News: Rolando McLain to stand trial for 2013 disorderly conduct charge Friday

[speedkilz88]

 

[Chocolate Lab]

I mean, jeez, guys. I know he has a star on his hat now, but this is a bad guy. Or at least someone who has been a bad guy. Simple as that.

I wish he and everyone else would stop blaming the police, the state he lives in, the judge, or anyone else but himself.

 

[BlindFaith]

Police discretion is heavily involved in defining these two terms. Freedom of speech, unless a cop doesn't like it?

(1) uses abusive, indecent, profane, or vulgar language in a public place, and the language by its very utterance tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;
(2) makes an offensive gesture or display in a public place, and the gesture or display tends to incite an immediate breach of the peace;

Not really. It's probably safe to say that society would deem the F word indecent, profane and vulgar. Shouting F the police would tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace.

Plus, the fact that he is a repeat offender and obviously has little regard for the law, see the article about him speeding and texting on a highway, just screams of him thinking he is somehow entitled to be above the law.

I have zero respect for this type of person.

 

[xwalker]

He's free on bond awaiting a jury trial. I assume it will be several months before the trial.

 

[jblaze2004]

so he will be at practice tomorrow? jerry get on you jet and fly him back today lol


jerry probably say McClain aint worth the gas lol

 

[BigStar]

Not really. It's probably safe to say that society would deem the F word indecent, profane and vulgar. Shouting F the police would tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace.

Plus, the fact that he is a repeat offender and obviously has little regard for the law, see the article about him speeding and texting on a highway, just screams of him thinking he is somehow entitled to be above the law.

I have zero respect for this type of person.

I agree with your general point in bold but how the law is defined is so flexible that it results in unbalanced authority in proving ones innocence. In this instance, did the police believe that "vulgar phrase" really effected the situation in any manner or was a way of inciting violence? Their call (and the problem). That is all it takes to get arrested in a large group? It is and it isn't; depending on the officers and the situation. That is a wide range of discretion awarded to authority with little proof/evidence on their part. I guess my issue would be with the vagueness and unwarranted authority allowed to law enforcement to decide how "they" want to interpret the law. Some are reasonable and wouldn't deem it as worthy, where others see it as an arrest worthy offense. Enabling this sort of vague authority stemming from vague circumstances puts the majority of the burden on the citizen to prove their innocence after the fact which is near impossible given the nature of how the law/authority is described/established.

 

[xwalker]

so he will be at practice tomorrow? jerry get on you jet and fly him back today lol


jerry probably say McClain aint worth the gas lol

 

[BlindFaith]

I agree with your general point in bold but how the law is defined is so flexible that it results in unbalanced authority in proving ones innocence. In this instance, did the police believe that "vulgar phrase" really effected the situation in any manner or was a way of inciting violence? Their call (and the problem). That is all it takes to get arrested in a large group? It is and it isn't; depending on the officers and the situation. That is a wide range of discretion awarded to authority with little proof/evidence on their part. I guess my issue would be with the vagueness and unwarranted authority allowed to law enforcement to decide how "they" want to interpret the law. Some are reasonable and wouldn't deem it as worthy, where others see it as an arrest worthy offense. Enabling this sort of vague authority stemming from vague circumstances puts the majority of the burden on the citizen to prove their innocence after the fact which is near impossible given the nature of how the law/authority is described/established.

The police get a bad rap, and much is deservedly so. They also don't write the laws, they just enforce them the best they can.

There was a large crowd. There was friction within the crowd. McClain even stated the only reason he was there because he thought his cousin was going to get into trouble because, God forbid, someone spit on his car and disrespected him.

Cops show up, try to get everyone to move along. Someone shouts "F the police" a couple times. Cops arrest suspect. Cops try to defuse what could be a bad situation as pushing and what not had already begun.

McClain could have just kept his big mouth shut and moved along. He could have also just not gone and mentored his cousin, explained to him that the situation could be clearly avoided and that he'd pay to have his car washed.

But nope. He chose to go. He chose to spout off. He chose to be in trouble with the law before. He's a punk.

 

[BigStar]

The police get a bad rap, and much is deservedly so. They also don't write the laws, they just enforce them the best they can.

There was a large crowd. There was friction within the crowd. McClain even stated the only reason he was there because he thought his cousin was going to get into trouble because, God forbid, someone spit on his car and disrespected him.

Cops show up, try to get everyone to move along. Someone shouts "F the police" a couple times. Cops arrest suspect. Cops try to defuse what could be a bad situation as pushing and what not had already begun.

McClain could have just kept his big mouth shut and moved along. He could have also just not gone and mentored his cousin, explained to him that the situation could be clearly avoided and that he'd pay to have his car washed.

But nope. He chose to go. He chose to spout off. He chose to be in trouble with the law before. He's a punk.

I agree with most of this. Obviously the bowing to authority aspect probably brought some personal bias into the debate. I know folks like McClaiin and not defending their "ways" by any means. Trust me, I didn't want to use him as my poster boy for victim's rights I am arguing a different topic and acknowledge I was probably incorrectly trying to tie the two together.

 

[Doomsday101]

I mean, jeez, guys. I know he has a star on his hat now, but this is a bad guy. Or at least someone who has been a bad guy. Simple as that.

I wish he and everyone else would stop blaming the police, the state he lives in, the judge, or anyone else but himself.

I said pretty much the same in another thread. You go to any city jail, county jail or state prison and you will find 95 percent innocent people, at least according to them. You want to change your life start with yourself and not looking to put it on police, judges or anyone else. As for Alabama there are a lot of kids of different races that attend Bama and they manage to stay out of jail so this non sense of the cops are out to get him?

 

[GimmeTheBall!]

The posts are vague, oppressive, nongermaine and lacking in pretrial, ongoing trial and post-trial pertinence, inferences and relevancies!

https://encrypted-tbn2.***NOT-ALLOWED***/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTfWmmJjTX4WKW_aalsBuQBhfhgMppZV7zFBQNf7M6FRv0Awvdl

 

[BlindFaith]

I agree with most of this. Obviously the bowing to authority aspect probably brought some personal bias into the debate. I know folks like McClaiin and not defending their "ways" by any means. Trust me, I didn't want to use him as my poster boy for victim's rights I am arguing a different topic and acknowledge I was probably incorrectly trying to tie the two together.

I get the general idea of your opinion. But like with everything in the world, it's all about context. Nothing is ever black and white.

 

[BigStar]

I get the general idea of your opinion. But like with everything in the world, it's all about context. Nothing is ever black and white.

I hear ya, life is the gray area.

 

[xwalker]

I agree with your general point in bold but how the law is defined is so flexible that it results in unbalanced authority in proving ones innocence. In this instance, did the police believe that "vulgar phrase" really effected the situation in any manner or was a way of inciting violence? Their call (and the problem). That is all it takes to get arrested in a large group? It is and it isn't; depending on the officers and the situation. That is a wide range of discretion awarded to authority with little proof/evidence on their part. I guess my issue would be with the vagueness and unwarranted authority allowed to law enforcement to decide how "they" want to interpret the law. Some are reasonable and wouldn't deem it as worthy, where others see it as an arrest worthy offense. Enabling this sort of vague authority stemming from vague circumstances puts the majority of the burden on the citizen to prove their innocence after the fact which is near impossible given the nature of how the law/authority is described/established.

One thing that seems obvious is that he didn't resist arrest. If he did those cops in the photo are not arresting him without tasing or shooting him.

 

[BigStar]

One thing that seems obvious is that he didn't resist arrest. If he did those cops in the photo are not arresting him without tasing or shooting him.

Very true (didn't think of that) and definitely adds to the gray area component relating to the resisting arrest charge we have been debating. It lends to the pettiness argument and the initial discretion that doesn't seem to result in accountability. Even if initially wrong, "make it work/stick".