More police brutality

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by Shawnski

Did the lawmakers intend to expend resources for a 50 cent smoke?

I have no idea but the laws exists for some sort of reason, antiquated or not. Even in most police acts, police officers can be found in neglect for failing to arrest someone after an offense occurs.

In Alberta:

38(1)Every police officer is a peace officer and has the authority, responsibility and duty

(a) to perform all duties that are necessary

(i) to carry out the police officer’s functions as a peace officer,

(ii) to encourage and assist the community in preventing crime,

(iii) to encourage and foster a co-operative relationship between the police service and the members of the community, and

(iv) to apprehend persons who may lawfully be taken into custody,

and

(b) to execute all warrants and perform all related duties and

services.

http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/P17.pdf

I agree arresting someone for selling illegal smokes may sound ridiculous, however, the simple fact that they were arresting this male isn't the story. If the legal grounds existed and they were bounded to do so, the issue comes to the use of force applied during the arrest.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by jar_e

I have no idea but the laws exists for some sort of reason, antiquated or not. Even in most police acts, police officers can be found in neglect for failing to arrest someone after an offense occurs.

In Alberta:

http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/P17.pdf

I agree arresting someone for selling illegal smokes may sound ridiculous, however, the simple fact that they were arresting this male isn't the story. If the legal grounds existed and they were bounded to do so, the issue comes to the use of force applied during the arrest.

I'm under he impression that really isn't followed to closely though. Even in that police ride along story during stampede they were talking about how the officers were policing based on how the people they were dealing with her acting. aka; No arrest for pot possession if they're being polite, they're just asked to throw it out, etc.

A small example, but that would be directly not making an arrest where an arrestable offence has occurred, no? Kind of similar to this minor selling of cigaretts.

[Zulu29]

Originally Posted by flameswin

I'm under he impression that really isn't followed to closely though. Even in that police ride along story during stampede they were talking about how the officers were policing based on how the people they were dealing with her acting. aka; No arrest for pot possession if they're being polite, they're just asked to throw it out, etc.

A small example, but that would be directly not making an arrest where an arrestable offence has occurred, no? Kind of similar to this minor selling of cigaretts.

I see what you're saying but there are dedicated units to tobacco enforcement believe it or not. Also, policing during a huge event like Stampede would be a lot different then a regular Friday afternoon in New York. It would be impossible for the police to enforce everything on a good day, let alone during stampede.

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by flameswin

I'm under he impression that really isn't followed to closely though. Even in that police ride along story during stampede they were talking about how the officers were policing based on how the people they were dealing with her acting. aka; No arrest for pot possession if they're being polite, they're just asked to throw it out, etc.

A small example, but that would be directly not making an arrest where an arrestable offence has occurred, no? Kind of similar to this minor selling of cigaretts.

Also, worth noting, arresting doesn't always equate charges. I have no idea about this case other than the video, but someone can be arrested and not receive any charges. Same with the pot thing...technically you're arrested (you can't just leave during it) but instead of charges, you're given an alternative to deal with it. Discretion plays a part of it, but given the guys demeanor in that video, I can't imagine a lot of discretion being used.

Edit: and furthermore, the Police Act in alberta is followed incredibly closely. That's the "rules" for policing in Alberta and failing to follow them can result in loss of pay, rank, or a job. It's not something taken lightly.

[Flash Walken]

“Cross your legs; don’t get up; put your legs back,” he said, before pointing to the tiny camera affixed to his Oakley sunglasses. “You’re being videotaped.”

It is a warning that is transforming many encounters between residents and police in this sunbaked Southern California city: “You’re being videotaped.”

Rialto has become the poster city for this high-tech measure intended to police the police since a federal judge last week applauded its officer camera program in the ruling that declared New York’s stop-and-frisk program unconstitutional. Rialto is one of the few places where the impact of the cameras has been studied systematically.

In the first year after the cameras were introduced here in February 2012, the number of complaints filed against officers fell by 88 percent compared with the previous 12 months. Use of force by officers fell by almost 60 percent over the same period.

And while Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg railed against the federal court, which ordered New York to arm some of its own police officers with cameras, the Rialto Police Department believes it stands as an example of how effective the cameras can be. Starting Sept. 1, all 66 uniformed officers here will be wearing a camera during every shift.

William A. Farrar, the Rialto police chief, believes the cameras may offer more benefits than merely reduced complaints against his force: the department is now trying to determine whether having video evidence in court has also led to more convictions.

But even without additional data, Chief Farrar has invested in cameras for the whole force.

“When you put a camera on a police officer, they tend to behave a little better, follow the rules a little better,” Chief Farrar said. “And if a citizen knows the officer is wearing a camera, chances are the citizen will behave a little better.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/22/us...anted=all&_r=0

[Shawnski]

Originally Posted by jar_e

I have no idea but the laws exists for some sort of reason, antiquated or not. Even in most police acts, police officers can be found in neglect for failing to arrest someone after an offense occurs.

In Alberta:

http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/P17.pdf

I agree arresting someone for selling illegal smokes may sound ridiculous, however, the simple fact that they were arresting this male isn't the story. If the legal grounds existed and they were bounded to do so, the issue comes to the use of force applied during the arrest.

Jar-e. I truly appreciate you not only as a poster, but as an emergency responder. Huge props.

But what you posted above is simply justification for bad judgements. The arrest IS the issue.

There is one thing I want to know. Did all those cops show up to arrest him on tobacco charges (which would be absurd), or did they pull them out after they were called in for a fight (which he apparently broke up) and had to save "face"?

CYA is normally the standard when you have your arse on the line.

Sigh.. people here slam libertarians for not caring and being selfish. I am a libertarian, and think that we as a group are the MOST caring about each other as we care about individuals. What happened to this gentleman is an absolute outrage, let alone no responses to the other videos I posted....

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by Shawnski

Jar-e. I truly appreciate you not only as a poster, but as an emergency responder. Huge props.

But what you posted above is simply justification for bad judgements. The arrest IS the issue.

There is one thing I want to know. Did all those cops show up to arrest him on tobacco charges (which would be absurd), or did they pull them out after they were called in for a fight (which he apparently broke up) and had to save "face"?

CYA is normally the standard when you have your arse on the line.

Sigh.. people here slam libertarians for not caring and being selfish. I am a libertarian, and think that we as a group are the MOST caring about each other as we care about individuals. What happened to this gentleman is an absolute outrage, let alone no responses to the other videos I posted....

I appreciate the props first off. Thank you.

To me, in my minutes of watching the video and skimming this thread...if this guy doesn't die, is this even a story? If there's no video and no death, is there even a blurb about a man being arrested for selling illegal cigarettes?

I'll agree that the arrest and effecting of it lead to the use of force being used which may (or may not) have had any hand in his death. However, at the end of the day, its an in-custody death and will be investigated thoroughly I'm sure. I just wonder if the guy doesn't die, is this even a line in the NY Post? I doubt it. That was my point.

I have no idea (mostly due to my lack of research into the matter) what the original complaint was. I would presume that it'll all come out in due time. I was simply trying to provide the context that despite police and law enforcement being the pointy end of the stick, a lot of times (not specific to this case) that they may not be the ones that require anger and vitriol being directed to...especially as they don't set or make the laws. I realize this is a tad crass in a thread that is focusing on police brutality which usually is based on the use of force.

Some may see it as semantics, but having legal ground to effect an arrest is a very important piece of the puzzle when these things are investigated especially when it comes to force being justified.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by jar_e

Also, worth noting, arresting doesn't always equate charges. I have no idea about this case other than the video, but someone can be arrested and not receive any charges. Same with the pot thing...technically you're arrested (you can't just leave during it) but instead of charges, you're given an alternative to deal with it. Discretion plays a part of it, but given the guys demeanor in that video, I can't imagine a lot of discretion being used.

Edit: and furthermore, the Police Act in alberta is followed incredibly closely. That's the "rules" for policing in Alberta and failing to follow them can result in loss of pay, rank, or a job. It's not something taken lightly.

I'm assuming your a Cop then? Otherwise how would you know if it's followed closely?
Just because there are repercussions does not mean people will bend the rules.
How many times in clear cut cases of abuse and all they get in the the majority of time is paid administration leave? I'm no fan of Unions because of this fact. At times they just act like tax payer mafia. If there always following the rules why are the unions always fighting the lapel cameras? Using the same line of reasoning as people defending this arrest, if their not doing anything wrong then there's nothing to worry about. They use the old old excuse of invasion of privacy of the officers.

I have no problem with majority of Officers but They remind me of Pit bulls. Question them and they may snap.

Its like what 4x4 said in the dog thread
The good ones are good and the bad ones are horrible.

Edit: I will admit I do not trust police fully. Its not that I have done any thing wrong. Its all the stories I hear from my buddy that works with Human rights BC. The police here are not models of what cops should be either. Consistent problems.

[Shawnski]

Originally Posted by jar_e

I appreciate the props first off. Thank you.

NP, it is well deserved. Thanks again.

Originally Posted by jar_e

To me, in my minutes of watching the video and skimming this thread...if this guy doesn't die, is this even a story? If there's no video and no death, is there even a blurb about a man being arrested for selling illegal cigarettes?

Sadly probably not. Case in point are the two videos I posted. Not a peep so far from the CP community, and googling them resulted in next to nothing for news. Yet both of those cases could very well have resulted in death.

No outrage. Just apparent ambivalence. Independent media is certainly picking it up, but not the mainstream. Have to ask yourself why that is.

Originally Posted by jar_e

I'll agree that the arrest and effecting of it lead to the use of force being used which may (or may not) have had any hand in his death. However, at the end of the day, its an in-custody death and will be investigated thoroughly I'm sure. I just wonder if the guy doesn't die, is this even a line in the NY Post? I doubt it. That was my point.

See above. Are we so in tuned to "if it bleeds it leads" that we are no longer outraged by situations like this?

Originally Posted by jar_e

I have no idea (mostly due to my lack of research into the matter) what the original complaint was. I would presume that it'll all come out in due time. I was simply trying to provide the context that despite police and law enforcement being the pointy end of the stick, a lot of times (not specific to this case) that they may not be the ones that require anger and vitriol being directed to...especially as they don't set or make the laws. I realize this is a tad crass in a thread that is focusing on police brutality which usually is based on the use of force.

I understand that. Police are the extension of the government, and it is the government that is invoking the force. However, each officer has the option on how to address each issue they face. Some make the right calls, some don't. This one didn't. Nothing makes sense as to why there were so many cops there for a simple tobacco violation, but that added to their "mob" mentality to take him down.

Originally Posted by jar_e

Some may see it as semantics, but having legal ground to effect an arrest is a very important piece of the puzzle when these things are investigated especially when it comes to force being justified.

"Papers please"

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by combustiblefuel

I'm assuming your a Cop then? Otherwise how would you know if it's followed closely?
Just because there are repercussions does not mean people will bend the rules.
How many times in clear cut cases of abuse and all they get in the the majority of time is paid administration leave? I'm no fan of Unions because of this fact. At times they just act like tax payer mafia. If there always following the rules why are the unions always fighting the lapel cameras? Using the same line of reasoning as people defending this arrest, if their not doing anything wrong then there's nothing to worry about. They use the old old excuse of invasion of privacy of the officers.

I have no problem with majority of Officers but They remind me of Pit bulls. Question them and they may snap.

Its like what 4x4 said in the dog thread
The good ones are good and the bad ones are horrible.

Edit: I will admit I do not trust police fully. Its not that I have done any thing wrong. Its all the stories I hear from my buddy that works with Human rights BC. The police here are not models of what cops should be either. Consistent problems.

I am a cop. I would say that's pretty well known on the forum (if anyone keeps track of these things). I'm sure even if you haven't seen a post blatantly stating it, I'm sure my past posts in these threads and other policing matters has made it incredibly evident.

You're misquoting me if you think I'm saying that rules don't get bent. Of course they do. I'm not naive. That being said, there's a lot of laws that give us a lot of power. What you may consider rules getting bent may be a cop using the law in a different way than you see it. There's a lot (a lot a lot) of ways you can be stopped by the police. There's hundreds (?) of bylaws within the city, thousands of provincial laws and regulations, and thousands of federal acts. Despite people saying its an abuse of power or arresting someone for illegal cigs, I'd say its strong police work as you never know what you're going to find while interacting. In regards to this case, I was just saying how the legal grounds of having someone under arrest greatly impacts the subsequent investigation into the members.

I can't speak for more than here in the city, but I can guarantee body worn cameras are happening and are being implemented in a wide range of areas. The statistics are overwhelming (80% less complaints, somewhere along the lines of 60% less use of force). I definitely haven't heard anything about the CPA fighting them, just seeking a strong policy in place to them.

Further more, there is no such thing as a "clear cut case of abuse" IMO. A 30 second clip from a cell phone never provides 100% context or even the full scene and circumstance of what's happening. Cops have lost their jobs for use of force and will continue to do so. The crux of this whole thread is the understanding of what is considered reasonable in use of force. It is never pretty to witness and most people find it crass and over the top. However, in a lot of these cases, the use of force is justified and officers are cleared.

If you're referring to CPS, I would love to hear why "police here are not models of what cops should be either". There are not "consistent problems" within CPS. CPS is arguably the most publicly accepted and supported police service in North America with approval ratings consistently north of 90% in the past decade. I can't speak for other departments but to say CPS has consistent problems or anything is anecdotal.

Originally Posted by Shawnski

NP, it is well deserved. Thanks again.



Sadly probably not. Case in point are the two videos I posted. Not a peep so far from the CP community, and googling them resulted in next to nothing for news. Yet both of those cases could very well have resulted in death.

No outrage. Just apparent ambivalence. Independent media is certainly picking it up, but not the mainstream. Have to ask yourself why that is.



See above. Are we so in tuned to "if it bleeds it leads" that we are no longer outraged by situations like this?



I understand that. Police are the extension of the government, and it is the government that is invoking the force. However, each officer has the option on how to address each issue they face. Some make the right calls, some don't. This one didn't. Nothing makes sense as to why there were so many cops there for a simple tobacco violation, but that added to their "mob" mentality to take him down.



"Papers please"

If you're trying to say there's some conspiring between mainstream media and police, I'd say that's a little too tin-foil hatted IMO. The media has a wide range of input and mainstream media regularly picks up (with a negative spin) stories of police abuse, mistrust, etc. Look at media within Vancouver/BC/Toronto/Ontario. They're policing is consistently questioned and critiqued. Why is that different here? I don't know.

I think being "outraged" is on a sliding scale. It's not an on/off thing IMO. You can be outraged at a questionable arrest just as much as an arrest where someone dies by the hand of a cop. It's a lot more personal and I don't think the amount of playtime it gets on the news should effect people on how outraged they are on it.

I agree each cop has their own choice of addressing issues how they please. There's edits in the video. I have no idea what happens in those spans and I'd argue it's ill advised for anyone to presume what happened in those moments. There's also an edit right before the arrest. There was probably so many cops there cause the guy clearly out weighed and was taller then both of them. Neither of them were in uniform and all their back up was. Arresting someone the same size as you, even when its two on one, can be damn near impossible. I wouldn't say it's "mob" mentality. But, there's so many unanswered questions in that video and with this story that I'd say its negligent to start presuming.

[Raekwon]

Originally Posted by jar_e

I am a cop. I would say that's pretty well known on the forum (if anyone keeps track of these things). I'm sure even if you haven't seen a post blatantly stating it, I'm sure my past posts in these threads and other policing matters has made it incredibly evident.

You're misquoting me if you think I'm saying that rules don't get bent. Of course they do. I'm not naive. That being said, there's a lot of laws that give us a lot of power. What you may consider rules getting bent may be a cop using the law in a different way than you see it. There's a lot (a lot a lot) of ways you can be stopped by the police. There's hundreds (?) of bylaws within the city, thousands of provincial laws and regulations, and thousands of federal acts. Despite people saying its an abuse of power or arresting someone for illegal cigs, I'd say its strong police work as you never know what you're going to find while interacting. In regards to this case, I was just saying how the legal grounds of having someone under arrest greatly impacts the subsequent investigation into the members.

I can't speak for more than here in the city, but I can guarantee body worn cameras are happening and are being implemented in a wide range of areas. The statistics are overwhelming (80% less complaints, somewhere along the lines of 60% less use of force). I definitely haven't heard anything about the CPA fighting them, just seeking a strong policy in place to them.

Further more, there is no such thing as a "clear cut case of abuse" IMO. A 30 second clip from a cell phone never provides 100% context or even the full scene and circumstance of what's happening. Cops have lost their jobs for use of force and will continue to do so. The crux of this whole thread is the understanding of what is considered reasonable in use of force. It is never pretty to witness and most people find it crass and over the top. However, in a lot of these cases, the use of force is justified and officers are cleared.

If you're referring to CPS, I would love to hear why "police here are not models of what cops should be either". There are not "consistent problems" within CPS. CPS is arguably the most publicly accepted and supported police service in North America with approval ratings consistently north of 90% in the past decade. I can't speak for other departments but to say CPS has consistent problems or anything is anecdotal.



If you're trying to say there's some conspiring between mainstream media and police, I'd say that's a little too tin-foil hatted IMO. The media has a wide range of input and mainstream media regularly picks up (with a negative spin) stories of police abuse, mistrust, etc. Look at media within Vancouver/BC/Toronto/Ontario. They're policing is consistently questioned and critiqued. Why is that different here? I don't know.

I think being "outraged" is on a sliding scale. It's not an on/off thing IMO. You can be outraged at a questionable arrest just as much as an arrest where someone dies by the hand of a cop. It's a lot more personal and I don't think the amount of playtime it gets on the news should effect people on how outraged they are on it.

I agree each cop has their own choice of addressing issues how they please. There's edits in the video. I have no idea what happens in those spans and I'd argue it's ill advised for anyone to presume what happened in those moments. There's also an edit right before the arrest. There was probably so many cops there cause the guy clearly out weighed and was taller then both of them. Neither of them were in uniform and all their back up was. Arresting someone the same size as you, even when its two on one, can be damn near impossible. I wouldn't say it's "mob" mentality. But, there's so many unanswered questions in that video and with this story that I'd say its negligent to start presuming.

[jar_e]

Originally Posted by Raekwon

Heaven forbid in a thread someone provides some actual context and reasoning instead of a bunch of wild speculation and armchair quaterbacking.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by jar_e

I am a cop. I would say that's pretty well known on the forum (if anyone keeps track of these things). I'm sure even if you haven't seen a post blatantly stating it, I'm sure my past posts in these threads and other policing matters has made it incredibly evident.

You're misquoting me if you think I'm saying that rules don't get bent. Of course they do. I'm not naive. That being said, there's a lot of laws that give us a lot of power. What you may consider rules getting bent may be a cop using the law in a different way than you see it. There's a lot (a lot a lot) of ways you can be stopped by the police. There's hundreds (?) of bylaws within the city, thousands of provincial laws and regulations, and thousands of federal acts. Despite people saying its an abuse of power or arresting someone for illegal cigs, I'd say its strong police work as you never know what you're going to find while interacting. In regards to this case, I was just saying how the legal grounds of having someone under arrest greatly impacts the subsequent investigation into the members.

I can't speak for more than here in the city, but I can guarantee body worn cameras are happening and are being implemented in a wide range of areas. The statistics are overwhelming (80% less complaints, somewhere along the lines of 60% less use of force). I definitely haven't heard anything about the CPA fighting them, just seeking a strong policy in place to them.



Further more, there is no such thing as a "clear cut case of abuse" IMO. A 30 second clip from a cell phone never provides 100% context or even the full scene and circumstance of what's happening. Cops have lost their jobs for use of force and will continue to do so. The crux of this whole thread is the understanding of what is considered reasonable in use of force. It is never pretty to witness and most people find it crass and over the top. However, in a lot of these cases, the use of force is justified and officers are cleared.

If you're referring to CPS, I would love to hear why "police here are not models of what cops should be either". There are not "consistent problems" within CPS. CPS is arguably the most publicly accepted and supported police service in North America with approval ratings consistently north of 90% in the past decade. I can't speak for other departments but to say CPS has consistent problems or anything is anecdotal.



If you're trying to say there's some conspiring between mainstream media and police, I'd say that's a little too tin-foil hatted IMO. The media has a wide range of input and mainstream media regularly picks up (with a negative spin) stories of police abuse, mistrust, etc. Look at media within Vancouver/BC/Toronto/Ontario. They're policing is consistently questioned and critiqued. Why is that different here? I don't know.

I think being "outraged" is on a sliding scale. It's not an on/off thing IMO. You can be outraged at a questionable arrest just as much as an arrest where someone dies by the hand of a cop. It's a lot more personal and I don't think the amount of playtime it gets on the news should effect people on how outraged they are on it.

I agree each cop has their own choice of addressing issues how they please. There's edits in the video. I have no idea what happens in those spans and I'd argue it's ill advised for anyone to presume what happened in those moments. There's also an edit right before the arrest. There was probably so many cops there cause the guy clearly out weighed and was taller then both of them. Neither of them were in uniform and all their back up was. Arresting someone the same size as you, even when its two on one, can be damn near impossible. I wouldn't say it's "mob" mentality. But, there's so many unanswered questions in that video and with this story that I'd say its negligent to start presuming.

No I didn't know you were. I saw First responder that could have been fire, Ems or police.
I am not refering to this case as clear cut. This one has no context to it. I'm talking about cases all across North America. I follow a lot cases to do happen. The Ones of the most disturbing ones are usually from New Mexico.

I am not taking about Calgary Police. I would agree they do a good job. I am Talking about Victoria and Vancouver police. This is mostly because of Cheif Jamie Graham. He has an Old school mentality. He allows the police to bully citizens. You best not let the Cops here catch you filming them they will go after you. I have seen it . He has been convicted of some things. He left his fire arm under the seat of an unlocked cop car. Leaking to the public that the had undercover officers that have penetrated the Anti -olympic protesters WHILE they were still protesting to only name a few. While he was still police Cheif of Vancouver before he resigned he left paper targert riddled full of bullets on the desk of a city manager.This is the Cheif doing this of all people. You can imagine what his foot soldiers are aloud to do.

There are some places using more cameras but there are still a lot of Unions that do appose them.

I have have had encounters with when I First bought my Mercedes when I was 20 that was frickin fishing expedition for them. Illegally searching with no probable cause. Just assumed I was some drug dealing punk.

[photon]

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nation...801-story.html

The death of a 43-year-old New York City man who was placed in a chokehold by police officers has been ruled a homicide, according to the New York City medical examiner's office.

Eric Garner, whose death became a national controversy after video surfaced of an officer placing him in what appeared to be a chokehold on July 17, was killed by "compression of neck (choke hold), compression of chest and prone positioning during physical restraint by police," according to Julie Bolcer, director of public affairs for the medical examiner's office.

Bolcer said Garner's asthma, obesity and cardiovascular disease were contributing factors, but the medical examiner's office has ruled the death a homicide.

[SHOGUN]

I don't know how people can defend the cop's action. Justice will be served.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by SHOGUN

I don't know how people can defend the cop's action. Justice will be served.

Other cops.

[Arya Stark]

I can maybe see manslaughter but definitely not murder.

[combustiblefuel]

Originally Posted by Arya Stark

I can maybe see manslaughter but definitely not murder.

Once he applied an Illegal way to subdue a person as is highlighted within the NYPD procedures he threw himself under the Bus. He clearly knew (at least I would hope so) that it is not tolerated.manslaughter charges are total accidents generally. Throwing a choke hold when you know it can kill a person is complete neglect . Considering when a man is yelling for mercy, This man was screaming he cannot breathe . This officer made the choice to continue to strangle this civilian . The officer did not have to let go completely but he could have loosened his hold as several other officers were as well subduing him. This officer acted with malice and no contempt to preserve life. He had opportunities to correct the situation . He choose unwisely.In my eyes this is 2nd degree murder. When you continue to use force upon a non violent offender with the knowledge that his airway is constricted and you choose to keep choosing to slowly kill him give me a damn break.

Originally Posted by photon

http://www.latimes.com/nation/nation...801-story.html

Just a FYI, all deaths (unless natural or undetermined) are ruled a homicide or murder by the medical examiner.

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by Bent Wookie

Just a FYI, all deaths (unless natural or undetermined) are ruled a homicide or murder by the medical examiner.

Whhhhhhaaat?