# Controversial encounters between law-enforcement and civilians - the omnibus thread **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 10, 2014, 7:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942 "2014-10-10T07:35:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 619
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2018, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12362 "2018-01-11T00:16:56Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Where was your humanity when it came to Jordan Davis? Why was his life so worthless to you that you had no problem at all that it was taken? Simple. Jordan Davis was black, and \*\*Steophan \*\*doesn’t believe black people are human. Ergo, no lack of humanity in his hateful and racist comments toward Jordan Davis. ---
**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:** [January 11, 2018, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12363 "2018-01-11T00:33:37Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Accusing the victims of serious threats and assaults of murder is disgusting. I actually don’t believe anyone here would disagree with that statement on its own, but for some reason there’s a blindness to the fact that certain people are victims. > > Maybe Dunn or Zimmerman should have worn longer skirts. You’re the one who accused Dunn’s victim, the unarmed black kid Jordan Davis, who didn’t threaten anyone according to all the evidence aside from the testimony of a proven liar and shooter-at-children, of being “dangerous” and a “thug” and have no problem that he died. So you’re disgusting by your own criteria. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2018, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12364 "2018-01-11T00:44:49Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > There isn’t any evidence produced at trial that establishes a probability that Martin was defending himself against Zimmerman. > > Martin’s actions show that he probably did not know that Zimmerman had a gun. Martin had no injuries apart from scraped knuckles probably produced by his punching Zimmerman. Zimmerman had a broken nose, gashes on his head, facial contusions, and a sprained back. Thus there is no evidence of an assault on Martin, and considerable evidence of an assault on Zimmerman. The only significant injury to Martin was the gunshot that killed him, and that must necessarily have happened after he inflicted the injuries on Zimmerman, and thus are evidence of self-defense on Zimmerman’s part, not Martin’s. > > If you want to hold an opinion based on nothing, you can, but you cannot credibly claim that it is based on evidence that doesn’t exist, and is contradicted by evidence that does. > > Regards, > Shodan …do you think OJ Simpson killed Nicole Brown? I know I do. I think the evidence is clear that OJ did it. I have no doubt. I also don’t have a problem with the verdict. I think they made the right call based on the evidence at trial, and if I had been on that jury, even though I believed that OJ had done it I would have voted not guilty as well. And as I’ve already stated I don’t have a problem with the verdict in the Zimmerman case either. I think if I had been on that jury I may have voted not guilty as well. But that doesn’t mean I’m beholden to believe that Zimmerman was blameless here. I see the endless characterizations of Martin “doubling back” and I think to myself: why was Martin not allowed to change his mind about where he went? You’ve cherry picked evidence and created a narrative that conforms to your point of view. Its arrogant to think that you are allowed to do that but I am not. If Zimmerman had remained in the car that night Martin would still be alive. Martin didn’t have to die that night. Thats my entire point. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2018, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12365 "2018-01-11T00:47:27Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Yes, but your opinion doesn’t align with reality or reason. Try again, without the chains of unsupported inferences. …thanks for admitting you lied. > [@](#): > > Your entire argument lies on the claim that, because Martin used violence on Zimmerman, he _must_ have had a good reason. Despite there being no evidence of a _good_ reason. Strawman. > [@](#): > > It’s possible you started this without understanding what you were doing, and genuinely thought your reasoning was sound. But there’s no way you can still believe that now, you’ve been shown repeatedly, by more than one person, what your mistakes are. So either you are the liar, or you are incapable of reason. You’ve proven jack shit. Still no cites from you. I’m still waiting for answers to my questions. Prove that “I’m the reason people in many areas are scared to leave their houses.” Prove that “I’m the reason people can get away with repeated sexual assaults because “they deserve it” based on their previous actions.” Prove that “Martin had no reason to fear a man with a gun that was stalking him at night.” Put up or shut up. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2018, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12366 "2018-01-11T04:56:35Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > Simple. Jordan Davis was black, and \*\*Steophan \*\*doesn’t believe black people are human. Ergo, no lack of humanity in his hateful and racist comments toward Jordan Davis. His race is irrelevant, and if thus us going to be another idiotic attempt to claim “thug” is a racist word, then stop now. The only people that could \*possibly \*be racist against is Indians (Asian, not American), and that usage is archaic now. The problem is, as I see it, I don’t give a shit about race. I don’t immediately assume any act someone makes I say racially motivated, I look at what actually happened. If you think my opinion of the Davis case would be any different had he been some white trash scumbag blasting Florid a Georgia Line st deafening volume and threatening a black guy who asked him to turn it down, you’re sadly mistaken. But for some reason, cases where black people act in self defence aren’t controversial here. My guess for the reason for that is it’s liberal guilt causing an overreaction, assuming that in any conflict the black guy gets the benefit of the doubt, rather than being a neutral observer. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2018, 5:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12367 "2018-01-11T05:02:25Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …thanks for admitting you lied. Fuck me, you really can’t read for comprehension can you? You have stated an opinion, I’ve never denied that. What you still fail to do is present an opinion backed up with evidence, not speculation. Show your reasoning from the evidence, not from chains of inferences, that Martin had reason to fear imminent attack from Zimmerman. Not “well he must have had some reason”. Not “he shouldn’t have been following him”. Not “you can’t prove he didn’t threaten him”, or any of your other false or irrelevant claims. Show why, based solely on the evidence and reason, why Martin should have feared imminent attack. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2018, 5:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12368 "2018-01-11T05:10:32Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > I see the endless characterizations of Martin “doubling back” and I think to myself: why was Martin not allowed to change his mind about where he went? Two reasons it’s relevant. Firstly, it’s hypocritical in the extreme to say that Zimmerman should have stayed in his car and not followed Martin, but not that Martin should have gone into his father’s house (which he said on the phone he was right next to) instead of following Zimmerman. Secondly, it proves that Zimmerman was not close enough to Martin to be an imminent threat, that Martin had “escaped” him, but chose instead to go back to him. It’s evidence that, at least up to that point, Martin was scared for his life, and that Zimmerman wasn’t in position to harm him. For it not to be true, both Zimmerman and either Martin or Jeantel would have to be lying. So I consider it to be most likely true. ---
**Author:** ![eschereal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eschereal/32/18939_2.png) [@eschereal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eschereal)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2018, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12369 "2018-01-11T05:41:57Z")
People, please stop feeding this piece of troll shit. Click the number next to the thread title: he has the lion’s share of the posts in this thread. Mostly loathesome garbage. Just scroll past him, he is not worth the aggravation. ---
**Author:** ![Chisquirrel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6bbea6/32.png) [@Chisquirrel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chisquirrel)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2018, 6:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12370 "2018-01-11T06:14:37Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > The first police officer arrived on the scene about 45 seconds after the gunshot that killed Martin was recorded on the 911 line. ([Cite](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin).) So, in forty-five seconds, Zimmerman [ul][li]banged Martin’s knuckles on the ground[_]hit himself in the face hard enough to break his nose and cause multiple contusions [_]banged his own head on the ground hard enough to cause multiple lacerations [_]put grass stains and moisture on the back of his own jacket [_]put grass stains and moisture on Martin’s knees, and [\*]convinced an eye witness to report that he saw Martin on top of Zimmerman and not vice versa.[/ul]If you believe that this is what happened, it does not seem to me that **Steophan** is the idiot.[/li] > Regards, > Shodan Because there’s no other explanation where there might have been a tussle instigated by the armed man following an unarmed teen around at night. Thanks for dropping another **Shodan** turd. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2018, 6:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12371 "2018-01-11T06:30:13Z")
> [@Chisquirrel](#): > > Because there’s no other explanation where there might have been a tussle instigated by the armed man following an unarmed teen around at night. Thanks for dropping another **Shodan** turd. There’s are many potential explanations, but unless they’re supported by the evidence they’re just meaningless, idle speculation. There’s no evidence Zimmerman started any physical confrontation. That doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. It’s also possible that an unknown third party injured Zimmerman and shot Martin, or that Martin shot himself, and there’s equally as much evidence for those possibilities. Also, by this point Martin was following Zimmerman, not the other way round as you claim. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2018, 6:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12372 "2018-01-11T06:58:00Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Fuck me, you really can’t read for comprehension can you? You have stated an opinion, I’ve never denied that. What you still fail to do is present an opinion backed up with evidence, not speculation. > > Show your reasoning from the evidence, not from chains of inferences, that Martin had reason to fear imminent attack from Zimmerman. Not “well he must have had some reason”. Not “he shouldn’t have been following him”. Not “you can’t prove he didn’t threaten him”, or any of your other false or irrelevant claims. Show why, based solely on the evidence and reason, why Martin should have feared imminent attack. > [@Steophan](#): > > Two reasons it’s relevant. Firstly, it’s hypocritical in the extreme to say that Zimmerman should have stayed in his car and not followed Martin, but not that Martin should have gone into his father’s house (which he said on the phone he was right next to) instead of following Zimmerman. > > Secondly, it proves that Zimmerman was not close enough to Martin to be an imminent threat, that Martin had “escaped” him, but chose instead to go back to him. It’s evidence that, at least up to that point, Martin was scared for his life, and that Zimmerman wasn’t in position to harm him. > > For it not to be true, both Zimmerman and either Martin or Jeantel would have to be lying. So I consider it to be most likely true. …Prove that “I’m the reason people in many areas are scared to leave their houses.” Prove that “I’m the reason people can get away with repeated sexual assaults because “they deserve it” based on their previous actions.” Prove that “Martin had no reason to fear a man with a gun that was stalking him at night.” ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2018, 7:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12373 "2018-01-11T07:03:32Z")
> [@Banquet\_Bear](#): > > …Prove that “I’m the reason people in many areas are scared to leave their houses.” > > Prove that “I’m the reason people can get away with repeated sexual assaults because “they deserve it” based on their previous actions.” > > Prove that “Martin had no reason to fear a man with a gun that was stalking him at night.” The third is proved by the fact that there was no man with a gun stalking him. The first two are proved because you have repeatedly blamed the victim of a serious assault for defending himself, and said that he us a murderer. You don’t accept that victims of crime should be believed, you think they should be locked up. Your turn. ---
**Author:** ![SaneBill](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e68b1a/32.png) [@SaneBill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SaneBill)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2018, 8:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12374 "2018-01-11T08:56:56Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > For you to call Zimmerman a murderer, you would need to _know_, not merely speculate without evidence that Zimmerman caused those injuries, not Martin. I don’t think I’ve ever called him a murderer or said that the verdict was wrong. All I’ve said is that I don’t know what happened. It seems that I shouldn’t be participating this exactly for that said reason. But before you congratulate yourself, let me tell you it was \*\*Shodan \*\*who convinced me to get off the way. But I still don’t know for sure what happened there. You however seemed to be dead sure which is why I’ve been challenging you. And nothing changes the fact that you have been lying, moving goalposts, and redefined meanings for words “imminent”, “reasonable”, “proof”, “evidence”, “dangerous” etc. into what ever you felt suitable for the time. Now I stop feeding the troll. Don’t bother to reply, it’s no use. ---
**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:** [January 11, 2018, 10:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12375 "2018-01-11T10:13:00Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > His race is irrelevant, and if thus us going to be another idiotic attempt to claim “thug” is a racist word, then stop now. The only people that could \*possibly \*be racist against is Indians (Asian, not American), and that usage is archaic now. > > The problem is, as I see it, I don’t give a shit about race. I don’t immediately assume any act someone makes I say racially motivated, I look at what actually happened. If you think my opinion of the Davis case would be any different had he been some white trash scumbag blasting Florid a Georgia Line st deafening volume and threatening a black guy who asked him to turn it down, you’re sadly mistaken. But for some reason, cases where black people act in self defence aren’t controversial here. > > My guess for the reason for that is it’s liberal guilt causing an overreaction, assuming that in any conflict the black guy gets the benefit of the doubt, rather than being a neutral observer. Davis didn’t threaten anyone, liar. What kind of scumbag believes a proven liar who shoots wildly at kids over multiple other witnesses, including the liar’s girlfriend? ---
**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:** [January 11, 2018, 10:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12376 "2018-01-11T10:16:58Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > For you to call Zimmerman a murderer, you would need to _know_, not merely speculate without evidence that Zimmerman caused those injuries, not Martin. For you to call Davis a thug and dangerous you would need to know for a fact that Davis threatened Dunn, contrary to all of the evidence aside from the word of a liar. ---
**Author:** ![Crazy\_Canuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crazy_canuck/32/5282_2.png) [@Crazy\_Canuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crazy_Canuck)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2018, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12377 "2018-01-11T18:58:40Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > No, I’ve repeatedly and consistently said that a cop using force to do their job is _not_ an attack or a threat You can say the sky is lemon yellow, or that you really are a very stable genius, but you saying it doesn’t actually make either of those statements true. Anyways, your broken record is getting incredibly boring, so it’s time to block your pathetic ass and move on. I’m almost certain that everyone in this thread knows what a hypocritical sack of shit you are by now, but just in case they haven’t, I’ll let your own words speak for you. > [@Steophan](#): > > My views are _fundamentally_ humane, in that they value humanity and human life > [@Can we please not do this again (Zimmerman media circus)?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-we-please-not-do-this-again-zimmerman-media-circus/681289/81): > > Yeah, I’m quite happy when sterling moral lawful gun owners get to shoot people that threaten them and get away with it. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2018, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12378 "2018-01-11T23:01:31Z")
> [@Crazy\_Canuck](#): > > You can say the sky is lemon yellow, or that you really are a very stable genius, but you saying it doesn’t actually make either of those statements true. Anyways, your broken record is getting incredibly boring, so it’s time to block your pathetic ass and move on. I’m almost certain that everyone in this thread knows what a hypocritical sack of shit you are by now, but just in case they haven’t, I’ll let your own words speak for you. Yes. This. I agree. It’s time to GTFO. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2018, 7:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12379 "2018-01-12T07:11:36Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > The problem is, as I see it, I don’t give a shit about race. Yeah, it’s just a coincidence that when an innocent black kid is gunned down you rush right in with the racist comments. And you care so much about self-defense, but when its two black men defending themselves you say they should have been charged. And when a white man gets convicted for murdering a innocent black kid you say it was a miscarriage of justice. When a white kid gets murdered you don’t jump in with racist comments about the victim. When white people defend themselves you don’t say they should have been charged. When a black man gets convicted of murder you don’t say the case should have been thrown out. Just own it–you’re a racist. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2018, 9:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12380 "2018-01-12T09:29:52Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > … The totality of the evidence makes it reasonable to think Zimmerman was defending himself. Therefore, not guilty. Therefore, he maintains his presumed innocence. > > As to what I actually believe, I think it’s absurd to think it’s likely Zimmerman caused those injuries himself… You’re correct that Zimmerman was almost certainly injured by Martin. And that, therefore, the claim that Zimmerman’s actual killing of Martin was in self-defense was valid. The jury may have been correct to acquit based on the evidence they heard and the _charges that were presented_. _ **But in the bigger picture you are quite wrong.** _ I thought of writing a long essay to explain this to you, but doubt you’d read it with an open mind, or even try to understand it. Instead, let me present you with a thought experiment. Suppose a craven thug — call him Georgie Z — hates niggers and wants to kill as many as he can without ever going to prison. He finds unarmed black boys walking alone, taunts them until they react with fisticuffs, and then pulls out his concealed weapon and fires “in self-defense.” Jury acquits, if he’s charged at all. Lather, rinse, repeat. Are Georgie Z’s actions _legal_? Are his actions _moral_? Answer these questions; then we can move further along. ---
**Author:** ![Steophan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steophan/32/9595_2.png) [@Steophan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steophan)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2018, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942/12381 "2018-01-12T17:15:44Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Suppose a craven thug — call him Georgie Z — hates niggers and wants to kill as many as he can without ever going to prison. He finds unarmed black boys walking alone, taunts them until they react with fisticuffs, and then pulls out his concealed weapon and fires “in self-defense.” Jury acquits, if he’s charged at all. Lather, rinse, repeat. > > Are Georgie Z’s actions _legal_? Are his actions _moral_? > > Answer these questions; then we can move further along. Two things. Firstly, that’s a complete mischaracterisation of Zimmerman based on his previous history, which involved anti-racist acticism. Secondly, taunting does not justify violence, ever, so if that happened then the person who started the violence would be the sole person responsible for the violence, and any injuries or deaths that result. That’s not to say that taunting someone is moral behaviour, and it may even extend to illegal harrassment. However, there’s no evidence that Zimmerman’s behaviour approached that level. So yes, it is theoretically possible that someone could repeatedly, legally, provoke people and then shoot them. However, anyone can choose to avoid being killed like that by not responding to taunts, so I don’t believe there is good reason to restrict the right to self defence based on this possibility. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942.md?page=618) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/controversial-encounters-between-law-enforcement-and-civilians-the-omnibus-thread/700942.md?page=620)