Cops are above the law

And if ever a sentence could do with some punctuation, there's one!

I'm getting a headache trying to work out what it means.

edit: I think I've got it nailed up to "thugs in blue", and then I lose it again with "bent over backwards apologetics". Wut?

edit2: I very nearly had it that time. I'm nearly sure I did.

What's throwing me is "by association by", I think. I more used to "by association with". Nah. I can't honestly say I see what you mean.

The thugs are making your friends look bad by association with whom?

He has friends who are cops. His friends make difficult arrests properly, sometimes being injured themselves in the process. His friends are made to look bad by association, because to the distant observer it is impossible to distinguish them from 'thugs in blue' who think that as long as they have successfully shot their way out they did a good job...compounded by the apologists who agree that as long as it is just a citizen dead in the street their shoddy work doesn't merit bad consequences for them.
 
It probably has more to do with knowledge of the individual. I bet cop apologists would not be apologizing for cops if someone close to them was killed.

This sort of thinking does not lay a basis for justice. Justice comes when you start from an unbiased approach, which means eliminating personal context.

1. You could be anybody in society.
2. You want the system to be as good for you as possible.

It follows that all social goods (e.g., liberty, opportunity, income) are to be distributed equally unless an unequal distribution is to everyone's advantage.

This is John Rawls's theory of justice.

I just don't see how cops being allowed by society to have this level of violence is possibly to "everyone's advantage." It certainly isn't to the victims, therefore, it's unjust.

Cops should not be awarded the liberty of violence. It's unfair to their victims.
 
I'm beginning to think justice has nothing to do with wanting a "good" system. I think it's more to do with precedent than just about anything else.

So, we do this, and accept this punishment for this sort of behaviour simply because that's what we've always done. And people complain about injustice if the punishment doesn't come within a nano-whisker of a previous punishment for a comparable crime.
 
I'm beginning to think justice has nothing to do with wanting a "good" system. I think it's more to do with precedent than just about anything else.

So, we do this, and accept this punishment for this sort of behaviour simply because that's what we've always done. And people complain about injustice if the punishment doesn't come within a nano-whisker of a previous punishment for a comparable crime.

It is reasonable to say that the most basic thing that can be demanded of justice is consistency.
 
Indeed. But that supposes we have justice in the first place. It's no good just having consistency, if your actions are simply consistent with something which is unjust.
 
Indeed. But that supposes we have justice in the first place. It's no good just having consistency, if your actions are simply consistent with something which is unjust.

I don't know if you can have "justice in the first place". If it is really the first place, you have to try to do what is right, or reasonable, or fair. It's only when you face the second time that you are called on to be just...by imposing the same penalty you did the first time.
 
I'm beginning to think justice has nothing to do with wanting a "good" system. I think it's more to do with precedent than just about anything else.

So, we do this, and accept this punishment for this sort of behaviour simply because that's what we've always done. And people complain about injustice if the punishment doesn't come within a nano-whisker of a previous punishment for a comparable crime.

This is common I think. In the back of my mind when I demand justice for cops, honestly, I don't want to see them in the sorts of prisons we have now. But I don't want to see any other violent offenders in our prisons either. I would rather have our prisons be a combination of punishment and then therapy, with shorter prison sentences on average. Prisons ought to be about reform, not punishment. Build up the offender's self-respect and work-ethic so they can re-integrate, instead of taking part in a criminal training camp, like prisons are now.

So I'm kinda hypocritical when I ask for justice for cops, because our prison system is awful. However, the punitive and degrading system we have now is at least effective at making people think "I don't want to go there!" It would be a strong incentive for cops to be more careful if they might actually get sent there for overzealous use of force.
 
Here's a link to the video, so you can see the specifics:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=idO9tKFAsk8

This one has more of the context before he punches her in the face and gets off with no charges.

Probably because she assaulted him first and he only hit her once to subdue her.

I like how she tries to deny she kicked him, and then alleges she kicked him because he punched her first. This was one particular case where the in car video probably helped the cop out immensely.
 
Probably because she assaulted him first.

:lol::lol::goodjob::goodjob:

You're parodying yourself to see who can't tell the difference, right?

Right?
 

Wow, what the hell?


Link to video.

A 36-year-old Baltimore woman claims she was tased by police and arrested while filming the arrest of a man with her mobile phone, according to a lawsuit to be served on the Baltimore City Police Department as early as Thursday.

Video of the March 30 melee surfaced online this week. Police erased the 135-second recording from the woman's phone, but it was recovered from her cloud account, according to the Circuit Court for Baltimore City lawsuit (PDF), which seeks $7 million.

Kianga Mwamba was driving home from a family gathering in March. Stopped in traffic, she began filming the nearby arrest of a man who she says was kicked by police.

"You telling me I can't record," the woman says on the video as police tell her to move on.

"I'll park. I'll park. I'll park,"
the woman is heard saying in her own recording.

All of a sudden an officer says, "Out of the car. Out of the car."

She was yanked out. "He burning me. He burning me," the woman is heard screaming.

The lawsuit comes as at least one state, Illinois, moves to ban the recording of the police amid calls across the nation for cops to be equipped with body cameras to help prevent future police scuffles resulting in deaths. President Barack Obama has also weighed in on the issue, announcing last week that the administration would provide $75 million in funding to police departments to purchase body cameras. Even before Obama's announcement, local police departments were gobbling them up as fast as they could in the aftermath of the Ferguson, Missouri death of Michael Brown.

Mwamba was arrested on charges of assault for allegedly trying to run over two officers. Charges were dropped, and she suffered cuts and bruises.

At the end of the tape, an officer says, "You a dumb #^!#@, you know that?"

"What did I do?" she asks.

"You just tried to run over an officer," the officer responds.

While in custody, she gave her phone to an officer to show the video that she didn't try to run over anybody.
The video was allegedly erased from the phone in what her attorney, Joshua Insley, described in a telephone interview as a "coverup."

Watching the video, she records a good 90 seconds while her car is stopped, then is told to pull over? :confused:

Then gets beaten and arrested for trying to run a cop over?
The car didn't move! Not one damn inch.

They told her to pull forward while other police stood in front of her so they could arrest her on a felony and ruin her life. See how police lie.
Any police defenders want to opine on this Youtube comment?
Seems accurate to me.

The $7 million lawsuit has much more sickening details:
http://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/baltimorecopssuit.pdf

Recording while stopped at a red light.
$75,000 bail for the made up charges.
All assets confiscated.
Laughing about not getting her inhaler for her from her car.
Only went free once the erased recording was recovered.



And what the hell is wrong with Illinois?
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2014/12/illinois-again-moves-to-ban-recording-the-police/
 
:lol::lol::goodjob::goodjob:

You're parodying yourself to see who can't tell the difference, right?

Right?

Have you noticed that the vast majority of these incidents start with someone punching a cop/going for their gun/kicking a cop in the face/resisting arrest/etc.?

See a trend there?

Wow, what the hell?


Link to video.

Watching the video, she records a good 90 seconds while her car is stopped, then is told to pull over? :confused:

Then gets beaten and arrested for trying to run a cop over?

The car didn't move! Not one damn inch.

And what the hell is wrong with Illinois?

Yeah, this one is bad. The city is going to take a huge hit fiscally on that one. Cop acted extremely unprofessional, and should be charged with assault and fired on that one.
 
Have you noticed that the vast majority of these incidents start with someone punching a cop/going for their gun/kicking a cop in the face/resisting arrest/etc.?

See a trend there?
Oh I see a trend alright. But the trend is you.
 
You mean this one? Ok.

I'm a Brazilian Jiujitsu instructor. I know for a fact that your claims about subduing people are utter shite.

Let me ask you a simple question. How many times have you ever placed a suspect into the back seat of a car while they were handcuffed?

Please be honest.

Cops are trained to try and get suspects in cuffs into the back seat of a police cruiser without harming them. And that is a lot harder than you think. You typically don't do this while employing the 'leg lock' you mentioned for the simple reason the person in cuffs will probably lose their balance and face plant themselves into the car - and if they hit something hard or awkwardly, they could lose an eye, teeth, or even fracture their eye socket. That being the case, at the moment of putting someone in the car, its entirely possible for someone to get out of hand and do something like this woman did when she turned and kicked the cop in the face.

In other words its easy to armchair quarterback the situation, but another thing entirely when your in their shoes.

You're entitled to your opinion, but you need to realize not everyone sees things from a 'Brazilian jiujitsu instructor' perspective. As such, you can probably accomplish subduing holds that even most cops cant. Your average cop, let alone your average person, can still have problems in hobbling someone so they cant kick back at you. If you watch film of cops subduing a person, you will typically see a couple of cops using their entire bodies to get on top of the persons legs and hold them there. Its not like they try to put the perp in a figure 4 to have them tap out in submission.

Point being, just because you can be well trained doesn't mean things can go south on you and you get surprised. It happens.

But I stand by my comments about simply just grabbing someones legs to subdue them, especially trying to do it while putting someone into the back seat of a car. If you watch the film, she managed to turn on him as he was trying to get her into the car, and that's when she kicked him in the face.

Getting someone into a car while they are in cuffs can even be troublesome even when they aren't putting up a fight. I continually see allegations of police brutality just from someone being cuffed and placed into the back seat of a police cruiser because they got their wrist hurt or hit their head while doing it. Someone fighting you while trying to do it is practically a guarantee that someones going to get hurt in the process.

Now,I might accept that the cop is too stupid to know how to correctly apply a leg lock, but I will not accept that a punch to the face is an appropriate response. Even ignoring the obvious idiocy of claiming that pepper spray or a taser should even be an option on an already cuffed subject, all the other injuries you describe are perfectly acceptable; if you resist arrest and your wrist pops in a wrist-lock, that's your own dumb fault for not rolling with the pressure.

Actually, I was merely referring to the taser and/or pepper spray as tools a cop has in general, not necessarily specific to this circumstance. But yeah, I've seen video of cops pepper spraying big guys in cuffs because they were tearing hell out of their squad car and trying to get to them in the enclosed space would be really problematic.

And I don't really see much of a difference in a wrist breaking from a hold, and the guy punching someone in the face. Both would be claimed to be the results of excessive force, even if, as you allege, 'that's [their] own dumb fault...'.

And someone's eye socket breaking from a punch to the face is not a case of getting "hurt in weird ways." It's a common enough occurrence that it's actually one of two major reasons the UFC introduced gloves in UFC 4, the other being knuckle damage. The breakage also has no factor in this use of force being excessive; that's due to the punch to the face, regardless of an injury.

I've seen a person actually fracture their jaw from chewing food and biting down on a piece of gristle. Bone density does indeed vary from person to person and some are far more susceptible to bone fracture than others. That same punch to you or me probably wouldn't have given either of us a fracture.
 
That case could have been solved with words. The cop let his ego control him. All he had to do was listen to the woman, acknowledge that it was unfair but he's just doing his job, and be patient with her emotions. Show a person respect and they'll usually return the favor.

Instead, he treats her like a dangerous animal.
 
You mean this one? Ok.

Let me ask you a simple question. How many times have you ever placed a suspect into the back seat of a car while they were handcuffed?

Please be honest.
4. Did you miss the part where I explained that I've trained cops?

Cops are trained to try and get suspects in cuffs into the back seat of a police cruiser without harming them. And that is a lot harder than you think. You typically don't do this while employing the 'leg lock' you mentioned for the simple reason the person in cuffs will probably lose their balance and face plant themselves into the car - and if they hit something hard or awkwardly, they could lose an eye, teeth, or even fracture their eye socket. That being the case, at the moment of putting someone in the car, its entirely possible for someone to get out of hand and do something like this woman did when she turned and kicked the cop in the face.
No, it's not. You obviously can't apply a leg lock on someone and keep them moving. At least, not unless you are considerably larger than them. You can, however, apply a shoulder-bar, with very little difficulty - it's hard to learn, easy to do once learnt - and propel them whereever the hell you want. Now, they could conceivably kick you in the shins when you are placing them in the backseat. That is all. There is absolutely no way that someone can kick you unless you release them, then stand there waiting for them to reposition themselves.

In other words its easy to armchair quarterback the situation, but another thing entirely when your in their shoes.
I've been in their shoes. There's plenty about policework that is hard, but placing an already handcuffed individual in a vehicle is not one of them. Not unless there is a considerable weight difference. If it had been Eric Garner that kicked an officer in the face while handcuffed, I might be on your side of this argument.

You're entitled to your opinion, but you need to realize not everyone sees things from a 'Brazilian jiujitsu instructor' perspective. As such, you can probably accomplish subduing holds that even most cops cant. Your average cop, let alone your average person, can still have problems in hobbling someone so they cant kick back at you. If you watch film of cops subduing a person, you will typically see a couple of cops using their entire bodies to get on top of the persons legs and hold them there. Its not like they try to put the perp in a figure 4 to have them tap out in submission.
I would certainly hope not, as a figure four is a professional wrestling move that is more painful to the person applying it than the person it applied to.

I understand that the average cop can't apply a gogoplata or rolling crucifix while remaining even-breathed enough to explain to a class what points this hold puts pressure on. I also do not pretend to know the exact training methods police receive in the US.

I do, however, know the methods taught in Australia, because I happen to have learnt Hapkido from the man who teaches them at the NSW Police Academy. And I can tell you that most police officers over here are both capable of learning, in a single lesson, the shoulder-bar technique I describe. I can also tell you that the vast majority of trainees ignore those lessons, in spite of the fact that the guy who teaches them has taught several Ultimate Fighters, including two World Heavyweight Championship competitors. The police apparatus over here is happy to have their officers do a sub-standard job, because they know that it will be those being arrested who are injured, and not their officers. It's disgusting. They also attempt to pressure him into teaching them chokeholds, which he refuses to do, as he doesn't want a bunch of dead police victims on his conscience.

Point being, just because you can be well trained doesn't mean things can go south on you and you get surprised. It happens.
Yes it does. I once got jumped by a drunk guy at a train station. I calmly performed a double-leg takedown and mounted him, only to have him escape the mount, pass my guard, and catch me in a back-mount. I ate two punches to the back of the head before I rolled through into a heel hook. It turned out the drunk guy had taken two Pankration classes three years previously, and picked that one time he got drunk and jumped a guy to remember everything he'd ever seen before. And if the police had punched him in the face, I wouldn't be concerned, because he's a guy that could counter a shoulder-bar. In fact, he did; I applied one after snapping his ankle while waiting for the police, and the wily bastard rolled with the pressure and I had to take him back down and apply a kimura.

But a woman in handcuffs is not the bastard lovechild of Jet Li that I came across one night in Seven Hills. All she did was kick. An appropriate response was to lock up her legs. As I said, maybe the police in the US simply don't know how to do that properly. But punching someone in the face is not the appropriate response. It increases the odds of the officer suffering a serious hand injury, for one thing; I teach people to throw forearms rather than punches for that reason.

But I stand by my comments about simply just grabbing someones legs to subdue them, especially trying to do it while putting someone into the back seat of a car. If you watch the film, she managed to turn on him as he was trying to get her into the car, and that's when she kicked him in the face.
Because he was doing a very bad job of placing her in the car.

Getting someone into a car while they are in cuffs can even be troublesome even when they aren't putting up a fight. I continually see allegations of police brutality just from someone being cuffed and placed into the back seat of a police cruiser because they got their wrist hurt or hit their head while doing it. Someone fighting you while trying to do it is practically a guarantee that someones going to get hurt in the process.
And I have zero sympathy with people who are injured in that manner. Though if someone is placed in a vehicle correctly, it is a shoulder injury that is most likely.

Actually, I was merely referring to the taser and/or pepper spray as tools a cop has in general, not necessarily specific to this circumstance.
Ah, fair enough.

But yeah, I've seen video of cops pepper spraying big guys in cuffs because they were tearing hell out of their squad car and trying to get to them in the enclosed space would be really problematic.

And I don't really see much of a difference in a wrist breaking from a hold, and the guy punching someone in the face. Both would be claimed to be the results of excessive force, even if, as you allege, 'that's [their] own dumb fault...'.
A wrist breakage from someone fighting a wristlock is obviously the person in the wristlock's fault. Unless the cop is taking them to the ground applying a full body scissors while doing so. The bigger the person being subdued, the more leeway I am prepared to give the police doing the subduing. Pepper spray seems like the sor of thing you'd save for one hell of a big guy though.

I've seen a person actually fracture their jaw from chewing food and biting down on a piece of gristle. Bone density does indeed vary from person to person and some are far more susceptible to bone fracture than others. That same punch to you or me probably wouldn't have given either of us a fracture.
I once saw a person break their leg kicking a soccer ball. A fractured eye socket from a punch to the face is not a weird injury. It's a very common injury. Now, if the punch to face had caused her to break her pelvis, you might have a point.
 
Back
Top Bottom