cops gone mad

[proud dad]

Insurgents "GOOD PEOPLE" with principles?  There is not a sane cell in your brain.You are one messed up person and a waste of oxygen.

Did I say ALL of them are "good people?" Do you not contend that they come from all walks of life just as our soldiers do? They believe in the cause they're fighting for just as we believe in ours. Just because our "principles" are at odds doesn't mean that they don't have any.

As for "comparing" police officers to Stasi agents and Iraqi insurgents, I didn't. If you'd read what I said without taking it out of context you'd understand that I was trying to explain the fact that there are good people and there are bad people within every organization, every gathering, and every group. The excuse that I've heard time and time again when a police officer oversteps his or her boundaries is, "yeah...but there are good cops out there too." I was pointing out the fallacy of this argument. We're not talking about the good ones here, we're talking about the bad ones and the good ones have no bearing on the argument at hand.

But you clearly can't read...so the point is moot.

You used a bad example and now you're trying to redeem yourself.Won't work.

 

[EtrnlSoldier]

I do indeed have a problem with ignorant cops (likely moreso than anyone here), and as much as said so.

I'd imagine that in your position you have even stronger feelings against them than the "citizens" do. Don't they make your job that much harder? One bad apple...and all that.

They don't so much make my job harder as they do to remind me of the weakness of human morality and annoy the crap out of me. We can put them through batteries of tests, psychological and otherwise, lie detectors, etc, but some still slip through. That's why we have Internal Affairs Bureaus. Well, that and, not all allegations made against cops are true. In fact, most aren't. But some are. We need open minded people in IA to figure that out.

The lesson I see here is, referring back to the first video of the chick, is not to judge so quickly, even when something seems strange to you and, appears at first glance to be out of line. Find out a bit more before making your determination. Do so with an open mind. This is one of the most important and yet, hardest things to teach even new cops, much less "civilians." New cops in training tend to take things at face value and go with it. We teach them to dig deeper, especially if what they've been told doesn't make sense after careful thought. People lie. Suspects, victims, and witnesses. Some women get angry with a boyfriend that broke up with them or cheated on them, etc. They then call the police and say that they were beaten or raped, when it didn't really happen (this is exceptionally unfortunate for the women that really have been victimized). Witnesses are frightened sometimes and don't want to get involved after witnessing a violent crime, or they are afraid of the suspect, or just apathetic. So they either "didn't see anything" or say that they saw something that didn't happen. Suspects, of course, don't want to be held accountable for their actions. All kinds of alternate realities out there. Assuming doesn't cut it in this business. Especially when you are taking someone's freedom away by arresting them. This is no light matter and, if you value your livelihood and possibly, your own freedom, you'd best have your ducks in a row before taking such steps.

As an example, I read a debate on another web site about an incident where a victim had been found beheaded, and the county coroner's office had said that the cause of death was, as yet, undetermined pending an autopsy. The members of this site were flabbergasted, and questioned the coroner's intelligence, saying that if his head was cut off, how hard could that be to determine the cause of death. They got quite indignant. Not a one of them even considered the possibility that the head was cut off after death (quite common really), and the the victim actually died of another cause (strangling, drowning, poisoning, gunshot, etc), the beheading having nothing to do with their demise. Face value. Things aren't always as they seem and, the easy conclusion is rarely the complete, or even right one.

Again, my assertion is that the first video proves nothing, other than a forced administrative segregation was taking place. Perhaps there's more to the story. Perhaps not.

Here's an interesting example. Two videos of the same police shooting. Watch them in the proper order. Can we be fooled by video? Can the camera "lie?" Perchance:

1.[/url]

Justified, or no? Once you've made up your mind, watch the second one:

2.[/url]

 

[EtrnlSoldier]

"Internal Server Error" caused a double post. Disregard this one please.

 

[GoFaster]

Here's an interesting example.  Two videos of the same police shooting.  Watch them in the proper order.  Can we be fooled by video?  Can the camera "lie?"  Perchance:

1.[/url]

Justified, or no?  Once you've made up your mind, watch the second one:

2.[/url]

Not saying right or wrong here on these videos. The man shot in this video was found to be pointing a cell phone. I'm not saying that the police should have know that, I'm just pointing out the final conclusion after the fact on this video.

 

[EtrnlSoldier]

AM -->

1298098[/ATTACH] AM]
Here's an interesting example. Two videos of the same police shooting. Watch them in the proper order. Can we be fooled by video? Can the camera "lie?" Perchance:

1.[/url]

Justified, or no? Once you've made up your mind, watch the second one:

2.[/url]

Not saying right or wrong here on these videos. The man shot in this video was found to be pointing a cell phone. I'm not saying that the police should have know that, I'm just pointing out the final conclusion after the fact on this video.

Then what is your point?? It's all about perceived threat anyway. Justified, or not?

It didn't look like a cel phone to me, and I hadn't just been in a high speed chase, with it pointing in my face. Would it have looked like that to you? And, give me a link to where you got this information please.

 

[GoFaster]

AM -->

1298125[/ATTACH] AM]
Here's an interesting example.  Two videos of the same police shooting.  Watch them in the proper order.  Can we be fooled by video?  Can the camera "lie?"  Perchance:

1.[/url]

Justified, or no?  Once you've made up your mind, watch the second one:

2.[/url]

Not saying right or wrong here on these videos.  The man shot in this video was found to be pointing a cell phone.  I'm not saying that the police should have know that, I'm just pointing out the final conclusion after the fact on this video.

Then what is your point??  It's all about perceived threat anyway.  Justified, or not?

It didn't look like a cel phone to me, and I hadn't just been in a high speed chase, with it pointing in my face.  Would it have looked like that to you?  And, give me a link to where you got this information please.

I knew, repeat, KNEW this would happen! Believe me without a doubt, I feel that the police had NO choice in this situation but to open fire. It's unfortunate circumstances, sometimes nobody's fault (situations where hearing impaired or mentally hanicapped people have fallen victims). In the follow video, one of the last comments by the narrator says 'the police had no choice but to fire again'. I would most definitely agree.

You're not reading what I read. I said that, once again, " Not saying right or wrong here on these videos. The man shot in this video was found to be pointing a cell phone. I'm not saying that the police should have know that, I'm just pointing out the final conclusion after the fact on this video."

The replies in this post seem to usually be one sided and quite passionate. Understandable from both points of view actually. It seems to be full of rebuttals from misquotes or misuderstandings, at least as far as I've read. Unfortunately it's difficult to always express one's true meaning through the written word. No ability to express the written words through verbal expression.

A miss quote at the beginning of this post is "For the person who said that if two female officers can't "handle" one female suspect, well, put yourself in that same position."

It DIDN'T say two women, it said "women", meaning get more than two female officers in the cell. I certainly agree that it is much more difficult to contain a person, male or female, than most think possible.

Actually mentioned, somewhat indirectly earlier in the post, is that there may not be enough female officers availible or that if there is a direct threat, male officers may be involved in a situation of assisting female officers in what's supposed to be an 'all female' officer situation is complete logic.

But let's face it, there is bias here. The folks on this post saying that no one knows what the police had to go through, don't know what the female that was arrested in this video had completely done either. I've heard her refered to as 'crackwhore' and most rescently 'chick'. 'Chick' not necessarily being a severly harse word, but I'm sure if someone walked up to you and referred to a female standing next to oneself that was your sister, wife, mother, daughter, etc. and said to you 'who's the chick?' you probably woundn't find it very respectful!

By the way, the people I ride with are Federal Law Enforcement. I had recently started to look into LVMPD as an occupation. I have friends that are with the department.

Below is the video clip where the information came from. I don't know why anyone should find it offensive, it's simply what happened.

 

[EtrnlSoldier]

AM -->

1298488[/ATTACH] AM]
Here's an interesting example. Two videos of the same police shooting. Watch them in the proper order. Can we be fooled by video? Can the camera "lie?" Perchance:

1.[/url]

Justified, or no? Once you've made up your mind, watch the second one:

2.[/url]

Not saying right or wrong here on these videos. The man shot in this video was found to be pointing a cell phone. I'm not saying that the police should have know that, I'm just pointing out the final conclusion after the fact on this video.

Then what is your point?? It's all about perceived threat anyway. Justified, or not?

It didn't look like a cel phone to me, and I hadn't just been in a high speed chase, with it pointing in my face. Would it have looked like that to you? And, give me a link to where you got this information please.

I knew, repeat, KNEW this would happen! Believe me without a doubt, I feel that the police had NO choice in this situation but to open fire. It's unfortunate circumstances, sometimes nobody's fault (situations where hearing impaired or mentally hanicapped people have fallen victims). In the follow video, one of the last comments by the narrator says 'the police had no choice but to fire again'. I would most definitely agree.

You're not reading what I read. I said that, once again, " Not saying right or wrong here on these videos. The man shot in this video was found to be pointing a cell phone. I'm not saying that the police should have know that, I'm just pointing out the final conclusion after the fact on this video."

The replies in this post seem to usually be one sided and quite passionate. Understandable from both points of view actually. It seems to be full of rebuttals from misquotes or misuderstandings, at least as far as I've read. Unfortunately it's difficult to always express one's true meaning through the written word. No ability to express the written words through verbal expression.

A miss quote at the beginning of this post is "For the person who said that if two female officers can't "handle" one female suspect, well, put yourself in that same position."

It DIDN'T say two women, it said "women", meaning get more than two female officers in the cell. I certainly agree that it is much more difficult to contain a person, male or female, than most think possible.

Actually mentioned, somewhat indirectly earlier in the post, is that there may not be enough female officers availible or that if there is a direct threat, male officers may be involved in a situation of assisting female officers in what's supposed to be an 'all female' officer situation is complete logic.

But let's face it, there is bias here. The folks on this post saying that no one knows what the police had to go through, don't know what the female that was arrested in this video had completely done either. I've heard her refered to as 'crackwhore' and most rescently 'chick'. 'Chick' not necessarily being a severly harse word, but I'm sure if someone walked up to you and referred to a female standing next to oneself that was your sister, wife, mother, daughter, etc. and said to you 'who's the chick?' you probably woundn't find it very respectful!

By the way, the people I ride with are Federal Law Enforcement. I had recently started to look into LVMPD as an occupation. I have friends that are with the department.

Below is the video clip where the information came from. I don't know why anyone should find it offensive, it's simply what happened.

As far as getting more females officer's in there, well, there quite simply aren't usually that many female officers around.

On the dude in the last video, if indeed it was a cel phone, well, he pointed it like a gun. Natural Selection, wouldn't you agree?

 

[GoFaster]

As far as getting more females officer's in there, well, there quite simply aren't usually that many female officers around.  

On the dude in the last video, if indeed it was a cel phone, well, he pointed it like a gun.  Natural Selection, wouldn't you agree?

I don't care if it was a pack of gum, or even just his fingers, you lift your hand and point something at a police officer when engaged in intense and high pursuit, something bad's going to happen. You can't possibly hold the officers responsible for defending each other at this junction. The officers don't know what it is or isn't in the assailants hand!

 

[EtrnlSoldier]

As far as getting more females officer's in there, well, there quite simply aren't usually that many female officers around.

On the dude in the last video, if indeed it was a cel phone, well, he pointed it like a gun. Natural Selection, wouldn't you agree?

I don't care if it was a pack of gum, or even just his fingers, you lift your hand and point something at a police officer when engaged in intense and high pursuit, something bad's going to happen. You can't possibly hold the officers responsible for defending each other at this junction. The officers don't know what it is or isn't in the assailants hand!

Agreed.

 

[craigntx]

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/202020/

 

[proud dad]

I never did understand that suspended with pay

 

[craigntx]

I never did understand that suspended with pay

yea its almost like getting a paid vacation to screw up

 

[99'busa]

I never did understand that suspended with pay

yea its almost like getting a paid vacation to screw up

+1

He just needs to push the buttons on the wrong person 1 time. Thats a vid. I'd pay to see