Just servin' and protectin' [Archive]

Bikewer

12th March 2008, 11:25 AM

An appropriate judgment, IMO. When this first aired, it was my opinion (as a police officer) that the officers actions were unjustified and endangered the individual as well.

I wonder what percentage goes to the lawyers....

WildCat

12th March 2008, 11:49 AM

An appropriate judgment, IMO.
It wasn't a judgement. It was a settlement, and quite low at that. It's basically the price point where it would cost the state more to defend the suit. And the defense lawyer accepted it rather than risk losing the suit outright.

Hell, I saw a minor CTA bus crash once, and people from a block around ran over as fast as they could and laid down next to the bus because the CTA would just give them $5,000 rather than contest every suit, which would cost them more than $5,000.

JoeEllison

12th March 2008, 11:57 AM

Too bad that cop was allowed to keep his job.

Marquis de Carabas

12th March 2008, 12:10 PM

Life lesson: if a cop pulls over to the shoulder to let you pass him, don't do it.

Autolite

12th March 2008, 03:23 PM

I starting driving over thirty years ago. I lived in an area where the speed limits where unreasonably low and the highway patrol would set up multiple cruiser "blockades" and employed aircraft to nab speeders. It was just routine getting pulled over and having to pay a couple of fines a month. The cops were just tax collectors with guns and they knew it, but they were always friendly. There was never any reason for anyone to get upset. You just paid the fine and got on with your day.

Today though it seems that the average cop is much more paranoid, for whatever reason(s), and I don't blame them for being that way. I've learned through personal experience that you NEVER argue with a cop and NEVER make any uncommanded movement (like getting out of the car). This makes the officer EXTREMELY nervous and the situation could potentially deteriorate very quickly.

The bottom line is to never argue, do exactly what you are told when you are told, and to do ONLY what you are told. The officer must always feel that he/she is in complete control...

Autolite

12th March 2008, 03:43 PM

Actually, incidents like the one under discussion could be avoided by teaching people how to behave in a traffic stop. I don't recall ever having been told how to act when getting pulled over and I've only learned through experience.

I suspect that many people aren't aware on how they should act when dealing with a highway cop and this could be part of the problem. Perhaps an explanation on how to behave in a traffic stop should be included in driver training manuals...

JoeEllison

12th March 2008, 03:45 PM

Actually, incidents like the one under discussion could be avoided by teaching people how to behave in a traffic stop.
That should start with the police, no?

Autolite

12th March 2008, 03:55 PM

That should start with the police, no?

Well, the police are trained on how to conduct a traffic stop. I would suspect that their training teaches them to establish and maintain complete control at all times. Perhaps many motorists might be unaware of this and don't understand that the cop is just doing what they are suppose to do...

billydkid

12th March 2008, 03:57 PM

I've always found that saying something like "My taxes pay your salary!" tends to make things go more smoothly. Just a tip from experience.

Region Rat

12th March 2008, 04:04 PM

That should start with the police, no?

I've got to agree with JoeEllison here. They are the paid professionals who are going to perform this activity throughout the course of their careers. Most people are going to get pulled over very few times, if any, during their lives. Who should be the one to take the most responsibility to make sure the situation doesn't get out of hand.

Cops may be more paranoid, but that's not my fault, or the fault of 99% of the people who are stopped. Out of those 99%, a good portion may be very upset, and may do rude and impolite things, but they are not going to assault or hurt the cop. Cops should be trained to know the difference.

Maybe we'll get to the point where remote control robots will come to your window to extort money, er, give you a speeding ticket. That way everyone can feel nice and cozy.

Autolite

12th March 2008, 04:04 PM

I've always found that saying something like "My taxes pay your salary!" tends to make things go more smoothly. Just a tip from experience.

Hey, thanks! That sounds like great advice! I think that I'll give it a try next time... :D

Region Rat

12th March 2008, 04:07 PM

I've always found that when asked, "Do you know why I pulled you over", I got the best results with "To get doughnut money?"

Autolite

12th March 2008, 04:12 PM

Cops should be trained to know the difference.

This is a good point but I am not sure if there actually is any way to really "know the difference". I get the impression that most cops now-a-days will just assume that you are a "baddie" as a self preservation mechanism. Cops might be trained professionals but they are still human in that respect...

Modified

12th March 2008, 05:01 PM

This is a good point but I am not sure if there actually is any way to really "know the difference".

In this case, I'd say arguing and pointing into the distance is not a reason to pull a tazer on someone. From the guy's reaction in the video, I buy his story that he thought the cop was pulling a gun. Maybe it would be a good idea to make police tazers look less like guns.

Also, when a cop asks you why you were going so fast, the correct answer is "I had the gas pedal all the way to the floor."

Autolite

12th March 2008, 05:18 PM

In this case, I'd say arguing and pointing into the distance is not a reason to pull a tazer on someone.

I don't think that the cop was completely out of line. He was just doing what he felt he needed to do to gain control of the situation. He drew the taser only after the motorist refused to place his hands behind his back. He showed more restraint than I would have expected.

I have a buddy of mine who is just naturally confrontational with police. He's had traffic cops draw their guns on him a couple of times for just getting "overly verbal"...

Modified

12th March 2008, 05:50 PM

I don't think that the cop was completely out of line. He was just doing what he felt he needed to do to gain control of the situation. He drew the taser only after the motorist refused to place his hands behind his back. He showed more restraint than I would have expected.

What about the second tazer shot when the guy was already on the ground? His comments to the other cop afterward also give the impression that in his mind he was "punishing the guy for mouthing off".

One thing that does amaze me is that the police give up these videos. I know a few people who have requested dashcam videos, and in all cases the cameras were "not working". In one case, the cameras of six cruisers malfunctioned simultaneously.

YoPopa

12th March 2008, 06:05 PM

This poor cop made a dumb error in judgment. The kid was even dummerer. The kid refused to sign the ticket then turned his back on the cop and then the kid put his hand near his pocket (which is just what he might do if he had a weapon). The cop had a right to be nervous.

The crowd mentality that the online community has directed at the cop is way over the top. If lynching online was possible that poor cop would be dead now. As it is he has suffered way more than he was due from harassment by Youtube viewers.

Even the kid admitted he was wrong and asked that the harassment of the cop end. The low settlement was because he had a weak case.

Autolite

12th March 2008, 06:19 PM

What about the second tazer shot when the guy was already on the ground?

If the guy was tasered twice then I missed it in the video. Was that before or after the cuffs were on? In any case, I am guessing that it was a fairly "mild" taser (if that is possible). I was surprised to see the guy getting back up after having been zapped.

Speaking with guys who've been tasered, I sorta got the impression that getting back up on your feet was either not an option or severely discourage. Don't tasers have "adjustable" voltages or something???

Autolite

12th March 2008, 06:28 PM

The kid was even dummerer.

This is pretty much how I see it also. The kid was putting up way too much of a fuss for just a speeding ticket. His behavior would make a cop think that there might be something more going on than just a traffic violation. If it was just an issue of a simple speeding ticket then just sucking it up would be the smart thing. Like the cop said, if you've got a problem then take it to court...

(Incidentally I believe the correct terminology would be to say that "the kid was most dumberest".)

billydkid

12th March 2008, 06:32 PM

the whole idea that one is to be physically punished for not "obeying" the police is pretty frightening to me. If an officer is defending himself that is one thing, but assault a person for not obeying you is something quite different. There is no law that says you can't argue with a police officer. There no law that states you must show an officer particular respect. These people are not our bosses. They are people we hire to enforce the law and they are, in fact, supposed to be our employees, not our bosses.

YoPopa

12th March 2008, 06:33 PM

(Incidentally I believe the correct terminology would be to say that "the kid was most dumberest".)
I suppose if you need to get all pedanteristical then that is the more better choice.

Autolite

12th March 2008, 06:50 PM

There is no law that says you can't argue with a police officer. There no law that states you must show an officer particular respect.

Perhaps, I am really not certain. However, aren't there laws that say that you must do what the officer tells you to do? If you choose to ignore a cop's instructions, then your belligerence might legally be considered threatening behavior...

Dancing David

12th March 2008, 08:05 PM