No, you police brutality wanker, there is not. There is a rule specific to Great Debates, so you can count on me not bringing up your fetish in that forum. And really, I’m not judging. Who can explain why we’re into whatever we’re into? Some guys like blondes, some like watching police shoot or attack innocent people. I do think it’s bad form that your lust for this kind of thing renders you incapable of being objective. The people in those videos that make you jizz are real human beings who don’t deserve this kind of treatment.
No, because I live in America. What ass-backwards country do you hail from?
Wherein, obeying the law = following orders, yes?
That is not a legitimate reason to tase him. If the law says it is (and you’ve failed to demonstrate this – for someone who worships the law as much as you, you’re remarkably pathetic at actually citing the law), then the law is wrong and should be changed. Fear of the police is entirely reasonable for many people, and acting in a fearful but non-dangerous way should not be met with force.
And how long should they wait for? Five minutes? Ten? An hour? A couple of days?
But you don’t believe anybody else does. Just you and the cops.
Ahh, I thought I heard the sound of jackboots stomping.
At least until the HOT NOW sign is on at the Krispy Kreme donut shop.
As quoted upthread, the Supreme Court has held that officers have the legal right to order passengers out of a vehicle during a traffic stop. If you feel that this is such an egregious violation of the inalienable rights of Man, then I sincerely encourage you to write your Congressman and get him working on amending the Constitution to close that loophole.
No, it is not.
They could wait for a supervisor to arrive, as the man requested. No one was in any danger, and there was no risk to waiting. Or, considering that the only possible violation of the law was a seatbelt violation, they could have written the woman a ticket and let them go.
To be fair, it would suck that they busted his window and tased him if they weren’t serious about it.
Of course then there’s the question of why they wanted him out of the car anyway. They asked for ID, but even though they almost killed him, he did provide it. So what was the problem?
Having the legal right to order doesn’t mean that it’s appropriate to smash windows, shower children with glass, and tase him for noncompliance.
Yes it is.
Those are totally boss. I wish the Public Defender’s office could afford them. I’m sending a link to that site to my husband. Awesome.
Smapti - are you a former LEO? I’m pretty sure most, if not all, of the cops I work with would disagree with you.
And then we’d be having a thread about how the racist cops unlawfully detained a woman on her way to see her dying mother because the manager didn’t get there fast enough.
Don’t pretend that isn’t how you’d spin it if things had gone the way you currently say they ought to have.
Smapti is waaaaay too much of a coward to ever be a cop. He’s stated that he wouldn’t even risk his life to save his child from drowning.
No. Nor apparently is there a rule against being an obsequious little toad who shows up in every goddamned cop thread and derails it with his excruciatingly predictable, childish sloganeering. To our great detriment.
In fairness, pretty much everyone smaptis these threads before he gets a chance to now.
It is common for people to be puzzled when they think about the benefits and costs of the actions taken by the passenger in this incident, or say by Daniele Watts in hers. What the cops ask seems not so unreasonable, and the costs of not immediately complying are very large for those involved. Thus the public explains to themselves the actions of the non-cooperators by saying they were irrational: uppity, crazy, on drugs, venal, or in general and deserving of their abuse.
We really should be grateful to those who produce the Public Good of civil disobedience / non-cooperation with unreasonable orders from police.
No we wouldn’t. I haven’t started any threads about non-violent cop behavior.