TexasCHLforum.com

It does come in several flavors

Perhaps they can't read cursive.

E.Marquez wrote:The item in question that caused ABC agents to believe that had cornered a criminal.
[ Image ]

Oh, yes, I can clearly see it says "Shiner" right there on the side...

These aren't beat cops.....these are supposed to be highly trained individuals.......surely they know most brands of beer. No one out of he seven said.....".wait......I've never heard of that beer.......hold on.....that's water!"

Surely such highly trained, amped up ATF agents would be better used elsewhere. Perhaps raids on the local sorority house.

E.Marquez wrote:The item in question that caused ABC agents to believe that had cornered a criminal.
[ Image ]

Gasp! That looks JUST LIKE a Schiltz case!!!! How could they have possibly known that wasn't beer?????

EEllis wrote:

MasterOfNone wrote:

EEllis wrote:...see what they believed was a minor carrying what appeared to be a 12 pack of beer.

This is the problem I am having. What made them "believe it was beer? They obviously did not positively identify it, so what made them believe it was beer instead of water or soda? I suspect it was a preformed bias toward believing it.
This just sounds a lot like the citizen having to prove innocence.

they don't have to positively identify it as beer it just has to be reasonable to them that it is. We, the courts, don't require law enforcement to be positive before allowing them it investigate or initiate a stop. There been no hint, except from people who in absolutely no position to know, that there was anything wrong with the RS for this stop.

Just for those who don't know this particular brand of water is canned not bottled and does not use the primarily single color packaging that soda uses. While soda and beer are not the only items that come in 12 pack cans these would certainly not cause me to instinctively think water.

And they would not cause me to instinctively think "beer.". As I said, it appears to me they applied the "assume crime and make the citizen prove otherwise" approach. I suspect the same group would initiate a stop if they saw a driver drinking from a can but could not identify the brand.

MasterOfNone wrote: And they would not cause me to instinctively think "beer.". As I said, it appears to me they applied the "assume crime and make the citizen prove otherwise" approach. I suspect the same group would initiate a stop if they saw a driver drinking from a can but could not identify the brand.

Maybe so but you're not an ABC cop who has to justify the RS for a stop.

EEllis wrote:It does come in several flavors
[ Image ]

There's a peach-pear or pear-peach flavor as well that's fantastic. My roommate and I buy out the store every time either of us finds any (because there's usually just one case).

apostate wrote:Perhaps they can't read cursive.

EEllis wrote:

MasterOfNone wrote:

EEllis wrote:...see what they believed was a minor carrying what appeared to be a 12 pack of beer.

This is the problem I am having. What made them "believe it was beer? They obviously did not positively identify it, so what made them believe it was beer instead of water or soda? I suspect it was a preformed bias toward believing it.
This just sounds a lot like the citizen having to prove innocence.

they don't have to positively identify it as beer it just has to be reasonable to them that it is. We, the courts, don't require law enforcement to be positive before allowing them it investigate or initiate a stop. There been no hint, except from people who in absolutely no position to know, that there was anything wrong with the RS for this stop.

Just for those who don't know this particular brand of water is canned not bottled and does not use the primarily single color packaging that soda uses. While soda and beer are not the only items that come in 12 pack cans these would certainly not cause me to instinctively think water.

It was wrong. In nonDear Leader land its not befitting a free people to be stopped for no reason.

EEllis wrote:

MasterOfNone wrote: And they would not cause me to instinctively think "beer.". As I said, it appears to me they applied the "assume crime and make the citizen prove otherwise" approach. I suspect the same group would initiate a stop if they saw a driver drinking from a can but could not identify the brand.

Maybe so but you're not an ABC cop who has to justify the RS for a stop.

You've basically said they don't have to either.

Cedar Park Dad wrote:

EEllis wrote:

MasterOfNone wrote: And they would not cause me to instinctively think "beer.". As I said, it appears to me they applied the "assume crime and make the citizen prove otherwise" approach. I suspect the same group would initiate a stop if they saw a driver drinking from a can but could not identify the brand.

Maybe so but you're not an ABC cop who has to justify the RS for a stop.

You've basically said they don't have to either.

Well, no that is not really what he said

And while I disagree with some of the positions EEllis has taken of late...
Lets not put words in his mouth he did not say... lets discuss only the ones he did.

EEllis wrote:they don't have to positively identify it as beer it just has to be reasonable to them that it is. We, the courts, don't require law enforcement to be positive before allowing them it investigate or initiate a stop

That statement by EEllis clearly opines a LEO must have at least reasonable suspicion of a crime committed for the stop... Hard to understand how an person having an honest conversation could read it otherwise.

hardly. His standard appears to be, if they have a bag, they are subject to a stop. Thats no standard at all as anyone with a bag can be stopped. Thats not reasonable in a free country.

Dave2 wrote:

EEllis wrote:It does come in several flavors
[ Image ]

There's a peach-pear or pear-peach flavor as well that's fantastic. My roommate and I buy out the store every time either of us finds any (because there's usually just one case).

My wife bought a couple of cases of that stuff about 3 months ago. I can't stand it, especially the coconut flavored one. It tastes like thinned out vomit and smells like suntan lotion.

Delightful.

We're still trying to get rid of it but I refuse to drink anymore of it so it's taking my wife a long time all by her onesies to not waste our money by throwing it out.

I don't think those girls should have been arrested for buying it, but the store should be arrested for selling it. Yes....the whole store. It's a crime against humanity to sell that stuff.

And yes, the ATF agents showed really poor decision-making. OTH, so did the girls. Nobody comes out looking clean in this one.

The Annoyed Man wrote: I don't think those girls should have been arrested for buying it, but the store should be arrested for selling it. Yes....the whole store. It's a crime against humanity to sell that stuff.