🔥 | Latest

Beautiful, God, and Love: You can't parse [X]HTML with regex. Because HTML can't be parsed by regex. Regex is not a tool that can be used to correctly parse HTML. As I have answered in HTML-and-regex questions here so many times before, the use of regex will not allow you to consume HTML. Regular expressions are a tool that is insufficiently sophisticated to understand the constructs employed by HTML. HTML is not a regular language and hence cannot be parsed by regular expressions. Regex queries are not equipped to break down HTML into its meaningful parts. so many times but it is not getting to me. Even enhanced irregular regular expressions as used by Perl are not up to the task of parsing HTML. You will never make me crack. HTML is a language of sufficient complexity that it cannot be parsed by regular expressions. Even Jon Skeet cannot parse HTML using regular expressions Every time you attempt to parse HTML with regular expressions, the unholy child weeps the blood of virgins, and Russian hackers pwn your webapp. Parsing HTML with regex summons tainted souls into the realm of the living. HTML and regex go together like love, marriage, and ritual infanticide The <center> cannot hold it is too late. The force of regex and HTML together in the same conceptual space will destroy your mind like so much watery putty. If you parse HTML with regex you are giving in to Them and their blasphemous ways which doom us all to inhuman toil for the One whose Name cannot be expressed in the Basic Multilingual Plane, he comes. HTML-plus regexp will liquify the neryes of the sentient whilst you observe, your psyche withering in the onslaught of horror. Regex-based HTML parsers are the cancer that is killing StackOverflow it is too late it is too late we cannot be saved the trangession of a child ensures regex will consume all living tissue (except for HTML which it cannot, as previously prophesied) dear lord help us how car anyone survive this scourge using regex to parse HTML has doomed humanity to an eternity of dread torture and security holes using regex as a tool to process HTML establishes a breach between this world and the dread realm of cörrupt entities (like SGML entities, but more corrupt) a mere glimpse of the world of regex parsers for HTML will instantly transport a programmer's consciousness into a world of ceaseless screaming, he comes,the pestilent slithy regex-infection wil I devour your HTML parser, application and existence for all time like Visual Bąsic only worse he comes he comes do not fight he comes, his unholy radiance destroying all enlightenment, HTML tags leakjng frqm your eyes/like liquid pain, the song of regular expressien parsing-will extinguish the voices of mortal man from the sphgre I can see it can you see i it is beautiful the f inal 4421 snuf fing of the lies of Man ALL IS LOST ALL IS LOST the pory he comes he comese comes tge ichor permeates all MY FACE MY F Fish god no NO NOOOO ΝΘ stop the anges . ạre not rea) ZALGo is TOM) THE PONY HEgOMES Unicöde
Beautiful, God, and Love: You can't parse [X]HTML with regex. Because HTML can't be parsed by regex. Regex is not a tool
 that can be used to correctly parse HTML. As I have answered in HTML-and-regex questions here
 so many times before, the use of regex will not allow you to consume HTML. Regular expressions
 are a tool that is insufficiently sophisticated to understand the constructs employed by HTML. HTML
 is not a regular language and hence cannot be parsed by regular expressions. Regex queries are
 not equipped to break down HTML into its meaningful parts. so many times but it is not getting to
 me. Even enhanced irregular regular expressions as used by Perl are not up to the task of parsing
 HTML. You will never make me crack. HTML is a language of sufficient complexity that it cannot be
 parsed by regular expressions. Even Jon Skeet cannot parse HTML using regular expressions
 Every time you attempt to parse HTML with regular expressions, the unholy child weeps the blood of
 virgins, and Russian hackers pwn your webapp. Parsing HTML with regex summons tainted souls
 into the realm of the living. HTML and regex go together like love, marriage, and ritual infanticide
 The <center> cannot hold it is too late. The force of regex and HTML together in the same
 conceptual space will destroy your mind like so much watery putty. If you parse HTML with regex
 you are giving in to Them and their blasphemous ways which doom us all to inhuman toil for the
 One whose Name cannot be expressed in the Basic Multilingual Plane, he comes. HTML-plus
 regexp will liquify the neryes of the sentient whilst you observe, your psyche withering in the
 onslaught of horror. Regex-based HTML parsers are the cancer that is killing StackOverflow it is too
 late it is too late we cannot be saved the trangession of a child ensures regex will consume all living
 tissue (except for HTML which it cannot, as previously prophesied) dear lord help us how car
 anyone survive this scourge using regex to parse HTML has doomed humanity to an eternity of
 dread torture and security holes using regex as a tool to process HTML establishes a breach
 between this world and the dread realm of cörrupt entities (like SGML entities, but more corrupt) a
 mere glimpse of the world of regex parsers for HTML will instantly transport a programmer's
 consciousness into a world of ceaseless screaming, he comes,the pestilent slithy regex-infection wil
 I devour your HTML parser, application and existence for all time like Visual Bąsic only worse he
 comes he comes do not fight he comes, his unholy radiance destroying all enlightenment, HTML
 tags leakjng frqm your eyes/like liquid pain, the song of regular expressien parsing-will extinguish
 the voices of mortal man from the sphgre I can see it can you see i it is beautiful the f inal
 4421
 snuf fing of the lies of Man ALL IS LOST ALL IS LOST the pory he comes he comese comes
 tge ichor permeates all MY FACE MY F Fish god no NO NOOOO ΝΘ stop the anges . ạre not
 rea) ZALGo is TOM) THE PONY HEgOMES
Unicöde

Unicöde

Being Alone, Cheating, and Crazy: And you guys have the nerve to call me a liar you had the nerve to try and act like my friend stand and see the sadness I was in friend me on Facebook, and then post pictures of my husband that you came from by God knows who to probably purposely interfere and feed him lies or you both were in on it together, COPS thats Who you both probably work for or you recruited him and he really did love me in the beginning your probably not even the real girl he was talking to l bet your whole identity fake, well l'm going to find out everything about you who you both are, and if it's the last thing I ever dol promise you that now l'm taking the private investigatorsrt on A and proof he, hired and sent You can't reply to this conversation. Learn More paid, to purposely inflict mental duress and trigger my PTSD I thought the was you on the nanny cam but see that's why A didn't get a dime, because he Was sloppy in the beginning And betweens, I knew he was cheating and using me and apart of publicly outing me after the wedding to create mental dehabilitation ive got all your names identities and pictures but atleastni figured it out before I was stupid enough to buy a car or pay a attorney it's you and him that hack my electronics vou were the one moving my stuff and hiding it when you were over here fucking him you both are perfect for each other psychopaths liars users and snakes but I promise you if l do it with my last breath I'm going to mak J 'e he goes to jail and if I'm лу I'll get all of You can't reply to this conversation. Learn More jail and if l'm lucky l'll get all of you sent to jail. I just wonder though for he was recruited just b4 the wedding or from the beginning something tells me that it was from the beginning.. Karma so going to get you, and misery you caused and cause others will fall upon your life's and souls the child your bearing will carry your sins, the Hapiness you stole all for money or other things of this world you'll pay for with your souls. But my life long torture ends today no longer will any of you win, no longer will I fall for your mind games I'm going to fight back and win win win, you guys are something else all the proof I have when we go to court and I know that your not the only girl S aka P is involved but vou know what th lians say laugh now cry <er... You think You can't reply to this conversation. Learn More laugh now cry later... You think your going to get away but this isnt American soil this is Canadian land this is the queens country where we are guided by humans rights and truly governed by the UN. And the UN has no tolerance for Gangstalking! And tell A I'm not signing anything 'II see him behind bars I'm going to make sure all the evidence is displayed in divorce court too he can say 911 calls that l abused him little does he know I have recordings of the calls where vou can see him putting on this grandiose display of false crys all while smiling... I know I've been knew he was dirty A with the tiny tinky dick. The life insurance he pulled out in my name, this time I'm not going to let me be the sacrifice because I'm focused sober and mentally grounded no You can't reply to this conversation. Learn More to let me be the sacrifice because I'm focused sober and mentally grounded no longer are my thoughts emotional there logical and intellectual get ready for me to expose who and what you ppl really are with God has my leader and archangel Michael my protectors will conquer and destroy this evil psychopathic cult/USGovt extension although now with proof you exist and names photos recordings I don't think the govt of Canada will be to pleased that the US has beern running unsanctioned operations within their borders.and nowI think it's time for thevUSB to be released You lost your mind. Leave me alone You can't reply to this conversation. Learn More This lady is convinced my fiancé is her husband in disguise. She thinks one of my friends is a bounty hunter from Texas sent by the Mexican cartel to steal her inheritance and ruin her relationship. (Idk if this belongs here, I didn't know where else to post this.)
Being Alone, Cheating, and Crazy: And you guys have the nerve
 to call me a liar you had the
 nerve to try and act like my
 friend stand and see the
 sadness I was in friend me on
 Facebook, and then post
 pictures of my husband that
 you came from
 by God knows who to
 probably purposely interfere
 and feed him lies or you both
 were in on it together, COPS
 thats Who you both probably
 work for or you recruited him
 and he really did love me in
 the beginning your probably
 not even the real girl he was
 talking to l bet your whole
 identity fake, well l'm going to
 find out everything about you
 who you both are, and if it's
 the last thing I ever dol
 promise you that now l'm
 taking the private
 investigatorsrt on A
 and proof he, hired and
 sent
 You can't reply to this conversation. Learn More

 paid, to purposely inflict
 mental duress and trigger my
 PTSD I thought the was you
 on the nanny cam but see
 that's why A didn't get a
 dime, because he Was sloppy
 in the beginning And
 betweens, I knew he was
 cheating and using me and
 apart of publicly outing me
 after the wedding to create
 mental dehabilitation ive got
 all your names identities and
 pictures but atleastni figured
 it out before I was stupid
 enough to buy a car or pay a
 attorney it's you and him that
 hack my electronics vou were
 the one moving my stuff and
 hiding it when you were over
 here fucking him you both are
 perfect for each other
 psychopaths liars users and
 snakes but I promise you if l
 do it with my last breath I'm
 going to mak J 'e he goes to
 jail and if I'm лу I'll get all of
 You can't reply to this conversation. Learn More

 jail and if l'm lucky l'll get all of
 you sent to jail. I just wonder
 though for he was recruited
 just b4 the wedding or from
 the beginning something tells
 me that it was from the
 beginning.. Karma so going to
 get you, and misery you
 caused and cause others will
 fall upon your life's and souls
 the child your bearing will
 carry your sins, the Hapiness
 you stole all for money or
 other things of this world
 you'll pay for with your souls.
 But my life long torture ends
 today no longer will any of you
 win, no longer will I fall for
 your mind games I'm going to
 fight back and win win win,
 you guys are something else
 all the proof I have when we
 go to court and I know that
 your not the only girl S
 aka P is involved but vou
 know what th lians say
 laugh now cry <er... You think
 You can't reply to this conversation. Learn More

 laugh now cry later... You think
 your going to get away but
 this isnt American soil this is
 Canadian land this is the
 queens country where we are
 guided by humans rights and
 truly governed by the UN. And
 the UN has no tolerance for
 Gangstalking! And tell A
 I'm not signing anything 'II
 see him behind bars I'm going
 to make sure all the evidence
 is displayed in divorce court
 too he can say 911 calls that l
 abused him little does he
 know I have recordings of the
 calls where vou can see him
 putting on this grandiose
 display of false crys all while
 smiling... I know I've been
 knew he was dirty A with
 the tiny tinky dick. The life
 insurance he pulled out in my
 name, this time I'm not going
 to let me be the sacrifice
 because I'm focused sober
 and mentally grounded no
 You can't reply to this conversation. Learn More

 to let me be the sacrifice
 because I'm focused sober
 and mentally grounded no
 longer are my thoughts
 emotional there logical and
 intellectual get ready for me to
 expose who and what you ppl
 really are with God has my
 leader and archangel Michael
 my protectors will conquer
 and destroy this evil
 psychopathic cult/USGovt
 extension although now with
 proof you exist and names
 photos recordings I don't think
 the govt of Canada will be to
 pleased that the US has beern
 running unsanctioned
 operations within their
 borders.and nowI think it's
 time for thevUSB to be
 released
 You lost your mind. Leave
 me alone
 You can't reply to this conversation. Learn More
This lady is convinced my fiancé is her husband in disguise. She thinks one of my friends is a bounty hunter from Texas sent by the Mexican cartel to steal her inheritance and ruin her relationship. (Idk if this belongs here, I didn't know where else to post this.)

This lady is convinced my fiancé is her husband in disguise. She thinks one of my friends is a bounty hunter from Texas sent by the Mexican ...

Apparently, Family, and Head: wwwoslightlywarped.com sixpenceee: The Witch of Joshua Ward House This Georgian and Federal style building was constructed by Joshua Ward, a wealthy merchant sea captain, in the late 1780s on the remaining foundations of former sheriff George Corwin’s house on Washington Street in Salem, Massachusetts. Corwin was a bloody figure whose zeal added to the unfortunate events surrounding Salem in the late 1600s. Nicknamed ‘The Strangler’ after his preferred torture (which included tying his prone victims’ necks to their ankles until the blood ran from their noses), he is said to have been responsible for many of the ‘witches’’ deaths, including that of Giles Corey who was crushed to death by placing heavy stones on his chest in order to extract a confession. Legend states that just before he died, Corey cursed the sheriff and all sheriffs that follow in his wake, for Corwin’s despicable acts. It should be noted here that every sheriff since Corey uttered his curse died while in office or had been “forced out of his post as the result of a heart or blood ailment.” Corwin himself died of a heart attack in 1696, only about four years after the end of the trials.  By the time of his death, Corwin was so despised that his family had to bury him in the cellar of their house to avoid desecration of the corpse by the public. In the early 1980s Carlson Realty bought the House with the intention of turning it into their headquarters. After moving in, a realtor by the name of Dale Lewinski began the task of taking photographs of the staff members to add to a welcome display.  Lewinski used a Polaroid camera to snap the head-and-shoulders, passport-style pictures. It was the photograph of a colleague by the name of Lorraine St. Peter that caused a stir. The Polaroid was developed and, instead of showing St. Peter, it appeared to depict a frightening image: a strange, black-haired, feminine figure. St. Peter was nowhere to be seen on the snap. The photograph has, apparently, not been cropped at all. St. Peter has been entirely replaced by the apparition. 
Apparently, Family, and Head: wwwoslightlywarped.com
sixpenceee:

The Witch of Joshua Ward House
This Georgian and Federal style building was constructed by Joshua Ward, a wealthy merchant sea captain, in the late 1780s on the remaining foundations of former sheriff George Corwin’s house on Washington Street in Salem, Massachusetts.
Corwin was a bloody figure whose zeal added to the unfortunate events surrounding Salem in the late 1600s. Nicknamed ‘The Strangler’ after his preferred torture (which included tying his prone victims’ necks to their ankles until the blood ran from their noses), he is said to have been responsible for many of the ‘witches’’ deaths, including that of Giles Corey who was crushed to death by placing heavy stones on his chest in order to extract a confession.
Legend states that just before he died, Corey cursed the sheriff and all sheriffs that follow in his wake, for Corwin’s despicable acts. It should be noted here that every sheriff since Corey uttered his curse died while in office or had been “forced out of his post as the result of a heart or blood ailment.” Corwin himself died of a heart attack in 1696, only about four years after the end of the trials.
 By the time of his death, Corwin was so despised that his family had to bury him in the cellar of their house to avoid desecration of the corpse by the public. In the early 1980s Carlson Realty bought the House with the intention of turning it into their headquarters. After moving in, a realtor by the name of Dale Lewinski began the task of taking photographs of the staff members to add to a welcome display.
 Lewinski used a Polaroid camera to snap the head-and-shoulders, passport-style pictures. It was the photograph of a colleague by the name of Lorraine St. Peter that caused a stir. The Polaroid was developed and, instead of showing St. Peter, it appeared to depict a frightening image: a strange, black-haired, feminine figure. St. Peter was nowhere to be seen on the snap. The photograph has, apparently, not been cropped at all. St. Peter has been entirely replaced by the apparition. 

sixpenceee: The Witch of Joshua Ward House This Georgian and Federal style building was constructed by Joshua Ward, a wealthy merchant sea ...

Anaconda, Tumblr, and Blog: abandonedandurbex: Abandoned Italian mental asylum famous for torture and child abuse 100% haunted image
Anaconda, Tumblr, and Blog: abandonedandurbex:

Abandoned Italian mental asylum famous for torture and child abuse

100% haunted image

abandonedandurbex: Abandoned Italian mental asylum famous for torture and child abuse 100% haunted image

Anaconda, Crime, and Fail: 7 Ways Police Will Break the Law, Threaten, or Lie to You to Get What they Want Cops routinely break the law. Here's how. By Larken Rose / The Free Thought ProjectOctober 19, 2015 libertarirynn: gvldngrl: wolfoverdose: rikodeine: seemeflow: Because of the Fifth Amendment, no one in the U.S. may legally be forced to testify against himself, and because of the Fourth Amendment, no one’s records or belongings may legally be searched or seized without just cause. However, American police are trained to use methods of deception, intimidation and manipulation to circumvent these restrictions. In other words, cops routinely break the law—in letter and in spirit—in the name of enforcing the law. Several examples of this are widely known, if not widely understood. 1) “Do you know why I stopped you?”Cops ask this, not because they want to have a friendly chat, but because they want you to incriminate yourself. They are hoping you will “voluntarily” confess to having broken the law, whether it was something they had already noticed or not. You may think you are apologizing, or explaining, or even making excuses, but from the cop’s perspective, you are confessing. He is not there to serve you; he is there fishing for an excuse to fine or arrest you. In asking you the familiar question, he is essentially asking you what crime you just committed. And he will do this without giving you any “Miranda” warning, in an effort to trick you into testifying against yourself. 2) “Do you have something to hide?”Police often talk as if you need a good reason for not answering whatever questions they ask, or for not consenting to a warrantless search of your person, your car, or even your home. The ridiculous implication is that if you haven’t committed a crime, you should be happy to be subjected to random interrogations and searches. This turns the concept of due process on its head, as the cop tries to put the burden on you to prove your innocence, while implying that your failure to “cooperate” with random harassment must be evidence of guilt. 3) “Cooperating will make things easier on you.”The logical converse of this statement implies that refusing to answer questions and refusing to consent to a search will make things more difficult for you. In other words, you will be punished if you exercise your rights. Of course, if they coerce you into giving them a reason to fine or arrest you, they will claim that you “voluntarily” answered questions and “consented” to a search, and will pretend there was no veiled threat of what they might do to you if you did not willingly “cooperate.”(Such tactics are also used by prosecutors and judges via the procedure of “plea-bargaining,” whereby someone accused of a crime is essentially told that if he confesses guilt—thus relieving the government of having to present evidence or prove anything—then his suffering will be reduced. In fact, “plea bargaining” is illegal in many countries precisely because it basically constitutes coerced confessions.) 4) “We’ll just get a warrant.”Cops may try to persuade you to “consent” to a search by claiming that they could easily just go get a warrant if you don’t consent. This is just another ploy to intimidate people into surrendering their rights, with the implication again being that whoever inconveniences the police by requiring them to go through the process of getting a warrant will receive worse treatment than one who “cooperates.” But by definition, one who is threatened or intimidated into “consenting” has not truly consented to anything. 5.) We have someone who will testify against youPolice “informants” are often individuals whose own legal troubles have put them in a position where they can be used by the police to circumvent and undermine the constitutional rights of others. For example, once the police have something to hold over one individual, they can then bully that individual into giving false, anonymous testimony which can be used to obtain search warrants to use against others. Even if the informant gets caught lying, the police can say they didn’t know, making this tactic cowardly and illegal, but also very effective at getting around constitutional restrictions. 6) “We can hold you for 72 hours without charging you.”Based only on claimed suspicion, even without enough evidence or other probable cause to charge you with a crime, the police can kidnap you—or threaten to kidnap you—and use that to persuade you to confess to some relatively minor offense. Using this tactic, which borders on being torture, police can obtain confessions they know to be false, from people whose only concern, then and there, is to be released. 7) “I’m going to search you for my own safety.”Using so-called “Terry frisks” (named after the Supreme Court case of Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1), police can carry out certain limited searches, without any warrant or probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed, under the guise of checking for weapons. By simply asserting that someone might have a weapon, police can disregard and circumvent the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches. U.S. courts have gone back and forth in deciding how often, and in what circumstances, tactics like those mentioned above are acceptable. And of course, police continually go far beyond anything the courts have declared to be “legal” anyway. But aside from nitpicking legal technicalities, both coerced confessions and unreasonable searches are still unconstitutional, and therefore “illegal,” regardless of the rationale or excuses used to try to justify them. Yet, all too often, cops show that to them, the Fourth and Fifth Amendments—and any other restrictions on their power—are simply technical inconveniences for them to try to get around. In other words, they will break the law whenever they can get away with it if it serves their own agenda and power, and they will ironically insist that they need to do that in order to catch “law-breakers” (the kind who don’t wear badges). Of course, if the above tactics fail, police can simply bully people into confessing—falsely or truthfully—and/or carry out unconstitutional searches, knowing that the likelihood of cops having to face any punishment for doing so is extremely low. Usually all that happens, even when a search was unquestionably and obviously illegal, or when a confession was clearly coerced, is that any evidence obtained from the illegal search or forced confession is excluded from being allowed at trial. Of course, if there is no trial—either because the person plea-bargains or because there was no evidence and no crime—the “exclusionary rule” creates no deterrent at all. The police can, and do, routinely break the law and violate individual rights, knowing that there will be no adverse repercussions for them having done so. Likewise, the police can lie under oath, plant evidence, falsely charge people with “resisting arrest” or “assaulting an officer,” and commit other blatantly illegal acts, knowing full well that their fellow gang members—officers, prosecutors and judges—will almost never hold them accountable for their crimes. Even much of the general public still presumes innocence when it comes to cops accused of wrong-doing, while presuming guilt when the cops accuse someone else of wrong-doing. But this is gradually changing, as the amount of video evidence showing the true nature of the “Street Gang in Blue” becomes too much even for many police-apologists to ignore. http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/7-ways-police-will-break-law-threaten-or-lie-you-get-what-they-want One of the biggest realizations with dealing with cops for me was the fact that they CAN lie, they are 100% legally entitled to lie, and they WILL whether you’re a victim of crime, accused of committing a crime or anything else Everyone needs to reblog this, it could save a life. Important Seriously if you ever find yourself in custody don’t say shit until you’ve got some counsel with you. No cop is your friend in that situation.
Anaconda, Crime, and Fail: 7 Ways Police Will Break the
 Law, Threaten, or Lie to You to
 Get What they Want
 Cops routinely break the law. Here's how.
 By Larken Rose / The Free Thought ProjectOctober 19, 2015
libertarirynn:

gvldngrl:

wolfoverdose:

rikodeine:

seemeflow:

Because of the Fifth Amendment, no one in the U.S. may legally be forced to testify against himself, and because of the Fourth Amendment, no one’s records or belongings may legally be searched or seized without just cause. However, American police are trained to use methods of deception, intimidation and manipulation to circumvent these restrictions. In other words, cops routinely break the law—in letter and in spirit—in the name of enforcing the law. Several examples of this are widely known, if not widely understood.
1) “Do you know why I stopped you?”Cops ask this, not because they want to have a friendly chat, but because they want you to incriminate yourself. They are hoping you will “voluntarily” confess to having broken the law, whether it was something they had already noticed or not. You may think you are apologizing, or explaining, or even making excuses, but from the cop’s perspective, you are confessing. He is not there to serve you; he is there fishing for an excuse to fine or arrest you. In asking you the familiar question, he is essentially asking you what crime you just committed. And he will do this without giving you any “Miranda” warning, in an effort to trick you into testifying against yourself.
2) “Do you have something to hide?”Police often talk as if you need a good reason for not answering whatever questions they ask, or for not consenting to a warrantless search of your person, your car, or even your home. The ridiculous implication is that if you haven’t committed a crime, you should be happy to be subjected to random interrogations and searches. This turns the concept of due process on its head, as the cop tries to put the burden on you to prove your innocence, while implying that your failure to “cooperate” with random harassment must be evidence of guilt.
3) “Cooperating will make things easier on you.”The logical converse of this statement implies that refusing to answer questions and refusing to consent to a search will make things more difficult for you. In other words, you will be punished if you exercise your rights. Of course, if they coerce you into giving them a reason to fine or arrest you, they will claim that you “voluntarily” answered questions and “consented” to a search, and will pretend there was no veiled threat of what they might do to you if you did not willingly “cooperate.”(Such tactics are also used by prosecutors and judges via the procedure of “plea-bargaining,” whereby someone accused of a crime is essentially told that if he confesses guilt—thus relieving the government of having to present evidence or prove anything—then his suffering will be reduced. In fact, “plea bargaining” is illegal in many countries precisely because it basically constitutes coerced confessions.)
4) “We’ll just get a warrant.”Cops may try to persuade you to “consent” to a search by claiming that they could easily just go get a warrant if you don’t consent. This is just another ploy to intimidate people into surrendering their rights, with the implication again being that whoever inconveniences the police by requiring them to go through the process of getting a warrant will receive worse treatment than one who “cooperates.” But by definition, one who is threatened or intimidated into “consenting” has not truly consented to anything.
5.) We have someone who will testify against youPolice “informants” are often individuals whose own legal troubles have put them in a position where they can be used by the police to circumvent and undermine the constitutional rights of others. For example, once the police have something to hold over one individual, they can then bully that individual into giving false, anonymous testimony which can be used to obtain search warrants to use against others. Even if the informant gets caught lying, the police can say they didn’t know, making this tactic cowardly and illegal, but also very effective at getting around constitutional restrictions.
6) “We can hold you for 72 hours without charging you.”Based only on claimed suspicion, even without enough evidence or other probable cause to charge you with a crime, the police can kidnap you—or threaten to kidnap you—and use that to persuade you to confess to some relatively minor offense. Using this tactic, which borders on being torture, police can obtain confessions they know to be false, from people whose only concern, then and there, is to be released.
7) “I’m going to search you for my own safety.”Using so-called “Terry frisks” (named after the Supreme Court case of Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1), police can carry out certain limited searches, without any warrant or probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed, under the guise of checking for weapons. By simply asserting that someone might have a weapon, police can disregard and circumvent the Fourth Amendment prohibition on unreasonable searches.
U.S. courts have gone back and forth in deciding how often, and in what circumstances, tactics like those mentioned above are acceptable. And of course, police continually go far beyond anything the courts have declared to be “legal” anyway. But aside from nitpicking legal technicalities, both coerced confessions and unreasonable searches are still unconstitutional, and therefore “illegal,” regardless of the rationale or excuses used to try to justify them. Yet, all too often, cops show that to them, the Fourth and Fifth Amendments—and any other restrictions on their power—are simply technical inconveniences for them to try to get around. In other words, they will break the law whenever they can get away with it if it serves their own agenda and power, and they will ironically insist that they need to do that in order to catch “law-breakers” (the kind who don’t wear badges).
Of course, if the above tactics fail, police can simply bully people into confessing—falsely or truthfully—and/or carry out unconstitutional searches, knowing that the likelihood of cops having to face any punishment for doing so is extremely low. Usually all that happens, even when a search was unquestionably and obviously illegal, or when a confession was clearly coerced, is that any evidence obtained from the illegal search or forced confession is excluded from being allowed at trial. Of course, if there is no trial—either because the person plea-bargains or because there was no evidence and no crime—the “exclusionary rule” creates no deterrent at all. The police can, and do, routinely break the law and violate individual rights, knowing that there will be no adverse repercussions for them having done so.
Likewise, the police can lie under oath, plant evidence, falsely charge people with “resisting arrest” or “assaulting an officer,” and commit other blatantly illegal acts, knowing full well that their fellow gang members—officers, prosecutors and judges—will almost never hold them accountable for their crimes. Even much of the general public still presumes innocence when it comes to cops accused of wrong-doing, while presuming guilt when the cops accuse someone else of wrong-doing. But this is gradually changing, as the amount of video evidence showing the true nature of the “Street Gang in Blue” becomes too much even for many police-apologists to ignore.
http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/7-ways-police-will-break-law-threaten-or-lie-you-get-what-they-want

One of the biggest realizations with dealing with cops for me was the fact that they CAN lie, they are 100% legally entitled to lie, and they WILL whether you’re a victim of crime, accused of committing a crime or anything else


Everyone needs to reblog this, it could save a life.


Important 


Seriously if you ever find yourself in custody don’t say shit until you’ve got some counsel with you. No cop is your friend in that situation.

libertarirynn: gvldngrl: wolfoverdose: rikodeine: seemeflow: Because of the Fifth Amendment, no one in the U.S. may legally be forced t...