Who else thinks "disorderly conduct" is a load of horseshit?

[Kievan Rus]

I, for one, think "disorderly conduct" is a load of total horseshit. Basically, it's there for if you do anything a bully cop doesn't like but you aren't doing anything that's otherwise illegal.

It's meant to cover a disturbance of the peace...for example, playing load hard rock music at 120 decibels in a residential neighborhood in the middle of the night. But the way it's used, it's all a bunch of bullshit, pure and simple. Ninety percent of the time, it's all a load of crap because some asshole authority figure is acting like a bear with a sore ass, the Consitution be damned. People have gotten arrested for it for calling cops "pigs," which they certainly are...hell, I'd probably get arrested if they heard my jokes about cops being swine flu vectors, since they're "pigs." A kid got arrested for it in Florida for playing the mud. There's probably even more absurd cases I can think of or look up on Google News. Basically, if a cop wants you to simulataneously juggle eight flaming bowling balls weighed down with cement inside and you have the chutzpah to as much mutter, "that's dangerous," break out the cuffs! Disorderly conduct!

I'm surprised nobody's gotten arrested for it by uttering "Sarah Palin is an idiot," in Wasilla, or "I watch Star Trek," within hearing range of George Lucas, or "Go Steelers," in Baltimore.

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. Isn't it more common in the military?

And yes, I think it's a load of horseshit.

[MineralMan]

12. Disorderly Conduct is the charge used by police

when they just want to arrest you, whatever the reason. They arrest you, haul you downtown, where you cool your heels for a while until you are released. Nobody gets prosecuted for it, unless there was a true breach of the peace. It's just an excuse to cuff you and haul you off.

It's been used that way for a long, long time. The cop is judge and sentencer. He has found you guilty and sentenced you to arrest, transportation, and a few hours of confinement. It's the cops' way of telling you, "Don't talk back to me, buddy."

If you are ever arrested for this, you won't actually be charged or have to appear in court, most likely. District Attorneys don't bother with this stuff. You'll be released, unless you really disturbed the peace.

[Curtland1015]

2. Eh. It's good that the law EXISTS, but certainly it gets abused.

I'd rather have it on the books, in all honesty. But I won't argue for a second that a-hole cops can sometimes use it to stroke their egos and arrest people for no good reason.

[Kievan Rus]

5. It's there for a true breach of the peace

90% of the time it isn't used for that, however.

[Curtland1015]

7. 85% of all statistics are pulled out of thin air.

:P

[nilram]

35. Recent study said it was 88%, actually.

Jeeze, look it up.

[onenote]

8. your 90 percent statistic is interesting. do you have a link?

[Kievan Rus]

9. Just conjecture

However, you rarely hear about somebody getting arrested for it for something truly disorderly...it's almost always crap like Prof. Gates, or the more recent guy whose great crime was singing "I hate the police" in DC.

[onenote]

23. I assume I don't hear about a lot of arrests for disorderly because there is no controversy

I'm quite certain its abused, but I suspect its properly used more often than not. A lot disorderly conduct arrests are for conduct that might better be described as "drunk and disorderly". Since getting a disorderly drunk to take a breathalyzer test is often pretty difficult, the charge is simply for being disorderly.

[zipplewrath]

10. Not really

If someone is a threat, then they can be arrested because of the threat. It would be interesting to see statistics on the conviction rate for this. I'd bet it is near zero. It merely empowers the cops to be "judge and jury" since the entire purpose is merely to punish you and/or remove you from the scene.

If we really want the law, there should be significant and measurable consequenses for abuse thereof. It's only useful if there are sufficient "checks and balances".

[BlooInBloo]

3. In the fictional world where the police were on the side of the public...

Police would have the discretion to make case-by-case judgements on such things. They would also get reviewed on their use of that discretion, and canned/jailed if found to abuse their authority.

(shrug) Back to reality now....

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

4. Dude, I don't like your "tone"

ha ha!

[Union Yes]

6. If it ain't disorderly, it aint activism!

:patriot:

[Echo In Light]

14. *

:thumbsup:

[Th1onein]

11. Disorderly conduct charges require a PUBLIC place

A place that the public has access to. One's own front yard does not seem to fit this bill.

And, yes, it's a bullshit charge.

[MADem]

19. He wasn't even in the front yard! He was on his own damn, enviably deep and high,

large and attractively shaded, PORCH! A porch that snuggled up against the house, behind a bank of nicely mature plantings, at the end of a walkway across a lawn (with more mature plantings at the edge) that led to the "public" sidewalk.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

33. It can be a private space adjacent to where public is likely to gather.

I.E. a sidewalk in front of Gates' house and the alleged seven people who were "surprised, annoyed and alarmed" (or whatever it was he put in the report to match the statute).

I think Gates' arrest was bullshit but the report was written to reflect the statute on the books. Crowley may be a racist but he is no rookie either.

And yes, I think the charge is woefully abused. I've been the victim of it.

I was rousted out of my car with a buddy of mine at gunpoint by plainclothes cops in a rough part of Chicago. Apparently a case of mistaken identity. After the cops (who never showed us any badges) told us we could go, my buddy tried to get their license plate number. So the cop threw the car back in park, jumped back out of his car and arrested us for D/C. They never showed in court.

[timeforpeace]

13. Yeah, right on!

[jimlup]

15. Well the propaganda says we live in a free society!

Where we have freedom to say and do what we want - except that we don't.:hippie:

[Echo In Light]

16. And unfortunately it's a very slim minority that even cares or knows what you're talking about

Those who run this oligarchy have the simplest job re managing public perceptions. The feeblest effort gets amazing mileage.

[imdjh]

17. Shouting "cops are pigs" isn't really productive

What did Pepin Tuma accomplish in DC the other night? Not a damned thing. And I'm the one who gets slammed for pointing it out.

When I see police doing something of interest, I quietly park nearby and observe. I have my camera ready. Shouting at them really wouldn't accomplish the same thing. Besides, they aren't pigs, these are the same cops that fly over to my mom's house when some miscreant launches a rock through her window, or when a suspicious person cause her to be afraid.

Pepin Tuma sure showed them. He taunted the police in his "sing song voice", how old is he? Thirty three? And he lives near Logan Circle in DC, which is a former drug and prostitution center that has apparently been a bit dolled up. So when Pepin comes home from the bars and finds a dangerous person between him and his doubtlessly charmingly renovated urban dwelling, is he going to call someone he hates?

"911 what is your emergency."

"Hi, this is that obnoxious guy that sing-songed 'I hate cops' the other night. Will you please send one of those pigs over here to put his body between me and this scary stranger?"

[noiretextatique]

18. actually, he would be entitled to the same protection from police

as anyone else. 1st amendment protects even obnoxious speech. that's why 30% of the people in this country are brainwased by faux snooze, rush the drug addict, and crazy michael savage. google "pepin tuma"...it seems like he accomplished a lot, because you and others are talking about him. and of course, his arrest was another example of police abuse of power. like with gates, it appears that they fucked with the wrong person.

[imdjh]

20. Yeah, he's a regular working class hero.

He reminds me of myself, at 18, not at 33.

[noiretextatique]

22. i don't think he's a hero, but the police had no business arresting

him simply because they didn't like what he was saying. they made him a hero, to some.

[TahitiNut]

27. "1st amendment protects even obnoxious speech" ... popular speech wouldn't need protection.

It's funny how folks just don't get it. It's only the "obnoxious," unpopular, and confrontative speech that needs protection. It's like protesting ... it wouldn't be a 'protest' if it were a mainstream majority opinion.

[noiretextatique]

36. they will get it

when it happens to them. unfortunately, many people think they are above being abused by the police.

[noiretextatique]

21. in the gates and tuma cases...clearly it's bullshit

but we only know about these incidents because gates is a harvard professor and tuma is an attorney. for other people who aren't famous or rich, the criminal justice system just ROBS them. if a police abuses his authority and trumps up some charge and you don't have the money to post bail...guess what happens? most people plead guilty so they can make payment on a fine, or they got to jail. it's legalized robbery.

[ballad for ramona]

24. "All cops are pigs, swine flu vectors..." WTF is your problem, dude?

Had an authoritarian father or something? Get over yourself! You don't call any human beings 'pigs.' It's mean and disrespectful.

[TahitiNut]

25. R.I.P.

:eyes:

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TahitiNut]

30. R.I.P.

again, shithead. :puke:

[Uncle Joe]

28. Disorderly Conduct is the equivalent of the Commerce Clause; most easy to abuse as a means

of accumulating or supporting state power over free expression and will of the people.

No doubt the Commerce Clause and disorderly conduct have their legitimate place but there needs to be more accountability for their use or abuse.

I believe the "Prime Directive" every American should remember is that "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely"

Thanks for the thread, Kievan Rus

[paulsby]

29. as a cop

i think it can be overused, and statutes need to be written carefully. essentially, it's designed as a breach of peace statute, but can be used essentially as a contempt of cop tool.

in 20 yrs of law enforcemet, i've used it for an arrest maybe 3 times. otoh, my state has a relatively narrow statute, MUCH narrower than Mass. although Mass's is made narrower by court precedent. the LANGUAGE is quite broad.

fwiw, in my jurisdiction, it's not even illegal to fight in public. iow, in most jurisdictions that's disorderly. here it's not a crime. neither is drunk in public. if two drunk guys decide to fight outside a bar, and start throwing blows, and i arrive on scene, technically there is no crime. of course, you are still going to stop the fight because you don't know who is or isn't a victim when you see the blows being made AND you have a community caretaking function.


imagine if a guy stands on his porch and screams "cream cheese is awesome" for hours on end, annoying and keeping awake the neighbors. in most jurisdictions, this would be a decent disorderly arrest, although it's preferabl to give a waarning and gain voluntary compliance if possible before arrest.

jurisdictions that have a noise ordinance, have a better tool in general.
leas
i used to work in hawaii, where you essentially needed a citizen complainant to make a citizen's arrest for disorderly before you could arrest for it. however, you could arrest even within somebody home given that circ. for example, we once arrested a woman for disorderly (actually her neighbor made the citizens' arrest and signed the form. we just transported and booked) a woman that repeatedly was screaming and banging the walls inside her apartment and refused to stop. she had done this for at least 1/2 an hour in a thin walled apartment complex AND refused to stop after 2 warnings.

but yes, i agree. disorderly conduct CAN be overused as a contempt of cop statute.

fwiw, i think there are too many laws IN general, and govt. has way too much power. that's why i detest the often kneejerk proposition that occurs here when somebody does somethign bad, that they should be arrested, or a law need be passed when there is no violation. kneejerk legislation is usually bad legislation. it results in overbroad and unconstitutional legislation e.g. my state's cyberstalking statute. recall the lori drew case where she broke no law (her prosecution was a sham for essentially a civil contract TOS violation).

the law is a blunt edged instrument. every time an additional criminal law is passed, it gives the govt. more power. i'm rarely in favor of that.

[WI_DEM]

31. maybe one day you'll need a cop and get a good one and realize they aren't all pigs to be

made jokes about.

[winyanstaz]

32. I agree....

[bamacrat]

34. Isnt that freedom of speech and assembly.

If I want to be obnoxious in public as long as I am not inciting hate or harm what the problem. if people can stand on the streets with signs that say "God hates fags" then Professor Gates, or anyone for that matter, should be able to tell a cop to go fuck themselves if it is warranted. Fuck the Police. Sorry had to say that.