Yes, that's where we differ, because she sure didn't seem to be trying to leave to me, just had an inability to stand still under stress, like many 15 year olds. (And as I've said, it's the macing a handcuffed, secured girl that's out of line imo, the manhandling was just more than needed and was certain to escalate problems rather than solve them, so not smart but on the low end of the scale of acceptability, the macing was a pure assault in my eyes, for no good reason beyond sadism. It was not the right way to get her in the car.)

Keep in mind, she gets on her bike and rides (slowly) with ZERO complaint from the officer she's right in front of, he LET her do it, then got pissed off that she did it. WTF?!
Again, this could have been solved with a simple command to sit down, a command they did not give. Also, detained is not under arrest. You are under zero obligation to submit to detention. If they thought she was leaving the scene, they should have arrested her. Instead, they said repeatedly that they were detaining her for 'cooperation of investigation' (not a crime) and a medical release (something they probably need for their own liability purposes, but not something they can arrest a person for as far as I know).

Yes, the little girl was in the wrong...did my saying exactly that confuse you?

Yes, I absolutely think that if an officer pepper sprayed another officer's child for something the first officer screwed up (like failing to put her all the way in the car) the parent would go ballistic and sue...no matter how their child had acted. Rude behavior is not a threat, the only legitimate reason to use force. I don't think they would see it like you do if it was their child.
Yes, they would also probably reprimand the child too, but bad manners do not excuse assault with a weapon on a handcuffed detainee.

There was no reason to use mace, the proper response is to pull her into the car from the other side.

Your analogy only works if the wolf hounds go after the sheep when there's not a wolf in sight.

Hours? Really? Try an extra 10 seconds to avoid 15 minutes of battle and days of court. "Sit down" doesn't take even that. If they don't have the patience to verbalize the instructions they want followed, they should quit. Deescalation is their job, and they absolutely failed, as they often do.

Remember, they repeatedly say they're only detaining her because she may need medical treatment, then they treat her in a way that ensures she needs medical treatment. If they were really trying to help her, they failed so utterly miserably that they all should quit today...but we know that was bullshit lies, right?

I'm guessing you've never had a gun to your head and a knee on your neck face down in a gutter because an officer made a mistake reading your licence plate and had zero patience for the car thief he was taking down, followed by threats of retaliation if you report them. You might give them less cooperation and leeway if you had.

And they didn't...ever. They intentionally blocked the road....for no reason...after the bike cut off traffic in the other direction by illegally crossing. To my eyes, that makes them the original offenders and the intentional assholes.
Honking at a douchbag walking in the middle of the road, seemingly oblivious on his phone, and yelling "move" seems quite restrained compared to most drivers here in America in the same position, imo.

I do agree, it seems overly convenient that they cross and turn around to be next to the puddle.

*promote a heavy sigh and a tear in my eye ... dammit

*quality creepy ... I'll be sleeping with my eyes open from now on!

Hit a nerve, did I?

The bible specifically tells you to murder them with your own hands, not to have society impose laws. No way out. If you don't murder them, you should also be murdered for failing to follow the commands. It's clear. That's pretty damn disrespectful in my eyes, murdering one for believing differently.

As for that Jesus guy changing things.....
17 Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them. 18 For I tell you truly, until heaven and earth pass away, not a single jot, not a stroke of a pen, will disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished. 19 So then, whoever breaks one of the least of these commandments and teaches others to do likewise will be called least in the kingdom of heaven, but whoever practices and teaches them will be called great in the kingdom of heaven.…

One of my favorite police PSAs ever.

My favorite, however, was when they cited me for possession and court ordered me to take a "marijuana" "class" taught by an ex-cop, who told us drug laws are bullshit, but as long as no one can see you smoke, it's a'ight.

I guess there's a reason he taught those classes -- emphasis on the "ex" part of "ex-cop" -- but damn. The. Court. Ordered. Me. To. Take. A. Class. Which. Said. Fuck. The. Law. As an intellectual who had only smoked marijuana like 3 or 4 times up until that point, it really opened my eyes. I was one of very few white people in that class room. That also opened my eyes.

Ahhhhh, the law. Such a fickle thing.

Dangit, something in my eye again...

It's the "people in the west do bad things too" argument in a different format.

That's a bit like saying, my car already has a dent so I don't bother driving carefully anymore. And in Germany's case, I now drive with my eyes closed
EDIT: (and Trump has basically banned driving )

And yes, for NewtBoy that is all a false equivalency. The two issues have absolutely nothing to do with each other, and not even remotely relevant to immigration. (But maybe they could be made relevant, and like you've suggested we'll not only send back the pedo priests back to the Vatican we'll take in a progressive Muslim immigrant, it's win win!).

Not false in my eyes. Explain.
If the atrocities aren't the exact atrocities you accuse others of, just really close, they are absolute hyperbole or false equivalency? Now who's dishonest.
The point is that other religions oppress and terrorize the same targets to the same ends, but because they do it slightly differently you think that's dishonest to say? Please.
Ok, I'll try again being excessively careful.....no, everyday Christians aren't crusifying civil rights workers that we know of, but have definitely murdered them and still treat them inhumanely and with violence...they don't stone gays, but have murdered them and still discriminate against them and attack them physically.... they still subjugate women in many ways, including polygamy, but also differently from how many Muslims do....now am I honest and specific enough for you to accept the point, that Islam has no monopoly on religious evil, or are you going to claim that's not exactly the same, and so ignore the point again?

Agreed on the sign. It opened up my eyes. I saw the sign.

That literally brought tears to my eyes when he sat up on the couch with his symptoms relieved. That was a beautiful moment.

Wow, I'm glad they switched it up. The original sounds terribly convoluted and confusing. I hate movies that jump back and forth in time to try to make you curious about what's happening, when really you're just confused having not been given enough information to have a clue about what you're seeing. I also hate the idea of knowing everything that's coming but the characters are completely in the dark. That's not a good movie in my eyes, but True Romance was excellent.
As made, it's my wife's favorite movie, and in my top 5.

Incredibly sad, no arrest yet, 2 weeks after the video was posted. That's negligence by the Boston PD in my eyes, they know who she is and where she lives, go get her. That behavior usually eventually ends in homicide, it nearly did just then.

@newtboy
yep,i misunderstood you.
never really looked at it that way.maybe that is due to how i consume news.

while i think that newsprint such as washpo,NYT and the wall street journal have become more suspect in my eyes.i do not dismiss some of the good work they do also.

and hedges has been critical of the russian oligarchs,and in particular putin himself.i do not have anything at this exact moment,but i will make it a point to post something soon.

on one point hedges is incredibly consistent:criticism of power and authority.
which on that note i have to admit appeals to my anti-authoritarian views.

but i never really considered how having hedges,or hartman,on RT would indirectly legitimize russian oligarchic propaganda.

and that is a fair point.