Another curbside lawyer bites the dust

[jimnyc]

Comply and give the license, fight in court - and pull away from the police in mere minutes. Turn into a curbside lawyer and think you're smarter than them, and you don't need to comply? You risk arrest and higher fines. Fight with the police and you risk getting shot. And he was WHITE. I have zero sympathy for him.

-----

<time class="date" datetime="2015-10-17">Uploaded October 17, 2015</time>

The family of a Michigan teen who flashed a car’s brights at a sheriff sergeant’s SUV and wound up dead filed a wrongful death lawsuit Wednesday. A complaint on behalf of slain 17-year-old Deven Guilford accuses Eaton County Sheriff's Sgt. Jonathan Frost of unconstitutional violations of privacy and excessive force in a Feb. 28 traffic stop in the rural central Michigan county

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.worldstarhiphop.com/embed/87279" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[NightTrain]

That kid watched too many YouTube vids of people refusing to cooperate with a cop beside the highway.

It looked to me like that cop in this video was professional all the way around. I'd like to see the cop car camera footage to see what happened after the kid got tazed... from the audio it sounds like he got nailed and then counter attacked.

Senseless. If the kid would have just given his license he'd be alive today and could have followed up with a lawsuit if he felt the cop was in the wrong for pulling him over.

I've taught my kids to go with the old "yes sir" and "no sir" respectful responses, do what the cop tells you and if there's a bullshit factor take it to court afterwards. If the cop was wrong, most likely the Judge will see it and make it right. The system has yet to fail me when the cop was wrong, and making a stand beside the highway is the wrong time to make your stand.

[jimnyc]

That kid watched too many YouTube vids of people refusing to cooperate with a cop beside the highway.

It looked to me like that cop in this video was professional all the way around. I'd like to see the cop car camera footage to see what happened after the kid got tazed... from the audio it sounds like he got nailed and then counter attacked.

Senseless. If the kid would have just given his license he'd be alive today and could have followed up with a lawsuit if he felt the cop was in the wrong for pulling him over.

I've taught my kids to go with the old "yes sir" and "no sir" respectful responses, do what the cop tells you and if there's a bullshit factor take it to court afterwards. If the cop was wrong, most likely the Judge will see it and make it right. The system has yet to fail me when the cop was wrong, and making a stand beside the highway is the wrong time to make your stand.

And the cop was right about the headlights too. New lights will be MUCH brighter than most. The kid beamed him and it was a cop, he screwed up. He should have given him the ID. It's possible he walked with a warning. Worst case is he leaves with a ticket - on that he could fight in COURT, where you are supposed to fight, not on the side of the road.

Fight with a cop and lots of shit can go wrong. If the taser isn't working and the perp keeps fighting, and if the cop feels threatened, it's game over.

I love these idiots that think they can tell the cops how to do their jobs on the side of the road, and think they know all the laws, and apparently think they can cite garbage and then walk away without a ticket. Yup, they watch WAY too many youtube videos. Kinda like the idiots that think they don't have to pay taxes for whatever reason.

[Bilgerat]

http://m.c.lnkd.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/p/6/005/063/21f/1321d91.jpg

[Noir]

teen who flashed a car’s brights at a sheriff sergeant’s SUV

What exactly is the offence?

[jimnyc]

What exactly is the offence?

Probably careless driving or similar... but when the cop comes out of the incident looking like this, things change.

http://i.imgur.com/d7xiUfM.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/W39rFdP.jpg

http://i.imgur.com/Y8hYfLs.jpg

[jimnyc]

And after...

http://i.imgur.com/m6xBbc6.jpg

[jimnyc]

I don't know why the kid high beamed the officer. But some do it because they're annoyed, and others do it to warn others about cops up ahead. Here's one site I though interesting, because... (Pennsylvania):

---

I often get this question from well-intentioned drivers that want to warn their pals in the oncoming traffic lane that a cop is running radar or a speed trap just ahead. They think that they have to be a "secret squirrel" about flashing their beams like it's Paul Revere warning the village Yanks that "the British are coming." The truth is that there is nothing illegal about flashing your high beams during the daytime. Doing it at night is illegal and poses a risk of harm to oncoming traffic that gets temporarily blinded by your high beams.

Here's what the PA Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S.A. 4306, says about High Beams:

Whenever the driver of a vehicle approaches an oncoming vehicle within 500 feet, the driver must use the low beam of light from the headlights. This requirement must be read in conjunction with statutory language that sets forth the circumstances when motorists are required to use their headlights and limits the use of high beams during the times when headlights must be used (night time). The driver of a vehicle is also required to use low beams whenever approaching another vehicle from the rear within 300 feet. This requirement does not impose a similar requirement to dim headlights when the motorist is passed by another vehicle that then pulls in front of the passed vehicle. The daytime flashing of high beams is not a violation of the Vehicle Code even when used to warn oncoming motorists of the presence of a police radar unit. The Vehicle Code also specifically allows motorists to flash high beams at oncoming vehicles as a warning of roadway emergencies or other dangerous or hazardous conditions ahead.

If you have been pulled over and ticketed for using your high beams improperly, be polite and accept the citation. Never argue with an officer.

http://www.shafferenglecriminalblog.com/2012/01/can-the-police-stop-me-for-flashing-my-high-beams-at-oncoming-traffic.shtml

[DLT]

Comply and give the license, fight in court - and pull away from the police in mere minutes. Turn into a curbside lawyer and think you're smarter than them, and you don't need to comply? You risk arrest and higher fines. Fight with the police and you risk getting shot. And he was WHITE. I have zero sympathy for him.

-----

<time class="date" datetime="2015-10-17">Uploaded October 17, 2015</time>

The family of a Michigan teen who flashed a car’s brights at a sheriff sergeant’s SUV and wound up dead filed a wrongful death lawsuit Wednesday. A complaint on behalf of slain 17-year-old Deven Guilford accuses Eaton County Sheriff's Sgt. Jonathan Frost of unconstitutional violations of privacy and excessive force in a Feb. 28 traffic stop in the rural central Michigan county

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.worldstarhiphop.com/embed/87279" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Wait....what? A teen was shot seven times by a cop and it wasn't splashed all over the news 24/7??? Oh wait. He was a white dumbass.

Nevermind.

[DLT]

That kid watched too many YouTube vids of people refusing to cooperate with a cop beside the highway.

It looked to me like that cop in this video was professional all the way around. I'd like to see the cop car camera footage to see what happened after the kid got tazed... from the audio it sounds like he got nailed and then counter attacked.

Senseless. If the kid would have just given his license he'd be alive today and could have followed up with a lawsuit if he felt the cop was in the wrong for pulling him over.

I've taught my kids to go with the old "yes sir" and "no sir" respectful responses, do what the cop tells you and if there's a bullshit factor take it to court afterwards. If the cop was wrong, most likely the Judge will see it and make it right. The system has yet to fail me when the cop was wrong, and making a stand beside the highway is the wrong time to make your stand.

The kid was probably driving without a license and on drugs. Not wise when combined with arguing with a cop.

[jimnyc]

The kid was probably driving without a license and on drugs. Not wise when combined with arguing with a cop.

He did have marijuana in his system, but that could have been from 10 days prior for all I know.

[DLT]

He did have marijuana in his system, but that could have been from 10 days prior for all I know.

It could have been one reason why he 'resisted arrest'. The main reason was sheer stupidity.

[NightTrain]

7 shots sounds pretty excessive, but that cop was getting his ass kicked bigtime, judging from those pics.

100,000 volts must really bring out the Mike Tyson in a smartass motorist!

[jimnyc]

7 shots sounds pretty excessive, but that cop was getting his ass kicked bigtime, judging from those pics.

100,000 volts must really bring out the Mike Tyson in a smartass motorist!

I suppose it all depends on the cop, and specifically what's happening which makes up his frame of mind. If someone is pummeling me (I believe he felt he was going to lose consciousness as well, would have to find an article though), and I felt my life is at risk, I would pull my gun out and empty the clip! :)

[jimnyc]

Not the same article I was thinking of, but found this on a quick search...

---

During the altercation, the two reportedly ended up in a ditch and Guilford was on top of Sgt. Frost. The teen was reportedly punching the officer in the face repeatedly. Sgt. Frost said that he felt blood in his mouth and was worried that he would lose consciousness. He attempted to shoot the teen, but his first round wouldn’t fire. The Sheriff’s sergeant ejected the unfired round and ended up firing seven shots into the teen’s upper body.

http://www.inquisitr.com/2176773/no-arrest-over-death-of-deven-guildford-teen-shot-by-sheriffs-sergeant-at-traffic-stop-newly-released-video/

[NightTrain]

Not the same article I was thinking of, but found this on a quick search...

---

During the altercation, the two reportedly ended up in a ditch and Guilford was on top of Sgt. Frost. The teen was reportedly punching the officer in the face repeatedly. Sgt. Frost said that he felt blood in his mouth and was worried that he would lose consciousness. He attempted to shoot the teen, but his first round wouldn’t fire. The Sheriff’s sergeant ejected the unfired round and ended up firing seven shots into the teen’s upper body.

http://www.inquisitr.com/2176773/no-arrest-over-death-of-deven-guildford-teen-shot-by-sheriffs-sergeant-at-traffic-stop-newly-released-video/


Interesting.

The brand new cop car didn't have the dash cam available? I'm not a conspiracy theory guy, but that raises a red flag. That really sounds suspicious.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Wait....what? A teen was shot seven times by a cop and it wasn't splashed all over the news 24/7??? Oh wait. He was a white dumbass.

Nevermind.


Duh-- "DA HONKY LIVES DONT MATTER!" :mad::mad::mad:

ONLY DUMBASS DEM VOTER LIVES MATTER!:mad::mad::mad:

Wake up to the nation that the scum obama is destroying and getting praised to high heaven for his fantastic leadership!--Tyr

[jimnyc]

Interesting.

The brand new cop car didn't have the dash cam available? I'm not a conspiracy theory guy, but that raises a red flag. That really sounds suspicious.

That I don't have an answer for. Most cars the camera gets turned on with their overhead lights and/or sirens. "Not available". I don't like to see that either. Broken? Never engaged properly? Not released for whatever reason?

But even without, we saw the whole thing up until the trigger being squeezed. We also saw the cops after effects. I think there is MUCH more reason to believe it's a good shooting than to lean towards a conspiracy of sorts.

[jimnyc]

This article states the vehicle had no camera. I suppose that would be easily verifiable. Ar eall cars without them in that department? Just a new car without it yet? There should be a paper trail to easily verify what was and what was not done to each car.

-----

Lloyd said Guilford got off the ground and the altercation ended in a snow-filled ditch, where Guilford was able to get on top of Frost and was hitting him in the face. There is no video of the final moments. Frost's body camera came off during the fight and his SUV had no dash camera; Guilford's cell phone remained on the pavement, recording audio of the shots but no video of the shooting.

http://www.lansingstatejournal.com/story/news/local/2015/06/16/press-conference-eaton-guilford/28801761/

[NightTrain]

That I don't have an answer for. Most cars the camera gets turned on with their overhead lights and/or sirens. "Not available". I don't like to see that either. Broken? Never engaged properly? Not released for whatever reason?

But even without, we saw the whole thing up until the trigger being squeezed. We also saw the cops after effects. I think there is MUCH more reason to believe it's a good shooting than to lean towards a conspiracy of sorts.

Right, I agree that the kid was out of line and that's showed clearly by the Body-Cam. And that cop definitely got a 1st class beat down... that kid didn't look like an ass-kicker to me, but looks can be deceiving as I've learned over the years! :laugh:

I'd really like to know if the dash-cam was there but the footage was 'lost' for whatever reason, or if it simply hadn't been installed yet. If the cam was indeed present, that would raise my suspicion of a coverup 100%. It's real easy to punch yourself in the face! lol

We're really behind the times here, only a few cop cars in AK have the dash-cams and hardly any cops have body-cams. It's a great idea because it protects professionally behaving cops and normal law-abiding citizens. Anyone who doesn't like the idea of all law enforcement encounters being video recorded displays behavior that they don't want a Judge & Jury to see.

[NightTrain]

Frost's patrol vehicle didn't have a working dash camera because the department was in the process of equipping its vehicles with the cameras but there were delays with the software, Reich said. All patrol vehicles had the cameras were installed and working by the middle of March, he said.

There we go, question answered. That's reasonable.

[Gunny]

[/FONT][/COLOR]There we go, question answered. That's reasonable.

If he's breathing, he's not a good lawyer.

[NightTrain]

If he's breathing, he's not a good lawyer.


LOL

Well, almost! I know 3 lawyers that I wouldn't throw overboard while running the canyon.

One is my divorce attorney that destroyed my ex-wife in court.

Second is a Real Estate attorney friend of mine that lives in Phoenix and here in AK.

The third is a member here on DP who shall remain nameless in order to protect their sterling reputation.

[DLT]

http://m.c.lnkd.licdn.com/mpr/mpr/p/6/005/063/21f/1321d91.jpg

Nice graphic. That's a keeper. :laugh:

[LongTermGuy]

7 shots sounds pretty excessive, but that cop was getting his ass kicked bigtime, judging from those pics.

100,000 volts must really bring out the Mike Tyson in a smartass motorist!



Fighting for ones life...Keep shooting until "you hit" something vital (to make them stop)..and or the perp goes down..

http://i.imgur.com/W39rFdP.jpg

[revelarts]

I don't know why the kid high beamed the officer. But some do it because they're annoyed, and others do it to warn others about cops up ahead. Here's one site I though interesting, because... (Pennsylvania):

Seems he was just trying to tell the cop his high beams were on.

the cop told the kid he already knew that his new lights looked liked high beams because he'd already been told twice by other drivers.
So why did he TURN AROUND pull the kid over if he already knew this?
There was no other reason for the stop. So why?

Is this good police work?
NO.
Should the kid have given the cop ID at the traffic stop.
YES
Was it a reasonable stop. a stop that would help the kid or the officer, or traffic, or safety or anything?
NO.
Could the cop have let the kid go?
YES.
Would any CRIME have been allowed if he had?
NO.
Who's dead because he wanted to alert the police of an potentially dangerous car lights. Who's killed someone over high beams and forcing others to comply over non criminal BS that escalates?
The whole thing was a series of bad decisions by both that ended up with a dead kid.
But the actions of the police, who's TRAINED to treat people well and employed to stop crimes. Started the whole death spiral.

I agree that encouraging people to comply with police and later deal with the BAD APPLE (or LEO having a bad day or LEO on a power trip or LEO that doesn't know the law) in court, is the best way to survive.
But i don't think we do the anyone any favors by giving the LEO a pass to harass people. Just Shrugging off all blame on the DEAD guy. Especially those who have not committed a crime. If i'm to believe the LEO defenders here the Police have every right and are EXPECTED to harass willy nilly and people just have to put up with it on the streets.
Well WHY NOT add to the conversation that police should be trained to know that it's NOT OK to pull people over for BS or when they are trying to help. That non criminal, or minor infractions are not good grounds arrest or a beat down.
But "98%" -- the good police know this already right?

[jimnyc]

Seems he was just trying to tell the cop his high beams were on.

the cop told the kid he already knew that his new lights looked liked high beams because he'd already been told twice by other drivers.
So why did he TURN AROUND pull the kid over if he already knew this?
There was no other reason for the stop. So why?

Regardless of how bright someones lights are, or even if they accidentally left the brights on - it's still illegal to flip the high beams at oncoming cars. I see cars all the time with xenon lights or similar, that are VERY bright, but that doesn't mean I get to high beam every one of those cares I see. And if I do so to a cop, you bet I expect to get pulled over for doing so.

And if I do, I'll shut my mouth and provide my ID. If I felt wronged, and especially if I were recording, I would handle my business in the courtroom.

These nitwits want to keep thinking they know more than the police, think it's ok to read them the riot act instead of cooperating, then refuse to cooperate... and then worse, FIGHT with them - you put yourself in a dangerous situation that can potentially be lethal. I have zero sympathy for folks that outright refuse to cooperate, refuse to ID themselves and then fight with police.

The common denominator is not bad police, but rather folks that want to hold court on the side of roads, that want to refuse to cooperate in any way, want to resist arrest and/or fight - and then bad shit happens. This issue isn't all about a kid who flipped his beams and somehow wrongly pulled over - but about a kid who tried to be a lawyer, refused to cooperate over and over, and then fought with a cop and lost.

[jimnyc]

it's NOT OK to pull people over for BS or when they are trying to help.

So this kid was just a good kid just trying to help the police? LOL Sorry, I disagree. And even if so - the whole thing was about nothing if the kid simply gave his ID. HE made this situation bad, not the cop following the law.

[revelarts]

Regardless of how bright someones lights are, or even if they accidentally left the brights on - it's still illegal to flip the high beams at oncoming cars. I see cars all the time with xenon lights or similar, that are VERY bright, but that doesn't mean I get to high beam every one of those cares I see. And if I do so to a cop, you bet I expect to get pulled over for doing so.

And if I do, I'll shut my mouth and provide my ID. If I felt wronged, and especially if I were recording, I would handle my business in the courtroom.

These nitwits want to keep thinking they know more than the police, think it's ok to read them the riot act instead of cooperating, then refuse to cooperate... and then worse, FIGHT with them - you put yourself in a dangerous situation that can potentially be lethal. I have zero sympathy for folks that outright refuse to cooperate, refuse to ID themselves and then fight with police.

The common denominator is not bad police, but rather folks that want to hold court on the side of roads, that want to refuse to cooperate in any way, want to resist arrest and/or fight - and then bad shit happens. This issue isn't all about a kid who flipped his beams and somehow wrongly pulled over - but about a kid who tried to be a lawyer, refused to cooperate over and over, and then fought with a cop and lost.


So this kid was just a good kid just trying to help the police? LOL Sorry, I disagree. And even if so - the whole thing was about nothing if the kid simply gave his ID. HE made this situation bad, not the cop following the law.


Sigh, yeah. so do you think police do have a right to pull over people for BS non crime crimes then and should use there Full real or imagined authority to enforce the smallest of issues?
And they SHoulD NOT be trained to understand that when someone's trying to help that they can just "let it go" or to deescalate a small issue rather than allow it to turn into a pissing match over minor -no harm done- BS?


And Yes I've turned on my high beams to alert other drivers and I have had other drivers alert me. no big deal. Often i'm grateful because i had no just forgot to turn them off. I've had high beams flashed at me when i didn't have my light on AT All and i should have.So yeah it's a helpful gesture. even if you or the cop don't know it.

[jimnyc]

Sigh, yeah. so do you think police do have a right to pull over people for BS non crime crimes then and should use there Full real or imagined authority to enforce the smallest of issues?
And they SHoulD NOT be trained to understand that when someone's trying to help that they can just "let it go" or to deescalate a small issue rather than allow it to turn into a pissing match over minor -no harm done- BS?


And Yes I've turned on my high beams to alert other drivers and I have had other drivers alert me. no big deal. Often i'm grateful because i had no just forgot to turn them off. I've had high beams flashed at me when i didn't have my light on AT All and i should have.So yeah it's a helpful gesture. even if you or the cop don't know it.

It WAS a crime. The cop was MORE than polite and handled it as a professional. The kid thought HE had the authority and HE made the issue what it was and HE got himself killed. The cop didn't press the issue about the beams, the kid did. The cop tried to deescalate by remaining calm, explaining his decision and asking for ID. He did nothing at all to make things worse.

You can call it a friendly gesture, but the cop follows the law. The kid chose the wrong person to high beam, simple as that. He should have taken his ticket and moved on, or fought it in court. He chose to fight on the street, literally, and paid for his bad decision with his life.

You can make excuses. But this kid broke the law, however small you see it. The cop was fine, and the kid CHOSE to escalate the issue. The kid CHOSE to fight, even after being tased. Every single bad decision made here was made by the kid. You may say the cop made the wrong decision by pulling him over, and I saw he was enforcing the law. From the VERY first request the kid had to be a dick. He didn't even make it past the ID part.

Then look at the cops face, it would appear that regardless of a traffic citation, the kid made a seriously wrong choice based off of his temper.

[revelarts]

It WAS a crime. The cop was MORE than polite and handled it as a professional. The kid thought HE had the authority and HE made the issue what it was and HE got himself killed. The cop didn't press the issue about the beams, the kid did. The cop tried to deescalate by remaining calm, explaining his decision and asking for ID. He did nothing at all to make things worse.

You can call it a friendly gesture, but the cop follows the law. The kid chose the wrong person to high beam, simple as that. He should have taken his ticket and moved on, or fought it in court. He chose to fight on the street, literally, and paid for his bad decision with his life.

You can make excuses. But this kid broke the law, however small you see it. The cop was fine, and the kid CHOSE to escalate the issue. The kid CHOSE to fight, even after being tased. Every single bad decision made here was made by the kid. You may say the cop made the wrong decision by pulling him over, and I saw he was enforcing the law. From the VERY first request the kid had to be a dick. He didn't even make it past the ID part.

Then look at the cops face, it would appear that regardless of a traffic citation, the kid made a seriously wrong choice based off of his temper.


So you think the LEO made all the best actions here? And theres nothing he could/should have changed so that he and the kid could have walked away alive and well? And "the law" not suffer any horrific damage from the "crimes"?

[Elessar]

What exactly is the offence?

You do not flashe Hi-beams at anyone, much less a cop, unless the other is driving with them on and obstructing your vision.

Never flash a cop, unless you are seeking help.

[Elessar]

Seems he was just trying to tell the cop his high beams were on.

the cop told the kid he already knew that his new lights looked liked high beams because he'd already been told twice by other drivers.
So why did he TURN AROUND pull the kid over if he already knew this?
There was no other reason for the stop. So why?

Is this good police work?
NO.
Should the kid have given the cop ID at the traffic stop.
YES
Was it a reasonable stop. a stop that would help the kid or the officer, or traffic, or safety or anything?
NO.
Could the cop have let the kid go?
YES.
Would any CRIME have been allowed if he had?
NO.
Who's dead because he wanted to alert the police of an potentially dangerous car lights. Who's killed someone over high beams and forcing others to comply over non criminal BS that escalates?
The whole thing was a series of bad decisions by both that ended up with a dead kid.
But the actions of the police, who's TRAINED to treat people well and employed to stop crimes. Started the whole death spiral.

I agree that encouraging people to comply with police and later deal with the BAD APPLE (or LEO having a bad day or LEO on a power trip or LEO that doesn't know the law) in court, is the best way to survive.
But i don't think we do the anyone any favors by giving the LEO a pass to harass people. Just Shrugging off all blame on the DEAD guy. Especially those who have not committed a crime. If i'm to believe the LEO defenders here the Police have every right and are EXPECTED to harass willy nilly and people just have to put up with it on the streets.
Well WHY NOT add to the conversation that police should be trained to know that it's NOT OK to pull people over for BS or when they are trying to help. That non criminal, or minor infractions are not good grounds arrest or a beat down.
But "98%" -- the good police know this already right?

Bullshit.

Did you listen to how calm the Deputy was and how defiant the kid was?

Try again.

[Noir]

You do not flashe Hi-beams at anyone, much less a cop, unless the other is driving with them on and obstructing your vision. Never flash a cop, unless you are seeking help.

May be a cultural difference thing - here flashing your high-beams is pretty common for a number of context dependent reasons.

[Gunny]

May be a cultural difference thing - here flashing your high-beams is pretty common for a number of context dependent reasons.

Legal difference. Technically, you have to be the only one on the road to even use them.

[Noir]

Legal difference. Technically, you have to be the only one on the road to even use them.

How bizarre.
Surly if there are cars behind you its grand tho.

[Gunny]

How bizarre.
Surly if there are cars behind you its grand tho.

It isn't bizarre at all. Driving into oncoming high beams is blinding. If the cars are behind you, it doesn't matter. But you can't have them on in oncoming traffic or if you are following. It sucks as bad to have them in your rear view mirror as in your face.

[Noir]

It isn't bizarre at all. Driving into oncoming high beams is blinding. If the cars are behind you, it doesn't matter. But you can't have them on in oncoming traffic or if you are following. It sucks as bad to have them in your rear view mirror as in your face.

That makes more sense (the 'bizarre' bit would have been more if it was only when 1 car on the road, rather than 1 side of a road).

All the same, flashing lights shouldn't be considered an offence.

[Gunny]

That makes more sense (the 'bizarre' bit would have been more if it was only when 1 car on the road, rather than 1 side of a road).

All the same, flashing lights shouldn't be considered an offence.

Here. you normally flash lights for two reasons: You flash your brights to get someone oncoming to turn their brights off; or, you flash your lights by turning them off for a second to let some knucklehead know he's driving with his lights off.

Since most vehicles now have a sensor that automatically turns your lights on, that's kind of old school.

[Noir]

Here. you normally flash lights for two reasons: You flash your brights to get someone oncoming to turn their brights off;

So it wasn't an offence?
The driver said he thought the cars full beams were on, so he flashed his, maybe i'm missing something but at that point i think the cop shoulda went along a 'seems there was a misunderstanding, carry on'.

[Perianne]

So it wasn't an offence?
The driver said he thought the cars full beams were on, so he flashed his, maybe i'm missing something but at that point i think the cop shoulda went along a 'seems there was a misunderstanding, carry on'.

Or the kid could have followed a legal order. Again, all you have to do is be nice to them (the police).

[Noir]

Or the kid could have followed a legal order. Again, all you have to do is be nice to them (the police).

After he'd been pulled over when he shouldn't have been - yes.

[Perianne]

After he'd been pulled over when he shouldn't have been - yes.

I remember my husband saying that the worst thing about young men is they don't know when to shut up. I suppose sometimes it results in them getting a busted lip or a broken nose. Older men here will understand how that works a lot better than I do. It's sad that this young man didn't understand that he could not win that battle.

[revelarts]

I remember my husband saying that the worst thing about young men is they don't know when to shut up. I suppose sometimes it results in them getting a busted lip or a broken nose. Older men here will understand how that works a lot better than I do. It's sad that this young man didn't understand that he could not win that battle.

It's more ashamed that the older wiser man on the scene with the badge and training couldn't just drive on after having 2 other drivers do the same thing to him for the same reason.
The older man with the gun and authority and far better things to do should have been the "bigger man" here it seems to me. It's sad that this older man didn't understand that he did not have to act like it was a battle at all.

Yes the kid should have OBEYED like a dog the way some cops like, so he'd avoid getting killed or arrested over minor BS. And he should have never raised his voice because it frightens and offends some police. And without question or joke the kid definitely shouldn't have raised his hands against the cops. He's just asking for death at that point.

But still i say the cop made the 1st offensive unnecessary move over something he knew by experience that night and confirmed by the kids words was not intended as challenge or a crime.

But neither his age or his police training allowed the protect and serve mentality to guide him.
Where i think a better officer would have.

[Gunny]

Y'all aren't looking big picture. Cops are nothing more than tax collectors. The Sheriff of Nottingham would be proud. They drive around looking for excuses to give you a ticket. You don't have to like it, but that is how it is. Escalating the situation NEVER works in your favor. The math isn't hard. There are always more cops than you, and that badge gives them the authority to do what they want.

Want to argue? Show up on your court date. They count on you NOT doing that and just paying the fine. Arguing with cops on the scene is a waste of time and breath. You figure out the time and effort in lost wages to show up, it isn't worth it. We aren't talking cream of the crop here. It's easier to get through a police academy than Marine Corps boot camp and I KNOW first hand how dumb privates are. I originally was going to be a cop when I retired until I saw how much money they DON'T make. I got paid better as an electrician. You're not getting into it with a Rhodes scholar.

What I CAN say about us "old guys" is we leaned how to pick our battles. All you young puppies want to get all indignant and get your asses kicked. I'll save getting mine kicked over something that actually matters.

[Noir]

It's more ashamed that the older wiser man on the scene with the badge and training couldn't just drive on after having 2 other drivers do the same thing to him for the same reason.

+1
I haven't seen it mentioned on any official report yet, but there are multiple mentions floating around that this guy was the third consecutive citizen to be stopped by this cop over the cops bright lights.
With that being the case, the cop needs to consider his that he is (unintentionally) the source of these violations, not the citizens he's stopping.

[Gunny]

+1
I haven't seen it mentioned on any official report yet, but there are multiple mentions floating around that this guy was the third consecutive citizen to be stopped by this cop over the cops bright lights.
With that being the case, the cop needs to consider his that he is (unintentionally) the source of these violations, not the citizens he's stopping.

Cops aren't responsible for their lights. The motor pool is. I've found most don't know jack about their firearms either.

You STILL don't start an altercation with them unless you just won the lottery and can afford the lawyer and legal fees.

[revelarts]

+1
I haven't seen it mentioned on any official report yet, but there are multiple mentions floating around that this guy was the third consecutive citizen to be stopped by this cop over the cops bright lights.
With that being the case, the cop needs to consider his that he is (unintentionally) the source of these violations, not the citizens he's stopping.

Yes, 2 other drivers told him about the lights earlier that night. He says so on camera, he's tells the kid about it.
so why is he stopping people for what he knows is a non-issue?
And arguing over a technicality of whether he had the high beams on or whether they LOOK LIKE they were on with a 17 year boy.

[NightTrain]

You guys are missing the obvious fact that the cop DID know that his lights were unusually bright. Of course he did, he admitted to the kid that 2 others that night had also flashed him and got pulled over.

He was cruising around waiting for people to flash him so that he could pull them over and check them out. Cops do things like that. Their goal is to check people out to see if they're drunk or illegal for some reason, and if you don't think they have a quota for traffic stops, you're sadly mistaken. It won't be officially called a 'quota', but it amounts to the same thing.

If a cop really wants to pull you over, but you've done nothing to warrant it, he'll just say you strayed over the fog line and initiate the stop. Who's to say any different? If he sees you've got a cam on your dash when he walks up, then he's in a bind because you can prove that you didn't stray over the fog line, but he'll quickly revert to a Plan B - something like "Thought I heard studs on your car - but since I've got you pulled over, have you been drinking tonight?" or something weak like that.

I had a Wasilla cop pull me over as I pulled out of a local bar a while back. I was the designated driver and was stone cold sober, but he didn't know that. His reason for pulling me over was : "You have a trailer ball on your bumper, and it was obstructing my view of the license plate." I looked back at him with a "bullshit!" expression and asked if it had anything to do with the fact that I'd just left a bar. Nope! It was the trailer hitch.

Personally, I think everyone should invest in a dash cam. It'll quickly pay for itself in accident disputes and making cops work a little harder in justifying why they pulled you over.

Unless you drive like an idiot, in which case you should probably go without one.

[jimnyc]

We can argue forever about whether or not flashing high beams should be enough to get someone pulled over. Considering IT'S AGAINST THE LAW, regardless of how often it's used, or why, it's still going to get you pulled over if you do so to the police.

But put that out of the way. And even saying that he could have sent the kid on his way once the "misunderstanding" was cleared up - a cop will always start off a stop with "license, registration and insurance please". The trouble here had very little to do with lights and everything to do with how this kid handled himself, and eventually fought, with a police officer. Not being happy with why a police officer pulled someone over doesn't give them carte blanche to act as one wants and to defy legal orders. If the kid was recording, and felt he was in the right - take it to court. He took it to curbside court, and lost. Zero sympathy.

Sometimes people get pulled over, or worse, due to mistaken identity. Should the mistaken person then be as defiant, and perhaps even fight with the police? And if he does, should he get a free pass because the initial stop was a mistake to begin with? Nope.

[Gunny]

You guys are missing the obvious fact that the cop DID know that his lights were unusually bright. Of course he did, he admitted to the kid that 2 others that night had also flashed him and got pulled over.

He was cruising around waiting for people to flash him so that he could pull them over and check them out. Cops do things like that. Their goal is to check people out to see if they're drunk or illegal for some reason, and if you don't think they have a quota for traffic stops, you're sadly mistaken. It won't be officially called a 'quota', but it amounts to the same thing.

If a cop really wants to pull you over, but you've done nothing to warrant it, he'll just say you strayed over the fog line and initiate the stop. Who's to say any different? If he sees you've got a cam on your dash when he walks up, then he's in a bind because you can prove that you didn't stray over the fog line, but he'll quickly revert to a Plan B - something like "Thought I heard studs on your car - but since I've got you pulled over, have you been drinking tonight?" or something weak like that.

I had a Wasilla cop pull me over as I pulled out of a local bar a while back. I was the designated driver and was stone cold sober, but he didn't know that. His reason for pulling me over was : "You have a trailer ball on your bumper, and it was obstructing my view of the license plate." I looked back at him with a "bullshit!" expression and asked if it had anything to do with the fact that I'd just left a bar. Nope! It was the trailer hitch.

Personally, I think everyone should invest in a dash cam. It'll quickly pay for itself in accident disputes and making cops work a little harder in justifying why they pulled you over.

Unless you drive like an idiot, in which case you should probably go without one.

Your age and maturity are showing. I elbowed a cop in the mouth when I was a teen. Got 10 days out of that deal. I was right, he was wrong and HE won. What some think is right and wrong are subjective. What is, is not.

[Noir]

We can argue forever about whether or not flashing high beams should be enough to get someone pulled over. Considering IT'S AGAINST THE LAW, regardless of how often it's used, or why, it's still going to get you pulled over if you do so to the police.

But put that out of the way. And even saying that he could have sent the kid on his way once the "misunderstanding" was cleared up - a cop will always start off a stop with "license, registration and insurance please". The trouble here had very little to do with lights and everything to do with how this kid handled himself, and eventually fought, with a police officer. Not being happy with why a police officer pulled someone over doesn't give them carte blanche to act as one wants and to defy legal orders. If the kid was recording, and felt he was in the right - take it to court. He took it to curbside court, and lost. Zero sympathy.

Sometimes people get pulled over, or worse, due to mistaken identity. Should the mistaken person then be as defiant, and perhaps even fight with the police? And if he does, should he get a free pass because the initial stop was a mistake to begin with? Nope.

The guy shouldn't have fought with the police, but that can only happen if the cop initiates a decision tree which he can chose not to.

I remeber a while back there was a clip of some Americans watching a British to show, where a camera crew follow the police around in there duties (I'm sure there are similar style American shows) anyways the American audicene were somewhat amazed at the idea that the police were not aggressive towards citizens. At one point on a late night out a drunk woman reached into a police car and grabbed a police officers face and they all carried on and laughed it off, and one of the Americans was like 'do that here and you'd be shot' lul and I'm sure the likes of yourself or others would be all 'well she shouldn't of grabbed his face, even if it was in jest', at some point you have to consider the consequences of unreasonable actions can be avoided by all parties involved.

[jimnyc]

The guy shouldn't have fought with the police, but that can only happen if the cop initiates a decision tree which he can chose not to.

Yes, he can choose not to follow the law, I suppose. But at the end of the day, what the kid did do IS against the law, even if minor. Are their other laws you think should be ignored?


I remeber a while back there was a clip of some Americans watching a British to show, where a camera crew follow the police around in there duties (I'm sure there are similar style American shows) anyways the American audicene were somewhat amazed at the idea that the police were not aggressive towards citizens. At one point on a late night out a drunk woman reached into a police car and grabbed a police officers face and they all carried on and laughed it off, and one of the Americans was like 'do that here and you'd be shot' lul and I'm sure the likes of yourself or others would be all 'well she shouldn't of grabbed his face, even if it was in jest', at some point you have to consider the consequences of unreasonable actions can be avoided by all parties involved.

We have "Cops", been on the air for like 25 years now!!

I agree to an extent. If the person is reasonable, and the law lame, and they work together amicably, sometimes they go their separate ways with an understanding. But it wasn't the tiny offense here that was the issue, but what happened after. What if this woman grabs the cops face, the cop laughed and explained to her that it was unlawful and she shouldn't be doing that - and rather than listen, she gets defiant and does it again and fights with him over the perceived law?

[Noir]

Yes, he can choose not to follow the law, I suppose. But at the end of the day, what the kid did do IS against the law, even if minor. Are their other laws you think should be ignored?

I assume you drive? If you're driving down the road, and your being blinded by the lights of a car coming towards you, is it legal to flash your lights at them?




We have "Cops", been on the air for like 25 years now!!

I agree to an extent. If the person is reasonable, and the law lame, and they work together amicably, sometimes they go their separate ways with an understanding. But it wasn't the tiny offense here that was the issue, but what happened after. What if this woman grabs the cops face, the cop laughed and explained to her that it was unlawful and she shouldn't be doing that - and rather than listen, she gets defiant and does it again and fights with him over the perceived law?

Already your edging the ground for the cop to be justified in being overzealous in their reaction. Would be interesting to see exactly how an American cop would have reacted in the same situation, I'm guessing their wouldn't have been smiles all round.

[jimnyc]

I assume you drive? If you're driving down the road, and your being blinded by the lights of a car coming towards you, is it legal to flash your lights at them?

No, it's not, but it's done quite often. Take your chances, and hope it's not a cop your do it too.


Already your edging the ground for the cop to be justified in being overzealous in their reaction. Would be interesting to see exactly how an American cop would have reacted in the same situation, I'm guessing their wouldn't have been smiles all round.

No, it's not being overzealous, it's the law. And I notice you avoided the question. If this girl is asked to back off, even after the cops were only laughing it off, and then she becomes defiant, and then she fights with the police.. what then? Give her a medal, or arrest her?

This cop was NOT overzealous in the video either. He was quite calm and respectful. NO issues started until the kid became defiant and then ultimately decided to fight. I'm sorry a few of you feel that since the crime was so minimal, that it should therefore be ignored.

[jimnyc]

Those who distrust and always complain about the government and law enforcement = always the first to think it's a-ok to ignore and/or break the laws of our country = always the first to be angry and whine when they end up on the shitty end of the stick from their actions

[NightTrain]

At one point on a late night out a drunk woman reached into a police car and grabbed a police officers face and they all carried on and laughed it off, and one of the Americans was like 'do that here and you'd be shot'

Touching an American cop in any way will result in a brutal takedown / tasing / beating / shooting. And it will result in an assault charge & most likely resisting arrest. That's a big no no.

Your cops are more user-friendly than ours are, but our culture is more violent than yours is, so that's to be expected.

Just a big cultural difference there between our two countries.


lul and I'm sure the likes of yourself or others would be all 'well she shouldn't of grabbed his face, even if it was in jest', at some point you have to consider the consequences of unreasonable actions can be avoided by all parties involved.

That's a nasty bite you've got there today, Noir. Uncalled for, IMO.

I think you misunderstand where most of us are coming from with regards to police. We know they do a tough job, and deal with the worst elements of our society on a regular basis at great personal risk. It's part of the job.

That said, most of us understand that cops can and do go too far and get overzealous with their job. Most of us have been on the wrong end of a bullshit traffic stop with an arrogant cop on a power trip, and we don't like cops like that.

BUT - not all of them are power tripping pricks out to ruin your day. Most of them are family men / women out there earning a living like the rest of us working stiffs and they quietly do their duties as they should without the whole ego trip that all of us loathe.

[jimnyc]

I think you misunderstand where most of us are coming from with regards to police. We know they do a tough job, and deal with the worst elements of our society on a regular basis at great personal risk. It's part of the job.

That said, most of us understand that cops can and do go too far and get overzealous with their job. Most of us have been on the wrong end of a bullshit traffic stop with an arrogant cop on a power trip, and we don't like cops like that.

BUT - not all of them are power tripping pricks out to ruin your day. Most of them are family men / women out there earning a living like the rest of us working stiffs and they quietly do their duties as they should without the whole ego trip that all of us loathe.

And it's quite possible that this cop would have verified all the ID, wrote a warning and let this guy go. Maybe, maybe not. But refuse to give ID, refuse to cooperate in anyway and then start physically fighting with them? I guess we'll never know. I saw no wrongdoing by this cop in the slightest prior to this kids actions. For all we know this vehicle was a newer vehicle with new bulbs. I see new vehicles all the time around here, and if they have the newer xenon bulbs in them, they look blueish and light up the entire damn road. Nothing abnormal.

It's not like we had a cop here going nuts on a citizen. It was a small infraction, and he only asked for his ID. The nuts part started right there - by the kid.

[Noir]

Touching an American cop in any way will result in a brutal takedown / tasing / beating / shooting.

Ace.
That woman should thankful she has British police officers to serve and protect her, rather than the service and protection she'd receive from an American cop.

[Noir]

No, it's not, but it's done quite often. Take your chances, and hope it's not a cop your do it too.



[ quote]No, it's not being overzealous, it's the law. And I notice you avoided the question. If this girl is asked to back off, even after the cops were only laughing it off, and then she becomes defiant, and then she fights with the police.. what then? Give her a medal, or arrest her?

I'm certain that (given the woman was drunk) if the police officer so intended he could have confronted her in such a manor as to elicit a negative reaction, resulting in possible arrest. But that's a cop looking for an arrest.

As a side note - in these scenarios there always seems to be just one cop in a car, is this the standard? The standard here is to always have two police per car, but of an interesting difference if so.

[jimnyc]

Ace.
That woman should thankful she has British police officers to serving and protect her, rather than the service and protection she'd receive from an American cop.

Care to compare how many lives were recorded as "saved" just last year alone by American police? I guess that makes the British police a bunch of pussies afraid to do their jobs. How many police over there gave their lives in the line of duty last year? I suppose the cowardice kept them indoors. Hell, the cowards over there are almost afraid to even look at a gun. Say what you will, I still feel 50,000% safer over here than with little police running around in tiny cars afraid to enforce the law and also lacking in knowledge.

[NightTrain]

And it's quite possible that this cop would have verified all the ID, wrote a warning and let this guy go. Maybe, maybe not. But refuse to give ID, refuse to cooperate in anyway and then start physically fighting with them? I guess we'll never know. I saw no wrongdoing by this cop in the slightest prior to this kids actions. For all we know this vehicle was a newer vehicle with new bulbs. I see new vehicles all the time around here, and if they have the newer xenon bulbs in them, they look blueish and light up the entire damn road. Nothing abnormal.

It's not like we had a cop here going nuts on a citizen. It was a small infraction, and he only asked for his ID. The nuts part started right there - by the kid.

Yeah, while I think the cop in this incident engaged in a stop for a chickenshit reason and was trolling for people to flash him, it was legitimate.

The fault was entirely on the kid - and his parents admitted that he'd been watching all those YouTube vids of motorists hassling cops. The kid didn't have his ID, but should have just given the cop the registration and insurance info and everything would have worked out fine.

The tasing was a bit premature IMO, but it's real easy to sit here on my ass and make calls like that. I'm positive the cop thought differently at the time in the dark, solo, with the kid going combative after the failed tasing.

The cop was in the right, although skirting pretty close to the line. He should have waited for his backup that was already enroute priority and the shooting most likely wouldn't have occurred and the kid would have simply gotten cuffed-n-stuffed. The cop got pissed and wanted to show the kid who's boss, but that's not illegal.

[jimnyc]

I'm certain that (given the woman was drunk) if the police officer so intended he could have confronted her in such a manor as to elicit a negative reaction, resulting in possible arrest. But that's a cop looking for an arrest.

As a side note - in these scenarios there always seems to be just one cop in a car, is this the standard? The standard here is to always have two police per car, but of an interesting difference if so.

I'm certain that the police can also choose to uphold the law, and not have someone fight with them for asking for ID. Poor little blokes. Probably at McCans with a pint of Guiness instead, gotta have priorities!!

Standard is almost always one per car, but it depends on location. Some NYC cars have 2. In my neighborhood it's always just one.

[NightTrain]

Ace.
That woman should thankful she has British police officers to serve and protect her, rather than the service and protection she'd receive from an American cop.

Are you suggesting that ALL British cops cheerfully take unwanted contact by a drunk person with such restraint?

I'm willing to bet I can find a few beatdowns for reasons like that over in Britain.

[jimnyc]

Yeah, while I think the cop in this incident engaged in a stop for a chickenshit reason and was trolling for people to flash him, it was legitimate.

The fault was entirely on the kid - and his parents admitted that he'd been watching all those YouTube vids of motorists hassling cops. The kid didn't have his ID, but should have just given the cop the registration and insurance info and everything would have worked out fine.

The tasing was a bit premature IMO, but it's real easy to sit here on my ass and make calls like that. I'm positive the cop thought differently at the time in the dark, solo, with the kid going combative after the failed tasing.

The cop was in the right, although skirting pretty close to the line. He should have waited for his backup that was already enroute priority and the shooting most likely wouldn't have occurred and the kid would have simply gotten cuffed-n-stuffed. The cop got pissed and wanted to show the kid who's boss, but that's not illegal.

Lots of "what ifs" with the cop - but the kid was 100% in the wrong here. In about 99% of locations the ending won't be very good when you beat the crap out of a cop. Without that beating, which resulted in the shooting, this never even makes the news. The kid made some HORRIBLE choices, and then a fatal one in thinking he could fight on the side of the road instead of taking a ticket to court. From the moment the cop reached this kids car, I see nothing that would even reach a reprimand for him.

Even if the cop were entirely wrong throughout, as soon as the kid beat the crap out of him it was game over. Seems a few here care more about high beams than they do beating up a cop. But that's nothing new from a few either.

[jimnyc]

Are you suggesting that ALL British cops cheerfully take unwanted contact by a drunk person with such restraint?

I'm willing to bet I can find a few beatdowns for reasons like that over in Britain.

Only when they're drunk too. :) And in his neck of the woods, the police inebriation level wouldn't surprise me. :laugh:

[Noir]

Care to compare how many lives were recorded as "saved" just last year alone by American police? I guess that makes the British police a bunch of pussies afraid to do their jobs. How many police over there gave their lives in the line of duty last year? I suppose the cowardice kept them indoors. Hell, the cowards over there are almost afraid to even look at a gun. Say what you will, I still feel 50,000% safer over here than with little police running around in tiny cars afraid to enforce the law and also lacking in knowledge.

Just to clarify that odd bold bit - Do you view it as a positive that more police have 'gave their lives in the line of duty' in the States compared to the UK?

[jimnyc]

Just to clarify that odd bold bit - Do you view it as a positive that more police have 'gave their lives in the line of duty' in the States compared to the UK?

I view it as less cowardly that a cop stands up for the law - as opposed to ignoring it.

[jimnyc]

Just spoke to my wife about this while refilling the coffee mug! She was first surprised that the kid got yanked over for high beaming. She didn't realize you could get in trouble for that, but added that it's never a good idea to do to the police. She then added, that EVEN IF it wasn't against the law, and was a bogus ticket - just take it, and your video to court. Get the video of the cop. Fight your ticket and perhaps win.

Of course I agree. I disagree with almost all curbside lawyers. Not much different than the idiots walking down Main Street with AK47's and AR15's, just to test and fuck with the police and others. With all of the shootings today... and then these idiots will make videos of that crap and claim they shouldn't be questioned and the police are wrong. But that's another thread, of course.

[Noir]

I view it as less cowardly that a cop stands up for the law - as opposed to ignoring it.

But on what basis are you making this assertion?
Just because police are not dying, does not mean they are not upholding the law. To pretend you know that to be the case is all sorts of silly.

[NightTrain]

Ace.
That woman should thankful she has British police officers to serve and protect her, rather than the service and protection she'd receive from an American cop.


A quick search turns up this article showing that over 3,000 of your vaunted British cops are under investigation for beatings of British citizens, with only 2% suspended while the investigation continues.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/over-3000-police-officers-being-investigated-for-alleged-assault-and-almost-all-of-them-are-still-on-10220091.html

A little hypocritical of you to cast stones, Noir.

[Noir]

A quick search turns up this article showing that over 3,000 of your vaunted British cops are under investigation for beatings of British citizens, with only 2% suspended while the investigation continues.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/over-3000-police-officers-being-investigated-for-alleged-assault-and-almost-all-of-them-are-still-on-10220091.html

A little hypocritical of you to cast stones, Noir.

Our service is bad, doesn't mean yours isn't worse.

[Nukeman]

Touching an American cop in any way will result in a brutal takedown / tasing / beating / shooting. And it will result in an assault charge & most likely resisting arrest. That's a big no no.

Your cops are more user-friendly than ours are, but our culture is more violent than yours is, so that's to be expected.

Just a big cultural difference there between our two countries.



That's a nasty bite you've got there today, Noir. Uncalled for, IMO.

I think you misunderstand where most of us are coming from with regards to police. We know they do a tough job, and deal with the worst elements of our society on a regular basis at great personal risk. It's part of the job.

That said, most of us understand that cops can and do go too far and get overzealous with their job. Most of us have been on the wrong end of a bullshit traffic stop with an arrogant cop on a power trip, and we don't like cops like that.

BUT - not all of them are power tripping pricks out to ruin your day. Most of them are family men / women out there earning a living like the rest of us working stiffs and they quietly do their duties as they should without the whole ego trip that all of us loathe.

My 2 cents worth on this is that the current crop of LEO's are NOT trained in deescalating an incident. It always appears to me that they try to push it to a confrontation.. This Officer ADMITS 2 others flashed lights at him and he KNEW full well his lights were VERY bright. It would have been SIMPLE for him to calmly tell the kid "hey thanks for the heads up but my brights really aren't on and I will have the motor pool look at them. Just an FYI it is illegal for you to flash your lights at oncoming traffic", he could continue to say "I am going to let you go but just wanted to give you a heads up".

I know the officer was "calm" during his interaction but he was also aggressive in his presentation and when he noted the 17 year old being defiant he should have worked to bring the levels down and calm every one, he DID NOT DO THAT. He made the kid get out of his car lay on the cold wet ground than he TOSSED his multi-hundred of dollars cell phone. All this for flashing his lights to say "hey your brights are on"

This officer called for a second car, why didn't he wait for his backup before pulling open the door and trying to yank the kid from the car, why didn't he try to calm the situation instead of escalating it?? He provoked the kid into a response by manhandling him without back up then he tossed his cell phone on the pavement to break, tell me YOU wouldn't be pissed if someone did that to you!!!???

There were mistakes by the kid, but I feel MORE were made by the officer who should KNOW BETTER and should be trained in handling belligerent people now a child has lost their life over a freaking driving infraction!!!!!!!!! All because the cop wouldn't back down and should have as the ADULT and PUBLIC SERVANT. He is not the law of the land he is there to protect the community and his car was obviously a danger to the community with its excessively bright lights. When he was being told about his lights the only way another driver can, he took the wrong path by trying to be a bully about it!

[jimnyc]

A quick search turns up this article showing that over 3,000 of your vaunted British cops are under investigation for beatings of British citizens, with only 2% suspended while the investigation continues.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/over-3000-police-officers-being-investigated-for-alleged-assault-and-almost-all-of-them-are-still-on-10220091.html

A little hypocritical of you to cast stones, Noir.

"vaunted" LOL - those are just the Guinness drinkers I bet!

I wonder who they assaulted, and why? Were they all legitimate reasons? According to some, I would guess there is NO legit reason to EVER lift a finger towards a citizen. And why are they still on the job? :laugh:

3,000 of them, and only 60 of them suspended? I can see the superiors in the UK truly care about things like Noir. :laugh:

[NightTrain]

Our service is bad, doesn't mean yours isn't worse.

But that's not quite what you said, is it?


Ace.
That woman should thankful she has British police officers to serve and protect her, rather than the service and protection she'd receive from an American cop.

Pot, meet kettle.

I know you enjoy beating up on us non-liberal American Savages, but the self-righteous judgement you dispense gets a tad old when you have the exact same problem. A little honesty would be nice.

[Noir]

My 2 cents worth on this is that the current crop of LEO's are NOT trained in deescalating an incident. It always appears to me that they try to push it to a confrontation.. This Officer ADMITS 2 others flashed lights at him and he KNEW full well his lights were VERY bright. It would have been SIMPLE for him to calmly tell the kid "hey thanks for the heads up but my brights really aren't on and I will have the motor pool look at them. Just an FYI it is illegal for you to flash your lights at oncoming traffic", he could continue to say "I am going to let you go but just wanted to give you a heads up".

I know the officer was "calm" during his interaction but he was also aggressive in his presentation and when he noted the 17 year old being defiant he should have worked to bring the levels down and calm every one, he DID NOT DO THAT. He made the kid get out of his car lay on the cold wet ground than he TOSSED his multi-hundred of dollars cell phone. All this for flashing his lights to say "hey your brights are on"

This officer called for a second car, why didn't he wait for his backup before pulling open the door and trying to yank the kid from the car, why didn't he try to calm the situation instead of escalating it?? He provoked the kid into a response by manhandling him without back up then he tossed his cell phone on the pavement to break, tell me YOU wouldn't be pissed if someone did that to you!!!???

There were mistakes by the kid, but I feel MORE were made by the officer who should KNOW BETTER and should be trained in handling belligerent people now a child has lost their life over a freaking driving infraction!!!!!!!!! All because the cop wouldn't back down and should have as the ADULT and PUBLIC SERVANT. He is not the law of the land he is there to protect the community and his car was obviously a danger to the community with its excessively bright lights. When he was being told about his lights the only way another driver can, he took the wrong path by trying to be a bully about it!

100% Spot on.

[jimnyc]

My 2 cents worth on this is that the current crop of LEO's are NOT trained in deescalating an incident. It always appears to me that they try to push it to a confrontation.. This Officer ADMITS 2 others flashed lights at him and he KNEW full well his lights were VERY bright. It would have been SIMPLE for him to calmly tell the kid "hey thanks for the heads up but my brights really aren't on and I will have the motor pool look at them. Just an FYI it is illegal for you to flash your lights at oncoming traffic", he could continue to say "I am going to let you go but just wanted to give you a heads up".

I know the officer was "calm" during his interaction but he was also aggressive in his presentation and when he noted the 17 year old being defiant he should have worked to bring the levels down and calm every one, he DID NOT DO THAT. He made the kid get out of his car lay on the cold wet ground than he TOSSED his multi-hundred of dollars cell phone. All this for flashing his lights to say "hey your brights are on"

This officer called for a second car, why didn't he wait for his backup before pulling open the door and trying to yank the kid from the car, why didn't he try to calm the situation instead of escalating it?? He provoked the kid into a response by manhandling him without back up then he tossed his cell phone on the pavement to break, tell me YOU wouldn't be pissed if someone did that to you!!!???

There were mistakes by the kid, but I feel MORE were made by the officer who should KNOW BETTER and should be trained in handling belligerent people now a child has lost their life over a freaking driving infraction!!!!!!!!! All because the cop wouldn't back down and should have as the ADULT and PUBLIC SERVANT. He is not the law of the land he is there to protect the community and his car was obviously a danger to the community with its excessively bright lights. When he was being told about his lights the only way another driver can, he took the wrong path by trying to be a bully about it!

'Cept for the fact the "mistakes" by the cop were not only legal, but fine by departmental regulations. The kids mistake was 100% illegal. BIG differences.

And how was a bully? If the kid complied with his ID, it's possible the kid gets let go with a warning. Prior to that, how and where was the cop a bully? For asking for ID?

And lastly, the kid didn't lose his life over an infraction, he lost his life because he CHOSE to fight and beat the crap out of a police officer. And asking for ID when being pulled over IS the law of the land, and the kid refused.

[Noir]

But that's not quite what you said, is it?



Pot, meet kettle.

I know you enjoy beating up on us non-liberal American Savages, but the self-righteous judgement you dispense gets a tad old when you have the exact same problem. A little honesty would be nice.

In the UK - the woman could have been assulted
In the US - the woman could have been shot dead.

Are either acceptable? No.
are both equal? No.

[jimnyc]

But that's not quite what you said, is it?



Pot, meet kettle.

I know you enjoy beating up on us non-liberal American Savages, but the self-righteous judgement you dispense gets a tad old when you have the exact same problem. A little honesty would be nice.

He likes to talk smack about Americans, and Christians. I think it's jealousy. The greatest country BY FAR in the world, with so many Christians that he despises? :laugh:

[NightTrain]

"vaunted" LOL - those are just the Guinness drinkers I bet!

I wonder who they assaulted, and why? Were they all legitimate reasons? According to some, I would guess there is NO legit reason to EVER lift a finger towards a citizen. And why are they still on the job? :laugh:

3,000 of them, and only 60 of them suspended? I can see the superiors in the UK truly care about things like Noir. :laugh:


As it turns out, 55% of those British cops beating up British citizens were minority beatdowns! Seems the British cops have a racial prejudice problem, as well.

[NightTrain]

In the UK - the woman could have been assulted
In the US - the woman could have been shot dead.

Are either acceptable? No.
are both equal? No.

Now you're suggesting that British cops have never killed a civilian?

I have to say I'm surprised you'd go there.

Very well, off to Google I go. Stay tuned.

[jimnyc]

As it turns out, 55% of those British cops beating up British citizens were minority beatdowns! Seems the British cops have a racial prejudice problem, as well.

You should see the racism in Noir's neck of the woods.

[Noir]

As it turns out, 55% of those British cops beating up British citizens were minority beatdowns! Seems the British cops have a racial prejudice problem, as well.

Very much so - the institutional racism in the British Police Service is well documented (of course whiny liberals like me are just too politically correct :laugh:)

[revelarts]

Ace.
That woman should thankful she has British police officers to serve and protect her, rather than the service and protection she'd receive from an American cop.

there are plenty of American cops that have personal restraint and can take an insult, loud talk and even some inadvertent ill advise touching without going into commando mode.
But the mindset that seems to prevalent among LEOs is a faux commando, schoolyard macho "don't touch me or i'll kick you asre" attitude.

See how Jim seems ready to call cops a bunch of "pu----" if they don't go to blows nearly at the drop of a hat.
And how NT relates that ANY touching can be considered '"Assault" by police.
It's always weird to me that on the one hand the cops are considered so macho but if they are touched or bumped or talked to too loudly some can't take it or ignore it. It's too often considered some HORRIFIC assault that they have to beat the living crap out of people for and/or jail them for.
It's a sad joke.



I view it as less cowardly that a cop stands up for the law - as opposed to ignoring it.
I consider it WISE and courageous for LEOs to stand up for the people in the real spirit of all laws for the public safety, peace and freedom.
Not to just enforce every little BS law like Barmy Fife or some pyscho meter maid.
The laws are FOR the public good, not some stick for cops use against the public.

[NightTrain]

In the UK - the woman could have been assulted
In the US - the woman could have been shot dead.

Are either acceptable? No.
are both equal? No.


Why, here's a British cop that shot an unarmed motorist through the windshield, into his heart and both lungs!

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-25759909

Would you like to revise your statement that there's no possibility that British cops shoot people without justification there in England?

[NightTrain]

And how NT relates how ANY touching can be considered '"Assault" by police.

I didn't say it was right nor fair, but it can and does happen frequently.

There's no way in hell that I'd ever touch a cop, unless the chips were down and I was fighting for my life. That's a foolhardy action to take, to say the least.

[jimnyc]

there are plenty of American cops that have personal restraint and can take an insult, loud talk and even some inadvertent ill advise touching without going into commando mode.
But the mindset that seems to prevalent among LEOs is a faux commando, schoolyard macho "don't touch me or i'll kick you asre" attitude.

See how Jim seem ready to call cops a bunch of "pu----" if they don't go to blows at nearly at the drop of a hat.
And how NT relates how ANY touching can be considered '"Assault" by police.
It's always weird to me that one the one hand the cops are considered so macho but if they are touched or bumped or talked to too loudly they can't take it or ignore it. It's too often considered some HORRIFIC assault that they have to beat the living crap out of people for and/or jail them for.
It's a sad joke.

And see how Rev thinks ANYthing done by the police is wrong. See how Rev believes in breaking the law more than he does following the law.


I consider it WISE and courageous for LEOs to stand up for the people in the real spirit of all laws for the public safety, peace and freedom.
Not to just enforce every little BS law like Barmy Fife or some pyscho meter maid.
The laws are FOR the public good, not some stick for cops use against the public.

Then fight with your representatives to remove the laws. Until then, they ARE laws. What if the guy down the road thinks grand larceny is a BS law? Or the kid across the street thinks drug laws are petty? And the girl on the next block thinks DUI is petty. I suppose those that disagree with a particular law should just ignore it then.

Laws are made for public good, not for those with low IQ's to ignore when they don't like the police.

Funny how some of you want to concentrate on what you think are petty laws, but ignore the fact that this kid beat the shit out of a police officer. I suppose we can just ignore that part, since the "petty" part happened first. And the next time I get pulled over because my tint in my truck is 5% darker than the law allows for - that means I can refuse to give ID, refuse any orders at all and then beat up the cop. Good to know!! :laugh:

[jimnyc]

Why, here's a British cop that shot an unarmed motorist through the windshield, into his heart and both lungs!

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-25759909

Would you like to revise your statement that there's no possibility that British cops shoot people without justification there in England?'

Interesting. They shoot this guy, but then allow the terrorists who lopped the guys head off to continue in the street as they yelled and retreated. Priorities, priorities!! LOL

[jimnyc]

I didn't say it was right nor fair, but it can and does happen frequently.

There's no way in hell that I'd ever touch a cop, unless the chips were down and I was fighting for my life. That's a foolhardy action to take, to say the least.

I'll explain to him, since he ignores the law anyway. ANY unwanted touching is battery, ANY. I know, I know, it's petty, so now we can all go out and rub on the police. :rolleyes: Fact is, you touch ANYONE on the street, and if they call the police, it's battery.

-----

BatteryAt common law, an intentional unpermitted act causing harmful or offensive contact with the "person" of another.
Battery is concerned with the right to have one's body left alone by others.
Battery is both a tort and a crime. Its essential element, harmful or offensive contact, is the same in both areas of the law. The main distinction between the two categories lies in the penalty imposed. A defendant sued for a tort is civilly liable to the plaintiff for damages. The punishment for criminal battery is a fine, imprisonment, or both. Usually battery is prosecuted as a crime only in cases involving serious harm to the victim.

[revelarts]

And see how Rev thinks ANYthing done by the police is wrong. See how Rev believes in breaking the law more than he does following the law.


Jim you're full of crap. and can't seem to read.

[jimnyc]

Jim your full of crap. and can't seem to read.

Then next time QUOTE me instead of your usual crap of off quoting my words. Just like I never stated that cops should go to blows at the drop of a hat. What's wrong, it's OK for YOU to interpret my words and add on things to the end, but you don't like it if someone does similar to you?

Seriously, after ALL of these years, you can't QUOTE people properly?

Every single time you do it, I will do it in return. Funny though how you get upset every time I do it. Either quote what I really said, or deal with it. I can read JUST FINE, thank you. :)

[revelarts]

I'll explain to him, since he ignores the law anyway. ANY unwanted touching is battery, ANY. I know, I know, it's petty, so now we can all go out and rub on the police. :rolleyes: Fact is, you touch ANYONE on the street, and if they call the police, it's battery.

-----

Battery

At common law, an intentional unpermitted act causing harmful or offensive contact with the "person" of another.
Battery is concerned with the right to have one's body left alone by others.
Battery is both a tort and a crime. Its essential element, harmful or offensive contact, is the same in both areas of the law. The main distinction between the two categories lies in the penalty imposed. A defendant sued for a tort is civilly liable to the plaintiff for damages. The punishment for criminal battery is a fine, imprisonment, or both. Usually battery is prosecuted as a crime only in cases involving serious harm to the victim.


And our macho courageous policeMEN can't stand to be touched because they are too precious or what Jim?

I suspect you've been touched before and didn't start beating the living crap out of people for it.
I bet you and Jeff have been bumped or had fingers in your chest and you didn't call the police or press charges. why not, it's the law Jim?

this is what i'm talking about, if these cops are a such men, it's NO BIG DEAL to have a bit of a scrape. It's not even worth mentioning much. Let alone beating to death or sending others to jail for.
but you want these manly men to strictly "follow the law" OK. fine.
But Hey Jim I'm SO GLAD you're NOT a cop.

[jimnyc]

And our macho courageous policeMEN can't stand to be touched because they are too precious or what Jim?

I suspect you've been touched before and didn't start beating the living crap out of people for it.
I bet you and Jeff have been bumped or had fingers in your chest and you didn't call the police or press charges. why not, it's the law Jim?

this is what i'm talking about, if these cops are a such men, it's NO BIG DEAL to have a bit of a scrape. It's not even worth mentioning much. Let alone beating to death or sending others to jail for.
but you want these manly men to strictly "follow the law" OK. fine.
But Hey Jim I'm SO GLAD you're NOT a cop.

And yet the law applies the YOU and everyone else as well. So while you CAN be charged with battery for touching a cop, you can also be charged for battery if you touch your neighbor. So stop with the lame dramatics about how it's somehow different with the police, or that they are "precious".

And this was about a girl touching a cops face in the UK, I didn't say anything about other than what the law is. So basically, fuck off.

I'm glad I'm not a cop too. As folks like you would make my job miserable. If you can't figure out how to function a simple little message board, it's no surprise you have difficulty in understanding the law.

[WiccanLiberal]

The cop's action may have been technically legal but certainly smacks of a set up R/T the lights being too bright. My impression was once he realized it was happening, he saw a way to stop any number of drivers and maybe get a few legit tickets out if it. Given the unpredictability factor in traffic stops, no telling what might have turned up. I though he was very restrained with the driver. My guess is that if the driver had produced legit paperwork without the arguments, he would have given him a warning. Instead the driver made a very poor choice. If you are stopped, comply with all requests even if you think they are unreasonable. Officers do not, in the stress of the moment, have time to figure out if you are a threat or just a smartass.

[revelarts]

Former good Cop tells what he experienced with quotas and a better way to deter crime and do better policing.

he also mentions the police practice of arresting people for P.O.P.s
that's the crime of Pissing Off the Police.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJLh3KlUHS4

[Elessar]

After he'd been pulled over when he shouldn't have been - yes.

A Law Enforcement Officer has all the right to pull someone over at any time.

It could be a routine check for compliance. That is not done often unless there is an
obvious violation, but it is well in their duty to do so.

[Gunny]

A Law Enforcement Officer has all the right to pull someone over at any time.

It could be a routine check for compliance. That is not done often unless there is an
obvious violation, but it is well in their duty to do so.

The don't have the "right". They have the power. BIG difference.

[Nukeman]

'Cept for the fact the "mistakes" by the cop were not only legal, but fine by departmental regulations. The kids mistake was 100% illegal. BIG differences.Come on Jim, really you are going to sit there and type that. This KID flashed his brights at someone who he thought had their brights on to signal them that they were distracting. I do this all the time so I must be some criminal element in your eye's now.. Just because the use of force was "justified" the FACT that the officer placed himself in the position to have to use the force in the first place is the BIG FREAKING ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM!!!!


And how was a bully? If the kid complied with his ID, it's possible the kid gets let go with a warning. Prior to that, how and where was the cop a bully? For asking for ID? I never stated he was a bully for asking for ID. He was a bully by his actions. He stayed calm in his delivery however he was unwavering and unwilling to change his tactic to one that would have garnered the KIDS compliance. This to me is bullying and NOT deescalating the situation but making it worse. He (the officer) called for backup.. Why didn't he wait the couple of minutes?? He had the license plate number and could always stop by the house later if need be. he GRABBED the kid to pull him out of his vehicle.. WHY???? He told the kid to get on the ground which he did, the officer continued to yell for the kid to get on the ground and when the officer FINALLY made it clear he wanted him on his belly the kid complied. The Officer grabbed the phone from the kid and threw it on the road. The kid tried to reach for his phone that's when the taser was used and all hell broke loose.

Are you HONESTLY going to tell me the officer has NO culpability in this just because the kid was difficult????


And lastly, the kid didn't lose his life over an infraction, he lost his life because he CHOSE to fight and beat the crap out of a police officer. And asking for ID when being pulled over IS the law of the land, and the kid refused.An altercation that the OFFICER STARTED!! What part of that are you failing to see!?!?!? The officer GRABBED the kid pulled him out of the car made him lie on the ground threw his phone and when he reached for that he tased him. There are so many times the officer could have stepped back and said woo wait a minute what am I doing here I'm making things worse JUST LIKE THIS KID IS!!!

Jim, The Officer instigated the physical contact!! WHY?? Why was there a need to physically grab this young man and trow his phone to be broken on the ground?? WHY?? over him being non compliant for a bullshit stop that should have been a simple "thanks for trying to let me know and here's the law and what you did was allowed". "Have a great night and remember not to flash your brights"

If this was your son Jimmy would you be defending the actions of this officer????

[jimnyc]

Come on Jim, really you are going to sit there and type that. This KID flashed his brights at someone who he thought had their brights on to signal them that they were distracting. I do this all the time so I must be some criminal element in your eye's now.. Just because the use of force was "justified" the FACT that the officer placed himself in the position to have to use the force in the first place is the BIG FREAKING ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM!!!!

I never stated he was a bully for asking for ID. He was a bully by his actions. He stayed calm in his delivery however he was unwavering and unwilling to change his tactic to one that would have garnered the KIDS compliance. This to me is bullying and NOT deescalating the situation but making it worse. He (the officer) called for backup.. Why didn't he wait the couple of minutes?? He had the license plate number and could always stop by the house later if need be. he GRABBED the kid to pull him out of his vehicle.. WHY???? He told the kid to get on the ground which he did, the officer continued to yell for the kid to get on the ground and when the officer FINALLY made it clear he wanted him on his belly the kid complied. The Officer grabbed the phone from the kid and threw it on the road. The kid tried to reach for his phone that's when the taser was used and all hell broke loose.

Are you HONESTLY going to tell me the officer has NO culpability in this just because the kid was difficult????

An altercation that the OFFICER STARTED!! What part of that are you failing to see!?!?!? The officer GRABBED the kid pulled him out of the car made him lie on the ground threw his phone and when he reached for that he tased him. There are so many times the officer could have stepped back and said woo wait a minute what am I doing here I'm making things worse JUST LIKE THIS KID IS!!!

Jim, The Officer instigated the physical contact!! WHY?? Why was there a need to physically grab this young man and trow his phone to be broken on the ground?? WHY?? over him being non compliant for a bullshit stop that should have been a simple "thanks for trying to let me know and here's the law and what you did was allowed". "Have a great night and remember not to flash your brights"

If this was your son Jimmy would you be defending the actions of this officer????

That's cool, we just disagree across the board on this one, no biggie. :)

[Gunny]

Come on Jim, really you are going to sit there and type that. This KID flashed his brights at someone who he thought had their brights on to signal them that they were distracting. I do this all the time so I must be some criminal element in your eye's now.. Just because the use of force was "justified" the FACT that the officer placed himself in the position to have to use the force in the first place is the BIG FREAKING ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM!!!!

I never stated he was a bully for asking for ID. He was a bully by his actions. He stayed calm in his delivery however he was unwavering and unwilling to change his tactic to one that would have garnered the KIDS compliance. This to me is bullying and NOT deescalating the situation but making it worse. He (the officer) called for backup.. Why didn't he wait the couple of minutes?? He had the license plate number and could always stop by the house later if need be. he GRABBED the kid to pull him out of his vehicle.. WHY???? He told the kid to get on the ground which he did, the officer continued to yell for the kid to get on the ground and when the officer FINALLY made it clear he wanted him on his belly the kid complied. The Officer grabbed the phone from the kid and threw it on the road. The kid tried to reach for his phone that's when the taser was used and all hell broke loose.

Are you HONESTLY going to tell me the officer has NO culpability in this just because the kid was difficult????

An altercation that the OFFICER STARTED!! What part of that are you failing to see!?!?!? The officer GRABBED the kid pulled him out of the car made him lie on the ground threw his phone and when he reached for that he tased him. There are so many times the officer could have stepped back and said woo wait a minute what am I doing here I'm making things worse JUST LIKE THIS KID IS!!!

Jim, The Officer instigated the physical contact!! WHY?? Why was there a need to physically grab this young man and trow his phone to be broken on the ground?? WHY?? over him being non compliant for a bullshit stop that should have been a simple "thanks for trying to let me know and here's the law and what you did was allowed". "Have a great night and remember not to flash your brights"

If this was your son Jimmy would you be defending the actions of this officer????

You ARE a criminal element. Hell, we knew THAT. :laugh:

Most stops are BS. They're looking for excuses to collect taxes. At the same time, arguing with the cop never ends well for YOU. You're talking right and wrong vs reality. Reality is, shut up, take the ticket and either pay the fine or go to court.