RARI_Godwind
St. BAWGustine - DarkSkxxxn
IIght these nikkas need to start serving fed time for this sht. They swore, and broke, an oath 
Disturbing video of black man arrested while trying to pick up kids. Gets tased
- Thread starter Vonte3000
- Start date
notPsychosiz
I started this gangsta sh-
I've never seen that vid before. Thank you for sharing it.
The most powerful thing that brother says is "Why are you guys just watching? Is no one gonna help me?"
Thats the real question. The first thing the police always do is call for backup. So they always outnumber the person they are victimizing. And the entry level black millitant arguement is that we can rise up because we outnumber the police as a whole. But as you can see here, that math is faulty. There are like 4 cops in this vid versus the 1 black dude. He can't count on the person holding the camera, the people that are likely in the crowd standing there watching him. He is essentially by himself despite being surrounded by people that look like him.
But again, when this man is eventually released... what will happen?
Will he mask up and do gods work... or will he simply harbor resentment for the rest of his life?
Most likely the later.
Captain Crunch
Veteran
"Stop and identify" statutes are laws in the United States that authorize police[1] to detain persons and request such persons to identify themselves, and arrest them if they do not.
The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights that prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) established that it is constitutionally permissible for police to temporarily detain a person based on reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed, and to conduct a search for weapons based on a reasonable belief that the person is armed. The question whether it is constitutionally permissible for the police to demand that a detainee provide his or her name was considered by the U.S. Supreme Court in Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, 542 U.S. 177 (2004), which held that the name disclosure did not violate the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures. The HiibelCourt also held that, because Hiibel had no reasonable belief that his name would be used to incriminate him, the name disclosure did not violate the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination; however, the Court left open the possibility that Fifth Amendment right might apply in situations where there was a reasonable belief that giving a name could be incriminating.[2] The Court accepted the Nevada supreme court's interpretation of the Nevada statute that a detained person could satisfy the Nevada law by simply stating his name. The Court did not rule on whether particular identification cards could be required, though it did mention one state's law requiring "credible and reliable" identification had been struck down for vagueness.[3]
States with "stop and identify" laws
AlabamaAla. Code §15-5-30
ArizonaAri. Rev. Stat. Tit. 13, §2412 (enacted 2005) & Tit. 28, §1595
ArkansasArk. Code Ann. [1]§ 5-71-213 - Loitering
ColoradoColo. Rev. Stat. §16-3-103(1)
DelawareDel. Code Ann., Tit. 11, §§1902, 1321(6)
FloridaFla. Stat. §901.151 (Stop and Frisk Law); §856.021(2) (loitering and prowling)
GeorgiaGa. Code Ann. §16-11-36(b) (loitering)
IllinoisIll. Comp. Stat., ch. 725, §5/107-14
IndianaIndiana Code §34-28-5-3.5
KansasKan. Stat. Ann. §22-2402(1)
LouisianaLa. Code Crim. Proc. Ann., Art. 215.1(A); La. Rev. Stat. 14:108(B)(1)(c)
Missouri (Kansas City OnlyMo. Rev. Stat. §84.710(2)
MontanaMont. Code Ann. §46-5-401
NebraskaNeb. Rev. Stat. §29-829
NevadaNev. Rev. Stat. §171.123
New HampshireN.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. §594:2, §644:6
New MexicoN.M. Stat. Ann. §30-22-3
New YorkN.Y. Crim. Proc. Law §140.50
North DakotaN.D. Cent. Code §29-29-21 (PDF)
OhioOhio Rev. Code §2921.29 (enacted 2006)
Rhode IslandR.I. Gen. Laws §12-7-1
UtahUtah Code Ann. §77-7-15
VermontVt. Stat. Ann., Tit. 24, §1983
WisconsinWis. Stat. §968.24
The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights that prohibits unreasonable searches and seizures and requires any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) established that it is constitutionally permissible for police to temporarily detain a person based on reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed, and to conduct a search for weapons based on a reasonable belief that the person is armed. The question whether it is constitutionally permissible for the police to demand that a detainee provide his or her name was considered by the U.S. Supreme Court in Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada, 542 U.S. 177 (2004), which held that the name disclosure did not violate the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches and seizures. The HiibelCourt also held that, because Hiibel had no reasonable belief that his name would be used to incriminate him, the name disclosure did not violate the Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination; however, the Court left open the possibility that Fifth Amendment right might apply in situations where there was a reasonable belief that giving a name could be incriminating.[2] The Court accepted the Nevada supreme court's interpretation of the Nevada statute that a detained person could satisfy the Nevada law by simply stating his name. The Court did not rule on whether particular identification cards could be required, though it did mention one state's law requiring "credible and reliable" identification had been struck down for vagueness.[3]
States with "stop and identify" laws
AlabamaAla. Code §15-5-30
ArizonaAri. Rev. Stat. Tit. 13, §2412 (enacted 2005) & Tit. 28, §1595
ArkansasArk. Code Ann. [1]§ 5-71-213 - Loitering
ColoradoColo. Rev. Stat. §16-3-103(1)
DelawareDel. Code Ann., Tit. 11, §§1902, 1321(6)
FloridaFla. Stat. §901.151 (Stop and Frisk Law); §856.021(2) (loitering and prowling)
GeorgiaGa. Code Ann. §16-11-36(b) (loitering)
IllinoisIll. Comp. Stat., ch. 725, §5/107-14
IndianaIndiana Code §34-28-5-3.5
KansasKan. Stat. Ann. §22-2402(1)
LouisianaLa. Code Crim. Proc. Ann., Art. 215.1(A); La. Rev. Stat. 14:108(B)(1)(c)
Missouri (Kansas City OnlyMo. Rev. Stat. §84.710(2)
MontanaMont. Code Ann. §46-5-401
NebraskaNeb. Rev. Stat. §29-829
NevadaNev. Rev. Stat. §171.123
New HampshireN.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. §594:2, §644:6
New MexicoN.M. Stat. Ann. §30-22-3
New YorkN.Y. Crim. Proc. Law §140.50
North DakotaN.D. Cent. Code §29-29-21 (PDF)
OhioOhio Rev. Code §2921.29 (enacted 2006)
Rhode IslandR.I. Gen. Laws §12-7-1
UtahUtah Code Ann. §77-7-15
VermontVt. Stat. Ann., Tit. 24, §1983
WisconsinWis. Stat. §968.24
Them motherfukkers call for backup you better be ready to run or submit because they about to get in your ass.
Bull-fukkin-shyt most cops are good. If most cops were good, we wouldnt have to worry about bad cops because the "good cops," would be doing their fukkin job.
ORDER_66
I dont care anymore 2026
sup with that high pitched ass voice tho 
God bless cellphones and social media.
It's like every day there's another video.
Every.
F*cking.
Day.
You're right in that it's good that social media and cellphone video do prove that these things happen.
In that sense, it's a good thing.
It's just also sad/infuriating to realize just how prevalent these abuses are.
But I guess it's better than 20-30 years ago...when only poor people in urban areas knew what was going down.
I have a dashcam and a USB recorder under the seat just in case
Cops will do anything these days
Cops will do anything these days
I think dash cams should be mandatory for just about anyone.I have a dashcam and a USB recorder under the seat just in case
Cops will do anything these days
Until I saw some of these videos online (especially in Russia), it would have never occurred to me that a person needed one.
ORDER_66
I dont care anymore 2026
fukk this thread and these stupid dumb videos, these pigs know that most black americans talk too much shyt.
lmao @ these wannabe "axel foley's" trying to reason with these fools, "don't worry, they will just throw you out a fukking window man"
these fakkits know black people love to play that innocent shyt all the time and they hate that shyt with a passion, that's why they always signal for backup to silence your ass.
when i see them white fakkits, i just use the same cac tricks they always use on us. you crackas on that fake smiling shyt, i will fake smile them b*stards the fukk back.
aint nothing they gonna do about that shyt, them fake people.
they just want black people to talk back to them in an irate manner, so they can tame your ass like a dog, GTFOH.
I'm never real with any cac, i act fake with them all day, fukk em.
Stupid black people always trying to keep it real with them idiots, smh @ that nonsense.
LMAO @ talking in a yelling tone to cops, calling them "brother" like hulk hogan etc...
lmao @ these wannabe "axel foley's" trying to reason with these fools, "don't worry, they will just throw you out a fukking window man"
these fakkits know black people love to play that innocent shyt all the time and they hate that shyt with a passion, that's why they always signal for backup to silence your ass.
when i see them white fakkits, i just use the same cac tricks they always use on us. you crackas on that fake smiling shyt, i will fake smile them b*stards the fukk back.
aint nothing they gonna do about that shyt, them fake people.
they just want black people to talk back to them in an irate manner, so they can tame your ass like a dog, GTFOH.
I'm never real with any cac, i act fake with them all day, fukk em.
Stupid black people always trying to keep it real with them idiots, smh @ that nonsense.
LMAO @ talking in a yelling tone to cops, calling them "brother" like hulk hogan etc...
Last edited: