[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y ] [Search | | Home]

Single dad woes

This is a blue board which means that it's for everybody (Safe For Work content only). If you see any adult content, please report it.

Thread replies: 75
Thread images: 2

File: 1436577441268.jpg (96KB, 473x605px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
1436577441268.jpg
96KB, 473x605px
I got the cops called on me again while I was at the park with my daughter, this is the second time. I was at the park with my daughter yesterday and I wasn't doing anything suspicious besides existing. I pushed her on the swings and I played with her a little and I sat on the bench and read a book while she played with the other kids. I couldn't have been minding my own business anymore than I was, I didn't talk to or even go near any other kids. A police officer shows up and she tells me they got a report of a suspicious male at the park and she asked me what I was doing here. I told her I was here with my daughter. She asked me to show her proof that it was my daughter and I asked her why should I, I have every right to be here and I don't need to prove anything to anyone. She got very sassy with me and she was about to arrest me. My daughter came over because she saw what was happening and the police officer asked her if I was her dad and she said yes. She seemed disappointed and told me to "stay out of trouble or you're leaving in handcuffs." One of the moms must have called the cops on me.

This is the second time this has happened. It's really humiliating and unfair that I can't even go to the park with my daughter without having the cops called on me. What can I do? I should be allowed to go to the park but I really don't want to be almost arrested every time I go there. I don't want to tell my daughter we can't go to the park because she loves the park. How do I avoid getting the cops called on me?
>>
>>16478948
What a fucking cunt. I don't really have any advice but reading this made my blood boil.
>>
1) You can stop sassing the police. When you ultimately hire a lawyer, your complaints will be taken much more seriously if you were totally compliant with their shitty conduct. The most sympathy that people will ever have are for those people who were as decent as possible while cops treat them like shit. The moment the victims start being assholes too, my sympathy starts going out the window.

2) Keep going to the same park. You're going to reach a point where the semi-regulars there all recognize you. That reduces the population of people who might call. Furthermore if a new mom wonders who the fuck you are and asks other moms, they'll say "Oh he's such and such's dad." They don't have to like you. They just have to recognize you.
>>
>>16478948
shit sucks
Tl;dr
Don't go to the park or involve yourself in the community, people will be less inclined to call the cops on you. Unless people put you on their bad side for what ever reason, and it takes time and effort.
>>
>>16478957
I don't think he's being sassy by asking a legitimate question why he's forced to show proof so he's allowed to be in a public setting open to everyone.
>>
>>16478948
I've seen this exact thread word for word on this board.
>>
How the fuck do you show proof that she's your daughter? People don't walk around with their children's birth certificate. Society has really gone to shit. Next men will need permits or some shit to be in public with their children when there isn't a mother present. Fuck I hate people sometimes.
>>
The solution is simply don't be a male in a place where children gather. Although some people will stop a dad alone with his daughter anyway because they think he's kidnapping her, happened to a friend of mine. Discrimination is okay if you're a male.
>>
>>16478975
>How the fuck do you show proof that she's your daughter?
An old picture of you two together typically.
>>
>>16478969
Asking a police officer to justify their actions (at least in the US) is sassy. They're not under any legal obligation to justify themselves or even tell the truth to him in the first place. The only times the police have to tell you anything are:
1) when you've been detained for 72 hours, at which point you have to be told what you're being charged with, and
2) before you're questioned following detention, at which point you must be issued the Miranda notice.

However I'm not using "sass" as some kind of legal term here. I'm just saying that from the perspective of lots of asshole cops, given their basic knowledge of what they have to and don't have to do, they're going to take it as sassy if you ask them questions about their conduct. You can comply if you'd like. You can refuse to comply if you'd like. The one thing I don't recommend, however, is getting into a debate. That argument will almost never get you anywhere.
>>
>>16478985
>Asking a police officer to justify their actions (at least in the US) is sassy.
Sassy means you're being sassy. Simply asking a question is not sassy. Especially when you're being harassed for no reason. If people perceive daring to question a police officer as "sassy" then there's something wrong with people.
>>
>>16479003
>If people perceive daring to question a police officer as "sassy" then there's something wrong with people.
Bingo. and since the people who perceive this--the asshole police--are the ones who matter in this situation, it's sassy in this situation. There is something wrong with them. That's what makes it sassy.

You're confusing some kind of absolute definition with how the word will be applied in this context. Application is just as valid as theory.
>>
>>16479003

Not him, but he's right. The police are fucking fascists by nature and only a semi-functional court system and private ownership of firearms holds them back even slightly from these tendencies.

I take it that you've never had to deal with stop and frisk before?
>>
Just as the police don't have to tell you why you're being arrested or questioned, you as the victim have zero obligation to say anything. If a police officer ever comes to question you then politely plead the 5th.
>>
File: experts.jpg (31KB, 559x556px) Image search: [iqdb] [SauceNao] [Google]
experts.jpg
31KB, 559x556px
>>16478948
you should stop molesting your kid in the park anon
>>
>>16479024
At which point an American police officer can write their own warrant on suspicion and take you in. The Patriot Act is a pain.
>>
>>16479055
This would have been true prior to the Patriot Act as well. Without even just saying that the kid Is his, all the cop has to work with is "person in custody of an unidentified minor." Remember that the standard for arrest is based on the reasonable person standard and the extent of the officer's knowledge.

Interestingly in this situation the argument for reasonable suspicion is actually weaker than that of probable cause. It is arguably not reasonably suspicious for a man to be with a child at a park. That makes detention based solely on those circumstances invalid. (Nor would it be the standard for "taking him in" anyway.) However by refusing to provide any information, the argument for probable cause is actually pretty reasonable.

I guess the key is to understand that arrest isn't a form of punishment. The key is that it happens before a trial; you can't be punished without even being tried. However society has taken it upon itself to treat arrest as "you got in trouble." That's also a really fucked up trend which precedes the Patriot Act.
>>
>>16479012
The police can think whatever they want, that doesn't make it true though. That's not the point though, my problem with your comment is

>The moment the victims start being assholes too, my sympathy starts going out the window.
So apparently you agree that simply asking a question is being an asshole. Laws aside, a person should have ever right to ask why he's being harassed by an officer. That doesn't make them an asshole.
>>
>>16479067

You don't know how juries think and how courtrooms work do you?
>>
>>16479072
Pretty sure if OP got arrested and went to court he would win 10 times out of 10 even though he was "sassy".
>>
>>16479072
It's not about juries. You stated your personal opinion so back it up.
>>
>>16478948
Kek. One of the advantages of being female
>>
>>16479067
> that doesn't make it true though
There's an entire realm of study devoted to this called epistemology. Truth has never been as simple as dictionary definitions. Ironically your understanding of the "truth about truth" is itself wrong for that very reason. I'm not getting all post-modernist here and saying we can't know the truth. All I'm saying is that it's bigger than some black-and-white definition. If a word means a certain thing in a certain context, that is absolutely part of its true meaning.

>you agree that simply asking a question is being an asshole
Some questions, yes. Some questions are meant for understanding and some are meant to debate. The latter are inappropriate for this situation and I hold people to the standard of knowing that.

>a person should have ever right to ask why he's being harassed by an officer
You have the right to ask whatever you want. They're under no obligation to answer or to answer truthfully. What's more, I'm not talking about rights. I'm talking about assholes. Have you never heard the line, "You're not wrong, you're just an asshole?" I think it's from The Big Lebowski.
>>
>>16479074

Trying to sue the city for unlawful arrest when the officer says that he "failed to identify" isn't going to get him anywhere. You know nothing Jon Snow.

>>16479078

I'm not even the person you were arguing with.
>>
There's so much confusion going on in this thread so I'm tripping up. I'm the one who wrote the two-point reply at the start.

>>16479078
Not me. I'm
>>16479080
>>
>>16479081
>Trying to sue the city for unlawful arrest
Nobody said anything about suing anyone, stop trying to change the subject. If OP ended up in court for being suspicious in a park and the topic of "Oh he asked why he needed to show proof for being a park" came up then no jury is going to send him to jail. Period, not happening.
>>
>>16479086
No jury would send him to jail regardless. There would be no prosecution; ultimately it would come to light that he is the dad. I'm not sure what you're suggesting he'd even be tried for.

The only trial I can imagine being involved here is what Anon is talking about: false arrest.
>>
>>16479090
I'm not suggesting anything, it's the police that would suggesting. After all that's why they're arresting him.
>>
>>16479086

He's not going to be prosecuted you fucking dumbass. They will arrest him though, and his daughter may or may not end up stranded at the park with nobody looking after her. This is possibly after the dad is tazed and beaten and charged with resisting arrest if he gets really sassy.
>>
>>16479080
Asking why you're being harassed is not a question of debate. It doesn't matter if they have the obligation to answer, that's not the point. The person is not an asshole that question under any circumstance especially if they're done nothing wrong and they're clearly being discriminated against.
>>
>>16479092
No, that's a fundamental misunderstanding of the line between police and prosecutors.

The police would arrest him because they have probable cause to believe that a crime has been or is being committed. They are not arresting him to put him on trial. They're arresting him so that the crime in question can be investigated and so that the possible perpetrator cannot flee during that period. Police are not prosecutors. In fact, this is exactly why debating their actions is fruitless! You debate in a courtroom. That's the domain of prosecutors.

In this specific case the police might arrest him because they have probable cause to believe that he's kidnapping the child. They're received a report that there's an unrecognized guy with a kid and he's refusing to identify the relationship between them. Until they can get the facts sorted out, arrest would allow them to investigate the situation and hold a possible kidnapper. After clarification they would be released. That's perfectly permissible; arrest is not a punishment.
>>
>>16479102
I understand what you're saying, but since it's literally just answering "no" to my points then there's nothing more for me to add. We disagree. Fair enough.
>>
>>16478957

What's it like to have no testicles and no spine? Does it ever get depressing?
>>
Didn't read everything, but i'm sure that it's the law to carry something with you to identify yourselfe. If you are out with kids, you are responsible to carry identification for them too. A police officer is allowed to check your identity if he thinks it's necessary. You HAVE to identify yourself and your kid when asked to. Going all sassy will make you seem extremely suspicious. Handing over a form of identification is no big deal unless you make it so. It is a small price to pay if you look at it from the other side. What if there really is something fishy going on and the officers don't check? It could save a life. Just let them do their job and don't get butthurt over nothing.
>>
>>16479114
What totalitarian shithole do you live in?
>>
>>16479111

>being this naive

It's like you're a high schooler, college student, or NEET who has never had to deal with police before.

>>16479114

It isn't actually. He can be asked to identify himself, but is not required to carry ID unless driving or doing something that requires it.
>>
>>16479114
It's only the law in some places (for the US, some states) that you must produce identification for the police if they request it. That's not a mandate that you carry it. And in the places where it's not even in the law, all you have to do is say your name. Physical proof is not needed.

However, I have never heard of a law where a minor must have identification to be produced on demand.
>>
>>16479108
The point of asking questions and trying to have a conversation is to avoid arrest because getting arrested is a big deal, a waste of everyone's time and traumatizing for the child. Yeah it doesn't follow the letter of the law, big fucking whoop. We're human beings and things can be avoided just by having a normal fucking conversation. So no, people are not assholes by trying to have a conversation and not reading every law by the book just to get arrested anyway.
>>
>>16479114
Nowhere in the US are you obligated to show identification for a child, stop making shit up. Plus asking for ID and asking for "proof" that someone is their child are two very DIFFERENT things.
>>
>>16479131

>the point of asking questions and trying to have a conversation is to avoid arrest
>refuse the officers requests
>question the officer's actions

Go try it in real life. See what happens.
>>
>>16479131
>because getting arrested is a big deal
Except legally speaking it isn't. Society did that. There shouldn't be any stigma associated with arrest. Yeah it's inconvenient, but we really should be living in a society where (a) we don't stigmatize people for being arrested and (b) we don't make it such a scary concept that it would traumatize a child. But I'm getting off topic.

>people are not assholes by trying to have a conversation
When that conversation is an inappropriate debate--and a silly one, because the cop can ask almost anything the cop wants to ask--it makes someone an asshole. It's not the right time to be debating what a cop is allowed to ask you and it's never the right time to be wrong about it.
>>
>>16479141
Depends on the officer. I've gotten out of several speeding tickets just by talking to the officer like a fucking human being.
>>
>>16479128
I jist checked and you are right, it's not a law, jist commom courtesy. I however still think it's immature to make a big deal out of it.
>>
>>16479145
>it's immature to make a big deal out of it.
Discrimination is not an "immature" thing to make a big deal of.
>>
>>16479145
I think so too. People can take whatever stands they want to, and under most circumstances I do in fact think it's a good idea to NOT talk to the police. However that doesn't change my view toward them when they make that decision poorly.
>>
>>16479147
Context, anon. Context.

Making a big deal of it in a complaint and/or suit against the police department is a very reasonable thing to do. Making a big deal of it on the spot with the officer is not.
>>
wear a "worst best dad" tshirt and make sure you are annoyingly vocal about your daughter to every other parent there
>>
>>16479143
And again, nobody cares about legally. It is a big deal and again, it traumatizes the child. That is enough reason to want to avoid it. If you follow the law like a robot, you're going to get arrested 9 times out of 10 in that situation because the police hate people who shove the law in their face.

Conversations can and have avoided arrests because cops are people too and some of them will let you go. It's always worth a try and if it doesn't look like it's going to work then you bring the laws out.
>>
>>16478980
>simply don't be a male
don't be a white male, it's open season on them and witch hunts common
>>
>>16479151
>Context
Yeah and in this context he was discriminated against for being a male. Plain and simple.
>>
>>16479159
I feel like we're unwittingly arguing against the same conclusion?

My position is that telling the cop "I'm her father" is correct and "You have no right to ask me that" is sassy.

>And again, nobody cares about legally
I understand. That's what I was calling messed up with respect to how society acts.
>>
>>16479162
Since you're ignoring half of my reply, I'm going to ignore half of yours.

>Yeah
>Plain and simple
Great, I'm glad you agree!
>>
make sure you shave, wash your greasy hair, and don't wear your anime graphic tee while at the park with your daughter.
>>
>>16479165
>"You have no right to ask me that" is sassy.
He didn't say that though.
>>
>>16479169
Fair enough.

>and asking "why should I [show you proof]" is sassy.
>>
Ironically if OP had not been "sassy" and just followed everything by the book and exercised his "rights" then he would have been detained.

You guys are morons.
>>
>>16479180

He was already detained when she asked him for ID. He would have been at less risk of arrest had he complied fully though. Doing what he did was risking arrest out of spite.
>>
>>16479175
It's not sassy to ask for proof when you're being discriminated against and harassed.
>>
>>16479180
How is that ironic? It's exactly what you'd expect. If you don't provide information to the police, they hold you while they figure out the information themselves. That is exactly why detention and arrest exist.

It also would have been "by the book" to answer the cop directly and honestly. He has the right to do that too. It would have equally ended without any complication.
>>
ITT edgy teenagers who offer no real consolation or advice to an innocent single dad harassed by normies
>>
>>16478948
Files a report bro. Take it to the media. Have a fucking field day. Get some representation (a lawyer). There's no reason you should have to put up with this kind of stuff.
>>
>>16479185
>He would have been at less risk of arrest had he complied fully though
Except he wouldn't have because police officers despise people who know their rights more than anyone. It would have ended with his arrest and his release most certainly, but in this scenario he didn't get arrested at all so it was the better outcome.
>>
>>16479186
OP wasn't the one asking for proof. OP was being asked for proof, and he answered by asking the reason why. That last part is what I'm calling sassy.
>>
>>16479190
He did answer her honestly though. He told her he was at the park with his daughter and she decide to not believe him. Besides OP should not be forced to prove he's not a pedophile for being a male in the wrong place.
>>
>>16479204
How would complying fully give the officer any indication that OP "knows [his] rights?" Complying fully is the best way to keep knowledge of rights totally out of the picture.
>>
>>16479209
"Directly" is also part of it. Replying to a question with another question as a challenge is not direct. What I'm saying is that if he had done so, it would have been "by the book" and also within his rights. It also would have ended without complication. I was just addressed a hypothetical situation.

>Besides OP should not be forced to prove
He's not forced to prove anything. I'm not saying he did something illegal. I'm saying he did something incredibly stupid.
>>
>>16479205
>OP was being asked for proof, and he answered by asking the reason why
Which is a legitimate thing to ask because asking for proof that you're not a child predator is an absurd thing to ask of someone. What if OP didn't have "proof"? Then he's fucked.
>>
>>16479215
Being discriminated against is against the law actually so that whole situation was illegal to begin with.
>>
>>16479218
Legitimate? Absolutely. Smart? Nope. It's dumb as fuck.

>What if OP didn't have "proof"?
Well that would mean he's got no documentation/photos/etc. and the kid isn't yet of speaking age. Okay, what he does in that situation is tell the cop "I don't have any proof on me and my kid is too young to speak. Is there something else I can provide, like contact with my parents or her birth certificate/doctor's records/etc. back at home?"

He might still get arrested until that information is secured. I'm sorry that you think arrest is "fucked," even though I understand why you say that because as a society we're fucking idiots about that topic. But that's not the fault of police protocol. And taking it all the way back to my original point, it's also a more likely outcome when asking a question like "why?"
>>
>>16479220
Well then it's a good thing he asked the cop "why?" That immediately won him a discrimination ruling, the cop was fired and millions of dollars were awarded.

Oh wait, no, that didn't happen. Because the way to handle discrimination is not to ask "why?" to a cop.
>>
>>16479238
It's certainly not bending over and trying to follow the law in a situation that's inherently unlawful.
>>
>>16479235
First he's an asshole, then he's sassy, now he's just stupid. You're just looking for reasons to put down OP, you seem to have a vendetta against him for no reason.
>>
Wonderful how OP hasn't replied once to this thread since it started and you're arguing about semantics.
>>
That really sucks, but the cops are just doing their jobs, man.
>>
Do women really think any pedo is going to be doing shit like that in front of tons of people? The meme that pedos are stalking parks is so fucking stupid. A child molester is going to wait until the child is isolated. Kidnapping a child is a calculated move, that's not something done easily. What are you expecting, that guy to assfuck your child on the swings while you watch in horror?

Calling the cops on a dude that's just sitting there is just shaming random guys for being guys. It has nothing to do with protecting your children, and if a guy was really creeping on your kids do you not have the balls to say something? But clearly that's not what was happening, there wasn't any guy talking to your kid and touching them or anything. It was just a random guy sitting there and you're so sexist that you called the cops.

Pure fucking bullshit. Cops should know better that this is bullshit. No child molester is going to be casually hanging around a park, they're going to be alert as fuck. Most child predators have moved to the internet because it's easy to isolate a child on the internet, keyword isolate. That's the whole point is to get the kid vulnerable and alone. Attacking random dudes on the street is just being an asshole, you're not a good parent for doing that.
Thread posts: 75
Thread images: 2


[Boards: 3 / a / aco / adv / an / asp / b / bant / biz / c / can / cgl / ck / cm / co / cock / d / diy / e / fa / fap / fit / fitlit / g / gd / gif / h / hc / his / hm / hr / i / ic / int / jp / k / lgbt / lit / m / mlp / mlpol / mo / mtv / mu / n / news / o / out / outsoc / p / po / pol / qa / qst / r / r9k / s / s4s / sci / soc / sp / spa / t / tg / toy / trash / trv / tv / u / v / vg / vint / vip / vp / vr / w / wg / wsg / wsr / x / y] [Search | Top | Home]
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5
If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.