More Taser Controversy.

[Cerebral_DownTime]

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/nation ... id=1198885

Haven't had one of these in awhile. Cops tased an umarmed wheelchair bound man with no legs.

Opinions?

[leadpipe]

Limbs or no limbs.....behave.

[Cerebral_DownTime]

I like most of your takes Pipe, but that one is crap. The notion that you have to follow every order of a cop, regardless of circumstance, or face unwarranted violence, is beyond stupid. Far beyond. The man was unarmed in a wheelchair and no threat to anyone. Obviously they knew they had a shit case because they didn't follow through on their "resisting arrest" charge.

A taser is only supposed to be used in the place of deadly force. It's not a toy to use people who disagree with you. It's brutality plain and simple.

Just because they have a badge, doesn't make them right. They aren't untouchable gods. They're just people who went through a 12 week training course.

[Erie Warrior]

Couldn't they just have stuck a baton in his spokes? Seriously, do what the cops ask. Probably excessive force, but I doubt it was completely unwarranted.

[leadpipe]

I like most of your takes Pipe, but that one is crap. The notion that you have to follow every order of a cop, regardless of circumstance, or face unwarranted violence, is beyond stupid. Far beyond. The man was unarmed in a wheelchair and no threat to anyone. Obviously they knew they had a shit case because they didn't follow through on their "resisting arrest" charge.

A taser is only supposed to be used in the place of deadly force. It's not a toy to use people who disagree with you. It's brutality plain and simple.

Just because they have a badge, doesn't make them right. They aren't untouchable gods. They're just people who went through a 12 week training course.

Yeah, it probably is shit, but, as I've stated before, I really don't give a damn about people that put themselves in these positions. There are too many people in this world that truly deserve sympathy, struck down by disease or accident.

And, you are correct again, in that the police are not untouchable Gods, and like any other profession, there are entitled assholes, but, again, the way to avoid the entitled assholes is to behave. The Lead Man doesn't get tased because he follows the rules.

Rodney King didn't deserve that brutal beatdown. If he'd a followed the rules he never would have. And, I know that it would be impossible to get accurate numbers, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that a good deal of these cats suffering "police brutality" either have a crminal record, or will be arrested post incident somewhere along the line. Like Rodney King for example.

Doesn't make any brutality correct. It's still clearly abhorrable - but, to my point, there is a really, really easy way to avoid it.

[The Score]

And, you are correct again, in that the police are not untouchable Gods, and like any other profession, there are entitled assholes, but, again, the way to avoid the entitled assholes is to behave. The Lead Man doesn't get tased because he follows the rules.

Rodney King didn't deserve that brutal beatdown. If he'd a followed the rules he never would have. And, I know that it would be impossible to get accurate numbers, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that a good deal of these cats suffering "police brutality" either have a crminal record, or will be arrested post incident somewhere along the line. Like Rodney King for example.

Doesn't make any brutality correct. It's still clearly abhorrable - but, to my point, there is a really, really easy way to avoid it.

I just have a question: To what rules are you referring to?

The actual laws of the nation, state, or municipality that are on the books or the rules that some police officers make up on the spot? You know, I can avoid getting punched in the face by giving the local bully my lunch money but that doesn't make the bully right or all the kids who stand up to him wrong.

[RC]

Normally I usually side with the cops but this one seems pretty bad. I'm guessing this guy should have a case against the cops. A problem I have though is with this story because the author doesn't give all the facts and it seems pretty slanted toward the man in the wheelchair.

For example, one thing that wasn't listed though is whether Mr. Williams had any prior arrests or if the police has had to come back to this guy's place multiple times before for stuff. For all we know the cops could have been to this guys place giving him multiple warnings about domestic violence, etc.

But once again a newspaper can't seem to get a story with all the facts and this is why the media sucks. I honestly don't know whether I should be outraged or not without all the facts.

My biggest question is why is child protective services storming into this guys house to take his 2 year old? I would have threw a fit too if some asshole social worker tried to storm into my house and grab my kid.

[pup]

Normally I usually side with the cops but this one seems pretty bad. I'm guessing this guy should have a case against the cops. A problem I have though is with this story because the author doesn't give all the facts and it seems pretty slanted toward the man in the wheelchair.

For example, one thing that wasn't listed though is whether Mr. Williams had any prior arrests or if the police has had to come back to this guy's place multiple times before for stuff. For all we know the cops could have been to this guys place giving him multiple warnings about domestic violence, etc.

But once again a newspaper can't seem to get a story with all the facts and this is why the media sucks. I honestly don't know whether I should be outraged or not without all the facts.

My biggest question is why is child protective services storming into this guys house to take his 2 year old? I would have threw a fit too if some asshole social worker tried to storm into my house and grab my kid.

1. Because they were there on a domestic violence call. Pretty much fair game to get the 2 year old out of the mix when you are there because of a report of hitting one's wife.
2. The part of the story that was glossed over, but in my mind points to the cops quick trigger was "the mob was growing angry" or something of that sort. Not sure of the neighberhood, but cops have to do what they have to do once a mob assembles.

Very simple. Someone calls the cops (wife?) about a domestic dispute. Caller says husband hits wife. Cops are showing up in a certain frame of mind. Which they have to. Once they get there, the steps to no get tasered are simple:

A) do what you are told
B) go back to A

If the cops say "Hand the kid over", hand the kid over. Do not force them to pry the kid out of your arms. Hand the kid over. Then proceed to a civil discussion with the cops about what happened.

It is pretty simple.

[leadpipe]

And, you are correct again, in that the police are not untouchable Gods, and like any other profession, there are entitled assholes, but, again, the way to avoid the entitled assholes is to behave. The Lead Man doesn't get tased because he follows the rules.

Rodney King didn't deserve that brutal beatdown. If he'd a followed the rules he never would have. And, I know that it would be impossible to get accurate numbers, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that a good deal of these cats suffering "police brutality" either have a crminal record, or will be arrested post incident somewhere along the line. Like Rodney King for example.

Doesn't make any brutality correct. It's still clearly abhorrable - but, to my point, there is a really, really easy way to avoid it.

I just have a question: To what rules are you referring to?

The actual laws of the nation, state, or municipality that are on the books or the rules that some police officers make up on the spot? You know, I can avoid getting punched in the face by giving the local bully my lunch money but that doesn't make the bully right or all the kids who stand up to him wrong.

I know this is a shock to many, but the incidents in which "cops make up rules on the spot" pale in comparison to those involve life long fuck ups that can't do what they are told. Even if it's of the utmost common sense to do so.

Look, my opinion. You are free to feel bad for who you choose to feel bad for. I'm not wishing my feelings on anyone else.

All I'm saying is that I don't feel I'm a genius, that is, I don't think you have to be all that bright to keep yourself from getting unlawfully tased.

So, to answer succinctly, follow the laws of the land AND common sense and you'll be fine. As Pup states, if this guy felt be was being wronged by the letter of the law, make that genius jump to common sense, and things would've been taken care of.

[jfiling]

And, you are correct again, in that the police are not untouchable Gods, and like any other profession, there are entitled assholes, but, again, the way to avoid the entitled assholes is to behave. The Lead Man doesn't get tased because he follows the rules.

Rodney King didn't deserve that brutal beatdown. If he'd a followed the rules he never would have. And, I know that it would be impossible to get accurate numbers, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that a good deal of these cats suffering "police brutality" either have a crminal record, or will be arrested post incident somewhere along the line. Like Rodney King for example.

Doesn't make any brutality correct. It's still clearly abhorrable - but, to my point, there is a really, really easy way to avoid it.

I just have a question: To what rules are you referring to?

The actual laws of the nation, state, or municipality that are on the books or the rules that some police officers make up on the spot? You know, I can avoid getting punched in the face by giving the local bully my lunch money but that doesn't make the bully right or all the kids who stand up to him wrong.

I know this is a shock to many, but the incidents in which "cops make up rules on the spot" pale in comparison to those involve life long fuck ups that can't do what they are told. Even if it's of the utmost common sense to do so.

Look, my opinion. You are free to feel bad for who you choose to feel bad for. I'm not wishing my feelings on anyone else.

All I'm saying is that I don't feel I'm a genius, that is, I don't think you have to be all that bright to keep yourself from getting unlawfully tased.

So, to answer succinctly, follow the laws of the land AND common sense and you'll be fine. As Pup states, if this guy felt be was being wronged by the letter of the law, make that genius jump to common sense, and things would've been taken care of.

First of all, I've followed this thread, but really wanted to stay out of it, for reasons most of you already know.

Nobody here really is a genius. We're just human beings getting by, day by day, with our various hobbies, interests, and such.

So here's the scenario: a legless guy in a wheelchair gets the cops called because of a domestic violence complaint. The police arrive, and he refuses to turn over his daughter to Child Protective Services. To make it easy on everyone, the police taser the guy in the wheelchair twice, causing him to fall out of the chair and his pants to fall down. They then handcuff the pantsless, legless perp, and leave him on the sidewalk in broad daylight. Finally, they charge him with domestic violence and, my personal favorite, "resisting arrest". The guy then spends six days in jail before prosecutors decide not to prosecute him with any crime, due to lack of evidence.

AND SOME PEOPLE HERE DON'T SEE A FUCKING PROBLEM WITH THIS.

Goddammit, I got all worked up when I was determined never to let NHB do that to me again.

And Pipe, here's an idea: let's teach the police the "laws of the land" and "common sense" and force them to abide by both, so that incidents like this become rarer. The prosecutor has flat-out admitted this guy committed no crime, so how do you justify his treatment?

I need about 6 more beers now.

[jfiling]

BTW, here's the local newspaper's video report.

[leadpipe]

And, you are correct again, in that the police are not untouchable Gods, and like any other profession, there are entitled assholes, but, again, the way to avoid the entitled assholes is to behave. The Lead Man doesn't get tased because he follows the rules.

Rodney King didn't deserve that brutal beatdown. If he'd a followed the rules he never would have. And, I know that it would be impossible to get accurate numbers, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that a good deal of these cats suffering "police brutality" either have a crminal record, or will be arrested post incident somewhere along the line. Like Rodney King for example.

Doesn't make any brutality correct. It's still clearly abhorrable - but, to my point, there is a really, really easy way to avoid it.

I just have a question: To what rules are you referring to?

The actual laws of the nation, state, or municipality that are on the books or the rules that some police officers make up on the spot? You know, I can avoid getting punched in the face by giving the local bully my lunch money but that doesn't make the bully right or all the kids who stand up to him wrong.

I know this is a shock to many, but the incidents in which "cops make up rules on the spot" pale in comparison to those involve life long fuck ups that can't do what they are told. Even if it's of the utmost common sense to do so.

Look, my opinion. You are free to feel bad for who you choose to feel bad for. I'm not wishing my feelings on anyone else.

All I'm saying is that I don't feel I'm a genius, that is, I don't think you have to be all that bright to keep yourself from getting unlawfully tased.

So, to answer succinctly, follow the laws of the land AND common sense and you'll be fine. As Pup states, if this guy felt be was being wronged by the letter of the law, make that genius jump to common sense, and things would've been taken care of.

First of all, I've followed this thread, but really wanted to stay out of it, for reasons most of you already know.

Nobody here really is a genius. We're just human beings getting by, day by day, with our various hobbies, interests, and such.

So here's the scenario: a legless guy in a wheelchair gets the cops called because of a domestic violence complaint. The police arrive, and he refuses to turn over his daughter to Child Protective Services. To make it easy on everyone, the police taser the guy in the wheelchair twice, causing him to fall out of the chair and his pants to fall down. They then handcuff the pantsless, legless perp, and leave him on the sidewalk in broad daylight. Finally, they charge him with domestic violence and, my personal favorite, "resisting arrest". The guy then spends six days in jail before prosecutors decide not to prosecute him with any crime, due to lack of evidence.

AND SOME PEOPLE HERE DON'T SEE A FUCKING PROBLEM WITH THIS.

Goddammit, I got all worked up when I was determined never to let NHB do that to me again.

And Pipe, here's an idea: let's teach the police the "laws of the land" and "common sense" and force them to abide by both, so that incidents like this become rarer. The prosecutor has flat-out admitted this guy committed no crime, so how do you justify his treatment?

I need about 6 more beers now.

Re-read the thread.

Never said police brutality was A-OK. As a matter of fact, I referred to it as abhorrable.

Never justified the treatment in this case, as a matter of fact, never really even referred specifically to this case.

Simply stating that this shit is pretty easy to avoid, and the great majority of us that obey the laws and use common sense do just that.

Also said I really don't feel that bad about it, for the reason, read sentence above this one.

Lastly, I stated it was my opinion. My opinion is really nothing to get worked up over.

Can't wait for the next thread involving some great, innocent guy getting tased. Sure, they'll be about a million cases in between in which police are tasing some dreg of society that is endangering others, thus helping clean up the streets a bit, but F'em I suppose. These asshole cops all have an agenda.

B-E-H-A-V-E.

[Orenthal]

And, you are correct again, in that the police are not untouchable Gods, and like any other profession, there are entitled assholes, but, again, the way to avoid the entitled assholes is to behave. The Lead Man doesn't get tased because he follows the rules.

Rodney King didn't deserve that brutal beatdown. If he'd a followed the rules he never would have. And, I know that it would be impossible to get accurate numbers, but it doesn't take a genius to figure out that a good deal of these cats suffering "police brutality" either have a crminal record, or will be arrested post incident somewhere along the line. Like Rodney King for example.

Doesn't make any brutality correct. It's still clearly abhorrable - but, to my point, there is a really, really easy way to avoid it.

I just have a question: To what rules are you referring to?

The actual laws of the nation, state, or municipality that are on the books or the rules that some police officers make up on the spot? You know, I can avoid getting punched in the face by giving the local bully my lunch money but that doesn't make the bully right or all the kids who stand up to him wrong.

I know this is a shock to many, but the incidents in which "cops make up rules on the spot" pale in comparison to those involve life long fuck ups that can't do what they are told. Even if it's of the utmost common sense to do so.

Look, my opinion. You are free to feel bad for who you choose to feel bad for. I'm not wishing my feelings on anyone else.

All I'm saying is that I don't feel I'm a genius, that is, I don't think you have to be all that bright to keep yourself from getting unlawfully tased.

So, to answer succinctly, follow the laws of the land AND common sense and you'll be fine. As Pup states, if this guy felt be was being wronged by the letter of the law, make that genius jump to common sense, and things would've been taken care of.

First of all, I've followed this thread, but really wanted to stay out of it, for reasons most of you already know.

Nobody here really is a genius. We're just human beings getting by, day by day, with our various hobbies, interests, and such.

So here's the scenario: a legless guy in a wheelchair gets the cops called because of a domestic violence complaint. The police arrive, and he refuses to turn over his daughter to Child Protective Services. To make it easy on everyone, the police taser the guy in the wheelchair twice, causing him to fall out of the chair and his pants to fall down. They then handcuff the pantsless, legless perp, and leave him on the sidewalk in broad daylight. Finally, they charge him with domestic violence and, my personal favorite, "resisting arrest". The guy then spends six days in jail before prosecutors decide not to prosecute him with any crime, due to lack of evidence.

AND SOME PEOPLE HERE DON'T SEE A FUCKING PROBLEM WITH THIS.

Goddammit, I got all worked up when I was determined never to let NHB do that to me again.

And Pipe, here's an idea: let's teach the police the "laws of the land" and "common sense" and force them to abide by both, so that incidents like this become rarer. The prosecutor has flat-out admitted this guy committed no crime, so how do you justify his treatment?

I need about 6 more beers now.

Re-read the thread.

Never said police brutality was A-OK. As a matter of fact, I referred to it as abhorrable.

Never justified the treatment in this case, as a matter of fact, never really even referred specifically to this case.

Simply stating that this shit is pretty easy to avoid, and the great majority of us that obey the laws and use common sense do just that.

Also said I really don't feel that bad about it, for the reason, read sentence above this one.

Lastly, I stated it was my opinion. My opinion is really nothing to get worked up over.

Can't wait for the next thread involving some great, innocent guy getting tased. Sure, they'll be about a million cases in between in which police are tasing some dreg of society that is endangering others, thus helping clean up the streets a bit, but F'em I suppose. These asshole cops all have an agenda.

B-E-H-A-V-E.

[jfiling]

First of all, I've followed this thread, but really wanted to stay out of it, for reasons most of you already know.

Nobody here really is a genius. We're just human beings getting by, day by day, with our various hobbies, interests, and such.

So here's the scenario: a legless guy in a wheelchair gets the cops called because of a domestic violence complaint. The police arrive, and he refuses to turn over his daughter to Child Protective Services. To make it easy on everyone, the police taser the guy in the wheelchair twice, causing him to fall out of the chair and his pants to fall down. They then handcuff the pantsless, legless perp, and leave him on the sidewalk in broad daylight. Finally, they charge him with domestic violence and, my personal favorite, "resisting arrest". The guy then spends six days in jail before prosecutors decide not to prosecute him with any crime, due to lack of evidence.

AND SOME PEOPLE HERE DON'T SEE A FUCKING PROBLEM WITH THIS.

Goddammit, I got all worked up when I was determined never to let NHB do that to me again.

And Pipe, here's an idea: let's teach the police the "laws of the land" and "common sense" and force them to abide by both, so that incidents like this become rarer. The prosecutor has flat-out admitted this guy committed no crime, so how do you justify his treatment?

I need about 6 more beers now.

Re-read the thread.

Never said police brutality was A-OK. As a matter of fact, I referred to it as abhorrable.

Never justified the treatment in this case, as a matter of fact, never really even referred specifically to this case.

Simply stating that this shit is pretty easy to avoid, and the great majority of us that obey the laws and use common sense do just that.

Also said I really don't feel that bad about it, for the reason, read sentence above this one.

Lastly, I stated it was my opinion. My opinion is really nothing to get worked up over.

Can't wait for the next thread involving some great, innocent guy getting tased. Sure, they'll be about a million cases in between in which police are tasing some dreg of society that is endangering others, thus helping clean up the streets a bit, but F'em I suppose. These asshole cops all have an agenda.

B-E-H-A-V-E.

At some point, doesn't the treatment in a particular case need to be addressed? Do the police have the discretion to act appropriately in different circumstances (and, in this particular case, there is an internal affairs investigation pending and the prosecutor, again, dropped all charges against the "perp"), or do they just have to assume the worst and beat (or taser) anyone not "respecting their authoritay" into submission?

I'd love if you had said something specific to this case, because of the facts I've already mentioned, but even more because I'd love for your explanation of how, exactly, the guy in question didn't "behave".

Furthermore, I haven't posted anything cop-related in a while, ironically because I've been trolling a cop website. I've learned how tough the job these guys have, and developed a respect for them, but not enough to give them a free pass.

But hey, that guy was giving them lip, so who cares if he had no legs and could not possibly pose a threat to the police. To use your words, "F'em".

[Orenthal]

Furthermore, I haven't posted anything cop-related in a while, ironically because I've been trolling a cop website. I've learned how tough the job these guys have, and developed a respect for them, but not enough to give them a free pass.

It takes trolling a cop website to learn that? Was COPS cancelled in yer neck of the woods? Pipe put it perfectly, no further information needed. Shit, Pipe's position is one step away from a police state... Watch out!

[Cerebral_DownTime]

Common sense is a term that's been tossed around alot in these threads. Apparently for some here, it's not a two way street. It doesn't take too much common sense to realize assaulting a unarmed man that's no threat to you in any way, is a really bad idea and the wrong way to handle it. Police officers should be held to a higher standard than the rest of while on the job.

Bottom line; If you got a badge on and you think doing things this way is the right way..... You're too stupid to have a taser, let alone a firearm.

95% of cops are good, honest, hard working men and women. The other 5% are mean rule crazy assholes who get their jollies fucking with people and abusing their power. They shouldn't get a pass because they wear the blue.

[pup]

1. As a cop, you KNOW he is unarmed how?
2. The cop gave him a specific direction. Hand the kid over. Had that happened, are we talking about this? Doubt it.



Did the cop over react? Probably.
But had he under reacted would this story be different and potentially worse? Possibly.

Look, if I cop gives you a direct order, follow it. If you still get tased, you have a real good case. But if you don't...I got nothing for you.

Say you are driving, going 7 MPH over the speed limit. 72 in a 65. And a cop radars you and decides to pull you over. But you think he is over reacting because 7 MPH isn't really speeding. Do you have the right to not pull over? No, because the rules are the rules and they are the rules for a reason. Get over it, pull over and take your ticket.

If a cop tells you to hand over your child to someone from Social Services, hand the god damn kid over.

[Cerebral_DownTime]

1. As a cop, you KNOW he is unarmed how?

lol. Really? You do it the same way you do it with other suspects. Have him put his hands on his head and frisk him. I've seen that done dozens of times during altercations on campus, because those were good cops who knew how to properly handle a scene. When they arrived they didn't seem too concerned with it, they told him to go back in his house.

Look, if I cop gives you a direct order, follow it.

So if a cop tells you to lay on the ground and eat a piece of dog shit ot get tased, you gonna do it?

I think it's hilarious that they dropped all charges, that's a tacit acknowledgement that they were wrong. That PD better brace for the lawsuit that's sure to come. Which is a shame, because it's going to cost all the good cops just as much.

Edit: For the record, I have no problem with or bias towards cops. In my 28 years, i've had 2 instances with police in which I felt I was being harrased. Considering the ineratctions i've had with cops, that's a great ratio of top notch officers compared to shitty ones.

[leadpipe]

1. As a cop, you KNOW he is unarmed how?

lol. Really? You do it the same way you do it with other suspects. Have him put his hands on his head and frisk him. I've seen that done dozens of times during altercations on campus, because those were good cops who knew how to properly handle a scene. When they arrived they didn't seem too concerned with it, they told him to go back in his house.

Look, if I cop gives you a direct order, follow it.

So if a cop tells you to lay on the ground and eat a piece of dog shit ot get tased, you gonna do it?

I think it's hilarious that they dropped all charges, that's a tacit acknowledgement that they were wrong. That PD better brace for the lawsuit that's sure to come. Which is a shame, because it's going to cost all the good cops just as much.

Edit: For the record, I have no problem with or bias towards cops. In my 28 years, i've had 2 instances with police in which I felt I was being harrased. Considering the ineratctions i've had with cops, that's a great ratio of top notch officers compared to shitty ones.

How many times are you guys going to bring up "unarmed" ?

This is no joking matter.

[Cerebral_DownTime]

How many times are you guys going to bring up "unarmed" ?

As many as I need to. The guy had no weapons and he wasn't violent, this is a fact. If there was any doubt they should've frisked him when they first arrived, for their own safety. If there was really any evidence he resisted arrest they would've filed charges against him.

This is no joking matter.

And I wasn't joking.

[The Score]

I don't know about "unarmed", but the guy was "unlegged".

[leadpipe]

I don't know about "unarmed", but the guy was "unlegged".

That's what I was geting at.

[peeker643]

No arms and no legs?

Clearly they should have searched the trunk.

G'night everybody. Take care.

[jfiling]

I don't know about "unarmed", but the guy was "unlegged".

That's what I was geting at.

Oh, I get it.

Haha.

No, wait.

HAHAHAHAH.

I'm not done yet.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!

[leadpipe]

I don't know about "unarmed", but the guy was "unlegged".

That's what I was geting at.

Oh, I get it.

Haha.

No, wait.

HAHAHAHAH.

I'm not done yet.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!

Glad you enjoyed it.

My target audience for that bit of material was really paranoid guys that believe anyone of authority is out to get em'

Looks like I hit the mark.

[dem425]

Sooner or later I was bound to wade into this...........

I know that everyone has a right to an opinion (like assholes).........but it seems that some of you KNOW what cops should and should not do in any given situations, but in fact, YOU DON'T KNOW SHIT......You take the media version of everything and expound with your vast experience in law enforcement (some I would assume gained that experience in the back of a cruiser, handcuffed)

Lead Pipe is exactly correct...........If you don't want police confrontations:
a) don't break the law
b) do what your told when cops respond to your home

Unarmed (or legged) does not mean non-violent.........
Child Services does not respond to domestics unless there were mitigating circumstance (which the news reports failed to report) or the cops felt the child was in jeopardy.

The neighborhood might have been predominantly black and the cops were white hence the concern.

Forget the fact that the man was handicapped. That is tragic. But it does not give him a free pass to act like an asshole.

If the cops acted improperly, then they should be disciplined including termination.

And those of you who sit in judgement, you are entitled to your opinion.............But your basically flapping your pie holes unless you've been there..........

BTW, domesic calls generally result in an arrest regardless of whether there is injury or not. A mere threat can be enough to warrant an arrest..............

[Cerebral_DownTime]

some I would assume gained that experience in the back of a cruiser, handcuffed)

Been cuffed before (never arrested), but those cops were dickless douches that had nothing better to do than bother me because it was 2 AM and they went to high school with me. Only cops i've ever encounter that I had a problem with. The first time, the cop's superior officer arrived on the scene, found out the situation and unhooked me within ten minutes. That was because I hadn't done shit wrong, yet that asshole still felt the need to act like a hardass (which he wasn't). But that's probably my fault, I shouldn't have been driving at 2 am, down main street, followng the speed limit.

Unarmed (or legged) does not mean non-violent.........

I agree, but in this case, it did. Hanging on to your daughter isn't violence.

BTW, domesic calls generally result in an arrest regardless of whether there is injury or not. A mere threat can be enough to warrant an arrest..............

The arrest isn't the problem. The overly aggressive actions were. I'll say it again, if that's the best way they could think of to handle this situtation, they should not have tasers, let alone firearms.

All in all, good conversation. I respect your guys' opinions and I get where you're coming from, I really do. I just disagree in this particular case. Well i've pretty much said all I can so i'll let the matter go.

[aoxo1]

http://electronicvillage.blogspot.com/2 ... tates.html
http://truthnottasers.blogspot.com/2008 ... known.html
These are deadly weapons that are being used with impunity whenever a citizen does not immediately comply, whether the request is lawful/reasonable or not. But I guess we ought to just obey; after all, the police have never known to behave in an unlawful manner.

http://cbs13.com/local/stockton.tased.e ... 99804.html
It's a good thing they got him 3 times, AFTER he was already forced to the ground! Fortunately for him, he wasn't a 14 year old girl who wasn't under arrest.

[peeker643]

http://electronicvillage.blogspot.com/2009/05/taser-related-deaths-in-united-states.html
http://truthnottasers.blogspot.com/2008 ... known.html
These are deadly weapons that are being used with impunity whenever a citizen does not immediately comply, whether the request is lawful/reasonable or not. But I guess we ought to just obey; after all, the police have never known to behave in an unlawful manner.

http://cbs13.com/local/stockton.tased.e ... 99804.html
It's a good thing they got him 3 times, AFTER he was already forced to the ground! Fortunately for him, he wasn't a 14 year old girl who wasn't under arrest.

Question: how many calls you think the police respond to on a weekly basis? How many of them don't end up in a taser headline?

I get it- one is too many for some people. That's fine. Get assholes off the streets whether they're cops or criminals.

But I hardly think 'impunity' is that the right word or that the majority of times a taser is used it's 'whenever a citizen (or criminal in apparently very rare cases) does not 'immediately' comply.

[Orenthal]

http://electronicvillage.blogspot.com/2009/05/taser-related-deaths-in-united-states.html
http://truthnottasers.blogspot.com/2008 ... known.html
These are deadly weapons that are being used with impunity whenever a citizen does not immediately comply, whether the request is lawful/reasonable or not. But I guess we ought to just obey; after all, the police have never known to behave in an unlawful manner.

http://cbs13.com/local/stockton.tased.e ... 99804.html
It's a good thing they got him 3 times, AFTER he was already forced to the ground! Fortunately for him, he wasn't a 14 year old girl who wasn't under arrest.

Question: how many calls you think the police respond to on a weekly basis? How many of them don't end up in a taser headline?

I get it- one is too many for some people. That's fine. Get assholes off the streets whether they're cops or criminals.

But I hardly think 'impunity' is that the right word or that the majority of times a taser is used it's 'whenever a citizen (or criminal in apparently very rare cases) does not 'immediately' comply.

No really, the other day on East 9th I was jaywalking and...

[aoxo1]

Maybe impunity isn't the right word, but I would say when everyone just laughs at a stupid college student saying "Don't tase me bro" instead of wondering why, exactly, the police had to use a deadly weapon in a situation that wasn't even threatening physical harm, I would say they pretty much have carte blanche to use them.

Just look at most of the responses on this thread. It's generally, "Well, he probably deserved it". And maybe a lot of these people are criminals and not people I want anywhere near me, but that doesn't mean they should be brutalized.

The point of my post, which may have come off a bit hostile to police, isn't meant to demean police or hate on them. But rather to bring attention to the fact that these are potentially deadly weapons, and it isn't that rare either. Using them to subdue someone who isn't threatening an officer's life, just because it makes the officer's job easier, and who hasn't committed anything close to a serious crime is unacceptable.

[peeker643]

Maybe impunity isn't the right word, but I would say when everyone just laughs at a stupid college student saying "Don't tase me bro" instead of wondering why, exactly, the police had to use a deadly weapon in a situation that wasn't even threatening physical harm, I would say they pretty much have carte blanche to use them.

Just look at most of the responses on this thread. It's generally, "Well, he probably deserved it". And maybe a lot of these people are criminals and not people I want anywhere near me, but that doesn't mean they should be brutalized.

The point of my post, which may have come off a bit hostile to police, isn't meant to demean police or hate on them. But rather to bring attention to the fact that these are potentially deadly weapons, and it isn't that rare either. Using them to subdue someone who isn't threatening an officer's life, just because it makes the officer's job easier, and who hasn't committed anything close to a serious crime is unacceptable.

That I get. That I can agree with for the most part.

But I'll stick by the fact that "Cop Handles DV Call Compassionately and Professionally-Nothing at All Happens" isn't going to make the news.

And those situations are the overwhelming majority.

[jfiling]

But I'll stick by the fact that "Cop Handles DV Call Compassionately and Professionally-Nothing at All Happens" isn't going to make the news.

And those situations are the overwhelming majority.

I think that's something we can all agree with. The only disagreement seems to be how to think about the rare bad cases.

Just to elaborate on a point brought up earlier, pre-taser days cops used diplomacy. Now, more and more are reaching for the taser to settle a dispute. We all have seen the taser videos, many posted here on this forum, where an officer who wasn't in any danger of being attacked, let alone in fear for his life, decided to take the taser option.

And yet we have people here saying "b-e-h-a-v-e", as if that's the problem.

Yes, the police have a very difficult job, as they always have. Nobody is saying the shit they have to deal with is easy. I'm one who says they shouldn't take the easy way out by using a potentially lethal weapon like the taser to deal with non-violent offenders.

[dem425]

jfiling:

1. I agree with you concerning the "diplomacy" route over the taser. Unfortunately, the resurgence (we tried the taser in the 90's but there were too many people being seriously injured) of the Taser has caused a small minority of police to believe that the taser is a hammer and all the problems cops encounter are nails. Somewhere along the line we have lost the art of "baffling them with bullshit".

2. The Taser is a less than lethal option. It was developed to reduce officer AND violent (or potentially violent) suspect injuries. As Peek stated, the incidents of serious injury are a significant minority. We went through this with OC (pepper) spray and when K-9s (dogbites) were utilized........The press only reports the SENSATIONAL!....That's why they are maggots.

Less than lethal tools have significantly reduced officer (read: worker's comp) injuries and claims. And whether anyone wants to accept it or not, the number of serious injuries to suspects has also been reduced.

And believe me, if a suspect says "don't tase me bro" and then complies with a cop's order, everyone wins.

[leadpipe]

But I'll stick by the fact that "Cop Handles DV Call Compassionately and Professionally-Nothing at All Happens" isn't going to make the news.

And those situations are the overwhelming majority.

I think that's something we can all agree with. The only disagreement seems to be how to think about the rare bad cases.

Just to elaborate on a point brought up earlier, pre-taser days cops used diplomacy. Now, more and more are reaching for the taser to settle a dispute. We all have seen the taser videos, many posted here on this forum, where an officer who wasn't in any danger of being attacked, let alone in fear for his life, decided to take the taser option.

And yet we have people here saying "b-e-h-a-v-e", as if that's the problem.

Yes, the police have a very difficult job, as they always have. Nobody is saying the shit they have to deal with is easy. I'm one who says they shouldn't take the easy way out by using a potentially lethal weapon like the taser to deal with non-violent offenders.

Cut the bullshit J, by people you mean me.

To the point of getting tased, it really is that easy.

Your the same fucking guy scouring the internet when the Twinsburg officer got shot in the head four times, looking for a way it could possibly be the officer's fault. I believe your quote was along the lines of "believing a dead officer"

So who has the agenda, who's sensationalizing things?

So, yeah, Jesus Christ, B-E-H-A-V-E, and you won't run into many problems. That's how I've managed a tase free life thus far.

[jfiling]

But I'll stick by the fact that "Cop Handles DV Call Compassionately and Professionally-Nothing at All Happens" isn't going to make the news.

And those situations are the overwhelming majority.

I think that's something we can all agree with. The only disagreement seems to be how to think about the rare bad cases.

Just to elaborate on a point brought up earlier, pre-taser days cops used diplomacy. Now, more and more are reaching for the taser to settle a dispute. We all have seen the taser videos, many posted here on this forum, where an officer who wasn't in any danger of being attacked, let alone in fear for his life, decided to take the taser option.

And yet we have people here saying "b-e-h-a-v-e", as if that's the problem.

Yes, the police have a very difficult job, as they always have. Nobody is saying the shit they have to deal with is easy. I'm one who says they shouldn't take the easy way out by using a potentially lethal weapon like the taser to deal with non-violent offenders.

Cut the bullshit J, by people you mean me.

To the point of getting tased, it really is that easy.

Your the same fucking guy scouring the internet when the Twinsburg officer got shot in the head four times, looking for a way it could possibly be the officer's fault. I believe your quote was along the lines of "believing a dead officer"

So who has the agenda, who's sensationalizing things?

So, yeah, Jesus Christ, B-E-H-A-V-E, and you won't run into many problems. That's how I've managed a tase free life thus far.

I count at least three other people in this thread who agree with your take on behaving.

I also recall retracting in that thread, and apologizing for in at least on other, my comments regarding Josh Miktarian.

And I haven't done anything in this thread to sensationalize anything, or promote an agenda.

I'm also not the one who now twice has attributed personal prejudices to opinions shared.

Just for shits and giggles, Google has no results for "believing a dead officer". If you want to dredge up stuff I've already admitted I was wrong about, be my guest. It really won't further your argument regarding the horrible fact that a guy with no legs who posed no threat to anyone was tasered.

But I know, you don't really care to address that particular fact. Carry on throwing out generalities that make you feel better.

[FUDU]

I agree that we are seeing a much higher frequency of these incidents in which people are either behaving or or posing zero physical threat to an officer and yet the tasers get pulled out & used much too quickly. I mean literally zero threat of harm.

The "just behave" argument is a legit argument but only to a point especially when we see so much evidence of unjustified use of tasers.

When somebody does behave and poses ZERO threat to LEO's then gets tasered what is the argument then, behave more, disconnect your voice box or play dead?

The cases of unjustified taser use are the vast minority no doubt, but the concern comes with the instinctive habit to grab and use with the taser. It is slowly becoming a systematical push to use the taser instead of using one's head. As if the training is when in doubt use the taser, which is very dangerous and almost insane.

How about some of these fully trained LEOs (often with families of their own) processing all the information at the scene for a change instead of reacting and ignoring the flowchart of decision making.

[dem425]

"zero physical threat"
"zero threat of harm"
"no threat to anyone"



............................Dead, comatose, unconscious...............Then the above MAY be accurate.........


You folks really don't have a clue......

[jfiling]

"zero physical threat"
"zero threat of harm"
"no threat to anyone"



............................Dead, comatose, unconscious...............Then the above MAY be accurate.........


You folks really don't have a clue......

Only if you have the opinion that all "civilians" are threats.

[peeker643]

"zero physical threat"
"zero threat of harm"
"no threat to anyone"



............................Dead, comatose, unconscious...............Then the above MAY be accurate.........


You folks really don't have a clue......

Only if you have the opinion that all "civilians" are threats.

You only need to miscalculate once before you no longer have a wife, kids, home in the suburbs. You lose or tie and it's done and over and it may not just be you who's dead.

Hire the right people, train them properly, weed out the assholes and things are far better off. No one here is saying otherwise.

Little note about dem425:

I wanted a handgun for my personal use. To have here at home, use at the range, take some ccp courses. Asked him for some advice and assistance. He wasn't really all that keen on the idea. But his first demand was that I come to his firearm safety course. His second piece of advice was that I stick with a revolver for safety and efficiency issues. His 3rd requirement was that I go to the range with him and demonstrate I could use the weapon responsibly and efficiently.

Then he made a recommendation as to a specific weapon.

The class was something else. Tons of people came in who barely knew what end of the gun to hold and who left with a far better idea. But the fact that some of these younger people, older people, grandmas and grandpas were armed was a sobering thought.

He's not Clint Eastwood. He's a guy who worked the job for 25 years and walked into some really shitty situations. He's the guy who talks it all out first whenever possible. The guy that walks into a bad situation and walks out with the situation under control and with everybody skeletally intact whenever possible. He recognized that the great deal of the time there was no reason for a situation to escalate and he had/has the demeanor to make sure it didn't.

But when the shit hits the fan then decisive action is necessary.

The vast majority of officers are, to one extent or another, like that. They don't want to send anyone away dead or incapacitated any more than they want to leave the scene that way.

But again, no room for ties, losses or second guessing. For me, because the majority of properly trained police officers are the same way, they get my benefit of the doubt.

And again, the ones that demonstrate the inability to properly gauge and handle the situation aren't wanted out there by their fellow officers any more than we want them out there.

[dem425]

Thanks for the back-up, B.

Apparently in my advanced age, I am incapable of trying to explain to folks that any cop who would taser a "defenseless" handicap person, the elderly or infirmed, a child, man or woman is a coward and should be dismissed, terminated or imprisoned. PERIOD

However, there is a concept called "totality of circumstance" in which you examine ALL aspects of a volatile situation before choosing a proper course of action and then initiating a response. If your exposure to police work is watching episodes of "Cops", you may think that you have at least one segment and a commercial break to decide what the proper course of action is.

In reality, it's seconds (maybe).

Totality of circumstance does not involve the media reports.........Like a coward, they are the last to show up.

If an impartial board (civilian or police) decides those cops involved in the above incident were negligent, reckless or criminal, then let the discipline fit the infraction.

However, if there was merit to their actions, then I hope those folks who lean slightly southpaw think about the totality of cicumstances when they are gassing up their Prius on their way to a tree-hugging competition.........

I will now enjoy a warm glass of milk, a stool softener and change my Depends.

[FUDU]

You only need to miscalculate once before you no longer have a wife, kids, home in the suburbs. You lose or tie and it's done and over and it may not just be you who's dead.

Here is the deal though, that works both ways. It only takes one second for something to happen in which an LEO makes a Joe citizen's children fatherless.

The ability to make quick sound decisions is the key, and as I said more and more it appears the convenience of the taser is weakening the ability of some LEO's to make sound quick decisions.

[peeker643]

You only need to miscalculate once before you no longer have a wife, kids, home in the suburbs. You lose or tie and it's done and over and it may not just be you who's dead.

Here is the deal though, that works both ways. It only takes one second for something to happen in which an LEO makes a Joe citizen's children fatherless.

The ability to make quick sound decisions is the key, and as I said more and more it appears the convenience of the taser is weakening the ability of some LEO's to make sound quick decisions.

Yeah, it is Donny. And as noted above, in one or more of the sentences you didn't quote, that's why the hiring, training and evaluation/discipline of officers is critical.

If a cop is oblivious or cavalier regarding the potential consequences of his actions then they need to be vetted out.
However, in the seconds or less that they have to make a decision, if that decision to use 'non-lethal force' (or even lethal force) was reached in a manner that takes into account the proper training and reactions then I'm standing behind that guy.

Last time because I'm just not sure people understand it: Nobody is defending the cowboys who treat any weapon as a toy or in a trivial manner. But the bottom line is that 99% of them go about it the right way and deserve the respect that the job warrants.

[FUDU]

You only need to miscalculate once before you no longer have a wife, kids, home in the suburbs. You lose or tie and it's done and over and it may not just be you who's dead.

Here is the deal though, that works both ways. It only takes one second for something to happen in which an LEO makes a Joe citizen's children fatherless.

The ability to make quick sound decisions is the key, and as I said more and more it appears the convenience of the taser is weakening the ability of some LEO's to make sound quick decisions.

Yeah, it is Donny. And as noted above, in one or more of the sentences you didn't quote, that's why the hiring, training and evaluation/discipline of officers is critical.

If a cop is oblivious or cavalier regarding the potential consequences of his actions then they need to be vetted out.
However, in the seconds or less that they have to make a decision, if that decision to use 'non-lethal force' (or even lethal force) was reached in a manner that takes into account the proper training and reactions then I'm standing behind that guy.

Last time because I'm just not sure people understand it: Nobody is defending the cowboys who treat any weapon as a toy or in a trivial manner. But the bottom line is that 99% of them go about it the right way and deserve the respect that the job warrants.

I'm not sure too many people in here are at any real disagreement on this, these discussions imply that we disagree though b/c they give the appearance of all or nothing with no middle ground.

I think part of the problem isn't that some try to defend those cowboys, it is that people appear to justify these situations quite often when many many times there is not one justification.

[jfiling]

Just thought I'd toss this in the taser thread.

http://www.kwtx.com/home/headlines/64876932.html

Curry, like many officers, works private security on the weekend at nightclubs in Waco. Curry says an unidentified officer snapped the picture in question after an incident on a recent weekend at a club in Waco.

Curry admits writing under the photo, "Guy pissed all over himself after he got tazed. Hahaha."

[dem425]

I am shocked and appalled at Officer's Curry obvious unprofessionalism and insensitivity...............

To quote: "lighten up, Francis"............

I don't see a big problem with what he wrote, the problem is he put it on a public web site for every "silly-vilian" to see. It should have stayed in the locker room..........

I finally decided to post the below article. I apologize for it's length, but it's just another side to the coin.

Tales from the Street Trades

Things You Probably Don't Want to Know



Fred Reed


You probably don’t like cops.


Nobody does.

Ride with them. See what they see. You’ll get a little perspective. You won’t like it, but you’ll get it.

It was August, near National Airport, and the guy lost his girlfriend and blew his brains out in the bushes. We found him by the smell. Flesh sliding off his face, sternum white through his chest, and my god the maggots. “Think CPR might help?” I asked, ever the wise guy. You get a macho tough-guy attitude, not because you want to be a tough guy but because otherwise you would go into a bar and never come out.

When children are burned alive in fires, which happens in shitty tenements with corrupt inspectors, they turn exactly the dark pink of a Christmas ham, except their bellies explode and things come out. You like children’s stories? How about this one?


Do you know that if you hold the hands of a girl of three in a pan of boiling water, you get what are called “immersion cuffs”? She screams a lot because she doesn’t understand why Mommy is hurting her.

That is because in most cases it is usually the mother doing it, or near as likely her dirtbag new boyfriend, almost never is it the father.


There isn’t enough bourbon, not anywhere. Not anywhere on earth to erase those memories. And.... There are people cops don’t much like, such as retail crack-dealers with their hangin,’ bangin,’ and slangin.’


Others people cops just don’t understand, such as faggots or homos - they don't hate them, they just don't understand them, and then there's others that they have a quiet sympathy for, such as whores and homeless. And then, then there are some people they want to hurt, to hurt very, very badly.

Child abusers, for example.... or pimps who running thirteen-year-old runaways as street whores.


I went with a DC cop to interview a rape victim of fifteen in some hospital. She was screaming, sobbing, out of her mind despite sedation—the usual. The guy had roughed her up pretty good. The protocol is to never, ever mention the perp’s race but, if the girl is white, there’s no need.If you think rape is a sexual crime, you have a lot to learn. You don’t risk three to ten years in jail and cripple a woman for something you can buy on any street corner for ten bucks.


The cop came out and said quietly, “I hope I arrest the the guy.” The jaw muscles said the perp would be red blubbering goo. You can’t get too involved. Or, at least you're not "supposed to". But.... Police brutality has its appeal at times....It really does.

You may think you know idiots.... No.


Cops know idiots. You’ve seen those shoes with the bright red lights built into them that flash when you walk? Some knucklehead in 7-D, in the prison in Anacostia, was wearing them. He mugged a pedestrian and ran into a dark wood to hide. I’ve known smarter lug nuts.


Seven-D also had a security-camera picture of a prisoner whose head was so narrow he could slip between the bars of his cell.

Of the street trades, med-techs (EMTs, Paramedics, even just street cops who "do what they can") get less credit and deserve more than most hospital doctors and office doctors. You see, they (the street ones) see the ugly stuff.


I rode once with the supervisor of the Arlington, Virginia fire department. Fire departments have a problem because buildings don’t burn very well, what with concrete walls and steel fire doors. So they do a lot of ambulance work. I once saw a hook-and-ladder truck respond to a miscarriage. The paramedic did his job perfectly well, but it seemed an odd way to get to the scene.

Anyway the super and I went to a call somewhere in the burbs and found this old guy, maybe seventy, bumping off walls. He’d walk as if seeing nothing, hit the wall, turn, and bump into another wall.

The reason was that his wife of multiple decades was lying there face up on the floor with her face purple and barely breathing, if that’s the word, breathing with a noise I still don’t like to think about.


Surprise, huh? We all reach the exit door of Life, she had, he knew it, and he had just totally "lost it".


The med guys put her blood pressure at something like 375/280, a number you could have inflated a truck tire with, and put her in the ambulance because that’s what ambulance crews do, not because there was the slightest reason.


The super and I drove off. She may have exploded in the ambulance. She clearly didn't make it - and the old gentleman who lost it knew that was what was happening.


I’m not kidding about getting hard, about turning off your emotions.

You HAVE to.... You’re a surgeon at Med-Star, a shock-trauma unit. The chopper brings in a kid of seven, horribly screwed up. Maybe a truck hit him, or he fell into a cement mixer, or it was an asteroid strike.


As a surgeon you don’t care what did it, only how to fix it. Blood, you say, I need blood, more blood. The brain is swelling badly, all those machines that say beep-beep and aren’t supposed to have flat lines on them are saying the wrong things and you work desperately for three hours and the kid is dead.

Depending on how your head works, you say “Oh, damn - damn, damn, damn,” and then go catch the second half of the Redskins versus the Steelers.

One night somewhere in suburban Maryland, maybe Kensington, some guy thought eighty miles an hour was a reasonable speed. It was about how fast he came through the windshield when he hit something. By the time I got there with the cop I was riding with he was lying on the pavement and an ambulance crew was working on him for no particular reason. Red gunkie stuff was spewing from his mouth, which I suppose is what happens when your chest is completely crushed. A woman paramedic dived into a bag with that fast but controlled way they do things and started intubating what amounted to a cadaver. Women can’t carry stretchers, but they can sure do medicine.

Another ambulance had showed up and wasn’t doing anything because there wasn’t anything for it to do.

A gal on the second ambulance crew knew my cop and so a conversation started, hey, how’s the wife? We ought to get together, ribs and beer, how the kids doing, etc., etc.?

Heartless with some guy going liquid, drowning in his blood ten feet away?

No.

You can’t get involved.

There just is NOT that much bourbon or whiskey or vodka.... Not anywhere.

If you can save the guy, you do, and that feels good. Real good. For a short while.

If he croaks, you say “Ahhh, screw it, let’s go get a burger.” (And even knowing there isn't that much bourbon or whiskey or vodka in the world, you try anyway and after shift hit a bar or hit a bottle at home and drink yourself into oblivion - temporarily anyway).

Or go to the psych ward and turn yourself in. (Not so surprisingly suicide is the third top cause of death amongst retired cops... and very close to being second).

Those are the choices.

[jfiling]

dem425,

Is there even the slightest possibility that this particular officer actually believes what he wrote? I understand gallows humor, but this seems to go beyond that.

Even if it doesn't, the fact is that many "civilians" are going to be outraged by his remarks. He has put his department in a very difficult position.

[dem425]

jfiling:

When I was a young cowboy, we made a traffic stop on a stolen car that had been used in a robbery of a mom/pop store. This was at the end of a pursuit where a police officer AND an innocent civilian had been hit in the parking lot of the store the bad guys were recklessly speeding out of.

When the tough guy in the back seat was proned on the ground he mentioned some of the things he was going to do to my mother, wife and children. He came up off the ground and reached into the front of his pants apparently grabbing something. An assisting police officer wielding a shotgun in a cover position to me shoved the shotgun in the suspect's lower back/ass area, loudly "jacked" a round into it and shoved the supect back onto the pavement.

The tough guy immediately and quite violently shit his pants.

Back at the station when we were processing the trio, it was procedure to have prisoners held overnight put in coveralls (we did not have jailers then). When Mr. Poopy-Pants dropped his drawers to change, I told him to pull his pants back on. He said, "I'm not wearing them, they are full of shit"......I responded, "You shit 'em, you wear 'em".

Was I serious about what I said???????............You bet your shitty u-trous I was......

If you read was I posted earlier, the cop's only mistake was allowing the public to see that and embarass his department.

If you noticed, the pisser face was never seen.

I would bet that the existentialist, Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum, would not have approved of either Officer Curry or my actions.......

[Cerebral_DownTime]

Meh. What cops find funny doesn't bother or concern me. It's nothing compared to the things my brother and his fellow Marines joked about in Iraq. He probably has 25+ pictures of himself and other guys posing with dead insurgents. One guy tried to blow up a checkpoint and his suicide vest went off prematurely and my bro and his buddy are standing over the splattered remains with a cardboard sign saying "Iraqi Organ Donor".

People who have jobs that are stressful/dangerous often have warped sense of humor. Plus it's unfair for me to wag my finger at cops' humor when i've had a few chuckles at their expense.

[Ziner]

One guy tried to blow up a checkpoint and his suicide vest went off prematurely and my bro and his buddy are standing over the splattered remains with a cardboard sign saying "Iraqi Organ Donor".

I dont care who you are, thats fucking funny.