>> ^handmethekeysyou:

Asking "what did I do?" is not "begging for it."
I understand why the cop got upset immediately. Guy got out of his car and started walking toward the officer with a hand in his pocket. Totally reasonable to react strongly to that. But by the 50th time when the cop told him to turn around and the guy was just asking what it was about, you'd think the cop would realize the guy isn't a threat.
Just answer the question, "what's this about?" And if you're not going to answer the question, say, "we'll discuss that in a minute, but for now just turn around and put your hands on your head." I'd say, "I pulled you over because of your license plate, but you started out acting like a threat. If you turn around and put your hands on your head, I assure you we'll walk away from this without a ticket or a problem." If the cop can't be expected to be the voice of reason, he shouldn't be allowed to carry a gun.
This was literally (rewatch it, precisely) three minutes of the cop saying "turn around and put your hands on your head" with smatterings of "do it now" and nothing else. That's not communication. That's ordering and tasering when your orders are not met. That's not law enforcement.>> ^smooman:
tasered 6 times for having a crooked license? thats not a misleading title at all!
what i saw was a dude get tasered 6 times for being a jackass
excuse me if i cant sympathize with a man who is practically begging for it



asking, no, demanding "what did i do?" is most assuredly "begging for it" given it's context.

You certainly have a strange reasoning in assuming a man who is utterly uncooperative, suspicious, erratic, and at times irate, is somehow not a perceivable threat.

"just answer the question"? jesus titty fucking christ do some people just have an abject lack of respect for judicial process? i'll let you be the one to leap out of your car on your next traffic stop and act surprised at the rate of escalation. Ya, the "voice of reason" certainly was working with the offender wasnt it? Guy gets pulled over, guy immediately gets out of car and approaches officer, guy is sternly and directly instructed to back the fuck up and at gunpoint even, guy refuses......ya thats a reasonable man right there

the only reason it was three minutes of "turn around and put your hands on your head" is because for three fucking minutes that asshat was overtly defiant and wholly uncooperative.

you know i hated authority too....then i graduated fucking high school

Haha! Thanks; you made my day =). I think that's what I needed to see. I finally get it now.

Cheers!

>> ^peggedbea:

meh, yeah... sometimes we're called anti-authoritarians... it's not cop-hate on a personal level... it's cop-hate as an ideological platform. google that shit.
was the dude a dumbshit for getting out of his car? you bet.
do i still dislike police and find this traffic stop/ the societal punishment paradigm we exist in abhorrent? you bet.
do i hate the culture that constructs these kinds of scenarios? absolutely.

Maybe you missed the earlier comment where @Hive13 was pulled over for a crooked plate. Maybe all the cop wanted to do was fix the plate for the guy before he lost it and would have to incur a replacement fee. Maybe he was pulling him over as a simple personal courtesy to say that, much as I would tell someone at a stop light. The difference is that the cop has the benefit of the lights to get they guy's attention.>> ^peggedbea:

meh, yeah... sometimes we're called anti-authoritarians... it's not cop-hate on a personal level... it's cop-hate as an ideological platform. google that shit.
was the dude a dumbshit for getting out of his car? you bet.
do i still dislike police and find this traffic stop/ the societal punishment paradigm we exist in abhorrent? you bet.
do i hate the culture that constructs these kinds of scenarios? absolutely.
>> ^draak13:
I'm really quite impressed with people who really hate cops soooo much; anything of or being field law enforcement seems to immediately evoke feelings of loathing in some people, to the point where a police officer cannot be without fault. Myself and many people who admittedly lean a little anti-cop end up siding with the cop on this one, but there are so many anti-cop people who are so far polarized against police that they still can't see any cop doing right...even when the officer deserves commendation for sticking to their training so well.
I dare anyone to post a police confrontation video in which they feel the cop was completely justified. Try posting a video where the police officer was not covering any sort of gray area of correctness in handling the situation, but in which every action was completely justified and necessary. Try posting a video where we feel empathy and satisfaction for the cop. I bet you'll be amazed at how many people will still hate the officer for what they did.

meh, yeah... sometimes we're called anti-authoritarians... it's not cop-hate on a personal level... it's cop-hate as an ideological platform. google that shit.

was the dude a dumbshit for getting out of his car? you bet.
do i still dislike police and find this traffic stop/ the societal punishment paradigm we exist in abhorrent? you bet.
do i hate the culture that constructs these kinds of scenarios? absolutely.

>> ^draak13:

I'm really quite impressed with people who really hate cops soooo much; anything of or being field law enforcement seems to immediately evoke feelings of loathing in some people, to the point where a police officer cannot be without fault. Myself and many people who admittedly lean a little anti-cop end up siding with the cop on this one, but there are so many anti-cop people who are so far polarized against police that they still can't see any cop doing right...even when the officer deserves commendation for sticking to their training so well.
I dare anyone to post a police confrontation video in which they feel the cop was completely justified. Try posting a video where the police officer was not covering any sort of gray area of correctness in handling the situation, but in which every action was completely justified and necessary. Try posting a video where we feel empathy and satisfaction for the cop. I bet you'll be amazed at how many people will still hate the officer for what they did.

>> ^maestro156:

Here's that study you wanted
Assuming a mid-range estimate of 120m stops per year, the likelihood of the cop being killed in a traffic stop is 1 in 20 million.
Your chances of being attacked by a shark is 1 in 11.5 million, according to the University of Florida’s International Shark Attack File. Lightning strikes are a bit more common even than that.
>> ^MrFisk:
How many cars are pulled over in the U.S., in a year? How many result in a fatality to the officer? I'm trying to figure out if it's more likely they'll be shot, hit by lightning, or bitten by a shark.



An interesting correlation to add (and there might not be any info on this) is to add how many traffic stops resulted in an arrest for something AND there was a weapon in the car. Any such case is a potential shoot out that didn't occur (well, except for when a shoot out occured).

Exclude Texas though, because there's pretty much guns laying out on street corners. "Timmy put that pistol down, you don't know where it's been!".

Here's that study you wanted

Assuming a mid-range estimate of 120m stops per year, the likelihood of the cop being killed in a traffic stop is 1 in 20 million.

Your chances of being attacked by a shark is 1 in 11.5 million, according to the University of Florida’s International Shark Attack File. Lightning strikes are a bit more common even than that.

>> ^MrFisk:

How many cars are pulled over in the U.S., in a year? How many result in a fatality to the officer? I'm trying to figure out if it's more likely they'll be shot, hit by lightning, or bitten by a shark.

I tried googling this. Not a single report or study devoted to "
how many traffic stops per year result in shootings" on the first page. Unsurprisingly, many sensationalist news stories.>> ^MrFisk:

How many cars are pulled over in the U.S., in a year? How many result in a fatality to the officer? I'm trying to figure out if it's more likely they'll be shot, hit by lightning, or bitten by a shark.

Bell curve aside, there seems to be a whole generation of idiots with zero respect for lawful authority and an inbred incapability to obey simple instructions, as if these traffic stops are the first time in their entire lives they've been told 'NO' or someone has asked them more than once to comply. Help! My self-esteem has been violated!

Another theory is these a-holes are looking for a payout from the city. They know that--right-or-wrong--they'll get one if they look like big enough victims.

In this scenario, you have an ignoramus wearing a giant pullover which could conceal any number of weapons, and a hatchback where anyone could be hiding with a firearm just under the back window.

Iggy should be billed by the city for the electricity and Taser cartridges for the exact amount of shyster "damages".

From one of the links in the description:

A traffic stop is viewed by police officers as a potentially life threatening situation, regardless of the impetus for the stop. The cop doesn't know whether the driver of the car stopped for some trivial reason is the nicest guy in town or a mass murderer. He is not about to take any chances finding out.

To the officer, the "threat" initiates with the refusal to comply with commands. There are some basic rules of a safe encounter, that the driver remain in the vehicle with his hands where they can be seen. No, the officer has no reason to believe he has a gun or the inclination to use one, but he's not willing to take any chances finding out.

When the driver alights from the vehicle, the cop immediately feels threatened. When the driver refuses to comply with commands, the sense of threat is elevated. When the driver argues, the threat reaches an untenable position.

Seems like the real problem was what happened at the very end.

I get that it was a tense situation, but from the video and reporting, once they had him subdued they kicked his ass. That wasn't necessary, and constituted excessive force.

They then got sued for exactly that, and wound up settling out of court over it.

Isn't this the way things are supposed to work?

I applaud your desire to present the awful truth of the danger that our police officers face every time they go out on patrol. I get upset about the beatdown that cops generally get on this site, too.

I said this on the video itself -- post a news report on the event to get the conversation going. We don't need the sound track to a man's death (I haven't watched it yet, the description of that vid make me cry, I don't need to hear to know that it is horrifying.)

We need this side of the story. I think cops can slide into brutality so easily because every day, they are faced with an armed public and they have a target on their back. Yes, some abusive assholes are drawn to the profession because they like guns and waving them around. But as professional standards rise, these guys won't get jobs or keep them if they manage to slip through.

I often say -- imagine it is your brother or your father who is going out on domestic violence calls or making traffic stops late at night. Imagine you are waiting at home for your police officer spouse to come home.

Watch this http://videosift.com/video/Sheriff-s-Deputy-Marine-Shot-Dead-Wife-Goes-Into-Labor

Video description from YT for the curious:

SUMMERVILLE, SC (WCSC) -

Dash cam video released Thursday from a stolen Summerville, South Carolina police cruiser shows a suspect fighting a police officer then crashing the stolen car into a landscaping truck at a high rate of speed.

According to police, the incident started last Friday when 38-year-old Arthur Lee Thompson attempted to steal a computer from a Summerville Wal-mart. When confronted, Thompson allegedly punched the store's loss prevention officer in the mouth. Authorities then put out an alert for Thompson's green Jeep.

Officers were able to spot the vehicle and made a traffic stop on Cedar Street near 9th Avenue. Dash cam video from the stolen police cruiser shows Thompson exiting his Jeep, disobeying the officer's commands and then attacking an officer.

According to the incident report, the officer tased the suspect twice, first when Thompson started fighting him and again once he was in the police cruiser, attempting to steal it.

Thompson wasn't affected by the taser and video shows him pulling out the stun-gun barbs and then continuing to fight with the officer. Thompson then drove off in the stolen car at speeds of over 100 mph.

The dash cam video shows Thompson weaving in and out of traffic, running through several red lights and making erratic maneuvers. The high-speed chase ended when Thompson crashed the cruiser into a landscaping truck attempting to make a left hand turn. The video shows the cruiser slam directly into the truck on North Maple Street near Elks Lodge Lane, three miles from the original traffic stop.

Thompson is then heard and seen trying to escape from the wrecked police cruiser. He shattered a window in the car in an attempt to escape, but failed, and was arrested. The victim in the landscaping truck was taken to a hospital. Thompson was transported to MUSC for treatment. Neither had serious injuries.

A toxicology report shows that Thompson tested positive for cocaine base. While at MUSC, Thompson became extremely violent, a police report states. Thomspon allegedly yelled "You are all racist," as people walked by him, and "If you don't get these (restraints) off me, I'm gonna hurt myself and turn this bed over."

Thompson then began violently throwing himself around on the bed in an attempt to overturn the bed. An officer then tried to secure his right hand when Thompson spit in his direction.

According to the incident report, Thompson admitted to police that he had "smoked crack" earlier that morning and was very high. Thompson then asked police if he "made the news."

Later, while being processed at the Summerville Police Department, police say he looked at every officer in the booking area and made derogatory comments to all of them. Thompson then allegedly bragged about stealing the police car saying, "You should've seen how big the officer was that I worked. He was like 280 pounds."

Thompson repeatedly looked down at his fists and said "I need to retire these things," the report states.

Authorities charged Thompson with strong armed robbery, failure to stop for blue lights, assault on a police officer while resisting arrest, grand larceny, possession of a firearm by a person convicted of a crime of violence and throwing bodily fluids on a law enforcement officer. Police say Thompson has an extensive criminal history.

Thompson was also charged by the South Carolina Highway Patrol with reckless driving in the collision. Authorities are continuing the investigation.

So they have 'evidence' that no one is allowed to see and that wouldn't hold up in a court of law.

Come back and look at the real world. Arrest warrants for Osama were already issued in 1998 for murder. He was formally indicted by an American court that listened to first hand witness testimony and satellite phone records for the embassy bombings long before 9/11 ever happened. He was unquestionably the leader of Al Qaeda, a terrorist organization responsible for 10's of thousands of civilian deaths, even if you exclude the victims of 9/11 from the count. And you still have the audacity to question if Osama was guilty?

What is wrong with you?!?!

As to 9/11 there is no if around Osama's guilt there either, even though it matters not to his guilt as a mass murdering terrorist leader. Ahmad Shah Massoud was the leader of Afghanistan's Northern Alliance. He spent most of 2001 warning Europe and the west that Al Qaeda was planning something 'bigger' than it had done before against America, and that it would happen soon. On September 10th, 2001 he was killed by assassins working for Al Qaeda. It's worth noting that Ahmad Shah Massoud was also one of the few people that the Afghan people could have been united around in a push to remove the Taliban and Al Qaeda. But I suppose you would call that circumstantial evidence, right? It's pure coincidence that the man warning of the attacks of 9/11 and able to help in retaliating after was assassinated the day before the 9/11 attacks were carried out! So if that is insufficient, when Hamid Gil interview Osama Bin Laden AFTER the 9/11 attacks, Osama spent a great deal of time and effort showing all the evidence that he and only he could have been the one that planned and coordinated the attacks.

No, you don't see that whether at war or not, you don't just start treating people like sub humans.
No, you don't see. Killing Osama as part of a military operation against a terrorist leader is different from a routine traffic stop. In a military operation ethics around killing go as far as offering a chance for surrender when it is possible to do so without risking your soldiers lives. If that offer of surrender is refused, bullets fly. Do really advocate for a world where the American's should have called up the Pakistani police and asked them to go knock on the door and ask Osama to come out? That leads to dead police officers, and Osama's escape. Assuming of course the police officers sent weren't sympathetic to Osama and called him up so he could leave even before the police arrive. That kind of failure is NOT respecting human life. It directly results in the continued killing of Pakistani civilians by Osama's terrorist network.

You seem to fancy yourself as someone who's objections to seeing Osama dead are based on a respect for life. You need to take that thought and give it an additional 5 minutes of critical analysis. Every day Osama remained free was another day that he directly provided support and leadership to the intentional killing of innocent civilians.

On an individual basis it'll watch the cop more. But overall it'll be watching whatever is in front of the car, whether that be the cop or the people he's pulling over. If they outfitted the cops with cameras on their uniforms it'd be more indicative of them being highly interested in the cops interactions at all times.

I think the dash cam was outfitted because as an expense versus return, it's cheaper to outfit the car with a cam to note the happenings of common traffic stops (because this is about the only useful thing the forward facing cams are going to reliably be watching) without having to have another officer in the car. So they get 2 cars, split up the pair and have double the presence.

If the cops opinion didn't matter, they could just use the dashcam footage in every case (when applicable) and the officer being in court would be a formality. The dashcam is only brought out when something goes very wrong, as you've noted. If it's impartial and truthful why not let it stand as evidence in all court cases? They do it with traffic cameras.


>> ^Lawdeedaw:

I can see why you would have that opinion. I myself disagree only because, in the past, a cop's opinion was the only one that mattered. Unless, in the few rare circumstances, a powerful individual was pulled over (Like a mayor or police chief.) Think on this--who is the camera around most often, the civilian or the cop? Who does it watch more?
(All of these incidents were on the news)
For example, Rodney King may not have been a dash cam, but the police were still caught. A cop nearby my residence pulled a drunk driver from her vehicle--through the window. He had all right to do so, because she tried to gun it and was behind the wheel of a dangerous weapon. But who gets suspended? In a booking jail in my home state, a paraplegic was dumped out of a wheelchair... Cop got a felony. Later, a man threw himself from a wheelchair with a cop trying to settle prevent either from getting harmed, and guess who gets suspended? (It was on tape and someone had to take the fall.) In a prison, four officers (Alibis) go into a cell when the power goes out (Dumbasses, backup power is a beautiful thing,) and beat a murderer to death.
The list goes on and on, and since most cameras do not affect the average joe, I tend to believe they are there for a reason beyond the cop's best interest. Remember, even if the cop is justified, "Cameras never lie."
Now, the Police Departments do benefit from dash cams, simply because they can limit liability.

>> ^Porksandwich:
I dunno I think the dash cam is there for non-biased record, it is as much for the cop as it is for the person he stopped. But I also think that they've let a lot of officers run solo because of the dash cam, since they don't need a second officer to file their report on any incident that might occur. As long as it happens mostly on camera and the audio is captured. You'll notice they have multiple units of single occupied vehicles show up to situations where their dash cam is unlikely to record anything useful....like responding to noise complaints and other such minor things...car can't record that without being positioned very deliberately.
The only downside to dash cams are that the footage can be tampered with or "lost" when it's convenient for the police. I haven't heard of any system where the footage is captured direct from car with no human hands/eyes being involved in it's cataloging and tamper resistant storage (nothing is foolproof, but it should at least be something deliberate to cause loss of records where it's not explained away as inefficiencies and mistakes).

I would have done the same thing personally.

http://videosift.com/video/Wolves-Interrupt-Traffic-Stop-Inside-edition

Update, here is an inside look

http://videosift.com/video/Wolves-Interrupt-Traffic-Stop-Inside-edition