“Why did you shoot me? I was reading a book”

[Paschendale]

Of course every POS criminal would claim "police brutality" when the cop takes then down after they tried to run.

Not if the police weren't frequently being brutal. But please explain to me why a friendly card game, somebody smoking pot, or a kid tagging a wall warrants being "taken down".

 

[specklebang]

Video. The very same technology that the police hate so much when we film them being jerks. Every cop could have a tiny camera along with their cuffs, guns, grenades, nukes and all that oyther crap oin their belts. They now have tiny cameras that they use to keep track of cats activities. They mount on the collar. But I'll bet they'll never get them or use them because they do, indeed, act abusively.

Of course every POS criminal would claim "police brutality" when the cop takes then down after they tried to run.

 

[molten_dragon]

Of course every POS criminal would claim "police brutality" when the cop takes then down after they tried to run.

They'd get a trial in front of a judge and jury with legal representation just like anyone else accused of a crime. If it's good enough for everyone else, why wouldn't that be good enough for a cop.

 

[blackjack50]

Not if the police weren't frequently being brutal. But please explain to me why a friendly card game, somebody smoking pot, or a kid tagging a wall warrants being "taken down".

I'm not saying that cops aren't corrupt. But quite clearly you don't deal with the dregs of society on a regular basis. Not every police brutality claim is true. Hell most aren't.

Why don't you tell me...if you were a cop...how you would handle each one of those situations? The naivety in your one post is hilarious.

 

[blackjack50]

They'd get a trial in front of a judge and jury with legal representation just like anyone else accused of a crime. If it's good enough for everyone else, why wouldn't that be good enough for a cop.

Because the police would be on trial for some BS claim after every shift. PLEASE tell me you understand that? The police don't deal with reasonable people who understand common sense and reasonable discourse. They deal with people who steal, lie, snort, and so on. Tell me YOU would trust a junkie who just broke into a 7-11 who fled and when caught tried to spit on and bite a cop? Seriously. Cops deal with that **** every single night.

I am not saying they shouldn't be held liable for stupid stuff they do. But saying they should go to court over every single police brutality claim is a VERY naive view of what police do. You only get to see the videos of police brutality. What you don't normally see is stuff like this:

http://youtu.be/pDVEVux7-hI

Tell me you don't think this happens ALL the time. Understand. I'm not standing up for police brutality, but I am simply being a voice of reason here. I want to keep it in your head that they don't deal with reasonable people in probably 90% or more of the cases that their cuffs come out. Things change instantly for them and people get violent, nasty, and crazy in the blink of an eye. They do stuff like this:

http://youtu.be/bLCUXs8q_Bo

And that cop could be accused "brutality" if that guy's face hit the ground. Or holding him down? I am no stranger to grappling. I did BJJ for 2 years and a host of other arts to go with that. You get injured falling. Putting your hand out wrong and you could dislocate a shoulder. And SOME people might be inclined to believe the drug dealing scumbag who resisted arrest after a probable cause search...but not me. I've been here long enough to know better. You should too.

 

[molten_dragon]

Because the police would be on trial for some BS claim after every shift. PLEASE tell me you understand that? The police don't deal with reasonable people who understand common sense and reasonable discourse. They deal with people who steal, lie, snort, and so on. Tell me YOU would trust a junkie who just broke into a 7-11 who fled and when caught tried to spit on and bite a cop? Seriously. Cops deal with that **** every single night.

I am not saying they shouldn't be held liable for stupid stuff they do. But saying they should go to court over every single police brutality claim is a VERY naive view of what police do. You only get to see the videos of police brutality. What you don't normally see is stuff like this:

False Police Brutality Cases by Minnesota Police - YouTube

Tell me you don't think this happens ALL the time. Understand. I'm not standing up for police brutality, but I am simply being a voice of reason here. I want to keep it in your head that they don't deal with reasonable people in probably 90% or more of the cases that their cuffs come out. Things change instantly for them and people get violent, nasty, and crazy in the blink of an eye. They do stuff like this:

COPS TV show, Resisting Arrest - YouTube

And that cop could be accused "brutality" if that guy's face hit the ground. Or holding him down? I am no stranger to grappling. I did BJJ for 2 years and a host of other arts to go with that. You get injured falling. Putting your hand out wrong and you could dislocate a shoulder. And SOME people might be inclined to believe the drug dealing scumbag who resisted arrest after a probable cause search...but not me. I've been here long enough to know better. You should too.

I'm not saying that they should be put on trial over every claim of police brutality. You're right, in many cases, the claims are BS. But a judge or prosecuting attorney can always decide that there isn't enough evidence to hear the case or that the charges aren't warranted, just like they do all the time with normal people.

The main thing is that I don't think that police should be investigating claims of police abuse of power themselves. There's way too much of an us vs them mentality that leads to true cases of police abusing their power getting swept under the rug, because the people investigating it are other cops.

 

[radcen]

I'm not saying that they should be put on trial over every claim of police brutality. You're right, in many cases, the claims are BS. But a judge or prosecuting attorney can always decide that there isn't enough evidence to hear the case or that the charges aren't warranted, just like they do all the time with normal people.

The main thing is that I don't think that police should be investigating claims of police abuse of power themselves. There's way too much of an us vs them mentality that leads to true cases of police abusing their power getting swept under the rug, because the people investigating it are other cops.

We just need to make sure that legitimate accusations aren't swept under the rug... as is a big part of the problem now.

 

[Paschendale]

I'm not saying that cops aren't corrupt. But quite clearly you don't deal with the dregs of society on a regular basis. Not every police brutality claim is true. Hell most aren't.

I'm a public interest lawyer. Formerly one working in the bad parts of Washington DC. Guess who all of my clients were.

Why don't you tell me...if you were a cop...how you would handle each one of those situations? The naivety in your one post is hilarious.

I would follow the law, which is what these overaggressive cops are not doing. They are breaking the law, using violence when they're not supposed to. And then they're not held accountable. Cops that murder people are murderers. Cops that tamper with evidence are criminals. Cops that harass and abuse people are criminals. Cops that take liberties with women are rapists. Cops that beat people up are criminals. The permissive police culture that allows cops to break the law needs to be fixed.

 

[joko104]

I might, as ex-LEO, quibble over some of the phrasing or certain details... but you're not entirely wrong.

I saw the change coming when I was in LE, and I didn't like it. Yes, there's always been a certain "Us vs Them" mentality, but it has grown beyond all reason. When I was a cop, I had a pair of cuffs, a radio, a pouch containing rubber gloves, two speed loaders, and one revolver on my belt. Today I see guys with two or three 15 round mags, Taser, pepperspray, two sets of cuffs, expanding baton, and more pouches with I dunno what in them. More and more, what we used to consider routine ops requiring two uniforms are today performs by 3-12 cops in tactical gear... of course, all of it black, armored and intimidating looking.

Apparently stuff I used to deal with solo, with my voice and authority as my primary tools (backed up by my hands and if need be my sidearm), now requires a heavy-weapons squad.

PDs are getting millions in Fed funding to buy all the tacti-kool SWAT and anti-terrorism gear and weapons and vehicles, then the dept feels obligated to USE the stuff to justify its purchase and maintenance... and you get situations where you have a platoon of cops looking like black-masked Storm Troopers on the street just to arrest a small time pot dealer.

That's not what I signed up for, and I'm glad I'm out, is all I'm saying.

THANK YOU for your candor. I agree. I also think the para-military attitudes, training, outfits and gear not only erodes the psychology of the department and the officers, but also can tend to escalate violence and confrontations.

 

[joko104]

I'm not saying that they should be put on trial over every claim of police brutality. You're right, in many cases, the claims are BS. But a judge or prosecuting attorney can always decide that there isn't enough evidence to hear the case or that the charges aren't warranted, just like they do all the time with normal people.

The main thing is that I don't think that police should be investigating claims of police abuse of power themselves. There's way too much of an us vs them mentality that leads to true cases of police abusing their power getting swept under the rug, because the people investigating it are other cops.

In most jurisdictions, prosecutors and judges are elected on the same ticket and few want police chiefs and sheriffs trying to get them defeated.

 

[joko104]

Another growing concern is how some officers freely falsely arrest people for "resisting arrest" and "interfering with an officer" and other crap charges.

The refusal of other officers to intervene to stop a bad-cop assaulting or going ballistic on someone.

And there is the legal complexity of does a person have any right at all to defend against being assaulted by a police officer. Or does a person just have to allow an officer or officers to beat on a person however they want as long as they want? If a police officer starts shooting at you, do you have a right to shoot back?

 

[molten_dragon]

In most jurisdictions, prosecutors and judges are elected on the same ticket and few want police chiefs and sheriffs trying to get them defeated.

While there will probably still be some corruption and cronyism, it would still be better than the current system.

 

[blackjack50]

I'm not saying that they should be put on trial over every claim of police brutality. You're right, in many cases, the claims are BS. But a judge or prosecuting attorney can always decide that there isn't enough evidence to hear the case or that the charges aren't warranted, just like they do all the time with normal people.

The main thing is that I don't think that police should be investigating claims of police abuse of power themselves. There's way too much of an us vs them mentality that leads to true cases of police abusing their power getting swept under the rug, because the people investigating it are other cops.

So you don't believe in Internal Affairs? I understand that. But to attempt to stop the daily life of a police officer over every single incident is crazy. There isn't a we vs them mentality with the police, but there is a "get me mine" mentality with a lot of the people they deal with. People already do that kind of stuff all the time as it is.

Here is a fun one. Is this next incident police brutality:

http://youtu.be/gU6srWXxTww

Would you prosecute that cop? If do why?

Now one close to me is this one:

http://youtu.be/6bVa6jn4rpE

I am a Gator fan and that happened at UF. Anyway. Is that police brutality? Would you charge the cop who tased him?

 

[molten_dragon]

So you don't believe in Internal Affairs? I understand that. But to attempt to stop the daily life of a police officer over every single incident is crazy.

I'm not saying we should stop their daily lives over every incident. They should be treated as innocent until proven guilty, just like anyone else accused of a crime. Unless they're actually charged with something and have to go to trial, it won't disrupt their lives at all.

There isn't a we vs them mentality with the police, but there is a "get me mine" mentality with a lot of the people they deal with. People already do that kind of stuff all the time as it is.

Oh, I agree with you about people suing at the drop of a hat, but I don't agree that there isn't an us vs. them attitude with cops. I've heard cops (and former cops) say it themselves.

Here is a fun one. Is this next incident police brutality:

COPS TV Show, Failure to Comply, Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department - YouTube

Would you prosecute that cop? If do why?

Now one close to me is this one:

University of Florida student Tasered at Kerry forum - YouTube

I am a Gator fan and that happened at UF. Anyway. Is that police brutality? Would you charge the cop who tased him?[/QUOTE]

 

[jetski]

“Why did you shoot me? I was reading a book”: The new warrior cop is out of control

http://www.salon.com/2013/07/07/“wh...a_book_the_new_warrior_cop_is_out_of_control/

America...where guns are legal, but betting can get you shot.

In the uk this guy bets online, and its in no way a crime.