More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

What kind of police force hires these goons? Just hired thugs who passed the "rigorous" training process hiding behind the shield. If I were the chief of one of these districts, I'd be fucking embarrassed.

Tragic accident?

How is slamming somebody against a wall with brute force a tragic fucking accident? The Schutzstaffel would be proud.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

Cops that do that kind of shit should at a minimum loose their jobs and depending on what they've done should serve time in jail.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

In reality, this hardly ever happens.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

how fortunate for the US to have such keen eyed eagles as their protectors...

*brownie points if you get the referance*

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

While that is true, this kind of behavior by the police should be punished when it does occur to send a clear message that it will not be tolerated.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

Warhammer dawn of war? So the good Inquisitor senses no Chaos on Tartarus. How fortunate for the Imperium that such keen-eyed eagles stand vigil over her gates." 'Under Siege'



anyways...


America land of the free, free to the people in uniform!

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

I don't find that so very surprising, to be honest. Police officer isn't exactly the best-paid job in the world and it often doesn't require a whole lot of education either (I think in Germany you can join the police with the lowest form of school education available).

The surprising thing is perhaps how many good police officers there are under these circumstances.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

1st one shouldn't have run.

2nd one we have a lot of talk from the guy with the camera about what's gone on but no real evidence. We don't know what the EMT is supposed to have done or what's going on.

3rd one I remembering being on TV with a gun involved or something like that.

And any of these I could have just dubbed the audio over to make things look entirely different. The camera may not lie but it's certainly selective with the truth.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

What Nemmerle said.

Here is the complete video footage from the incident.


I think the situation looks a bit different now.

Never trust a single youtube clip alone. Too many people know how to use video editing software...



Depends on the hierarchy level and the German state.
In some states (i. e. Lower Saxony) the three-level system has been replaced with a two-level system.

All police officers in these states need at least Fachhochschulreife/Abitur to study at the police college/university.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

Looks painfull but there is no footage of just before the incident (did the man react aggresively? did he indeed run? In which manner did the polite tried to attract his attention?

Having said that, it's unfortunate that the officer jumped on the man in such a manner with the outcome as shown there (guy gets in a coma).

It's a bit unclear what happend here before the incident... the camera of the patrolcar (and ambulance, if it was equiped with a camera) would be useful. The video discription says (which may be true or false, can't verify it myself) that:

"the policecar (lgiths on, sirens off) tried to pass the ambulance (no lights, no sirene). The ambulance didn't gave way (didn't see the policecar?) so the officer said over the radio that the ambulance driver should check his mirrors more often. He pulled the ambulance over, the officer says the ambulance driver/paramedic assaulted the policeofficer, the paramedic denies this and says he didn't do anything till the policeofficer grabbed him forcefully by the arm. Some arguments go on, guy gets arrested."

So we'd need to know:
- How long did it take for the ambulance to notice the police car? it's not like you check your rear every minute but if it's more then 10 minutes it would show bad driving skills of the ambulance driver)
- Is it plausible that the ambulance didn't gave way on purpose?
- Did the policecar had right of way (if US law is the same as Dutch law that "emergency vehicles only have right of way when if sirene and lights are both on" (just lights or sirenes do NOT grand right of way) then the answer would be no.
- Who acted aggresively first be it through words, grabbing, pushing etc?

Again, misses the start of the incident. But it looks painful regardless (thi guy coulod have ended up wiht bad injuries). Were there no other, better options like a tazer, pepperspray or other?



This shows that the guy was not an innocent passer by. But still, as above what other options were tried (available) before they decided to knock the guy down with a car (which could mean the guy would hit the curb and break his neck among other possible injuries).

But indeed, a video can't be trusted as telling the whole story due to possible manipulation, poor timing (not taping the start of the incident or what triggered the incident), the view point etc. It can however raise attention and awareness about potential abuse which need further investigation. Tapes can be used as evidence in combination with eye withness reports and the like (if the reports are trustworthy and it seems unlikely the tape has been editted in any shape or form).

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

I agree. I don't know how far the police in that state is allowed to ram an armed suspect. In Germany it would only be legal in case of self-defence.

On the other hand, a situation with an armed suspect who is not complying with commands from the police is always very stressful and upsetting for the officers involved.

I think I am actually not a very aggressive person. But I remember that I nearly lost my self-control during an arrest when a violent drunk suspect bit into my arm and spat into my face. I was about to punch him directly into the face and only stopped in time because a female medic was present.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

Indeed, I can imagen that it cna be frustrating but the whole "eye for an eye" approach would only cause more problems (the situation escalates into a full fight with possible serious injuries or even death).

The more that those that work for the state are supposed to act responsibly, maturily, orderly etc. because they are meant to give a public example on behaviour/morals, showing they can eb trusted with the powers granted to them (no abuse of power) and are there to serve the people.

A provoking reaction from law enforcement and other such forces (or act that can easily be seen as a provakation) can easily worsen a situation and hurt public support and image. If I'm spoken to by any authoirty (doesn't need to be a police officer, can be a guard, staff etc.) I'd like to be adressed respectfully and I'll show them the same respect back. If I think they come down on me in an uncomfortable way (you feel like a gestapo agent is targeting you abd abusing his power or acusing you of things completly out of the blue), or am being shouted at while for doing something wrong while I'm not aware (I accidently entered something that is off limits for example) I'll dig (as we say in the Netherlands) dig my feet in the ground. I'll be a lot less cooperative, possibly even trying not to cooperate at all if it seems valid and legal to do so thinking "fuck you, bugger off you because-I-am-in-uniform-I-can-poke-my-nose-around-in-whatever-I-want").

De-escalation training is given for a very good reason.

Sort-of on topic: About a year or so ago in Amsterdam ( ? ) there was an paramedic who was called to an person that was passed out (in a sauna building?) , but the paramedic refused to help the guy because the victem was a homosexual. He left the scene and the poor sod died... not sure what they did against that paramedic but this caused quite a negative response towards the A'dam paramedics, who i turn were upset that the public jumped on the fence and they felt unsafe. Demanding from the Amsterdam major that he did something about it to ensure their safety. Or something along those lines, my memory is a bit fuzzy. ALl I could think was "DO you find it strange that people are pissed off at the paramedic service and shout things in anger at them? I do not, even though individual paramedics can't be held responsible for what went on... responding negatively may only make things worse....".

As for drunk people: I know that the state they are in ain't an excuse but it does make people who normally wouldn't act agressively or disrespectful , to do so. They may use physical or mental (cursing) violence against others who "get in their way" (which thus affects law enforcement and resque forces especially) while they will regret it when they sober up and realize what a mess they made. It's indeed tempted to punish/get back at those people while they are in that state but generally it's better to take approperiate action when the person is in a state were he can be reasoned with (propper dialog). Incase they are still violent I'd punish them harder then when they show clear regrets. In the later case you might evne decide to forget about the incident if the situation seems to call/allow for it.

Edit: Also, rules of engagement (laws) about which options may or may not be used by authority may sometimes work against them or make it more difficult to resolve the situation. In the incident of the armed man who was knocked down with a car this might have ended the situation faster then calling in a policedog (or other solution) would but it also makes citizens defenseless against abusive or amateur/improper/stupid behaviour from said authority. The world has both well intended citizens and authoirty figures, and those who are less well intended (abusive, aggresive etc.) , to be on the save side it is better to side with those without authority to protect them against the "stronger" power in a conflict. This may sometimes works against valid actions by authorities though but this is still better then an authority figure being able to abuse his power and get away with it.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

Speaking of abusive behaviour and other things that just seem wrong. I remember:

- Last year or so a female police officer who was not prosecuted when she got involved in an accident with her policevan. A girl was seriously injured when she crossed a road and the policevan collided with her. The policevan did carry the blue lights but not the sirene. She was not prosecuted, without further comment on the reason why. The officer explained that she was distracted for a secondwhile she approached the crossing, as she tried to locate the button for the sirene. Her colleague next to her (front passenger seat) couldn't assist in operating the sirene and light instaltion as he had no knowledge of such. Source: AD.nl - Binnenland - 'Elisa's leven overhoop na aanrijding'

This frustrated me since:
- If you don't carry both signal and lights you are not a prioity vehicle thus any accident you caused is automatically your fault. If an other person doesn't notice you because your lack of propper signals or refuses to grant you right of way (which would be their right) you are to blame.
- How hard could it be to tell the person next to her were to find the buttons for controlling the sirenes and lights? Shouldn't that be one of the first things to do when you are towing along a newbie or a person who is new to a certain vehicle? Just incase the driver can not get his/her eye off the road and her co-rider has to operate certain installations...
- If the co-rider really can't help you out, and the driver has to do this him/herself then (s)he should be aware of the danger of not watching the road (especially at high speeds, i crowded town centres etc.!) and slow down or stop so it becomes safe to do whatever you need to do. Things like it being illegal to use a operate a phone that isn't handsfree behind the wheel were introduced for a reason.
- Regardless of why the accident accured, the policecar did not had right of way... thus the officer is at fault, to blame and should be punished accordingly such as being fined or whatever else the punishment for causing a road accident is.

---------------------

And how about people that see possible abuse of power? Granted they may be wrong and not be able to judge the situation as they "don't know all the facts". But sometimes you see clear abuse of power. Such as when you see a policecar work his way through traffic with sirenes and lights, only to see the officers stop at an outlet to buy food/drinks/snacks/books/whatever. Which makes you want to fine them at the very least. It's just not social, we all want to get from A to B smoothly and as fast as possible, because you got those fancy bells and lights doesn't mean you cna use them for personal gain... :mad:

Or when you see a policecar driving through red, againt traffic, exceeding the speed limit and such things without them carying lights and sirenes. Their ofcourse is a slim chanche that they actually are onroute to an incident but don't carry their signals for some reason (stealth) but there is a better chanche of them just knowing they can easily get away with it and wont'end up paying fines of ignoring red lights. Such actions should be fined as normal (the officer himself needing to pay the fine out of his own pocket) and incase of repeated violations the person needs to be punished in other ways, with the ultimate risk of being fired. Those violations may be "small" but they do hurt the reputation of law enforcement as a whole.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

Hey, self defense right? I'd be pissed too if someone could have potentially infected me with some disease.

Too much force used on the suspect with the knife. He was walking around in circles, not really going toward anyone.

The EMT. I'm assuming he had the lights going, since he was going to the hospital. Why the fuck would anyone even try to stop a speeding ambulance?

The cop slamming the guy into the wall. A simple body tackle would have sufficed. Not a full-on shoulder tackle. It looked like he was trying to actually hurt the guy. I liked how he dragged him around a while before putting the cuffs on his "unconscious" body.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

They don't do just emergency rides, they also transfer people to the hospital that are not in a state of emergency. If you broke a bone for example or when you need to be transfered from one hospital (aid post) to the other and your condition is stable (but you being required to lay down so they can't use a bus/taxi). The video discription says the ambulance didn't use it's signals so...
Haven't seen any dragging around, only a silly repeat of five seconds of footage (the slamming into the guy). I was wondering if the news showed some more footage from before and after that very moment. I mean, after perhaps one repeat (for those slower people that are like "err what just happend there?") you don't need to show it again and again and again? :uhm:

speaking of which, sometimes they show persuit programs from american TV which besides a Dutch narrator are left intact. The few times I watch those programs I always notice how they take an event of a few seconds and loop it atleast four times: a car driving across a crossing, barely missing a truck, which is looped 4-6 times... video continues, other loop is shown and on the end of the video (arrest/chrash) it's looped endlessly till the narrator is done talking... it annoys the heck out of me. =p I saw it the first time alright. Ugh. :lol:

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

The full video shows the cop getting down next the the guy and pulling on his arm, dragging him around to cuff him.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

I love people who sit back and critize actions of other people all the time, themselves never having been in a situation where you dont know who is good or bad and you may not be able to go home that night.

(1st video) See my above statement. Ever see SWAT standoffs? Everybody is arrested and sorted, you make any actions, police dont know who is innocent or not.

(2nd video) He resisted arrest. You dont do that. If you are right, let the judge tell the policeman that.

(3rd video) Obviously a prolonged standoff and the guy refused to surrender after multiple warnings.

You ever see police chase videos? (world scariest police chases, worlds wildest police videos...etc). If you dont stop when they tell you to, they can use multiple techniques to take you down and its all legit. Ive seen them PIT cars until they flip onto the roofs, ive seen cops hit running "suspects" with their cars doing a good 30 mph or faster.


pwned. And I have no sympathy for him either. If anything, the cop should have gone faster.

They dont ambush private citizens who are doing nothing wrong, draw weapons, tell them to get down, and them pin them against a pole.

Bottom line...listen to the cops. Plain and simple. They have a hard as shit job dealing with shitbags of society, and i have never seen a case where a cop just starts running over random innocent strangers on the sidewalk.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

In all the videos except the EMT One, the cops followed proper procedure. From what I understand, you NEVER pull over an ambulance bringing someone to the hospital except in the most extreme circumstances. You pull one over, see that they have someone, and follow them. Then you sort shit out. I'd like to know what happened to the dickhead cops in that video. Does anyone have a follow up on it?

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

I'm sure their squad car's ESP computer told them all the convenient facts before they pulled them over. Just as your computer's convenient ESP is telling you the situation in which they were pulled over so you can decide whether it was in policy or not.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

That police officer should be fired.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

What ever happend to that officer who shot that guy in the back of the head while he (the guy) was down on the ground and surrounded by various cops in a (metro?) station?

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

Last I read, he was indicted on murder or manslaughter and upon discovering that he was wanted, fled the area only to be picked up later. Aside from being in custody, haven't heard anything else on him.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

He did not flee. He spent time with his family prior to being arrested and booked into jail. His trial is in its beginning stages; the arraignment has gone through.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

What do you mean? That no one believes charges of police misconduct unless they're on tape? Maybe so. And innocent people do get mistreated. But a hell of a lot less than we're told by some who have an agenda.

Really - what has damaged the quality of life in the US more, and what truly poses a quantifiable, articulable threat to our liberties and security? Is it really "police brutality" that endangers Americans?

Or is it the astronomical increase in violent and major crime since the 60's; the rise of an uncontrolled, hyper-violent criminal class which is almost completely unafraid of law enforcement; the almost non-existence of "true" prison sentences in state court systems ( e.g. a "10 year sentence" being eroded by all kinds of "good time" laws and administrative chicanery so that only 1 year is served - which works to release criminals far sooner, but in a way that keeps the deceived public in the dark.)

I'm voting "b".

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

Is it any wonder there are so many more criminals when we've created so many more crimes?

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

It is the laws they blindly and randomly enforce that is the danger. I cannot understand how a cop worth his ironed blue uniform will cuff and jail a person smoking a joint in a park, minding his own business. Or how an officer will force you to pour out any open container in public. We're all fucking babies that must be kept in the crib 24/7 according to this nation's idea of moral turpitude.

Oh and don't even think about questioning their decision, because "the law is the law". Such a fucking weak argument that every police officer chooses to follow. It's really sad and pathetic. What is even more pathetic is that people defend the notion that there is no such thing as a victimless crime.

Even if the illegal activity is consensual and unobtrusive, "the law is still the law". No matter how illogical and arcane it may be...

The boogieman negro?

...or because the prisons are overflowing with "criminals" charged with prostitution, drugs and/or some other bullshit law that shouldn't even be on the books?

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

They've got a job, and just like anyone with a job they need to fufill the requirements of that job. Especially since I imagine many cops were people with strong work ethics, who believe in getting the job done. I really don't blame cops for the stupidity that are our drug laws here in the U.S., I blame lawmakers.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

You're really buying into that fear mongering media, aren't ya.

If it's fear mongering that interests you. Check out what could happen to anyone in the US.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

Because its illegal. Plain and simple. The cop is not there to give his opinion on the law, he is there to enforce it.

I dont understand why half america cries like babies when we waterboard a known terrorist.

Because, again, illegal.

Yes, you are.

When I had to chew a 23 year old man out this morning (mind you, I am 21) because he has gone 5 days without shaving, its fucking stupid. When I have to humiliate some stupid FNG because he came to work this morning without shaving, its fucking stupid. When I got a different FNG driving a car around with a cracked radiator and he just keeps adding water, thinking its a perfect solution, its fucking stupid.

The world is full of fucking stupid people. All ages, races, sexes, everything from the very rich to the dirt poor.

Its their job. Do you even know what a police officer is? They ENFORCE the laws. They are not the senate. They are not a judge.

There is not such a thing. Give me any example you wish.

Tis not the cops' job to call it "illogical" or "arcane". Tis his job to enforce. If he dont like it, dont be a cop.

Give me one good as fuck reason why heroin should be legal. Prostitution? I can see making that legal, selling a service. But drugs are a different story.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

Do you know that, or are you just going on what you suspect? Because in England the police are largely empowered to arrest without being obligated to. Technically the police should arrest you every time you swear in public, do they do so? Like fuck they do. A system where you were obligated to arrest for every crime? I can't imagine that being practical.

Carrying a lobster over a certain length is illegal in some states. Where's the victim in that?

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

You're right. He's a mindless monument to the ignorance and lunacy that this nation holds dear to its heart.

I don't understand what that has to do with the conversation.



If an entire society is criminalized, what remains legal is irrelevant.


You only know me as Jeffro on a gaming forum. Which means you don't really know a goddamn thing about me. I could be the prime minister of Ireland for all you know...

So if you criminalize every conceivable activity, they will magically become intelligent and keep them in line?


They don't have to and if they had any sense, they'd not enforce such petty violations.


Drinking openly on the street, smoking a joint on the porch/park/outside, picking up a prostitute, etc.


All drugs are like herion and crack, right? :rolleyes:

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

Well thats england. We talking america.

Where is it illegal to do that?

Thats where tickets and citations come in.


Well some dumb laws like "no whale hunting in nevada" are no shit impossible laws and I would love to know why they are laws. But why are you carrying such a big lobster? Maybe it needs to be in water constantly over a certain size, so the victim is the lobster.

Enforcing laws is lunacy? Im pretty sure thats the centerpiece of our society.

You are not seeing a common viewpoint and I dont see a common viewpoint.

But you are not.

EDIT: Ment to say a grown ass 23 year old man went 5 days without SHOWERING.

Its conditioning. You tell them this is wrong and why and there are consequences for the stupidity. And it usually rectifies the situation. If it doesnt, you enact harsher punishments.

Only petty to you.

Minor getting ahold of alcohol by people over age providing it to them, drunk getting in a vehicle, getting belligerent and starting fights with people.

Seen all of this so I know what im talking about and agree with the laws.

Smoking a joint anywhere is illegal. The smoking isnt as bad, but the drug dealing causes more violence. Hell, i'd say legalize pot and tax the piss out of it.

Well the prostitute would be the "victim" then....

Enough of them are to make them illegal right alongside heroin and crack. So that tells you something.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

The lobster, he wants nothing to do with being carried.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

You know, up until recently I thought as you did, that rule of law was the most important thing is this country. Now that the government is so lacking in integrity that it is unwilling to prosecute the criminals who approved of and ordered the use of torture, I'm not so sure anymore.

If you're interested in controlling drug related crimes you should read up on the topic. The surprising facts are that strict penalities and enforcement of drug laws do not help. Decriminalization (different from legalization!) does.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/wtpapers/gr...whitepaper.pdf

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

Say what you will about the justice system, but if you don't enforce laws uniformly you open the door for a great deal of corruption, which is not to say there isn't already corruption. The job of the police is to enforce the law, not to make it, not to deliberate upon it, but to enforce it. We have a legislature and judiciary for a reason.

Work through the legislature to get laws changed, but for God's sake let the police do their job. Don't corrupt that institution further.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

I think you misunderstood me. I believe that rule of law should be the most important concern for a society, but the US government of today seems to feel that it is insignificant.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

"Eye for an eye" means revenge. I wanted to point out that the loss of self-control in certain situations is the result of an emotional response. It doesn't justify a brutal reaction, it only explains it. And some persons are more prone to it than others, of course.

I completely agree.

Sure. In Germany we have a saying: "The first weapon of a police officer is his word."

Nevertheless, some people (like the drunken bugger I mentioned before who had perpetually terrorised his ex-wife and her family and destroyed the furnishing of a pub) refuse a peaceful negotiation and actually seek trouble. Fortunately, this guy received a one-year sentence without parole.

I might be wrong here, but from my experience people just tend to show their real face when drunk. That doesn't mean that anyone who becomes aggressive after a few beers is a criminal, just that this person takes better control of his/her aggressiveness in a sober state.

I had him handcuffed already when he spat in my face. Of course, it was disgusting. However, I had no legal reason to punch him in his face. Nevertheless, although I wanted to, I didn't punch him. But I wasn't far away from doing it.

On the other hand, I am not working in the street anymore and therefore I am glad that I don't have to deal with this kind of white trash on the "front line of crime" any longer.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

I think the first clip was excessive force. The suspect did run but made no effort to defend himself from the cop when the cop approached him.

I agree on the second one. Why in the hell would Police pull over a speeding ambulance. Its kind of obvious they were carrying people. Found this on the net.

State Police Pull Over Ambulance Going to Hospital - Expanton

The cops probably did not arrest the EMT due to a OK law that would have led to some confusion on who exactly would be going to jail.

Cant taser the guy in the last video due to lawsuits and liberal outcry that tasers are cruel and inhumane. If you get close enough to Pepper sray him then you run risk of being stabbed or slashed and possibly killed. This is a case where the net gun would have been handy.

YouTube - net gun(http://www.taiwan-di.com)

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

All very well, but that doesn't answer my question.

England certainly, I don’t know about the ‘States. Although I seem to remember a senator in Sou Carolina was trying to get it made illegal there so *shrug* whatever.

While better than an arrest it doesn't make it a good idea. If you write a ticket for everyone who speeds you'll end up screwing over a lot of people who were doing the only safe speed on that section of road and using up a lot of police time. You won't have made society any safer for it.

Doesn't matter if the lobster is alive or dead, doesn't matter whether it's in water or not. You're just not allowed to have it.

The centrepiece of society is selectively enforcing the law. The people at the top issue these bullshit decrees and then you take them and run them through a fine filter of common sense interpretation before you go out and do anything with them. If you didn't nothing would ever get done.

Systems have to have that wiggle room; otherwise some moron who's never done anything relating to the job gets elected into office and makes some uninformed decision to fuck it up for everyone else.

Oh no, what a nightmare.

But, ironically, only because it's illegal.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

That reveals some more info, but it still doesn't sound like the ambulance tried to block (or refuse to yield) the trooper's car. Unless it took several minutes for the car to take over the ambulance and/or other clear signs that the ambulance refused to yield.

When do emergency vehicles get right of way? Do lights alone grant them that right?

If not, then the amulance can't have refused to yield to begin with. Perhaps it could be givena ticket if (again basing this on Dutch traffic laws) the ambulance was "unneccesarily" driving on the left (if 2 or more lanes go in the same direction like on a highway, you are supposed to keep right so that other traffic can overtake. if you keep left without good reason you can be fined).

I wonder if the ambulance personell could have played dickedhead back: ea after saying they can sort this out at the hospital, say they need to go to the hospital right now (implying that though it's not a straight emergency speed is still of the essence), get back in the car and drive off. I suppose they couldn't get away with turning their own lights&sirene (unauthoritised use of equipement?).

That or an police dog... if the guy kept going in circles they could have waited for a K9 (or the net gun) to arrive. And only fall back on the car knockdown if the situation seems to spin out of control (ea the guy is making a run for it in the general direction of people).

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

I think the German police should be allowed to use tazers, too. The net gun would be an interesting alternative.

In certain situations where an armed suspect is not directly threatening other people the use of pepper spray or a tonfa/baton will not be safe enough for the police officers involved to get a dangerous person down and shooting the suspect will not be appropriate.

The use of police dogs is fine as long as you have instant access to them. But most of the time you don't have a colleague with a police protection dog at your side.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

Taser, not tazer.

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

Which was what again, forgot, too lazy to look.


Yea I remember that but you can swear all you want. After a point you may get cited for indecency if you are shouting fuck infront of a preschool, but otherwise, say whatever.


So where is the limit? If the speed limit is technically 65 mph but everyone is doing 75, that seems to be generally accepted here in Cali. Around 10 mph faster than the average flow is where you get pulled over. 15-20 over will probably land you a ticket.



Doesn't matter if the lobster is alive or dead, doesn't matter whether it's in water or not. You're just not allowed to have it.



The centrepiece of society is selectively enforcing the law. The people at the top issue these bullshit decrees and then you take them and run them through a fine filter of common sense interpretation before you go out and do anything with them. If you didn't nothing would ever get done.

Systems have to have that wiggle room; otherwise some moron who's never done anything relating to the job gets elected into office and makes some uninformed decision to fuck it up for everyone else.



Oh no, what a nightmare.



But, ironically, only because it's illegal.[/QUOTE]

Re: More police tomfoolery in the land of the free.
 

Which was what again, forgot, too lazy to look.


Yea I remember that but you can swear all you want. After a point you may get cited for indecency if you are shouting fuck infront of a preschool, but otherwise, say whatever.


So where is the limit? If the speed limit is technically 65 mph but everyone is doing 75, that seems to be generally accepted here in Cali. Around 10 mph faster than the average flow is where you get pulled over. 15-20 over will probably land you a ticket.


Well if its alive it could be construed as kidnapping. Dead, it could be necrophealic beastality.


Ok so in practical application of law enforcement, thats one thing. Limit of travel is 65 but everyone is doing 75. A single man is smoking an illegal substance in full public view.

The smoking man...why does he not go inside and smoke? He prolly wouldnt be bothered then, but also, not everyone is doing it.

There is wiggle room. Lots of it. A 40 year old male teacher grabs a 16 year olds tit and he gets 20 years. A 35 year old female teacher fucks a 15 year old male student for 4 years and she gets probation.


When we run about 5 miles a day and sweat a crapload with our working conditions its pretty damn disgusting.