Letusnamenames

United States

#23 Feb 5, 2013
remember when wrote:
<quoted text>
Go blow dogs for a quarter maybe you could pay yours this month.
I think you have completely lost your mind.

Post the proof of your allegations. Don't respond snidely as that will show you have no proof and are diverting. Post the proof.
Ha Ha

Arnold, MO

#24 Feb 5, 2013
Letusnamenames wrote:
So you support the storm water tax now as long as it is used the way you want it to be. Weren't you part of the lawsuit to get rid of it or did you support the lawsuit from the sidelines?
Flip flop.
Don't break a leg jumping to conclusions.
Letusnamenames

United States

#25 Feb 5, 2013
No proof. Just like I thought.
What corruption

Saint Louis, MO

#26 Feb 5, 2013
Can anyone see the links I posted? I posted it teice but I'm not so sure it made it... I can see it when I log in but I'm not sure you are seeing it.
Ha Ha

Arnold, MO

#27 Feb 5, 2013
What proof do you have? For what issue? You just are slinging crap to see what will stick. There is no rhyme or reason to what you write. You make no sense. It is safe to conclude you are senseless!
Letusnamenames

United States

#30 Feb 5, 2013
No, can't see the links.
Defined

Arnold, MO

#31 Feb 5, 2013
So you are saying that everyone except police officers should ignore any violations they see? Be a good citizen and just look the other way, then no one will have to deal with it or do their job. Any citizen has the right to ask questions. Any citizen should question authority. Any citizen should stand up and do the right thing when they see something obviously wrong. Any citizen has the right to make a citizen's arrest. Have you ever heard of good Samaratins? They help people who need help. Have you ever heard of integrity? That is something someone has when they do the right thing even when no one is watching. Ninth grade civics has nothing to do with the issue you are trying to make. The law is supposed to be able to be interpreted by laymen. Support means the same thing as uphold. If a law is obviously not being upheld it is everyone's duty to see that it is. By the way, this isn't Washington D.C. they are even more screwed up there.
Letusnamenames

United States

#32 Feb 5, 2013
The citizen should report violations, not take the law into their own hands. And this doesn't give the right to go door to door looking for problems which could be deemed harassing behavior.
Laughing at You

Arnold, MO

#33 Feb 5, 2013
This is a free country. You can't tell anyone what they can or cannot do. No one has to follow your orders. Try to leave the sane people alone, go bother your roommates in the psych ward.
Letusnamenames

United States

#34 Feb 5, 2013
Expected that type of response.

If this is a free country and you can't tell people what they should or should not do then why have laws?

Police enforce the laws. Councils enact the laws.
Laughing at You

Arnold, MO

#35 Feb 5, 2013
Don't really care what you expected, you aren't debating anything, you just make obscure demands. You have no clue what you want or what you are talking about. Go make your demands on another board, go talk to your friends, show them what you have been doing and tell them your beliefs, watch them scurry away one by one leaving you alone with your scary thoughts.
Letusnamenames

United States

#36 Feb 5, 2013
I just want you to post proof of one of your conspiracy theories. You pick which one, but I want to see documented proof.

Is that concise enough for you? If nothing is posted then there mustn't be any proof for any of those corruption allegations you keep making.
Laughing at You

Arnold, MO

#37 Feb 5, 2013
What conspiracy are you talking about? The one in your head? Spinning a little too much to keep up with yourself? You live in your world where everything is wonderful and no corruption exists. What kind of drugs are you prescribing yourself? Maybe you should increase the dose.
Honestly

Arnold, MO

#38 Feb 5, 2013
Oh, Defined. Nope. Never heard of "Good Samaritins." I do know of Good Samaritans, though, and never not once have I known them to enforce a law, or (laughably) make a citizen's arrest. I can tell you if you try to "citizen's arrest" me outside of direct authority of - get this - a COP with legal authority to enforce the law, you're liable to get a flattened schnauze and a lawsuit to boot (along with likely criminal charges). So just keep that in mind. Wow. I can't even believe you think that is something available to you. Actually, no, you know what? I would L-O-V-E to see you on the front page of the Leader this week. Why not go out and make a few citizens' arrests? That would be rich.

The law is easily interpreted by intelligent and well-read laymen who are concrete sequential thinkers. Some of you, eh, have a little work to do.

I swear, some of y'all are HILARIOUS with this whole heidy-ho-here-we-go act.
Comical

Arnold, MO

#40 Feb 6, 2013
Honestly wrote:
Oh, Defined. Nope. Never heard of "Good Samaritins." I do know of Good Samaritans, though, and never not once have I known them to enforce a law, or (laughably) make a citizen's arrest. I can tell you if you try to "citizen's arrest" me outside of direct authority of - get this - a COP with legal authority to enforce the law, you're liable to get a flattened schnauze and a lawsuit to boot (along with likely criminal charges). So just keep that in mind. Wow. I can't even believe you think that is something available to you. Actually, no, you know what? I would L-O-V-E to see you on the front page of the Leader this week. Why not go out and make a few citizens' arrests? That would be rich.
The law is easily interpreted by intelligent and well-read laymen who are concrete sequential thinkers. Some of you, eh, have a little work to do.
I swear, some of y'all are HILARIOUS with this whole heidy-ho-here-we-go act.
You would love to see who on the front page of the Leader this week? You sure are into violence, aren't you? Concrete sequential thinkers should be above that kind of brute force action. Arrogance will get you nowhere, neither will the spelling police. Back to the point, now just what was the issue you were wanting to debate?
Honestly

Arnold, MO

#41 Feb 6, 2013
Ha! Why, Comical! Surely you didn't misunderstand that anyone assaulting me by making an unauthorized citizen's arrest would be subject to me exercising my right to self-defense! It is most certainly a concrete, sequential action to defend oneself against assault, sweetcheeks.

If I'm coming off as arrogant, so be it. Turns out those who are being schooled often find their educators to be so.:) I'm afraid it's more a reflection upon you than upon me.
Comical

Arnold, MO

#42 Feb 6, 2013
Seriously, answer the question, who would you like to see on the front page of the Leader this week? Sweetcheeks? Really? An a**man are you? Is that how you attract other men? You're the one who brought it up. Good luck with that self-defense thing, pretty sure that if someone were to exercise their right to make a citizen's arrest, after you were on the ground with your arm half way up your back you wouldn't be exercising anything but your mouth and vocal chords screaming in pain while waiting for uni's to arrive. No reflections on me, just an observation of your feelings of inadequacy being demonstrated by your proclivity to threaten violence.
Honestly

Arnold, MO

#43 Feb 6, 2013
You really can't tell? I'd advise you to go back and read what I wrote. Actually, I'll help you out. I was clearly referring to "Defined." I mean, hello, who else was talking about going out and making citizens' arrest?

SMH

Oh, and actually, I am a woman (although I am unsurprised you would hold such hostility toward homosexuals...I'd have pegged you for one of those types immediately). And you might be very, very surprised at the self defense of which I am capable. See...I wouldn't be on the ground to begin with. It just wouldn't get that far. And again, while it is tiresome for me to have to repeat myself, citizens' arrests are illegal without the authority of a law enforcement officer. So there wouldn't be any "waiting for [them] to arrive." Sorry. I'd advise you to try again but you are really just embarrassing yourself. Maybe you should quit while you're ahead.

No feelings of inadequacy here. I simply don't have any use for them.

Still want to get under my skin? You'll have to try much, much harder.:) Meanwhile, I'll eagerly await your response which, I am sure, will be amusing and almost cute in its infantility.
Wrongo

Arnold, MO

#44 Feb 6, 2013
Private person's use of force in making an arrest.
563.051. 1. A private person who has been directed by a person he reasonably believes to be a law enforcement officer to assist such officer to effect an arrest or to prevent escape from custody may, subject to the limitations of subsection 3, use physical force when and to the extent that he reasonably believes such to be necessary to carry out such officer's direction unless he knows or believes that the arrest or prospective arrest is not or was not authorized.

2. A private person acting on his own account may, subject to the limitations of subsection 3, use physical force to effect arrest or prevent escape only when and to the extent such is immediately necessary to effect the arrest, or to prevent escape from custody, of a person whom he reasonably believes to have committed a crime and who in fact has committed such crime.

3. A private person in effecting an arrest or in preventing escape from custody is justified in using deadly force only

(1) When such is authorized under other sections of this chapter; or

(2) When he reasonably believes such to be authorized under the circumstances and he is directed or authorized by a law enforcement officer to use deadly force; or

(3) When he reasonably believes such use of deadly force is immediately necessary to effect the arrest of a person who at that time and in his presence

(a) Committed or attempted to commit a class A felony or murder; or

(b) Is attempting to escape by use of a deadly weapon.

4. The defendant shall have the burden of injecting the issue of justification under this section.
What corruption

Saint Louis, MO

#45 Feb 6, 2013
Who's wrong?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Eureka Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Fox C6 Board of Education : Discussion (Jun '14) 15 min Eileen 898
Seckman Elementary parents...our problems are s... 2 hr what's up with that 9
fox athletics 6 hr Warrior12 10
Why does a town the size of Byrnesmill need a m... Thu cedar hill 13
Abundance of Fat Slobs Dec 14 Twinkie 2
Missouri KKK Leader: Ferguson Protests Are Boos... Dec 14 neveratfault 26
Know Missouri Law Regarding Cameras Before You ... Dec 13 Mary 25
Eureka Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Eureka People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Eureka News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Eureka

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 4:54 pm PST

Bleacher Report 4:54PM
Previewing Giants vs. Rams
Bleacher Report 8:44 PM
Complete Week 16 Preview for New York
Bleacher Report 4:32 AM
Chiefs' Week 16 Preview vs. Steelers
Bleacher Report10:58 AM
Polamalu (Knee) Likely to Sit Sunday
ESPN 7:36 AM
Sources: Goodell says no L.A. team in 2015