# Just fucking obey the cops and the law. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 28, 2014, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848 "2014-11-28T20:33:17Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 23
**Author:** ![Ambivalid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a5b964/32.png) [@Ambivalid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ambivalid)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2014, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/441 "2014-12-03T02:51:15Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Is this the new angle? The child was a complete imbecile? Well, his daddy _does_ have a criminal record. So there’s that. :eek: ---
**Author:** ![River\_Hippie](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/river_hippie/32/26_2.png) [@River\_Hippie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/River_Hippie)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2014, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/442 "2014-12-03T02:53:37Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Is this the new angle? The child was a complete imbecile? Just throwing out possible ideas that may have gone through Rice’s mind in his last few moments. We will never know. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2014, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/443 "2014-12-03T03:44:43Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > The problem is not that the cops made the wrong decision in the 1.5 seconds between pulling up and shooting the kid, when he made some sort of movement that they interpreted (either justifiably or unjustifiably) as threatening. They didn’t make any such decision, they had already decided what to do, which was to shoot him as soon as humanly possible without giving him a chance to respond. Yes, you nailed it. Judging by the speed in which they rolled up on the kid and shot him, they’d made up their mind about how to “neutralize” him well before they even saw him. A 12 year old is no match for that. ---
**Author:** ![FXMastermind](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fxmastermind/32/7289_2.png) [@FXMastermind](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FXMastermind)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2014, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/444 "2014-12-03T03:57:04Z")
This is Cleveland, right? > [@](#): > > The nine were part of 13 officers involved in the shooting deaths of Timothy Russell and Malissa Williams in a hail of bullets following a high speed chase in 2012. The chase, which involved 104 officers, ended when police fired 137 times upon the duo after their car came to a halt in a schoolyard. Russell was shot 23 times, with Williams hit 24 times. > > Police officers claimed the suspects fired upon them, but no gun was found on them or in their vehicle. [http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/12/cleveland-cops-who-killed-unarmed-black-men-claim-racial-discrimination-over-suspensions/](http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/12/cleveland-cops-who-killed-unarmed-black-men-claim-racial-discrimination-over-suspensions/) ---
**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:** [December 3, 2014, 9:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/445 "2014-12-03T09:21:16Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > Can you simply believe that what appears to be the majority of people on these threads not only don’t find it “absolutely obvious” that the police story might be plausible, we find it ''absolutely obvious" that this is an unjustified shooting by any stretch of the imagination. Police should not shoot a person, even if that person is armed with a deadly weapon, unless they reasonably believe they have no choice. “perceiving danger” is not enough. I’m sorry people shoot police officers. It’s a terrible thing. That fact, however, does not create a reasonable threat of death every time they come across a boy with a “gun” in his wasteland. > > But, this has all been explained to you multiple times, and you choose to dismiss all arguments as merely “intellectual dishonesty.” No, I don’t believe that anyone looking at all the evidence available so far could reasonably conclude that it’s obviously an unjustified killing. That would require not only deciding that the police are liars, for no good reason - although that in itself isn’t actually wrong - but then making the false deduction that, since the police are liars, another set of events that are unsupported by any evidence must have occurred. You are assuming that, because a kid was shot and killed, it was unjustified and expecting the police, or their defenders, to prove that it was justified. That’s backwards, the burden of proof is on those who claim they’re guilty, and that burden is not even close to being met. So yes, intellectual dishonesty. It’s been repeatedly explained why you can’t say the police are guilty without evidence, and yet you continue to say they are without presenting any evidence. Conversely, there’s been evidence presented that they could reasonably have been in fear of their lives. You can dismiss that evidence as weak if you like, but at least it exists - unlike the evidence for your side. ---
**Author:** ![Novelty\_Bobble](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Novelty\_Bobble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Novelty_Bobble)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2014, 10:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/446 "2014-12-03T10:50:19Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > You are assuming that, because a kid was shot and killed, it was unjustified and expecting the police, or their defenders, to prove that it was justified. That’s backwards, the burden of proof is on those who claim they’re guilty, and that burden is not even close to being met. I’m not reading that at all. The claim being made is that the cops in question were reckless and negligent and made a situation escalate unnecessarily. The evidence being presented is…well, the recording of what they did, which shows them being reckless and negligent. that is pretty much a slam dunk. I can go out now and provoke a situation that ultimately ends with me dealing out “justified” violence on another person because I think I might now be in danger. In that situation I’m still the one in the wrong. I provoked it, I caused it, I escalated it, I’m to blame. How much more in the wrong can I be than if I’m also a LEO behaving in direct contravention of my training ---
**Author:** ![Bibliovore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7ba0ec/32.png) [@Bibliovore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bibliovore)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2014, 10:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/447 "2014-12-03T10:58:38Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > Seems premature to conclude they didn’t follow their procedure when you don’t know what it is. Possibly. However, I’d be willing to bet money on it. ---
**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:** [December 3, 2014, 12:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/448 "2014-12-03T12:21:27Z")
> [@Novelty\_Bobble](#): > > I can go out now and provoke a situation that ultimately ends with me dealing out “justified” violence on another person because I think I might now be in danger. In that situation I’m still the one in the wrong. I provoked it, I caused it, I escalated it, I’m to blame. How much more in the wrong can I be than if I’m also a LEO behaving in direct contravention of my training Unless what you did actually warrants violence on the part of the person who threatens you - as in, they are entitled to defend yourself - then you are fully entitled to defend yourself. There is _nothing_ that counts as a legitimate provocation for violence, the only thing that can be allowed is defence of self or others. No matter how much I call your mother a whore, or whatever, you are not allowed to use violence, and I am allowed to defend myself if you do. This was discussed _ad nauseum_ in the Zimmerman threads. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2014, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/449 "2014-12-03T13:45:47Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > Unless what you did actually warrants violence on the part of the person who threatens you - as in, they are entitled to defend yourself - then you are fully entitled to defend yourself. There is _nothing_ that counts as a legitimate provocation for violence, the only thing that can be allowed is defence of self or others. > > No matter how much I call your mother a whore, or whatever, you are not allowed to use violence, and I am allowed to defend myself if you do. This was discussed _ad nauseum_ in the Zimmerman threads. Did that child, sitting at that table empty handed, _warrant them speeding right up to him with guns drawn and shooting him less then two seconds later_, no matter what action you imagine you saw the poor kid take in that very grainy video? Try to focus in on the italicized part of that question, and, for once, not pretend that the escalation began after the officer _supposedly_ said “Put your hands up! Put your hands up! Put your hands up!” when they got there. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2014, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/450 "2014-12-03T15:24:47Z")
**Steophan** , neither you nor **Bone** have acknowledged taking a look at [this cite from the _PORAC Law Enforcement News_](http://www.experts.com/Articles/The-Art-of-Force-Pre-Contact-Threat-Assessment-By-Ron-Martinelli) concerning pre-contact threat assessment that I and others have brought up before. Would you please take a look at it and tell us how well you think the officers followed the five rules laid out in that article? ---
**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:** [December 3, 2014, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/451 "2014-12-03T15:35:11Z")
> [@Morgenstern](#): > > It’s hard to keep up with you since I really don’t pay all that much attention to _roadkill_ like you on the information highway. But yes, I’m perfectly okay with dope dealers getting their asses whooped every day. In fact, I’d vote for it if it was ever on the ballot. Video of this particular drug dealer getting his ass beat here: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GncaM\_lt3-E](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GncaM_lt3-E) Go to about 1:29 to see the actual attack. For fun then read the YouTube comments. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2014, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/452 "2014-12-03T15:55:31Z")
That video is disgusting and only underscores the violent mindset that so very often influences how cops conduct themselves. And they knew their actions were indefensible. That’s why they tried to destroy the evidence. ---
**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:** [December 3, 2014, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/453 "2014-12-03T16:32:54Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > **Steophan** , neither you nor **Bone** have acknowledged taking a look at [this cite from the _PORAC Law Enforcement News_](http://www.experts.com/Articles/The-Art-of-Force-Pre-Contact-Threat-Assessment-By-Ron-Martinelli) concerning pre-contact threat assessment that I and others have brought up before. Would you please take a look at it and tell us how well you think the officers followed the five rules laid out in that article? How does that apply to the Clevland Police? Even if it did, which aspect of the rules specifically do you think they did not follow? ---
**Author:** ![Bibliovore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7ba0ec/32.png) [@Bibliovore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bibliovore)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2014, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/454 "2014-12-03T16:37:08Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > How does that apply to the Clevland Police? Even if it did, which aspect of the rules specifically do you think they did not follow? Rule number 5 - “Distance and cover are your friends” ---
**Author:** ![Bibliovore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7ba0ec/32.png) [@Bibliovore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bibliovore)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2014, 4:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/455 "2014-12-03T16:40:34Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > How does that apply to the Clevland Police? Even if it did, which aspect of the rules specifically do you think they did not follow? Also, Rule #4: Rule #4 - If at all possible, avoid “time compression.” _Police officers have a habit of wanting to take immediate action during the course of an incident when it is neither safe nor prudent to do so. This again speaks to a lack of “situational awareness.” **Remember that there is a distinction between “potential” and “imminent” jeopardy**. While all contacts with resistant subjects are potentially dangerous, significantly fewer encounters actually place officers in imminent danger. The trick is to follow Rule #1 and not to become so “emotionally captured” in an event with a resistant or threatening subject that you become unreasonably phobic and adrenalized to the point that you rush into a situation when you do not have to. Examples of unnecessary time compression include: (1)_\* moving too close to the subject\*\*, (2) **posturing by screaming and yelling complex or confusing orders** , or (3) **rapidly engaging an already agitated, angry, delusional or otherwise psychotic person who does not present an imminent danger from a distance**.\* Bolding mine. I’d suggest that if the cops followed these rules, they would not have had to shoot Rice in “self defense” with 1.5 seconds of charging up to him. ---
**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:** [December 3, 2014, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/456 "2014-12-03T16:59:56Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Did that child, sitting at that table empty handed, _warrant them speeding right up to him with guns drawn and shooting him less then two seconds later_, no matter what action you imagine you saw the poor kid take in that very grainy video? Try to focus in on the italicized part of that question, and, for once, not pretend that the escalation began after the officer _supposedly_ said “Put your hands up! Put your hands up! Put your hands up!” when they got there. That’s irrelevant to whether the killing was justified, all that matters is the officer’s state of mind when he fired. > [@Czarcasm](#): > > **Steophan** , neither you nor **Bone** have acknowledged taking a look at [this cite from the _PORAC Law Enforcement News_](http://www.experts.com/Articles/The-Art-of-Force-Pre-Contact-Threat-Assessment-By-Ron-Martinelli) concerning pre-contact threat assessment that I and others have brought up before. Would you please take a look at it and tell us how well you think the officers followed the five rules laid out in that article? That’s irrelevant to whether the killing was justified, all that matters is the officer’s state of mind when he fired. I think we are all aware by now that the cops didn’t follow normal procedure. Why do you keep bringing that up as though it’s some kind of “gotcha!”, as though it’s relevant to Rice’s death? Maybe it was sufficient a violation of procedure to get them sacked, I don’t know, but that’s an internal police matter. ---
**Author:** ![Fallen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e99b99/32.png) [@Fallen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fallen)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2014, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/457 "2014-12-03T17:00:34Z")
Please note that some recommended “rules” to live by produced by some research association in California isn’t a very productive focus. Whether a department decides it wants to abide by any given association-generated rules and engage in smart policies and procedures is up to its own discretion (or lack thereof), I’m afraid.[1] Better to focus on the laws and codified regulations and how those are being ignored. [1] This is not unlike the layperson’s expectation that an attorney, incl. prosecutor or judge will follow ABA Model Rules applicable to a given area when they aren’t obligated to subscribe to them. The reality is that they are free to ignore the rules of practice and procedure with the force of law as promulgated by the relevant state’s highest court and the FCRP. Whether a higher authority by some chance decides to take them to task for so doing is another matter. ---
**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:** [December 3, 2014, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/458 "2014-12-03T17:03:43Z")
> [@Bibliovore](#): > > Also, Rule #4: > > Rule #4 - If at all possible, avoid “time compression.” > > _Police officers have a habit of wanting to take immediate action during the course of an incident when it is neither safe nor prudent to do so. This again speaks to a lack of “situational awareness.” **Remember that there is a distinction between “potential” and “imminent” jeopardy**. While all contacts with resistant subjects are potentially dangerous, significantly fewer encounters actually place officers in imminent danger. The trick is to follow Rule #1 and not to become so “emotionally captured” in an event with a resistant or threatening subject that you become unreasonably phobic and adrenalized to the point that you rush into a situation when you do not have to. Examples of unnecessary time compression include: (1)_\* moving too close to the subject\*\*, (2) **posturing by screaming and yelling complex or confusing orders** , or (3) **rapidly engaging an already agitated, angry, delusional or otherwise psychotic person who does not present an imminent danger from a distance**.\* > > Bolding mine. I’d suggest that if the cops followed these rules, they would not have had to shoot Rice in “self defense” with 1.5 seconds of charging up to him. Your previous post doesn’t actually contain any substance so I’ll reply to this one. Since you bolded #1-3 of Rule #4 let’s look at that: _(1) moving too close to the subject:_ How close is too close? _(2) posturing by screaming and yelling complex or confusing orders:_ Are you asserting they did this? _(3) rapidly engaging an already agitated, angry, delusional or otherwise psychotic person who does not present an imminent danger from a distance._: Are you asserting they did this? I’ve said in this thread and others that I’m not aware of what Clevland PD procedures are for felony stops. I’ve seen many many videos of police rapidly engaging subjects during stops. I’ve also seen where they approach much more cautiously. If their procedures call for rapid threat engagement then I would not fault the approach. > [@Steophan](#): > > I think we are all aware by now that the cops didn’t follow normal procedure. I don’t think that’s conclusive at this time. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2014, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/459 "2014-12-03T17:06:57Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > How does that apply to the Clevland Police? Even if it did, which aspect of the rules specifically do you think they did not follow? That is the question I just asked _you_. Do you think that those are valid rules, and do you think the officers followed those rules? ---
**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:** [December 3, 2014, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848/460 "2014-12-03T17:08:01Z")
> [@Bone](#): > > I don’t think that’s conclusive at this time. I sit corrected. Personally, I’m pretty convinced that they didn’t follow best practice, at minimum, and I doubt that official department practice is to do as they did. Still irrelevant to whether the killing was justified though. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848.md?page=22) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/just-fucking-obey-the-cops-and-the-law/705848.md?page=24)