I think you gave the easy answer...call her parents. I bet you anything that if mama got on the phone and told her to leave class, she would do it right away. That makes way more sense than calling officer slam (his nickname at the school) to re-escalate a situation that had already calmed down.

Actually, she was not being arrested. She was only being removed, at first. At least that's what's been reported. That means that, at least at first, she was not 'resisting arrest', only 'resisting removal'.

I do agree, force is a FINAL resort, rightfully in the hands of police. My issue is it's often used as a PRIMARY resort (meaning it's often the first thing tried). There were MANY options available to the cop besides violence against a child, he didn't try anything once his command was ignored except unnecessary violence. For instance, he could have, with less force and no injury to anyone, dragged the girl and her desk out of the room and waited her out in the hallway, but instead he chose to react with severe violence to being 'disrespected' by a child.

Saying she 'brought it on herself', to me, is the same as saying abused women 'bring it on themselves' by not capitulating fast enough to their abusive spouses, and abused children 'bring it on themselves' by not being perfect at all times.
Even if you want to call what she did 'resisting arrest' (which I think I've already debunked, but may still be questioned), the force used was SO out of proportion and unnecessary that this officer has already been banned from all schools in the state, and will likely lose his job and money in the end. If her fellow students had not risked the same treatment by pulling out their phones and recording his actions, we would never have heard about this, and the poor girl would have a record for assaulting a police officer instead of an FBI investigation against the officer. That sounds like one more instance where always on-body cams might have defused the situation, because KNOWING he was on camera, I bet he would not have acted so rashly against a calm, non violent child.

EDIT: He's now been fired.

No, I mentioned those few officers that had not seen the criminal action (and so not ignored it), they are just such a tiny minority that they are statistically insignificant. I gave them...and the non-corrupt forces an incredibly generous 10%, even though I believe the true measure is closer to <2%. I have yet to see an independent investigation of any police force that failed to find rampant criminal behavior force wide. I conceded that they likely do exist...somewhere...but they have yet to show themselves, and appear to be quite endangered if not extinct.
Whistleblowers do show up, but in such tiny numbers compared to total law enforcement that they statistically don't exist at all.
I understand that's your position, I just disagree. Ben Franklin was talking about private citizens VS law enforcement, and you have twisted it backwards. Those IN law enforcement have a higher duty to be honest, non-violent, non-criminals. Do you not agree? And please understand no one has suggested putting them all in prison based on a presumption of guilt...which is what Ben Franklin was talking about...the court of public opinion is a different matter. Also, in practice, assuming that all law enforcement is 'bad' and are untrustworthy liars actually lets far more innocent 'escape suffering', since they are the one's making the (often enough, false) charges. Just something to think about.

OK, let me try another tact. Do you think it's OK to put all members of a mafia crime family in prison, even though some may have done little more than honest accounting work? Well, I'm not suggesting prison, or even replacement, just meaningful, independent oversight EDIT:with real teeth. While I would LIKE to replace all officers (including the 'good' ones, let them all re-apply with stricter standards) and start fresh, I do see that that's not in any way reasonable or feasible...the best I can hope for is a change in behavior and a change in how we treat them...to one of zero tolerance for any professional malfeasance.
OK, once again, there is a statistically insignificant population of law enforcement that is totally 'pure' and not criminal. They exist. Because law enforcement as a group has become SO corrupt, they will be lumped in with the rest in public opinion until they prove themselves. There comes a point when the presumption of innocence is so damaged by a particular group of like minded individuals (which excludes by race, as a race is not 'like minded') that it no longer makes sense....and I'm far past that point. I now presume they are all trained liars (and I contend that's true, all of them, 100%, it's part of the job, and another way they're 'bad', but that's another discussion altogether) and that they'll lie to and about anyone they come in contact with. It's a terrible presumption to have to make about a group of people, but the only logical one to make since the alternative so overwhelmingly often leads to severe suffering for the innocent.

He probably would have had a stern word with you about all the assumptions you're making too.

You've said the guy was unarmed as if it was an established fact when he was shot when it wasn't. You have said he was non-violent but his movement and demeanour certainly weren't submissive, and one really has to wonder what he was planning to do when he got close enough to the officer, kiss him?

My position in all this is that as a Brit I think it's madness that police have to go around with guns all the time. This simply couldn't happen in the UK so as far as I'm concerned it's a fully avoidable situation, just put all the fucking guns down.

However, it's really not that easy. Guns are everywhere in America so the police have to act accordingly. It's really easy with hindsight to say all the things you're saying but in the heat of the moment that cop has to assume the guy is armed and dangerous. That's the effect of having guns everywhere.

They're on the edge of a highway at night, the guy is lit with flashing lights and car headlights going past. This makes seeing bulges or anything like that that might indicate a weapon very difficult and yet you think the officer should have been able to tell this and be happy to risk his life on it? Bullshit.

People are suggesting that under the same circumstances it's a simple job to aim for an extremity and it's a guaranteed hit. Really? It's that easy? So easy you'd stake your life on it?

The guy committed suicide by cop. Plain and simple. He wasn't a compliant victim, he was a threat to the officer. His shuffling was strange and that in isolation isn't threatening, but shuffling closer and closer to an armed officer is a different story.

Maybe the cop should have pulled a tazer first? That wouldn't help much if the guy came out of the car with a gun. Or would it? I don't know. If a tazer would have worked in that situation please put me right, I'm no expert. To me it seems if a guy comes out of the car with a gun and points it at the officer then a gun would be more use in defence than a tazer. Same with pepper spray.

So maybe the officer should put the gun away as soon as he's established that the guy isn't armed? That's fine, I'm all in agreement there. But nowhere in the video is he able to establish that as fact. So if he started with a gun he sure as hell should still have it drawn all the way through this video.

I'm really fucking glad I don't have to deal with anything like this in the UK. It's shit that this happens. But given the prevalence of guns in the US I can't see any way this could have gone differently without risking the situation becoming like the videos reiwan posted.

Actually, I do have a point and I am not arguing. Its called debating a difference of opinion. Other instances are not just other instances. They groom the way we act and react to situations based on past examples of previous encounters and behaviors. This guy tried to 1: Evade police in his car, 2: endangered the public in doing so, 3: refused to obey the officers requests to stay back, 4: verbally provoked the officer, 5: acted erratically once out of the car. This all attributed to a hostile situation. I'm sorry you decide to "argue" irrational points of golden firearms and laser beams. It seems you're the one with no point. You say that nobody knows another persons intentions. By that same fact, how do you know this guy was going to be non-violent after disregarding the officers simple command to stay back and advanced towards the officer. The suspects actions contributed to the outcome of the situation as much as the way the officers did.

"Good Bye."

I highly recommend "About Time" starring Bill Nighy and Rachel McAdams for a solid non-violent time travel movie.

I think what's happening is that the cops see this stupid criminal behavior day in and day out, they risk their lives, and the lives of innocent people are risked, and nothing really happens to the criminal. I mean, he goes to court, or skips court, or gets a fine, or gets sentenced, then goes to jail perhaps, for a week, or a month, and it's not really punishment. It's 3 squares a day, and basketball, so the cops feel like, hey, let's tune this bastard up a bit, maybe next time he'll think twice before doing something stupid.

Now, I'm just speculating, but I bet there's a good chance this is what happens. For instance, a few weeks ago I got into a vehicle pursuit of a woman who was passing bad checks halfway across the country, we chased her for a good 10 miles at pretty high speeds. She finally gave up, she goes to jail, it's a non-violent crime so the judge gives her a court date and lets her go. This fucking broad was homeless. We'll never see her again. And all those innocent people on the interstate, and the cops chasing her, took chances on physical injury trying to bring her to justice. We brought her to justice but the court just opened the door for her.

http://www.zalmos.com/ for unblock.

Think I posted this before but The Economist had some good articles on this last year:

http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21589868-shocking-number-non-violent-americans-will-die-prison-throwing-away-key

http://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21589903-if-you-are-poor-dont-get-caught-speeding-new-debtors-prisons

ROTFLMFAHS!!!!!!
Your organization (the police) has fought tooth and nail to keep those names and the numbers from being complied in a useable form, or viewable form. You know this well, and yet you dishonestly pretend that not having them somehow invalidates the numbers the DOJ compiled. They're hidden from the public by the police themselves, and there's only one reason for them to be 'hidden', police are embarrassed at the real numbers. Police kill >10 times the number of citizens compared to the number of people that kill police, yet police are constantly whining about how 'dangerous' their job is (not even in the top 10 most dangerous in America), and insisting on rules and equipment to allow them to kill more people with impunity while putting themselves at less risk. Most Americans don't think cops should have their own laws or loopholes, nor should they have any offensive equipment not available to the public, and there should be no purely defensive equipment outlawed.
Blacks aren't necessarily resisting arrest more often, they are definitely being attacked by police more often. 100% of dog bites on blacks is telling to anyone with a brain...but not to you. So is 85% of use of force being against blacks. Blacks have a reason to not want to be under police control, it never ends well for them, and often ends with them dead, it is never just a minor inconvienience.
How often are those reported 'black' suspects actually not black, pretty often.
Of over 500 innocent deaths per year in this law enforcement report, how many prosecutions? How many convictions? I bet close to 0...if not 0.
Hey Bill O, non-violent civilians are not actively fighting military, armed or not....so not a war zone.
Since 99+% of officer's crimes are not even reported, and of those that are 99% are not investigated, and of the 1% of 1% left, <1% are prosecuted, so it's a good bet they got away with the improper behavior.
Wow, you're really blind to racism, aren't you? One person in a position of power does not erase racism, sometimes it causes it (can you say Obama)...and racism happens within races as well. The report on New Orleans shows that even when the police closely resemble the populace, racism still happens, even from black officers against black citizens. You've said some fairly racist things in this thread alone...but you are so used to blatant racism that you can't see your own racism, ever.
Eric Holder told us, we don't need to tell him. Give me a fucking break!
Now Bill O...that's a fraud.

As usual, any sense of nuance is completely lost on you. Things are all black and white in your world, and blacks are all bad. I honestly can't understand how you survive with that mindset.

No, of course the video doesn't tell the whole story, they shut it off so we wouldn't know the whole story. That's the point. Duh.

All cops that beat up non-violent 'suspects' are bad. All cops that shoot unarmed, controlled civilians are bad. All cops that punt people in the head are bad. All cops that steal from victims are bad. All cops that lie or trick people are bad. All cops that hide their criminal activity, or that of other officers, are bad. If all cops do those things, then yes, all cops are bad. Are you now saying that's the case? You should know.

It's incredibly sad to me that so many like you have adopted the 'you're either (100%) with us or your (100%) against us' mindset. That's why anyone not goose stepping along with you must be a 'leftie', a dirty word in your mind. That's going to end up leaving you pretty lonely.

Um...so now you're whining about what being a cop entails?! Sorry, you actually have to do something for that paycheck. Jesus Christ!

Try thinking about what you whine about before writing it publicly...or you could just do what lantern53 does and snidely write a bunch of ridiculous whining BS, insults and lies over and over until everyone knows you're a troll.
Stop wasting our time. ;-)

What makes me mad is that Brown committed strong-arm robbery but was labeled a shoplifter. What pissed me off is that he was portrayed as an angel and he was the kind of guy that would kill you for a dollar, or rape your sister. What pisses me off is that a group of biased witnesses even matter. What pisses me off is that Brown's parents are not fit to mourn and created this situation far more than the cops did. And what pisses me off is that Garner died for a non-violent crime.

@enoch

I'm not arguing that American laws are entirely reasonable. I'm simply arguing that, given America's significantly higher violent crime rates, American prisons have a much higher percentage of violent criminals than Norway's prisons. These criminals would love Norway's prisons and would be perfectly fine living in them.

The U.S. and Norway are very different countries with very different cultures, economic situations and crime rates. What works for Norway won't necessarily work for the U.S. One statistic I'd love to know is the recidivism rate for non-violent criminals in the U.S. I imagine it's significantly lower than the recidivism rate for violent criminals.

@Jerykk
i cant make heads nor tails what you are trying to convey.
are you making an argument for harsher prisons?
or an assertion that if they were less harsh people would WANT to go to prison?
that recidivism is irrelevant so we should just execute prisoners?

i agree that poverty leads to desperation which can lead to criminal activity.there is plenty of statistics to back that up,though interestingly those numbers are dropping in regards to poverty=crime.

as for your deterrence argument.
yeah..no.the numbers obviously dont add up.
right now there are more american citizens incarcerated than the soviet gulags of the 80's.in fact,america incarcerates more citizens per capita than any other nation in the world.

americas prison population=2.4 million..and rising.

which leads me to my next point.
what is the purpose of prison?
well,it should be to remove those violent elements from society and for the offenders who are non-violent a way to pay a debt to the society they betrayed (fill in the offense here ____).

when their time has been served (paid) then they are free to rejoin society and reintegrate themselves back into society.

but what if that system of punishment strips you of all dignity and humanity?treats you like an abandoned dog at the local animal shelter?physically beaten and spiritually shattered,just HOW to you rejoin normal society?

what then?
do you blame the inmate who was thrown into a inhumane system?or maybe..juuuuust maybe..it may be the SYSTEM which is the blame.

let us look at some stats shall we?
the private prison industry is the 9th largest lobbiest in the country.who lobby for stricter sentencing,zero tolerance and mandatory jail time.a new trend in this area is now regarding teens AND pre-teens.they also make contracts with the local government to have a certain % occupancy.(meaning that even if those beds are not filled,the company STILL gets paid).

and lets not forget those kick backs to the local judges.already 25 judges this year got caught with their hand in the cookie jar.

the idea that prison is a deterrence has been debunked.
there are over 5000 federal laws NOT including state and local.so at any given time,in any given day,YOU have perpetrated a federal crime.

the idea the prison is for rehabilitation is utter bullshit,another liberal feel-good "look at the good we are doing" trope.

prison is a business.
based on the mafia principle.
it is about making the poor a commodity and exploiting their lack of resources to fight back.
recidivism?
thats just repeat customers.american prisons care zippo about recidivism.

again i reference the milgram experiment.
treat people like animals and they will soon behave like animals.
treat them with humanity and dignity and the outcome is far more positive for a society as a whole..we ALL benefit.

but the private prisons dont want that..it means less profit for them.

the norden is doing it right and the results are impressive.

@lucky760
um...what?
inmates are wild animals?

i guess i could get on board with your opinion if the parameters were exclusively directed toward extremely violent psycho/sociopaths.

otherwise your comment makes no sense.
2.4 million inmates in american prisons.the majority for non-violent offenses (think pot smokers),70% are non-white and to singularly lump them all as somehow being "wild animals" unworthy of participating in normal society,reveals a serious lack of understanding.

the american penal system dehumanizes and has zippo to do with rehabilitation OR corrections.
which is why i referenced the milgram experiment.

treat someone with humanity,even if they are paying a debt to society,and the results will always be a better outcome than what we do to prisoners here in the states.

the american penal system is a racket,a business.it commodifies the poor and those not deemed "of value" and its a travesty.something we should all be ashamed of,not celebrating.

USA is about punishment. Trouble with some small country: bomb it. Trouble with a larger country: economic sanctions. Trouble with crime: destroy their lives.

Nordic countries: rehabilitate so they can have a better lives and return to the tax paying, well behave folks. If it is countries, talk. Negotiate. (of course that last one is a bit different, nordic countries are VERY small so we can't just use force.) But the biggest difference is the need to punish, to make others suffer. This echoes all the way thru USA model: lose your house, fuck you, you are on your own. Get sick, lose your job end up stealing, fuck you, you made that choice.

I know criminals, hell, i am one. Prisoners do not behave badly if you keep them sane. That means giving them something meaningful to do, trust them, give them decent living. Prisons STILL frighten people. My upcoming two months sentence, damn, i haven't slept well in ages. I have done everything i could to reduce the sentence, to stay one more day out here. And i know that the place i will go is like a summer camp. Camp that i can not leave.

Guess which one works? I do have my own business in the works, i work everyday, i study, educate myself and i have full knowledge that once those 68 days are over, i can return back to regular life and continue my healthy plans (and if you wonder what i did, i am homegrower, never have hit anyone in my life, non-violent offender. My only crime is my love for weed, a substance that is going soon to be legal) I know a lot of guys that have been in prison, most of them come out better than they went in. Yes, we do have repeat offenders. That is very small percentage comparing to USA. If punishment would work, if the deterrent of longer sentences worked, there wouldn't be revolving doors. We know that there will always be small minority that will end up in prison, no matter if the punishment would be capital. Always. You have thieves in countries that chop your hands off. But if we treat instead punish, the ones that have a chance for good life, take it...

'You are here because of your actions, don't blame the corrections dept, or the cops, or the judge...'
He intentionally ignores the fact that the corrections dept is the largest lobbying group in Washington and lobbies for more draconian laws and mandatory sentences because that's how they make money. No inmates, no dough.

'You gave up your rights by committing murder....committing rape....'
He intentionally ignores the fact that most convicts are in prison for non-violent drug crimes, not murder, not rape, not violent crime at all.

'This is prison utopia...for the inmates.'
He seems too dense and set in his 'us VS them' mentality to see that it's prison utopia for the guards too, and society in the long run because this prison doesn't create violent criminals, it creates well adjusted citizens.

Imagine that, treating inmates like human beings, because we want them to act like human beings when they're released. And big surprise, it works! Not only less recidivism, but less problems while they're in the system as well.
Thanks to privatization and profitization of prisons and lobbying by prison guard unions, and a mindset by so many that all 'criminals' are sub-humans that don't deserve proper treatment, we'll never see this in the USA.