Video: Bro tased
posted at 9:31 pm on November 21, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Starts slow but the initial demand for license and registration contains just enough ‘tude to make it worth watching in full. If you can’t be bothered, skip ahead to 2:00 or (-8:00 if you’re counting down) and see what happens when electricity is introduced into the mix of an ornery cop, a driver who doesn’t take him seriously, and his pregnant wife. The investigation’s already begun:
The Utah Highway Patrol has a nine-page policy on Taser use, including in instances where “a subject is threatening himself, an officer or another person with physical force, and when other means of controlling the subject are unreasonable or could cause injury to the officer, the subject or others,” Nigbur said.
Any threat of injury to the officer here?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 Next »
Put the cough medicine down and back away slowly or I’ll tazer you!
peacenprosperity on November 22, 2007 at 1:19 AM
Isn’t that like the old saying about Stalin and the young boy with the lemon-aide stand? Stalin did not kill him, thus proving his benevolence?
What if the batteries in the cop’s taser were dead? What would he have done then? WHY THE HELL WAS HE EVEN POINTING A TASER AT THIS GUY???
For all of you in the “cops can do no wrong” crowd…Google the story about the narcotics officer in Schenectady, NY that STOLE EVIDENCE from the lock up. HE TOOK CRACK COCAINE because…………HE IS A CRACK HEAD. And all of the other cops he worked with knew he was a crack head and NOT ONE OF THEM broke the code of silence. So a crack dealer walks due to lack of evidence, crack head cop gets treatment(fired from the force too) but all his GOOD COP buddies skate.
Cop pulls me over it’s “Yes Sir, No Sir, on the way I go Sir”. Show me where it is THE LAW that I have to kiss his back side. Show me THE LAW that says I am not allowed to question his judgement. Show me THE LAW that says I am not allowed to ask WHY I am being ticketed. So far all of you “OBEY” posters have offered nothing but insult and in a few instances the ultimate “OR ELSE”.
We are not talking about ALL cops here. JUST this one particular PUNK COP.
This guy did not try to fight with the cop, he did not pull a weapon AND HE DID NOT TRY TO RUN. He asked the PUNK a question and the PUNK decided that he was ABOVE questioning and tased the guy. YAY!!!!! I FEEL SO MUCH SAFER SINCE BARNEY GOT A TASER!!!!!
One cop…..not ALL cops. See? Not attacking “the men and women that protect my neighborhood”. Not throwing the baby out with the bath water.
BTW, Bomb dude was the first call people that did not agree with him “stupid”.
Yay for Bomb dude!!! Moveon has a position open for you.
Talon on November 22, 2007 at 1:19 AM
“Laws are stupid”?
Yeah, no sense in having laws and such.
Really, is this really your argument? We should question why we have laws that some people refuse to obey?
Bomb Doctor on November 22, 2007 at 1:21 AM
Aren’t you supposed to obey the cops? That cop was a jerk, the driver screwed up by not obeying. They hit you with batons, not tasers, in the city when you don’t follow orders.
Kevin M on November 22, 2007 at 1:22 AM
The sad thing is if this guy would have not listened to the cop and walked back to his car grabbed a gun and shot the cop we would not be having this discussion..it would just be another story of a cop getting killed on the 11 o’clock news…I still stand with the cop.
EnochCain on November 22, 2007 at 1:22 AM
Wow… 2 comments from 300.
I love the passion on both sides, but if you’re not a cop, it can never be fully appreciated what happened and why. More importantly, it cannot be fully appreciated that the Trooper, while not perfect and certainly no robo-cop, should not only not be disciplined, he should be exonerated, but won’t be because the outcry of emotion over-rides too many peoples common sense… if they have any to be over-ridden.
Anyway, trying to open eyes and help some understand is a fruitless endeavor on teh interweb. G’nite.
Some men you just can’t reach. So you get what we had here, which is the way he wants it… well, he gets it. I don’t like it anymore than you men.
SilverStar830 on November 22, 2007 at 1:23 AM
Relax Dr., a health debate is what makes this country of laws great.
Even when they’re not always enforced.
Too err is human…., and this cop err’ed big time.
Kini on November 22, 2007 at 1:23 AM
MB4 on November 22, 2007 at 1:24 AM
well said tommylotto :)
ThackerAgency on November 22, 2007 at 1:26 AM
If the cop had not told the guy to get out of the car, the situation would not have been out of control. If the cop had told the guy how fast he was going, the guy would likely have complied.
This was a case of miscommunication and the cop only communicated with his taser. The guy got out of the car (only when the cop asked him to) to see the speed limit sign. The cop told him to get out of the car to be arrested.
Could the cop have said, ‘If you don’t sign this you will be under arrest’ at some point before saying ‘get out of the car’ . . . bang tased.
This cop put himself in a dangerous situation. The guy was trying to calm the cop down because he didn’t want his wife to get tased too. Anytime the cop needs to be calmed down, something is wrong.
ThackerAgency on November 22, 2007 at 1:30 AM
Or the guy could have been real polite to the cop, including signing the ticket, and then walked back to his car and shot the cop with a gun that his pregnant wife had up her dress. The cop should have tased them all. He had no choice if he wanted to make it home to his dog.
MB4 on November 22, 2007 at 1:30 AM
Heh.
EnochCain on November 22, 2007 at 1:31 AM
HOOORAY!!! The moral authority card has FINALLY been played!!! Not a cop = too ignorant to comment.
(Technically, Bomb Doctor already hinted at this earlier)
The Borg are real! “YOU WILL BE ASSIMILATED…..RESISTANCE IS FUTILE”
Fine, young, sheep.
What if Hillary runs those cops? What if those cops decide that your “Right to keep and bare arms” is wrong? (Believe me, I know PLENTY that think private gun ownership is a BAD thing) What if a cop decides that you’re standing too long on a sidewalk?
OBEY!!!!!!
Like a good servant. Obey.
Talon on November 22, 2007 at 1:36 AM
The officer can not do anything wrong. If the cop walked up and shot the speeder, instead of asking for registration, I am sure someone here would say the speeder should just obey the speed limit.
infidel on November 22, 2007 at 1:40 AM
Regardless the thing will be handled and honestly I think the cop will end up losing his job whether he deserves to or not. I also think if the guy would have just signed the ticket none of it would have ever happened in the first place and as far as calming the cop down goes I don’t think walking away from him back toward your car when you are being ordered is not the smartest way to handle it.
EnochCain on November 22, 2007 at 1:41 AM
ordered to stop that is.
EnochCain on November 22, 2007 at 1:42 AM
You will all be exterminated! Obey me! OBEY!
- The Emperor Dalek
MB4 on November 22, 2007 at 1:42 AM
Can I make a citizen’s arrest? Both should go to jail…..
ritethinker on November 22, 2007 at 1:45 AM
I love a good Star Trek Quote to cap the night.
Now I look forward to a good tryptophan overdose.
Kini on November 22, 2007 at 1:45 AM
I don’t doubt this is true of driving on an expired license… but I doubt it on speeding tickets, etc. Traffic violations, not misdemeanors.
Your comment doesn’t make sense to me, because my name is put in bold in the middle of an excerpt that didn’t come from me. Care to clarify?
RightWinged on November 22, 2007 at 1:46 AM
Wow, I finally see we have some really intelligent people hanging around here, and the kind that think the cop was wrong! Are you folks 6 years old? I’ll bet you’re liberals also.
Grow up before it’s too late. With your attitudes you’ll be the next ones tazed…
stacman on November 22, 2007 at 1:51 AM
Dont taze me bro!
infidel on November 22, 2007 at 1:52 AM
I never even carry weapons. If people see you mean them no harm, they never hurt you. Nine times out of ten.
- The Doctor
MB4 on November 22, 2007 at 1:54 AM
I kept trying to fix that in the “preview” button, but nothing worked. For some reaon your quote was included in with mine even though mine was outside the “block quote”
El Guapo on November 22, 2007 at 1:59 AM
I was picking up my girlfriend who was working at Taste of Chicago in Grant Park. (Ironically not to far from the area of some of the 1968 riots.) The cops had formed a line to clear the area. When I got to the line they were about 50 feet past the booth where my girlfriend was working. I politely asked one of the officers if I could just go past them and get my girlfriend. He told me to wait. I waited for 10 minutes when I saw a Sargent. I approached him and asked him if I could go through and he said no and leave or I would be arrested.
I said, “but she is just right over there,” he yelled at me to leave and then I looked at his badge and he grabbed me by the back of my neck and started screaming in my face. In no time I had about a dozen officers surround me but I was putting up no resistence and they Sargent let me go and walked off. My girlfriend had heard the commotion and ran over to me and I said we must get out of there now. None of the cops knew what to do so we just walked away.
When we were almost 1/3 of mile away a young patrolman ran up to me and told me I shouldn’t have talked back to the Sargent. I told him that the Sargent should not have lost his cool. Then he asked me what I planned to do. I said nothing. I respect the police and I know they have a tough job but cops who lose their cool and abuse citizens just make every cops job more difficult.
The kid in this video was being a jerk but was not a threat. I did not feel for one second that he was a threat to the cop.
Bill C on November 22, 2007 at 2:03 AM
Talon It is not wise or pot to group eveyone into one group.
That is stereotyping. And stereotyping is wrong!
El Guapo on November 22, 2007 at 2:04 AM
Resistance is inadvisable.
- Styggron
MB4 on November 22, 2007 at 2:05 AM
Yeah, but I still think you’re missing something… I don’t believe anything you quoted came from me… I believe you were quoting someone else… Go back and check, but I’m pretty sure that’s where the confusion lies.
RightWinged on November 22, 2007 at 2:05 AM
I predict, if an honest judge takes up this case, the driver’s lawsuit will be dismissed as not a violationa of any civil rights and therefore does not warrant any $$ compensation because he did argue and resist the officer the entire time. But The judge should at the same time discipline the officer with improper escalation of force/judgement. He could have taken a few more “steps” before telling the driver to step out of the car.
El Guapo on November 22, 2007 at 2:08 AM
This Cop created a potentially dangerous situation by operating on ego rules of engagement from the get go.
Yes the driver was jerk but if the Cop had done his job and put the speed the guy was going on the ticket to begin with the driver probably would have signed it and gone on.
Then the Cop instead of giving the guy his copy of the unsigned ticket (the Cops signature should have been on it) and gone on he again let his ego run up the tension level by arresting the guy to teach him a lesson.
I was wondering when the Cop was going to call the guy, boy.
The driver was told to get out of the car when the Cop could have given him the ticket and told him to call the court.
The Cop gave the driver good reasons to question what was happening and then Tazed the guy when his ego demanded an escalation and subservience from a guy he could have let go.
Then to top it off the Cop searched the vehicle without permission or reasonable cause to do so.
Then he told the backup officer a different story than what actually happened, did he think the dash cam wasn’t on?
This is where two jerks met, one of them though had the responsibility to be professional and he used a Tazer instead.
I have all the respect in the world for just how difficult a job law enforcement is.
This Cop made the job much harder and more dangerous.
Egos are expensive, what’s the price going to be for this guy’s?
Speakup on November 22, 2007 at 2:09 AM
I worked in traffic court for 8 years. As I said. Here, meaning where I live.. ALL lesser traffic tickets are misdemeanors. Speeding, ran stop signs etc.. ALL. There were differing classes.. A DUI is a bigger offense than a ran stop sign but it is still a misdemeanor in a different class and it carries a bigger punishment than the ran stop sign but it is still a misdemeanor no matter what. Let me say again..here, where I live, ALL traffic tickets are misdemeanors. If I need to clarify it for you any more.. please let me know.
GoodBoy on November 22, 2007 at 2:12 AM
That cop is a jerk. He pulled out a less than lethal weapon becuase the guy was smiling at him and questioning his authority. I would flinch and retreat too if you pulled a weapon at me. The cop was mad that the guy had a hottie in the car. Notice how he leans in the passenger side to soothe her nerves. I wonder if he carressed her leg, no doubt trying to score points.
I can see using a less than lethal weapon if the guy poses a threat, but laughing at an idiot is not a crime. Ruin a guy’s life because your got your feelings hurt is not a reasonable threat. This is why I say “yes sir/ no sir”, becuase these kind of cops feel that they can do anything they want to anybody they want. Also, this is why I never skip jury duty.
m1a1usmc on November 22, 2007 at 2:12 AM
RightWinged can you reference it? i am trying ot find it but my *ctl-F* search funsction jsut isnt finding it. Unles I am overloking it.
I am not seeing that post.
El Guapo on November 22, 2007 at 2:14 AM
Speakup In just about every state, searching a vehicle and searching a house or office are not necessarily covered by the same “warrant” definitiions. Sometimes, a driver acting noncompliant or “other than normal” can warrant a vehicle search. Just as looking in and happening to see a baggie of powder, or in this case, even an arrest of any charge can justify a legal search. Depending on the state.
El Guapo on November 22, 2007 at 2:19 AM
Absolutely spot on!
Cop goes through specific training when dealing with the public and knowing how the public has a knee jerk reaction to being pulled over.
They go through physiological training on this.
This is pure and simple, ego, fueled by adrenalin. And Wrong.
Kini on November 22, 2007 at 2:22 AM
Any one commenting on this link employed as a law enforcement officer?
Well I am and let me take a quick moment to comment.
The officer was incorrect to tazer this individual.
The individual was refusing to sign the citation (which the opportunity to do so is in lieu of arrest. YES you can be arrested for failing to sign a misdemeanor traffic citation. The citation is offered to violators as a written promise to appear in court to answer the CRIME of breaking traffic laws. Yes, breaking traffic laws is a violation of the law, and thus….a crime! If you fail to sign or refuse to sign, unless you are under a certain age, you provide the officer no choice but to place you under physical arrest. It’s up to the officer once someone refuses to sign the citation WHEN this is going to take place. A ‘no, I won’t sign’ is enough if the officer decides that’s enough. Sorry folks, make sure you either take the citation to court or pay the fine, and SIGN the citation. Otherwise you will spend some time behind bars.) and the officer told, not asked him to exit the vehicle. This is a lawful order by a police officer that cannot be refused, regardless of whether or not the individual ‘decides’ he being treated fairly. Unfortunately you must comply with what a police officer orders you to do at the time of the incident. If there is a problem with what that officer orders you to do, that must be addressed at a later time via a person’s right to complain to a supervisor, court, etc. When this guy exited the vehicle the officer made several safety errors (ie turning his back on the subject, duhhhhhh! Guy has gun, Guy gets out, Guy shoots cop in the back, not good.)then ordered the subject to place his hands behind his back. The subject both asked why and refused. Again, ya gotta just do it. A cop orders you to place your hands behind your back, do it. There’s a pretty good chance he or she either wishes to search you, or arrest you. If you fail to comply, you face a resisting charge, and like this guy, a tazer.
Was this officer a little fast on the trigger in tazing this guy? Yes. I think so. A calm answer to his question would have probably worked better and some time explaining that the man had the right to appeal the citation in court may have resolved the issue without the need for the tazer.
However, in the officer’s defense, he was A. Alone. B. Back up was several minutes away. C. Had ordered the individual to comply with placing his hands behind his back and the subject refused. D. Had made up his mind that he was going to arrest this guy, thus the individual has no choice but to comply, and he told the man this, which removes any excuse the man has for failing to comply. And E. May have felt from past experience that a knock down drag out fight by himself with a guy on the side of a busy highway was not something he desired to do nor safe for the individual or his wife. Cops do DIE when people refuse to comply.
So, please…follow orders from police and save yourself the bother of something like this happening when an officer may or may not be having a bad day and is a little fast to make a decision to go to more ‘painful’ methods of compliance. You must sign the citation or you go to jail. You must follow an officers orders, and no, sorry, you don’t get to argue your case with an officer when the orders start flying. It just makes it harder for you.
Thats what your day in court is for.
My verdict, this guy gets a repremand for improper use of force because he didn’t have enough of a presented threat to himself at the point the subject simply refused to place his hands behind his back.
Had it continued and the guy got more confrontational, you bet. Tazing the guy is entirely lawful at that point.
Thanks all. God Bless and Happy Thanksgiving
russ2553 on November 22, 2007 at 2:23 AM
I’m sorry, but that jerk deserved to be tased. I grew up in a house that still respected authority and he could have easily solved this in court or if he had been cooperative then the officer may have been willing to listen.
And Allah, the guy was fumbling with his pocket – repeatedly. Check the video again.
He points with his unnatural arm, the one that would hide/cover what he was doing with the one in the pocket and continues to fumble with whatever he had there. He could have been getting a weapon. His phone should have been in the clip on his hip, or is that a leatherman?
Here is how I was raised to act, you put your hands on the steering wheel as soon as you pull over, turn off the car and don’t move until requested to do so. Then you cooperate with the officer and follow all legal instructions.
I agree with ColdBore76
LifeTrek on November 22, 2007 at 2:26 AM
Bottom line – neither jerk should be a cop.
MB4 on November 22, 2007 at 2:27 AM
russ2553 ALmost like seeing it debated on TV.
Good post. I think I covered those same points in my dozen or so posts, the latter changing to that the officer did improperly jump the gun in orderingthe friver out of the car and using hte taser. A typical rookie mistake I see in the military also.
Rigthwinged I can’t find that post. Sorry for the confusion.
El Guapo on November 22, 2007 at 2:31 AM
I was taught that too! Always keep your hands where the office can see them, until told to do so!
They dont even teach kids how to correct a skid anymore in most places, let alone the rules of a 4 way stop sign.
El Guapo on November 22, 2007 at 2:36 AM
Authoritarian morons in this thread should drive by Rome, Ohio every once in a while.
Not every cop is a good cop. Bout time you opened your eyes and saw that.
triple on November 22, 2007 at 2:38 AM
sorry thats “new rome”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Rome,_Ohio
triple on November 22, 2007 at 2:40 AM
I concede. The officer overreacted a bit. But the driver provoked it by being a tool and arguing and then resisting arrest. If he had just obeyed, he would have never had to step out of his global warming SUV in the first place.
Nice debate everyone, except for the guy with the death threat to police officers. Happy Thanksgiving.
El Guapo on November 22, 2007 at 2:41 AM
I grew up near Smithville Ohio, where going 1 MPH over the limit often got you a ticket. Finaly after years of complaining by many people, those officers were corrected. Yes there are arrogant and poor cops. My point? Resisting arrrest is NOT the way to go in contesting your citation.
It will only justify, in the officer’s eyes, the escalation of force. And we all know what happens then.
El Guapo on November 22, 2007 at 2:47 AM
He was right about the citation, too. Look at the first 10 seconds or so of the video. The cop pulls right up to the sign, stops, and then pulls over the guy.
All set, right? Open and shut? No, because the stupid cop was blocking the driver’s view of the sign. That guy is looking at a the back of a cop car, with the speed limit posted behind it. No way he could know.
triple on November 22, 2007 at 2:48 AM
Agreed, this is true.
Incidents like this do not help cops public image. This officer put himself and the driver at great risk and could have handled the incident better.
Cops work for the public, they are not Judge Dredge.
Probably and most likely after the belligerent drivers attitude PO’ed the cop.
First rule, don’t get angry.
Added aggravation, but not foremost on his mind I suspect.
However, if so, a lesson not learned very well.
Kini on November 22, 2007 at 2:52 AM
That doesn’t mean WE can’t call them bad cops. The taser guy can’t. I sure as hell can hold them accountable for their actions, however.
triple on November 22, 2007 at 2:56 AM
You explained yourself very well. Too bad the cop never even attempted to explain himself. The kid must sign or be arrested. It is very simple. So why didn’t the cop tell the kid that? Why not tell the kid, “sign or be arrested”? Why not tell the kid that he’s arrested? The cop just started issuing to the kid what the kid thinks are irrational orders.
Everyone agrees the kid acted foolishly, but the cop’s conduct was foolish, negligent and possibly criminal.
tommylotto on November 22, 2007 at 3:06 AM
Lessee…putting him under arrest for not signing a ticket? BZZZ.
Tasering a traffic citation with no reasonable cause to believe any other crime was being committed? BZZZ.
Tasering someone backing away very slowly? BZZZ.
Not reading Miranda rights? BZZZ.
Searching the vehicle without consent of the owner? BZZZ.
I hope he ends up working at a bowling alley. See ya. The reputation of the police only suffers as long as he is one of their number.
MadisonConservative on November 22, 2007 at 3:06 AM
I wish we could place bets on whether the SUSPECT is a Republican or Democrat… I could make a killin’
Rugged Individual on November 22, 2007 at 3:17 AM
I’m not a criminal lawyer, but I’m pretty sure the cop can do a search of the interior of your car once he places you under arrest. He would need a warrant to get into a trunk however.
So, the cop was okay on the search. That shouldn’t save his job though. He should be an unarmed security guard by Christmas.
tommylotto on November 22, 2007 at 3:20 AM
Let’s place the cop and go double or nothing.
Kini on November 22, 2007 at 3:21 AM
The driver was clearly an idiot about matters, but idiocy on one end is no excuse for brutality on the other. The officer had to have a hyperactive imagination to think that this guy was “jumping around” or that his walking beside his vehicle presented any more of a risk that sitting in or standing by the vehicle. True, the driver did not obey the officer on every point, he argued to the officer then rather than to a judge later, and he seemed to have a TV-drama view of his rights. (If you ask to be read your rights, that implies you already know them. And you don’t need to be read them anyway, unless you’re interrogated. In this case, the officer didn’t want an interrogation; he wanted the opposite: the guy to shut up.) The driver was stupid. He was ignorant. He was not nice. He was also a victim of improper use of force.
Andrew Meyer on the other hand….
calbear on November 22, 2007 at 3:23 AM
This guy must be drunk, or really mental. Cop should have breath-alyzered him first. Does that pick up the wacky weed?
I just love the way he keeps whining. Something was wrong with him. Driving while white.
Agrippa2k on November 22, 2007 at 3:30 AM
1. The suspect’s car showed backup lights, indicating the vehicle was in reverse and the keys were in the ignition. The vehicle is a deadly weapon. The driver repeatedly engaged the transmission to reverse, a repeated threat to the police. Do you want to risk getting run over?
2. The events took place on a busy highway. The oncoming traffic represented a sequence of readily available improvised weapons. All the non-compliant suspect had to do was throw the police officer in front of an oncoming vehicle.
There were multiple and ongoing threats. The suspect was non-compliant when a weapon was pointed at him. He is still alive and so is the officer. This was a good use of force u the presence or threat of injury.
Patrick_Lasswell on November 22, 2007 at 3:33 AM
I just watched the video again, and that cop was definitely on a power trip.
The kid said he wanted to show the cop the speed limit sign the cop tells him no, he has to sign the ticket. The kid refuses, so the cop tells him to get out of the car.
This is where the cop really screwed up. He made no mention of placing the kid under arrest. He knew the kid wanted to get out of the car and show him the sign, and he tells the kid to get out of the car without saying why. Obviously the kid thought they were going to see the sign. He starts walking back, pointing off at the sign, talking about the sign, and the cop starts yelling at him to put his hands behind his back. This makes the kid look at the cop and at that point realizes there’s a gun in his face. He jumps back, as most anyone would do, and then starts asking the cop “what the heck is wrong with you?”. At this point the kid has no idea what’s going on, and he thinks he’s dealing with a completely irrational person with a gun, so he does the stupid thing and fails to comply. Then gets tazed. Cop’s fault the situation got out of control, hands down.
If the cop was being rational, why’d he point the tazer in the guys face the second he stepped out of the car? He was doing what the cop asked him to do.
Why’d he feel the need to lie to the other cop if he didn’t think he did anything wrong? Remember, he told the other cop he pulled the tazer after he had told the kid to put his hands behind his back several times. Flat out bold faced lie.
As for the reverse lights people keep mentioning; Give me a break. When you shift from drive to park with an automatic transmission, it goes through reverse on the way.
frost on November 22, 2007 at 3:59 AM
Ever notice how wherever he goes people are trying to kill him?
- The Cat
MirCat on November 22, 2007 at 4:15 AM
A clear case of police brutality and/or overreaction.
The cop had no probable cause to tase the man, he did not appear to be a threat to himself or the officer.
The driver’s level of belligerance was verbally argumenative, not physically threatening. It appears that the only “crime” (besides speeding) the driver committed was not “jumping” fast enough to the cop’s orders.
Given all that, the wise thing for the driver to have done is simply sign the ticket. In some states, signing the ticket is only acknowledgement that you were cited, not an admission of guilt. This may not be the case elsewhere. Had he had a clue, his day might not have been ruined.
The officer was, IMHO, remiss in not telling the driver that his signature in no way conceded guilt but was a receipt that he had been cited. Rather, he simply ordered the man to sign it, and, BTW, don’t ask any questions. In not explaining the procedure, the officer’s behavior was the proximate cause of everything that followed.
To be fair, the driver was being a bit of an ass himself. While he had a right to know the specifics of the charge (i.e., driving xx mph in a 40 zone) and while the officer wasn’t not forthcomming with it, the driver raised the level of tension for the officer by arguing. Frankly, a calm and civil demeanor would avoided the arrest and may have saved him from the ticket, with a warning issued instead. However, I saw ZERO threat of violence in the man. I saw a driver who was pissed at getting a ticket that he didn’t believe he deserved and who was arguing about the specifics of the case.
I know of no provision in the Constitution that criminalizes simple arguing with a police officer over the issuing a speeding ticket.
Rather than simply explain to the driver what signing the ticket actually meant, the officer proceded to immediately order him out of the car and when the driver didn’t “jump” fast enough, pulled the taser and zapped him. Not responding fast enough to a police officer’s orders quickly enugh ought not be grounds to be subjected to 50,000 volts, any more than it would be grounds for the officer to beat him with his billy club or shoot him with his pistol.
To be fair to the officer, I did not seem him use any tricks to incite the driver’s reaction. In other words, the cop wasn’t trying to set the driver up for a zapping or beating.
georgej on November 22, 2007 at 4:16 AM
Just watched again. The officer was trying to answer the guy’s questions about how fast and where the speed limit signs were. Note that the sign in the vid wasn’t the first one. The cop told him there was one a half a mile back. Also the first thing out of the driver was “I was going a kinda fast.”
- The Cat
MirCat on November 22, 2007 at 4:24 AM
At the point the officer first pulls his taser, the suspect is walking around with one hand in his pocket. At one point he pulls his hand out, then puts it back in the pocket. From what I could see, there appeared to be something in that hand, what I couldn’t tell. Maybe nothing, maybe a knife. At that point the officer WAS justified in tasing him. Personally, I would have drawn my sidearm. Bottom line, the driver escalated the situation unnecessarily. He could have simply signed the ticket (which I believe in just about all jurisdictions clearly states signing is NOT an admission of guilt) then fought the ticket in court. That IS why we have judges after all.
It takes the same amount of time to strike someone with a knife as it does to throw a punch. Often, officers who are stabbed/sliced did not see the knife until after the fight. It also takes apx. 1.4 seconds for the average person to cover 30 feet and strike a killing blow with a hand held weapon. These two appeared to be 6 feet apart. If you don’t want to get pulled over, obey the traffic laws. If you don’t want to get tased, obey the cop. If you think he’s wrong, you do NOT argue with him. Get his badge # and complain to his supervisor. D’uh.
wolfva on November 22, 2007 at 4:29 AM
– The cop did deescalate the situation through the use of non-lethal force without anyone being injured.
– Someone asked how the video ended up on YouTube, the driver put it there after requesting it from the police. (In the Fox News Story) The YouTube page is also asking people to call and complain.
– Many people have an irrational reaction when they witness tazing, however these procedures are put in place and used because they reduce the risk to both the individual and the officer. Had the officer chosen to use pepper spray and the guy staggered into traffic it would have been tragic but that didn’t happen because of the procedures that are in place.
It may look cruel to all of us, and that is probably what this guy is hoping for by putting up the video, he wants people to call and complain, but it may have saved his life.
It is somewhat stunning that at some point in the past it became acceptable to argue with police and assume that they are “stormtroopers”. In addition years of lawsuits and numerous cases of people flaunting the law have virtually eliminated the ability of officers/courts/schools to grant commonsense requests for exceptions to anything.
DKK
LifeTrek on November 22, 2007 at 4:30 AM
wolfva, if you look closely you can see that he is putting his wallet into his front pocket – I think, but I had to look 3 or 4 times. I don’t think the officer could have known this and when he keeps fidgeting with it is when it became dangerous.
DKK
LifeTrek on November 22, 2007 at 4:33 AM
Exactly. A cop tells you to turn around and put your hands behind your back, and instead you walk in the other direction and start unbuttoning your pocket? How stupid.
Doing EXACTLY what the cop tells you is the first thing I taught my son when he was learning to drive. We even practiced traffic stops so that, hopefully, he won’t make a stupid move that can get misinterpreted if he ever gets stopped.
Bad Penny on November 22, 2007 at 4:37 AM
In this state, if you don’t know what the speed limit is you are to assume it is a certain speed depending on what kind of road you are on..residential street is one speed and a highway is a different speed, blah blah blah.. All of that info and the assumed speed limits are in our States drivers handbook to get your license. Not sure if other states have that law.
GoodBoy on November 22, 2007 at 4:46 AM
On the YouTube page they keep talking about excessive force, but I just don’t see that. He didn’t beat or kick the guy when he was down, he didn’t reload his tazer and shoot again and again, over and over, he didn’t even sit on him and ask him to say uncle.
Like I said above there seems to be an almost irrational over reaction to tazering but it is by far the best, least excessive alternative under the circumstances.
DKK
LifeTrek on November 22, 2007 at 4:46 AM
I’m thinking what the driver was really ticked about was not the ticket but where the cop stuck a lightbulb in the guys mouth on the ride back, calling him “Uncle Fester” and tweaking his nipple to make the bulb light up.
GoodBoy on November 22, 2007 at 4:49 AM
The cop was wrong. He told the guy to turn around when he was facing two different directions and tased the guy hastily. The citizen remained calm and collected through it all while the cop did not.
ZRyan on November 22, 2007 at 5:02 AM
So…when we are pulled over we are to assume the fetal position or risk injury or death by hair trigger paramilitary? The whole “Cop Safety” manipulation strikes me as being the same as the “Think of the Children” manipulation. If you don’t roll over then you hate cops or something. Look 99.8 percent of us are NOT dangerous thugs. Just Mom and Dad on the way home. I have never been mugged but I have had a cop point a gun at me. I have no criminal record, hell I don’t have a traffic ticket and at this point in my life cops have placed me in the most danger than anyone. I get pulled over and if I move the wrong way I risk being shot? This is what police boosters advise in these comments? This is Liberty? Cops have unique powers and so have unique responsibilities. They must adhere to rigid standards. Higher standards than you and I. The guy was a dick but a tazer should be the LAST resort before lethal action. If I fail to signal, my life should not be in danger from those who volunteer, are accepted, earn the right, and are charged to “Protect and Serve”. EVEN IF I AM AN ASSHOLE!
ronsfi on November 22, 2007 at 5:56 AM
Two a$$holes meet face to face. The civilian got tased, justice would be served if the cop was also.
And my cousin is a detective in Louisiana. I will forward this link to him for a semi-official response.
Texas Nick 77 on November 22, 2007 at 6:03 AM
All of that said,(what you said) a law enforcement officer who was actually carrying a set of Malkins would have found one of many available ways to maintain control of the situation without resorting to this POS’s resorting to the easiest way available to him.
What a tool.
( SS830, I respect and admire most law enforcement officers, but that doesn’t mean that I give a green light to anything and everything done in the name of the law.)
The vast majority of cops deserve to be respected. This guy isn’t one of them.
Now I understand your handle, though. (You can trust your car to the man who wears the star).
Yeah, right.
hillbillyjim on November 22, 2007 at 6:19 AM
A video where both the subjects are wrong, and an argument about who was more wrong.
Nice.
By default, the person ‘in charge’ is more wrong.
Yep the jackass in the SUV is a total buffoon for trying to be Perry Mason beside a busy highway. HOWEVER, the responsibility for the situation arising at all is the cop’s. The cop decided, after actually seeing that he’d pulled over doofus doughboy and his pregnant significant other to escalate, in a fairly hazardous location, for all involved, doofus doughboy’s petulant refusal to scribble on some paperwork. Despite the visual and audio record of the entire event being made from his car and on person microphone.
Plenty of evidence for the continuation of the exercise of the imposition of the power of the state, in that it reasonably constitutes proof of guilt.
Speaking of proof of guilt – the setup/initial point of the video has the cop in front of the vehicle he subsequently pulls over – and it’s reasonable, that unless the police officer was also operating his vehicle above the temporary 40 mph limit, riding in tandem with the SUV, he truly had no idea how fast the guy was going – and once stopping the guy, makes elicitation of an admission of wrongdoing (’so, how fast do you think you were going’) part of the interaction.
The point however, is this – compound stupidity, by all involved, over simple speeding – and to what degree, the cop probably cannot say. And from this, the rest of this stupidity just rolls…
Ok, commence piling on that it isn’t just simple speeding – and make the case for imposing limits on rates of travel on limited access, unobstructed highway in clear, dry, daytime conditions.
Quite frankly, I think that there are probably better things cops could be doing.
Wind Rider on November 22, 2007 at 6:36 AM
This is an excellent argument against street cameras. Everyone posting here saw the same video and still there is no consensus.
tgillian on November 22, 2007 at 6:47 AM
I can’t believe that a police officer can force a person to sign a document on the spot. I think I would refuse to sign as well. I’ll comply with all other reasonable requests but I’m not signing any documents. That seems very un-american. I probably would have ended up arrested too if I ran into this cop.
greggish on November 22, 2007 at 7:12 AM
Here is an article with more details:
Greggish, it is your duty to know the rules of the road and in Utah (according to this article) you do have to sign or you can be arrested – officers discretion. But, the guy admitted to going 68 and the officer had to ask twice for license and registration.
DKK
LifeTrek on November 22, 2007 at 7:22 AM
LifeTrek, I think that law needs to be overturned because it seems unconstitutional.
greggish on November 22, 2007 at 7:26 AM
But, if that is indeed the law, then the officer was indeed in the right, up until his little illegal search at the end.
greggish on November 22, 2007 at 7:29 AM
First let’s understand one thing. When you’re stopped for any moving traffic violation, speeding included, you are being arrested. But instead of custodial arrest you are giving a traffic citation. Here in Tennessee speeding is still a class C misdemeanor. The standard is Probable Cause, as with any arrest. The place to argue your innocence or guilt in in court.
Most run ins with police can be handled quickly and without further complications is you just follow the officer’s instructions. But some just refuse too. Be it pride, stupidity and/or ignorance they want to control the stop.
And the video is the end results of what happens. Now to those of you who thinks the officer was wrong I direct your attention here or maybe here.
Now before you start jumping up and down in a hissy fit, I’m not saying the Officer’s actions were correct, but lets remember who’s action put the ball in motion.
And Allah pay close attention to the second link since by your comments it seems you think a man and his pregnant wife could not be construed as a threat to the officer. In this day and age you can never tell who’s going to be a threat.
SPIFF1669 on November 22, 2007 at 7:30 AM
Sounds like a case of ‘A-hole A’ meeting ‘A-hole B’.
Coronagold on November 22, 2007 at 7:33 AM
SPIFF1669, I’m willing to concede that the officer probably did not violate any laws with the arrest and tasering. Although I think the law that requires a signature on the spot is unconstitutional. But I don’t think there’s much doubt that his little in-vehicle search at the end was illegal.
greggish on November 22, 2007 at 7:35 AM
Asshat what a great word..and there are so many asshats out there from all walks of life. But one thing I learned is if one asshat has a gun or a tazer that one usally wins.
If Asshat in Blue pulled me over I would have asked the same questions that the Asshat in the SUV did but I would have obayed the officer. Lets face it the ticket gives you the chance to argue your case in front of a judge (hopefully he isn’t an Asshat also) and win the case if you are right. All the SUV Asshat did was to give Officer Asshat the excuse and chance to show his true Asshattyness.
Fandango
Happy Thanksgiving
I’m thankfull for HOT AIR
Fandango on November 22, 2007 at 7:47 AM
greggish, the search wasn’t illegal. Remember he had a belligerent driver and he either had to arrest a potential belligerent wife or he had to search the car. Very probable cause.
DKK
LifeTrek on November 22, 2007 at 7:49 AM
Your response illustrates well the “us v. them” mentality too many cops have, with their assumption that there are cops and there are dirtbags.
No, I’ve never been arrested. I’ve always respected cops, but the one time I challenged a cop (on a traffic citation), I won in court.
Oh, and the hundreds of people who’ve died after being tased probably agree with your assertion that the taser isn’t just short of deadly force.
flipflop on November 22, 2007 at 7:50 AM
greggish, also remember, you don’t have to sign – you can be taken in and appear before a judge who will then probably release you on your own recognizance, or you can just sign the damn thing agreeing to be released ROR and return for the court date or pay the fine. Nothing unconstitutional.
DKK
LifeTrek on November 22, 2007 at 8:06 AM
This kid, being part of the me, me ,me generation, has not learned respect for anyone but himself.
This is the kid that raised hell in the grocery store until mommy gave in and he got what he wanted.
Like it or not the cop was the authority and in charge of this circumstance, but his mommy failed to teach him to respect authority.
He could have argued his fool head off once he got to court, but mommy taught him he doesnt have to wait for anything.
Sooner or later baby always pays when mommy fails.
leanright on November 22, 2007 at 8:08 AM
Cop needs to be fired and I always come down on the side of the cops in these things. Granted that driver is an idiot, but the cop was worse.
Dash on November 22, 2007 at 8:09 AM
I’ve been focusing on how wrong I felt the cop was to tase the guy without saying anything about how stupid the guy was not to sign the citation. AFAIK, the signature is little more than an acknowledgment that you received it, and agree to pay the fine or appear in court. There’s no admission of guilt in signing the damned thing.
flipflop on November 22, 2007 at 8:11 AM
I’ve read most of the comments here on this fine Thanksgiving morning, and it is obvious that there are some LEOs commenting. Gentlemen, listen up.
You are tasked with solving crimes and apprehending those that commit them. You are NOT about “maintaining an orderly society”. Society does that just fine on its own, thank you. We do not give you absolute obedience. You are merely the strong arm of the government, which in many ways has turned against our liberty. You are arrogant, you are insulting, you are power-mad, and you believe us to be the “enemy”. You arrive amongst us with weapons to intimidate us with your authority, and if we resist, you kill us. You dress up in stormtrooper suits and play Ninja, killing and maiming the innocent all too often. And for this, we pay through the nose. What did Jefferson say? “He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.”
Many of you have commented that this asshat who didn’t obey “had it comin’”. Well, while he didn’t act appropriately. That was no reason to use potentially lethal force (and don’t even try to argue in favor of the taser). The ego of the officer was threatened, and the officer reacted the way tyrants always react.
If you didn’t have so much contempt for us, this type of thing wouldn’t happen.
HerrMorgenholz on November 22, 2007 at 8:11 AM
Sure, you have the option of not signing a document, and just go through something trivial like having handcuffs put on you and being taken to jail. Being forced under the threat of arrest to immediately sign a document may seem perfectly constitutional to you, but to me it seems downright Totalitarian, and not something I would expect in the USA.
greggish on November 22, 2007 at 8:18 AM
Put on Fox News right now and watch what can happen to a Trooper on the side of the road during a routine traffic stop…
If you have an encounter with a police officer, you had better be cooperative, respectful and non-threatening or it will end very badly for you – and get this – it doesn’t matter if you are right and the cop is a jerk – it will end badly for you. You can act like a petulant child and stamp your feet all you want it’s not going to change a thing. That’s reality and if you don’t wrap your head around that, sooner or later you’ll learn the hard way.
TheBigOldDog on November 22, 2007 at 8:20 AM
BBBBAAAAAAAAAAAAAA….
HerrMorgenholz on November 22, 2007 at 8:26 AM
it seems over the top but then again exactly what was the cop supposed to do when the guy started walking back to his car. Thank God he didn’t taser a pregnant woman too
Keli on November 22, 2007 at 8:29 AM
Promising to appear in court is why they do not take you to jail (to ensure your appearance) when you get a ticket.
That driver refused to promise to appear in court, so there was little choice but to arrest him. When a police officer tells you that you’re under arrest, refusing to follow instructions is escalating the situation to a very different level.
I think the officer used the minimum force required to take the suspect into custody. The driver was conscious and still shooting his mouth off about 5 seconds after getting tased. A baton blow to the head, or attempting to manhandle the suspect into submission with brute force would have been more dangerous to both parties.
I guess if the guy had been (suspected of being) an illegal alien, it would have been OK for the officer to shoot him in the back with his service revolver as he walked away, though, eh?
LagunaDave on November 22, 2007 at 8:31 AM
So, no matter what the alleged offense is (jaywalking, spitting on the sidewalk, removing the tag from the mattress), the cop’s got the right to do whatever he wants?
flipflop on November 22, 2007 at 8:31 AM
If just a few more criticize the cop or criticize the citizen we get to 400 POSTS!! Yea…
IntheNet on November 22, 2007 at 8:37 AM
Also, when you have a crazy, unreasonable, and probably unconstitutional law like this on the books, how’s about having as standard procedure informing a person that refuses to sign, that if they don’t sign they will be handcuffed, arrested, and taken to jail? Most reasonable people would never assume that in the USA you could be dragged away in cuffs for simply refusing to sign a document. The officer didn’t give the guy a chance to comply by telling him what the insane ramifications would be of not coercively signing a document on the spot.
greggish on November 22, 2007 at 8:37 AM
You got it. No consequences, no accountability. When was the last time you heard of a cop going to jail for this stuff? The proper response is “Jawohl, mein Fuhrer. Heil!” We live in a police state.
HerrMorgenholz on November 22, 2007 at 8:37 AM
Pretty much. If he abuses his power you file a complaint and go through the process. If you decide to take the law into your own hands by being uncooperative, disrespectful and argumentative and ignore an order to put your hands behind your back, it’s going to end badly for you. That’s reality.
I can’t wait to watch you on YouTube too. Be sure to wave to us while you do the Tuna on the ground because you refuse to be a “sheep” and disobey lawful orders of a Police officer even after he draws a weapon. I love watching petulant people get their comeuppance.
TheBigOldDog on November 22, 2007 at 8:38 AM
If I’d been that cop I would skipped the taser and gone straight for my sidearm. Bang! One less Kos Kid.
AntonK on November 22, 2007 at 8:39 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 Next »