Calgary Cops caught using excessive force?

[nik-]

I also think the switch to the black cars was silly and an attempt to make them look more aggressive. The old color scheme was fine.

[btimbit]

From the CPS website

Based on current pricing for the vehicles, and the reduced cost of the proposed decaling, the move could save the Service in excess of $1 million

They aren't the only ones either. Vancouver, Victoria, Abbotsford, Edmonton, OPP and others I'm forgetting (London?) Have all made the switch

[LanceUppercut]

Originally Posted by btimbit

From the CPS website



They aren't the only ones either. Vancouver, Victoria, Abbotsford, Edmonton, OPP and others I'm forgetting (London?) Have all made the switch

Hey, stop bringing facts into this. They changed the cars to black and white to scare the common folk into obeying!

[btimbit]

Noticed someone mentioned it was a militarized look. I know what they meant by the comment,but still, for comparison, here's a Canadian Military Police car.

Spoiler!

[doctajones428]

If he didn't swat the cops hand away when he tried grabbing his arm there wouldn't of been a problem. Not to mention he was continuously squirming and flailing his arms and legs when they were trying to keep him still

If you don't resist they don't need to use force and he was clearly resisting. It took three guys 4 seconds just to contain his left arm for crying out loud

[calgarywinning]

Originally Posted by doctajones428

If he didn't swat the cops hand away when he tried grabbing his arm there wouldn't of been a problem. Not to mention he was continuously squirming and flailing his arms and legs when they were trying to keep him still

If you don't resist they don't need to use force and he was clearly resisting. It took three guys 4 seconds just to contain his left arm for crying out loud

Hope you or someone in your family gets the treatment.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by doctajones428

If he didn't swat the cops hand away when he tried grabbing his arm there wouldn't of been a problem. Not to mention he was continuously squirming and flailing his arms and legs when they were trying to keep him still

If you don't resist they don't need to use force and he was clearly resisting. It took three guys 4 seconds just to contain his left arm for crying out loud

If someone is bending your neck by kneeling on it and punching you in the head, you can bet you will squirm. Not too many people would have the willpower not to. It would be like blaming someone for struggling while being waterboarded.

Squirming does not equal resisting.

[CroFlames]

If you resist arrest and become aggressive, cops assume you can become dangerous and they neutralize you with force. That is their training.

They have to make a split second decision in cases like these, and they did what they were trained to do. Should the training be different? That is up for debate.

I think a good rule of thumb is to comply with cops and let a judge decide who is at fault later on.

[Frank MetaMusil]

The body worn cameras can't come soon enough.

I guess we'll see if another one of these officers gets suspended with pay.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Zulu29

Really? Based on what? I've travelled Europe extensively and they do not mess around. Do you see para-military police armed with machine guns in airports, subways and tourist attractions in Canada? Well they are a regular sight in many European countries.

Those para-military police are posted in international travel hubs and other terrorist targets. Things may have changed, but I don't recall regular beat cops in Europe carrying machine guns.

I'd guess the average cop in Canada and the U.S. is 20 pounds heavier than the average cop in the UK, Netherlands, or Germany. They also carry themselves in a much more intimidating way, in their walk and the way they approach people. Is there something about the job in North American that requires police to be massive and project physical intimidation? Or does the job here just attract those sorts of people?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

If someone is bending your neck by kneeling on it and punching you in the head, you can bet you will squirm. Not too many people would have the willpower not to. It would be like blaming someone for struggling while being waterboarded.

Squirming does not equal resisting.

Yeah, it's one thing to say the best thing to do when police apprehend you is to go limp and let them do whatever they want. It's another to expect all people to have the presence of mind and self-discipline to passively let yourself be hurled to the ground and pinned under a 200 lb cop's knee.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

If you resist arrest and become aggressive, cops assume you can become dangerous and they neutralize you with force. That is their training.

They have to make a split second decision in cases like these, and they did what they were trained to do. Should the training be different? That is up for debate.

I think a good rule of thumb is to comply with cops and let a judge decide who is at fault later on.

So you think cops are either stupid or brainwashed?

Honestly it is the only explanation for saying they are so programmed by their training that it removes all common sense and humanity from their brains.

They are militant robots who attack people who don't comply with their demands and all ability to make judgement calls have been completely wiped from their minds.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

That ^ was a strange post. If X is an aspect of police training - e.g. it's something they're trained to do - I'm confident that there's at least a reason they're being trained to do that. It's somehow evolved out of best practices. Are you suggesting that they should ignore their training?

I am interested in whether the police training manual calls for blows to the back of the head of a suspect who is on the ground but not fully compliant (e.g. is trying to free himself), and if so, why that method is called for.

[peter12]

I've taken two self-defense classes through CPS over the last 5 years. Obviously, they had different protocols than the restraint and subdue procedures used here, but the first thing they taught us was that most situations can and should be solved verbally. So, obviously the officers didn't attend that part of class.

[PepsiFree]

I can see the argument for not resisting if they are turning you around to cuff you.

But they didn't do that.

The cop closed a gap, grabbed the guy, put him on the ground, and all three got on top of him. I guarantee that unless you knock your head on the ground and get dazed, every single person here would squirm/struggle in that scenario. It's the way the body and brain reacts. Fight or flight.

I too am curious about their training. Taking him down like that seems odd (but we have no context, so that is hard to judge) but the excessive punches after he's covering his face remain unexplained.

[peter12]

If these guys hadn't been wearing blue, it would have looked a regular old assault.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

The cop closed a gap, grabbed the guy, put him on the ground, and all three got on top of him. I guarantee that unless you knock your head on the ground and get dazed, every single person here would squirm/struggle in that scenario. It's the way the body and brain reacts. Fight or flight.

Yep, but even in light of this, I can see a justification for subduing him in spite of this understandable reaction (I'm far less sure that subduing him with hammer blows to the skull is acceptable). There are higher stakes than most people are appreciating.

This is a physical altercation - whether or not it should have been escalated to that is an open question, but you can't argue the fact it's a physical altercation with a suspect - and there are three guns involved. You have to take seriously the possibility that he has a knife on him. You have to take even more seriously even the possibility that the guy is going to go for your gun - which would obviously be a total disaster, especially given the presence of civilians.

He needs to be completely subdued. It's more the methodology that's in question (and the necessity of escalating to that point but like you say there's no way to know on that front).

[peter12]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Yep, but even in light of this, I can see a justification for subduing him in spite of this understandable reaction (I'm not sure if subduing him with hammer blows to the skull is acceptable). There are higher stakes than most people are appreciating.

This is a physical altercation - whether or not it should have been escalated to that is an open question, but you can't argue the fact it's a physical altercation with a suspect - and there are three guns involved. You have to take seriously the possibility that he has a knife on him. You have to take even more seriously even the possibility that the guy is going to go for your gun - which would obviously be a total disaster, especially given the presence of civilians. He needs to be completely subdued.

Of course, the aggressive actions of the police precipitated all of those potential risks.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Maybe so; the video sure makes it look that way. Wouldn't be too surprised if he just got lippy with them and the officer decided to teach him a lesson. But it's hard to know for sure what exactly happened that led them to go hands-on. Once that situation has materialized, though, the risk is there and has to be dealt with whether the initial takedown was justifiable or not.

[Cecil Terwilliger]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

That ^ was a strange post. If X is an aspect of police training - e.g. it's something they're trained to do - I'm confident that there's at least a reason they're being trained to do that. It's somehow evolved out of best practices. Are you suggesting that they should ignore their training?

I am interested in whether the police training manual calls for blows to the back of the head of a suspect who is on the ground but not fully compliant (e.g. is trying to free himself), and if so, why that method is called for.

Does it really need to be explained that their training needs context?

Are you also suggesting their training teaches them to unnecessarily escalate situations by violently apprehending traffic violators?