Arrested for eating a samich
0
-
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.
Merc0 -
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.0 -
Looks like Officer McCormick hasn?t missed too many samiches. 0 -
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? 0 -
I first heard the term used by Godwin on Duck Dynasty. 0 -
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? 0 -
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. Bob0 -
And folks wonder why so many people hate cops ............... this is why. 0 -
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. 0 -
0 -
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.0 -
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.
Neal0 -
?Tuned up?- My dad used to use that term.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.0 -
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!!! 0 -
California legal defense strategy:
That was not a sandwich, it identifies as a cup of water.0 -
The guy's an idiot but the situation is BS. 0 -
BOTH sides could have handled it differently. 0 -
Sorry, but I do not think that is a very useful allocation of assets.
Yes, worthy of an arrest.
Not.0 -
A confrontational, loudmouth hoodrat doing confrontational, loudmouth hoodrat stuff? 0 -
Apparently, some of us have a different idea of an "Arrestable Offense."
This is not one of them.
Obviously, your view may differ.0 -
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.0 -
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?0 -
If only he would have officer a bite, this would have been over in less than a minute. 0 -
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.0 -
35 Whelen wrote:KenK/84Bravo wrote:35 Whelen wrote:
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.
You may want to re-think the Flag, in your signature.0 -
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 douche 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 dumbass got what was coming.0 -
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.0 -
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".🤔0 -
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".0 -
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.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
30 comments