Woman calls police. They brutalize and arrest her.

[Sage Rat]

On Tasers: Yes, they hurt. They're supposed to. What good would they be if they didn't?

I don't believe that that's true. The purpose of a taser is to incapacitate a person, not to make them feel pain. The pain is just a side-effect of the method used.

Point in fact, I'm nigh 100% certain that incapacitating a person is the sole intended and prescribed purpose of a taser.

 

[alice_in_wonderland]

No he didn't. Hal was talking about different police officers involved in a different situation. Nobody has defended the cops in the OP. They may be along to do so later in the thread, but gonzo's post was nothing but a big pile of stupid.

Dunno - I think when Hal referred to this thread as the weekly "All copz is duh suxxorz!" festival" he implied that the cops in the OP didn't deserve any criticism for their actions.

If that's not what he intended then I retract my comments.

I have nothing to say about either Dewey or gonzomax as neither of their posts struck me as particularly obnoxious, and your reaction was so over the top I can only assume there is history that I'm not aware of.

 

[ElvisL1ves]

Intended by the designer and manufacturer, yes. The intent of the user can be somewhat different, no?

 

[Lute Skywatcher]

At least they were able to use the dash cam against the officers.

While listening to Talk of the Nation a week or two ago about laws making it illegal to record cops (Link) the guest mentioned an incident in Prince George's County where a journalist was mistreated by cops. There were seven police cars which all had malfunctioning dash cams.

I started a Pit thread for that one at the time.

 

[Sage Rat]

Intended by the designer and manufacturer, yes. The intent of the user can be somewhat different, no?

Indeed. But such use is not acceptable, will get you fired, fined, and possibly jailed.

Like I said, using a knife to eat a steak is acceptable. Using it to kill someone isn't. A taser is the go-to device for de-escalating what could be a physical encounter into a (comparatively) peaceful subduing of a suspect for arrest, regardless of what the person's crime was. Resisting arrest is, itself, a crime and use of a taser as a response is acceptable to the limit that it is used specifically for the purpose of incapacitating the suspect and getting them into the police car. It isn't acceptable to use it to inflict pain.

 

[gonzomax]

What the hell are you blubbering about now? Dewey didn't give any indication that he was on the side of the cops. Why did you think that a lengthly explanation of the situation indicated that he was?

Nobody has defended these cops in this thread.

Have someone read posts 26 and 27 to you. The idea that this is another "the cops suck" thread implies that the posters are just picking on the cops who were doing their duty. I guess the woman was a few shocks low on her quota. They zapped her several times. But it is not about that. It is about people who just jump on the cops in every story
Actually it is not. It is about this case, where many think the cops are too easy to zap. Apparently she was a real threat because she would not tell them the name of her friend. She called the cops about a prowler . She wound up getting mashed on her face and zapped several times. For some reason, I should thing that is OK.

 

[gonzomax]

At least they were able to use the dash cam against the officers.

While listening to Talk of the Nation a week or two ago about laws making it illegal to record cops (Link) the guest mentioned an incident in Prince George's County where a journalist was mistreated by cops. There were seven police cars which all had malfunctioning dash cams.

I started a Pit thread for that one at the time.

Seven at the same time. It must be so, the police said it and they are underpaid people who like to serve the people. They would never lie. The journalist must have done something to cause the poor police to act.

 

[Hal Briston]

Dunno - I think when Hal referred to this thread as the weekly "All copz is duh suxxorz!" festival" he implied that the cops in the OP didn't deserve any criticism for their actions.

Naaa...the details here are very much lacking, but even with our limited info it sure looks to me like those two were Grade-A fuckwits.

My comment was regarding the other case, in which the cops took reasonable action, along with the way these threads tend to bring out the "fuck all cops" contingent

 

[Dewey Finn]

And notice that these guys were FIRED. That means---THEY WERE WRONG!

Note that only one officer was fired. The other resigned and shortly thereafter hired by the sheriff's office in a nearby county.

 

[magellan01]

Have someone read posts 26 and 27 to you. The idea that this is another "the cops suck" thread implies that the posters are just picking on the cops who were doing their duty. I guess the woman was a few shocks low on her quota. They zapped her several times. But it is not about that. It is about people who just jump on the cops in every story
Actually it is not. It is about this case, where many think the cops are too easy to zap. Apparently she was a real threat because she would not tell them the name of her friend. She called the cops about a prowler . She wound up getting mashed on her face and zapped several times. For some reason, I should thing that is OK.

No. Post 26 was referring to another incident that was brought up. Post 27 was just trying to fill in what the hell happened here...what actually went down. I've seen no one offer ANY excuse for the cops. And they seem to deserve none. But I am curious as what the hell they were thinking. At least they got caught.

 

[Freudian Slit]

At least they were able to use the dash cam against the officers.

While listening to Talk of the Nation a week or two ago about laws making it illegal to record cops (Link) the guest mentioned an incident in Prince George's County where a journalist was mistreated by cops. There were seven police cars which all had malfunctioning dash cams.

I started a Pit thread for that one at the time.

Ugh. There really is at least one person to support the cops no matter what they do, isn't there? They could brutalize a three year old with a tazer and someone would be right there pointing out that some three year olds really are that strong and out of control and do we want a police officer to get killed in the line of duty, do we?

 

[ivan astikov]

And notice that these guys were FIRED. That means---THEY WERE WRONG!

Note that only one officer was fired. The other resigned and shortly thereafter hired by the sheriff's office in a nearby county.

Standard police practice; when an officer is naughty, ship them somewhere they won't be recognised. The Catholics almost perfected it with their redistribution of paedophile priests.

 

[billfish678]

[
From what I've heard, "aggravated eyeballing" as such might well get you pulled in on disorderly conduct if the cop is in a bad mood. The charges may not stick, but I'd be in a position with some dude with a gun hauling me to a place I would rather not be.

Well, see thats when you tell the cop he can't arrest you because he is violating your rights. Then when he insists anyway, you fight em. Then, when he tazes you or beats the crap outa you to gain physical dominance, rather than submit, you keep on fighting, because your right you know, and hey, you might actually win this tussle if you try hard enough. You'd be amazed at how often this works out well for the wrongly arrested. I'd go so far as to say it should be the standard response a citizen should make when faced with being harassed by the man.

 

[Labrador Deceiver]

Have someone read posts 26 and 27 to you. The idea that this is another "the cops suck" thread implies that the posters are just picking on the cops who were doing their duty.

Nothing of the sort was said, or even implied, in post 27. That was the post you responded to, after all. It wasn't even related to post 26 in any way. Try again.

 

[ivan astikov]

A high-speed chase endangers everyone on the road.

There wouldn't be a dangerous high speed chase if LEO's didn't panic lowly car thieves into driving in a life-threatening manner.

Unless you have proof that in every instance they'd already been driving dangerously before the police joined in? Thought not.

 

[Kobal2]

Just out of curiosity on a technical/legal point, did the officer really have any legal grounds to arrest her for not giving him the name of her guest, or was that made up BS?

BS. Right to remain silent and all that.
OTOH, cops can book you for a short period of time (~10 hours, actual duration varies from state to state) for no specific reason, or while they scramble for grounds to arrest you for realz. Sometimes, they do it just to fuck with you or teach you to reSPEK their auTHORITAH.

 

[gonzomax]

[
From what I've heard, "aggravated eyeballing" as such might well get you pulled in on disorderly conduct if the cop is in a bad mood. The charges may not stick, but I'd be in a position with some dude with a gun hauling me to a place I would rather not be.

Well, see thats when you tell the cop he can't arrest you because he is violating your rights. Then when he insists anyway, you fight em. Then, when he tazes you or beats the crap outa you to gain physical dominance, rather than submit, you keep on fighting, because your right you know, and hey, you might actually win this tussle if you try hard enough. You'd be amazed at how often this works out well for the wrongly arrested. I'd go so far as to say it should be the standard response a citizen should make when faced with being harassed by the man.

And that is what happens. The police are never at fault. it is a citizen who is stupid enough to think they should defend their constitutional rights against a cop who is perfectly willing to ignore them. Many cops get pissed when a person does not blindly respect the authority of the cops over the rights we have guaranteed in the constitution. Getting arrested for not obeying a cops directions is absurd. It is necessary for citizens to stand up against the over reaching aggression of the bad cops to expose them. The cops don't clean their own nests. they protect bad cops. That is one of the problems ,the bad cops they protect taint them all.

 

[magellan01]

Since the cops had spoken to him and told him he could leave, I'd say that was proof enough.

Actually, my post was a joke. Evidently a bad one...

 

[descamisado]

I admit my post could have been the result of a hasty reading but since you're willing to take the hit, I owe you one.

 

[Kobal2]

On Tasers: Yes, they hurt. They're supposed to. What good would they be if they didn't?

I don't believe that that's true. The purpose of a taser is to incapacitate a person, not to make them feel pain. The pain is just a side-effect of the method used.

Point in fact, I'm nigh 100% certain that incapacitating a person is the sole intended and prescribed purpose of a taser.

You would be wrong. From Wiki :

Some Taser models, particularly those used by police departments, also have a "Drive Stun" capability, where the Taser is held against the target without firing the projectiles, and is intended to cause pain without incapacitating the target. "Drive Stun" is "the process of using the EMD weapon [Taser] as a pain compliance technique. This is done by activating the EMD and placing it against an individual