Police Brutality

I don’t usually reply to these threads because normally no good will come from it. I have been a police officer for a long time and I didn’t see anything in that video to provoke the officer into using force…words shouldn’t start a fight. Even if a citizen refuses to obey a “lawful” command there should be a lot more talking before going to hands on. One thing I don’t get… just like in the “nerd tazer” video, why are officers not trying to place suspects in handcuffs. In any violent encounter that is my goal… get the suspect into cuffs and cool down.

Now for the hate cops, beat up the police crowd… That is the quickest way to get arrested and prison time. And how does that stop violent cops… The best way to do that is to know the law, comply with arrest orders, and if they are wrong… you get them in the Chief’ office, in Court or in the court of public opinion.

[quote]RenegadeDragon wrote:
I’m a LEO. From the perspective of the video, it looks like this cop should lose his job. However we don’t have the totality of the situation. No audio, and nothing but 1 second before the cruiser pulls up.

I’ve been in quite a few fights on the job. 80-90% of all uses of force, the suspect claims police brutality. However, less then 1% are actually found to be illegal. I only say this because so many people on here seem to have a story about how they got beat up or picked on by cops. You guys need to look at the way you acted from a reasonable person’s point of view… too many of you are very skewed in what your thoughts of reality are. I’ve never had to cover for a partner slapping someone around wrongly.

This perception by a lot of the people on the board actually makes me think I’m electronically hanging out with a lot of scumbags. If you go back and read the posts on all these police threads, you guys talk like convicts. Actually I take that back, a lot of the convicts actually know they are in their place based on the choices they made. Most of you post the most ridiculous stereotypical crap I’ve ever seen about people you have never met, and have no clue about.[/quote]

x2. The guy didn’t look that compliant to me. He was clearly refusing to roll over to his belly on the pavement. I DO NOT think the cop needed to rough the guy up like he did, but this is hardly the blatant brutality I expected to see after reading these posts. Sounds like most people around here just hate cops.

Oh, and lol at the guy wheeling his little kid between the squad cars to see the action.

[quote]Vash wrote:
Well, I can understand almost asking the man to zip his shirt; from the vid, it looked like he had nothing underneath. Which isn’t something a parent with their child out side wants the kids to see. But the civilian WAS being compliant, WAS following direction from the LEO, and STILL got fucking tanked.

I know we have some cops on the board; do you guys want to say anything?[/quote]

Being a LEO in NJ I will answer this the best way I can. The officer should definitely be suspended with out pay pending a formal investigation. Once he is found guilty of excessive force he should be subject to criminal and civil rights violations. In NJ, the prosecutors
preferred charge would be conduct unbecoming since it is a second degree crime requiring between 10-15 years imprisonment. He should also be tried in federal civil court and receive civil rights violations landing him in Federal Prison for 5-25 years. Minimum time served in a case like this should be 15 years.
In this state it is mandatory we receive training annually in proper use of force. There is no excuse force excessive force, ever. It is always the minimum amount of force reasonably necessary to affect an arrest. To those that don’t know reasonable amount also includes esacalation to one level above what is being used against you and also includes the totality of the entire circumstance. As an example, a smaller officer being physically attacked may be justified in using deadly force.
The problem more times than not is that lawyers get involved and plea deals are cut between the prosecutors, defense attorneys and judges. An officer with a history is more likely to be fully prosecuted than one who has a first time incident. Also taken into account is the degree of bodily injury sustained by the victim.
To the question about defending yourself from excessive force, you absoultely can. You can even use deadly force to protect yourself. The problem is, you better have indisputeable evidence or you are screwed. I am not saying it’s right, it’s just what society has degraded to. There are way to many laws and ordinances it’s almost impossible for people to know what is legal and what is not.
From my personal experiences, almost any time you use force the offender claims excessive force. Excessive force is continuing the use of force after the offender has been subdued or become incapacitated.
The force this guy used was unnecessary and unlawful. Can’t screen out all the fuck ups, you just have to hope leadership catches the ones that fall through the crack.

[quote]jtd72 wrote:
I don’t usually reply to these threads because normally no good will come from it. I have been a police officer for a long time and I didn’t see anything in that video to provoke the officer into using force…words shouldn’t start a fight. Even if a citizen refuses to obey a “lawful” command there should be a lot more talking before going to hands on. One thing I don’t get… just like in the “nerd tazer” video, why are officers not trying to place suspects in handcuffs. In any violent encounter that is my goal… get the suspect into cuffs and cool down.

Now for the hate cops, beat up the police crowd… That is the quickest way to get arrested and prison time. And how does that stop violent cops… The best way to do that is to know the law, comply with arrest orders, and if they are wrong… you get them in the Chief’ office, in Court or in the court of public opinion. [/quote]

Just because a cop says something doesn’t mean it is “lawful”. When did telling someone to zipper a sweat shirt become a lawful order? Oh btw I am a cop myself.

Headhunter, you’re a complete fool. I take it your in some type of service due to your homoerotic Avatar. Stop jazzing up your little opinion of what cops do. As a Marine I run into types like you all the time that think its about guns, glory, and shooting “Bitches”. As an infantry Marine I can say that yeah things get dangerous about 10% of the time, but the 90% its quiet, but still all Marines like you want to talk about are the shootouts. Don’t be a toolbox being a cop has its risks, but hell its not more dangerous than being a Marine and being a Marine ain’t that dangerous. Loser.

[quote]snipeout wrote:
Vash wrote:
Well, I can understand almost asking the man to zip his shirt; from the vid, it looked like he had nothing underneath. Which isn’t something a parent with their child out side wants the kids to see. But the civilian WAS being compliant, WAS following direction from the LEO, and STILL got fucking tanked.

I know we have some cops on the board; do you guys want to say anything?

Being a LEO in NJ I will answer this the best way I can. The officer should definitely be suspended with out pay pending a formal investigation. Once he is found guilty of excessive force he should be subject to criminal and civil rights violations. In NJ, the prosecutors
preferred charge would be conduct unbecoming since it is a second degree crime requiring between 10-15 years imprisonment. He should also be tried in federal civil court and receive civil rights violations landing him in Federal Prison for 5-25 years. Minimum time served in a case like this should be 15 years.
In this state it is mandatory we receive training annually in proper use of force. There is no excuse force excessive force, ever. It is always the minimum amount of force reasonably necessary to affect an arrest. To those that don’t know reasonable amount also includes esacalation to one level above what is being used against you and also includes the totality of the entire circumstance. As an example, a smaller officer being physically attacked may be justified in using deadly force.
The problem more times than not is that lawyers get involved and plea deals are cut between the prosecutors, defense attorneys and judges. An officer with a history is more likely to be fully prosecuted than one who has a first time incident. Also taken into account is the degree of bodily injury sustained by the victim.
To the question about defending yourself from excessive force, you absoultely can. You can even use deadly force to protect yourself. The problem is, you better have indisputeable evidence or you are screwed. I am not saying it’s right, it’s just what society has degraded to. There are way to many laws and ordinances it’s almost impossible for people to know what is legal and what is not.
From my personal experiences, almost any time you use force the offender claims excessive force. Excessive force is continuing the use of force after the offender has been subdued or become incapacitated.
The force this guy used was unnecessary and unlawful. Can’t screen out all the fuck ups, you just have to hope leadership catches the ones that fall through the crack.[/quote]

I agree with all of this.

Am I a fan of cops? eh. There’s some good and some bad, most will fall into the bell curve like everything else in life. I have been on the wrong side enough times and on the right not enough, and I’ve been treated OK by them. Not great, but OK (and I wouldn’t expect sunshine and rainbows from them.) Some folks don’t get treated too well, though.

My purpose was not to get people posting who say “yo bro I FUCKING HATE COPS!” although plenty of you did that. You’re as ignorant as the people who support every cop no matter what… and I really wonder how those same people would act if they were faced with violence every single day. To say you become desensitized is an understatement.

But I was just amazed at this case, and that something like this was so clearly caught on video. This guy should do 10 or 15 years and never have a badge again. The blatant abuse of authority (and his history at doing this) means that I hope NJ makes an example of him.

It certainly doesn’t go well for those good cops who work the cities to have white cops beating up on a retarded black guy. It widens the divide between the citizens and the police to unimaginable lengths.

And by the way HH- Passaic isn’t a “drug den.” It’s a rough town but not Baghdad. It’s actually a lot of very, very hard working new immigrants from Hispanic countries.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:

My purpose was not to get people posting who say “yo bro I FUCKING HATE COPS!” although plenty of you did that. You’re as ignorant as the people who support every cop no matter what… [/quote]

I would disagree with this. Thankfully, I’ve never been involved in illegal activity. Immoral, certainly, but not violating either the letter or the spirit of the law.

I have, however, been on the wrong side of a group of LEOs with close friends and no accountability. Self-confessed drug users, dealers, cops who took kick-backs from the local dealers. I’ve had cops tell me if the person that deserved to kill me didn’t, well, justice could still be served, by me or mine. I’ve had repeated stops and vehicle searches without warrant and without probable cause. I’ve had a cop unholster his weapon and tell me about hunting accidents.

In my home town, I’ve met one good cop. He was not a local. He did not stay long.

Earlier in the thread, I said I fucking hate cops. Well, fuck, I do. I should qualify that, though. I fucking HATE cops who go above and beyond, not the call of duty, but the line of the law.

Absolutely. Those who serve the public honorably deserve more praise and support than the governments which support them can provide.

From experience, though, there are often more of the bad than the good.

And that’s a damn shame.

Agreed.

FI, rest assured even if this guy isn’t held criminally liable(which he should be)he will be forced to sign a document removing from ever working in civil service position again.

[quote]RenegadeDragon wrote:
I’m a LEO. From the perspective of the video, it looks like this cop should lose his job. However we don’t have the totality of the situation. No audio, and nothing but 1 second before the cruiser pulls up.

I’ve been in quite a few fights on the job. 80-90% of all uses of force, the suspect claims police brutality. However, less then 1% are actually found to be illegal. I only say this because so many people on here seem to have a story about how they got beat up or picked on by cops. You guys need to look at the way you acted from a reasonable person’s point of view… too many of you are very skewed in what your thoughts of reality are. I’ve never had to cover for a partner slapping someone around wrongly.

This perception by a lot of the people on the board actually makes me think I’m electronically hanging out with a lot of scumbags. If you go back and read the posts on all these police threads, you guys talk like convicts. Actually I take that back, a lot of the convicts actually know they are in their place based on the choices they made. Most of you post the most ridiculous stereotypical crap I’ve ever seen about people you have never met, and have no clue about.[/quote]

Flagged

[quote]pushharder wrote:
HH, you are surely destroying any credibility you might have as a Rand devotee. If you truly are one then Irish is right, you can be doing nothing but openly trolling.[/quote]

Not at all. Ms. Rand advocated a society in which all relationships between human beings must be voluntary on all sides. Anyone violating this rule is a criminal. The vast majority of people in this country believe it perfectly fine to hire a government to initiate violence against unarmed victims, namely by stripping the productive for the benefit of the non-productive.

You are all then shocked when someone actually practices what you all preach. You don’t mind if park bench dwellers vote into office men who destroy vast industries, but scream foul when a cop clobbers this guy, and you don’t even know all the facts.

I choose to be consistent. If we are to have a society of violence against the unarmed, well then, let’s do it. You advocated it, you voted for it, you gave it your blessing. Why then do you denounce it when you see it with your own eyes?

Trolling? Hardly.

[quote]snipeout wrote:
FI, rest assured even if this guy isn’t held criminally liable(which he should be)he will be forced to sign a document removing from ever working in civil service position again.[/quote]

Bummer. Instead of sitting on his ass, drinking coffee and eating doughnuts, he’s trying to clean the streets of Passiac (a true shithole). Well, good. He’ll be fired and cops in the future will be terrified of enforcing the laws, because lib whiners might bitch about how he hurt ‘my widdle toe!!’

But don’t bitch when the city turns into a chaos of ruins and slaughter. You fired all the guys who could stop it.

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
I have no idea what I’m talking about.

This makes no sense. Re-write it, please, so that it can be deciphered.

[/quote]

See. I did it for you.

I was going to respond to him, but he will either never get it, or gets it, but gets off on this stuff.

Snipeout…I never said telling someone to zip up their sweatshirt was a lawful command. I think it is a pretty stupid thing to get involved in a fight with someone over. I do wonder where these crooked cops that Vash refers to work.

[quote]jtd72 wrote:
Snipeout…I never said telling someone to zip up their sweatshirt was a lawful command. I think it is a pretty stupid thing to get involved in a fight with someone over. I do wonder where these crooked cops that Vash refers to work. [/quote]

There’s crooked cops, to be sure. Anything that has to do with the political system is crooked, and cops are no different.

However, there’s as many decent guys trying to do the right thing as there is crooked things. To say that any race, religion, profession, etc. is all good or all bad is asinine. People are just people.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
jtd72 wrote:
Snipeout…I never said telling someone to zip up their sweatshirt was a lawful command. I think it is a pretty stupid thing to get involved in a fight with someone over. I do wonder where these crooked cops that Vash refers to work.

There’s crooked cops, to be sure. Anything that has to do with the political system is crooked, and cops are no different.

However, there’s as many decent guys trying to do the right thing as there is crooked things. To say that any race, religion, profession, etc. is all good or all bad is asinine. People are just people.[/quote

Absolutely… I just hate all the eff the police and I hate all cops B.S. There are a lot of good men and women out there who believe in what they do as Law Enforcement Officers and try to do it in a professional and even handed manner. We all know the risks when we take the jobs and I don’t need anyone to pat me on the back for taking that risk. I just want people to react to me based on who I am and how I am treating them rather than some video they saw on Youtube or how they were treated in the past.

headhunter you need to start thinking a little bit

[quote]pushharder wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
pushharder wrote:
HH, you are surely destroying any credibility you might have as a Rand devotee. If you truly are one then Irish is right, you can be doing nothing but openly trolling.

Not at all. Ms. Rand advocated a society in which all relationships between human beings must be voluntary on all sides. Anyone violating this rule is a criminal. The vast majority of people in this country believe it perfectly fine to hire a government to initiate violence against unarmed victims, namely by stripping the productive for the benefit of the non-productive.

You are all then shocked when someone actually practices what you all preach. You don’t mind if park bench dwellers vote into office men who destroy vast industries, but scream foul when a cop clobbers this guy, and you don’t even know all the facts.

I choose to be consistent. If we are to have a society of violence against the unarmed, well then, let’s do it. You advocated it, you voted for it, you gave it your blessing. Why then do you denounce it when you see it with your own eyes?

Trolling? Hardly.

This makes no sense. Re-write it, please, so that it can be deciphered.

[/quote]

You truly don’t see the connection between hiring a guy to clobber people on streets and hiring devils to strip the productive and destroy (through legislation) vast industries? Hmmm…maybe…that’s why it’s happening?