12

Man Handcuffed for Eating Sandwich in Violation of Tyrannical Calif. Law

Posted by Dobrien 5 years, 5 months ago to News
23 comments | Share | Flag

In the state of California, law enforcement is willing to handcuff a man for the crime of eating a sandwich.

According to KGO-TV in the Bay Area, 31-year-old Steve Foster was handcuffed and detained Monday on an open-air platform at the Pleasant Hill station in Walnut Creek, California.

A cop putting a man in handcuffs for eating a sandwich would have been business as usual, sadly — except, in the cell phone age, the whole thing was recorded and ended up inflicting a massive black eye on the Bay Area Rapid Transit public transportation system, not to mention California’s profoundly excessive nanny state laws.

All Comments

  • Posted by CircuitGuy 5 years, 5 months ago
    Officer McCormick: "You’re eating. It’s against the law." "You’re going to jail."
    It sounds like a parody of a fictional police state, except it's real.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jdg 5 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    That's not a statewide policy; it's that of the new San Francisco DA.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by exceller 5 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I agree.

    These people think that violating the law is an expression of resistance to authority (which is less and less enforced) but what they actually are doing is inconveniencing the people of the City. Walking around the City and using the escalators of BART you need to hold your nose from the offending stench of urine. They clean it up but it is back the next day. They want anarchy and chaos.

    I was actually surprised that the policeman had the courage to arrest the guy and not be concerned he'd be lynched by the mob.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jdg 5 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    There's at least one photo making the rounds of a bum lifting her skirt and urinating against the side of a train, on a platform, surrounded by other people.

    When even publicity doesn't shame these people, what's left? To punch them out? I think arresting them is the best option left to us.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Dobrien 5 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    It would make more sense to me if they outlawed public defecation on side walks or streets. Or didn’t harbor , aide and abet illegal aliens
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jdg 5 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Agree 100%. And the ban has been in place since BART opened its doors in 1972. Granted, it would be better if the rule were merely "no littering", but that would require some judgment on the part of police and I'd just as soon not trust them with discretion.

    This case is all about racism by (some) blacks. They expect preferential treatment, and cry "racism!" when they don't get it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 5 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    But was an entitled black person. Courtesy doesn’t apply to them post obams
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ 25n56il4 5 years, 5 months ago
    Wouldn't it have been alright to point out a trash receptacle and tell the offender eating was prohibited? Handcuffing is a bit over the top!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ allosaur 5 years, 5 months ago
    Why eat a sandwich in Kalifornia when you can get away with defecating in public?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Joseph23006 5 years, 5 months ago
    Keeping the BART line stations clean is very noble, the point would be well made if the subject were littering used food or beverage containers around, but eating? However the same concern should be extended to the streets where the squatters are probably eating and scattering their trash let alone more unsanitary things that do not seem to concern those in power for they have done little if nothing to remedy the situation. What will happen when those same squatters find more agreeable accommodations on the platforms?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by sgijantopaeth 5 years, 5 months ago
    Isn't this the same state that will no longer arrest anyone for public urination? It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad Mad world out there, folks.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 5 years, 5 months ago
    Next!...farting, burping, sneezing, coughing and last, which might be sooner than you think: BREATHING!

    But probably, they'll attack EXHALING first...CO2 ya know.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 5 years, 5 months ago
    What kind of sandwich? It is CA afterall and it has been known for some very weird things.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by exceller 5 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I agree to that.

    Now if CA would be just as efficient catching and restricting illegals instead of being a sanctuary to their crimes, that would help the State a great deal.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Dobrien 5 years, 5 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Thanks G, The restriction certainly make sense but not investigating or charging crime for a theft of $100 or less doesn't when willing to cuff a sandwich chewer.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by exceller 5 years, 5 months ago
    Sorry to say this but everyone knows there is no eating, drinking or smoking on BART stations or premises.

    I think it is a generally accepted rule of subway transportation.

    California has many idiotic laws but this is not one of them.

    When there are hundreds or thousands crowding the stations at rush out, the last think you want to have is people dropping/dripping food or drink for others to step in or slip on

    There are signs at the entrance and the trains warning about the ban
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo