But, but, but… she’s 72 years old! I mean, she’s old. Forget that she could have just complied after breaking the law, she’s OLD.
Well, I’m glad, I guess, you’re finally coming around. I saw the pointlessness of this exercise a while back when you indicated your ignorance with regard to electricity and chose to dismiss the data I provided to explain it.
If IPICD is not impartial, would you care to back that opinion up with some evidence of its partiality? Could you inform me that their mission is something else than what they are claiming it to be? What is that actual mission, exactly? The fact that a former police administrator founded the organization indicates the guy’s got a lot more experience with in-custody deaths and the reasons behind them than most of us do. I realize it must be hard for you to accept that anyone carrying a badge or even tangentially related to law enforcement wants to prevent in-custody deaths because they are such a bloodthirsty bunch. :rolleyes:
This is just, “if the president does it, it’s not against the law.”
I don’t know who you’re addressing but I never made that argument. I don’t give a shit if she was 20. The cop repeatedly escalated the situation when he didn’t have to.
Right. More strawmen. 'Cause I said police were a bloodthirsty bunch. My friends and family on the force will be very disappointed to hear that :rolleyes:.
(By the way I can’t wait to ask my AZDPS Officer friend what he thinks of this next time we go mountain biking together.)
How 'bout IPICD’s unabashed stance on the controversial ‘Excited Delirium’ as evidence of their partiality?
So, your issue is with authority then? I’m not even sure where you’re going with this statement. It’s the primary job of the police to enforce the law that’s why we refer to them as law enforcement. Are you saying that this cop and any other utilize tasers are breaking the law? Are you saying there are no lawful orders? What?
What’s your point?
Yes, well you mentioned that the fact he was a former cop made him biased. I just threw a little hyperbole back at you. Sue me.
Link? Come on, quit making me do all the work. Back up your shit fercrissakes.
No, I don’t have a problem with authority, but I have a problem with the blind, unwavering support for authority when they are obviously wrong. Sure, what he did was legal. It was also very, very wrong. You can’t tell me you think that situation played out as best as it possibly could have. Anyone with half the people skills that should be required to carry a gun, a taser, and a badge should’ve been able to talk her down and get the signature without ever raising their voice or asking her to step out of the car.
http://www.ipicd.com/aboutipicd/history.html
***Excited Delirium - Is Not a New Phenomenon!
-
Dr. Luther Bell published in the American Journal of Insanity in 1849
"A New Form of Disease" - in 1849“…patient’s attacking anyone who approaches him with blind fury. He will struggle in the utmost desperation, irrespective of the numbers or strength of those who may be endeavoring to restrain him. [There is] no disposition to yield to an overpowering force, noticeable in some degree in the blindest fury of the most intense forms of ordinary mania. . .”***
Just in case my first post went unnoticed, I’ll ask again.
To those who think the officer did the right thing, would you support him if he had hit her with a billy club instead of tasing her?
And I’m not talking about blocking her movement with a club, but actually wacking her to make her submit. Is there a substantive difference between these actions that make one justifiable while the other not?
Which was just an extension of his earlier aggressive stance and tone and furtherance of it. Moving on from plain yelling to yelling physical threats is not a diffusion tactic.
And each situation is different. Your death will not be my death, even if we die side by side.
By whom? Name one independent professional medical, pathological, psychiatric or psychological professional organization who recognizes this “syndrome” and validates its existence, let alone its role in the deaths in question.
Cite.
You can what if all day. What if granny had whacked her head on the patrol car bumper as she fell and died from a subdural hematoma the next afternoon? What if granny broke a hip as she fell from being Tasered? What if, recognizing that he was actually serious once he put his hand firmly on her upper arm and turned her around and moved her toward the hood of the car, granny recognized that she couldn’t possibly fight a man 50+ pounds, 6+ inches and 40- years on her and let him cuff her with nothing more than additional running at the mouth? We’ll never know. It doesn’t really matter.
You said any means. Guns are a means. You were the one who said that cops were justified using physical means against people who were not physically combative. I just wanted to know where you draw the line. Apparently it’s not painful electrical shocks, but it is bullets. That’s good to know. At least you do recognize that some things are disproportionate uses of force. Sadly your line is drawn far too far on the cops’ side.
I think it is - not just him, but Americans in general.
It is really difficult for a lot of us to wrap our heads around the notion that there is sometimes someone in authority over us, and we have to do what that authority says. You don’t get to say No, you don’t get to stall, you don’t get to walk away. You have to do as you are told. And it is perfectly fine with the rest of us if, in the course of having this explained in the only way some people will listen, you incur a certain amount of pain and even some personal risk.
Because the rest of us don’t not want to live in a society where, if you are a big enough asshole, you get a pass on obeying the law, even in a small way.
It’s quite clear that she didn’t want to sign the ticket. The bottom line is, fuck what she wanted. She has to sign the fucking ticket. If she won’t, then she will be arrested, as she should be.
Because everybody knows that, once the message goes out that you can get away with breaking the law if you just act like a big enough asshole, then every single traffic stop is going to escalate into a screaming match.
Yes, I realize I am arguing with someone who has announced that he will not change his mind even if facts are presented to disprove his position. So it goes.
Regards,
Shodan
I have no problem with that, especially if he warned her as many times as he did on the video. Double points for her daring him to like she did with the juice.
If only she had been a poor old conductor…
“Factually prove” that I don’t believe what I believe and I’ll change my mind :rolleyes:. You don’t get it. IIRC you’re a conservative, right? What if I could “factually prove” that high taxes are good? Would you change your mind about high taxes? Of course not! Because you don’t believe in them. I don’t believe a taser was in any way necessary in this situation. No fact is going to change that, short of - like I said - proving granny had a knife drawn.
IIRC you’re also a Christian if I remember correctly from another thread, no? Should we go into the facts of the bible?
You DO realize that electricity is also used as a method of saving lives?
:rolleyes:
You’re relatively new here, so I’ll cut you some slack, but by now you should know that if you’re going to make a claim, you’re expected to back it up, not reply, “I don’t CARE!”, and then claim it doesn’t matter if you meant directly or indirectly.
I was going to answer, then I noticed you mentioned you hadn’t watched the video. Perhaps you should watch and then get back to us.
I get your point and agree in a very limited sense. I expect grown people in this country to have the common sense to know that being pissy with a police officer is a really bad idea. The officer could have done it better {perhaps} but cops are allowed to be people and have moods and personalities that vary from officer to officer. He preformed his duty correctly according to the guidelines of his training. Not ideally, but reasonably. There isn’t a lot of time between when she refuses to sign the ticket and when she cusses and resists arrest. There’s no reason to place the responsibility on the officer to spend time trying other tactics. The final outcome was the correct one according to her choices. Is it unfortunate? Sure? The officer probably wishes he hadn’t tasered an old woman but it was her resisting arrest that got him there. He tells her repeatedly to put her hands behind her back and she refuses and struggles rather than comply. As far as responsibility goes it’s at least 95% her.
Not completely. It reveals the person the officer was dealing with. I’m thinking he was professional and courteous from the get go and she made it worse by being argumentative and belligerent.
Wow!! According to who?
He reacted as a reasonable trained professional might be expected to act given the latitude of being a human being. She did not act as a grown up person might be expected to act when stopped for speeding. He only reacted to her escalating the situation.
Again, according to whom? I’m no expert but I imagine officers are taught certain procedures in dealing with uncooperative suspects. You make it clear what you expect and what the consequences will be if they do not comply. You protect yourself first. Officers can never be positive what kind of nut they might run into or what that nut might do. You are not required to coax and plead or spend extra time reasoning with them. He’s a cop not a psychiatrist.
He clearly can deal with it and did. If someone had a weapon or attacked him physically I imagine he’d draw a more serious weapon than the taser.
They are under no requirement or even moral obligation to do so. You’re claiming officers should be trained to behave ideally. That’s totally unrealistic.
Same comment. Completely unrealistic.
There are parameters in dealing with this type of situation rather than just right and wrong. If he was within the standards of professional behavior he was right even if he wasn’t ideal.
I’ve seen the video of the officer who very calmly talks to the wildly belligerent speeder. I admire his restraint. I don’t expect that from every officer or even that officer in every situation. It’s an unrealistic expectation.
That’s your problem - I do get it.
As you say, your arguments are faith-based, not factually-based. That’s fine - all of us do that to a certain extent, and on certain topics, and not all of us are as honest as you are in admitting it.
But I approach this more or less in the spirit that I approach arguments about creationism or anti-vaccination. I don’t expect to convince people who write OPs on those subjects, either. I argue mostly to convince those on the sidelines.
And for my own amusement, of which you have provided a reasonable amount. Thanks!
Regards,
Shodan
In the video everyone has watched, the policeman’s superior defends Bieze. I was going to ask if anyone here would change their tune if an even more senior officer denounced Bieze’s actions. I was just going to ask it as a hypothetical, but since it actually happened, now I ask it as a real life question.
The Sheriff of the county in which this took place:
So, this change any opinions?
No, your comments have made it abudantly clear that you don’t get it. You can no more “prove” to me that this was right than I can “prove” to someone that Coke is better than Pepsi.
But doesn’t it matter that all of this is over a speeding ticket? We’re not talking about a liquor store robbery or an assault, but something so minor that a majority of people get away with it on a daily basis. Billy clubs can break bones. Is a speeding violation worth that?
What is the potential harm associated with letting her go and then putting a warrant out for her arrest? Does it come anywhere close to the harm that could have resulted from zapping her with a taser or beating her with a club? Maybe these questions are irrelevant, but I’d like to think they’d always be in the forefront of my mind if I were a cop.
Don’t see why it matters whether I’ve watched it. If you’ve watched it, would you support him if he’d employed a billy club rather than a taser?
ETA: I’ll watch the video when I get home. Can’t do it from my computer at work.