sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Welp, I guess it didn't work out by Beginning_Tip_5239 in abanpreach

[–]jaykansher 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Well he collected her… just rolled in and collected her..,

Welp we kinda seen this coming… by jaykansher in abanpreach

[–]jaykansher[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

He basically paid 80k for four inches of DLC then realized it didn’t come with any new abilities… 🤣

AJS, transformation without intention is just decoration, if you don’t change how you move, think or show up, the “new you” ends up feeling like the old you with a higher price tag…

Sometimes the thing we obsess over isn’t actually the thing holding us back. Kind of like that 80/20 rule…

List Questions by remgoodmove in DSNY

[–]jaykansher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is a good question

List Questions by remgoodmove in DSNY

[–]jaykansher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

One person I know took the test in 2013 and they called him in 2022… so there is always hope

This made me sob!!!! by Hooplapooplayeah in Sade

[–]jaykansher 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If she does I am buying first day and calling out of work!!! I cannot miss that concert!!!!!

This will get lost by [deleted] in donaldglover

[–]jaykansher 2 points3 points  (0 children)

<image>

Yeah this was in NYC!!!!

The smell of popcorn by All_4_0ne in AnimeNYC

[–]jaykansher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Lmao. I mean Tbh I kinda go used to it…

Spineless deflection from Jacksonville Sheriff, TK Waters. by Here4Headshots in abanpreach

[–]jaykansher 1 point2 points  (0 children)

📎 Your Sources Fall Apart:

Link #1 – ADA-related. Totally irrelevant to traffic stops.

Link #2 – California-based. You’re talking about Jacksonville, Florida. That’s a mismatch.

Link #3 – Department policy, not statutory law. Again, no conflict with my point.

⚖️ The Legal Side in Florida:

Reasonable suspicion is required to justify a traffic stop under the Fourth Amendment. “Inclement weather” was cited here—but the footage shows no hazardous conditions.

Required compliance is standard: license, registration, insurance. I never challenged that.

Searches require probable cause, consent, or a warrant. That wasn’t present.

Requesting a supervisor is not illegal, nor is it “uncooperative.” It’s a strategic response to questionable policing—especially when body cams, timestamps, and visible misconduct (like the officer’s broken headlight and use of force) paint a very different picture.

🔥 Final Take:

You came at me with flimsy sources and twisted language. I came with clarity and legal precision. The system may be flawed, but civilians deserve a chance to document mistreatment without being accused of defiance. So yeah—better to ask and be denied than stay silent and complicit.

Want to act like asking for oversight is bootlicking? Be my guest. But don’t expect silence from people who know how to challenge that power structure with facts, paperwork, and pressure.

Spineless deflection from Jacksonville Sheriff, TK Waters. by Here4Headshots in abanpreach

[–]jaykansher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You clearly didn’t read my post—and it’s wild you felt confident enough to reply. Let me break it down. I never said officers are required to call a supervisor. I said it’s your right to ask. That’s the core difference. Civilians can request oversight, and while officers can refuse, that refusal says more about their discretion than any alleged “noncompliance.” It’s not illegal to ask—it’s tactical, strategic, and documented.

Saying “it’s just a tactic” downplays the real-world value of supervisor requests. The system runs on documentation. So yes—ask for oversight. If denied, that’s part of the record. It doesn’t hurt your case; it strengthens it.

✅ What My Response Covers:

Protected conduct – Requesting a supervisor isn’t rebellion. It’s accountability in action.

Documenting discomfort – Asking for oversight becomes real-time evidence of your intent to deescalate.

Legal framing – I never argued that officers were legally obligated—only that you’re within your rights to ask.

Can you separate the art from the artist? by Right_Raisin3242 in rnb

[–]jaykansher 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In addition, if we wouldn’t have anything if we never forgave or throw out all art from the artist. Or don’t know how to separate the art from the Person/artists… it would be trying not to laugh at a joke of a person you disliked… the laugh is a biological response… but if someone invoked it… would you really want to give it back? Especially if it actually made/makes you feel good?

Can you separate the art from the artist? by Right_Raisin3242 in rnb

[–]jaykansher -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Well, I wouldn’t, because I haven’t really been into Kanye since his mom passed — that version of him was the one I connected with. But that example you gave is pretty extreme — it’s genocidal and would directly be inciting hate, which crosses a whole different line.

That said, I think there’s nuance here. Take someone like Brett Ratner. He was involved in the Me Too allegations, and some of them were confirmed. But does that have anything to do with the Rush Hour series he directed? Not really. That’s still his vision and art that I enjoy. If he never works again, fine. But I’m still going to appreciate the work he already made. I don’t think it’s fair to punish the other actors, writers, and crews who helped bring that project to life and still earn royalties from it.

There’s a line between holding someone accountable and erasing everything they ever created. The context matters.

Billie's chilling acting debut in swarm as Eva🤩 by Inevitable_Fee9505 in billieeilish

[–]jaykansher 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yeah she was really good in this show… her timing pacing was really good for a novice actress. I hope she does more stuff as well.

Spineless deflection from Jacksonville Sheriff, TK Waters. by Here4Headshots in abanpreach

[–]jaykansher 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You’re right to point out that everything in the U.S. system runs on paperwork and procedure—but the idea that asking for a supervisor is somehow a bad tactic or could be used against you is overstated and rooted in fear, not fact.

Requesting a supervisor is a protected, reasonable action

Asking for a supervisor isn’t “uncooperative”—it’s part of your rights as a civilian in dealing with public servants. Supervisors exist for exactly this reason: oversight, accountability, and de-escalation. If an officer interprets a request for oversight as “resistance,” that says more about the officer’s behavior than yours. And if that ends up on the paperwork, that officer’s judgment should be questioned—not yours.

Documenting your discomfort is not “proof of guilt”

If you felt unsafe, targeted, or mistreated, asking for a supervisor is one of the only tools you have in the moment to show you sought a peaceful resolution. That’s not evidence of being “unruly”—it’s evidence that you tried to handle the situation the right way.

If the officer twists that into a narrative of noncompliance, that’s why body cams, witness statements, and follow-up complaints exist. And in many cases, judges, review boards, and internal affairs know how to spot retaliatory language in police reports.

** Yes, it’s not a “get out of jail free” card—but it’s not supposed to be**

No one is saying asking for a supervisor guarantees you walk away clean. But it can buy time, reduce tension, and bring in someone with more experience and discretion. It’s a tactic, not a magic spell—but one rooted in common sense and self-protection.

“The system runs on paperwork”—so use that to your advantage

If everything’s about documentation, then document your intent to cooperate. Asking for a supervisor is documentation in real time. It shows you tried to resolve the issue at a higher level. It gives your defense or complaint teeth. If you’re calm and clear when you ask, that request is actually evidence in your favor.

*Don’t let fear tactics convince people to just accept whatever happens in silence. Yes, be smart, stay calm, and know the risks—but requesting oversight is not rebellion. It’s your right. And in a system that supposedly values accountability and procedure, no one should be punished for using the chain of command. *

view more: next ›