Don’t bother, that’s the way Cisco always debates: he slings around emotionally-charged phrases and strawmen, and then pouts when people don’t debate “rationally.” He’s not worth it.
I just googled her name and clicked video. It was last night so I don’t remember the exact one I watched.
I don’t see why getting pushed/yelled at/shocked/hauled off to jail, or anything else remotely that serious should be a consequence of not signing a ticket. Like I said, he had her on camera. It’s not like they weren’t going to be able to serve justice on this supercriminal. Police should not be returning nerf-gun fire with rocket launchers. This woman was no threat to anyone, including “herself” as the pro-taser crowd usually likes to claim.
Excuse me pal, the one time I ever remember seeing you around here is when you ran away from our last discussion after several people started agreeing with me. This ad hominem attack was completely un-called for and unnecessary.
“Dragged her out into the street”? He didn’t even touch her at that point. Your mis-stating of events that are clearly on tape, and your use of gross hyperbole (his “playground bully style,” her “naughty little mouth”) make me I think you’re responding to what you wish had happened, because you’re clearly not conveying, much less responding to, the factual truth of this event.
More accurately, because this woman couldn’t handle being ticketed for a moving violation without escalating things to the point where she needed to be physically subdued.
What’s the alternative? “I’m getting in my truck!” “Alright, ma’am.”
Not having her get out of the truck in the first place. “Not gonna sign? Ok.” <drops ticket in window> “See you in court.”
My hyperbole has a track record of 0 fatalities. Can’t say the same for the cop’s style of hyperbole.
Quote snipped by me. And I see on preview, it’s come up again.
Can I address this one specific point? In many states, a ticket is a “Promise to Appear”. By signing the ticket, the driver, without admitting guilt, promises to either show up in court or take care of the ticket by other means. If the driver refuses to sign the ticket, and therefore refuses to promise to appear, they must be brought directly before a magistrate. The policeman does not have the option to just drop the ticket through the window and drive off.
So, how does this work out? If court is open (i.e. the traffic stop happened during normal working hours), the cop will take the driver to court and the judge will either address the violation or (more likely) say “ok, sign the ticket and show up on your court date.” If court is not open (i.e. the traffic stop happened on a holiday, weekend, or after working hours), the cop will take to the driver to jail. The driver will wait in jail until court opens and he/she can be taken before a judge. Not a good idea to refuse to sign the ticket late on a Friday afternoon.
The point of all this being, once the driver refuses to sign the ticket, the policeman MUST remove them from the car. The policeman MUST place them in handcuffs, put them in the back of the car, and transport them to court or jail. The policeman does not have the option to say, “ok, bye!” and then try to bring them to justice later based on the dash camera.
Please note: this is generalized. Your jurisdiction’s approach may, and probably does, differ.
He told her to get out of the truck because she wouldn’t sign the ticket, which meant she was going to jail and he was taking her there. Apparently that’s the law there.
So, she gets to be above the law if she’s old and belligerent? If someone at the police station got hold of that video and the unsigned ticket, it would have been “police showing favoritism” and some dude with a sports car/beater/whatever would have been yapping to a camera crew on the 5 o’clock news about how cops let the elderly get away with stuff that (insert favored cop target stereotype here) get nailed for every time, and how he would have been face down in the gravel alongside that highway if it was him.
It’s not, but it is a consequence of resisting arrest, and that’s the sequence here: Refuse to sign ticket => subject to arrest; resist arrest => subject to use of force. And just so we’re clear: continue to resist arrest => escalating use of force. But if she’d continued to resist and ended up injured, I’m sure that would be the officer’s fault as well, because obviously the woman bears no responsibility whatsoever for the encounter. [/sarcasm]
Under Texas law, she was required to sign that ticket to secure her release. If she refused to sign, the officer was entitled to arrest her.
As a comeback this is quite snappy, so perhaps you’d prefer if we just ignore the fact that it doesn’t actually make any sense?
While I can intellectually agree that such an action is justifiable, the notion of using a taser on an elderly lady over an altercation concerning a speeding ticket simply doesn’t sit right with me - however obnoxious and reprehensible that old lady may be.
Maybe I’m just old-fashioned.
Moving this thread to Great Debates because it’s turned into that type of thread, as all Taser arguments do.
Personal insults are not allowed in this forum, and this is a critique of Cisco, not of the content he posted. This is a formal warning not to do this again.
By the same token, as the discussion continues everybody else is advised to remember not to make it personal.
I agree, I’m iffy about the tasering, but I wasn’t there.
However, the lady was certainly supposed to be placed under arrest, resisted attempts to be placed under arrest, was verbally abusive and confrontational, and made at least two attempts to get back in her truck while along a busy highway. I’m not sure there’s a “good” end result when you get someone like this who thinks the laws don’t apply to her and because she’s female and old (she said at the start that she wasn’t going to jail, she’s 72) she can get away with it. Do you fail to perform your duties and let her flee? End of your career, likely. Do you muscle her onto the hood of your car and get police brutality charges from that, maybe with a few nice broken bones to show off on the evening news? Taser to make her stop running into traffic? I dunno.
Good! Boomers are jerks!
You seem to have conveniently forgotten that she was pulled over doing 60 mph in a construction zone?
At what point was she no threat to anyone, including herself?
Your Texas cops are a bunch of wimps.
Tasering a 72 year old Granny? pffft. That’s nothing.
Why here in Canada, we taser 82 year old men, while they lie in their hospital beds after bypass surgery!
Now THAT’S law enforcement!
I don’t understand what about it doesn’t make sense to you, unless you think tasers have never killed anyone.
By this logic, the penalty for speeding is a tasin’.
She had the ticket. She had to pay it. She was upset. Tickets are very expensive and it may have been a hardship for her.
But she was definitely a threat to the poor defenseless cop. He probably should have shot her. She was not a little old lady but a big strong granny criminal type. He was out of his league . Thank god he had a taser. It saved his life.
Then he shouldn’t have gotten her out of the car. Toss the ticket in and send her on her way. If she tears it up or refuses to sign it it makes no difference; he still has a copy of it and her car’s on tape.
His mistake was not made at the point of using the taser, it was made in getting her out of the car, which endangered them both and served no purpose.