That doesn't mean much coming from a poster who is considered racist by 95 percent of CP.
LOL
95% of CP doesn't have an opinion of me at all or who say "who" if asked.
But nice job going after me personally instead of defending you ridiculous post that a few posts that are different from your opinion means that they are pyschopaths.
95% of CP doesn't have an opinion of me at all or who say "who" if asked.
But nice job going after me personally instead of defending you ridiculous post that a few posts that are different from your opinion means that they are pyschopaths.
I can't take anything you say seriously, Quincey Egg. There's no sense wasting brain cells debating with a caricature from the 1950s deep south.
The Following User Says Thank You to icecube For This Useful Post:
Location: Close enough to make a beer run during a TV timeout
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SHOGUN
Anyone who supports what the officer did should not have children.
Perhaps anybody who speaks in absolutes should not have children.
One of the shows my son and I watch is COPS. It's great for getting him to ask me questions about difficult subjects like drugs, etc. The other lesson he has received by us watching it together is to understand that it usually works out better for you if you obey the lawful commands of a police officer.
Don't get me wrong, I agree that the officer over reacted to the situation. I also like the previous suggestion by afc wimbledon that he could have just dragged the desk into the hallway. However the girl could have also prevented the whole situation from happening by simply following the instructions of a person in authority.
I have also seen another video from a different angle that shows the girl striking the officer before he grabbed her. Once again, the amount of force used by the officer was still not a proportional response. However in a split second the officer had to make a choice. I think he should have been reprimanded, and I still think that will be the end result. As I said earlier, I think the best course of action was the firing of the officer, and then after appeal he should be given his job back with conditions, a reprimand, and further training.
However in my world things are not black and white. I'd put this situation 60% on the girl, and 40% on the officer.
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ken0042 For This Useful Post:
I have also seen another video from a different angle that shows the girl striking the officer before he grabbed her. Once again, the amount of force used by the officer was still not a proportional response. However in a split second the officer had to make a choice. I think he should have been reprimanded, and I still think that will be the end result. As I said earlier, I think the best course of action was the firing of the officer, and then after appeal he should be given his job back with conditions, a reprimand, and further training.
.
If it's the same video that I saw, it was kind of more like a "don't touch me" hit and not a strike that was meant to hurt. Maybe I saw something else though. It was disrespectful, but not something that would make him fear for his safety.
I don't know if it is fair to say the cop is racist. He apparently is in a long term relationship with an African American woman, and his nickname was already "Officer Slam", so it just sounds like it's something he does to people. Regardless of his motive, like you said, the force used was definitely not proportional.
I try to put myself in the girl's position though. Being a 16 year old girl being asked to go somewhere with an adult man would be scary. Being black and knowing off all the situations where black people end up dead with police, that would make it scary too. She was probably putting on a tough front, but I don't doubt for a second that she was terrified.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
Last edited by FlamesAddiction; 10-30-2015 at 09:11 AM.
Location: Close enough to make a beer run during a TV timeout
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction
If it's the same video that I saw, it was kind of more like a "don't touch me" hit and not a strike that was meant to hurt. Maybe I saw something else though. It was disrespectful, but not something that would make him fear for his safety.
Yeah, that about sums it up regarding the hit. That's why I said I didn't think the force used by the officer was proportional. However it did appear the situation had the potential to escalate quickly from that point, and the officer's actions put a stop to it immediately. However I will certainly agree that his actions were excessive.
Maybe it's a fortunate thing about being in Canada, but I've always taught my son that the police our are friends. If the girl feared the officer, maybe she should have listened to either the teacher or the VP. That's why I put a little more blame on her. She brought the situation up to that level. However that's also why I don't find the officer innocent; as trained adults should be able to deal with the situation better.
However in my world things are not black and white. I'd put this situation 60% on the girl, and 40% on the officer
You're 100% wrong. Excessive force isn't what they teach you in cop school and what Officer Slam did goes against SC Law Enforcement policy according to the sheriff. So there's that. The guy who runs the show thinks you're wrong.
Then there is the law itself. Let's say you get a speeding ticket for 20 km's over, you toss it back at the cop and drive away doing 20 over. Then the same cops pulls you over again, his only recourse is to write you another ticket, not haul you out of the car and break your arm because you're disobeying his own personal law. Disturbing schools is a summary offense. You get a summons and in most states the school then deals with your non violent behavior. The law that gave Officer Slam the authority to arrest has been changed in all but seven states to reflect its true purpose....protecting kids from strangers. I suppose you could say a 14% minority of states think this is a good law. But we all know criminalizing normal child behavior is totally freaking stupid.
People who think this 16 year old is responsible for the cop's actions seriously need to smarten up. It is a totally black and white issue. Under these circumstances no cop anywhere is allowed to slam a kid around like that. And in the vast majority of jurisdictions, cops have no authority in this situation at all. This is not an episode of Cops.
Also, guys with anger issues who bench press 600 lbs are on steroids. He needs to be tested.
I try to put myself in the girl's position though. Being a 16 year old girl being asked to go somewhere with an adult man would be scary. Being black and knowing off all the situations where black people end up dead with police, that would make it scary too. She was probably putting on a tough front, but I don't doubt for a second that she was terrified.
Location: Close enough to make a beer run during a TV timeout
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!
Then there is the law itself. Let's say you get a speeding ticket for 20 km's over, you toss it back at the cop and drive away doing 20 over. Then the same cops pulls you over again, his only recourse is to write you another ticket, not haul you out of the car and break your arm because you're disobeying his own personal law.
I would say that a better analogy is that a cop tries to pull you over for doing 20 over the limit. However instead of pulling over you lead the cop on a 20 minute "low speed" chase throughout the city; making sure you stop at every stop sign, red light, and not going over the limit again. At that point in addition to speeding, you have also committed the offense of eluding. The latter offense being the more serious of the two.
I would say that a better analogy is that a cop tries to pull you over for doing 20 over the limit. However instead of pulling over you lead the cop on a 20 minute "low speed" chase throughout the city; making sure you stop at every stop sign, red light, and not going over the limit again. At that point in addition to speeding, you have also committed the offense of eluding. The latter offense being the more serious of the two.
Good point....if sitting in your desk without being violent or threatening to anyone is akin to leading cops on a high speed chase where everyone around you is in imminent danger.
I would say that a better analogy is that a cop tries to pull you over for doing 20 over the limit. However instead of pulling over you lead the cop on a 20 minute "low speed" chase throughout the city; making sure you stop at every stop sign, red light, and not going over the limit again. At that point in addition to speeding, you have also committed the offense of eluding. The latter offense being the more serious of the two.
__________________
Captain James P. DeCOSTE, CD, 18 Sep 1993
Corporal Jean-Marc H. BECHARD, 6 Aug 1993
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to undercoverbrother For This Useful Post:
Location: Close enough to make a beer run during a TV timeout
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by OMG!WTF!
Good point....if sitting in your desk without being violent or threatening to anyone is akin to leading cops on a high speed chase where everyone around you is in imminent danger.
That is the opposite of what I said. I clearly said "low speed", and went on to define what what I meant.
So yes, the exact opposite of what I said is clearly wrong.
Good point....if sitting in your desk without being violent or threatening to anyone is akin to leading cops on a high speed chase where everyone around you is in imminent danger.
Didn't he use the word low speed chase right in his post?
The Following User Says Thank You to adc For This Useful Post:
That is the opposite of what I said. I clearly said "low speed", and went on to define what what I meant.
So yes, the exact opposite of what I said is clearly wrong.
What you said is clearly wrong too. Should AC and OJ have had their arms broken and lives risked for what they did? By all accounts, this kid had a full 30 seconds to comply. I would expect guys in prison to ask at least twice before ramming your head in the concrete. Watch the video again. You can't watch it and tell me that's ok.
Actually the low speed chase is even better as an example. What Officer Slam did was akin to a cop ramming a car off the road to end a low risk low speed chase. Obviously that's not something you'd ever see on Cops because it's clearly against protocol. So, well made example.
It's concerning that people place blame on the girl. She was not posing an imminent threat to anyone and thus legally and morally there was no right to attack her like he did, end of story.
There's no argument you can make that will contradict that. The false equivalencies only serve to show the fundamental lack of basic understanding many of you have, legal authority is supposed to respond with force proportional to the risk the offender faces to the authority and the public. Since she posed none there was no justification, legally, for him to respond as he did. A police chase where civilians are in danger is 100% the polar opposite of someone sitting silently.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to AcGold For This Useful Post:
I'm sure the song a lot of you would change if it was a white girl in a knee high skirt getting superplexed by a cop while sitting at her desk silently.
I'm sure the song a lot of you would change if it was a white girl in a knee high skirt getting superplexed by a cop while sitting at her desk silently.
