Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Sept 29, 2016 8:50:10 GMT -5
So, I'll go ahead and throw this dead cat of a topic on the table.
As you're no doubt aware, police use of lethal force, particularly against minorities, has been in the news a lot lately.
So my question is, when is police use of lethal force justified? Is there a problem with this in the U.S, and if so, how can it be fixed?
To be more specific, is lethal force justified when.
A. The suspect won't obey commands. B. When the suspect is behaving erratically. B. The officer cannot see the suspects hands (i.e. keeping them in their pockets or behind their back). C. When the suspect makes sudden movements (drawing something out of their pockets, or reaching into a car window for example) D. When the suspect is physically aggressive. E. When the suspect has a weapon that is not a firearm. F. When the suspect has a gun G. When the suspect has discharged a firearm.
Or some combination of the above.
How can we ensure incidents of unjustified lethal force are minimized but still respect the right of the officer to go home to their families at the end of the day?
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 48,108
Member is Online
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Sept 29, 2016 9:05:00 GMT -5
I think body cams and dash cams are a wonderful thing. Not only do they protect citizens but they also protect the police officers using them. It provides real time evidence as to what happened, especially useful in a case where one party is deceased.
If we spend the money to equip all our officers with body cams and dash cams I think you'll see these incidents go down because now there is an invisible man watching you holding you accountable. Accountability is a very powerful motivator to human beings, we're hard wired to modify our behavior if we know there are others watching/judging.
I'm not going to even pretend I can decide when lethal force is justified. There are too many variables involved and it's a highly emotionally charged situation. I can tell you how I THINK I would react but there is no way to know for sure. If I can't tell you with certainty how I would behave I can't tell you what the proper response for someone else should be.
|
|
Lizard Queen
Senior Associate
103/2024
Joined: Jan 17, 2011 22:19:13 GMT -5
Posts: 14,659
|
Post by Lizard Queen on Sept 29, 2016 9:13:53 GMT -5
I think police officers aren't judge, jury and executioner. Lethal force is only justified in cases where there is an immediate, real threat to the life of the officer or bystanders. If there is an error, I'm sorry, but it should be on the side of harm to the officer by the very virtue that they chose their profession (and wear bulletproof vests in many cases). This is in contrast to erring on the side of killing unarmed, completely innocent civilians who may have had no choice in the case (i.e., kids playing with toys). I think the founding of this country was based on the principles I'm describing, and the founding fathers would be horrified at the tack that law enforcement and general opinion has taken on this subject. True freedom is freedom from fearing police when there is no law being broken, or even when there is and it's a non-violent infraction, not risking death because of it (i.e., marijuana).
|
|
Green Eyed Lady
Senior Associate
Look inna eye! Always look inna eye!
Joined: Jan 23, 2012 11:23:55 GMT -5
Posts: 19,629
|
Post by Green Eyed Lady on Sept 29, 2016 9:18:30 GMT -5
Unjustified lethal force is already minimal. The ideal would be zero incidents and I don't think we'll ever get to that. As to your numbered points, some of them can't be answered with a yes or a no.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Oct 14, 2024 11:26:09 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2016 9:26:05 GMT -5
A. The suspect won't obey commands. No, unless the command is to drop a weapon.
B. When the suspect is behaving erratically. No, unless they have a weapon.
B. The officer cannot see the suspects hands (i.e. keeping them in their pockets or behind their back). No
C. When the suspect makes sudden movements (drawing something out of their pockets, or reaching into a car window for example) Yes, but this may be the greyest area of any of them.
D. When the suspect is physically aggressive. No, unless they have a weapon or someone is in immediate danger (large man bashing in skull of smaller victim).
E. When the suspect has a weapon that is not a firearm. Yes, if they won't obey commands to drop it and move towards someone in a hostile manner.
F. When the suspect has a gun. Yes, if they won't obey commands to drop it.
G. When the suspect has discharged a firearm. Absolutely.
I agree with NomoreDramaQ1015 that body cams are a wonderful thing, for the public and the 99.9% of good police officers. I know of an example where the officer was exonerated after a shooting several years ago because of what the camera showed (it was the officers personal camera that they purchased themselves), otherwise it would have ended up in the never ending news cycle like some of the other ones.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Sept 29, 2016 9:26:38 GMT -5
I think body cams and dash cams are a wonderful thing. Not only do they protect citizens but they also protect the police officers using them. It provides real time evidence as to what happened, especially useful in a case where one party is deceased. If we spend the money to equip all our officers with body cams and dash cams I think you'll see these incidents go down because now there is an invisible man watching you holding you accountable. Accountability is a very powerful motivator to human beings, we're hard wired to modify our behavior if we know there are others watching/judging. I'm not going to even pretend I can decide when lethal force is justified. There are too many variables involved and it's a highly emotionally charged situation. I can tell you how I THINK I would react but there is no way to know for sure. If I can't tell you with certainty how I would behave I can't tell you what the proper response for someone else should be. Yes, I concur that dashboard cameras and body cameras are helpful and should be employed wherever possible. But they aren't the end all and be all some may think. As we've seen in recent cases, even incidents caught on camera are open to interpretation as to who was right and who was wrong.
Often, cameras don't catch the "build up" to a situation, and sometimes they don't work or the shooting happens off camera.
And as noted above, even in cases where it is on camera, like the incident near San Diego, the guy pulled out a vaping device and assumed a "shooting stance." Is such an incident of lethal force justified, even though the guy was unarmed? It was caught on camera, and there's room for disagreement what is right.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Sept 29, 2016 9:32:42 GMT -5
A. The suspect won't obey commands. No, unless the command is to drop a weapon. B. When the suspect is behaving erratically. No, unless they have a weapon. B. The officer cannot see the suspects hands (i.e. keeping them in their pockets or behind their back). No C. When the suspect makes sudden movements (drawing something out of their pockets, or reaching into a car window for example) Yes, but this may be the greyest area of any of them. D. When the suspect is physically aggressive. No, unless they have a weapon or someone is in immediate danger (large man bashing in skull of smaller victim). E. When the suspect has a weapon that is not a firearm. Yes, if they won't obey commands to drop it and move towards someone in a hostile manner. F. When the suspect has a gun. Yes, if they won't obey commands to drop it. G. When the suspect has discharged a firearm. Absolutely. I agree with NomoreDramaQ1015 that body cams are a wonderful thing, for the public and the 99.9% of good police officers. I know of an example where the officer was exonerated after a shooting several years ago because of what the camera showed (it was the officers personal camera that they purchased themselves), otherwise it would have ended up in the never ending news cycle like some of the other ones. I largely agree with this, and this is likely what I'd do if I was a cop. I'd largely draw the line at sudden physical motion, especially reaching for something or pulling something out of their pockets. It doesn't matter if it turns out to be a weapon or not. The point is, you don't know at that point and if you wait to find out, it will probably be too late if it is a weapon. But, as you noted, it can easily be a gray area.
But I'm surprised at how many civilians don't know how to handle a confrontation with an officer. You obey the officer's commands, keep your hands where they can see them, and don't make sudden or aggressive moves. It's not rocket science.
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 48,108
Member is Online
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Sept 29, 2016 9:32:54 GMT -5
I don't think cameras are perfect but they are a good start.
Our legal system is designed and run by people it will NEVER truly be "blind" justice. That being said the cameras are as close to "blind" as we can get I think. It doesn't have to deal with unconcious bias or have any interest in what the verdict is. It just records the situation as presented.
Then as I said there is the subtle pressure concerning the fact you are both being "watched". Not only have the cameras but make EVERYONE in the situation aware there is a camera filming (like the signs in parking lots that inform you that you're being watched).
You are a lot less likely to do something stupid if you know it will be caught on camera and can be used against you. Same with the police officer.
Will it be perfect? Of course not but I think it would lead to a lot more transparency than we have now.
Plus not only would it catch BAD cops but having every cop with a body/dash cam would show all the GOOD cops out there too. Right now we only hear about the "bad" cops and see "bad" cop videos. If ALL officers wore cameras you'd have video of "good" cops out there too.
I think that would do a lot to help relations between officers and citizens if there was a balance in footage offered.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,581
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 29, 2016 9:51:28 GMT -5
In addition to body cameras, it would be great if technolgy could be created to have the camera mounted in the officer's vehicles somehow follow the movements of the officer as (s)he moves around. There will be some blind areas in the video due to construction of the vehicle itself. Police-car mounted camera lens should also be panoramic as should the body cameras.
A good example of the police car needing a automatic camera following the officer(s) would be they shooting and murder of two West Memphis police officers back in 2010. The violent actions of the father and son Sovereign Citizen members took place outside of the camera's fixed position.
In the West Memphis case, the father and son were shortly tracked down by police in a nearby Walmart parking lot and died in a gun fight with police. Well deserved deaths of the two murderers.
|
|
souldoubt
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 11:57:14 GMT -5
Posts: 2,757
|
Post by souldoubt on Sept 29, 2016 10:40:37 GMT -5
I pretty much agree with AJ. Just this week in SoCal there's a story of an African American man who was shot by police. The witnesses interviewed said he did nothing and made it sound like the cops over reacted but then video footage came out showing the suspect not listening to the cops, had his hands in his pocket then he pulls them out and acted like he had a gun which there's a video still picture of online. The cops shot him and in that case I don't blame them because if they fear for their lives that's how they have to respond. Obviously it wasn't the outcome anyone wanted but I don't know what else people would want a cop to do in that situation. In recent months we've seen shootings where I can say it definitely looks like the cop was 100% in the wrong but at the same time we've seen other instances where people don't listen, get hostile and present a danger to the cops.
|
|
tskeeter
Junior Associate
Joined: Mar 20, 2011 19:37:45 GMT -5
Posts: 6,831
|
Post by tskeeter on Sept 29, 2016 11:07:55 GMT -5
There will always be differences of opinion about when lethal force is appropriate. Take the comments of the aunt of a young burglar who was killed by the homeowner of the home he was burglarizing. The aunt thought that the homeowner should not have shot the man who had broken into the home. Why? Because the nephew supported himself by committing burglaries. For some reason, the aunt thought that the homeowner should not have considered a person who had broken into the home as a possible threat. Instead, the aunt thought the homeowner should have ignored the burglar doing his "work".
However, I do think that police officers are often selected for their aggressive personalities and that police officers are often trained to respond to many situations in a hyper aggressive fashion.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 64,581
|
Post by Tennesseer on Sept 29, 2016 11:43:52 GMT -5
There will always be differences of opinion about when lethal force is appropriate. T ake the comments of the aunt of a young burglar who was killed by the homeowner of the home he was burglarizing. The aunt thought that the homeowner should not have shot the man who had broken into the home. Why? Because the nephew supported himself by committing burglaries. For some reason, the aunt thought that the homeowner should not have considered a person who had broken into the home as a possible threat. Instead, the aunt thought the homeowner should have ignored the burglar doing his "work".However, I do think that police officers are often selected for their aggressive personalities and that police officers are often trained to respond to many situations in a hyper aggressive fashion. Happened here almost verbatim about 8-9 years ago. Except it was the burglar's neighbor's home. And a few weeks later, the neighbor's house was set on fire. There was also a similar incident here around the same time. Some guy put a gun to the head of a driver who was leaving a shopping complex. Told the driver to get out of the car as he was hijacking it. What the bad guy with the gun didn't know was that the driver had his own gun by the driver's seat. The guy gets out of his car hiding the gun and the hijacker starts driving away. The car owner shot at the car and the hijacker was killed. The hijacker's mother complained her son was not going to harm anyone. He only wanted the car. Hey mom-guess what-your son put a gun to another guy's head. Live with the outcome.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Sept 29, 2016 12:39:50 GMT -5
I think some people just don't have a realistic view of policing. it's often not pretty, and to take down tough criminals you got to be equally tough. But I can see how police officers could benefit from better training in recognizing and dealing with metal illness and personal crises.
Plus, I think some people need to take a step back and not play Monday Morning Quarterback. Being a police officer requires you to make split second decisions and snap judgments, and it's all too easy to point fingers weeks later when all the facts are known. You have to make an evaluation if the police officer's actions were reasonable under the circumstances with the given information.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,602
|
Post by happyhoix on Sept 29, 2016 15:41:15 GMT -5
There are no hard and fast rules about when lethal force is justified or not. Too many variables.
I am by no means an expert on policing, but from what I've read about some of these incidents, the quality of the police in an area is tied to the management of the police department. Poor/corrupt departments end up having to scrape the bottom of the barrel when they hire officers, and can end up with officers who resigned or were forced to resign from other departments due to poor/aggressive performance. When a department gets too many of those bad actors, the good police officers often get disgusted and leave, which makes the department even worse. I was reading about one department in Arizona, I think, that had such bad management and zero accountability of it's officers that they had to advertise as far away as NYC to try to recruit new officers.
Of course that comes back to the community, and what they demand from their elected officials. Sometimes you just have to clean house at election time. Plus having body cams and dash cams helps both to root out the poor performers and to protect officers from false accusations. And they need a lot more training than most of them get on how to recognize people with mental illness issues, or health issues like dementia, and how to defuse or isolate a potential situation instead of drawing a weapon. Can't really blame them for bad actions when they haven't had much training.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Sept 29, 2016 15:57:34 GMT -5
I never worry my head over it. I always feel a dead criminal commits no more crimes.
|
|
rob base
Well-Known Member
Joined: Aug 21, 2016 13:08:22 GMT -5
Posts: 1,433
|
Post by rob base on Sept 29, 2016 19:54:10 GMT -5
How about instead of wondering when it is OK for police to use deadly force, why don't we worry about when it is OK to comply with police instruction? The answer to that question is ALWAYS. If police are doing something wrong, wait and report it later. COMPLY.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Sept 29, 2016 22:05:06 GMT -5
If we spend the money to equip all our officers with body cams and dash cams I think you'll see these incidents go down because now there is an invisible man watching you holding you accountable. Accountability is a very powerful motivator to human beings, we're hard wired to modify our behavior if we know there are others watching/judging. This echoed my own "conventional wisdom", but I found out recently that it's not true in the case of police shootings. papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2808662Abstract (bold by me): Deaths of civilians by the police in recent years have led to protests and disruptions in several cities, such as New York and Chicago. In this study, we investigate how the use of technology by the police affects deadly shootings of civilians. Drawing upon the criminology literature, we propose a simple, stylized model on a police officer’s decision-making to shoot to explain how technology use for intelligence analyses and evidence gathering affects the use of lethal force. Our empirical analyses revealed both encouraging and surprising findings. We found that both the use of smartphones and the statistical analyses of crime data are associated with a decrease in deadly shootings. In contrast, the use of wearable body cameras is related to an increase in fatal shootings by the police. We also found that the effect of technology use is more pronounced for armed suspects and among males, the youth, and minorities. The authors quantify the increase at about 4% and deem it statistically significant. They attribute it to the fact that more police officers refrain from shooting suspects due to worries that there's no video evidence to clearly exonerate them than shoot suspects unjustifiably. The net result: more cameras mean more shootings.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,246
|
Post by billisonboard on Sept 29, 2016 22:43:26 GMT -5
... They attribute it to the fact that more police officers refrain from shooting suspects due to worries that there's no video evidence to clearly exonerate them than shoot suspects unjustifiably. ... If they can refrain from shooting, then a shooting isn't justified.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Sept 30, 2016 4:45:05 GMT -5
Maybe there are more deaths because there are more assholes being raised by other ones?
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Sept 30, 2016 8:23:11 GMT -5
How about instead of wondering when it is OK for police to use deadly force, why don't we worry about when it is OK to comply with police instruction? The answer to that question is ALWAYS. If police are doing something wrong, wait and report it later. COMPLY.
Yes. As I mentioned above, I think part of the reason for these controversial shootings is the suspects aren't doing what they need to do when stopped by police.
Even if the cop is asshole, and you didn't do anything wrong, just shut up, comply, don't be aggressive and keep your hands where they can see them and get it worked out later.
But, obviously none of that advice matters if you're in the throes of mental illness or personal crises, or if you want to commit suicide by cop, which given the behavior of some of the recent suspects who have been shot, I think may have been the case.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Sept 30, 2016 8:45:55 GMT -5
How about instead of wondering when it is OK for police to use deadly force, why don't we worry about when it is OK to comply with police instruction? The answer to that question is ALWAYS. If police are doing something wrong, wait and report it later. COMPLY.
Yes. As I mentioned above, I think part of the reason for these controversial shootings is the suspects aren't doing what they need to do when stopped by police.
Even if the cop is asshole, and you didn't do anything wrong, just shut up, comply, don't be aggressive and keep your hands where they can see them and get it worked out later.
But, obviously none of that advice matters if you're in the throes of mental illness or personal crises, or if you want to commit suicide by cop, which given the behavior of some of the recent suspects who have been shot, I think may have been the case.
I'm not sure I agree with this. There was the recent case of a black home worker who was trying to deal with an older autistic man in public. The social worker tying to deal with his client had his hands up and was lying on his back, explaining to cops who he was. The cop still shot the man. There was absolutely no reason for this. What else was the man supposed to do? He did absolutely everything he was supposed to do, and the cop still shot him. Luckily, not fatally but you can be damn sure that that injury cost the man in other ways. www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article90905442.html
|
|
busymom
Distinguished Associate
Why is the rum always gone? Oh...that's why.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 21:09:36 GMT -5
Posts: 29,247
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"https://cdn.nickpic.host/images/IPauJ5.jpg","color":""}
Mini-Profile Name Color: 0D317F
Mini-Profile Text Color: 0D317F
|
Post by busymom on Sept 30, 2016 10:21:09 GMT -5
When I was a kid, Mom & Dad drilled into me that you ALWAYS obey a police officer's commands if you're pulled over. The time to argue is not at that moment, but, later in court if you feel you were genuinely right, & the officer was wrong. All you're going to do, if you allow yourself to get worked up, is get the officer worked up too. And that rarely ends up well.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,602
|
Post by happyhoix on Sept 30, 2016 10:25:28 GMT -5
Yes. As I mentioned above, I think part of the reason for these controversial shootings is the suspects aren't doing what they need to do when stopped by police.
Even if the cop is asshole, and you didn't do anything wrong, just shut up, comply, don't be aggressive and keep your hands where they can see them and get it worked out later.
But, obviously none of that advice matters if you're in the throes of mental illness or personal crises, or if you want to commit suicide by cop, which given the behavior of some of the recent suspects who have been shot, I think may have been the case.
I'm not sure I agree with this. There was the recent case of a black home worker who was trying to deal with an older autistic man in public. The social worker tying to deal with his client had his hands up and was lying on his back, explaining to cops who he was. The cop still shot the man. There was absolutely no reason for this. What else was the man supposed to do? He did absolutely everything he was supposed to do, and the cop still shot him. Luckily, not fatally but you can be damn sure that that injury cost the man in other ways. www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article90905442.htmlI read about that case. Apparently, the cops thought the autistic man had a gun and was threatening the health care worker with it (the autistic man had a toy car). The cop that fired his weapon meant to shoot the autistic guy and ironically missed and hit the health care worker instead. This despite the healthcare worker pleading with the cops and with the autistic man to lay down on the ground. There was also a neighbor down the street who had binoculars who saw what the autistic man had in his hand and who came running down the street trying to tell the police that the autistic man was unarmed - the cop guarding the periphery of the scene told the neighbor to back off and ignored what he was trying to say.
This is why more training is so important. There are lots of reasons people may not respond to what a cop says - autism, dementia, mental health issues, language issues. Even someone with a diabetic problem can seem confused and nonresponsive. It's not acceptable to shoot everyone just because they don't immediately do what the cop says to do - the person in question has to be an immediate threat to the officer or someone else, and if they aren't, the cop needs to know how to de-escalate the situation and recognize when someone is having mental or physical issues.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Sept 30, 2016 10:38:27 GMT -5
I'm not sure I agree with this. There was the recent case of a black home worker who was trying to deal with an older autistic man in public. The social worker tying to deal with his client had his hands up and was lying on his back, explaining to cops who he was. The cop still shot the man. There was absolutely no reason for this. What else was the man supposed to do? He did absolutely everything he was supposed to do, and the cop still shot him. Luckily, not fatally but you can be damn sure that that injury cost the man in other ways. www.miamiherald.com/news/local/crime/article90905442.htmlI read about that case. Apparently, the cops thought the autistic man had a gun and was threatening the health care worker with it (the autistic man had a toy car). The cop that fired his weapon meant to shoot the autistic guy and ironically missed and hit the health care worker instead. This despite the healthcare worker pleading with the cops and with the autistic man to lay down on the ground. There was also a neighbor down the street who had binoculars who saw what the autistic man had in his hand and who came running down the street trying to tell the police that the autistic man was unarmed - the cop guarding the periphery of the scene told the neighbor to back off and ignored what he was trying to say.
This is why more training is so important. There are lots of reasons people may not respond to what a cop says - autism, dementia, mental health issues, language issues. Even someone with a diabetic problem can seem confused and nonresponsive. It's not acceptable to shoot everyone just because they don't immediately do what the cop says to do - the person in question has to be an immediate threat to the officer or someone else, and if they aren't, the cop needs to know how to de-escalate the situation and recognize when someone is having mental or physical issues.
If this was truly the case, why was the man they shot handcuffed and left bleeding? I don't buy it. BTW....the person calling the event in and the worker BOTH said the autistic man had a toy truck in his hand.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Sept 30, 2016 10:48:06 GMT -5
When I was a kid, Mom & Dad drilled into me that you ALWAYS obey a police officer's commands if you're pulled over. The time to argue is not at that moment, but, later in court if you feel you were genuinely right, & the officer was wrong. All you're going to do, if you allow yourself to get worked up, is get the officer worked up too. And that rarely ends up well. I've been drilling this into my boys, too. Not just that but after watching the videos of the college students kneeling peacefully in a row and being deliberately pepper sprayed in the face - I'm trying to talk to them about being careful what protests they're involved in, too. Both of them have severe asthma - the kind where they can get a sudden attack and literally turn blue - pepper spray could easily be fatal. That one really upsets me since I think peaceful protest is a right; of course you might have to face reasonable consequences like arrest, but you shouldn't receive severe physical harm or death for simply kneeling in silent protest. Before anyone points it out, yes, in the case of the college students it was campus police not government but I think it's a similar issue with training and disproportionate response.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Sept 30, 2016 10:56:30 GMT -5
When I was a kid, Mom & Dad drilled into me that you ALWAYS obey a police officer's commands if you're pulled over. The time to argue is not at that moment, but, later in court if you feel you were genuinely right, & the officer was wrong. All you're going to do, if you allow yourself to get worked up, is get the officer worked up too. And that rarely ends up well. The thing is, there are a LOT of cops spoiling for a fight, even when you do comply to the letter. TD was picking me up at the airport. My flight had been delayed, so we were driving through Seattle at 2 am. The dog was in the back seat, along with my suitcase. He had his cruise control set at the speed limit (which I objected to, I wanted to get home NOW as I was exhausted). We got stopped. He was not driving erratically, nor fast. His guilt was that he was driving a sports car, a Subaru WRX, the windows were not tinted. TD pulled over immediately. He complied with all directions, including rolling down the rear window so the cop could see the dog and suitcase in the back seat clearly, and turned on the dome light. The cop had his gun drawn, and told TD he had been clocked going 75 (TD was not passing other cars, in fact, they were passing him as he was going the speed limit). He accused him of drinking. He accused him of driving erratically. TD was polite, didn't argue with the cop. In fact, the accusations were so off the wall that I was beginning to become frightened. That cop was spoiling for a fight, and had anything been said by either of us, I'm sure that we would have been hauled in. He let us go, but made us sit along the side of I5 at 2 am for a good 30 minutes while he went back to his car. He said he was letting TD off with a warning (for what?), and he let us go. My best guess was that when he stopped the car, he didn't realize there were 2 50+ year professionals, stone cold sober and the cop was trying to save face. But he was an utter ass to both of us and wanted to push TD's buttons.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Sept 30, 2016 11:01:45 GMT -5
That's when you write down his name and badge number.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Sept 30, 2016 11:05:00 GMT -5
That's when you write down his name and badge number. Easier to remember this after the fact. And quite frankly, I would have been afraid to ask him for this at the time. I'm not afraid of a lot, but this cop freaking scared me.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Sept 30, 2016 11:42:28 GMT -5
That's when you write down his name and badge number. Easier to remember this after the fact. And quite frankly, I would have been afraid to ask him for this at the time. I'm not afraid of a lot, but this cop freaking scared me. I think everyone has dealt with a cop that was kind of a dick at some point or another.
I got pulled over for speeding (and to be fair, I was speeding), aftering coming home from working a night shift. I was tired, had been working for 9+ hours on my feet, and just wanted to go to bed.
The cop threatened to take my to jail, that I could have died speeding like that, all kind of stuff. Like you said, perhaps trying to push my buttons. But I knew it was pointless to argue, and I was too tired to do that even if I wanted to. I can't say I was "scared" though.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,912
|
Post by zibazinski on Sept 30, 2016 11:56:32 GMT -5
You don't have to ask. It's on their name thingie
|
|