7 ms·

> She turned to me and abruptly said that I was not needed as a witness and should leave immediately. "I then walked home." should have been the next line, and

> She turned to me and abruptly said that I was not needed as a witness and should leave immediately. "I then walked home." should have been the next line, and I'm fairly sure the author knows it. That doesn't excuse what the officers did, but it's not "being a good Samaritan" that backfired. Being nosy is the part that didn't end well. I'm not even sure the use of force wasn't justified - even in this immensely biased account, he mentions being told to back away by the officers. What are they supposed to do when you ignore them?

rayiner 13y ago
> Being nosy is the part that didn't end well. Neither did being obnoxious, I imagine: "I told them that it was an early stage startup; I’m doing this because I feel it’s a way to make the world around me better, to bring people joy through better food." I don't condone the violence and abuse of authority, obviously. But imagine being a cop, and having to deal with this at 1 am after a long day at work.
- ForHackernews 13y ago
  Yeah, I'm surprised and almost impressed by how much he manages to come across as a total wanker in his own account where he's presumably trying to cast himself in the best possible light.
- jellicle 13y ago
  And yet your reply condones the violence and abuse of authority. Why is that? Here's the basic rule: as a police officer, you must be polite, fair, kind, and law-abiding, even if the public you deal with is rude, nasty, entitled, somewhat drunk, and otherwise unpleasant. Period. If you can't do that, you're in the wrong profession. And if the profession permits people who can't do that, the profession has systemic issues that need to be corrected.
  - rayiner 13y ago
    Asserting that the reaction was predictable and in some sense understandable isn't the same as condoning it. This is the real world, and it's unavoidable that the sorts of people who are going to sign up to police the streets in the face of aggressive hobos and violent gang-bangers aren't going to be the most staid and self-controlled.
  - diminoten 13y ago
    I disagree. As a police officer, you must be fair and law-abiding. Why must they be kind and polite?
    - dragonwriter 13y ago
      Because one of the key challenges of law enforcement is securing community cooperation. Law enforcement cannot be effective when hey are seen by the community as a hostile gang of thugs, and politeness is just a name for adherence to social standards than signal that you are part of the community and not a hostile outsider.
      - diminoten 13y ago
        Sometimes, yes. Other times, such as when a robbery is in progress, or when an accident has just occurred and you've arrived on the scene, polite and kind aren't very important. Fair and law-abiding become much more important in these situations. Once the danger has passed, kind and polite can be important again.
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
  - nemo 13y ago
    If you walk in the street you might get hit by a car. I don't condone a driver hitting you, but reality is what it is. Cops have to constantly deal with the worst elements of society doing the worst things imaginable. It'd be great if they didn't get hardened, but the reality is they often do. Expecting cops to be polite and kind to the drug addicted guy beating his wife because she isn't turning enough tricks to support his habit is probably an unreasonable expectation. Until we've fixed society, cops aren't going to change.
    - jjoonathan 13y ago
      > It'd be great if they didn't get hardened "Hardened" suggests the officers are immune to bullshit. The officers' behavior suggests the exact opposite.
      - nemo 13y ago
        Hardened has nothing to do with being immune to BS. It means that they adopt the mindset needed to do a job that involves potentially getting killed, potentially dealing with murders, murderers, rapists, and similar things that require hardening psychologically to handle working with. That mindset doesn't make them immune to BS, it makes them able to do their job. It also makes them the kind of person you don't want to have interactions with professionally, so if they tell you to leave an area, you leave the area and don't linger and piss them off pointlessly. Hanging out and obstructing/distracting them from their work is the kind of BS they have no tolerance for, which is what the guy in this article was doing out of mind-bogglingly profound ignorance.
        jjoonathan 13y ago
        Then how about we call it "oversensitized" or "embrittled" instead of "hardened"? They are far more fitting terms for what you just described. Not only is the "Colonel Jessup hypothesis" total baloney (note how the deputy at the end saw what happened as the mark of a rookie), but accepting it glorifies moral failure and belittles the efforts of officers who have managed to develop a thick hide along with the integrity to judiciously wield the authority they have been given.
Karunamon 13y ago
>"I then walked home." should have been the next line Unless it's against some kind of law for someone to observe police, you should know better than that. And seeing the way these animals acted, I'd say being concerned for the welfare of the downed biker is a perfectly legitimate reaction. >Being nosy is the part that didn't end well. Not illegal, and certainly not worth violent treatment and solitary confinement. >What are they supposed to do when you ignore them? If they're breaking this minute of a law? I don't know, issue a fucking citation? If they're not breaking a law, leave them alone? You know.. sane, professional, calm behavior that police SHOULD aspire to? By the way - I find it interesting that people are referring to the police report as if it were the gospel where the author's article is just some random nut's view. Do you really think a police force that has no problem with brutality and unjust imprisonment really has any moral issue with filing an untrue/misleading report that makes them look better?
- diminoten 13y ago
  By his own account, he was ignoring police officers while interfering with their work at the scene of an accident. You can't do that and expect to not get physically removed.
  - Karunamon 13y ago
    Even then, that still doesn't necessitate violence and solitary confinement. Stop making excuses for bad behavior!
    - danielweber 13y ago
      So when he says "that doesn't excuse what the officers did" you think he's excusing their behavior?
      - Karunamon 13y ago
        >You can't do that and expect to not get physically removed. This is an excuse/rationalization.
mcphilip 13y ago
I've witnessed two horrific wrecks and been a witness for the cops one of those times. There's a time and a place for projecting your importance as an individual, but assisting someone else in an accident is not one such time. Do what you can until the authorities arrive and be helpful and respectful, and for fuck's sake, follow directions. Obviously the cops should have handled the situation better, but the mature response would be to walk away.
- bostik 13y ago
  So, in effect the correct response for seeing someone you happen to know get hurt in the US is "don't give a toss". As if caring for someone was a crime in itself? I am left speechless.
  - mcphilip 13y ago
    No, the correct response is to help in an appropriate way, assisting until emergency response arrives, and then walk away.
    - watwut 13y ago
      Cops here are imperfect, corrupt and what not. That being said, I'm very happy I live in a place where I would not be arrested in these circumstances. It is kind of cool that I do not have choice between clearing the place immediately when cops come in and being arrested. Cops here seem to be used that people stop on streets to watch what is going on. They also seem to be able to make people leave (when they jam the place) without arresting them for first slight tiny hint of possible disobedience.
  - pdonis 13y ago
    You're kidding, right? Obviously the correct response when you see someone get hurt (btw, the author of the article did not know either of the people who got hurt in the bicycle accident; he asked them what their names were) is to assist them and call 911 if necessary. Nobody is saying otherwise--unless you count the author of the article himself, who at the end says that calling 911 is often a bad idea (which I don't agree with).
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
thefreeman 13y ago
Thank you for saying this. I don't think the author necessarily meant harm, but by constantly questioning and trying to take control of the situation ("Is that protocol", rolling over after being placed on his stomache, etc.) he was digging himself deeper and deeper in a hole. It is also hard to take the article at face value. Literally every other sentence screams of hyperbole. Basically, he got arrested and had to spend the night in jail. He makes it sounds like he was locked in Guantanamo Bay. He didn't get sent to a "safety cell" (what he refers to as isolation) until he (by his own account) threw a temper tantrum demanding to see a doctor. When Deputy Terry walked away muttering, “I have had enough of you,” I banged on the door repeatedly and screamed, “I want to see a doctor. I WANT TO SEE A DOCTOR.” I don't even understand what the original accident really was. It looks like the girl fell off her bike and hit her foot on the ground. Was it really necessary to call 911 for this? I apologize if it was more serious then it appeared, but from the photo it does not look that bad.
- freditup 13y ago
  In the 911 call audio, he states that the accident victims asked him to call 911. In a situation like that, I'd say it's proper to call 911.
tibiapejagala 13y ago
Yeah, she was asking for it. Oh, sorry, this isn't victim-blaming.net? My mistake.

rayiner 13y ago

> Being nosy is the part that didn't end well. Neither did being obnoxious, I imagine: "I told them that it was an early stage startup; I’m doing this because I feel it’s a way to make the world around me better, to bring people joy through better food." I don't condone the violence and abuse of authority, obviously. But imagine being a cop, and having to deal with this at 1 am after a long day at work.

ForHackernews 13y ago
Yeah, I'm surprised and almost impressed by how much he manages to come across as a total wanker in his own account where he's presumably trying to cast himself in the best possible light.
jellicle 13y ago
And yet your reply condones the violence and abuse of authority. Why is that? Here's the basic rule: as a police officer, you must be polite, fair, kind, and law-abiding, even if the public you deal with is rude, nasty, entitled, somewhat drunk, and otherwise unpleasant. Period. If you can't do that, you're in the wrong profession. And if the profession permits people who can't do that, the profession has systemic issues that need to be corrected.
- rayiner 13y ago
  Asserting that the reaction was predictable and in some sense understandable isn't the same as condoning it. This is the real world, and it's unavoidable that the sorts of people who are going to sign up to police the streets in the face of aggressive hobos and violent gang-bangers aren't going to be the most staid and self-controlled.
- diminoten 13y ago
  I disagree. As a police officer, you must be fair and law-abiding. Why must they be kind and polite?
  - dragonwriter 13y ago
    Because one of the key challenges of law enforcement is securing community cooperation. Law enforcement cannot be effective when hey are seen by the community as a hostile gang of thugs, and politeness is just a name for adherence to social standards than signal that you are part of the community and not a hostile outsider.
    - diminoten 13y ago
      Sometimes, yes. Other times, such as when a robbery is in progress, or when an accident has just occurred and you've arrived on the scene, polite and kind aren't very important. Fair and law-abiding become much more important in these situations. Once the danger has passed, kind and polite can be important again.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- nemo 13y ago
  If you walk in the street you might get hit by a car. I don't condone a driver hitting you, but reality is what it is. Cops have to constantly deal with the worst elements of society doing the worst things imaginable. It'd be great if they didn't get hardened, but the reality is they often do. Expecting cops to be polite and kind to the drug addicted guy beating his wife because she isn't turning enough tricks to support his habit is probably an unreasonable expectation. Until we've fixed society, cops aren't going to change.
  - jjoonathan 13y ago
    > It'd be great if they didn't get hardened "Hardened" suggests the officers are immune to bullshit. The officers' behavior suggests the exact opposite.
    - nemo 13y ago
      Hardened has nothing to do with being immune to BS. It means that they adopt the mindset needed to do a job that involves potentially getting killed, potentially dealing with murders, murderers, rapists, and similar things that require hardening psychologically to handle working with. That mindset doesn't make them immune to BS, it makes them able to do their job. It also makes them the kind of person you don't want to have interactions with professionally, so if they tell you to leave an area, you leave the area and don't linger and piss them off pointlessly. Hanging out and obstructing/distracting them from their work is the kind of BS they have no tolerance for, which is what the guy in this article was doing out of mind-bogglingly profound ignorance.
      - jjoonathan 13y ago
        Then how about we call it "oversensitized" or "embrittled" instead of "hardened"? They are far more fitting terms for what you just described. Not only is the "Colonel Jessup hypothesis" total baloney (note how the deputy at the end saw what happened as the mark of a rookie), but accepting it glorifies moral failure and belittles the efforts of officers who have managed to develop a thick hide along with the integrity to judiciously wield the authority they have been given.

Karunamon 13y ago

>"I then walked home." should have been the next line Unless it's against some kind of law for someone to observe police, you should know better than that. And seeing the way these animals acted, I'd say being concerned for the welfare of the downed biker is a perfectly legitimate reaction. >Being nosy is the part that didn't end well. Not illegal, and certainly not worth violent treatment and solitary confinement. >What are they supposed to do when you ignore them? If they're breaking this minute of a law? I don't know, issue a fucking citation? If they're not breaking a law, leave them alone? You know.. sane, professional, calm behavior that police SHOULD aspire to? By the way - I find it interesting that people are referring to the police report as if it were the gospel where the author's article is just some random nut's view. Do you really think a police force that has no problem with brutality and unjust imprisonment really has any moral issue with filing an untrue/misleading report that makes them look better?

diminoten 13y ago
By his own account, he was ignoring police officers while interfering with their work at the scene of an accident. You can't do that and expect to not get physically removed.
- Karunamon 13y ago
  Even then, that still doesn't necessitate violence and solitary confinement. Stop making excuses for bad behavior!
  - danielweber 13y ago
    So when he says "that doesn't excuse what the officers did" you think he's excusing their behavior?
    - Karunamon 13y ago
      >You can't do that and expect to not get physically removed. This is an excuse/rationalization.

mcphilip 13y ago

I've witnessed two horrific wrecks and been a witness for the cops one of those times. There's a time and a place for projecting your importance as an individual, but assisting someone else in an accident is not one such time. Do what you can until the authorities arrive and be helpful and respectful, and for fuck's sake, follow directions. Obviously the cops should have handled the situation better, but the mature response would be to walk away.

bostik 13y ago
So, in effect the correct response for seeing someone you happen to know get hurt in the US is "don't give a toss". As if caring for someone was a crime in itself? I am left speechless.
- mcphilip 13y ago
  No, the correct response is to help in an appropriate way, assisting until emergency response arrives, and then walk away.
  - watwut 13y ago
    Cops here are imperfect, corrupt and what not. That being said, I'm very happy I live in a place where I would not be arrested in these circumstances. It is kind of cool that I do not have choice between clearing the place immediately when cops come in and being arrested. Cops here seem to be used that people stop on streets to watch what is going on. They also seem to be able to make people leave (when they jam the place) without arresting them for first slight tiny hint of possible disobedience.
- pdonis 13y ago
  You're kidding, right? Obviously the correct response when you see someone get hurt (btw, the author of the article did not know either of the people who got hurt in the bicycle accident; he asked them what their names were) is to assist them and call 911 if necessary. Nobody is saying otherwise--unless you count the author of the article himself, who at the end says that calling 911 is often a bad idea (which I don't agree with).

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

thefreeman 13y ago

Thank you for saying this. I don't think the author necessarily meant harm, but by constantly questioning and trying to take control of the situation ("Is that protocol", rolling over after being placed on his stomache, etc.) he was digging himself deeper and deeper in a hole. It is also hard to take the article at face value. Literally every other sentence screams of hyperbole. Basically, he got arrested and had to spend the night in jail. He makes it sounds like he was locked in Guantanamo Bay. He didn't get sent to a "safety cell" (what he refers to as isolation) until he (by his own account) threw a temper tantrum demanding to see a doctor. When Deputy Terry walked away muttering, “I have had enough of you,” I banged on the door repeatedly and screamed, “I want to see a doctor. I WANT TO SEE A DOCTOR.” I don't even understand what the original accident really was. It looks like the girl fell off her bike and hit her foot on the ground. Was it really necessary to call 911 for this? I apologize if it was more serious then it appeared, but from the photo it does not look that bad.

freditup 13y ago
In the 911 call audio, he states that the accident victims asked him to call 911. In a situation like that, I'd say it's proper to call 911.

tibiapejagala 13y ago

Yeah, she was asking for it. Oh, sorry, this isn't victim-blaming.net? My mistake.