Bricker’s cite did not say that CPS takes kids without calling the police. The one case he cited was a case in which a CPS worker was being sued for violating policy, not for following it.
…
Dio cannot be wrong. It is impossible for Dio to be wrong. The sooner you all realize that, the sooner all of this will be over.
Oops, you seem to have missed this post: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11631671&postcount=71
and this post: http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=534676&page=2
As far as Ontario goes, the child protection legislation and enforcement procedure is substantially similar to that in states in the USA, including Tennessee, which is where the apprehension took place. I note that you have relied on your wife as your cite, despite your wife not working in Tennessee.
Once again, no one has suggested that apprehensions made at home do not usually include police attendance to keep the peace. It was your insistence that there must be a preceding court order that brought you to the pit. Now it is your insistence that there must be either a preceding court order or an apprehension by police that keeps you in the pit. Wouldn’t it be easier for you to simply provide a reputable cite to prove your point, rather than hanging your can’t be assed ass in the wind for all to see?
And so you have moved from straight denial, to weaselling, to stomping your little hoofies. Didn’t we already address this sort of behaviour problem in my OP? I realize that this might not make sense to you, but just because I am in Ontario does not invalidate the Tennessee CPS cite I provided to you, that clearly sets out that CPS has the authority to apprehend without a court order if there is an emergency (and for that matter does not require the authority of a police officer). So grunt and burp and raise the flag as much as you wish – by all means stand up for your patriotic right to be ignorant in the third declension.
did you read the whole order? at this point, you’ve got to be kidding.
Nozzleousity.
Ontario is fucking irrelevant. We’re talking about America.
As long as you agree that the cops are always involved, then we’re resolved.
I’d like to refute this post with two points.
-
Nu-uh.
-
So’s your face.
Dude, they’re not, read **Bricker’**s post. The courts are always involved (eventually), but not the cops. Seriously man, are you ok?
If we agree that courts are always involved then I was right in saying the courts are always involved.
Dio, since you insist on being a blow-hard, why don’t you make a vortex cannon? That way with one big boom you can flatten all the cited law that stands in your way. Vortex Cannon Demolishes House « Science Experiments :: WonderHowTo
Except that it not even close to what you said. Care for a refresher?
And once again for the nth time, courts are not involved in emergency apprehensions. They only become involved after the emergency apprehension has been completed. Their authority is not needed to make an emergency apprehension. The police’s authority is not needed to make an emergency apprehension, although they may attend to keep the peace. The CPS has the authority to make the emergency apprehension.
There is a word for this…
Pathetic.
Dio, are you Chuck Norris in disguise?
Dio, it isn’t that hard. Really. Follow along with me.
I
was
wr. . .
wro. . .
wrong.
Or are you Arthur Fonzirelli and you have a mental psychosis that will cause your fingers to bleed if you type those words?
Ignoramity?
I’m really getting to like that word. “His ignoramity was a bit of an embuggerance.” Yes, I quite like it.
Do you know the difference between “usually” and “always”?
I was wrong.
I take back the Michele Bachmann crack. It was a low blow anyway.