Cops brutally taze protester, then turn on the man filming it - Polidicks

[QUOTE=w00tf1zh;46875963]How can you speak for all cops? There have obviously been multiple cases where the arrests have been wrongful or out of spite. And the last part of your post doesn't say anything in favor of cops. Just that you should follow through with their corruption and not let them provoke you. Best case scenario: You do nothing wrong, but still get a weekend in jail. That's some bullshit.[/QUOTE] Best case scenario is you comply, the officer is reasonable, and you clear it up right then and there, no charges filed, no fuss. You can't do that if you resist.

[QUOTE=w00tf1zh;46875963]How can you speak for all cops? There have obviously been multiple cases where the arrests have been wrongful or out of spite. And the last part of your post doesn't say anything in favor of cops. Just that you should follow through with their corruption and not let them provoke you. Best case scenario: You do nothing wrong, but still get a weekend in jail. That's some bullshit.[/QUOTE] Or you resist arrest and then have actually done something wrong, which just makes it harder to argue your innocence in court. Sure, being wrongly arrested sucks, but you can't avoid it if the cops decide they want to arrest you, so making it worse is idiotic.

There's a reason why this takes 11+ minutes and ends with a busted window and an arrest/detainment, when all he had to do was roll down the window, basically say "no I'm not carrying any contraband", and be on his way. [video=youtube;6CxYIXcG9Bw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CxYIXcG9Bw[/video] Every second you waste of a cop's time with your bullshit indignation is another second a criminal is out on the street victimizing lawful citizens just like yourself.

[QUOTE=Apache249;46875920]Why are you so invested in giving cops a hard time?[/QUOTE] Have you seen what the fuck is happening recently? They need to be taught what is right and what is wrong, because obviously the Academy doesn't teach these things. They are supposed to protect the citizens, so they need the most criticism of them all. These are people who need to do their job. And if you can argue that they aren't here to protect the public, then what the fuck use are they then? They are right up there with soldier's who need to fucking be trained better. If we had trained cops better, and hired ones with a higher IQ, we wouldn't have these issues. Any strong dumbass can become a cop.

[QUOTE=Fort83;46876111]Yes because the actions of a few bad cops represents the entire police force right?[/QUOTE] They all certainly need evaluated to make sure they aren't a threat. Those who are nice will get to keep their jobs.

[QUOTE=Apache249;46876037]There's a reason why this takes 11+ minutes and ends with a busted window and an arrest/detainment, when all he had to do was roll down the window, basically say "no I'm not carrying any contraband", and be on his way. [video=youtube;6CxYIXcG9Bw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CxYIXcG9Bw[/video] Every second you waste of a cop's time with your bullshit indignation is another second a criminal is out on the street victimizing lawful citizens just like yourself.[/QUOTE] [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/w5GyLyc.png[/IMG] Four cameras, at least. How paranoid is this motherfucker?

[QUOTE=Megadave;46876092]Have you seen what the fuck is happening recently? They need to be taught what is right and what is wrong, because obviously the Academy doesn't teach these things. They are supposed to protect the citizens, so they need the most criticism of them all. These are people who need to do their job. And if you can argue that they aren't here to protect the public, then what the fuck use are they then? They are right up there with soldier's who need to fucking be trained better. If we had trained cops better, and hired ones with a higher IQ, we wouldn't have these issues. Any strong dumbass can become a cop.[/QUOTE] According to wikipedia, there are ~780,000 sworn LEOs in the US. How many of them have you heard of recently? 4? 5? I agree wholeheartedly that any misconduct must be amended/punished accordingly, but criticizing police as a whole? You are way out of line.

[QUOTE=Riller;46876138][IMG]http://i.imgur.com/w5GyLyc.png[/IMG] Four cameras, at least. How paranoid is this motherfucker?[/QUOTE] Maybe you could argue that he just want to be sure that his rights are to be protected from people who can abuse them.

[QUOTE=w00tf1zh;46876148]Maybe you could argue that he just want to be sure that his rights are to be protected from people who can abuse them.[/QUOTE] He just wants to get a good angle for youtube [editline]7th January 2015[/editline] Do you honestly not see his actions as a provocation?

[IMG]http://i.imgur.com/nUO8aHb.png[/IMG] There's a passenger-side GoPro too, and a trunk-cam, and what looks like a steering-wheel mounted camera. I think I'm in love with this man's paranoia.

[QUOTE=Fort83;46876145]Is this a double edge sword? Do citizens need to be evaluated to make sure they aren't a threat? Or are the cops always to blame in your eyes?[/QUOTE] Citizen's need a background check to get a gun. Since cop's are allowed to use their gun's anywhere, they need the strictest of evaluations.

[QUOTE=w00tf1zh;46876148]Maybe you could argue that he just want to be sure that his rights are to be protected from people who can abuse them.[/QUOTE] Wanting your rights protected is one thing. Having [I]eight cameras[/I] in your car is another. [IMG]http://i.imgur.com/w2Y3gYt.png[/IMG]

[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;46875271]i don't see an issue with this. They were protesting on walmart's property, Walmart called the cops to get them off of their property, the guy decided to argue with the cops instead of listening, then instead of going peacefully, he fought his arrest. You can't protest on private property without the owners consent. You can't just not listen to the cops instructions and expect to walk free. You can't resist arrest without expecting to get tased. So unless I got one of those 3 main points wrong, this was justified and the source is biased as hell...[/QUOTE] It really didn't feel like he was resisting arrest though, I mean it's pretty hard to do what they want you two with four people grabbing you. Ask him to turn around, take off the backpack and put his hands behind his head or something instead of that. But other than that, I agree.

[QUOTE=Apache249;46876139]According to wikipedia, there are ~780,000 sworn LEOs in the US. How many of them have you heard of recently? 4? 5? I agree wholeheartedly that any misconduct must be amended/punished accordingly, but criticizing police as a whole? You are way out of line.[/QUOTE] You gotta criticize the whole to weed out the few.

[QUOTE=Megadave;46876175]Citizen's need a background check to get a gun. Since cop's are allowed to use their gun's anywhere, they need the strictest of evaluations.[/QUOTE] Cops have to get background checks and then some just to become cops in the first place.

He said he's [I]filming a documentary[/I]

[QUOTE=Megadave;46876092]Have you seen what the fuck is happening recently? They need to be taught what is right and what is wrong, because obviously the Academy doesn't teach these things. They are supposed to protect the citizens, so they need the most criticism of them all. These are people who need to do their job. And if you can argue that they aren't here to protect the public, then what the fuck use are they then? They are right up there with soldier's who need to fucking be trained better. If we had trained cops better, and hired ones with a higher IQ, we wouldn't have these issues. Any strong dumbass can become a cop.[/QUOTE] Cops aren't there to protect individuals, they are there to protect the community. A slight but important distinction. Though it is one that doesn't really apply in this case. [QUOTE=jiggu;46876180]It really didn't feel like he was resisting arrest though, I mean it's pretty hard to do what they want you two with four people grabbing you. Ask him to turn around, take off the backpack and put his hands behind his head or something instead of that. But other than that, I agree.[/QUOTE] There could have been 20 cops there and he can still be resisting; perhaps not very successfully, but still resisting. And they wanted him to let go of the helmet which was probably a precursor to having him take off the backpack and put his hands behind him, but he didn't seem to comply with the initial request.

[QUOTE=Megadave;46876092] Any strong dumbass can become a cop.[/QUOTE] :v:

He was definitely resisting arrest, this is clear by his attempt, with or without violence, to keep his hands in his helmet? pocket? somewhere that wasn't behind his back. However, at this point they are now bringing him to the ground and there's 2-3 cops there to hold him down. Why in the world would a higher ranked individual (not sure who it was in this video, but you can see him watching and saying "Taze him, taze him, taze him".) These devices have shown to be dangerous to victims but effective in dangerous situations, I would argue that if the man was still verbally arguing and physically resisting while standing, a tazer is necessary. But since this man was already incapacitated, I would say tazing him was just nasty. And to sit there and watch nobody do anything about it... at a police brutality protest... says a lot

I don't see how he was "brutally tazed" - The cops hit him with the juice 3 times, and they were all short bursts, less than 1-2 seconds each time. That's standard procedure, especially when, as you can see, he is resisting arrest. He was trespassing, he was told to leave, he didn't, he argued with cops and then resisted arrest. I also don't get the reactions at all. The first thing anyone says when they hear about a cop shooting someone is "oh my god why didn't they just tase him" but when they do that suddenly that's unacceptable too. [editline]7th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=cody8295;46876557]He was definitely resisting arrest, this is clear by his attempt, with or without violence, to keep his hands in his helmet? pocket? somewhere that wasn't behind his back. However, at this point they are now bringing him to the ground and there's 2-3 cops there to hold him down. Why in the world would a higher ranked individual (not sure who it was in this video, but you can see him watching and saying "Taze him, taze him, taze him".) These devices have shown to be dangerous to victims but effective in dangerous situations, I would argue that if the man was still verbally arguing and physically resisting while standing, a tazer is necessary. But since this man was already incapacitated, I would say tazing him was just nasty. And to sit there and watch nobody do anything about it... at a police brutality protest... says a lot[/QUOTE] Tasers are useful to force someone that's resisting to stop resisting by making them close control of their muscles. Just because there are 3 cops holding someone down on the ground doesn't mean he's not dangerous, and it doesn't mean it's easy to get handcuffs on him. If you're still struggling and they can't pull your arms behind your back to cuff you, they WILL tase you because it makes it infinitely easier to cuff your arms.

[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;46876629]I don't see how he was "brutally tazed" - The cops hit him with the juice 3 times, and they were all short bursts, less than 1-2 seconds each time. That's standard procedure, especially when, as you can see, he is resisting arrest. He was trespassing, he was told to leave, he didn't, he argued with cops and then resisted arrest. I also don't get the reactions at all. The first thing anyone says when they hear about a cop shooting someone is "oh my god why didn't they just tase him" but when they do that suddenly that's unacceptable too. [editline]7th January 2015[/editline] Tasers are useful to force someone that's resisting to stop resisting by making them close control of their muscles. Just because there are 3 cops holding someone down on the ground doesn't mean he's not dangerous, and it doesn't mean it's easy to get handcuffs on him. If you're still struggling and they can't pull your arms behind your back to cuff you, they WILL tase you because it makes it infinitely easier to cuff your arms.[/QUOTE] And the guy filming was doing what wrong exactly?

[QUOTE=cody8295;46876557]He was definitely resisting arrest, this is clear by his attempt, with or without violence, to keep his hands in his helmet? pocket? somewhere that wasn't behind his back. However, at this point they are now bringing him to the ground and there's 2-3 cops there to hold him down. Why in the world would a higher ranked individual (not sure who it was in this video, but you can see him watching and saying "Taze him, taze him, taze him".) These devices have shown to be dangerous to victims but effective in dangerous situations, I would argue that if the man was still verbally arguing and physically resisting while standing, a tazer is necessary. But since this man was already incapacitated, I would say tazing him was just nasty. And to sit there and watch nobody do anything about it... at a police brutality protest... says a lot[/QUOTE] The person said taze him as some of the cops were still trying to get him on the ground, and just because he's on the ground doesn't mean he stopped resisting. I can't really tell from the video, but if he's still refusing to put his hands behind his back, then he's still resisting; he doesn't need to be standing up to do that. [editline]7th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Kybalt;46876650]And the guy filming was doing what wrong exactly?[/QUOTE] Criminal trespass or whatever it was they were arresting the other guy for? The video, like most videos, doesn't provide nearly enough context to determine how reasonable it was for the police to be arresting those people so I can't really comment as to that, though what the cops said before they decided to arrest the guy filming doesn't paint them in a good light on that matter I will say.

[QUOTE=Kybalt;46876650]And the guy filming was doing what wrong exactly?[/QUOTE] He was one of the protesters, wasn't he? He was asked to leave private property and was not complying. If you're asked to leave private property and you don't, it's automatically criminal trespass. Not a very serious crime, but it'll get you a night in jail.

"Please stay in the fenced-in protesting zone."

[QUOTE=soccerskyman;46876724]"Please stay in the fenced-in protesting zone."[/QUOTE] Protest at this guy's house in five minutes! Who's with me? [editline]7th January 2015[/editline] We wanted to protest at Walmart, but they booted us. You'd be cool though right?

[QUOTE=Apache249;46876733]Protest at this guy's house in five minutes! Who's with me? [editline]7th January 2015[/editline] We wanted to protest at Walmart, but they booted us. You'd be cool though right?[/QUOTE] I mean if there was a legitimate reason for it, sure.

[QUOTE=soccerskyman;46876724]"Please stay in the fenced-in protesting zone."[/QUOTE] Private property is private property. They own it, they're allowed to bar people from protesting on it, and if they don't leave when told, they can be arrested.

In all honesty it was a pretty stupid choice to go to the walmart parking lot. How about the police station or some other form of public land that you won't be removed from violently.

[QUOTE=soccerskyman;46876751]I mean if there was a legitimate reason for it, sure.[/QUOTE] So I need you to agree with my protest to use your property?

[QUOTE=Snoberry Tea;46876760]Private property is private property. They own it, they're allowed to bar people from protesting on it, and if they don't leave when told, they can be arrested.[/QUOTE] Which is not ok in my book. Private property should be fair game for protest (NOTE: Not personal property). [editline]7th January 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=Apache249;46876790]So I need you to agree with my protest to use your property?[/QUOTE] I didn't say that. I'm just saying I'd be fine with it. I mean, I wouldn't take legal action anyway.