4 ms·

Thanks for providing a nice example of a rock bottom terrible comment. Yes, the problem with this person being beaten up, put in solitary and abused for no rea

Thanks for providing a nice example of a rock bottom terrible comment. Yes, the problem with this person being beaten up, put in solitary and abused for no reason simply comes down to their inability to shut up. If only they had the wisdom to know that the police, who are paid by our tax dollars just HAVE to beat you up and abuse you if you say anything they dislike. I mean, its not as if they had a choice of whether they wanted to beat the person up or not, they basically HAD TO! Because, you know, that person was mouthy. "he acted (and wrote) in such a way where he's constantly assuming the role of a victim" What type of brain got you to the conclusion that this person was something other than the victim here? Look, I get your point that shutting up is a good idea, but we can't blame the person for not shutting up, the police should be blamed for their actions. The fact that we have people like you standing up for the police here makes me think we probably have no chance as a society anymore.

rayiner 13y ago
We can both blame the author for not shutting up and the police for not responding reasonably to someone who was nothing more dangerous than a smartass.
- ryguytilidie 13y ago
  I would argue that the police deserve somewhere in the neighborhood of one million times more blame for false imprisonment and beating than a civilian deserves for, gasp, talking when they people they pay to protect them didnt want them to talk.
  - Gorbzel 13y ago
    No problem, thanks for providing an example of the naiveté that underscores way too many HN comments. First off, I never said that there isn't a problem with the way the police treated OP. In fact, I'm encouraging him to sue both the police department and the officers personally for the way they treated him, which was clearly unacceptable behavior. Translation: I want to see him get justice. But I also am able to see nuance in a situation, which clearly you're lacking. He might be a victim, but he's not blameless, insofar as: • Refused to pipe down and leave the accident when ordered to by a police officer. • Continued to instigate police officers who were securing the scene. • Yelled like a crazy person while in a holding cell. or, as I said in the parent comment: OP COMPLETELY FAILED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF HIS RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT AND AVOID AN ENCOUNTER WITH THE POLICE. His behavior was unacceptable, and holding him to account for that as someone who enjoys their constitutional rights and insists upon defending them in NO WAY MAKES ME A POLICE APOLOGIST. Police aren't the only one who can trample upon rights, those who fail to understand or abuse them are culpable as well. The fact you don't understand that makes me wonder if our free society held together by liberty and a respect for the rule of law has any chance any more, yet I'll remain an optimist.
    - ryguytilidie 13y ago
      You seem to have projected some bizarre stuff on my comment. I understand that the OP failed to take advantage of their right to remain silent, I really do. However, none of the things you say the person should be "blamed" for, should EVER result in the punishment they got. The fact that you're not able to see beyond "well they both fucked up" is pretty shocking really. "His behavior was unacceptable, and holding him to account for that as someone who enjoys their constitutional rights and insists upon defending them in NO WAY MAKES ME A POLICE APOLOGIST." "Holding him to account" in your book happens to mean beating the shit out of him and putting him in a cell, whereas I simply don't think someone who is yelling things the police don't like deserves this treatment. If that makes me naive, I'll take it. "But I also am able to see nuance in a situation, which clearly you're lacking." This is one of the dumbest things I've ever read. Because you were able to see subtle details like "this person wasn't being polite!" only super wisdom filled you is able to understand that the police were right to beat them up and put them in solitary. I genuinely cannot believe that someone could make such an utter shit argument and then have the gall to blame the OTHER person for a lack of understanding of the nuances, like yourself, who is of course brilliant.
    - swombat 13y ago
      In civilised countries, the police are the good guys, and having them nearby makes you feel safer. Encounters with the police should not be scary if you've done nothing wrong. There was a place I've heard about where the police was scary, though I never lived there: that was communist Romania, where my parents grew up. And the US, too, it seems.
    - Dylan16807 13y ago
      Fuck off, is it not 'unacceptable' to decide not to use your right to be silent.
- technologue 13y ago
  You're high, the guy did NOTHING wrong. The police are to blame for this.
- lawnchair_larry 13y ago
  Nope, we can't. This type of thinking is a strong indicator that one may be suffering from antisocial personality disorder.
- cryoshon 13y ago
  The police work for the public. They are "public servants". Who should be the one shutting up when the boss is talking?

rayiner 13y ago

We can both blame the author for not shutting up and the police for not responding reasonably to someone who was nothing more dangerous than a smartass.

ryguytilidie 13y ago
I would argue that the police deserve somewhere in the neighborhood of one million times more blame for false imprisonment and beating than a civilian deserves for, gasp, talking when they people they pay to protect them didnt want them to talk.
- Gorbzel 13y ago
  No problem, thanks for providing an example of the naiveté that underscores way too many HN comments. First off, I never said that there isn't a problem with the way the police treated OP. In fact, I'm encouraging him to sue both the police department and the officers personally for the way they treated him, which was clearly unacceptable behavior. Translation: I want to see him get justice. But I also am able to see nuance in a situation, which clearly you're lacking. He might be a victim, but he's not blameless, insofar as: • Refused to pipe down and leave the accident when ordered to by a police officer. • Continued to instigate police officers who were securing the scene. • Yelled like a crazy person while in a holding cell. or, as I said in the parent comment: OP COMPLETELY FAILED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF HIS RIGHT TO REMAIN SILENT AND AVOID AN ENCOUNTER WITH THE POLICE. His behavior was unacceptable, and holding him to account for that as someone who enjoys their constitutional rights and insists upon defending them in NO WAY MAKES ME A POLICE APOLOGIST. Police aren't the only one who can trample upon rights, those who fail to understand or abuse them are culpable as well. The fact you don't understand that makes me wonder if our free society held together by liberty and a respect for the rule of law has any chance any more, yet I'll remain an optimist.
  - ryguytilidie 13y ago
    You seem to have projected some bizarre stuff on my comment. I understand that the OP failed to take advantage of their right to remain silent, I really do. However, none of the things you say the person should be "blamed" for, should EVER result in the punishment they got. The fact that you're not able to see beyond "well they both fucked up" is pretty shocking really. "His behavior was unacceptable, and holding him to account for that as someone who enjoys their constitutional rights and insists upon defending them in NO WAY MAKES ME A POLICE APOLOGIST." "Holding him to account" in your book happens to mean beating the shit out of him and putting him in a cell, whereas I simply don't think someone who is yelling things the police don't like deserves this treatment. If that makes me naive, I'll take it. "But I also am able to see nuance in a situation, which clearly you're lacking." This is one of the dumbest things I've ever read. Because you were able to see subtle details like "this person wasn't being polite!" only super wisdom filled you is able to understand that the police were right to beat them up and put them in solitary. I genuinely cannot believe that someone could make such an utter shit argument and then have the gall to blame the OTHER person for a lack of understanding of the nuances, like yourself, who is of course brilliant.
  - swombat 13y ago
    In civilised countries, the police are the good guys, and having them nearby makes you feel safer. Encounters with the police should not be scary if you've done nothing wrong. There was a place I've heard about where the police was scary, though I never lived there: that was communist Romania, where my parents grew up. And the US, too, it seems.
  - Dylan16807 13y ago
    Fuck off, is it not 'unacceptable' to decide not to use your right to be silent.
technologue 13y ago
You're high, the guy did NOTHING wrong. The police are to blame for this.
lawnchair_larry 13y ago
Nope, we can't. This type of thinking is a strong indicator that one may be suffering from antisocial personality disorder.
cryoshon 13y ago
The police work for the public. They are "public servants". Who should be the one shutting up when the boss is talking?