6 ms·

According to the article, three kids are stopped by the police over a broken license plate light, then one of them, apparently without any reason, is pepper spr

by Udik 12y ago

According to the article, three kids are stopped by the police over a broken license plate light, then one of them, apparently without any reason, is pepper sprayed twice and tasered four times, and finally they're arrested (one of them will be in jail till July), not before the cops have tried to delete the recordings of the whole scene from one of the boys' phone. Well, the first comment to the story (via Facebook) reads: "It's unbelievable that people actually justify these kids behavior!! I guess maybe it's because my parents raised me to respect police officers. They knew that camera was on them and they added fuel to the fire because of it. Just get out of the car, no taser, no spray...". The comment has 100 likes so far. What the hell is going on in the USA?

paintrayne 12y ago
These are not the most sympathetic victims so people shit on them. Welcome to the USA. It's a real shame because the escalation of force there was entirely unnecessary. Some comments even sarcastically ask, what should the police have done with the kid who refused to get out? Just leave? Obviously not. But the kid wasn't going anywhere and they could have waited for a legal guardian or negotiated further before escalating with the use of force. Not to mention the gratuitous use of TASER when the kid was attempting to comply. Unfortunately, my ultimate take away is that people who object to police abuse are in the minority. If someone is perceived as a punk or criminal, it is open season. Democracy at its finest. I'd really like to hear from a European counterpart how they think this scenario would have gone down across the pond. Not like this, I am sure. What good are cameras and recordings if the citizens are OK with what they see?
- oh_sigh 12y ago
  Does the officer need to wait for a legal guardian if the person is 17?
  - fit2rule 12y ago
    The answer is: yes.
    - oh_sigh 12y ago
      You are completely incorrect, and you should research your claims before posting on the internet. Minors have a right to access to their legal guardians when they are under arrest, not when they are being detained.
      - fit2rule 12y ago
        Clearly, he was being arrested. Or did you think that a tasing and handcuffing were just standard practice for detainment?
        oh_sigh 12y ago
        You have a right to the presence of your legal guardian once you are under arrest, and the process is not immediate. You can't demand your mothers presence in the back seat of a cop car. You can at the station though, for example. You don't have the right when you are in the process of being arrested, especially if you are actively resisting arrest.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
  - craigmccaskill 12y ago
    No, they do not. The officer should have made that clear to the 17 year old, part of the problem seems to be that the kid thinks he's protected by the fact that his mother isn't present. This leads to resistance which could be seen as justification for the escalation. You would hope that the police officer was fully aware of the kids rights and part of their job should be to calmly explain the situation and try to defuse any possible conflict. Regardless of any law breaking here by either side (not going to pass judgement on that) this police officer is really bad at his job.
- fit2rule 12y ago
  >I'd really like to hear from a European counterpart how they think this scenario would have gone down across the pond. Not like this, I am sure. In Germany I'm quite sure the police would have waited politely and patiently until the parents arrived. (Well, I'm also pretty sure they wouldn't have stopped and attempted violent arrest of someone for having a broken light above their license plate...)
  - oh_sigh 12y ago
    I'm guessing that your views prevent you from seeing this situation for what it was. No one was being violently arrested for having a broken light. They were arrested because they refused to step out of the car, and put up a fight when the officer tried to get them to come out of the car. The officer claimed to have smelled marijuana, and so had probable cause to ask the person to step out of the car and perform a search. The driver of the car was previously arrested for marijuana possession, so perhaps it was possible that the officer was telling the truth, and did smell marijuana? You may disagree with marijuana prohibition (I do), and the idea that a smell implies probable cause, but that is the law as it is today. You don't have a right to refuse that, or demand that the officer must wait until your mother shows up. Even so, we have no idea how long it would take the mother to show up. How long should an officer wait before being allowed to ask a 17 year old to step out of a car for probable cause?
    - fit2rule 12y ago
      These folks were not being arrested, they were being detained while the officers determined if there was probable cause - only because the officers claimed they smelled marijuana coming from the car. Any officer can make that claim, its a BS claim that is used to justify aggressive force and to try to trip up a suspect into doing something stupid that would warrant further application of force. And that is precisely what happened here. > perhaps it was possible that the officer was telling the truth, and did smell marijuana? Innocent until proven guilty. Lots of things smell like marijuana. Hot rubber tires can sometimes give off a similar odor. Maybe it was some other car that drove by, and the officers were being prejudiced because they recognized her from a previous arrest? We can play the 'maybe' game an infinite number of ways - its up to the officers, who are using force, to justify that force. >How long should an officer wait before being allowed to ask a 17 year old to step out of a car for probable cause? You have a right to stay in the car until the officer determines probable cause. The smell of marijuana is a tactic used by police to try to upset you and provoke you into doing something that might give them probably cause to arrest you. These people had every right to stay in the car, ask if they were being detained and if they were free to go. The police used the threat of arrest to induce conditions that allowed them to use force - and this is, unfortunately, such a common form of social engineering by the police that people have just come to accept complacency as the only possible 'correct' response. Stand your ground and know your rights. They're only trying to provoke you into doing something they can then use to justify their force. Know these phrases and use them well: “AM I FREE TO GO?” “I DO NOT CONSENT TO ANY SEARCHES,” “I WANT TO REMAIN SILENT,” “I WANT A LAWYER.”
- shaneofalltrad 12y ago
  Seems like this is the issue in the US. Police are no longer tactful and use the same techniques that might make sense on someone drugged out or of a threat or danger to someone or the officer. They need to be retrained in civil duties, and respect of more typical citizens or non-violent situations. I personally have had a few instances growing up back in the 90's (Southern California), as a white and this is not a racist thing (most of the times), it is a power thing that has been a problem for years. Many people are scared of cops and that's because some don't respect us. I believe that these two teens are legitimately scared of what will happen to them away from the camera, and based on the officers excessive use of force, their instincts where correct.
- mixmax 12y ago
  In Denmark it would be a major disaster, people would get fired, hearings would be held, and media discussion would ensue. As a comparison: In 2012 (the latest year I could find data for) Danish police fired a total of 49 shots over the year.
  - plongeur 12y ago
    I don't think so. If a Danish police officer tells somebody to leave the car and that person refuses - do you think they will back down and call it a night?
  - plongeur 12y ago
    "female and male police officers arresting a black guy in Denmark" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXDExhjrMd4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXDExhjrMd4
  - plongeur 12y ago
    "Danish Police Beating Unarmed, Disengaged, Kneeling Civilians" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4xlfiEzx14 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4xlfiEzx14
  - PhantomGremlin 12y ago
    > Danish police fired a total of 49 shots over the year A few points to consider: 1) Denmark population 5.7 million. USA population 320 million. The USA has a number of metropolitan areas with more people than the entire country of Denmark. 2) Denmark is probably a lot more homogenous than the USA. The USA has been a "melting pot" for immigrants (legal, illegal, former slave, religious zealot, etc) for hundreds of years. Things are going to be a little "rowdier" here than in the "old world".
- gregsq 12y ago
  >I'd really like to hear from a European counterpart how they think this scenario would have gone down across the pond. Not like this, I am sure. I've been pulled over twice in the UK. The first time was a fair time back when I had a cheap old Saab. I was out very late near Hampstead Heath and I overtook a car, definitely exceeding the speed limit. As I did that I spotted a police panda ( car ) parked on the side, and I thought I was in for some kind of penalty. I went back to the speed limit and he caught me up. He kindly explained that my number plate wasn't to the most recent regulations and that I should have them replaced. I thanked him very much and was on my way. That's the nice end of town. The other time I was visiting a friend who lived in the opposite side of the fence, near Brixton, an area known for trouble sometimes. I saw a police car behind me but was near his estate so pulled over and turned off the engine to call him to let him know I was downstairs and waiting. A sergeant knocked on my window and I was surrounded by four police. I explained that I was calling my friend, and the sergeant said that I should finish my call and I should wait. Took a few seconds, and then I hopped out if the car. They kept their distance. Apparently they thought my behaviour was suspicious because I'd pulled in and turned off my lights and engine. I explained to the police that within the past two days the law had changed so that it had become illegal to talk on a mobile phone while the engine is on. They said that they didn't know that, and we wished each other good night and my friend and I went to the pub. Oh one more. My Peugeot 205 had an issue with the spare wheel being accessible to thieves. I walked up to my car and was shocked to see my spare wheel inside on the back seat. At first I thought a thief was playing tricks. It was a walking Bobbie who'd disturbed someone trying to make off with it apparently, and who had kindly broken into my car, put the wheel in and then locked it up for me. Peel chose blue for the police so as to distinguish them from the red of the military, who were armed and not well trusted. Police were not armed for the same general reason, to be part of the community. [edit punctuation]
  - aidos 12y ago
    I was talking to a cop in London about this today. They had a stall in the local shopping, doing a "Cuppa with a Coppa" campaign. When I came to the UK 12 years ago I was shocked to discover a police force that seemed interested in keeping everyone safe and happy. Since then, every single interaction I've had with the police here has been overwhelmingly positive. I once ran a red light on my bike in a really stupid way and came very close to getting myself killed. Cop on a motorbike pulled next to me and said "I think you'd better pull over, sunshine" (literally, I thought it was so brilliant I still remember the words). Instead of being a dick about it he said something along the lines of, you know that was stupid, just be more careful out here because we don't want you getting hurt. Back in NZ, not so much. I was once tripped from behind and bundled against the wall by police for not walking fast enough. There was a protest march and the cop said that I wasn't allowed to walk at the same pace if I was on the footpath. Told her I lived on the street (which I did) and was going to follow along with the march until my house. At that point she tapped my foot as I walked so I would fall over. I was a bit surprised, then she did it again. After 2 or 3 attempts I hit the ground and was then bundled against the wall. There were tv cameras there so they gathered around and I was released after she tried justifying it to her superior officer. It's not like I was hurt or anything, but you have to ask yourself, what's the point? How does that in any way help you in your role of keeping people safe? That's not even a bad story as it goes (I have plenty of others from my, and my friend's interactions). There's a stark difference in the cultures. In the UK, if a cop can diffuse a situation, they've done a good job (one better if they get people screaming with joy [0]). In NZ they seem to like the power trip (I know that's a total generalisation). [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-E_tikSXfc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-E_tikSXfc
- jacquesm 12y ago
  People in Europe (Western Europe, unfortunately not all police forces are equal in this respect) are generally less afraid of being physically abused by the police which is why they'd have much less of a problem to do things like getting out of the car (a young person might feel safer in their car than out of it when confronting a police officer from a police force they do not trust).
guiambros 12y ago
It's the same mindset of people who blame rape victims for using tight clothes. "She was asking for it".
- oh_sigh 12y ago
  There's a difference between dressing how you want, and actively resisting a lawful order coming from a police officer. It's pretty offensive that you could even remotely compare this situation to rape.
  - rantanplan 12y ago
    Fuck the lawful orders of abusive, child-torturers. Lawful != Ethical
    - oh_sigh 12y ago
      You sound reasonable.
      - rantanplan 12y ago
        I am sorry for not having a huge hard-on for men in uniform that drag teens, by tasers and pepper sprays, out of their cars while they're not being a threat to anyone. For what reason? Ah right, he smelled pot. Bravo officer of the law! Everyone feels safer now. His family would be so proud. This looks like something I'd see in a movie about a 3rd world country with a corrupt government and a police state. Not in a country that touts democracy, freedom, justice and equality.
        oh_sigh 12y ago
        He didn't need to be dragged out - he was asked multiple times to get out, and it was only after he flailed around and resisted the officers orders that he was maced/tased. And guess what: maybe the reason the person didn't want to get out of the car, and resisted a lawful order multiple times is because he actually had pot on him, and he had enough to be classified as intent to sell. Which is exactly the case. I'm fine with you if you think that marijuana laws are bullshit(I'd be on your side then), but while they are on the book, it would be good if officers actually enforce the laws that they are sworn under an oath to enforce.
fit2rule 12y ago
> What the hell is going on in the USA? The people have been conditioned to accepting a totalitarian/authoritarian police state, whether they like it or not. Militaristic behavior is considered worthy of respect, and aggression from authorities is tolerated - because of the conditioning. That conditioning consists of repeated propaganda about what happens to you when you don't obey - i.e. news reports, daily, about who got shot today. Who got brutalized today. Who got put away, today. All because they did not obey. But the real question is, why do you expect more from the country that has 25% of the worlds imprisoned population within its borders? What conditioning have you accepted that makes you think things should be any different in the USA today? Because that is the other half of the dialetic materialist campaign that is conditioning us all into acceptance/denial.
- eternalban 12y ago
  They have a great game going here. Reminds me of `A Clockwork Orange` and the recruitment of thugs to the police. At some level, imo, everyone is perfectly aware as to what is really going on, but repressing the awareness. They are not exactly being subtle, these days.
oh_sigh 12y ago
Did you watch the video? The officer asks the person in the back to get out of the car. He refuses. Then the officer tries to pull him out of the car, he struggles and puts his hands up like he is going to punch the officer. The officer tries to get him multiple times out of the car, then the person gets pepper sprayed, and is still combative and resisting about 10 attempts to grab him and get him out of the car. Then he gets tased twice and gets pulled out of the car. If an officer demands that you get out of your car, get out of your car. If an officer puts his hands on you to get you out of the car, DEFINITELY do not pull away, put your hands up to fight, and repeatedly try to get away from the officer.
- rantanplan 12y ago
  Yes I watched the video you moron. Just because you don't like the 17 yo kid and because you may classify him as a "punk" doesn't mean that the asshole in the uniform has the right to torture the kid with pepper sprays and tasers. The kid said "I ain't going nowhere till my mother is here" and he's right. The asshole in the uniform could patiently wait for the kid's parent. WTF is wrong with you people?
  - foz 12y ago
    I also watched the video. If you are legal to drive a car and you are stopped, and refuse to do what the police tells you to do, you can be arrested. There's no law that I know which says police are not allowed to arrest occupants in a car without parental consent. I think the behaviour of the police was way over the top, but the way the kids acted was not smart, and I wouldn't be surprised if the police actions turn out to be legal. You can't just refuse, it's never going to end well. The only option is to comply. If the police are out of bounds, the challenge has to come later, in court, not on the road.
    - rantanplan 12y ago
      People in this thread continue to talk about laws and blah blah. I want to state 2 things: 1) The kid is not going to win a prize for his IQ, no one is denying that. 2) Fuck the laws. The laws change. Here we're witnessing a full blown assault to a teenager. Actually where I come from this would classify as torture. And you people keep talking about how lawful it is and how stupid the kid might be. Now I understand the problem you have over there.

by Udik 12y ago

paintrayne 12y ago

These are not the most sympathetic victims so people shit on them. Welcome to the USA. It's a real shame because the escalation of force there was entirely unnecessary. Some comments even sarcastically ask, what should the police have done with the kid who refused to get out? Just leave? Obviously not. But the kid wasn't going anywhere and they could have waited for a legal guardian or negotiated further before escalating with the use of force. Not to mention the gratuitous use of TASER when the kid was attempting to comply. Unfortunately, my ultimate take away is that people who object to police abuse are in the minority. If someone is perceived as a punk or criminal, it is open season. Democracy at its finest. I'd really like to hear from a European counterpart how they think this scenario would have gone down across the pond. Not like this, I am sure. What good are cameras and recordings if the citizens are OK with what they see?

oh_sigh 12y ago
Does the officer need to wait for a legal guardian if the person is 17?
- fit2rule 12y ago
  The answer is: yes.
  - oh_sigh 12y ago
    You are completely incorrect, and you should research your claims before posting on the internet. Minors have a right to access to their legal guardians when they are under arrest, not when they are being detained.
    - fit2rule 12y ago
      Clearly, he was being arrested. Or did you think that a tasing and handcuffing were just standard practice for detainment?
      - oh_sigh 12y ago
        You have a right to the presence of your legal guardian once you are under arrest, and the process is not immediate. You can't demand your mothers presence in the back seat of a cop car. You can at the station though, for example. You don't have the right when you are in the process of being arrested, especially if you are actively resisting arrest.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
- craigmccaskill 12y ago
  No, they do not. The officer should have made that clear to the 17 year old, part of the problem seems to be that the kid thinks he's protected by the fact that his mother isn't present. This leads to resistance which could be seen as justification for the escalation. You would hope that the police officer was fully aware of the kids rights and part of their job should be to calmly explain the situation and try to defuse any possible conflict. Regardless of any law breaking here by either side (not going to pass judgement on that) this police officer is really bad at his job.
fit2rule 12y ago
>I'd really like to hear from a European counterpart how they think this scenario would have gone down across the pond. Not like this, I am sure. In Germany I'm quite sure the police would have waited politely and patiently until the parents arrived. (Well, I'm also pretty sure they wouldn't have stopped and attempted violent arrest of someone for having a broken light above their license plate...)
- oh_sigh 12y ago
  I'm guessing that your views prevent you from seeing this situation for what it was. No one was being violently arrested for having a broken light. They were arrested because they refused to step out of the car, and put up a fight when the officer tried to get them to come out of the car. The officer claimed to have smelled marijuana, and so had probable cause to ask the person to step out of the car and perform a search. The driver of the car was previously arrested for marijuana possession, so perhaps it was possible that the officer was telling the truth, and did smell marijuana? You may disagree with marijuana prohibition (I do), and the idea that a smell implies probable cause, but that is the law as it is today. You don't have a right to refuse that, or demand that the officer must wait until your mother shows up. Even so, we have no idea how long it would take the mother to show up. How long should an officer wait before being allowed to ask a 17 year old to step out of a car for probable cause?
  - fit2rule 12y ago
    These folks were not being arrested, they were being detained while the officers determined if there was probable cause - only because the officers claimed they smelled marijuana coming from the car. Any officer can make that claim, its a BS claim that is used to justify aggressive force and to try to trip up a suspect into doing something stupid that would warrant further application of force. And that is precisely what happened here. > perhaps it was possible that the officer was telling the truth, and did smell marijuana? Innocent until proven guilty. Lots of things smell like marijuana. Hot rubber tires can sometimes give off a similar odor. Maybe it was some other car that drove by, and the officers were being prejudiced because they recognized her from a previous arrest? We can play the 'maybe' game an infinite number of ways - its up to the officers, who are using force, to justify that force. >How long should an officer wait before being allowed to ask a 17 year old to step out of a car for probable cause? You have a right to stay in the car until the officer determines probable cause. The smell of marijuana is a tactic used by police to try to upset you and provoke you into doing something that might give them probably cause to arrest you. These people had every right to stay in the car, ask if they were being detained and if they were free to go. The police used the threat of arrest to induce conditions that allowed them to use force - and this is, unfortunately, such a common form of social engineering by the police that people have just come to accept complacency as the only possible 'correct' response. Stand your ground and know your rights. They're only trying to provoke you into doing something they can then use to justify their force. Know these phrases and use them well: “AM I FREE TO GO?” “I DO NOT CONSENT TO ANY SEARCHES,” “I WANT TO REMAIN SILENT,” “I WANT A LAWYER.”
shaneofalltrad 12y ago
Seems like this is the issue in the US. Police are no longer tactful and use the same techniques that might make sense on someone drugged out or of a threat or danger to someone or the officer. They need to be retrained in civil duties, and respect of more typical citizens or non-violent situations. I personally have had a few instances growing up back in the 90's (Southern California), as a white and this is not a racist thing (most of the times), it is a power thing that has been a problem for years. Many people are scared of cops and that's because some don't respect us. I believe that these two teens are legitimately scared of what will happen to them away from the camera, and based on the officers excessive use of force, their instincts where correct.
mixmax 12y ago
In Denmark it would be a major disaster, people would get fired, hearings would be held, and media discussion would ensue. As a comparison: In 2012 (the latest year I could find data for) Danish police fired a total of 49 shots over the year.
- plongeur 12y ago
  I don't think so. If a Danish police officer tells somebody to leave the car and that person refuses - do you think they will back down and call it a night?
- plongeur 12y ago
  "female and male police officers arresting a black guy in Denmark" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXDExhjrMd4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oXDExhjrMd4
- plongeur 12y ago
  "Danish Police Beating Unarmed, Disengaged, Kneeling Civilians" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4xlfiEzx14 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4xlfiEzx14
- PhantomGremlin 12y ago
  > Danish police fired a total of 49 shots over the year A few points to consider: 1) Denmark population 5.7 million. USA population 320 million. The USA has a number of metropolitan areas with more people than the entire country of Denmark. 2) Denmark is probably a lot more homogenous than the USA. The USA has been a "melting pot" for immigrants (legal, illegal, former slave, religious zealot, etc) for hundreds of years. Things are going to be a little "rowdier" here than in the "old world".
gregsq 12y ago
>I'd really like to hear from a European counterpart how they think this scenario would have gone down across the pond. Not like this, I am sure. I've been pulled over twice in the UK. The first time was a fair time back when I had a cheap old Saab. I was out very late near Hampstead Heath and I overtook a car, definitely exceeding the speed limit. As I did that I spotted a police panda ( car ) parked on the side, and I thought I was in for some kind of penalty. I went back to the speed limit and he caught me up. He kindly explained that my number plate wasn't to the most recent regulations and that I should have them replaced. I thanked him very much and was on my way. That's the nice end of town. The other time I was visiting a friend who lived in the opposite side of the fence, near Brixton, an area known for trouble sometimes. I saw a police car behind me but was near his estate so pulled over and turned off the engine to call him to let him know I was downstairs and waiting. A sergeant knocked on my window and I was surrounded by four police. I explained that I was calling my friend, and the sergeant said that I should finish my call and I should wait. Took a few seconds, and then I hopped out if the car. They kept their distance. Apparently they thought my behaviour was suspicious because I'd pulled in and turned off my lights and engine. I explained to the police that within the past two days the law had changed so that it had become illegal to talk on a mobile phone while the engine is on. They said that they didn't know that, and we wished each other good night and my friend and I went to the pub. Oh one more. My Peugeot 205 had an issue with the spare wheel being accessible to thieves. I walked up to my car and was shocked to see my spare wheel inside on the back seat. At first I thought a thief was playing tricks. It was a walking Bobbie who'd disturbed someone trying to make off with it apparently, and who had kindly broken into my car, put the wheel in and then locked it up for me. Peel chose blue for the police so as to distinguish them from the red of the military, who were armed and not well trusted. Police were not armed for the same general reason, to be part of the community. [edit punctuation]
- aidos 12y ago
  I was talking to a cop in London about this today. They had a stall in the local shopping, doing a "Cuppa with a Coppa" campaign. When I came to the UK 12 years ago I was shocked to discover a police force that seemed interested in keeping everyone safe and happy. Since then, every single interaction I've had with the police here has been overwhelmingly positive. I once ran a red light on my bike in a really stupid way and came very close to getting myself killed. Cop on a motorbike pulled next to me and said "I think you'd better pull over, sunshine" (literally, I thought it was so brilliant I still remember the words). Instead of being a dick about it he said something along the lines of, you know that was stupid, just be more careful out here because we don't want you getting hurt. Back in NZ, not so much. I was once tripped from behind and bundled against the wall by police for not walking fast enough. There was a protest march and the cop said that I wasn't allowed to walk at the same pace if I was on the footpath. Told her I lived on the street (which I did) and was going to follow along with the march until my house. At that point she tapped my foot as I walked so I would fall over. I was a bit surprised, then she did it again. After 2 or 3 attempts I hit the ground and was then bundled against the wall. There were tv cameras there so they gathered around and I was released after she tried justifying it to her superior officer. It's not like I was hurt or anything, but you have to ask yourself, what's the point? How does that in any way help you in your role of keeping people safe? That's not even a bad story as it goes (I have plenty of others from my, and my friend's interactions). There's a stark difference in the cultures. In the UK, if a cop can diffuse a situation, they've done a good job (one better if they get people screaming with joy [0]). In NZ they seem to like the power trip (I know that's a total generalisation). [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-E_tikSXfc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-E_tikSXfc
jacquesm 12y ago
People in Europe (Western Europe, unfortunately not all police forces are equal in this respect) are generally less afraid of being physically abused by the police which is why they'd have much less of a problem to do things like getting out of the car (a young person might feel safer in their car than out of it when confronting a police officer from a police force they do not trust).

guiambros 12y ago

It's the same mindset of people who blame rape victims for using tight clothes. "She was asking for it".

oh_sigh 12y ago
There's a difference between dressing how you want, and actively resisting a lawful order coming from a police officer. It's pretty offensive that you could even remotely compare this situation to rape.
- rantanplan 12y ago
  Fuck the lawful orders of abusive, child-torturers. Lawful != Ethical
  - oh_sigh 12y ago
    You sound reasonable.
    - rantanplan 12y ago
      I am sorry for not having a huge hard-on for men in uniform that drag teens, by tasers and pepper sprays, out of their cars while they're not being a threat to anyone. For what reason? Ah right, he smelled pot. Bravo officer of the law! Everyone feels safer now. His family would be so proud. This looks like something I'd see in a movie about a 3rd world country with a corrupt government and a police state. Not in a country that touts democracy, freedom, justice and equality.
      - oh_sigh 12y ago
        He didn't need to be dragged out - he was asked multiple times to get out, and it was only after he flailed around and resisted the officers orders that he was maced/tased. And guess what: maybe the reason the person didn't want to get out of the car, and resisted a lawful order multiple times is because he actually had pot on him, and he had enough to be classified as intent to sell. Which is exactly the case. I'm fine with you if you think that marijuana laws are bullshit(I'd be on your side then), but while they are on the book, it would be good if officers actually enforce the laws that they are sworn under an oath to enforce.

fit2rule 12y ago

> What the hell is going on in the USA? The people have been conditioned to accepting a totalitarian/authoritarian police state, whether they like it or not. Militaristic behavior is considered worthy of respect, and aggression from authorities is tolerated - because of the conditioning. That conditioning consists of repeated propaganda about what happens to you when you don't obey - i.e. news reports, daily, about who got shot today. Who got brutalized today. Who got put away, today. All because they did not obey. But the real question is, why do you expect more from the country that has 25% of the worlds imprisoned population within its borders? What conditioning have you accepted that makes you think things should be any different in the USA today? Because that is the other half of the dialetic materialist campaign that is conditioning us all into acceptance/denial.

eternalban 12y ago
They have a great game going here. Reminds me of `A Clockwork Orange` and the recruitment of thugs to the police. At some level, imo, everyone is perfectly aware as to what is really going on, but repressing the awareness. They are not exactly being subtle, these days.

oh_sigh 12y ago

Did you watch the video? The officer asks the person in the back to get out of the car. He refuses. Then the officer tries to pull him out of the car, he struggles and puts his hands up like he is going to punch the officer. The officer tries to get him multiple times out of the car, then the person gets pepper sprayed, and is still combative and resisting about 10 attempts to grab him and get him out of the car. Then he gets tased twice and gets pulled out of the car. If an officer demands that you get out of your car, get out of your car. If an officer puts his hands on you to get you out of the car, DEFINITELY do not pull away, put your hands up to fight, and repeatedly try to get away from the officer.

rantanplan 12y ago
Yes I watched the video you moron. Just because you don't like the 17 yo kid and because you may classify him as a "punk" doesn't mean that the asshole in the uniform has the right to torture the kid with pepper sprays and tasers. The kid said "I ain't going nowhere till my mother is here" and he's right. The asshole in the uniform could patiently wait for the kid's parent. WTF is wrong with you people?
- foz 12y ago
  I also watched the video. If you are legal to drive a car and you are stopped, and refuse to do what the police tells you to do, you can be arrested. There's no law that I know which says police are not allowed to arrest occupants in a car without parental consent. I think the behaviour of the police was way over the top, but the way the kids acted was not smart, and I wouldn't be surprised if the police actions turn out to be legal. You can't just refuse, it's never going to end well. The only option is to comply. If the police are out of bounds, the challenge has to come later, in court, not on the road.
  - rantanplan 12y ago
    People in this thread continue to talk about laws and blah blah. I want to state 2 things: 1) The kid is not going to win a prize for his IQ, no one is denying that. 2) Fuck the laws. The laws change. Here we're witnessing a full blown assault to a teenager. Actually where I come from this would classify as torture. And you people keep talking about how lawful it is and how stupid the kid might be. Now I understand the problem you have over there.