Guns, dogs and cuffs at Goose Step High

The drug raid at Goose Step High, as Michael Graham calls it, was even worse than first reported: Police ran in the building with guns already drawn; the principal searched a student’s wallet and demanded to know why he had $100. (I registered for the Charleston Post-Courier, sacrificing for my readers.)

GOOSE GREEK–Last Wednesday started out like most any other school day for Ray Glover, a senior at Stratford High School — until police officers with guns drawn stormed into the school’s cafeteria at 6:45 a.m. and began barking orders at startled students.

The perplexed Glover said he had no idea what was happening, or why.

“The police came into the cafeteria with the dogs, and then they chased one kid down the hall,” said Glover, a tall 19-year-old with braided hair who is known by the nickname “Bolo.”

“I know that some students who’ve never seen a gun in their lives were really scared,” he said.

Glover said an officer hustled him out of the cafeteria and into the hallway, placed plastic handcuffs on him and made him lie on the floor while his clothes and book bag were searched.

“He was yelling, telling me to get down,” he said. “The police are crazy nowadays. If stuff like this keeps happening, a lot of students won’t want to come back to school.”

The police ran in with guns drawn. To a school.

Two brothers were targeted.

Shortly after Sam (Ody) sat down in the cafeteria, a coach came up and told the students at his table to put their hands on the table. When the students asked why, they were told it was the principal’s orders.

Then a police officer came over and bound Sam’s hands behind his back with yellow restraints, took him into the hallway and told him to face the wall as a dog smelled his bag. He watched as his binders and folders were dumped out on the floor.

Then the principal, George McCrackin, patted him down, checked his shoes and took out his wallet, asking him where he got the approximately $100 he was carrying, Sam said. The student said he told McCrackin he had just gotten paid at his job at KFC.

“The people I hang out with are not drug dealers,” Sam said. “We play basketball. We have nice clothes because we have jobs.”

Down the hall, Josh (Ody) was standing with his friends when he heard a rustling and felt something hit him in the back. When he turned around, he said, he saw a police officer standing behind him with his gun drawn.

“He told me to get down on the ground,” said Josh, who then was instructed to put his hands behind his head and stay down.

Thank God nobody was shot.

The Ody brothers are black, like 70 of 107 students searched at the majority white school. The ACLU is investigating. It’s going to be lawsuit time in Goose Creek, South Carolina.

About Joanne

Comments

  1. Of the non-black students searched — I wonder how many were “poor white trash”. That group gets targeted an awful lot in suburban southern schools (my stepdaughter was, for one).

  2. I don’t mean that my stepdaughter was one of the SC students searched. She just kept getting targeted for all sorts of unwelcome attention because she lived in government housing.

  3. After this revelation, I look forward to hearing what the apologists for the police department have to say…

  4. I am seldom in favor of lawsuits but this might be the rare exception.

  5. All of the morons that planned out this raid should be fired since I’ll assume they’re too stupid to quit.

    There just doesn’t seem to be anything to defend in this incident.

    What is their plan for real crime? Surround the building and burn it down?

  6. Sounds like a collection of Barney Fife clones working for that police dept (morons). I hope they get their asses sued to the hilt by the students, parents, and ACLU (Add to the lawsuit, the principal and school district).

    I hope they get big bucks…

  7. Eric Jablow says:

    I’m afraid Principal Snyder lives.

  8. I included this incident with a number of others that I blogged about on Sunday. I’m not aware of any incident like this in the history of American education. The principal apparently triggered the police action. I agree with those that think everyone in the decision chain on this should be fired.

    Oh, the police apologist explained the drawn guns as needed for “officer safety,” apparently a much higher priority than “student safety.”

    We’ve grown afraid of our own children and that does not bode well for the health of our society.

  9. Walter E. Wallis says:

    A police officer who goes into a school with gun drawn will, next, shoot a student who makes a sudden move. Very regretable, of course.
    Police owe the public taking the first shot. They don’t like that, get another job.

  10. Walter,

    What do you mean by your statement “Police owe the public taking the first shot?”

  11. He just meant that the police aren’t supposed to take the first shot. They can respond to shots against them but shouldn’t the first ones putting bullets in the air.

    Therefore there was no reason to have guns drawn when they went into the school unless they expected to get shot at. Like at a crack house. Or some miltia compound.

  12. Walter E. Wallis says:

    Thank you, Corsair. My meaning precisely.

  13. Actually, police are allowed to take the first shot if there is eminent danger to themselves or others. In South Carolina (where I live), it’s going to be hard to find a judge that is going to fault police officers for drawing their weapons on a drug raid. In a school or not, a drug raid is a drug raid. There is a high probability of weapons being present. With regards to the police officers being idiots, the South Carolina Criminal Justice Academy (where ALL officers in SC go for training) is one of the top rated police academy’s in the nation. Most officers coming out of our academy have more knowledge of SC criminal law than most 2nd year law students.

  14. Whit
    If what you say is true, I think we’re in real trouble.

    Actually, police are allowed to take the first shot if there is eminent danger to themselves or others. In South Carolina (where I live), it’s going to be hard to find a judge that is going to fault police officers for drawing their weapons on a drug raid. In a school or not, a drug raid is a drug raid. There is a high probability of weapons being present. With regards to the police officers being idiots, the South Carolina Criminal Justice Academy (where ALL officers in SC go for training) is one of the top rated police academy’s in the nation. Most officers coming out of our academy have more knowledge of SC criminal law than most 2nd year law students.

    Posted by Whit at November 12, 2003 09:43 AM

  15. scarshapedstar says:

    Whit,

    The problem with your reasoning is that most dangerous drug raids involve people who actually have drugs.

    As opposed to innocent schoolchildren.

  16. scarshapedstar,

    They’re not innocent children when several students had been observed through CCTV either selling, carrying, and acting as look outs for drug sales. ALL drug raids dangerous.

  17. After the Columbine shootings, I wondered what it took to get cops to run into a school with guns drawn. Now I know!

  18. Mr. Bigglesworth says:

    Whit-

    A drug raid is a drug raid? High probability of weapons being present? Gimmie a break.

    Do you honestly believe what you wrote? That there is the same likelihood of some kid selling dime bags out of his backpack breaking out a 9mm and pulling a “you’ll never take me alive” as say, a hardened street gang running a crack house in a seedy part of town?

    If you do, there’s no wonder you seem to side with the zealots who authorized that raid.

    Intelligence deficiencies all around.

  19. Whit,

    And yet, NO DRUGS WERE FOUND. Not ANY. NONE.

    That in and of itself makes me question the officers’ competence.

    Sounds dangerous to me…

    What if the police raided the MALL based on similar evidence? Would it be reasonable for them to behave similarly? If you say yes, I’ll at least give you marks for consistency, though I will proceed to doubt your connection to reality.

    I think that’s a reasonable analogy, by the way – you’re strolling through the mall, and the police rush in with guns drawn, hand-cuff you, and search you and all your stuff because somebody, sometime, somewhere in the mall was observed with drugs. Would you feel violated?

  20. Whit,

    I grew up in South Carolina (Fort Mill) and graduated from high school there.

    You’re right—it will be tough to find a judge in SC sympathetic to the plaintiffs. But that’s why there are such things as “juries,” and this case has “federal court” written all over it.

    People like you—with your knee-jerk, mindless obedience to any sort of authority, now matter how questionable its legitimacy or logic—are the reason why I got the hell away from there as soon as I could. And believe me when I tell you it was the smartest thing I have ever done.

  21. Ah, the great war on drugs. Given the resources we spend on it, the consequences to society (more crime, more prisons, profits for organized crime, etc), not to mention our obvious success, what a bargain. How could anyone fault the people responsible for this raid?!

  22. PJ/Maryland says:

    Whit, I don’t think Walter was talking about SC law, but rather how the public feels about the issue of police shootings. (The moral consensus, if you will.)

    I doubt entering a school with a drawn gun is illegal for a cop, but it’s extremely bad PR, and I doubt a jury will approve.

    There is a high probability of weapons being present.

    If any weapons were seen on the video, I’d agree with you. Since I haven’t heard any mention of this, my guess is no weapons were seen, and the cops should have known better.

    What is their plan for real crime? Surround the building and burn it down?

    Hey, it worked at Waco, Robin!

  23. Mark Buehner says:

    A fair question: what do you consider worse for your highschooler: smoking pot, or finding a ‘safe’ place like your school invaded by gun waving government agents who push you to the ground, bind your hands, and search your possessions with no warrant and no probable cause? This is insane, these are citizens of the United States of America. Who says you check your basic human rights at the door to the school?

    That comparison to the mall is awesome. Lots and lots of kids hang out at the mall. From an overhead video it would be easy to find groups acting ‘furtively’ (thats what kids do). So is there anything wrong with cops storming a mall, sealing the exits, detaining and binding everyone and searching them? Why not? Because there are adults present? I thought this was all about keeping the kids safe, if their civil rights dont trump their ‘safety’, why should an adults? Arent our children more precious than grownups?

  24. “They’re not innocent children when several students had been observed through CCTV either selling, carrying, and acting as look outs for drug sales. ALL drug raids dangerous.”

    Of course what was observed is according to the principal who arranged for the raid and who personally searched one of the students. Not to mention that if this was all observed on the surveillance cameras, if could have been recorded. Furthermore, if all this was observed on the surveillance cameras, why weren’t the perpetrators identified and singled out; i.e. search and/or arrest warrants based on what was observed, rather than a dragnet?

  25. Whit – What are you smoking? I want some; it’s reality distorting effects are truly amazing.

    The cops apparently took a control-freak principal’s WORD as to what the surveillance tapes meant and committed a full-out, consciously terrifying raid on a school, and you say that the fact they were raiding for drugs justifies the fact that they did a drug raid in the most consciously intimidating and terrifying way imaginable?

    You then say they did this because
    “[m]ost officers coming out of our academy have more knowledge of SC criminal law than most 2nd year law students. ”

    Really. Your law schools must really suck.

    Do any of them know the term “Unreasonable Search and Seizure?” Here’s a clue for you; while the school is “in loco parentus” and as such somewhat exempt, that’s due to delegation of parential rights, and that which is delegated is subject to review. It’s not an inherent right given to a school to excercise on a whim, nor is it a licence to violate natural rights, much less endanger the lives of children that delegation is intended to protect.

    I wonder if an SC copper can define “armed assault?” What about “Police Brutality?” No? What about “Appropriate Force Doctrine?” Any appreciation of the impact of clear racial profiling on any sort of bust?

    Yes, IF there is a reasonable appreciation that there ARE drugs AND those drugs are being dealt by dealers who are actually ARMED with something more lethal than a #2 pencil, THEN it might be reasonable to do that, IF THE BUILDING WASN’T UNDER COMPLETE SURVEILLANCE to record for posterity what kind of jackbooted IDIOTS are in charge of the freaking raid!

    Even a second year law student could figure THAT out. I’d love to know who released the tape – which sure as HELL shouldn’t be released to the news media without a subpoena.

    My only question is which idiot decided to further violate the student’s rights by doing so and unwittingly place their metaphoric ‘nads in the proverbial vice by doing so. Because EVEN IF this raid somehow manages to be legal by technicality, it was a) clearly wrong, b) clearly based on invalid assumptions and c) clearly (to anyone with two firing neurons) likely to increase disrespect for law and law enforcement exponentially.

    If this is the sort of “training” police get in SC, then I suggest that every black citizen strap down right now and be clearly prepared to shoot any ossifer that approaches them with a weapon drawn.

    My NRA training told me to never draw a weapon unless I was prepared to put a slug right in the center of mass RIGHT THAT SECOND. I was taught to PRESUME a drawn weapon to be a deadly threat, and to respond IMMEDIATELY to such a threat by putting two in the chest and one in the head.

    Then they went back to the idea that you never, ever even TOUCH the butt of your gun unless it’s your intention to ventilate someone if they so much as twitch.

    Nobody said nothin’ about ossifa pup being an exception to that rule; indeed, I’m pretty damn sure I just summarized the essentials OF their weapons training. It stuns me that they think a badge somehow makes them immune to the same calculation. – behavior like this tends to emphasize that point REAL well.

    And I remind everyone that we have a 2nd Amendment for just this eventuality, lest our delegated officials get above themselves.

    It might be instructive to the police and the school officials for a “well-regulated militia” to guard that school from further intrusion until the matter is resolved in the courts, as clearly the police in SC have forgotten their place.

    They are supposed to KEEP the peace, not breach it. If the police themselves are indistinguishable from a band of armed thugs, it should not be surprising to them if people start to react to them as if that is exactly what they are.

    If this concept is not clearly understood, perhaps a few shotguns at “low ready” might be a useful reminder.

    Surely there are enough armed vets in the area more than clear enough on “appropriate force”, rules of engagement, warrentless searches, the constitution in general and how to deter some fool who things a black suit and body armor makes him God Almighty.

    As for the principal – the fact that he assumed drugs were being dealt simply because kids were avoiding surveillance and taking precautions against being “busted” by his controlfreakness speaks volumes. This is a guy who is known to have suspended kids for not having their shirt-tails tucked it. Seems like posting sentries to warn of this idjut’s approach is entirely rational and easily explained.

  26. Walter E. Wallis says:

    Thank you, too, Bob. It is unusual for my screeds to find agreement, much less two agreements, in one venue. A tribute to the excellence of JJ’s audience. [Audience suggests hearing, Would we be JJ’s Vidience?]

  27. Jim Armstrong says:

    And people wonder why we home-school our children! Public schools become more of a failure every year. Now, not only are your children in danger from other students, but from the VERY PEOPLE WHO ARE SUPPOSED TO KEEP THEM SAFE!!! I not only cannot believe that this happened, but that there are people who defend these actions. Even if there were drugs being bought and sold, does this justify placing innocents in danger? If they believed there were weapons present, couldn’t they reason that storming in with weapons drawn might conceivably result in someone being shot? So what if 47 students died, at least our officers were safe, and we found $10 of crack to boot!

  28. If this school uses metal detectors, and the cops came in GUNS OUT-the SUIT is a GARANTEED winner-after all, no guns could be there, could they-so EXCESSIVE FORCE WAS USED….Pietr

  29. Agree with almost everything you said Bob, except the standard on when a police officer should draws his/her weapon. While civilian training dictates not drawing a weapon until it’s use may be imminent, police are trained in most places to have their weapon out in almost any potentially threatening situation to try and de-escalate the situation, i.e. We both have to draw and fire, I might get ideas; you’ve already got a gun pointed at me, I probably won’t.

  30. Mike steele says:

    Robin:
    Real Crime? Surround the building and burn it down?

    You have to be a obscure religious sect to merit that sort of treatment.

  31. Hey just an English gripe. I noted that eminent meaning prominent, conspicuous or famous is used more than once when imminent meaning ready to take place should have been used. Sorry to be a nitpicker, but that type of error really bugs me..

  32. Bob King: well said. Keep up the good fight πŸ˜€

  33. I hate to make a simple issue complex, but what we are seeing here is a natural result of the interaction of three failed ideologies: Publik Skools, The War on (some icky) Drugs, and idiotic Zero-Tolerance policies imposed by (yes, you guessed it) the Federal Government.

    The real, underlying responsibility here does not lie with the cops or the kids or the principal or even Congress. It lies with the stupid, apathetic parents who continue to believe that the Federal, State, and Local Governments can raise and educate their kids better than they can.

  34. Regarding metal detectors: They have them here, but my kid’s school does not have them set up every day. They set them up at unannounced intervals, and even then, all the kids don’t go through, just randomly selected ones. So having metal detectors doesn’t guarantee no guns.

    Having said that, I have a real problem with the police rushing into a school full of unsuspecting kids, prepared for a gunfight. The utter lack of concern for the safety of those kids, especially those who had nothing to do with drug dealing or guns, is appalling.

    Stephen said, “After the Columbine shootings, I wondered what it took to get cops to run into a school with guns drawn. Now I know!” Exactly.

  35. Mark Odell says:
  36. This raid was based on evidence gathered by an idiot who watched for clues to back up his preconceived notion that some students were engaging in suspicious activities. He’s been fooled once and probably will be again.

    In my teenaged years, I had a friend who lived near a park that was under surveilance. He and his friends got considerable amusement by passing nothing back and forth to each other, placing bets on how many seconds it would take for the police car to arrive. It always did. But since they didn’t run away, the police eventually learned that they were being bullshitted.

    The war on drugs has many diversions.

  37. During my senior year in high school (5 years ago) the DEA and the local police and sheriff’s office raided our school. They had an undercover cop infiltrate the “drug circles” to figure out where all of it was comming from. Then, about 5 months after the cop “transfered” to our school, the raid happened. the cops came in during 2nd period and locked down all of the classrooms so they could arrest the specific people they wanted. we ended up having to stay in the rooms until after lunch, but i never once saw a cop draw his gun… granted I was peering through the windows, but still, I havent even heard from anyone else about guns being drawn. The different tactics used at my school could be attributed to the layout of the school itself being differnt than the school in SC (my school was made up of tons of separte buildings, we dont have the hallways and such like they do) but i doubt it. it seems to me that the cops here in CA had a plan, where the SC cops just went… withno plan whatsoever, and no clue who they were going after. Sounds like a “due process” violation to me.

    “Even a second year law student could figure THAT out”

    I am a first year law student and I even figured that out.

  38. I’m new to this blog, so please forgive me…

    If I were in a hallway at my high school, and it was suddenly invaded by uniformed police with guns drawn, I’d assume there was something very bad happening somewhere closeby – where I couldn’t see it. Either a hostage taken, or an active shooter, but whatever it was, it’s not in that hallway. So I’d try to get out of their way and evacuate the school as quickly as I could.

    Once they started pointing their guns at people that I could see presented no threat, forcing them to the ground and handcuffing them, I’d have to conclude that they weren’t real cops. That would lead me to question why they were doing it at all. I’d guess that they were there to kill us. Possibly islamic terrorists, after all, what would get more press than bad guys dressed as cops killing 100 or so high school kids. No one would go to high school again for a year.

    Then, of course, I’d have to shout that conclusion to everyone present and resist to the death.

    I’m certainly in the minority in this, but I’ve been in a bar when 2 guys came in with guns and phony shields, announced they were cops, and proceeded to empty the till. These cops should remember, there’s a down side to overwhelming force. It could have made for a very bad day for everyone there.

  39. Kirk Parker says:

    Uh, Captain Holly, there is no Federal Mandate for Zero Tolerance. Any place that happens, it’s the local folks’ fault.

  40. Bob commented on Whit(less)’ post:
    You then say they did this because
    “[m]ost officers coming out of our academy have more knowledge of SC criminal law than most 2nd year law students. ”

    Really. Your law schools must really suck.

    Do any of them know the term “Unreasonable Search and Seizure?” Here’s a clue for you; while the school is “in loco parentus” and as such somewhat exempt, that’s due to delegation of parential rights, and that which is delegated is subject to review. It’s not an inherent right given to a school to excercise on a whim, nor is it a licence to violate natural rights, much less endanger the lives of children that delegation is intended to protect.

    I wonder if an SC copper can define “armed assault?” What about “Police Brutality?” No? What about “Appropriate Force Doctrine?” Any appreciation of the impact of clear racial profiling on any sort of bust?

    Bob, Bob…
    That stuff’s covered in 3rd year law school…

  41. I guess we will have to wait until the first set of lawsuits are filed against the police, principal, assorted officials, and the school district to see how this will all play out.

    I suspect the district is going to have to reach some kind of out of court settlement, as the way things stand now, they don’t have a snowball’s chance in hell of winning in court, and they’ve lost in the court of public opinion (try finding 12 jurors who are gonna believe the cops are correct when they didn’t find any drugs whatsoever).

    I predict the school district is gonna wind up being short of funds in Fall 2004 (any takers)?

  42. How about USC 42 1983,1985,1986 and USC 18 241,242? Deprivation of civil rights under color of law?

  43. What stuns me more than what the police did is the reaction of some of the parents. What the hell is the matter with them that they could sanction having guns pointed at their children! I pulled my son out of public school this year because of the stupidity of the school administration and the utter incompetence of the teacher with whom he was placed. His homework was never corrected–mustn’t damage his self-esteem (as though being ignorant wouldn’t do that for him). I never recieved a note from this teacher that was coherent or grammatical, and each was full of misspelled words! He is in the second grade, supposedly being taught to read and write. He is now being home-schooled; I quit my job to do this. If I would go this far because my son’s time was being wasted, I wonder what my reaction would be if someone had pointed a gun in his direction!

    If the police were concerned about guns being present, did they honestly believe that a confrontation in a school full of children was the way to go? Couldn’t they think of a way to get the suspected individuals out of the school, thereby safeguarding the innocents? Perhaps the problem is that they, too, were educated in such a school and, therefore, were never taught to think (reason) beyond their indoctrination. Or, perhaps, zero-tolerance actually means that they will not tolerate _any_ child. Period.

    In any event, that paranoid little Himmler of a principal ought to be tarred and feathered, then run out of town on a rail.

  44. Glenn Reynolds has a link to a Charleston PD chat board where cops have at each other over Operation Goose Step. Particularly entertaining is Dirty Harry (his nick), obviously a seasoned officer, who excoriates the whole sorry crew in no uncertain terms.

    He also cites something police are taught about a “force continuum”, which probably means a kind of measuring of the amount of appropriate force for a particular situation, and says these guys clearly didn’t follow it.

    The Fourth Amendment is quoted.

    It emerges from this that the police chief was “out of town” when the storm erupted and “couldn’t get back in time”. The principal sounds like a typical paranoid uniform wannabe

  45. Bob,

    I only found one sentence in your post I disagreed with:
    “If this is the sort of “training” police get in SC, then I suggest that every black citizen strap down right now and be clearly prepared to shoot any ossifer that approaches them with a weapon drawn.”

    Strike the word BLACK. I wasn’t aware of a racial clause in the Second Amendment, and jackasses in uniform should get the same reaction from all citizens regardless of skin color (on either side).

    I support the police when they are in the right, but we the people grant them the right to use deadly force expecting them to have better judgement than the average citizen.

  46. Morons. First of all every high school has drugs in it so their inability to find any is certainly ironic. I thought you guys in the states are protected by your constitution, to keep your freedom and civil rights, but this sort of action is something you’re more likely to find in a rogue state. I’ve been stopped and searched in several different countries and not once was I handcuffed or a gun used to confirm their intent. My sister was recently arrested in NY subway station for allegedly not having a ticket, the ticket was in her pocket, she told the police this which resulted in them yelling at her to keep her hands away from her pockets, pushing her to the floor and binding her hands behind her back, she ended up spending 36 hours in a police cell. As far as I’m concerned your constitution is pointless if it doesn’t protect you against such police idiocies. Seems almost like the wild west days when the sheriff could make the law to suit him. Just what civil liberties do you have in America now, and how many of them aren’t threatened?

  47. someone said:
    Agree with almost everything you said Bob, except the standard on when a police officer should draws his/her weapon. While civilian training dictates not drawing a weapon until it’s use may be imminent, police are trained in most places to have their weapon out in almost any potentially threatening situation to try and de-escalate the situation, i.e. We both have to draw and fire, I might get ideas; you’ve already got a gun pointed at me, I probably won’t.”

    Exception noted; I also note that it’s predicated on the assumption that you have ALL threats covered and that everyone there is less amped than you AND IF that’s the case, people ALSO know they WON’T be shot if they do comply.

    In other words, it’s high stakes poker and the police are trying to buy the pot.

    Given that broad policy, it’s likely that someone will feel the need to call that bluff.

    It’s a valid risk-reward calculation ONLY if you value the life of a cop OVER that of a citizen who may or MAY NOT actually be guilty of anything.

    SDN: It’s not a racial calculation, it’s a risk/reward calculation.

    EG, because of where I live, and the fact that I’m white, there’s more inherent risk in carrying a firearm than not doing so. This is a tourist town and the police do not bust the chops of the marks. πŸ™‚ It’s bad for business. It’ not always true, but the odds are with me.

    Were I black and living in SC, I believe the odds would compute differently, and would be more lopsided still in, say, Florida.

    I mean, yes, there’s still a risk of being randomly brutalized or hassled by a cop – I’ve even had it happen to me, and in Canada, where it’s almost unheard of.

    But the odds of being shot out of hand are very low.

    I could not in concience say that was true for non-white citizens – and as you say “I’m not aware of a racial clause in the Second Amendment.”

  48. 1Sa:8:11: And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots.
    1Sa:8:12: And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots.
    1Sa:8:13: And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers.
    1Sa:8:14: And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants.
    1Sa:8:15: And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants.
    1Sa:8:16: And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work.
    1Sa:8:17: He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants.
    1Sa:8:18: And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day.

  49. John Edwards says:

    The cops suck. The niggers suck too. Mostly, all of you South Carolina fucks REALLY suck.

  50. Dayday "not telling says:

    how are u gonna sit there and say that niggas suck.. Listen bitch i am a nigga and i was there.. But o wait u werent.. I was there that day and that shit wasnt nothing to joke about.. and ANOTHER THING NIGGAS DONT SUK u do and south carolina may suk… But u suk dik.. go sit on that Racist Pig

  51. To the SCPD way to go you idiots!! I hear there’s a major drug deal going down in a pre-school, go get em assholes!

Trackbacks

  1. rape porn says:

    rape porn

    rape porn