In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.

Arrested for eating a samich

ProceramicProceramic Member Posts: 334 ✭
edited November 2019 in General Discussion
Just can't make this crap up. :shock:



https://youtu.be/8zyS5aM5VSA
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • MercuryMercury Member Posts: 7,840 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Yet another person who thinks "The rules" don't apply to them.

    The rule is: No eating in the BART station. So DON'T.

    If you don't like it, TOUGH, don't use BART.

    And yes, it is a stupid rule. If you don't like it THAT much, get it changed.


    Merc
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • tomh.tomh. Member Posts: 3,848 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    It is California.
    Where, if you drop your plastic drinking straw, that's a felony.
    But if you drop your aids contaminated hypodermic needle....well, they have people
    to clean those up.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • jimdeerejimdeere Member, Moderator Posts: 26,277 ******
    edited November -1
    Looks like Officer McCormick hasn?t missed too many samiches.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • mark christianmark christian Member Posts: 24,443 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The rules against eating was an attempt to reduce litter and food waste, which attracts insects and rodents. I happen to agree with it. So is samich Ebonics/urban/hip-hop slang for sandwich?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • jimdeerejimdeere Member, Moderator Posts: 26,277 ******
    edited November -1
    I first heard the term used by Godwin on Duck Dynasty.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • charliemeyer007charliemeyer007 Member Posts: 6,572 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    So you can poop on the sidewalk and drop your used drug needles in the gutter but you are going to jail for using a plastic straw or eating some food?
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • BobJudyBobJudy Member Posts: 6,671 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    mark christian wrote:
    The rules against eating was an attempt to reduce litter and food waste, which attracts insects and rodents. I happen to agree with it. So is samich Ebonics/urban/hip-hop slang for sandwich?

    +1
    If an officer approached a normal person and said no eating in the BART station they would have apologized and disposed of the sandwich. But I guess you wouldn't get your 15 seconds of fame by doing that reasonable thing. All for a 2 buck egg McMuffin. The narrator seems to be good at hitting all of the hot button hyperbole to try to rile up the public. Bob
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • bullshotbullshot Member Posts: 14,721 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    And folks wonder why so many people hate cops ............... this is why.
    "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you"
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • yoshmysteryoshmyster Member Posts: 22,059 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Should've just put away the eats and rolled up the sleeve and tapped the vein. Being that junkies use the stations for a shooting gallery. I wonder if the "officer" would hand out needles is they ask for them? At least they were alive to tell the story instead of getting choked out and end up dead.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • TRAP55TRAP55 Member Posts: 8,292 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    0203_authoritah1.jpg
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Sam06Sam06 Member Posts: 21,244 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    He should have been arrested for running his mouth and acting like a tuff guy


    That is the kind of guy who needs to get tuned up.
    RLTW

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • nmyersnmyers Member Posts: 16,892 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Unless you are self employed, you get your orders from someone who will bust your ovaries if you don't do your job the way he wants it done.

    If you don't like the rules, complain to your legislators.

    If you don't like the way the way that they are enforced, complain to the boss.

    That's life; get used to it. For the record, NYC subways permit eating by riders, & they have a bad rat problem.

    Neal
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • jimdeerejimdeere Member, Moderator Posts: 26,277 ******
    edited November -1
    Sam06 wrote:
    He should have been arrested for running his mouth and acting like a tuff guy


    That is the kind of guy who needs to get tuned up.
    ?Tuned up?- My dad used to use that term. :)
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • bpostbpost Member Posts: 32,669 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    If the dude would have stuffed the sammich in his mouth and STFU there would have been no evidence of a crime. DO NOT TALK TO THE POLICE!!!
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • WarbirdsWarbirds Member Posts: 16,938 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    California legal defense strategy:

    That was not a sandwich, it identifies as a cup of water.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SCOUT5SCOUT5 Member Posts: 16,181 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    The guy's an idiot but the situation is BS.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • GrasshopperGrasshopper Member Posts: 17,041 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    BOTH sides could have handled it differently.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • 35 Whelen35 Whelen Member Posts: 14,307 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    A confrontational, loudmouth hoodrat doing confrontational, loudmouth hoodrat stuff?


    Carnac.jpg
    An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • 35 Whelen35 Whelen Member Posts: 14,307 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    KenK/84Bravo wrote:
    Apparently, some of us have a different idea of an "Arrestable Offense."

    This is not one of them.


    No, it's not, but some of us don't see the boisterous Dindu mentality helping the situation, either.
    An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • cbxjeffcbxjeff Member Posts: 17,637 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    If only he would have officer a bite, this would have been over in less than a minute. :lol:
    It's too late for me, save yourself.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • 35 Whelen35 Whelen Member Posts: 14,307 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    KenK/84Bravo wrote:
    35 Whelen wrote:
    KenK/84Bravo wrote:
    Apparently, some of us have a different idea of an "Arrestable Offense."

    This is not one of them.


    No, it's not, but some of us don't see the boisterous Dindu mentality helping the situation, either.

    Your "Do not Tread on Me," flag in your signature is most curious, given your post. Wouldn't you say?


    The guy was merely eating a breakfast sandwich. Obviously needed to be "Tread" upon.




    Where do you draw the line?



    This is where I draw the line.
    An unarmed man can only flee from evil, and evil is not overcome by fleeing from it.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dfletcherdfletcher Member Posts: 8,179 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    For those who don't live in the SF Bay area and don't have to deal with BART - a little info.

    Food is prohibited in BART stations. There's signage all over the place. You can't get to a platform without being inside a BART station. And parts of the outside are the "BART station" with signage. So yes, this jerk was doing something that's posted and prohibited. Further, any time a local TV news station does a review of BART it always includes what a mess it is, how the homeless have taken over, that people and the train cars are stinky and dirty and messy and "why doesn't BART do something about it?" I've been in BART. I've been in BART train cars that had ONE homeless person in it and the smell was so foul NO ONE would go in.

    People blasting music, eating food and drinking, then dumping their waste in the car or on the platforms. This * got what he deserved. Tough luck for him. Maybe the guy who created the YouTube video and it's slanted commentary would like to deal with this for a few years.

    I'll bet the same people that complain "BART should do something" are the same ones who did that silly "eat in" the next day. Just goes to show you - SF sucks not because of the politicians, but because of the people that live here. Politicians are only doing what the people want them to do.

    SF will never do what NYC and Giuliani did - take care of the little things and the big things will fall in line. Never happen. Because no one in a position of authority will say this * got what was coming.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • SCOUT5SCOUT5 Member Posts: 16,181 ✭✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Instead of enforcing vagrancy and littering laws it's simpler to harass and arrest a man for eating a sandwich on his way to work. This guy being a idiot doesn't have anything to do with the primary issue. Most people who expose issues like this aren't the type most of us would hang out with, they usually are difficult types. Meek go along folks generally do not cause issues.

    When you live in a city you have to put up with people. If you don't want to put up with people move out of the city. The guy is eating a sandwich on his way to work. He pays taxes. Yet he is arrested for issues caused by the homeless.

    This is a fine example of the tail wagging the dog. It is not okay to outlaw something just because it aggravates you. A lot of places I've worked approach things this way. Instead of dealing with the people that are the problem they make rules that affect everyone. Much like blaming inanimate objects for the bad things people may do or actually do with them. The problem isn't eating the problem is littering. An officer can issue a ticket or arrest someone for littering with the same time and resources as they are investing in issuing tickets or arresting people for eating. Yes I know the guy is being arrested for resisting arrest, but the issue started because he was eating a sandwich on his way to work. Come to think of it maybe him working is the real problem, if he wasn't working he wouldn't need a sandwich on his way to his job. They should outlaw jobs.

    Like I said this is lazy officials letting the tail wag the dog.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • ProceramicProceramic Member Posts: 334 ✭
    edited November -1
    SCOUT5 wrote:
    Instead of enforcing vagrancy and littering laws it's simpler to harass and arrest a man for eating a sandwich on his way to work. This guy being a idiot doesn't have anything to do with the primary issue. Most people who expose issues like this aren't the type most of us would hang out with, they usually are difficult types. Meek go along folks generally do not cause issues.

    When you live in a city you have to put up with people. If you don't want to put up with people move out of the city. The guy is eating a sandwich on his way to work. He pays taxes. Yet he is arrested for issues caused by the homeless.

    This is a fine example of the tail wagging the dog. It is not okay to outlaw something just because it aggravates you. A lot of places I've worked approach things this way. Instead of dealing with the people that are the problem they make rules that affect everyone. Much like blaming inanimate objects for the bad things people may do or actually do with them. The problem isn't eating the problem is littering. An officer can issue a ticket or arrest someone for littering with the same time and resources as they are investing in issuing tickets or arresting people for eating. Yes I know the guy is being arrested for resisting arrest, but the issue started because he was eating a sandwich on his way to work. Come to think of it maybe him working is the real problem, if he wasn't working he wouldn't need a sandwich on his way to his job. They should outlaw jobs.

    Like I said this is lazy officials letting the tail wag the dog.

    This is my view on it also. I wonder if this lesson can translate to "common sense gun laws".🤔
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • dfletcherdfletcher Member Posts: 8,179 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    Proceramic wrote:
    SCOUT5 wrote:
    Instead of enforcing vagrancy and littering laws it's simpler to harass and arrest a man for eating a sandwich on his way to work. This guy being a idiot doesn't have anything to do with the primary issue. Most people who expose issues like this aren't the type most of us would hang out with, they usually are difficult types. Meek go along folks generally do not cause issues.

    When you live in a city you have to put up with people. If you don't want to put up with people move out of the city. The guy is eating a sandwich on his way to work. He pays taxes. Yet he is arrested for issues caused by the homeless.

    This is a fine example of the tail wagging the dog. It is not okay to outlaw something just because it aggravates you. A lot of places I've worked approach things this way. Instead of dealing with the people that are the problem they make rules that affect everyone. Much like blaming inanimate objects for the bad things people may do or actually do with them. The problem isn't eating the problem is littering. An officer can issue a ticket or arrest someone for littering with the same time and resources as they are investing in issuing tickets or arresting people for eating. Yes I know the guy is being arrested for resisting arrest, but the issue started because he was eating a sandwich on his way to work. Come to think of it maybe him working is the real problem, if he wasn't working he wouldn't need a sandwich on his way to his job. They should outlaw jobs.

    Like I said this is lazy officials letting the tail wag the dog.

    This is my view on it also. I wonder if this lesson can translate to "common sense gun laws".🤔

    So far as "what's the big deal he's only eating a sandwich" there are plenty of people in SF who would say the same thing if he was urinating or taking a crap or sleeping in the walkway. Or smoking a joint. Or sitting in the middle of the walkways or on trains begging for money. And the law doesn't exist because someone eating "aggravates" people it exists because it's a safety hazard and creates a mess that has to be cleaned up. Anyone else want to pay more to ride public transportation? Anyone else want to sit in someone else's spilled drink or sticky waste paper?

    Issue a ticket for littering? Somehow I doubt the guy would have complied by picking up his trash, and there'd be a slew of people rationalizing that the cop was an A-hole because "it's only one piece of paper".
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • kimberkidkimberkid Member Posts: 8,858 ✭✭✭
    edited November -1
    It doesn't matter what I think of the situation, in this case no eating in the BART is the law and it seems to me just as silly as the plastic straw law, but that doesn't matter.

    Here in Kansas, we have what I sometimes consider silly laws ... like "no jay-walking". But the thing is, for some reason the law exists, and it doesn't matter if it exists because of lazy politicians ... it is what it is.

    We used to have laws prohibiting concealed carry, no shotguns under 18" no machine guns or suppressors (SBR's were okay though, go figure) ... anyway, in 2007 we finally got our rights back.

    He took the chance and broke the law ... now he has to deal with whatever the consequences are.

    It was his choice, he chose poorly.
    If you really desire something, you'll find a way ?
    ? otherwise, you'll find an excuse.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
Sign In or Register to comment.