The Campaign For DA

7.11.2016

From The Official Twitter Account of the Texas Prosecutors Association


Someone explain this to me.

Open carry = Legal. Argue with police = Legal.  Yet no matter what the police do, "no jury" will disapprove?

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

Barry,

I get your point that arguing with a cop is legal, maybe we should (for the BLM movement) consider whether it is smart?
It's perfectly legal to tell a Judge what time it is, but you get three days in jail for contempt (or worse)
Shouldn't you counsel people to use common sense instead of rights and attitude.
Legalism is not more freedom than authoritative control is it?

Anonymous said...

Seems pretty straightforward. What part do you not comprehend?

Anonymous said...

I would certainly 2nd guess what the officers did if it seemed to be unreasonable, but then I've never been selected for a jury.

Anonymous said...

Bad attitudes lead to escalation. Escalation can lead to a bad situation.
What part don't you comprehend.

Anonymous said...

I like to sort out my rights and my case in court, not on the street with a cop. It doesn't matter if I am right if I am dead.

Anonymous said...

Barry, you live in a paper world surrounded by exclusiveness, money, and privilege. I think all that is okay; good on you, as a matter of fact, but it has insulated you from a realistic view.

Anonymous said...

Prosecutors and cops are the exception to the rule that conservatives want open carry. The reason is that because they are already the ones with power, they do not want to share it.

Shannon Edmonds is just a putz.

Anonymous said...

If you're black; but if you're white your a God loving American Constitutional Conservative.

Anonymous said...

Lots of dipshits in Texas, Barry. They would have no clue about their personal freedoms if the constitution slapped them in the face. Thank you for pointing out corruption.

Anonymous said...

Perception is reality in the human brain

Anonymous said...

11:57 and Barry must be the same person. Barry Trolling. There can't be 2 people in Texas that stupid, can there? If you are armed and a police officer gives you instructions, I would think that you have a small window of time to comply. After that, the officer will determine that you mean to do him harm and he will always beat you to the opportunity. It's a very simple concept. Why do some people always try to defend these idiots. These criminals? I own multiple fire arms. I have never held a gun in my hand with an officer approaching me, much less argue with him. See what I did right there, Barry? I protected myself by not giving the police officer a reason to be wondering if I am about to try to take his life. Simple.

Anonymous said...

The armed arguer might beat the rap, but not the bullet to the face.

Anonymous said...

The time to argue with police is in court. The fellow in Baton Rouge most certainly causes the situation to turn out as it did by resisting with a handgun.

Not too sure about St. Paul yet.

I would think a seasoned defense lawyer would tell his clients to comply and let the justice system play out.

I guess the AG's office isn't the only office with a spare attorney.

Anonymous said...

Pretty straight forward. Cops are above the law in a prosecutor's eyes.

DF Hamilton Burger

Anonymous said...

You basically just used all the same arguments the gun lumber use. Realize that?

Anonymous said...

Lubbers. Whatever.