HerrMorgenholz on December 3, 2007 at 6:36 PM

(sigh) Another poseur talking smack on the internet about what a badass he is.

Just sayin’…

Lehuster on December 3, 2007 at 12:10 PM

I actively participated in the disarming and a$$ kicking of two out of control cops once many years ago. They were found in the parking lot cuffed, with their service weapons on the hoods of their respective cruisers, unloaded, secure, and oddly free of any fingerprints. They deserved every bit of it, and more, and there was no fall-out for us “scofflaws”.

Just sayin’….

Lehuster on December 3, 2007 at 12:10 PM

lol You have quite a vivid imagination yourself ;-)

Poseur.

…people who would no doubt act like the sheep…

Wrong again. I’ve deflected many bullsh!t attempts by cops to pull rank. None of them needed more than a firm lecture on exactly what their authority is…and _isn’t_

It’s a matter of confidence. Sheep need not apply.

So you’re going to shoot at them as you would “any other armed threat”?

What else should I do? Subject myself to brutality at the hands of an armed man? Of course I’ll _try_ to defend myself.

Good luck with that.

Thanks. I’m well trained, both physically and psychologically. I give myself better than even odds. Cops aren’t supermen.

I look forward to the video of them shooting you down like a mad dog

Thanks again. Nice to know which side you’ll be cheering for.

Cops need to be aware that they are _armed men_, and as _armed men_, if they act unlawfully and aggressively and threateningly, they should be dealt with in the same manner as any other armed threat. Your badge earns you no special favor.

So you’re going to shoot at them as you would “any other armed threat”? Good luck with that. I look forward to the video of them shooting you down like a mad dog.

So much chest-thumping in these threads from people who would no doubt act like the sheep they profess to despise if they were actually pulled over.

Cops need to be aware that they are _armed men_, and as _armed men_, if they act unlawfully and aggressively and threateningly, they should be dealt with in the same manner as any other armed threat. Your badge earns you no special favor.

Dude, there are cops on here, some from Texas. I hope that’s not your real name.

peacenprosperity

I’m not worried. Many cops from Texas would probably agree with my statement. I’m a strong advocate of cops! If you’ve read my previous comments on other posts, I’m always on the side of the cop even when I’m in the minority. I won HotAir bragging rights and kudos from Allahpundit on the previous taser post. Whenever I hear a story about cops being abusive, 99% of the time, I side with the cop. After every taser video I’ve ever seen (until this one) I’ve always sided with the cop. Cops are underpaid heroes as far as I’m concerned that are constantly being held back by political correctness and typical anti-authority attitudes. All I meant was that the reputation of AUSTIN’s police among Texas citizens isn’t very good. That’s a matter of local news and politics, not a matter of my opinion. Austin is a sanctuary city among other things.

“I’m thorry you’re having a bad day but thith ith uncalled for”

Talon on December 3, 2007 at 12:28 AM

Oh, you don’t have to obey. Argue all you want, demand – I say, DEMAND – all the explanations you want. It is up to you to gauge the costs and benefits of this relative to complying with the cop and being on your way as soon as possible. But, if you choose to argue, don’t run whining to me for sympathy when you get tased and arrested.

“Whether or not to argue with a cop who stops you for a routine traffic offense” is a very basic IQ test, which seemingly some people are happy to fail. This is all the more amusing because there is a 99% chance you are guilty as hell of what he stopped you for, and you know it.

… Farmer_Joe completely destroyed your assertion. He gave an example of a case in which compliance is optional which you were unable to refute. He gave an extreme example because it illustrates his point most effectively and since your statement was an absolute, any example to the contrary is good enough to refute it. You mocked his example, but you didn’t refute it.

Indeed I did make an absolute statement, to wit: “When the police issue a command, your compliance is not optional.” I made that statement in the context of the Massey case, and I had in mind only the ordinary orders of law enforcement (e.g., step out the vehicle, put your hands behind your back, etc). I did not intend to say — nor do I think that most readers would have understood me to say — that compliance is compulsory in the unlikely event that an officer orders you to disrobe at the roadside, or fellate him, or drop kick your infant over the hood of the car.

Still, your point is well taken, and I’m happy to amend to my assertion. How’s this? “When the police issue an ordinary command, your compliance is not optional.”

I say we let speeders go and taze Teddy Kennedy.

- The Cat

MirCat on December 3, 2007 at 1:28 AM

Throw in Jimmy Carter and its on!

- The Cat

Thought experiment: A cop pulls over a woman. He orders her out of the car and directs her to remove her clothes. Is she obligated to comply?

Compliance with the officer is only mandatory if those orders are lawful.

Farmer_Joe on December 2, 2007 at 8:27 PM

The list of improbable scenarios is endless. In the one you offer, I take it for granted that no reasonable person would fault the woman for resisting.

…

But that doesn’t undermine my original assertion — and the one that I think AP may have been referring to — that compliance with the orders of law enforcement is not optional.
paul006 on December 3, 2007 at 12:16 AM

Actually paul006, Farmer_Joe completely destroyed your assertion. He gave an example of a case in which compliance is optional which you were unable to refute. He gave an extreme example because it illustrates his point most effectively and since your statement was an absolute, any example to the contrary is good enough to refute it. You mocked his example, but you didn’t refute it.

And to make it worse, he misuses the word lay (for correct lie).

If I counted right it was about 16 seconds he told Eugene to get out of the car and 23 seconds for the break-dancing lesson.

I think these discussions need to happen. How do we know how far is too far. No one wants to see police officers hurt, but they also don’t want to be hurt by them either.

The list of improbable scenarios is endless. In the one you offer, I take it for granted that no reasonable person would fault the woman for resisting.

So we’re applying a “reasonable person” test?

God bless Amerika!

My fav sheep saying, “Do what the cop says and keep your trap shut”……So my freedoms cease to exist when a cop stops me for a GD SPEEDING VIOLATION????

Do ya’ think that JUST MAYBE SOME cops are going for the “Non-Lethal” taser a bit too quickly BECAUSE it is non-lethal??? IS THAT NOT A POSSIBILITY???!??!?

Notice I said “some”….not ALL.

Cops, whether they like it or not, are people….and people screw up. This cop proves it.

Defend him and all like him if you want……………….but mark my words…………someday they will be coming for you.

Talon on December 3, 2007 at 12:28 AM

Wow, I wasn’t aware we were on a 9/11 Truther site! Lol. Hey, I still think it looks bad for the cop based on this tape, but you’re losin’ it Talon. The “Amerika” with a K, calling people “sheep”… How did you find the time to do that in between posting “Ron Paul 2008!” all over YouTube and Digging every Ron Paul story you could find? I know, I know “WTC7!!!”

Oh by the way, what’s with the quotes around “non-lethal”… It is extremely rarely lethal, and I think in most cases deaths were the result of other medical conditions… but either way, I think the point is to avoid lawsuits from someone who might get choked out or smacked over the head with a baton. If brutality were the goal, the cops would much rather get dirty with them, rather than just drop them with a device who’s effect are almost always very temporary.

Anyway, I also wanted to let you know that you’re not just paranoid, you really do have a chip in your head and we are constantly monitoring you. As we speak we’re watching everything you’re doing on your computer and listening to your phone calls through “warrantless wiretaps”, because we’re trying to take away your constitutional rights and make this a police state.

or that such a confrontation is justified no matter how rude the cop is.

Lehuster on December 2, 2007 at 11:20 PM

Excellent!

The cops can do what ever they like………….I must OBEY.

God bless Amerika!

My fav sheep saying, “Do what the cop says and keep your trap shut”……So my freedoms cease to exist when a cop stops me for a GD SPEEDING VIOLATION????

“Do what he says”…..”Do not argue”….????……….”Fight it in court”??????

The cop went to school to learn the laws, I DID NOT. So who is supposed to explain WHY I am being ticketed???

If I go to school long enough………….will I be allowed to “render justice” like a cop even though I never got a badge?

Do ya’ think that JUST MAYBE SOME cops are going for the “Non-Lethal” taser a bit too quickly BECAUSE it is non-lethal??? IS THAT NOT A POSSIBILITY???!??!?

Notice I said “some”….not ALL.

Cops, whether they like it or not, are people….and people screw up. This cop proves it.

Defend him and all like him if you want……………….but mark my words…………someday they will be coming for you.

Thought experiment: A cop pulls over a woman. He orders her out of the car and directs her to remove her clothes. Is she obligated to comply?

Compliance with the officer is only mandatory if those orders are lawful.

Farmer_Joe on December 2, 2007 at 8:27 PM

The list of improbable scenarios is endless. In the one you offer, I take it for granted that no reasonable person would fault the woman for resisting.

Do you have a thought experiment with orders that police officers ordinarily issue (e.g., show me your license and proof of insurance; step out of the vehicle; keep your hands where I can see them; stop moving)? Is compliance with ordinary orders of law enforcement discretionary?

If not, what should the officer do when a motorist refuses to comply? Myself, I don’t see what choice a cop has except to compel compliance. Otherwise, how do we maintain the rule of law?

(In this video, the officer is attitudinal from the get-go. And though his orders are not unusual, unlawful or immoral, he doesn’t provide the driver with a reasonable opportunity to comply. But that doesn’t undermine my original assertion — and the one that I think AP may have been referring to — that compliance with the orders of law enforcement is not optional.)

You are out of your mind. When is it an arrestable offense for acting like any other reasonable person would to a cop with a serious attitude problem, rather than a sheep? A badge doesn’t make anybody exempt from common courtesy, nor the predictable consequences from a complete lack of it.

You are out of your mind! A reasonable, sensible, sane person is even more polite (or sheeplike, if you prefer) if the cop has an “attitude problem” than if he is acting calmly and professionally. If the cop has an “attitude problem” the last thing any rational person wants to do is provoke him even further and possibly get hurt. The “predictable consequence” of reciprocating the discourtesy of a rude officer is that you will likely be tased, arrested, and spend some time in jail, at the very least. Only a complete moron thinks that he is ever going to win a verbal confrontation with a cop, or that such a confrontation is justified no matter how rude the cop is.

Maybe it would’ve, maybe it wouldn’t have, but the point is: racism exists! Just because someone mentions it doesn’t make them “shady.”

Just a short P.S.: Silverstar, almost as much as the officer in the clip, you’re doing your profession a disservice by behaving incredibly antagonistically. You don’t like what you see so you are caustic and overbearing about it (calling those who disagree with you things like “toots”), then seem to assume that people are more annoyed by your point than by you and your manner of making it. Then, you drown yourself in self-congratulation and call it a day.

Yoosaion on December 2, 2007 at 8:28 PM

What I mean is, until the “oh it’s cuz I’m black?” BS, I was largely willing to take the guy’s side… That sort of crap calls his character in to question, unless the cop had done something to indicate it was a race thing. Therefore, while I still think the video shows the cop going overboard, we don’t know what the guy was doing in the car. There was potential that the guy did something that escalated the situation, and I believe him pulling out the race card causes me to lose a lot of potential sympathy for him. It wasn’t like he was having a conversation and just asking the cop. He was being an agitator and trying to scare the cop with threats of crying racism. You know the second he said that the cop was like “oh crap”, and you know that’s why the guy said it. I can’t count the amount of times black guys would come up, without IDs (most of whom were clearly underage), to the club I worked at in Nashville for a number of years, and upon me saying they couldn’t come in would say something to the effect of “oh, it’s because I’m black?” and they’d try to stare hard at me, etc. Usually I’d just look 5 feet over to my coworkers (who were black themselves and say) “you wanna let this guy in?” They’d obviously agree with me, then usually get called “uncle Tom” for simply doing their jobs. But never once was the “it’s cuz I’m black!” a reasonable thing to say to us, and as far as anyone can tell, there was no reason for it here.