Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, August 20, 2014

Sunil Dutta: Regardless of what happened with Mike Brown, in the overwhelming majority of cases it is not the cops, but the people they stop, who can prevent detentions from turning into tragedies. ... Even though it might sound harsh and impolitic, here is the bottom line: if you don't want to get shot, tased, pepper-sprayed, struck with a baton or thrown to the ground, just do what I tell you. Don't argue with me, don't call me names, don't tell me that I can't stop you, don't say I'm a racist pig, don't threaten that you'll sue me and take away my badge. Don't scream at me that you pay my salary, and don't even think of aggressively walking towards me. Most field stops are complete in minutes. How difficult is it to cooperate for that long?

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

bocaink

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

More

This insane editorial is written by Sunil Dutta, a veteran LAPD officer and current professor of homeland security. Dutta explains that if you don't want to get shot, do what the police officer wants you to do, even if your rights are being violated. In very terse works, he threatens anyone who challenges his authority that very bad things will happen as a result.

Did this maniac justify police brutality? This type of attitude must stop.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

He is right.

If the cop is wrong in every way, the venue to show that is not by resisting the police officer. The venue is filing a complaint and/or retaining an attorney.

The cop is operating under the assumption his actions are correct. He has the authority under that assumption, to arrest you, and subdue you if you resist. If he can't, there are plenty of cops to call on to help him accomplish this.

Therefore, the prudent act is to comply, ask questions politely, but comply. Then resolve the wrongness once the situation is defused.

No one is saying the cop can't be wrong. Just that the way to resolve it is not in the middle of an already stressed situation where the end result can be injury or death.

That you don't see the wisdom in his words is actually sort of funny.

Do what the cop says. If he is wrong, sue the crap out of the department for improper training the officer and wrongful arrest.

Simple.

#1 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-20 08:37 AM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 3 | Newsworthy 5

Heavy badge syndrome.

#2 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2014-08-20 08:51 AM | Reply | Flag:

#1 | POSTED BY ABH

Agreed, most people get belligerent and it serves no real purpose other than to piss off someone with a firearm and authority.

"shrug", most of the article is common sense and the most sensible thing really it to shut up and challenge it in court.

Course, it doesn't happen to me multiple times a day, but I can also see how it can be frustrating as well.

#3 | Posted by Lohocla at 2014-08-20 08:51 AM | Reply | Flag:

Don't argue with me or I'll hurt you? Who does this cop think he is?

#4 | Posted by rcade at 2014-08-20 09:21 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 3

Don't argue with me or I'll hurt you? Who does this cop think he is?

Posted by rcade at 2014-08-20 09:21 AM | Reply

King Jackabooboo

#5 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2014-08-20 09:22 AM | Reply | Flag:

"If the cop is wrong in every way, the venue to show that is not by resisting the police officer. The venue is filing a complaint and/or retaining an attorney."

That would be reasonable IF complaints were handled appropriately but we all know that this is not the case. The first concern is always protecting the cop and the reputation of the department. Filing a complaint is usually no more effective than farting in the wind.

I'm not saying that anyone should ever act physically aggressive towards a cop. But questioning an unlawful order is not wrong and completely appropriate and if the cops are reacting violently to such questioning then that should change. Its not appropriate for anyone to expect citizens to give up their rights because our police have become a bunch of entitled, disingenuous prima donnas who are encouraged to pretend that asking questions is a threatening behavior.

The easiest way to fix the problem would be for those in charge of oversight to stop allowing cops to pretend that everything is a threat.

#6 | Posted by Sully at 2014-08-20 09:24 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 4

ABH got is 100% correct.

#7 | Posted by CrisisStills at 2014-08-20 09:33 AM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

The venue is filing a complaint and/or retaining an attorney.

So the cop is wrong and someone then has to take time off from work and pay an attorney to prove it.

What utter bullhsit this cop is spewing.

#8 | Posted by 726 at 2014-08-20 10:09 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

"If the cop is wrong in every way, the venue to show that is not by resisting the police officer. The venue is filing a complaint and/or retaining an attorney.
#1 | POSTED BY ABH AT 2014-08-20 08:37 AM"

That's great advice for all who have the resources (time/$$$) to follow through. After all, it's a simple matter to compete with the resources of the police department and obtain swift justice and/or compensation. I won't bother to cite the numerous examples from the historical record that support this view.

It MIGHT be safest to follow this course of action, but for a society to permit this attitude by any individuals in the police force sets up a dangerous situation.

#9 | Posted by TrueBlue at 2014-08-20 10:15 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Sully got it 100% correct. Police who cannot take non-threatening action such as questioning unlawful orders need to get a different job. It's not our fault they can't handle their job and are so insecure that they can't handle their authority without unquestioning blind obedience that isn't their due.

More so, it's pointless to file later. Good luck even getting a complaint form, which should you manage, you can rest assured will be investigated by their buddies on the force who believe they can do no wrong, and will be rubber-stamped "no wrong doing" before summarily blown off. Should you somehow have enough video evidence to not be ignored and possibly get some press support, in the end, you might manage a lawsuit and... punish your fellow taxpayers for the actions of a bad cop, who won't feel a thing.

The system is currently so useless people are going to have to start defending themselves against the police, and then taking that to court. Much more abuse from bad cops, and they won't find juries on their side much longer at least.

#10 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-08-20 10:17 AM | Reply | Flag:

You aren't very bright, are you, 726?

Cops get paid to enforce the law. If they are wrong and don't know it, in your world resisting is the best option, because they are obviously going to change their mind once you resist. I mean, there is no way yoy would be resisting for any other reason than your snow white innocence.

The cop thinks he is justified in arresting you. If you resist, no matter how right you are, you are getting injured.

So why bother? Protect yourself, comply. Take copious mental notes, and file a complaint later, sue the department, and win your case in court. All when the immediate outcome doesn't involve getting physically subdued.

I will never understand the "I am so right, that I have to keep fighting a battle I have no chance of winning" mentality.

The SMART way to win is to not take the beating, and win after its over.

#11 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-20 10:22 AM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

You guys are conflating verbal questioning of the officer. With resisting the officer. If you and the cop are talking about why your were stopped and/ being questioned, by all means state your case. But once the bracelets come out, the discussion is finished.

It is not worth the fight.

#12 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-20 10:27 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

You guys are conflating verbal questioning of the officer. With resisting the officer. If you and the cop are talking about why your were stopped and/ being questioned, by all means state your case. But once the bracelets come out, the discussion is finished.

It is not worth the fight.

#12 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-20 10:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

Umm, no. It appears you haven't read the article. Because the author is the one conflating questioning with resisting - which isn't unusual. From the article:

"Even though it might sound harsh and impolitic, here is the bottom line: if you don't want to get shot, tased, pepper-sprayed, struck with a baton or thrown to the ground, just do what I tell you. Don't argue with me, don't call me names, don't tell me that I can't stop you, don't say I'm a racist pig, don't threaten that you'll sue me and take away my badge. Don't scream at me that you pay my salary, and don't even think of aggressively walking towards me."

The author very clearly categorizes arguing and telling a cop that what he's doing is illegal as an excuse to get violent.

You can make as many excuses as you want but this is attitude is the real problem.

#13 | Posted by Sully at 2014-08-20 10:57 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 5

You guys are conflating verbal questioning of the officer.

So is this cop: "Don't argue with me ... don't threaten you'll sue me ... don't scream at me that you pay my salary ..." A citizen has the right to question and criticize the actions of police as they are occurring, within reason.

Your argument that we should always acquiesce first and only complain later -- by filing a complaint or a lawsuit -- gives an officer making an unlawful order no reason to stop making them. The chances a complaint will be taken seriously are slim. Lawsuits are beyond the ability of many citizens to afford.

Civil disobedience is a valid pushback to police going beyond their authority to cow the public into submission.

#14 | Posted by rcade at 2014-08-20 11:19 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Ex-gang member: If you don't want to get hurt, don't challenge me.

The rationale at work in the mind of the one who thinks it's his job to put the hurts on you is identical.

#15 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-20 11:51 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

He also goes on to clarify and stay to not initiate a physical confrontation.

I agree that his choice of words was not the best. He certainly should have been more clear. But I think the gist of his point is to not resist arrest...And when stating your case to him, don't be an arrogant, angry, d bag. That is guaranteed to not help yoy at all. Be polite, respectful, and still forceful with your points, and you will be fine.

Perhaps I am wrong in interpreting his meaning. I shouldn't be putting words in his mouth. But, my point about pile, non violent, respectful, and not resisting arrest are accurate.

#16 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-20 11:53 AM | Reply | Flag:

Rcade, do you seriously think instigating a violent confrontation with the police officer trying to arrest you provides any form of "incentive to reform" on the party of the officer? If your do, you are seriously mistaken.

No one is saying to not state your case when stopped by an officer. Vociferously, if necessary. Just be polite about it so you don't aggravate the situation. Once the handcuffs come out, the discussion is over and yoy have two choices: get your butt kicked good and hard and go to jail anyway, or go to jail in one piece and sort it out later.

I am teaching my children to avoid getting their butt kicked good and hard and stool ending up in jail. Everyone would be wise to do the same.

#17 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-20 11:58 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Lawsuits are beyond the ability of many citizens to afford. #14 | POSTED BY RCADE

Incorrect Rcade, unless you are talking about hiring at a Johnny Cochran level. Most lawyers would jump at a chance for a big pay off. Don't win the case, you get nada. Cost is zero. Gee, its a wonder why lawyers get a bad rap.

The cop is an obvious ------ but ABH is correct in his assessment on how to act when one is placed in this situation.

#18 | Posted by CrisisStills at 2014-08-20 12:05 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

"No one is saying to not state your case when stopped by an officer. Vociferously, if necessary. Just be polite about it so you don't aggravate the situation."

The problem, as I see it, is that many officers become aggressive if you question them at all. As if any challenge to their perceived authority is a threat. That needs to change.

"Once the handcuffs come out, the discussion is over and yoy have two choices: get your butt kicked good and hard and go to jail anyway, or go to jail in one piece and sort it out later."

I agree. But cops who take out those handcuffs when they shouldn't do not face harsh consequences and that is a major problem. As far as I'm concerned, the first case of wrongful imprisonment should result in a firing if not criminal charges.

#19 | Posted by Sully at 2014-08-20 12:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

The cop is an obvious ------ but ABH is correct in his assessment on how to act when one is placed in this situation.
#18 | Posted by CrisisStills

Maybe for the bulk of us, who are, perhaps sensibly, cowards in the face of rampant unchecked power-tripping injustice.
But some brave few among us stand up for their rights and for what's right.
I wish more did.

#20 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-20 12:27 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

He also goes on to clarify and stay to not initiate a physical confrontation.
#16 | Posted by ABH

That is nonsense advice that simply cannot be complied with.

Seeing as an arrest is a physical confrontation initiated by a police officer.

But I think the gist of his point is to not resist arrest.

When shielding your face from a baton blow is considered resisting, when turning your body away from an impending boot strike is considered resisting, this too is nonsense advice that simply cannot be complied with.

The gist of his advice is when you see cops you should leave.

#21 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-20 01:21 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

I occasionally watch Cops and I saw a scene earlier this year that perfectly illustrates the faux-victim mentality of modern police.

The typical shirtless dirtbag looking guy is pulled over and, as always, it turns out he has warrants so the police search and cuff him. He's sitting on the curb and he's squirming around a bit because he's uncomfortable.

One of the two cops stops what he's doing and says "You're making me nervous when you do that. Stop moving because I don't know what you're trying to do. I wouldn't want to have to taze you."

Now keep in mind this guy is on his best behavior because the camera crew is there. Yet still, he sees nothing wrong with the threat he just made. The shirtless dirtbag was perfectly docile the whole time. He cooperated every step of the way. He was smaller than either cop. He was searched and was not armed. His hands were cuffed behind his back. He was seated.

The cops outnumbered him 2 to 1. They were both bigger. They were both heavily armed. They were both standing.

And yet the cop is not ashamed at all to claim he's scared. It was one of the most pathetic displays I have every witnessed and nobody on the scene seemed to recognize it as such. Its like we expect this type of disingenuous crybaby behavior from our officers now.

#22 | Posted by Sully at 2014-08-20 01:50 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

Its like we expect this type of disingenuous crybaby behavior from our officers now.
#22 | Posted by Sully

A large part of that stems from the fact that cops and judges and DAs are just different heads of the same criminal justice hydra. Cops have essentially been given carte blanche. When they do wrong it's remarkably hard to fire them, even when their actions result in major civil payouts. "Reinstated with back pay plus projected overtime" has become boilerplate in the newspaper follow-up.

"You're making me nervous when you do that. Stop moving because I don't know what you're trying to do. I wouldn't want to have to taze you."

Indeed, anything other than lying there like you're dead can be interpreted as resisting or as a threat. The predictable result is that force continues to be applied until the person is lying there like they're dead because they're dead.

#23 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-20 02:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

I see ABH is the local shop steward for the thin blue line [...]

#24 | Posted by bocaink at 2014-08-20 02:19 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

Rcade, do you seriously think instigating a violent confrontation with the police officer trying to arrest you provides any form of "incentive to reform" on the party of the officer?

I'm not saying anything about being violent to a cop. But arguing with a cop who is wrongfully detaining or questioning you is not -- contrary to what this cop is arguing -- a justifiable reason for the cop to "hurt" you.

To me, this commentary is another sign that our police are out of control.

#25 | Posted by rcade at 2014-08-20 02:47 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Of course, bocank. Everyone should be getting their butts kicked by the police. I just hope that someday I can visit my son in the hospital to thank him for escalating a speeding stop into a full on beating because he thought he was going slower than the cop said.

That makes sense.

That attitude is the worst sort of insidious tripe. Advocating for people to resist arrest all the time is cheering for the streets ribbing red with blood. Not only is that not productive, it aggravates the situation.

#26 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-20 02:48 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 2

I get that, rcade. I do. This guy obviously used a poor choice of words, or perhaps really did mean that he would kick anyone's butt that talked back.

But, in your vociferous defense of yourself, it is smart to remain polite and calm. Getting fired up, angry, and insulting is guaranteed to not help Getty your point across.

#27 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-20 02:52 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

But, in your vociferous defense of yourself, it is smart to remain polite and calm.

The problem with your reasonable advice is the cops don't hold themselves to that same standard. They ask provoking questions. They ask questions that you have no obligation to answer. By asking these questions, they are essentially asking people to give up their rights. This is never done to exonerate you in the eyes of the cop, it's always done to ferret out some detail which will be used against you. They might even try to get a rise out of you, to make you angry, in order to establish probable cause, which justifies further police intervention beyond whatever prompted the stop in the first place.

Yes, of course, everyone should remain polite. The police should lead by example. They don't. And that's the problem with the police. They treat anyone they come in contact with as a potential enemy, not as a likely fried.

#28 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-20 03:34 PM | Reply | Flag:

"#17 | POSTED BY ABH AT 2014-08-20 11:58 AM:
Rcade, do you seriously think instigating a violent confrontation with the police officer trying to arrest you provides any form of "incentive to reform" on the party of the officer? If your do, you are seriously mistaken."

No one is saying to not state your case when stopped by an officer. Vociferously, if necessary. Just be polite about it so you don't aggravate the situation. Once the handcuffs come out, the discussion is over and yoy have two choices: get your butt kicked good and hard and go to jail anyway, or go to jail in one piece and sort it out later."

Let see a show of hands of all those who think a vociferously stated case (politely, of course) would NOT have aggravated this particular police officer. No doubt it would have initiated a thoughtful discussion regarding the merits of the police officer's actions and it would not involve batons, tasers, guns, etc. [SERIOUSLY???]

Meanwhile, no one was saying it was a good idea to instigate a violent confrontation. What IS being pointed out that this particular police officer has crossed the line between wanting to protect the public and wanting to intimidate the public. We all get that it's a lousy, dangerous job which can (and likely does) change some (most?) that elect to do this job. The point is: if this is a police officer's attitude, he is unfit for duty. Period.

"I am teaching my children to avoid getting their butt kicked good and hard and stool ending up in jail. Everyone would be wise to do the same."

If your point is that it's not a good idea to instigate violence in a woefully uneven matchup with armed individuals, that probably goes without saying. What parent would counsel their children to be reckless or stupid? I confess (as a parent), I advise my child to not be reckless or stupid. So what? I also teach them to be good citizens. That includes having the courage of their convictions, even when it's "unpopular" or dangerous. Yes, that does put them at some risk sometimes. However, if we really are to be good citizens of the USA ("land of the free; home of the brave", remember?), it is imperative to maintain in ourselves that belief and to instill it in our children.

'The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.'
- Edmund Burke

#29 | Posted by TrueBlue at 2014-08-20 03:35 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

If one is REALLY interested in addressing this type of situation, they would (vociferously!) promote the requirement that police must have on-board video taping whenever on duty. THEN you'll see a change.

#30 | Posted by TrueBlue at 2014-08-20 03:44 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

"The problem with your reasonable advice is the cops don't hold themselves to that same standard. They ask provoking questions. They ask questions that you have no obligation to answer. By asking these questions, they are essentially asking people to give up their rights. This is never done to exonerate you in the eyes of the cop, it's always done to ferret out some detail which will be used against you. They might even try to get a rise out of you, to make you angry, in order to establish probable cause, which justifies further police intervention beyond whatever prompted the stop in the first place."

Another thing that I've learned from watching Cops is that at least 80% of them tell people the same lie: "This is your chance to help yourself out. Tell me [incriminating information]. If I have to uncover it myself it will be worse for you."

Meanwhile the cop has made no concrete promise to do anything for the poor sucker if he gives himself up. Every time the poor dope fesses up, he gets arrested just as he would have been if he made the cop uncover the crime on his own. The only difference is that the cop will say "Thank you for being honest" instead of acting all butthurt that the guy lied to him.

And of course most of the suspects do lie because they know the cop has everyone intention of throwing the book at them and then the cop goes into the butthurt "You lied to me!" routine.

Just once I'd like to see someone ask one these cops "What do you mean it will be better for me if I just tell you what you want to know? What are you going to do for me? Are you going to let me go? You're asking me to give up my 5th ammendment rights, what are you offering in exchange?".

#31 | Posted by Sully at 2014-08-20 03:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

I don't see a problem with him asking. You have the right to remain silent, but you can choose not to. The cop is asking which course you are choosing to take. Why is that a problem?

"Can I take a look in your car? No.

Okay. Have a nice day. "

"Did you do it? Just so you know, lying to me well make it worse.

No, I didn't."

Real problems there.

Not sure why asking folks to waive there rights is a problem.

I have had cops ask to search my car on a traffic stop. Out of state plates on a known drug corridor, I expected it. I said no, and five minutes later I was on my way.

Big deal.

One thing about lying you are forgetting, lying to a cop in almost every state is punishable by up to a year in jail as a misdemeanor. Lying to a federal agent is a felony, punishable by up to five years in jail. Just ask Martha Stewart.

Besides that, prosecutors well use cooperation and truthfulness in there decisions in what to offer someone as part of a plea deal. It can be very beneficial, let alone prevent yoy from having a charge of lying tacked on.

#32 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-20 04:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

The problem is that this does not take into 2 significant and irrefutable facts. One is that police frequently target specific groups for attention and that is extremely frustrating and degrading to the individual being targeted, that is the jist of the problem in Ferguson, the cops target and treat harshly young black males. Secondly, often when you are dealing with a cop, it is often a stressful situation and you are not in your regular state of mind, so his advice is difficult to implement. And cops must take that into consideration and be trained in conflict resolution, how to reduce tension and stress in stressful situations.

#33 | Posted by truthhurts at 2014-08-20 04:31 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Not sure why asking folks to waive there rights is a problem."

I don't think that's a problem.

I don't even care that much that they lie and pretend that they are offering someone something in exchange for incriminating themselves when it fact they aren't.

I just think find it odd that they pretend to take it personally when the guy doesn't fall for it. And if they are going to habitually lie to people then their faux hurt over being lied to is comical.

#34 | Posted by Sully at 2014-08-20 04:43 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

No one ever won an argument with a cop in the field. In a your-word-against-his scenario, the "justice system" will always back the cop unless you have video, physical evidence and multiple witnesses. Is it the way it should be? Hell, no. Is it how it is? Sadly, yes. Surrender to reality, grab your ankles and bring your own lube.

#35 | Posted by morris at 2014-08-20 06:26 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

So the cop is wrong and someone then has to take time off from work and pay an attorney to prove it.
What utter bullhsit this cop is spewing.

----

What's the alternative? The cop thinks he's right, you think he's wrong. A 3rd party has to decide.

#36 | Posted by Pirate at 2014-08-20 07:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

Don't argue with me or I'll hurt you? Who does this cop think he is?

#4 | Posted by rcade

What is the point in an arguement? It's one you will never win.

#37 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-08-20 07:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

Don't argue with me or I'll hurt you? Who does this cop think he is?

#4 | Posted by rcade

What is the point in an arguement? It's one you will never win.

#38 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-08-20 07:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yes, of course, everyone should remain polite. The police should lead by example. They don't. And that's the problem with the police. They treat anyone they come in contact with as a potential enemy, not as a likely fried.

I got pulled over about a year ago for expired tags.

When the cop got to my window he asked why my tags were expired. I was thinking "crap this has to be about my expired registration" at the same time. So, when he asked that it took me a split second to realize they were the same thing.

In any case, my brief hesitation brought on an antagonistic as hell series of questions about why the befuddled face, why the hesitation to answer ect as if I was looking for an angle to scam him with.

The possibility that I was new to the state and hadn't yet jumped through all the hoops to getting replacement plates was apparently not anywhere on they guy's radar.

#39 | Posted by jpw at 2014-08-20 09:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

Sunil Dutta just spelled it out. Power is intoxicating. That is one reason bad individuals become bad cops.

#40 | Posted by Robson at 2014-08-20 09:54 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

I don't see a problem with him asking.
#32 | Posted by ABH

You don't see a problem when the people the Bill of Rights was written to protect you from ask if you'd like to give up those protections.

I just want to make sure we're on the same page here.

Would you be okay with some troops coming by and asking if they could be quartered in your home?

How about if the police came by and asked if you'd like to hand over your guns?

Should judges ask convicts if they consent to being tortured?

What the actual ----.

#41 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-21 01:36 AM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

The fundamental problem, ABH, is that ignorance of your rights is routinely used to deprive you of your rights -- by the very people those rights protect you from!

If you don't see a problem there, you must necessarily reject the Social Contract by which the people give consent to be governed in the first place.

Contracts require good faith. It's as simple as that.

#42 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-21 01:44 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Cop: Don't Want to Get Hurt? Don't Challenge Me"

Don't roll up on a couple guys crossing the street and tell them to "get the ---- on the sidewalk", as Darren Wilson did.

If you're an ----- to the people you swore 'to protect and serve' you aren't going to get respect in return.

For starters.

#43 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2014-08-21 02:32 AM | Reply | Flag:

POSTED BY AMERICANUNITY

Long way from TN to Ferguson; so you were a witness?

#45 | Posted by Greatamerican at 2014-08-21 04:59 AM | Reply | Flag:

Snoofy, are you actually saying that it is a problem top ask for permission top do something like search a car, and do it When they say yes? When ask they have to do is say no, and everything is fine?

If you are, I am not sure what to say about that special brand of stupidity. Jesus, why be able to ask anybody for anything? Why should we have individuals in this country able to make any decisions what so ever?

If you don't care, say yes. If you do, say no.

#46 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-21 08:15 AM | Reply | Flag:

"No one ever won an argument with a cop in the field."

Youtube has plenty of videos of people winning arguments with cops who are overstepping their boundaries. I'm not saying its common. The cop has to know he's being recorded AND he has to knowledgable/self aware enough to know he is breaking the law. But its happened plenty of times. There is a reason why they hate being recorded.

#48 | Posted by Sully at 2014-08-21 09:19 AM | Reply | Flag:

"What is the point in an arguement? It's one you will never win.

#38 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-08-20 07:20 PM | Reply | Flag:"

Why make it easy for some ------ to walk all over you?

#49 | Posted by Sully at 2014-08-21 09:26 AM | Reply | Flag:

Agreed sully. Video us the great equalizer. No good cop fears having a body or dash camera. No cop doing the right thing fears cell phone video either.

Every cop I have been in contact with has TALKED with me. I have explained what I was doing. Usually it didn't matter and I got a ticket anyway, but they have me an opportunity to speak. Speaking is a good thing.

Being a disrespectful jerk, is only going to make a situation worse. However, being polite and respectful has a real chance at diffusing a situation in your favor.

#50 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-21 09:27 AM | Reply | Flag:

Go ahead sul and argue with any one of them. Have a good time in the slammer.

If you act like a sensable human there won't be an arguement in the first place.

If you just robbed a store, don't walk down the middle of the street holding up trafic.

#51 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-08-21 09:34 AM | Reply | Flag:

Wow Rcade, speaking of first amendment rights. No curse words, no direct provocation, and pretty much a statement of the obvious mixed in with a salient moral lesson.

....not cool dude.

#52 | Posted by bocaink at 2014-08-21 09:43 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Go ahead sul and argue with any one of them. Have a good time in the slammer."

I've argued with cops before. Not over anything major. But there is nothing wrong with calmly disagreeing with a cop as long as you don't do or say anything that will result in additional charges. If he's already trying to screw you anyway it can't really hurt.

"If you act like a sensable human there won't be an arguement in the first place."

Not if the cop isn't being sensible. You seem to have totally dismissed that possibility and if you can't even conceive of a situation where a cop may be wrong and you may be right. Sad that some people melt and become nothing in the face of a little authority.

"If you just robbed a store, don't walk down the middle of the street holding up trafic.

#51 | Posted by Sniper at 2014-08-21 09:34 AM | Reply | Flag:"

That's a rather sloppy attempt to conflate my position with something out of left field. A child could do better.

#53 | Posted by Sully at 2014-08-21 09:44 AM | Reply | Flag:

You aren't very bright, are you, 726?

So why bother? Protect yourself, comply. Take copious mental notes, and file a complaint later, sue the department, and win your case in court. All when the immediate outcome doesn't involve getting physically subdued.
I will never understand the "I am so right, that I have to keep fighting a battle I have no chance of winning" mentality.
The SMART way to win is to not take the beating, and win after its over.

#11 | POSTED BY ABH AT 2014-08-20 10:22 AM | REPLY | FLAG:

That is a ridiculous assumption. Your ad hominem suggests that you are not 100% confident in your interpretation.

The problem is not that you are not answering them, it is that they are even asking in the first place.

The problem is that they have the attitude that everything they tell you to do is the 100% correct. The ----- in the article makes it clear that unless you 100% comply with them, then they will hurt you. No middle ground.

If you want to be that kind of sheep so be it.

What if a cop walks up to you and demands you to hand over your legally carried gun? Just out of the blue. You gonna comply and then take your scared ass to court to prove him wrong?

You gonna take a checkpoint along the road with cops doing DNA swabs and comply?

As I said, what this cop said is complete bullhsit. They have unlimited resources. They get paid for going to court (most of it is OT for them, they love it). If they lose they suffer no consequences. They operate with impunity. You have to pay a lawyer and take time off of work to fight it.

Glad to see where stand on defending your own rights.

#54 | Posted by 726 at 2014-08-21 09:50 AM | Reply | Flag:

Don't argue with me, don't call me names, don't tell me that I can't stop you, don't say I'm a racist pig, don't threaten that you'll sue me and take away my badge. Don't scream at me that you pay my salary, and don't even think of aggressively walking towards me.

Actually, I can do all of that except aggressively walk towards you. It is called freedom of speech. You should learn some anger management and the actual role of the job you choose to have. Maybe you are not cut out to be a cop. Maybe your insecurity overshadows what your occupation requires. Just passing the academy exam doesn't mean everyone should be a cop.

#55 | Posted by kanrei at 2014-08-21 09:53 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

This kind of power - which the former officer believes he has - is completely corrupting. It should be banned.

#56 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2014-08-21 09:56 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

"As I said, what this cop said is complete bullhsit. They have unlimited resources. They get paid for going to court (most of it is OT for them, they love it). If they lose they suffer no consequences. They operate with impunity. You have to pay a lawyer and take time off of work to fight it."

Geez...that's quite an indictment of public employees and the protections you claim you think they so much deserve.

Is this how you talk about fireman and teachers as well?

what about police and firemen in Wisconsin?

I remember some attempts to address the "unlimited resources" including collective bargaining, no consequences, etc....and leftists like you cried into your pillows for months over it.

Maybe Scott Walker needs to move to Missouri and take over that state now...........

:-)

#57 | Posted by eberly at 2014-08-21 09:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

And of course most of the suspects do lie because they know the cop has everyone intention of throwing the book at them and then the cop goes into the butthurt "You lied to me!" routine.
Just once I'd like to see someone ask one these cops "What do you mean it will be better for me if I just tell you what you want to know? What are you going to do for me? Are you going to let me go? You're asking me to give up my 5th ammendment rights, what are you offering in exchange?".

#31 | POSTED BY SULLY AT 2014-08-20 03:51 PM | FLAG:

The cops have to play it up for the camera. They appear to go overboard on the moral lectures just to show how smart and righteous they are.

Most of these people pulled over would never think of asking those questions, they are either too stupid or too scared to do so. The one's that don't end up on the editing floor are always the guilty ones. A half hour of cops pulling over people and them being innocent and let go is not sensational enough for television. It is much better to roll on someone who is going to bail from the car and get into a nice foot chase. That gets ratings.

#58 | Posted by 726 at 2014-08-21 09:57 AM | Reply | Flag:

Is this how you talk about fireman and teachers as well?

How many children have been shot dead by a teacher?

How many teachers have made a statement "Don't challenge me and I won't hurt you"?

Same with firemen.

I am not indicting all police officers. If you think that, then I guess I was not clear enough.

There are plenty of fine officers that are fair, calm and intelligent enough to deal with people and never have any incidents.

But more and more bad cops are coming to light thanks to cell phone cameras and video tape. Those are the ones that need to be weeded out. If you cannot see the difference between them and everyday ordinary well adjusted public servants perhaps you need to step back and take a long look.

what about police and firemen in Wisconsin?

What about them? If there are bad one's there, they need to be weeded out too. I also remember Walker making a deal with the police union before he was elected to not touch their contracts and only go after the teachers union.

"Cop Pointing Rifle At Ferguson Protestors: "I Will ------- Kill You" "

theconcourse.deadspin.com

To protect and serve..... some.

You think that is acceptable behavior?

#59 | Posted by 726 at 2014-08-21 10:05 AM | Reply | Flag:

BTW - Cops are always sizing people up based on what they drive, what they wear, how they look, how they carry themselves, the kind of language that they use, etc., etc., etc. And they do treat people differently based on these perceptions. If you unaggressivly make a cop aware that you know what your rights are and are likely to be someone who will complain, he's alot less likely to overstep his bounds. They don't want to deal with headaches later.

#60 | Posted by Sully at 2014-08-21 10:07 AM | Reply | Flag:

Where you are going wrong, 726, is that I am not defending this particularl cops poor wording. I believe I know what he is trying to say, but as I have said, I should'nt be putting words in his mouth. That's why I have been discussing in general how to interact with the police to protect yourself.

I am not sure where this feeling that I would do nothing is coming from. I have said numerous times in this thread, discuss it with the cop as much as possible. But as soon as the bracelets come out, the time to discuss is over.

Maybe you like getting your butt kicked and charged with resisting arrest. I don't know you.

But for me? In your scenario of the cop asking me for one of my legally owned firearms, I would say no and ask why he wants to take them. I would continue arguing, respectfully and politely to keep the situation from escalating as much as possible. The moment it got to the point where it looked like it was going from a discussion to a violent encounter, I would hand it over.

Then I would go home, call my attorney, and sue the crap out of the department and get it back.

It sounds to me like you are saying if the cop asked for your gun you would clear leather and start shooting, which is a seriously stupid course of action.

I am well aware that some cops are testosterone fueled power monsters. That makes it even more imperative that you don't become an arrogant ------ when dealing with them. Measuring your ---- against a guy that has numerous weapons, and the authority to subdue you and take you to jail is a very unintelligent way to parade through life.

A real man knows how to fight strategically. Retreat from the physical battle with the power monger that you have no hope of winning, but win the war in court.

#61 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-21 10:21 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

Bocank the only moral lesson I learned is that you are extremely violent and advocate for people to fight the police. If you want to see less people in jail like I do, that is the opposite of the way yoy should go about it.

#62 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-21 10:24 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

#59

I understand your point 726. None of that is acceptable behavior and should be dealt with accordingly.

I was just deflecting this issue with the reality that municipal employees enjoy many of the benefits given to these police officers. Other similar employees live in a consequence free world where they can get away with a lot of crap.....I'm just asking the left to remember that the next time a politician attempts to address that.

#63 | Posted by eberly at 2014-08-21 10:32 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Cops are always sizing people up based on what they drive, what they wear, how they look, how they carry themselves, the kind of language that they use, etc., etc., etc. And they do treat people differently based on these perceptions."

don't forget what neighborhood they are in as well. I'm sure cops have significant biases based on where they are.

#64 | Posted by eberly at 2014-08-21 10:34 AM | Reply | Flag:

I have never flagged a thing on this site. [...] And yes, you did advocate for violence against cops. You said very clearly that my stance if not fighting the police was somehow a ----- way out.

Not sure how else I could take that. Your poor wording does not indicate a mistake on my part. It's yours.

I agree with you on substantive policy changes top make it more difficult for bad cops to hide. The time to fight injustice is not during the stop. It's after.

#66 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-21 11:02 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

BTW - Cops are always sizing people up based on what they drive, what they wear, how they look, how they carry themselves, the kind of language that they use, etc., etc., etc. And they do treat people differently based on these perceptions. If you unaggressivly make a cop aware that you know what your rights are and are likely to be someone who will complain, he's alot less likely to overstep his bounds. They don't want to deal with headaches later.
#60 | POSTED BY SULLY AT 2014-08-21 10:07 AM | FLAG:

The second an officer starts paying attention to you, you're at increased risk of losing your freedom or even your life. It's a serious matter and people should be aware of how serious.

In addition to using the word "unagressively" I would add "formally". Speak as though you were making each statement on the record. If you need to, tell the officer that you do not understand what is going on, or the implications of what is going on, and let them know that you would have to speak with a lawyer before you make any more choices. If it is something minor, still be formal. Tell them that you are sorry that they believe that you were speeding, but you do not believe that it is true. Provide them with a way out. Say that there may have been a mistake and another car may have been in the sights of the lazer. Try one or two of these and see if they bite. If not, save your story for court.

Do not trust the police. They are not your friends. They are not there to help you. They are there to enforce the law. That job has nothing to do with you. It may be that the only reason that they're messing with you is because they found out before shift that their wife is leaving them. You don't know. So play it safe and imagine things could go downhill at any time. The truth is that they could.

#68 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2014-08-21 11:11 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

#67 you don't get to change your stance just because you feel better about it.

You took a teaching moment about children and how to interact with the police, and made it personal. Not my problem. I actually found it funny, and certainly wouldn't flag it.

Your anger is comical to me. Jumping up and down all indignant about your own actions I'd humorous.

The bottom line is simple. You feel like violence is the answer against what you perceive as tyranny. That is a great meathead point of view. It's guaranteed to not work, but will get you attention.

The only real way to fight individual instances of injustice is through the court system using complaints, law suits, and the press. That is a battle I can win and will work.

#69 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-21 11:20 AM | Reply | Flag:

"The bottom line is simple. You feel like violence is the answer against what you perceive as tyranny. That is a great meathead point of view. It's guaranteed to not work, but will get you attention."

What the hell are you talking about? I said I almost hope the violence and looting doesn't stop in Ferguson because it is attracting global attention to the issue. That is a commentary on the American attention span, not by any means did I even say the violence be directed at the police. I am not advocating violence toward cops. I am infuriated by the editorial. I am talking about the editorial and the predominant attitude among the police. I want intensive debate and pushback on this attitude.

To think that a common citizen isn't fighting an unfair fight in court against the police system is beyond naive. The reasons for this have been stated ad-nausem and statistics bear this out.....especially if you are a minority. You are uniformed if you think otherwise. That is why without public pressure, the system will continue to be broken as we slide toward tyranny. I am sorry if you can only take these points and bastardize them.

#70 | Posted by bocaink at 2014-08-21 11:28 AM | Reply | Flag:

Snoofy, are you actually saying that it is a problem top ask for permission top do something like search a car
#46 | Posted by ABH

Yes, it's a problem to ask people to give up their rights. I've often heard that ignorance of the law is no excuse. You go one step further and use ignorance of the law to deprive people of their rights.

Government acts in bad faith when it asks people to give up the rights that were specifically written to protect them from government.

Unless the cops are willing to roll with a public defender so that I might have a lawyer available at the time of questioning, it's an abuse of power to ask people to give up their rights.

Would you be okay with a judge asking a convict if he would be willing to endure torture as part of his sentence, perhaps promising a lesser jail time if he consents, and then having no obligation to uphold that promise?

#71 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-21 11:44 AM | Reply | Flag:

The problem with a cop "asking" to search a car is that for the vast majority of people such a "request" comes across as a demand. Let me search your car... or else! This is especially true when dealing with young adults. Many many people feel coerced to give consent no matter how innocently the cop tries to frame the "request". As a criminal defrense attorney for 22 yearsI have seen this very same dynamic over 1000 times.

#72 | Posted by moder8 at 2014-08-21 11:52 AM | Reply | Flag:

The problem with a cop "asking" to search a car is that for the vast majority of people such a "request" comes across as a demand. Let me search your car... or else!

It basically is. I have been asked and refused. The cop kept me there for over an hour while we waited for a dog to come and sniff the outside of my car.

Basically, it was "let me search now or I will really make this hard on you."

#73 | Posted by kanrei at 2014-08-21 11:53 AM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

The only real way to fight individual instances of injustice is through the court system using complaints, law suits, and the press. That is a battle I can win and will work.
#69 | Posted by ABH

It appears you're not even listening.
The problem is not individual instances of injustice.
It's systemic. It's policy. And as if that weren't enough, it's the Blue Wall of Silence.

The title of this article is "I'm a cop. If you don't want to get hurt, don't challenge me." Challenge, definition 4, "a demand to explain, justify, etc." dictionary.reference.com

His attitude is unacceptable in a civilized society that respects the rule of law. If I make a perfectly legal and reasonable demand for an explanation as to why I have been stopped, why I'm being asked questions, why I'm being asked to step out of the car, this cop thinks it's okay to hurt me. He and anyone who thinks that way must not be allowed to wear the uniform. He is a bully hiding behind a badge.

#74 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-21 01:38 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

I can't get they with you silly and moder8. I see absolutely nothing wrong with asking for permission, and adults being able to decide for themselves whether to grant that permission or not. The state says yoy hand the right, but I don't think it should be able to force you to keep the right. Free thinking individuals can determine their own best interest.

As for your point Snuffy, you are taking the words if a single cop, and attempting to use them as an indicator of a systemic problem. I see no evidence of that.

There are problem cops. Yes, if the author means exactly what these words seem to indicate, then he doesn't have the right attitude to be a cop and should be let go. But, the system had checks and balances. Lawsuits for wrongful detention are possible, a complaint against the officer is effective in that it becomes part of their record.

I have never had a negative interaction with a police officer of any kind. I just don't think it is as widespread as you are claiming.

#75 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-21 01:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

Kanrei, if they detained yoy fir more than an hour, you have grounds for a wrongful detention suit. Moder8 would know better, but I think the allowed limit for a roadside stop to await a k9 after a refusal is one hour. Longer than that is unlawful. Or so is my understanding.

#76 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-21 01:54 PM | Reply | Flag:

ABH,

It is, but I live in Miami and complaining about that will get me laughed at.

#77 | Posted by kanrei at 2014-08-21 01:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

Translation: I'm a police officer. I serve power, not you. If you don't like this: #$%^ you, I will shoot you.

Fascism.

#78 | Posted by Shawn at 2014-08-21 02:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

I can't imagine that there isn't an attorney in Miami that would be willing to take that case on.

#79 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-21 02:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

I can't imagine that there isn't an attorney in Miami that would be willing to take that case on.

#79 | POSTED BY ABH AT 2014-08-21 02:01 PM |

LOL. We can't even try some killers because the courts are so backed up. Do you really believe a DA will take the time and resources because a cop kept on the side of the road 15 minutes too long?

#80 | Posted by kanrei at 2014-08-21 02:03 PM | Reply | Flag:

The da doesn't have any input. You file a civil suit against the department.

#81 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-21 02:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yes, if the author means exactly what these words seem to indicate, then he doesn't have the right attitude to be a cop and should be let go. But, the system had checks and balances.
#75 | Posted by ABH
?

Then why is he still a cop? Why is he a 17-year veteran?

If the "checks and balances" don't kick in after 17 years, they're not about to start.

Please try to be honest about reality during this discussion.

#82 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-21 02:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

LOL. Only a loser or someone who really hates cops would bother with a lawsuit over 15 minutes.

Nice job hijacking the thread to a different subject though.

#83 | Posted by kanrei at 2014-08-21 02:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

At least file a formal complaint against the officer. Don't let the SGT talk you out of it by saying he will "take care of it." Fill out the forms and have it put into the officers record. They have to do that. Enough of those complaints, and the officer is suspended or fired.

That is how the system is supposed to work.

#84 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-21 02:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

"I can't imagine that there isn't an attorney in Miami that would be willing to take that case on.
#79 | POSTED BY ABH AT 2014-08-21 02:01 PM"

At the risk of pointing out the obvious:

KANREI is saying that it is a waste of time.

I'm sure there are attorneys in Miami who would take this case. A reputable attorney will tell KANREI what he already knows: "You're wasting your time and/or money.". Hopefully that advice won't be too expensive (in time or $$$). A less-reputable one will take on this case as long as one's hasn't reached the bottom of their pockets. I'd be VERY surprised if many (ANY?) attorney would take on this case on a contingency fee.

#85 | Posted by TrueBlue at 2014-08-21 02:13 PM | Reply | Flag:

I once got pulled over for expired tags. 2 cops 1 on each side of the car. The one on the passenger side is shining his light all over the car and sees a bag of gas fireplace embers. He says is that marijuana? The officer at my window shines his light back there and asks me whats in the bag. I glance back to see what he was talking about and see the bag. I tell him those are glowing embers for a gas fireplace. He is satisfied (they really don't look much like weed) The other cop looks skeptical and wants to search my car and check it out. Now I installed fireplaces so it was a huge bag cost me close to 50 bucks at wholesale so I wasn't real interested in having them trash the bag and search my car damaging pilot assemblies and other delicate equipment. So I say I would prefer you not search my car but if you want I'll open the bag and let you try some, but don't blame me when they shred your lungs and cause lung cancer. The first cop looks at me and moves on with the stop the second cop gets really pissy.

If he had been the one in charge I suspect I would have wound up beaten in cuffs by the side of the car while dogs went over every inch of my car trashing delicate pieces of fireplace equipment and late as hell to my appointment.

Cops are great when they are keeping order but when they don't have anything better to do than harass citizens they sure take it on themselves to do so.

#86 | Posted by TaoWarrior at 2014-08-21 02:46 PM | Reply | Flag:

#1 ABH nailed it. The writer is a punk, and too aggressive, true. But being rude to a cop or worse, aggressive is only going to end one way.

#87 | Posted by e1g1 at 2014-08-21 03:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

The trouble I have with police attitudes like this, above and beyond the obvious lack of understanding of their imperative to protect and serve, not assault and subjugate, is that out makes it to where legitimate law enforcement is suspect. I don't advocate people to resist arrest: it won't go well for them, and society can't work that way. Anymore though, if someone injured or killed a cop, if a bystander thought things were going overboard and defended a perp, possibly with lethal force - I would give a great deal of credence to a self-defense type defense.

We shouldn't be at the point where that can be said about the people supposed to be protecting us.

#88 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-08-21 06:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

This article really hits home the idea that reform really does need to begin with attitudes. Americans tend to seek technical solutions more readily than social ones. Cops getting a bit rough with their truncheons? Give them tasers! (The problem being that these sorts if solutions tend to produce unforeseen results: tasers are a great way to torture without leaving marks.) Police need to be trained not to regard even poor and dangerous areas as war zones to be contained.

#89 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2014-08-21 06:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

www.rawstory.com

The type of incident I'm referring to. Just stand there, and hope your complaint form is suitably angry in its wording? The mom in this story did, but how many parents could or would stand by while their child was tased and tased into seizures? How many dad's wouldn't rush the cop and take them down, how many who have CCW's could watch that and not defend their child, possibly lethally? And would you blame them?

You'll note: I never state that as the correct form of action, or that anything good would come of it: we all know it won't, but in the heat of the moment, police abuse could come to that. And it shouldn't. No one should be in that situation.

This police entitled-to-brutality attitude has got to go. Because it's going to push people too far, which will just escalate police fears and powers, until no one is safe. We have to get a handle on it before it's too late.

#90 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-08-21 06:40 PM | Reply | Flag:

Long way from TN to Ferguson; so you were a witness?

#45 | Posted by Greatamerican

Sure, uh, I was right there [/snark off]

The cop rolled up and the first thing out of his mouth is "get the ---- on the sidewalk." Nice way to start off with a couple guys crossing a residential street in the middle of the afternoon, eh?

#91 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2014-08-21 06:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

The cop rolled up and the first thing out of his mouth is "get the ---- on the sidewalk." Nice way to start off with a couple guys crossing a residential street in the middle of the afternoon, eh?

#91 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2014-08-21 06:48 PM | Reply | Flag:

He told them to get the ---- on the sidewalk because they saw him and took their sweet ass time moving out of the way. That's why.

Any other observations?

rwd

#92 | Posted by rightwingdon at 2014-08-21 06:55 PM | Reply | Flag:

#92 | POSTED BY RIGHTWINGDON AT 2014-08-21 06:55 PM | REPLY | FLAG

You could have just wrote "uppity negroes didn't know their place." Would have said the same thing about you, and saved some words on the way.

#93 | Posted by zeropointnrg at 2014-08-21 07:00 PM | Reply | Flag:

Did the officer us profanity? That might be a factor... Doesn't America case law have some provision or other for "fighting words?"

#94 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2014-08-21 07:07 PM | Reply | Flag:

American case law ^

#95 | Posted by DirkStruan at 2014-08-21 07:08 PM | Reply | Flag:

The LAPD should change their logo from "To Protect and Serve," to "Don't Want to get Hurt, Don't Challenge Me!"

That would look awesome on the side of their cars..

#96 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2014-08-21 07:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

He told them to get the ---- on the sidewalk because they saw him and took their sweet ass time moving out of the way. That's w

If this really happened, a cop who begins an interaction with a member of the public that disrespectfully is increasing the chances things will go badly. It's unprofessional and reckless, like he wanted a confrontation.

#97 | Posted by rcade at 2014-08-21 08:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

"The venue is filing a complaint and/or retaining an attorney.
Do what the cop says. If he is wrong, sue the crap out of the department for improper training the officer and wrongful arrest.
Simple.
#1 | Posted by ABH"

I take calls like this every month or so. I tell every single caller I cannot help them. The citizen in this situation has the burden of proving a "he said/she said" event, and that burden is nearly impossible to overcome.

Bottom line: your advice is useless.

Your choices are to stand up for yourself with words and risk the wrath of the occasional ------- cop, or comply like the sheep to make sure you don't get a baton to the forehead. This is not how it should be.

#98 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2014-08-21 08:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

If this really happened, a cop who begins an interaction with a member of the public that disrespectfully is increasing the chances things will go badly. It's unprofessional and reckless, like he wanted a confrontation.

#97 | Posted by rcade at 2014-08-21 08:04 PM | Reply | Flag:

Respect goes both ways. When you're dealing with people (any) that show no respect you speak their language, it's the way it is.
You can't really expect those two to be offended first since they dissed first, it's not how it works. Anything after that is fighting words.

Always.

rwd

#99 | Posted by rightwingdon at 2014-08-21 09:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

When you're dealing with people (any) that show no respect you speak their language, it's the way it is.
#99 | Posted by rightwingdon

So you're saying the cops are no better than black people when it comes to showing respect to one another?

#100 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-21 09:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

#100 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-21 09:15 PM | Reply | Flag

What I am saying is exactly what I wrote.

So what you are saying is, your neighbors dog that repeatedly craps on your lawn you greet that neighbor with a hearty wave and a hi-ho neighbor and an invite to your annual BBQ.

Is that about right?

rwd

#101 | Posted by rightwingdon at 2014-08-21 09:42 PM | Reply | Flag:

Respect goes both ways. When you're dealing with people (any) that show no respect you speak their language, it's the way it is.

The first words out of his mouth were profane and disrespectful. Your excuses for bad behavior from a cop are pathetic. If a cop rolled up on you and said "get the ---- out of the street," you'd be pissed off.

#102 | Posted by rcade at 2014-08-22 09:31 AM | Reply | Flag:

The cops work for the 1%, but are paid for by ordinary working people. Everything works this way because the 1% don't like to lose money.

#103 | Posted by nutcase at 2014-08-22 09:56 AM | Reply | Flag:

How do we know, exactly, what words were said initially?

#104 | Posted by ABH at 2014-08-22 11:13 AM | Reply | Flag:

I got pulled over once for speeding. When the officer told me how fast he clocked me at I replied, "I didn't think I was going that fast." His reply was, "Are you calling me a liar?" in a pretty hostile tone. That cop was escalating the situation. At which point I shut up and just let him issue the ticket.

There was no reason for him to react like that. He could have just said, "That's what the radar said, here is your ticket." He apparently didn't like even the tiniest bit of questioning.

Wether cops (or any other authority figure) like it or not, we *should* question authority. It comes with the territory and they should be trained to handle it like professionals.

#105 | Posted by jaydillyo at 2014-08-22 12:17 PM | Reply | Flag:

So what you are saying is, your neighbors dog that repeatedly craps on your lawn
#101 | Posted by rightwingdon

A black guy standing in the street in the black part of town is not on the cop's lawn. He's on his lawn. The police officer is the guest, the neighbor.

#106 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-22 01:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

I admire some people's trolling skills (both in the article and some of the comments here).

#107 | Posted by sentinel at 2014-08-22 02:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

Don't argue with me or I'll hurt you? Who does this cop think he is?

#4 | Posted by rcade

What is the point in an arguement? It's one you will never win.

#38 | Posted by Sniper

I have lost a lot of arguments in my life. Interestingly I have never given up if I still believe I am right. Which is why I have also won quite a few.

Cops are not the boss of me...they actually work for me.

I will never submit to Tyranny of any kind.

I am not sure where you are from and how your justify your submission to tyranny but I am from Virginia and I am trained as a Marine.

If an Officer of the Law is acting in respectful and professional manner in their interactions with me I can respect that and will respond accordingly as most humans will do.

If they don't then all bets are off.

As for this madman. The officers were in no danger until they put themselves in danger. They had other means to diffuse the situation and they CHOSE to kill the man instead. We should all be held accountable for our actions.

Semper Fi

Sic Semper Tyrannis

#108 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-08-22 03:17 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

^^... RE#108 the "madman" I was referring to was the knife welding nut not Mike Brown (though he may have been mad, too, for all I know).

#109 | Posted by donnerboy at 2014-08-22 03:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

How do we know, exactly, what words were said initially?

Dorian Johnson, the guy walking with Brown when the cop rolled up on them, said he yelled "get the ---- on the sidewalk."

#110 | Posted by rcade at 2014-08-22 05:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

The same guy who filed a false police report and said brown was shot in the back? The same guy that copped to robbing the cigars? You go with that...

#111 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-08-22 05:23 PM | Reply | Flag:

Am I to believe that people blocking traffic and walking down the middle of the road are respectful of others, and rational people? At their age do you believe they were unaware of the problem they were causing?
Have you ever even been through a ghetto FFS? It is SOP to walk in the street aimlessly, or stop your car in the middle of the road to talk to your peeps. It is literally unfathomable that you could be in a ghetto at any hour of the day and be unaware of this fact.

#112 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2014-08-22 05:27 PM | Reply | Flag:

How do we know, exactly, what words were said initially?

Dorian Johnson, the guy walking with Brown when the cop rolled up on them, said he yelled "get the ---- on the sidewalk."

#110 | Posted by rcade at 2014-08-22 05:14 PM | Reply | Flag:

[...] Have you ever at anytime spent time in the hood, because I really don't think you have a grasp of what goes on there.

rwd

#113 | Posted by rightwingdon at 2014-08-22 06:35 PM | Reply | Flag:

The same guy who filed a false police report and said brown was shot in the back?

The New York Times has sources who confirmed Wilson fired his gun at Brown's back as he was running away:

"As Officer Wilson got out of his car, the men were running away. The officer fired his weapon but did not hit anyone, according to law enforcement officials."

He just didn't hit him. Brown then turned around and got shot six times.

How would you expect Dorian Johnson to know the first shot in the back didn't hit? He fled as Wilson repeatedly shot his friend. But he was right about Wilson shooting at Brown as they fled.

www.nytimes.com

#114 | Posted by rcade at 2014-08-23 02:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

Have you ever at anytime spent time in the hood, because I really don't think you have a grasp of what goes on there.

Tell us all about your hood expertise, Rightwingdon. Did you grow up on the mean streets of New York City's Upper West Side? Did you belong to the Sharks or the Jets? Did you meet a girl named Maria?

#115 | Posted by rcade at 2014-08-23 02:07 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 2

He DOES have some sharp dance moves...

#116 | Posted by Corky at 2014-08-23 02:20 PM | Reply | Flag:

Am I to believe that people blocking traffic and walking down the middle of the road are respectful of others, and rational people?
#112 | Posted by 101Chairborne

So we're back to you thinking it's smart sensible policy to be rude to disrespectful, irrational people.

#117 | Posted by snoofy at 2014-08-23 03:01 PM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable

 

Advertisement

Drudge Retort