Piss of the Police in NY go to jail for 4 years.

[RetArmySgt]

Senate Passes Bill Creating Crime of Aggravated Harassment of a Police Officer | New York State Senate

This is a necessary action because we can see from the rise in incidents that too many people in our society have lost the respect they need to have for a police officer. We need to make it very clear that when a police officer is performing his duty, every citizen needs to comply and that refusal to comply carries a penalty.”

 

[Vaquero]

Not surprised.
Then again, piss on me and see what you get.

 

[TX69]

Thanks for the travel tip.

 

[cbigclarke]

i think yall going to read about me at the end of the month

 

[moshow9]

And yet stop and frisk searches continue.

 

[itchin]

Stop n frisk lol. Sounds like a perverted game.

 

[Younggun]

", every citizen needs to comply and that refusal to comply carries a penalty.”

Hmmm, interesting.

 

[Stukaman]

Papers please?!

 

[hkusp1]

 

[txinvestigator]

Did any of you bother to read the bill?

Some of you, I swear......

The New York State Senate today passed a bill that creates the crime of aggravated harassment of a police or peace officer. The bill (S.2402), sponsored by Senator Joe Griffo (R-C-I, Rome) would make it a felony to physically attack a police officer while on duty.

Rather than hyperbole, someone tell me your issue with that.

Here is the actual law.

Section 1. The penal law is amended by adding a new section 240.33 to
read as follows:

S 240.33 AGGRAVATED HARASSMENT OF A POLICE OFFICER OR PEACE OFFICER.
A PERSON IS GUILTY OF AGGRAVATED HARASSMENT OF A POLICE OFFICER OR
PEACE OFFICER WHEN, WITH THE INTENT TO HARASS, ANNOY, THREATEN OR ALARM
A PERSON WHOM HE OR SHE KNOWS OR REASONABLY SHOULD KNOW TO BE A POLICE
OFFICER OR PEACE OFFICER ENGAGED IN THE COURSE OF PERFORMING HIS OR HER
OFFICIAL DUTIES, HE OR SHE STRIKES, SHOVES, KICKS OR OTHERWISE SUBJECTS
SUCH PERSON TO PHYSICAL CONTACT.
AGGRAVATED HARASSMENT OF A POLICE OFFICER OR PEACE OFFICER IS A CLASS
E FELONY.
S 2. This act shall take effect on the first of November next succeed-
ing the date on which it shall have become a law.

 

[Das Jared]

Did any of you bother to read the bill?

Some of you, I swear......



Rather than hyperbole, someone tell me your issue with that.

Here is the actual law.

We read it. Still think its outrageous. End of story.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk 2

 

[TX69]

Did any of you bother to read the bill?

Some of you, I swear......



Rather than hyperbole, someone tell me your issue with that.

Here is the actual law.

Yep. NYPD is known to be trustworthy and will follow the letter of the law. All of us should either believe that or get on board. The ones that do not believe that should not be allowed to travel, live or work there. I think I'll put a biggo red "X" over that state thank you very much.

 

[txinvestigator]

We read it. Still think its outrageous. End of story.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk 2

What, exactly, is outrageous?

 

[Flyingswords]

Stop n frisk lol. Sounds like a perverted game.

Sounds like seasoning to me heh

 

[Das Jared]

What, exactly, is outrageous?

Better yet, what ISNT outrageous about it.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Dawico]

What, exactly, is outrageous?

There is some broad language there depending on how you read it. It all depends on how the courts interpret the wording.

I have no problem with laws against touching an officer with negative intent, but a Felony for annoying an officer? I think that could be a little outrageous.

 

[Stukaman]

I see good and bad but a major way for this to be used incorrectly.

 

[Shorts]

Section 1. The penal law is amended by adding a new section 240.33 to
read as follows:

S 240.33 AGGRAVATED HARASSMENT OF A POLICE OFFICER OR PEACE OFFICER.
A PERSON IS GUILTY OF AGGRAVATED HARASSMENT OF A POLICE OFFICER OR
PEACE OFFICER WHEN, WITH THE INTENT TO HARASS, ANNOY, THREATEN OR ALARM
A PERSON WHOM HE OR SHE KNOWS OR REASONABLY SHOULD KNOW TO BE A POLICE
OFFICER OR PEACE OFFICER ENGAGED IN THE COURSE OF PERFORMING HIS OR HER
OFFICIAL DUTIES, HE OR SHE STRIKES, SHOVES, KICKS OR OTHERWISE SUBJECTS
SUCH PERSON TO PHYSICAL CONTACT.
AGGRAVATED HARASSMENT OF A POLICE OFFICER OR PEACE OFFICER IS A CLASS
E FELONY.
S 2. This act shall take effect on the first of November next succeed-
ing the date on which it shall have become a law.

If annoy is only used in the context of a physical contact, I don't see an issue with it. If annoy is going to be used in a more broad context, without physical contact, then folks should take notice. I'd be asking for a statute definition of "annoy".

A scenario off the top of my head, a bystander using their phone cam to capture video of an arrest or altercation and the LEOs get 'annoyed'. If 'annoy' applies only to physical contact (as from the text quoted it looks like it does) there is no issue. If annoyed is defined as a non-contact judgement call, well there might be something to think about.

Another scenario, LEOs making an arrest of a drunk during some street celebration or parade. Then the drunk's drunk buddies and girlfriend are encircling, touching, grabbing, strong-arming, poking, slapping, or thumping the LEO to distract him/her from tending to the arrest at hand, then there's an application I see fulfilling "annoy" in physical context.

 

[kusai]

Did not get a donut
HARASSMENT

Did not say "All hail bloomber"
HARASSMENT

Talk back about actual law
HARASSMENT

Talk to educate the LEO on the right law
HARASSMENT

Cruiser passes by and you dont say "Hail bloomie" by raising hand
HARASSMENT

Black, wearing a hoodie with hands in pocket and gold teeths
HARASSMENT

Reserve your rights
HARASSMENT

 

[txinvestigator]

Better yet, what ISNT outrageous about it.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk 2

So you have nothing that would make sense, so instead try to turn it around.

You thing it should be lawful to kick, strike, etc., a cop who is performing his job? On second thought, outrageous is an appropriate term, but for YOUR thinking that should be OK.

Good grief.