Have you not read what Brian and others have said? They weren't being dicks or doing ANYTHING that warranted a cop to be such a douche bag. If someone is being belligerent then yes, they need to be shut up and sometimes unfortunately you have to be a dick for that to happen. We aren't even arguing that.

Everyone here has listed nothing but examples of when the cops were dicks for no reason other than to be power tripping dicks.


Yes, that was a lot of dicks.

This would be a good time to quote Clerks.

I'll role play as Lord Kuat:

ffffffffffffffffffffffffff ugh gahk *slurp* *slurp* mmm *slurp*

Temperamental, you're clearly too stupid to understand. Responding to an argument is really, really hard. You have to, like, read and think and stuff. It's way faster to pretend they said whatever you want and then respond to that. That way JLee and Lord Kuat can have their conversation, we can have our conversation, and nobody ever needs to have their preconceptions challenged.

Sorry Jon, when you post something that I feel warrants me paying attention to I'll do so. Until then I'd rather join in on the discussion and keep ignoring your arrogance. I mean, if that's OK with you and your internet. Instead of attacking me personally, how about you go through the post I made and say something about that and the stories/videos in them since they do relate to the discussion? Come on Jon. Be smarter than that. You're smart. We all know it. You know it. I am sure the entire universe knows it. Although I personally could care less as to your IQ or you in general, I'm interested in a discussion and not a battle of insults.


It's sad and ironic that someone who seems as smart as you isn't smart enough to go about it in a humble and well...intelligent manner. I thought your type of distinguished people had more character.

Anyway, I think JLee gave up.

Oh, I've read what people have posted. I'm just not willing to take all of these instances at face value. When people have blatant biases or are so emotionally affected by something, they are more liking to remember things the way they want to or to leave out things out that don't agree with their position.

Now, I'm not saying that people don't feel wronged, or what ever, but we're just getting one side of the story.

See? I told you. Way easier.

He may just be busy, at work or something.

I'm pretty sure it's in the best interest of the citizenry to be suspicious of everyone in the public sector. That whole, they work for us and shouldn't control us ideal.

Stop expressing in words what common sense should tell us.

Sleeping.

There's no point for me to continue this discussion. No matter what I say or do, there are people who have biases against law enforcement. If anyone has a specific question that they actually want answered, feel free to PM me. Otherwise, I'm going to step back from being a troll magnet.

There are over half a million law enforcement officers in the US. Most of the time we do a good job. Bad apples will get into every bunch. Once you find a way to find perfect people, convince them to become cops. We need them.

There's no point for me to continue this discussion. No matter what I say or do, there are people who have biases against people who distrust bad apples.

When did "I don't care how smart you are, you're not a very nice guy" become a valid counter-argument?

Hey, at least I'm trying not to be a ***.

...er, I'm pretty sure he was playing along with my joke.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Suspicion is one thing, contempt is another.

I know I'm supposed to be offended. But I haven't the foggiest what you are trying to imply, although my imagination comes up with a variety of colorful scenarios.



You're taking Jon'C seriously? He's nice to argue with, but overall the guy aims to offend. Also, either you are playing along too well, or you missed that he was talking about the guys you were arguing with.

Most of this thread has been based on "cops were a dick to me once in this anecdote right here." The only time I've seen a meaningful statistic was Mort-hog's about eye witnesses, but that is only tangentially related to the discussion of cops busting you for no reason. If I could be bothered to actually start quote snipping the thread, that's what it would boil down to, plus an extraneous conversation on the activities of lawyers, and the discussion of the three strikes law. Neither of which has anything to do with the OP, which has to do with police brutality as being some sort of epidemic. Just because some people have had a bad experience with some law enforcement, it does not warrant any specific change. Also, everyone is very lenient on themselves when it comes to recalling a story. Maybe they were dicks, but no one with a vendetta against the po-po is going to every include the fact that they had a attitude.

I didn't miss it. I was simply pointing out that my opinion is that cops are far more likely to get away with the "reasonable belief" excuse than a private citizen. There are obviously going to be cases on both sides where this is true. The only agenda that I have is for our society to look at the way in which law enforcement treats private citizens (aka criminals). The citizens of this country shouldn't be treated in such a manner.


I felt like fighting back when I was being arrested for something that I didn't do. Life hits you pretty hard when you're being placed in to handcuffs, put in to the back of a cruiser, taken to jail & forced to go to court for something that you didn't even do.


Skateboarders understand that cops are usually *******s as well as anyone. I used to skateboard in middle & high school & went through dozens & dozens of similar situations. I don't know how it is now because it's an olympic sport & people generally have a little more respect for skateboarders, but when I was doing it, if you had one in your hand, you were treated like a criminal. I even had a sticker on my skateboard that said "skateboarding is a crime". There were days that we'd spend more time being harassed by cops than actually skateboarding. If a regular guy talked to you like these ****ers talked to me when I was a kid, most of you would be ready to fight. It always seemed to me that they were purposely trying to enrage someone in to making a mistake.


I don't know what the superior tactic would be in this case. I only know that running away has served me quite well over the years & that it's probably a viable option for cops in certain situations. I do think that instead of writing this off as another "unfortunate tragedy" or something of that nature, we should take a serious, independent look, in to whether or not the officers made a mistake & develop tactics to prevent said mistake from reoccurring.


I see police officers as human beings. However, when they put on that uniform, get that training & load that gun, they're supposed to be protecting & serving us. It appears to me that the person in this situation that needed to be protected & served the most was the mentally ill man with the hammer. They failed to protect & serve this guy. They actually did quite the opposite. I obviously don't want anyone to get hurt, whether they're a citizen or a cop but I think that someone who is being paid to protect & serve us should be getting hurt & killed more often than someone who is not (e.g. soldiers in Afghanistan & Iraq). That's their ****ing job.


Are you certain of this? How do you know that the man would've reacted in the same manner had the cops avoided the area? There are times when the presence of the police does indeed create a violent situation. However, I recognize that this is one of the necessary evils of having law enforcement.


I've been following this case for a few days now & it appears that the only person that he was trying to hurt was the police (we'll never even know that he was trying to hurt them for certain). Once the officers arrived, they were the only ones in danger of being hurt or killed. At that point they should've attempted to help the guy, not kill him. He didn't have a gun. He had a hammer. I expect the police to put themselves at a little risk when protecting & serving the people of this country. We should also be investing more heavily in providing law enforcement with the necessary body armor that will make them more confident when facing such a person. The problem that I have is that it doesn't appear that the police are there to serve our interests at all. It appears that they're their to serve their interests. I think that ButterBalls brings up that interesting point when he cited the Warren vs. D.C. case.


What about when they're off-duty? Many of those cops are off-duty in his videos (e.g. the one where the cops are illegally parking to attend a police union meeting).


That may be true but there are also traffic laws that exist for safety as well.


While I'm no expert in logic, I would have to argue that me stating that my analogy was quite likely absurd before even making it, should prevent it from being classified as a godwin.


I never stated that all cops were bad. I've actually stated quite the opposite. As usual, you're putting words in my mouth.


I never stated nor do I believe that the police are inherently bad people. I'm obviously commenting on the attitude & tactics that they employ. I do however think that the power that they obtain from becoming a police officer does indeed have an effect on them. The rest of your post was nothing more than a humorous caricature with little basis in reality.


You're making the assumption that we have no experience in dealing with the mentally ill & you're insinuating that it's impossible for someone that disagrees with you to have said experience. Are you poisoning the well? I have several mentally ill people in my family. That doesn't make me an expert on the subject but then again, neither does being an EMS.


So everyone that speaks about how things could've gone differently in the past is showing complete ignorance? I think that this statement is ignorant. By your logic, historians would be the most ignorant of all people.


You don't need a PhD or a tattoo on a soon-to-be murder victims forehead when witnesses are screaming "he's mentally ill" at the top of their lungs.


We'd probably have some practical alternatives if everyone in charge weren't always just writing these things of as "tragic" situations that could've have been prevented.


I have mentally ill people in my family, one of which has spent a great deal of time in a mental institution, I have a friend that's an EMS & family & friends that are nurses in a psych-ward. Can I be an expert too?


I don't doubt your lack of empathy because it's quite apparent when you're not showing any towards victims of police brutality.


You mean sort of like what you've also been doing throughout this thread?


I'd like to hear the hammer-wielding retards side of the story. Whoops. Too late. He's ****ing dead. The problem is that if there are 2 sides to a story, the cops ****ing win. If you're not as famous or as wealthy as O.J. Simpson, you're far less likely to prevail. Not to mention that the other side can beat, tase & kill you & they're far more likely to get away with it.


I think that many of the people that have contempt for law enforcement originally had skepticism or suspicion. Far too often it's the attitudes, actions & tactics of law enforcement that change this in to contempt.



http://nonrhotic.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/kettle-black.jpg


You've managed to hear several people on an internet message forum tell you that they've had bad experiences with the police. Maybe the police are just out to get Massassians?


...& this includes police officers.


I don't think that the people that have posted on this forum could be accused of having a vendetta for their mistrust & skepticism when it comes to law enforcement. I think that's a bit of an exaggeration. I think that the average person here is just as capable as a police officer in telling their story (actually, many of them are probably more qualified to do so).

You don't think that the police look at every situation and think about how it could have gone differently? Do you think that cops are all so inhuman as to take a life and feel no remorse? Do you think they just walk away and say "Woops!" and never think about it again?



Their job is to protect the rest of society from people who would harm a fellow citizen. Their priorities include keeping the guy with a hammer from hurting someone else first (how do they know he only wants to hurt police? Why did he have the hammer in the first place before police arrived? How do they know he wouldn't attack someone else once they left?) They also would like to protect him from himself. Maybe he intends to harm himself with the hammer, or in some other way. That's why they try to diffuse the situation and use less-lethal means to take him down. However, when it comes down to it, it is absolutely disgusting to expect a police officer to let a guy attack him with a hammer. You'd run into a real shortage of police officers if you didn't let them defend themselves.



No, I can't be certain. Why are you so certain he wouldn't have gone on a hammer rampage if they hadn't been there to divert his attention? Would you rather it had been you dealing with the crazy guy with the hammer, or the police?



That's exactly what they were doing there. If they were "Attempting to kill him" they would have just shown up, shot him, and left. Job complete. The fact that they shot him means that their hand was forced while they were trying to help him (and everyone else).


They do put themselves at risk. How many videos would you like me to post of law enforcement officers being murdered, attacked, beaten, stabbed, shot, yelled at, spit on, and disrespected? I can go for a long time. They put themselves at risk simply by being there dealing with the guy instead of you dealing with him. You don't expect them to "put themselves at little risk". You expect them to disregard their own safety always. That's a good way to not have any police officers anymore.


The taser didn't just pop out of thin air. Kevlar armor and effective radio communication didn't just pop out of thin air. Spike strips, beanbag rounds, pepper spray...police are constantly working to be more effective and safer for the people they deal with AND themselves. If you think they aren't trying, then you're extremely jaded.


You have yet to comment on the video I posted for you.

I honestly overlooked the video that you posted. I'll check it out & respond once I finish watching the latest episode of "Caprica".

I imagine you got distracted by kuat's impression of you immediately after it.

After reading up on the story about the mentally ill person....

1. At the time they had absolutely no clue if he was indeed trying to harm just police, or other people. Obviously people felt threatened as they called up and reported this fellow
2. He was mentally ill, not mentally handicapped or something. Just because you are mentally ill does not mean you do not respond to "drop the hammer". Whatever happened to, you know, listening to the cops and dropping the hammer. You can try all you want to argue that he shouldn't of been shot, and that's fine and that's an argument that won't get settled, but jesus christ you cannot discount the fact that he just kept holding onto the hammer and apparently threatening the cops.
3. They tried nonlethal ways of detaining the victim after he apparently refused to cooperate, pointed a paint gun at them, and then tried to flee the scene. They used gas gun, and a tazer (but missed)
4. His arrest history dates back to 1986 and includes everything from disorderly conduct and criminal mischief to assault of a police officer.

Should the cops have shot him? Probably not. But they clearly were running out of options. He had a choice. Drop the hammer or be detained. They tried gas, they tried tazers, they tried using words to tell him to stop. He didn't and ran. If anything, they definitely should not have shot to kill seeing as how the victim had no gun. A shot to the knee or two would've taken him down. This guy was obviously looking for trouble or else most likely someone wouldn't of called and complained about him. Tackling is definitely not an option seeing as the guy had a hammer. And apparently he charged the police (according to people who have been commenting on the story in Louisville, people I assume from there). I don't like the outcome, but to me personally I definitely see why the cops acted.

Also, for the record, here are some statistics from the Lousiville metro area about what the outcome was when cops were involved with a CIT incident (which is I guess a crisis incident that often involves mentally unstable or ill people). Obviously, consider the source, and take with a grain of salt. But as far as we are concerned, this is what we know. I'd say 97% is a pretty damn good record....:
A Metro Police spokesperson says there were 2900 reported CIT runs in Metro Louisville last year, and many times the individuals involved are taken to University Hospital for treatment. "97% of those had no force involved whatsoever," Dr. Mlinarcik says, "and out of almost 3,000 runs I think four citizens had some injury and seven officers had injuries."

Thanks for that information, mscbuck, and I completely agree with you except for one small point:


This is a big no-no with guns. No one ever shoots to "kill" rather they shoot to "stop"...it's a semantics game, but the objective is not to kill, it's to stop the threat, and the most sure way to do that is to do some serious damage to important parts of the body, which obviously often leads to death. Therefore, a gun should only be used if you're willing to kill the person you're shooting at. A shot to a specific body part on a moving individual would be extremely difficult and very likely to be ineffective, especially in a high-stress situation on an impulse.

If they had been discussing how to take him down without killing him and carefully planned a precision sniper shot on his leg, then that would make sense (although I still think that's wrong, and it's definitely not a good idea legally) but when the guy is charging at someone, you shoot center of mass so you're sure you hit, and you're sure to stop him, because you've only got split seconds to do it.

But back to your main point...those statistics are really helpful. This is exactly what I'm talking about...the police do their best and do a good job of dealing with these situations. They do put themselves in harm's way and they do try to help these people as much as possible...I think those statistics show that. However, sometimes, things just don't work out. They look at those cases, they try to prevent things from happening like that in the future, but sometimes it just happens. You can't latch on to the few instances where things go bad, or where an officer is bad, and judge the entirety of law enforcement based on that.

Shooting a moving person twice in the knee, lol. I suppose the second one would be easier

I understand what you're saying, and perhaps if I was told an anecdotal story about something I wouldn't take it at face value either. But I have absolutely zero reason to lie or pull a story in my direction on the internet. People around here already seem to think I am a huge dick and there would be no point to me lying about something like that in order to garner trust or sympathy.

I know there are usually two sides of the story, but in the stories that corroborate with the experiences myself and friends have had are damn hard to ignore that they fit together. I also think there has been the argument brought up in here (also in some of the links I posted I think) that even when there are two sides to the story, there are unfortunately some situations where the police are protected or get away with their false side of the story being believed just because "they are the police".

Politicians can be corrupt.
Governments can be corrupt.
Banks can be corrupt.
Jobs can be corrupt.
People in general can be corrupt.

Why can't some of the police?



I was playing along/mimicking to a point. I know, he's an intelligent Rob.



I agree. But again, what reason do myself and Brian and others have to lie or spin it in our direction? And if we are apparently capable of this, why aren't the police? You don't think that a police officer has ever lied or spun a story in his direction to get out of trouble? And succeeded?

Who said anything about a vendetta against the police? I don't have one. I just don't trust them, nor do I appreciate someone thinking they can talk to me like a piece of **** and tell me what to do and I can't do anything back. I don't think so. That's just not right. Seriously, I've asked cops for directions and they have flipped out telling me I shouldn't bother a cop with something like that while they are on duty. That is another anecdote I know, for you, but for me it happened and is one of the contributing factors as to why I am not very trusting of the police. Never did I say anything about inherently having a vendetta against them or that I have gone out of my way to piss them off or cause grief.

Not that I'm arguing against you here (this applies to everyone), but people don't need a reason to spin a story in their favor. It just happens subconsciously a lot of the time. People will remember and experience an event in a way that fits with the way they see themselves, whether that is accurate or not.

I know you and I weren't personally discussing anything, but I don't take issue with you not trusting the police. You shouldn't blindly trust the police, just like they should basically never "trust" a citizen (Oh trust me, sir, I don't have any warrants or weapons on me. No sir, that's not my meth. No sir, I never do drugs. Oh, yes sir, I purchased that legally.). I do take issue with the unspoken tone that I detect coming from some of you guys. Maybe it's an inaccurate impression, or maybe you guys don't even realize it, but I think you do. That tone is one of general contempt, that you don't respect the police. That you see a police officer and think "what's this douche going to do to me now?" to some degree or another. I think that's unfair (in the same way I think racism is unfair).

I think it's unfair because a large portion of police officers (yes, even some of the dicks!) are truly good people who mean well and care about people. I think it's unfair because if someone attacked you right as you had that thought, it would instantly change to "please help me officer dick, I don't care if you're rude".

It's not that I think all police are saints...I just don't think that you should judge all police officers by contact with a bad one. Nor do I think you should judge a police officer based on one contact with him. Sure, be aware of your rights, be on the lookout for bad officers...but when you go into an encounter with the attitude "this guy is a dick" rather than "this guy could be a dick or could be a good guy" then you're no better than an officer who approached you with the attitude "this is a criminal" rather than "this guy could be a criminal, or he could be a good citizen."

Bob I completely agree with you and what you are saying. A lot of it is true. The thing for me is that I know there are good cops out there, there have to be. But I have yet to speak to a cop that talks back to me like a human being they want to protect, rather than someone that could have a gun or warrant for their arrest.

It is the same thing when you hear about a lady clenching her purse when she sees a gangster looking black man. I understand why they do it, their job is not easy and definitely high stress. The point is, it is not necessary. If you cant take the pressure, get a desk job and stop being a dick to people. If you can handle it, you obviously were cut out to be a cop. Dont carry a grudge on your shoulder with the other nice people in the world because you had one ******* criminal ruin your day.

Oh I completely agree. Sorry if I was unclear. I was unaware that they shot him while he was charging them (did he?). I understand that it's tough to shoot that accurately while charging, haha! I was under the impression that the guy was somewhat stationary when they shot him, but if he was running then yeah, definitely luck of the draw and you don't' have that time.

I think the biggest complaint here is not "all officers are douchebags" or even "I met this one douchebag one time", but more along the lines of "most cops I've encountered have been douchebags."

I suppose it's fair to understand that most of the people an officer deals with are not nice. Most of the people they deal with have problems. Most of those people are aggressive. So the cop gets used to acting aggressively. The problem is that it carries over to those of use who are not aggressive, and the cop comes off as a douche (which he becomes, if he acts that way all the time with everyone, regardless of intent or origin).

The thing is, for all they know, you COULD have a gun or a warrant. The minute an officer assumes you definitely don't, that's when you turn out to be someone who does, and he's dead.

Edit: For a lot of cops, it's not that they truly think everyone they deal with is a criminal...but they do know that if they don't treat someone like they could flip out and kill them at any second, then dying becomes much more likely. It definitely doesn't always excuse being a dick, but sometimes what you think is a cop being a dick is really just a cop trying to make sure he doesn't get attacked.

I should clarify that I don't know one way or the other. Maybe someone else has details. I'm simply ASSUMING he was charging because otherwise, there'd be no reason to shoot him. I'm talking about the most likely scenario, but I can't know for sure.

Ahaha just a word of advice... if you think someone you are dealing with has a weapon and is eager to use it... try not to be a dick.

Anyway, I'm not asking cops to put their lives at more risk, I'm asking them to treat people better. None of the situations I've been exposed to or have heard about had anything to do with safety -- I have never been cuffed or put up against a car or searched or anything like that. Yelling when talking regularly would suffice doesn't help diffuse the situation. If anything, it makes it more dangerous.

This.



And this.

Bob, I totally get where you're coming from, so please don't take it as if I don't agree with you. I totally understand where you're coming from when you say that the cops have to deal with *******s and put themselves in danger for the safety of others on a daily basis. I am immensely thankful for them doing that, and the security they provide to my community and the rest of the world's. But that still doesn't give them the right to talk to someone that isn't being a dick like they are a piece of **** just because they've had a bad day.

No, it doesn't give them the right. However, when you understand why they HAVE to basically view everyone as a potential criminal, you can understand how SOME of them end up coming off as dicks. I'm just saying, give the guys a break. You don't have to say "hey you're totally justified in being a dick" but you can think to yourself "this guy is being a dick, but it's nothing personal against me, and as long as he doesn't infringe my rights, then I guess I'll just continue to be reasonable and accommodating".

I'm not saying that they SHOULD treat you like a criminal, but I'm saying if you encounter one who does, you should understand and be the bigger person, and as long as they don't infringe your rights, give them a break.

Here's what's going through an officer's mind every time he talks to you.

Now, Brian, obviously your case is one where there was almost no reason for the officer to be a jerk to you...but I bet you that he has dealt with heaps of bratty little kids skateboarding where they aren't supposed to who showed no respect or were openly hostile to him even when he was polite. That doesn't make it RIGHT the way he treated you, but I just think, again, that it never hurts to be the bigger person and understand where he's coming from.



The fact that you have never been cuffed or put up against a car or searched is a testament to the trust the officers put in you that you WEREN'T going to attack them. But, you're completely right, yelling when talking regularly would suffice doesn't help diffuse a situation. I don't refute that there ARE officers who are dicks for no reason. I just don't think you need to judge the entire profession on the one guy who yelled at you one time.



Edit: And yes, we basically all agree with each other except that I like to give people a lot more leeway in their behavior than most people do. I take it a little bit personal because I worked as a parking officer and I ONLY dealt with small violations and I got essentially treated like complete **** every second I was at work. It wears on a person when he walks up to 25 people a day with "Good afternoon!" and gets a reply of "You ****in *******!" 23 of those times. Rare was the person I dealt with that treated me like an honest guy just trying to do his job. I like to think I was always polite and accommodating when unprovoked, but as we've discussed...I'll never really know if I was all the time. And I bet you almost every person who argued with me thought I was a complete jerk even when I was being as polite as possible while still doing my job.

How about 10 different guys who yelled at me 10 different times? Or at least, I watch COPS sometimes, does that count?

Again, I don't want to presume to know every situation you were in, but in what way exactly have you talked to 10 different cops 10 different times? I know I'm younger than you, but I've dealt with police (in the context where I may or may not have been doing something wrong according to them) about 5 times. 4 of those were completely professional and polite and 1 was a bit impolite but understandable. In how many of yours were you completely polite and compliant and the officer was a jerk for no reason? I'm assuming all of them, in your view? Like I said, I understand that that would make you think all cops are jerks, but I'm just suggesting that every new officer you deal with is an opportunity NOT to be dealing with a jerk.

I don't like getting pulled over for no reason.

Last week I got pulled over, almost had my hand broken (apparently my keys look like a pipe?) and got karate chopped in the balls during a search.

I learned that I have a warrant.

Pro-tip: Don't mail in your speeding ticket payment, they will lose it.

I like cops though, they're fun people when you're drunk in public.

All cops are dicks. I know, because I'm a mailman.

I wasn't being serious about it happening to me -- more like, how many times does something bad have to happen to a person before they think it's going to always happen like that?