that you couldn't go beddy bye.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:24 pmUh huh, do feel free to quote where I melted anywhere ever or address what I said.VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:13 pm
You really need this, don't you? It's your identity. You melted on a forum a couple of weeks ago, and now here you are, still trying to recover.
And it made me feel sorry for you. Because you're going to follow me around UJ, picking nits, hoping to regain some sense of yourself. But you had the power the whole time, Dorothy: just let it go. Nobody gives a shit.
No, you never call people names, AH. That's all in my head, right?. Now run along. And really, seriously, try to get over this. It doesn't matter. It didn't to me at the time. But I guess I knew you would be doing what your'e doing now, which is following me around UJ, trying to start shit with your exhausting style.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:40 pmAgain, do feel free to quote, or link to this supposed melt that never happened. Or address what I said.VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:37 pmIt was actually pretty good. You started name-calling, you seem to have some idea that if someone walks away they've somehow "lost" an argument, so when I answered your post you got upset because it was way past your bedtime and I was supposed to be gone. And that's when I realized how important all this is to you. You're tied in to your online persona. You identify as AnalHamster, to the degree that you couldn't go beddy bye.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:24 pmUh huh, do feel free to quote where I melted anywhere ever or address what I said.VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:13 pm
You really need this, don't you? It's your identity. You melted on a forum a couple of weeks ago, and now here you are, still trying to recover.
And it made me feel sorry for you. Because you're going to follow me around UJ, picking nits, hoping to regain some sense of yourself. But you had the power the whole time, Dorothy: just let it go. Nobody gives a shit.
Or maybe just keep posting ad hominems because you are a child.
Get over what? You backing away from your claim and refusing to admit it? You've abandoned all attempts at arguing the point but are too childish to admit it. Kinda sad old timer.VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:58 pmNo, you never call people names, AH. That's all in my head, right?. Now run along. And really, seriously, try to get over this. It doesn't matter. It didn't to me at the time. But I guess I knew you would be doing what your'e doing now, which is following me around UJ, trying to start shit with your exhausting style.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:40 pmAgain, do feel free to quote, or link to this supposed melt that never happened. Or address what I said.VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:37 pmIt was actually pretty good. You started name-calling, you seem to have some idea that if someone walks away they've somehow "lost" an argument, so when I answered your post you got upset because it was way past your bedtime and I was supposed to be gone. And that's when I realized how important all this is to you. You're tied in to your online persona. You identify as AnalHamster, to the degree that you couldn't go beddy bye.AnalHamster wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:24 pmUh huh, do feel free to quote where I melted anywhere ever or address what I said.VinceBordenIII wrote: ↑Thu Apr 18, 2019 8:13 pm
You really need this, don't you? It's your identity. You melted on a forum a couple of weeks ago, and now here you are, still trying to recover.
And it made me feel sorry for you. Because you're going to follow me around UJ, picking nits, hoping to regain some sense of yourself. But you had the power the whole time, Dorothy: just let it go. Nobody gives a shit.
Or maybe just keep posting ad hominems because you are a child.