I know that there is the veil of anonymity which allows these clowns to act/talk tougher then they would in reality (hopefully, anyway), and I'm sure it would be easy to get desensitized as a police officer. With LEO's going to work every day with these sort of attitudes, it's easy to see why there is a mistrust of LEO's in certain communities.
On a larger scale, the continued militarization of local police forces leads to less and less personal interaction with the communities they serve. It gets easier to dehumanize the individual. It's one of the worst results of the War on Drugs/post 9-11 U.S.
What I'm not going to do is defend the comments made on a message board because we all know every message board has its crazies that are no indicative of the majority, this board reflects that on a daily basis. Plus I would not put therant as a police message board.
Now to look at the video, the video is incomplete from what I've seen so we have no idea the actual story leading up to what is seen in they video.here's a few things to consider....
1: Just because "bystanders" attested that this man "had done nothing" doesn't mean he wasn't lawfully arrestable for a different offence (in this case the illegal sale of cigarettes). More accurately it means "he didn't do anything that I noticed in the last five minutes that would seem to make him eligible for arrest." Which when translated, means, "I really have no idea."
2: Why does the peanut galley always forget that the law actually requires citizens to cooperate when advised they are under arrest? The process in place for disputing the validity of an arrest is COURT - NOT an argument, fight, or struggle with the officer/s. This, in fact, is an additional offence (resisting arrest) and allows officers as much force as is necessary to effect the arrest......they then have to answer for their decisions.
3: Lets also not forget that cops support their families n pay their bills via these decisions....ergo.....in most cases it is HIGHLY unlikely officers such as these woke up in the morning & thought "Hmmm, think I'll risk my life, family, and livelihood by killing an innocent man today!"
4: Believe it or not MOST people that are placed under arrest lie to the police at one time or another.....so saying "I can't breath" has mixed value....especially when u need to breath to speak at all - just saying.
5: Officers can't possibly know the pre-existing conditions of every person they meet.....but this man knew of his own health issues......don't u think HE shoulda considered them before deciding to resist arrest & fight with the Police? I would have......
Just somethings to think about.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to underGRADFlame For This Useful Post:
What I'm not going to do is defend the comments made on a message board because we all know every message board has its crazies that are no indicative of the majority, this board reflects that on a daily basis. Plus I would not put therant as a police message board.
Now to look at the video, the video is incomplete from what I've seen so we have no idea the actual story leading up to what is seen in they video.here's a few things to consider....
1: Just because "bystanders" attested that this man "had done nothing" doesn't mean he wasn't lawfully arrestable for a different offence (in this case the illegal sale of cigarettes). More accurately it means "he didn't do anything that I noticed in the last five minutes that would seem to make him eligible for arrest." Which when translated, means, "I really have no idea."
2: Why does the peanut galley always forget that the law actually requires citizens to cooperate when advised they are under arrest? The process in place for disputing the validity of an arrest is COURT - NOT an argument, fight, or struggle with the officer/s. This, in fact, is an additional offence (resisting arrest) and allows officers as much force as is necessary to effect the arrest......they then have to answer for their decisions.
3: Lets also not forget that cops support their families n pay their bills via these decisions....ergo.....in most cases it is HIGHLY unlikely officers such as these woke up in the morning & thought "Hmmm, think I'll risk my life, family, and livelihood by killing an innocent man today!"
4: Believe it or not MOST people that are placed under arrest lie to the police at one time or another.....so saying "I can't breath" has mixed value....especially when u need to breath to speak at all - just saying.
5: Officers can't possibly know the pre-existing conditions of every person they meet.....but this man knew of his own health issues......don't u think HE shoulda considered them before deciding to resist arrest & fight with the Police? I would have......
Just somethings to think about.
I'm sure you wouldn't consider theerant a police message board. Just like Calgarypuck isn't an official Calgary Flames message board.
1. Agreed, that's why I didn't comment on the justification of the arrest.
2. The peanut gallery may very well be aware, but sometimes human nature takes over. When you have an ingrained distrust of law enforcement, you may be less than excited to be in their custody. The second someone grabs your neck from behind, you're going to struggle/resist no matter who you are, the situation likely wouldn't matter.
3. I'm not suggesting that officers actively seek out people to kill. What I am suggesting is that there are too many that see the individuals they deal with as less than people, which can lead to justification of actions which would otherwise be unacceptable.
4. I have no doubt that this is the case. I'm sure that police officers have the training and expertise to determine adequate airway restriction.
5. Perhaps the man did consider his preexisting conditions, and weighed those risks against preexisting knowledge/experience he and others have had with the NYPD.
While I may have been spurred to comment by this most recent situation, I'm more concerned with the greater issue of police officers and a seemingly increasing dehumanization of the people they serve.
Is it a tactic to cope with what they have to deal with in their day to day duties? Is it part of the training curriculum as it is in the military? Is there some truth to the idea that the occupation simply attracts a certain personality trait?
There are obviously larger sociological issues at play regarding the relationship between police departments and certain sections of society. Do the officers here have any suggestions on how to bridge that gap, or is that not a priority/concern on the individual level?
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
The one thing in just about all these incidents i simply cant wrap my head around is...when a cop tells you you are under arrest and to turn around and be handcuffed....its not up for debate.
If you feel like its an incorrect arrest i understand, but that doesnt mean it isnt going to happen with or without your co-operation. Just agree to it, get to the station and then sort it out with judges/jp's or who ever. Fighting police will NEVER result in anything but a worse experience for you.
While I may have been spurred to comment by this most recent situation, I'm more concerned with the greater issue of police officers and a seemingly increasing dehumanization of the people they serve.
Is it a tactic to cope with what they have to deal with in their day to day duties? Is it part of the training curriculum as it is in the military? Is there some truth to the idea that the occupation simply attracts a certain personality trait?
There are obviously larger sociological issues at play regarding the relationship between police departments and certain sections of society. Do the officers here have any suggestions on how to bridge that gap, or is that not a priority/concern on the individual level?
I personally don't think there is an increasing "dehumanization" of the population, I think if anything in this era of smart phones and YouTube, incidents like this are just more available to the populace to view. That results in people thinking these incidents are commonplace. If anything, I'd say there is more educational training for police towards mental health, aboriginal and minorities, community policing, de-escalation etc. I'd wager 95% of police-public interaction results in simply verbal communication or a co-operating arrest (you're under arrest for such and such, person complies, handcuffs are put on and that's the end of it).
I think society in general is becoming more self centred and less concerned about others. This results in less respect to others including police.
The Following User Says Thank You to Zulu29 For This Useful Post:
The one thing in just about all these incidents i simply cant wrap my head around is...when a cop tells you you are under arrest and to turn around and be handcuffed....its not up for debate.
If you feel like its an incorrect arrest i understand, but that doesnt mean it isnt going to happen with or without your co-operation. Just agree to it, get to the station and then sort it out with judges/jp's or who ever. Fighting police will NEVER result in anything but a worse experience for you.
Its just so stupid.
You can afford to trust the system. I'd say many people in these situations believe that they cannot.
The Following User Says Thank You to Montana Moe For This Useful Post:
Again though....there is no benefit in fighting an arrest/handcuffing. None.
It will only make whatever is going to happen...worse. As evidenced by this latest video.
On a larger scale, what can be done to make this section of the population feel that being in custody of law enforcement is a better option? Obviously, they believe that the minuscule chance of escape is worth the risk in that moment.
On a larger scale, what can be done to make this section of the population feel that being in custody of law enforcement is a better option? Obviously, they believe that the minuscule chance of escape is worth the risk in that moment.
Not the question that should be asked! If you're really looking to ask a question, why are these people breaking the law? It's really easy in this life to not get arrested.
Not the question that should be asked! If you're really looking to ask a question, why are these people breaking the law? It's really easy in this life to not get arrested.
It's just that simple, isn't it?
Innocent until proven guilty isn't the concern of law enforcement, leave that to the courts. If they don't quite make it there, they were probably guilty, anyway.
The Following User Says Thank You to Montana Moe For This Useful Post:
Again though....there is no benefit in fighting an arrest/handcuffing. None.
It will only make whatever is going to happen...worse. As evidenced by this latest video.
Would this point of view be described as white privilege by someone? I'm not saying it is, but it sounds like something I would loosely associate with white privilege. The idea that an encounter with the police will be A-OK as long as you're innocent.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by puckluck2
Well, deal with it. I wasn't cheering for Canada either way. Nothing worse than arrogant Canadian fans. They'd be lucky to finish 4th. Quote me on that. They have a bad team and that is why I won't be cheering for them.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Brannigans Law For This Useful Post:
Innocent until proven guilty isn't the concern of law enforcement, leave that to the courts. If they don't quite make it there, they were probably guilty, anyway.
Way to take some liberties there. Guess what you are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, how ever there are certain things that happen before that, including an arrest! A trial can't happen without an arrest. A police officers job is not to determine guilt beyond a reason doubt as the courts do, they have to have reasonable belief that an offense occurred to effect an arrest.
I'm sure you wouldn't consider theerant a police message board. Just like Calgarypuck isn't an official Calgary Flames message board.
1. Agreed, that's why I didn't comment on the justification of the arrest.
2. The peanut gallery may very well be aware, but sometimes human nature takes over. When you have an ingrained distrust of law enforcement, you may be less than excited to be in their custody. The second someone grabs your neck from behind, you're going to struggle/resist no matter who you are, the situation likely wouldn't matter.
3. I'm not suggesting that officers actively seek out people to kill. What I am suggesting is that there are too many that see the individuals they deal with as less than people, which can lead to justification of actions which would otherwise be unacceptable.
4. I have no doubt that this is the case. I'm sure that police officers have the training and expertise to determine adequate airway restriction.
5. Perhaps the man did consider his preexisting conditions, and weighed those risks against preexisting knowledge/experience he and others have had with the NYPD.
While I may have been spurred to comment by this most recent situation, I'm more concerned with the greater issue of police officers and a seemingly increasing dehumanization of the people they serve.
Is it a tactic to cope with what they have to deal with in their day to day duties? Is it part of the training curriculum as it is in the military? Is there some truth to the idea that the occupation simply attracts a certain personality trait?
There are obviously larger sociological issues at play regarding the relationship between police departments and certain sections of society. Do the officers here have any suggestions on how to bridge that gap, or is that not a priority/concern on the individual level?
He wasn't fighting or resisting at all. The cop put him in a rear naked choke out of surprise. It's pretty clear that the cop used excessive force to detain a person. I know justice will not be served in this case so I hope that POS cop will be haunted the rest of his life of the fact that he murdered an innocent person who leaving behind five children and wife.
I do think the guy could have diffused things a bit. Especially knowing that a physical confrontation was nearing and he has serious asthma issues.
Making up a statement such as he was in a "fighting stance" just shows you how the cop has zero remorse. He should be jailed for murder.. end of story.
He wasn't fighting or resisting at all. The cop put him in a rear naked choke out of surprise. It's pretty clear that the cop used excessive force to detain a person. I know justice will not be served in this case so I hope that POS cop will be haunted the rest of his life of the fact that he murdered an innocent person who leaving behind five children and wife.
The fact that he was not complying with officers request after he was informed he was under arrest means he's resisting arrest.
It's not clear that the offices used excessive force, your assuming because the man died that it was excessive, but there were a lot of contributing factors, not just the "choke hold" his health was the most likely contributing factor. The officers had to escalate their force due to the male not being compliant. It is truly unfortunate that the man died, and the police very well could be held accountable, even criminally if investigators/district attorney deem it appropriate.
The fact that he was not complying with officers request after he was informed he was under arrest means he's resisting arrest.
It's not clear that the offices used excessive force, your assuming because the man died that it was excessive, but there were a lot of contributing factors, not just the "choke hold" his health was the most likely contributing factor. The officers had to escalate their force due to the male not being compliant. It is truly unfortunate that the man died, and the police very well could be held accountable, even criminally if investigators/district attorney deem it appropriate.
All Officers are told never to use choke holds or any other other techniques that will restrict breathing. This means it was excessive.
The fact that he was not complying with officers request after he was informed he was under arrest means he's resisting arrest.
It's not clear that the offices used excessive force, your assuming because the man died that it was excessive, but there were a lot of contributing factors, not just the "choke hold" his health was the most likely contributing factor. The officers had to escalate their force due to the male not being compliant. It is truly unfortunate that the man died, and the police very well could be held accountable, even criminally if investigators/district attorney deem it appropriate.
No, I'm not assuming just because he died, he was using excessive force. Putting a choke hold on a person is excessive, considering he did not fight, or physically resist the officers. There are a lot more safer methods of detaining someone than constricting a human's blood flow to the brain and airway isn't one of them.
