# Another filmed police encounter (Hammond, IN) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 7, 2014, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645 "2014-10-07T13:23:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 20
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/381 "2014-10-09T01:46:00Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > It wasn’t simply because the passenger wouldn’t get out of the car, it was because he repeatedly refused to get out of the car. Um, so in fact, it **was** because the passenger wouldn’t get out of the car. That’s what “refusing” to do something means, you know? And I think you’re on very shaky ground when you suggest that an unarmed, nonviolent person not engaged in any unlawful activity has somehow “earned” a taser attack merely by refusing to comply with a police request. And AFAICT, [official police guidelines on the Use-of-Force Continuum don’t support your position](http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article_id=2204&issue_id=92010): > [@](#): > > Table 1: Use-of-Force Continuum > Suspect resistance Officer use of force > > 1. No resistance 1. Officer presence > 2. Verbal noncompliance 2. Verbal commands > 3. Passive resistance 3. Hands-on tactics, chemical spray > 4. Active resistance 4. Intermediate weapons: baton, Taser, strikes, nondeadly force > 5. Aggressive resistance 5. Intermediate weapons, intensified techniques, nondeadly force > 6. Deadly-force resistance 6. Deadly force > […] > > Table 2: Levels of Resistance Defined > \*\*Passive Resistance \*\* The subject fails to obey verbal direction, preventing the officer from taking lawful action. > \*\*Active Resistance \*\* The subject’s actions are intended to facilitate an escape or prevent an arrest. The action is not likely to cause injury. > \*\*Aggressive Resistance \*\* The subject has battered or is about to batter an officer, and the subject’s action is likely to cause injury. > \*\*Deadly-Force Resistance \*\* The subject’s actions are likely to cause death or significant bodily harm to the officer or another person. The actions of the subject in this case were clearly no more than “passive resistance” (and I think an argument could be made that they didn’t even exceed “verbal noncompliance”, since he didn’t “prevent” the officers from taking any of the “lawful action” that the situation required, i.e., ticketing the driver for a traffic violation). That is not the sort of behavior for which a taser attack is appropriate. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/382 "2014-10-09T01:53:10Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > But what would you do if it happens? No, really. The odds of this happening to any individual are probably small, and the odds of it happening to me are far smaller. Does that seem reasonable to you? Do you think it seems reasonable to people on the wrong end of the equation? ---
**Author:** ![Belowjob2.0](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Belowjob2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Belowjob2.0)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/383 "2014-10-09T02:33:26Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > Yes, and I regret and have learned from every one of those experiences. > > Yes. I was honest, cooperative, and apologetic. > > You catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar. And even more with bullshit. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 3:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/384 "2014-10-09T03:21:06Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > No, really. The odds of this happening to any individual are probably small, and the odds of it happening to me are far smaller. Does that seem reasonable to you? Do you think it seems reasonable to people on the wrong end of the equation? Reasonable? Yes. But what would you do if it did happen to you? Me, I’d get out of the car. Especially if I had younger children in the back seat. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/385 "2014-10-09T03:22:29Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Reasonable? Yes. But what would you do if it did happen to you? Me, I’d get out of the car. Especially if I had younger children in the back seat. Sure is easy to tell someone else what they should do when nobody’s pointing a gun at you, isn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 4:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/386 "2014-10-09T04:31:06Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Sure is easy to tell someone else what they should do when nobody’s pointing a gun at you, isn’t it? I’m not telling anyone what they should do. I did mention what I would do in a similar circumstance. Since no one is currently pointing a gun at you (blink your eyes 😉 😉 twice if they are), would you stay in the vehicle with the young children or would you get out? ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 5:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/387 "2014-10-09T05:10:40Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > Taking a step back here for a second, I realize that I’ve started to sound like I’m actively defending the cops’ actions, which is not my intent. For instance, you’re 100% correct, that’s exactly how this should have played out in an ideal world, and the fact that it didn’t play out that way is on the cops far more than it’s on the civilians. What I’m reacting to in this thread is what I perceive as an overreaction in the opposite direction. The family in this case is not civil rights heroes, their actions weren’t brave, they weren’t standing up for our rights. They were just scared and nervous people making foolish choices while under a lot of stress in a shitty situation that they didn’t really deserve to be in. I’ve highlighted what I disagree with. It’s a pity; you were doing so well for the first hundred words or so. And I hope you’ll agree that _at this point_, these folks are acting out of concern for their (and our) civil rights. BTW, has anyone checked out [this VICE piece](http://www.vice.com/read/how-can-we-stop-cops-from-beating-and-killing-109) yet? I thought it started off well but by the end it was just kind of bleating like a sunstroked goat. I’d have preferred to see the author take a look at what a police-less society would look like and what steps we might take to get there. I’d don’t know that it’s a realistic goal, but it would have been a more interesting read and a better end to the piece than what was published, IMO. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 11:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/388 "2014-10-09T11:26:37Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > I assume that the male in the passenger seat, the one who repeatedly refused to exit the vehicle, was aware that there was still a young girl in the back seat. The guys who break the window are responsible for showering glass on kids, not the unarmed, non-violent guy sitting in the front seat. The cops had other options than showering glass on kids. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 11:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/389 "2014-10-09T11:36:21Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > BTW, has anyone checked out [this VICE piece](http://www.vice.com/read/how-can-we-stop-cops-from-beating-and-killing-109) yet? I thought it started off well but by the end it was just kind of bleating like a sunstroked goat. I’d have preferred to see the author take a look at what a police-less society would look like and what steps we might take to get there. I’d don’t know that it’s a realistic goal, but it would have been a more interesting read and a better end to the piece than what was published, IMO. I read that article. I’m not sure about the conclusion either, but the instances it highlights make me think this issue has a lot of similarities to the Penn State abuse coverups, the Catholic Church pedophilia scandal, the NFL domestic abuse problem, and similar big organizational coverups. In short, big, powerful institutions pretty much _always have corrupt institutional morals_, and will _always prioritize protecting themselves above justice_. So that to police forces as institutions, this issue will be seen more as “how can we stop all this criticism and media/legal attacks on police officers?”, rather than “do we really have a problem with excessive force towards black people, and if so, how do we fix it?”. As an institution, police forces are not concerned with this question – they’re uninterested in finding out if they have a brutality problem, except for how it affects their public relations, to the point that they don’t even want statistics about it out there (and will refuse to help anyone looking into it). ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/390 "2014-10-09T12:46:15Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > And the kids earned being showered with glass, I guess. Can we please stop with this particular piece of hyperbole? And calling it that is being generous. The kids were in the back seat. Looks like the passenger was a fairly big guy and the seat was fairly far back. Watch the video. If the rear passenger window was smashed you could rightly say that the kids were showered with glass. It wasn’t, and they weren’t. You know, if you, and others, have to resort to this kind of emotional hyperbole, maybe your point isn’t a point after all, but a desperate attempt to argue through emotion. Won’t someone think of _the children!_ ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/391 "2014-10-09T14:35:58Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Um, so in fact, it **was** because the passenger wouldn’t get out of the car. That’s what “refusing” to do something means, you know? > > And I think you’re on very shaky ground when you suggest that an unarmed, nonviolent person not engaged in any unlawful activity has somehow “earned” a taser attack merely by refusing to comply with a police request. And AFAICT, [official police guidelines on the Use-of-Force Continuum don’t support your position](http://www.policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/index.cfm?fuseaction=display_arch&article_id=2204&issue_id=92010): > > The actions of the subject in this case were clearly no more than “passive resistance” (and I think an argument could be made that they didn’t even exceed “verbal noncompliance”, since he didn’t “prevent” the officers from taking any of the “lawful action” that the situation required, i.e., ticketing the driver for a traffic violation). That is not the sort of behavior for which a taser attack is appropriate. So, the “passive resistance” column says that “Hands-on tactics, chemical spray” are permitted. I don’t think any glass got on the kids in the back. But I suspect the kids would have gotten a whiff of chemical spray, if it had been used. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/392 "2014-10-09T14:54:29Z")
> [@monstro](#): > > [A brave woman stands up to two police officers and nothing bad happens to her](http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-29544145) > > She’s white. She’s an attorney. The officers are black, for whatever it’s worth. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/393 "2014-10-09T15:00:17Z")
If they were in such a tearing hurry to get to the hospital, why was the passenger sitting there wasting time? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/394 "2014-10-09T15:09:16Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > If they were in such a tearing hurry to get to the hospital, why was the passenger sitting there wasting time? > > Regards, > Shodan Your rapid decline to troll status is sad to see. You were always fairly annoying but now you appear to have stopped even trying to be rational. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/395 "2014-10-09T15:39:30Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I read that article. I’m not sure about the conclusion either, but the instances it highlights make me think this issue has a lot of similarities to the Penn State abuse coverups, the Catholic Church pedophilia scandal, the NFL domestic abuse problem, and similar big organizational coverups. In short, big, powerful institutions pretty much _always have corrupt institutional morals_, and will _always prioritize protecting themselves above justice_. So that to police forces as institutions, this issue will be seen more as “how can we stop all this criticism and media/legal attacks on police officers?”, rather than “do we really have a problem with excessive force towards black people, and if so, how do we fix it?”. As an institution, police forces are not concerned with this question – they’re uninterested in finding out if they have a brutality problem, except for how it affects their public relations, to the point that they don’t even want statistics about it out there (and will refuse to help anyone looking into it). The thing that I liked most about the piece was that it showed that I’m not the only person who noticed (I noticed years and years ago) that nearly every police shooting has the same story and that even when other eyewitness accounts contradict the officer’s version of things, the law ALWAYS seems to fall on the cops’ side. I’ve always wondered how it was that I seemed to be the only person noticing that the police seem to have a script that they read from when they talk about an officer shooting someone. ---
**Author:** ![Bone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bone/32/407_2.png) [@Bone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bone)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/396 "2014-10-09T16:00:31Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > No, really. The odds of this happening to any individual are probably small, and the odds of it happening to me are far smaller. Does that seem reasonable to you? Do you think it seems reasonable to people on the wrong end of the equation? How do you reconcile your belief that the odds of this happening to any individual are probably small but the honestly held belief that it’s reasonable for people to fear thuggery from police during a traffic stop? > [@Kimstu](#): > > Um, so in fact, it **was** because the passenger wouldn’t get out of the car. That’s what “refusing” to do something means, you know? > > And I think you’re on very shaky ground when you suggest that an unarmed, nonviolent person not engaged in any unlawful activity has somehow “earned” a taser attack merely by refusing to comply with a police request. The order to exit the vehicle was not a request, it was a lawful command. The police have the authority to compel compliance with that command. Do you agree? > [@](#): > > The actions of the subject in this case were clearly no more than “passive resistance” (and I think an argument could be made that they didn’t even exceed “verbal noncompliance”, since he didn’t “prevent” the officers from taking any of the “lawful action” that the situation required, i.e., ticketing the driver for a traffic violation). That is not the sort of behavior for which a taser attack is appropriate. Actually, the actions of the person based on your description would be ‘active resistance’. He was ordered to exit the vehicle and refused. At that point he was going to be arrested. The table states: _The subject’s actions are intended to facilitate an escape or prevent an arrest. The action is not likely to cause injury._ Moreover, I can’t determine if this article is binding on the department in question. It looks like a study and recommendation but let me know if there is something that is authoritative. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/397 "2014-10-09T16:02:48Z")
> [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > The thing that I liked most about the piece was that it showed that I’m not the only person who noticed (I noticed years and years ago) that nearly every police shooting has the same story and that even when other eyewitness accounts contradict the officer’s version of things, the law ALWAYS seems to fall on the cops’ side. I’ve always wondered how it was that I seemed to be the only person noticing that the police seem to have a script that they read from when they talk about an officer shooting someone. From what I understand, in many departments nowadays officers receive specific and significant instruction on how to justify a shooting _after the shooting is complete_. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/398 "2014-10-09T16:13:28Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Can we please stop with this particular piece of hyperbole? And calling it that is being generous. The kids were in the back seat. Looks like the passenger was a fairly big guy and the seat was fairly far back. Watch the video. If the rear passenger window was smashed you could rightly say that the kids were showered with glass. It wasn’t, and they weren’t. You know, if you, and others, have to resort to this kind of emotional hyperbole, maybe your point isn’t a point after all, but a desperate attempt to argue through emotion. Won’t someone think of _the children!_ I’m criticizing the decision making of the police – they did not need to break that window to “protect and serve”. And breaking the window put the children in the back at risk. Not a huge risk, but still a totally unnecessary one. Watching the video again, it looks like pieces of glass went everywhere, including into the back seat, by the way. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 4:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/399 "2014-10-09T16:29:26Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I’m criticizing the decision making of the police – they did not need to break that window to “protect and serve”. And breaking the window put the children in the back at risk. Not a huge risk, but still a totally unnecessary one. > > Watching the video again, it looks like pieces of glass went everywhere, including into the back seat, by the way. Oh, please. You, and others, have repeatedly whined about the cops “showering glass on kids”! Oh, the horror!!! It didn’t happen. Stick to what did happen and you’ll have a better argument. And just show you know, there’s very little danger from wind glass. It’s designed to break just the way you see, into pebbles, not shards with sharp edges. Either way, the kids were in zero danger due to the breaking of the glass. What caused them the most damage, IMO, is the length of the confrontation and arguing. I said upthread that they seemed like a once family and I feel for them. But if he would have gotten out of the car as requested, this incident would have been much less traumatic for everyone. Now, I’m not placing blame on anyone. In fact, I asked upthread if anyone knew about what law would allow a police officer to ask a passenger to step out of the car, and under what circumstances. I can’t find a satisfactory explanation, So it is perfectly possible that the officers acted inappropriately. Unless they didn’t. I also asked if anyone knew how ling the incident had been occurring prior to the video being recorded. Anyone know? ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [October 9, 2014, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645/400 "2014-10-09T16:39:38Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > …I also asked if anyone knew how ling the incident had been occurring prior to the video being recorded. Anyone know? (post shortened) Two days ago, someone on CNN said it took 13 minutes. I wasn’t watching the TV so I can’t tell you which one said it. Of course, CNN did not say when the clock started. Was it when the stop occurred? Was it when the officer first talked to the driver? Was it when the driver called 9-1-1? They didn’t bother to say when the clock stopped either. When the passenger was handcuffed? When the window was broken? The police videos haven’t been released yet. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645.md?page=19) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/another-filmed-police-encounter-hammond-in/700645.md?page=21)