Death from the Sea wrote:no, you don't understand. I actually say "I am not going to arrest you for it."
So in other words you use phraseology that, coming from a cop, gives the very strong impression that you *could* arrest them for it, but you're simply choosing not to. The same way that a cop who pulled someone over for speeding, but decided to be a little merciful says "I'm not going to write a ticket for this."
In short: You threaten them. Thanks for proving yourself wrong, douche.
as long as I am not arresting them on a lie or writing a ticket on a lie.
So threatening to use force is okay as long as you don't actually end up using force? Wow, what a morally bankrupt, piece of shit you are. "Well, I *threaten* to beat the shit out of my girlfriend if she so much as looks at another guy, but I never actually do it, so that makes it okay."
guys, I CAN make false claims all day long, as long, as long as I don't take any action on it. As long as the false claims are not in court or in reference to any kind of official report, then there is no law(s) against it.
Wow, this may be the first time I've seen legalistic idiocy used in reverse here. Most of the time it's people going "It's moral because it's the law," instead, you're saying, "It's moral because it's not actually *against* the law."
I *can* get married, have children, and teach them from birth to be violently antagonistic towards cops. There are no laws against it, so by your logic, it must be perfectly okay. Even so, that analogy doesn't fully capture how much of an asshole pig you actually are because you're one of the ones charged with *upholding* the law and preserving public order and safety, meaning you should know far better than the average person not to abuse your position of trust.