Ridiculous Police News (Specific events)

[kuronosan]

I dunno "Don't do it Keith" sounds an awful lot like "Don't be an idiot" to me.

[Greatguardian]

A serious answer to how to avoid such things is simply being informed of your rights and what you are and are not obligated to do, ultimately all you can do is make a complaint after the fact unless you want to risk getting your ass beat and hauled in for nothing, and that's the saddest part.

This is true. Unfortunately, people being insufficiently informed of their rights in their respective states/counties/municipalities is a real contributor to conflicts with police during stops (this thread has tons of examples of this). Falling back to the bill of rights is simply ineffective in the midst of a stop.

Local jurisdictions pass laws every day that may or may not be interpreted as entirely constitutional. But until those laws are challenged in courts, they're still the law. You don't get a free pass on following them by walking around with a copy of the US constitution.

[Yuri-G]

This is true. Unfortunately, people being insufficiently informed of their rights in their respective states/counties/municipalities is a real contributor to conflicts with police during stops (this thread has tons of examples of this). Falling back to the bill of rights is simply ineffective in the midst of a stop.

Local jurisdictions pass laws every day that may or may not be interpreted as entirely constitutional. But until those laws are challenged in courts, they're still the law. You don't get a free pass on following them by walking around with a copy of the US constitution.

unless you're a sovereign citizen!

[jmc]

"I'm going to (insert food place) for a burger, can I do that?"

Easy way to figure out if you are being detained for investigative purposes.

[Salodin]

Still waiting to hear how to walk away from a police encounter with out getting shot minority style. You can't respond to a fair statement with an exaggeration and expect to not get called out on it lol.

[Niiro]

Jmc gave the gist of it, but basically ask if you're being detained and why, and don't answer any questions you're neither obligated to answer or comfortable answering.

And the original point wasn't that there's some magical get-out-of-jail-free card when the police overstep their bounds, it's that "just sue them later" is not a valid excuse to allow these things to happen.

[Greatguardian]

You're doing it again. Allow what to happen? How does one not allow these things to happen? How much control over the situation do you think you really have when an officer decides they are within their rights and you are not?

If you're referencing this video, the kid was held because she refused to produce identification.

[NynJa]

Fun fact: judges and DAs are extremely biased in favor of the police and the only "official" account of the events is the cop's.

Thats why they wear bodycams, and yet people still cry abuse ie: how they were violently thrown against the wall and pepper sprayed repeatedly...then the footage gets out and you find out all those cries were vastly exaggerated.

[Niiro]

You're doing it again. Allow what to happen? How does one not allow these things to happen? How much control over the situation do you think you really have when an officer decides they are within their rights and you are not?

If you're referencing this video, the kid was held because she refused to produce identification.

When saying we allow this to happen I mean as a society, not in the moment. I already said before:

ultimately all you can do is make a complaint after the fact unless you want to risk getting your ass beat and hauled in for nothing

You've been reading my posts, don't be obtuse.

And I'm not talking about the incident with the girl at all, this conversation originated with Salodin's general comment about things the police have a right to do, Zoobernut questioned it and I weighed in.

[Greatguardian]

When saying we allow this to happen I mean as a society, not in the moment. I already said before:

You've been reading my posts, don't be obtuse.

I've been reading them but failing to catch something which you seem to think is obvious. Let me try breaking it down.

You posted that quote just now. I assume this contains a grievance of yours. So "getting your ass beat and hauled in for nothing" is what you want to not allow to happen? And somehow being more cognizant of your rights is going to prevent this? How?

If anything, it seems like it would be more beneficial for citizens to understand what rights they do not have during a stop, since "getting your ass beat and hauled in for nothing" is often the result of a person refusing to do something an officer asks them to do.

Are you going to magically convince an officer that they can't ask you to do something they want to ask you to do? Praytell, how? Are you going to stop them by force and argue self defense later? Good luck with that. What recourse do you suggest besides the court system for people asked to do something they don't want to do at a stop?

[Niiro]

since "getting your ass beat and hauled in for nothing" is usually the result of a person refusing to do something an officer asks them to do.

It's often the result when the officer's request was valid or not, and knowing when your rights are being violated and calling the police out on it can deter them from pushing their luck.

Police use the public's ignorance of the law to their advantage in dubious but often legal ways, it's as simple as a cop saying "ok I'm gonna search you know" and a person nodding in acceptance when they had every right to say "no" but they simply were not aware of it. An officer can use the assumption of cooperation in their language to get someone to consent to something they didn't know they had a choice on.

This is how having knowledge of your rights can help avoid unwarranted searches.

I don't mean to drag Jmc into this but I think he'd agree with this (and if not his input would be appreciated anyway).

If an officer does violate your rights in the end there is no recourse besides the courts but just because that's an option it does not make such violations any less of a big deal and it doesn't mean people should hand-wave such issues away.

[Greatguardian]

No one's handwaving the issue. If your rights are violated, you should seek justice. I just don't think a superficial knowledge of the rights people on the internet say you should have is sufficient to prevent that violation of your rights in the first place in most cases.

Getting some form of verbal confirmation of detention is one thing. Continuing to argue after an officer gives you a command is another and this is where people get hurt.

As strange as it sounds, laws are under no obligation to be "constitutional" when they're passed. Sure, it's a waste of time to pass a law that's clearly unconstitutional, but ultimately someone still needs to challenge that law in court if you want it overturned. Whatever you know about the bill of rights is meaningless in the face of local statutes which may or may not have faced any judicial scrutiny.

[Salodin]

Getting some form of verbal confirmation of detention is one thing. Continuing to argue after an officer gives you a command is another and this is where people get hurt.

This.

Some of y'all have this juvenile sense of imminent justice, like somehow telling the cop (s)hes doing something illegal will suddenly make them stop, or worse give you a reason to not obey orders. It does not. You can point out how unlawful they are all you want, it gives you no excuse to resist arrest or run away. This is the law, and two wrongs do not make a right; two wrongs just add another notch on the "i am now a statistic" tally.

Does that mean we hand wave blatent violations of civil liberties? Of course not. But the streets are not where we fix that issue, a court is. If the problem is systemic, then congress is where we fix it.

Let me repeat that for our arm chair activist in the thread: no one cares how right you are, if the cop says to sit down and chill you sit down and chill. If they violate your civil liberties, then lawyer up. Is that not sufficient for many, including our black communities? Of course it's not, but we have lots of very talented and caring individuals working on it; you don't need to get blasted by cops to assist.

[Deejay]

Does that mean we hand wave blatent violations of civil liberties? Of course not. But the streets are not where we fix that issue, a court is. If the problem is systemic, then congress...

If they violate your civil liberties, then lawyer up. Is that not sufficient for many, including our black communities? Of course it's not, but we have lots of very talented and caring individuals working on it; you don't need to get blasted by cops to assist.

Hate to paraphrase here but you downplay civil injustice to the point where it sounds a fast food manager talking to a guest about a drive thru order going on 15 minutes.

[Salodin]

I can sugar coat it for you if you'd like.

[Deejay]

People of color have been dealing with police abuse for 50+ years and your best course of action is to be patient. Shit won't change unless people are up in arms about it. Hoping our congress not only acts but follows through on civil injustice is a laughable response to a very serious problem. That's why I think it's funny.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Salodin]

I never said be patient. I said do what you need to do to not get shot while your community watches and the country wonders if you actually deserved it or not.

You still keep dancing around a scarecrow. You gonna recommend to your friends to walk/drive away from a police questioning, or listen to their orders? I'm not saying to incriminate yourself, I'm saying don't reach for your "book" when guns are drawn, don't suddenly reach for your (assumably) black cell phone when tensions are high. No, you can't open your video app faster than bullets will fly and kill you.

[thetruepandagod]

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crim...icle-1.2809204

San Diego-area police critically wounded a man who witnesses said was unarmed with his hands up Tuesday afternoon.

Gunfire rang out around 2 p.m. local time in a parking lot at the Broadway Village Shopping Center in El Cajon, Calif., KNSD-TV reported. Witnesses and family members said that the as-yet-unidentified man shot by police is a mentally-challenged black man.


Oh no, my little half brother gonna get caught up in the race war before I ever even meet him.

[Aerin]

Oh, his hands were up alright...



http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/28/us/cal...ing/index.html

Edit: In this case I'd say the cops were totally justified. If someone has their hands in their pockets, and then quickly moves their hands into a position like they're firing a weapon, you don't have time to see what they might have.

[Intrinsic]

Not answering questions from the police because you're not required to legally isn't an option for non-whites in America. By not complying with every single thing they say you're just increasing the odds that you're going to get shot. Dancing around whether they can legally detain you or not just because you refuse to answer some questions is playing with your life. The likelihood is some cop is just gonna get fed up and shoot you.