While we’re on it:
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Big_Boss wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
Big_Boss wrote:
dmaddox wrote:
Vegita wrote:
ok nevermind, just answer this. Do you think it shoul be against the law to get out of your vehicle during a traffic stop when the police have not given you a command to do so?
V
Why would you want to get out of your car?
EXACTLY? What do you gain by getting out of your car without asked to do so? You can have a conversation just fine with your ass in your driver’s seat.
Hell,most people that don’t trust law enforcement usually decide to stay IN their car…not get out.
Incidentally or not(sarcasm) people guilty of something usually get OUT of their cars when stopped…or are just mentally handicapped(or just stupid).
The idea of liberty means you don’t have to answer that question.
edit:
“They who would trade liberty for security soon have none and deserve neither.”
They guy had done nothing wrong, he is free to f***ing get out of his car when he damn well pleases.
Then he’s free to take responsibility for his own actions afterward. The possibility of that cop doing anything wrong would have been next to nothing if not for the driver’s actions.
I don’t understand why some people are so caught up in their “liberties” and rights when they can’t even accept personal responsibility for their own actions.
Okay, you are free to exercise the right of free speech. I’ll shoot you if you do though. You seem to have no idea what rights are. You should never have your rights violated for using your rights. By your logic, the Jews were never oppressed by the Nazis. They can exercise their rights, they just have to deal with the consequences.[/quote]
Yeah,that’s EXACTLY what I’m getting at. Hell…they should have just shot his car with a rocket launcher for having a crooked license plate.
I’m not saying that he has no rights…but what was unreasonable about getting back in his car? Was his rights violated for being asked to do so? In fact,when exactly did the driver’s rights get violated??
I understand people that really “flex” their rights…but most do so as if they’re antagonizing law enforcement…and disregarding their rights and duties. I don’t know your experience with cops,but through mine…no cop is going to take that situation lightly…it’s not their place to decide if they’re innocent or guilty…their job is to arrest,seize,search through probable cause. Which the driver gave probable cause by his OWN aggressive behavior.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
Big_Boss wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
Big_Boss wrote:
dmaddox wrote:
Vegita wrote:
ok nevermind, just answer this. Do you think it shoul be against the law to get out of your vehicle during a traffic stop when the police have not given you a command to do so?
V
Why would you want to get out of your car?
EXACTLY? What do you gain by getting out of your car without asked to do so? You can have a conversation just fine with your ass in your driver’s seat.
Hell,most people that don’t trust law enforcement usually decide to stay IN their car…not get out.
Incidentally or not(sarcasm) people guilty of something usually get OUT of their cars when stopped…or are just mentally handicapped(or just stupid).
The idea of liberty means you don’t have to answer that question.
edit:
“They who would trade liberty for security soon have none and deserve neither.”
They guy had done nothing wrong, he is free to f***ing get out of his car when he damn well pleases.
Then he’s free to take responsibility for his own actions afterward. The possibility of that cop doing anything wrong would have been next to nothing if not for the driver’s actions.
I don’t understand why some people are so caught up in their “liberties” and rights when they can’t even accept personal responsibility for their own actions.
Okay, you are free to exercise the right of free speech. I’ll shoot you if you do though. You seem to have no idea what rights are. You should never have your rights violated for using your rights. By your logic, the Jews were never oppressed by the Nazis. They can exercise their rights, they just have to deal with the consequences.
Yeah,that’s EXACTLY what I’m getting at. Hell…they should have just shot his car with a rocket launcher for having a crooked license plate.
I’m not saying that he has no rights…but what was unreasonable about getting back in his car? Was his rights violated for being asked to do so? In fact,when exactly did the driver’s rights get violated??
I understand people that really “flex” their rights…but most do so as if they’re antagonizing law enforcement…and disregarding their rights and duties. I don’t know your experience with cops,but through mine…no cop is going to take that situation lightly…it’s not their place to decide if they’re innocent or guilty…their job is to arrest,seize,search through probable cause. Which the driver gave probable cause by his OWN aggressive behavior. [/quote]
What was unreasonable for the cop to engage in positive communication rather than engage in the behavior he did when the civilian asked him to? Was it illegal for him to get out of his car in the first place? When exactly did the cop have the authority to bark commands after the man saw the officer had his weapon drawn and exhibited he posed no threat to the officer?
I watched that video a few times, and I agree that guy didn’t make the best decision when he got out of his car, but it wasn’t illegal. Also, the man stood near his car once he got out and made not sudden movements that would indicate him to be a threat or aggressive. A lot of you are saying just getting out of the car was an act of aggression and I disagree. I’ll give you that his hands in his pockets initially MIGHT be seen as threatening, but once they were exposed that argument is moot.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
Big_Boss wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
Big_Boss wrote:
dmaddox wrote:
Vegita wrote:
ok nevermind, just answer this. Do you think it shoul be against the law to get out of your vehicle during a traffic stop when the police have not given you a command to do so?
V
Why would you want to get out of your car?
EXACTLY? What do you gain by getting out of your car without asked to do so? You can have a conversation just fine with your ass in your driver’s seat.
Hell,most people that don’t trust law enforcement usually decide to stay IN their car…not get out.
Incidentally or not(sarcasm) people guilty of something usually get OUT of their cars when stopped…or are just mentally handicapped(or just stupid).
The idea of liberty means you don’t have to answer that question.
edit:
“They who would trade liberty for security soon have none and deserve neither.”
They guy had done nothing wrong, he is free to f***ing get out of his car when he damn well pleases.
Then he’s free to take responsibility for his own actions afterward. The possibility of that cop doing anything wrong would have been next to nothing if not for the driver’s actions.
I don’t understand why some people are so caught up in their “liberties” and rights when they can’t even accept personal responsibility for their own actions.
Okay, you are free to exercise the right of free speech. I’ll shoot you if you do though. You seem to have no idea what rights are. You should never have your rights violated for using your rights. By your logic, the Jews were never oppressed by the Nazis. They can exercise their rights, they just have to deal with the consequences.
Yeah,that’s EXACTLY what I’m getting at. Hell…they should have just shot his car with a rocket launcher for having a crooked license plate.
[/quote]
Apparently getting tazed does hurt pretty bad though. it’s a pretty serious deal to me. You may not think it is, I do.
When he was tazed for violating no laws. Not being allowed to get out of your own car after doing nothing wrong is a violation of rights. presuming guilt is a violation of rights.
[quote]
I understand people that really “flex” their rights…but most do so as if they’re antagonizing law enforcement…and disregarding their rights and duties. I don’t know your experience with cops,but through mine…no cop is going to take that situation lightly…it’s not their place to decide if they’re innocent or guilty…their job is to arrest,seize,search through probable cause. Which the driver gave probable cause by his OWN aggressive behavior. [/quote]
does law enforcement have the right to not be antagonized? But wow, the guy got out of his car, he might as well of swung at the officer. talk about antagonizing.
the cop chose to be a cop. he chose to do a risky job. that may garner respect, but it does not give him leeway with rights. If he doesn’t like dealing with people doing as they wish within the law, don’t be a cop.
getting out of a car is probably cause to arrest? you gotten out of many cars?
My experience is that there are many cops that are pieces of shit. There are many who get off on their own power trips. That love to give orders simply because they can and believe they are entitled because of a badge. They guy should have as many rights in the situation as the officer, until he has done something wrong. Period.
cops are nothing more than an individual person. this blind obedience makes me sick.
Anyone has as much right to protect themselves from cops as the other way around.
Thought this was appropriate:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,571514,00.html?test=latestnews
The police officer owes a duty of care to the motorist, which would be not to inflict physical harm on him unless the duty he owes to his OWN safety is severly questioned (merely tasering someone for a quick conveinent arrest for example, is not covered.)
So that is the exclusion clase he would argue covers him from negligently inducing this damage, however he can also argue that the motorist contributed to his own negligence by partaking in activities that a reasonable person would know are not safe.
I am applying the australian legal system to it, im not sure what you guys do over there…
It would be an interesting battle, but my guess if the police offer would win even the civil case, while the motorist would definately lose the criminal case and there would be lengethy political discussion about tasers and nothing would change.
The second video of the pastor at the border patrol was really fucked up. He made a reasonable request and the cop said, “You have to obey me.” Actually, the guy does not UNLESS there is reason for the cop to search/apprehend him.
A cop loses tactical advantage sometimes by letting the civilian know the infraction before the arrest/search, so that is why the cop got all pissy; he didn’t want to bend to the civilian’s demands and the civilian was pretty sure he had done nothing illegal OR given the cop probable cause (hence his request to bring the K9 out a second time).
As a LEO, when giving a lawful order such as turn around, put your hands on your head etc… You ask them, tell them, and if those don’t work you make them. You don’t sit around arguing with the guy forever. He had many force options, and it appears he was scared of using them to obtain control of the suspect.
This guy got out of his car and advanced towards the officer, even after the officer had a weapon drawn. That would lead me to believe this guy is either on something, or very willing to challenge me, which he was clearly doing. Of course the officer couldn’t just shoot him, so he should have been tased or pepper sprayed less then 1 minute in that video.
He’s lucky he didn’t meet this guy.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Big_Boss wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
Big_Boss wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
Big_Boss wrote:
dmaddox wrote:
Vegita wrote:
ok nevermind, just answer this. Do you think it shoul be against the law to get out of your vehicle during a traffic stop when the police have not given you a command to do so?
V
Why would you want to get out of your car?
EXACTLY? What do you gain by getting out of your car without asked to do so? You can have a conversation just fine with your ass in your driver’s seat.
Hell,most people that don’t trust law enforcement usually decide to stay IN their car…not get out.
Incidentally or not(sarcasm) people guilty of something usually get OUT of their cars when stopped…or are just mentally handicapped(or just stupid).
The idea of liberty means you don’t have to answer that question.
edit:
“They who would trade liberty for security soon have none and deserve neither.”
They guy had done nothing wrong, he is free to f***ing get out of his car when he damn well pleases.
Then he’s free to take responsibility for his own actions afterward. The possibility of that cop doing anything wrong would have been next to nothing if not for the driver’s actions.
I don’t understand why some people are so caught up in their “liberties” and rights when they can’t even accept personal responsibility for their own actions.
Okay, you are free to exercise the right of free speech. I’ll shoot you if you do though. You seem to have no idea what rights are. You should never have your rights violated for using your rights. By your logic, the Jews were never oppressed by the Nazis. They can exercise their rights, they just have to deal with the consequences.
Yeah,that’s EXACTLY what I’m getting at. Hell…they should have just shot his car with a rocket launcher for having a crooked license plate.
Apparently getting tazed does hurt pretty bad though. it’s a pretty serious deal to me. You may not think it is, I do.
I’m not saying that he has no rights…but what was unreasonable about getting back in his car? Was his rights violated for being asked to do so? In fact,when exactly did the driver’s rights get violated??
When he was tazed for violating no laws. Not being allowed to get out of your own car after doing nothing wrong is a violation of rights. presuming guilt is a violation of rights.
I understand people that really “flex” their rights…but most do so as if they’re antagonizing law enforcement…and disregarding their rights and duties. I don’t know your experience with cops,but through mine…no cop is going to take that situation lightly…it’s not their place to decide if they’re innocent or guilty…their job is to arrest,seize,search through probable cause. Which the driver gave probable cause by his OWN aggressive behavior.
does law enforcement have the right to not be antagonized? But wow, the guy got out of his car, he might as well of swung at the officer. talk about antagonizing.
the cop chose to be a cop. he chose to do a risky job. that may garner respect, but it does not give him leeway with rights. If he doesn’t like dealing with people doing as they wish within the law, don’t be a cop.
getting out of a car is probably cause to arrest? you gotten out of many cars?
My experience is that there are many cops that are pieces of shit. There are many who get off on their own power trips. That love to give orders simply because they can and believe they are entitled because of a badge. They guy should have as many rights in the situation as the officer, until he has done something wrong. Period.
cops are nothing more than an individual person. this blind obedience makes me sick.
Anyone has as much right to protect themselves from cops as the other way around.
Thought this was appropriate:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,571514,00.html?test=latestnews
[/quote]
Well…sounds like you have just have a huge issue with law enforcement.
And your “appropriate” link can be paralleled with the many incidents/assaults on officers by “non-threatening” people who are “within their rights” just as the guy that was tasered.
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
Well…sounds like you have just have a huge issue with law enforcement.
And your “appropriate” link can be paralleled with the many incidents/assaults on officers by “non-threatening” people who are “within their rights” just as the guy that was tasered. [/quote]
Yes I do, and I have experiences to justify it.
exactly why every individual has the same rights to protect themselves, cop or not.
- I was getting irritated at the d/a for not listening.
- In some parts of Arkansas, he would have been shot.
- He got what he needed in the end.
[quote]undesired08 wrote:
- I was getting irritated at the d/a for not listening.
[/quote]
neither was the officer.
[quote]
2) In some parts of Arkansas, he would have been shot.
3) He got what he needed in the end. [/quote]
It blows my mind that some of you think yelling at someone who’s done nothing wrong to get in their car is more reasonable than asking why you were pulled over.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
undesired08 wrote:
- I was getting irritated at the d/a for not listening.
neither was the officer.
- In some parts of Arkansas, he would have been shot.
- He got what he needed in the end.
It blows my mind that some of you think yelling at someone who’s done nothing wrong to get in their car is more reasonable than asking why you were pulled over.[/quote]
Is it more reasonable to get out of your car to find out why you’re pulled over than staying in your car and having that question answered with no incident?
[quote]Big_Boss wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
undesired08 wrote:
- I was getting irritated at the d/a for not listening.
neither was the officer.
- In some parts of Arkansas, he would have been shot.
- He got what he needed in the end.
It blows my mind that some of you think yelling at someone who’s done nothing wrong to get in their car is more reasonable than asking why you were pulled over.
Is it more reasonable to get out of your car to find out why you’re pulled over than staying in your car and having that question answered with no incident? [/quote]
Looks late, the guy could have been driving trying to get home, could have been harassed by cops recently, you have no idea. But couldn’t the cop have answered the question when outside of the vehicle with no incident? couldn’t they have not tased a non-threatening law abiding citizen to avoid an incident?
The cop chose to become a cop, he initiated the event, we grant him privilege to do certain duties, he has more responsibility to the person than the other way around. His oath is to protect and serve the public of which the guy is a member.
Even if Chuck Norris came out of that car all cranked up, that cop had DRAWN on a man (and rightfully so) that kept his hands visable after the first five seconds. He was agitated, but not agressive. It’s a pretty insecure man that can’t at least try a different angle and possably diffuse the situation, especially after back-up arrives.
Most law enforcement I know personally are great guys, but guys like this need to find a different line of work. Repeating yourself 60 times?! Guy missed his calling as a hostage negotiator.
I have been in a similar situation as the pastor in the video, some of you might sing a different tune when it happens to you.
Both parties are idiots.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Looks late, the guy could have been driving trying to get home, could have been harassed by cops recently, you have no idea. But couldn’t the cop have answered the question when outside of the vehicle with no incident? couldn’t they have not tased a non-threatening law abiding citizen to avoid an incident?
The cop chose to become a cop, he initiated the event, we grant him privilege to do certain duties, he has more responsibility to the person than the other way around. His oath is to protect and serve the public of which the guy is a member.[/quote]
Well…those assumptions really have no bearing…BUT to play along:
If he was in a hurry to get home,no way he gets out of his car and acts in any way that prolongs his traffic stop. That officer would have ran his registration/license and he could have been on his way with a warning in a matter of minutes.
If he had been harassed by cops recently or whatever,no way in hell does he get out of his vehicle like that. And if he had been asked,I highly doubt he would have complied.
And this talk about a “cop chooses to be a cop”…“their sworn duty is to serve us” gives the presumption that officers have no right to deal with situations in a manner that keeps them safe.
[quote]RenegadeDragon wrote:
As a LEO, when giving a lawful order such as turn around, put your hands on your head etc… You ask them, tell them, and if those don’t work you make them. You don’t sit around arguing with the guy forever. He had many force options, and it appears he was scared of using them to obtain control of the suspect. This guy got out of his car and advanced towards the officer, even after the officer had a weapon drawn. That would lead me to believe this guy is either on something, or very willing to challenge me, which he was clearly doing. Of course the officer couldn’t just shoot him, so he should have been tased or pepper sprayed less then 1 minute in that video.
He’s lucky he didn’t meet this guy.
He’s lucky he didn’t meet that guy? More like the cop is lucky he didn’t crush the guys larynx or kill him by cracking his adam’s apple. It’s cops exactly like that that piss me off.
[quote]
V,
One generation before us did not have drive bys with tech 9’s, uzis, or fully automatic weapons. There was mutual respect between officers and citizens just one generation ago. The citizens starting believing that their rights are more important than the police officers rights.
Try getting out of your car next time you get pulled over. It is your right. I cant wait to see you get tazed. [/quote]
I have gotten out of my car when a cop pulled me over, i walked over to his car, and he told me what was up, this was (in grade 11), 4 years ago, I didn’t know “I wasn’t allowed” to do this, but he informed me told me why he pulled me over, and to not get out of my car in future, and i left, the cop being a HUMAN, made a good judgement call, saw i wasn’t dangerous or posing a threat to him and dealt with it accordingly rather than being a robot, and escalating the issue.
I agree with all V’s statements in the above argument.
Looking at this from alot of different angles I could see the guy having a legitimate lawsuit if there had been only one order to comply and then he was tasered.
But the officer tried to get him to cooperate for 3:30!!! And didn’t fire the taser till another patrol unit was on scene (you can see the other sets of flashing light show up).
Also the statement about how the guy didn’t do anything, he kep walking towards the officer. All the time the officer not knowing what was in the individuals pockets.
What was the cop supposed to do say “Pretty Please with sugar on top”!
[quote]Vegita wrote:
Big_Boss wrote:
Vegita wrote:
Uh, yea, I also draw the line here, I mean the cops KNOW this guy is going to be a smartass and instead of beating him at his own game, telling him the infraction, diffusing the situation like they are supposed to, they chose to escelate it. Not following my orders boy, don’t you know who I am boy? BZzzzzzzzzz.
I understand that police officers put thier life on the line every day to help keep our streets safe, but they do not get a pass when they assault an innocent, unarmed civilian. This was assault, thier badge does not give them that right. Why was it so hard to tell the guy, Hey I pulled you over because your plate is not mounted correctly, now please get back in your car so I can process the ticket that I was origionally going to only give you a warning for before you got out and started being a smartass. Then write the guy a ticket and leave it at that. I mean cops have authority, they can fuck with someone and still stay well within thier rights and not have to resort to such tacticts to still fuck the guy over.
V
If you preemptively get out of your car and walk towards an officer with your hand in your pocket…YOU have escalated the situation. Even if the guy was told why he was pulled over,etc how do YOU think this situation could have been de-escalated???
We all know there is no way in hell he’s going to be allowed to get back into his car…AFTER he has acted in the manner that he did.
I’m not saying what the guy did was smart, specifically though, because this is unfortunately how some cops react. This was not about the officers safety, it was about his authority being callenged. Like someone else said, the guy really should have waited in his car and then asked why he was pulled over IF the cop didn’t tell him when he came to his window. I mean if we are going to allow police to taser and apprehend people now because they “thought” the guy could have been a threat to them, then all bets are off.
Thier duty isn’t to protect themselves, it’s to protect the public, they signed on to take a bullet if need be, that is thier job, no one forced them into doing it, they chose it. It is not unreasonable for people to expect to not get tasered unless they are perhaps, breaking a law or something?
V[/quote]
I’m getting tired of people that have never put their lives on the line get self righteous about the correct way to protect yourself. Apparently, hesitation is a core factor in protecting yourself intelligently. The cop shouldve waited after the guy had punched him in the face and stolen his vehicle before pulling out his weapon.
his job isnt to protect himself? Its not in his oath but thats because its a given. How is he going to protect other people if he is dead? Then we wouldn’t have any more volunteers, and you’d get drafted.