# Sandra Bland video **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 22, 2015, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859 "2015-07-22T05:50:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 82
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1621 "2015-08-03T01:55:51Z")
> [@CannyDan](#): > > Huh! I thought quality journalism was pretty well defined as “accurate and thorough reporting”. Gee, guess you showed me! No. Quality journalism leaves out the part about “advancing (pet political) values.” ---
**Author:** ![CannyDan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cannydan/32/548_2.png) [@CannyDan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CannyDan)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 3:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1622 "2015-08-03T03:29:43Z")
You’re misrepresenting the statement. The claim is that quality journalism will result in the advancement of progressive values. It’s a statement of faith in the belief that progressive values are inherently superior, and accurate reporting will demonstrate this. Nothing in thinkprogress’ statement suggests support for propaganda, advocacy, or any other distortion of quality journalism. Feel free to provide instances where accurate and thorough reporting presents an inaccurate world view. ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1623 "2015-08-03T03:36:30Z")
> [@CannyDan](#): > > The claim is that quality journalism will result in the advancement of progressive values. Please provide evidence in support of this claim. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1624 "2015-08-03T04:25:29Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > She failed to signal a lane change, which, in Texas, is reason for arrest. That’s a bullcrap way to phrase it. The Supreme court _allowed_ for a minor (fine only) infraction arrest. An improper lane signal is not “reason for arrest” in Texas. I’m sure a dozen people a week get tickets for it without being arrested. In this particular case the cop was only going to issue a warning but decided to affect an arrest when he decided he didn’t like the subject’s attitude. ---
**Author:** ![scabpicker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/scabpicker/32/8268_2.png) [@scabpicker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scabpicker)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1625 "2015-08-03T04:49:46Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > That’s a bullcrap way to phrase it. The Supreme court _allowed_ for a minor (fine only) infraction arrest. An improper lane signal is not “reason for arrest” in Texas. I’m sure a dozen people a week get tickets for it without being arrested. In this particular case the cop was only going to issue a warning but decided to affect an arrest when he decided he didn’t like the subject’s attitude. Bullcrap or not, it’s an accurate way to phrase it\*. In Texas, [moving violations](http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=93495) other than speeding are valid reasons for arrest. Even if neglecting to signal a lane change isn’t in the scope of offenses that the DPS policy allows for, I have also been informed personally that other minor violations (out of date inspection and tags, I was a year and a half out) are within the offenses that they’re allowed to arrest over. I myself have been taken to the station to pay the fine now, or face jail time. I thankfully had money in the bank to cover it (and yay, got to walk back to my car). It’s how it works sometimes. Now, I’m of the opinion that the trooper should be fired for how they handled this stop, and that the laws pertaining to arrest-able traffic offenses in Texas should be changed. But their statement reflects current practice. \*And I am not generally in agreement with **Smapti** ’s interpretation of law enforcement’s relationship with society: but when you’re right, you’re right. ---
**Author:** ![scabpicker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/scabpicker/32/8268_2.png) [@scabpicker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scabpicker)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1626 "2015-08-03T05:07:37Z")
And I missed the edit window, but I don’t know if she’d have a civil suit against the officer if he hadn’t technically broken the law. He obviously escalated the stop beyond any sense a common person would expect (e.g. calmly explaining his reasoning behind his order to exit the car, and it’s legality would have been appropriate long before drawing the taser, if he was determined to lecture\* her in a smoke-free environment). But I’m really not sure what protections he has against suits in this context. \*IME, a lecture always accompanies the warning, even if you’ve been bitten by ants due to their instructions. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 5:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1627 "2015-08-03T05:32:09Z")
Sorry, he’s not right. Not sure why you would link to some ABC news story about the SC decision when I specifically talked about the Supreme court decision in the post you quoted. I know what they said. They allowed the arrest. I get it. But the fact remains that the vast majority of lane change signal violations do not end in arrest. It’s not a good “reason” for arrest. It’s a good excuse. ---
**Author:** ![Andiethewestie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ba9def/32.png) [@Andiethewestie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andiethewestie)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 10:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1628 "2015-08-03T10:18:18Z")
> [@scabpicker](#): > > I really don’t know what you mean here. So far, there’s no case to “stick”. And as has been explained already, the arrest was legal, no matter how stupid. No, my issue is that I don’t believe this cop. Ergo, I don’t believe he was kicked and therefore the arrest was not legal. These jackasses do so much damage with impunity they need to be babysat with a camera in order to do the right thing. The camera wasn’t on him when he was allegedly assaulted. These fucking morons will do anything to divert the truth. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1629 "2015-08-03T12:35:39Z")
> [@Andiethewestie](#): > > I don’t believe he was kicked and therefore the arrest was not legal. The arrest was legal whether he was kicked or not. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![cmyk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmyk/32/3353_2.png) [@cmyk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmyk)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1630 "2015-08-03T12:38:02Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > The arrest was legal whether he was kicked or not. > > Regards, > Shodan Her record says she was arrested for assault. Not arrested for failure to signal. The whole thing is trumped up. Do you not think this is so? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 1:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1631 "2015-08-03T13:38:12Z")
> [@cmyk](#): > > Her record says she was arrested for assault. Not arrested for failure to signal. The whole thing is trumped up. Do you not think this is so? We’ve gone over this a half-dozen times. The arrest was legal. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 1:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1632 "2015-08-03T13:44:09Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > We’ve gone over this a half-dozen times. The arrest was legal. > Regards, > Shodan HE doesn’t seem to be addressing the legality so much as pointing out that the cop’s actions instigated the incident for which Bland was arrested. ---
**Author:** ![scabpicker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/scabpicker/32/8268_2.png) [@scabpicker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scabpicker)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1633 "2015-08-03T13:56:07Z")
> [@PatriotX](#): > > HE doesn’t seem to be addressing the legality so much as pointing out that the cop’s actions instigated the incident for which Bland was arrested. Yeah, but **Andiethewestie** is either using the word or concept “legal” improperly in in this context. ---
**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:** [August 3, 2015, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1634 "2015-08-03T13:58:53Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > [QUOTE=ThinkProgress] > ThinkProgress is progressive. We believe the best way to advance progressive values is to accurately and thoroughly report on what is happening in America and the world. That is advocacy, not journalism. [/QUOTE] So “journalism” would be _in_accurately and _selectively_ reporting on what is happening in America and the world? ---
**Author:** ![cmyk](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmyk/32/3353_2.png) [@cmyk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmyk)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 3:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1635 "2015-08-03T15:15:40Z")
> [@PatriotX](#): > > HE doesn’t seem to be addressing the legality so much as pointing out that the cop’s actions instigated the incident for which Bland was arrested. I find it sad and ironic, had she been speeding, a more serious violation than not signaling, what he would’ve done would be illegal. ---
**Author:** ![scabpicker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/scabpicker/32/8268_2.png) [@scabpicker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scabpicker)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 3:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1636 "2015-08-03T15:50:04Z")
> [@cmyk](#): > > I find it sad and ironic, had she been speeding, a more serious violation than not signaling, what he would’ve done would be illegal. Well, that’s not really the case, either. It’s legal for him to order her from the car even if the original offense was speeding. If she refuses to get out of the car, she’s guilty of not following an officer’s orders, which is an arrest-able offense. It doesn’t make it any more right to arrest her, it just moves the arrest-able offense to earlier in the stop. ---
**Author:** ![Andiethewestie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ba9def/32.png) [@Andiethewestie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Andiethewestie)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1637 "2015-08-03T16:11:46Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > The arrest was legal whether he was kicked or not. > > Regards, > Shodan Sandra was arrested for assault. I don’t believe that jackass cop. Wrongful arrest is illegal. ---
**Author:** ![CannyDan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cannydan/32/548_2.png) [@CannyDan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CannyDan)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1638 "2015-08-03T16:21:46Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > Please provide evidence in support of this claim. I don’t know where you think you’re going with this. You said > [@D\_Anconia](#): > > …Also earlier in this thread, someone cited “think progress” as if it were a news organization. They are not. **’luc** said > [@elucidator](#): > > Well, that certainly settles\* that!\* In reply you made this claim > [@D\_Anconia](#): > > Do you _honestly_ think that they’re not biased in a certain direction? > They, themselves, admit it, to their credit. > > > [@](#): > > > > Originally Posted by [thinkprogess.org](http://thinkprogess.org) > > ThinkProgress is progressive. We believe the best way to advance progressive values is to accurately and thoroughly report on what is happening in America and the world. > > That is advocacy, not journalism. You claim that **thinkprogress** admits to bias and cannot be trusted to provide accurate and thorough reporting. This is clearly not supported by your own cite, in which **thinkprogress** simply states a high aspirational standard for their reporting and makes no admission of bias. Which I point out to you. > [@CannyDan](#): > > Huh! I thought quality journalism was pretty well defined as “accurate and thorough reporting”. Gee, guess you showed me! So you double down and repeat the implication of bias in reporting. > [@D\_Anconia](#): > > No. > Quality journalism leaves out the part about “advancing (pet political) values.” I point out to you that **thinkprogress** simply makes a _claim_ about striving for accuracy. Nothing in that statement suggests an acceptance of bias in reporting. I ask you to back up your assertion of bias with an example. > [@CannyDan](#): > > You’re misrepresenting the statement. The claim is that quality journalism will result in the advancement of progressive values. It’s a statement of faith in the belief that progressive values are inherently superior, and accurate reporting will demonstrate this. Nothing in thinkprogress’ statement suggests support for propaganda, advocacy, or any other distortion of quality journalism. Feel free to provide instances where accurate and thorough reporting presents an inaccurate world view. And now you either want me to do your homework for you, or you really don’t know what you are claiming. You’ve gone full circle. > [@D\_Anconia](#): > > Please provide evidence in support of this claim. I think I’ll just leave you to wallow in your own confusion. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1639 "2015-08-03T16:45:20Z")
> [@scabpicker](#): > > Well, that’s not really the case, either. It’s legal for him to order her from the car even if the original offense was speeding. If she refuses to get out of the car, she’s guilty of not following an officer’s orders, which is an arrest-able offense. > > It doesn’t make it any more right to arrest her, it just moves the arrest-able offense to earlier in the stop. People have pointed out that he said “You can step out” not given as an order, and connected it with his “request” about the cigarette. So they are questioning whether the arrest is based on fictions. A scenario which he is cooperating with by not having any rationale behind his actions or explanation that is credible. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2015, 4:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859/1640 "2015-08-03T16:46:37Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > People have pointed out that he said “You can step out” not given as an order, and connected it with his “request” about the cigarette. So they are questioning whether the arrest is based on fictions. A scenario which he is cooperating with by not having any rationale behind his actions or explanation that is credible. Which part of “this is a lawful order” was unclear? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859.md?page=81) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sandra-bland-video/725859.md?page=83)