Woman calls police. They brutalize and arrest her.

07-09-2010, 01:00 AM

Originally Posted by Hal Briston

Hey now, don't be bringing up any reasonable points into our weekly "All copz is duh suxxorz!" festival...

The police have asked me to tell you, and I quote, "less teeth, more tongue and lip action".

07-09-2010, 02:36 AM

Originally Posted by Spit

Again, that was excessive force, tasers should not have widespread use, and I am not defending the cops.....It's just that *something* in this makes me feel that she is not as clean as the wind driven snow.

Even if she is lying, and the cop knows she is lying, there is no justification for tasering. That's essentially using torture to get information out of her.

07-09-2010, 05:19 AM

I didn't expect something like this from YouTube snarker Philip DeFranco.

Warning, this may be triggering.

http://phillydtv.tumblr.com/post/834...edly-tasered-a

A 57-year-old woman called the police to report a prowler. The above video is from the second squad car to arrive. We see the first responding officer tasing the woman who called them. The second responding officer then assists his comrade; at one point, when they're putting her in the car, asking if she's been maced yet.

One was fired & the other resigned, so that's something. But talk about a chilling effect.

We don't see the woman, but I can make a pretty good educated guess what she looks like.

Apparently, in western Georgia, 911 is worse than a joke.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJ-ldcnhsLY

07-09-2010, 05:46 AM

WTH?!?!?

What possible justification could there be for the way these police reacted?

07-09-2010, 06:04 AM

Originally Posted by Labrador Deceiver

No he didn't. Hal was talking about different police officers involved in a different situation. Nobody has defended the cops in the OP. They may be along to do so later in the thread, but gonzo's post was nothing but a big pile of stupid.

Oh, and they've bidden me to tell you to bend over more, as they can't penetrate with the shaft's full length and girth.

07-09-2010, 06:16 AM

There's been another thread about this recently. But I can't find it. Maybe the discussion was buried in some only peripherally related thread.

**Astro** · 07-09-2010, 09:22 AM

The policeman's actions were way over the top, but it might be instructive to identify where the precise point of failure was operationally in this scenario. Possibly some SDMB LEO can help.

Remember the context that there is huge push via various laws that the police must follow in scenarios where the might even be a hint of domestic violence to identify and separate the participants. This legislation was drafted to prevent domestic violence and the police are responsible for enforcing these laws which they take very seriously.

Policeman thinks he's going to what is a probably a domestic dispute of some kind. He gets there and sees there is no evidence of physical violence, and is greeted by what he thinks is a typical "I was angry when I called you, but we've made up, please go away" response from the woman.

What are his duties as a policeman charged with enforcing the aforesaid laws at this point? If the woman tells him to MYOB re the identity of someone he thinks might be the person she was trying to eject from the premises, does he have any duty to go further in acquiring that identity? How far should he go in getting that information. Should he be able to arrest her if she refuses that information?

07-09-2010, 10:49 AM

Originally Posted by Bookkeeper

So the first cop claims he tried to arrest her, pepper-sprayed her, and tazed her to save her from being a potential victim of domestic violence? Sounds like "We had to destroy the village in order to save it".

That was my first reaction to the summary, too. You think she's a domestic abuse victim and now you're going to brutalize her? Ugh.

07-09-2010, 01:23 PM

Originally Posted by ivan astikov

There wouldn't be a dangerous high speed chase if LEO's didn't panic lowly car thieves into driving in a life-threatening manner.

Unless you have proof that in every instance they'd already been driving dangerously before the police joined in? Thought not.

Let's recap: you threw in the strawman of high-speed chases (which, of course, had not a damn thing at all to do with this conversation). I then pointed out the glaring difference between a tasing and a high-speed pursuit. You then offered up the pointless dung-nugget above.

Now, since you're in the bottom 1% of this board when it comes to both reading comprehension and brain function, let me try and get this to sink in for you: A girl I cared very deeply for has been in the ground for 20 years now, the result of an overzealous cop pursuing someone who decided not to pull over...because of a broken turn signal. Anyone who thinks I'm always on the side of police is a fucking moron. And anyone who thinks I'm in favor of high-speed chases makes a fucking moron look like a Mensa candidate.

Radio waves travel faster than cars. Pursuit should be used in only the most extreme cases.

07-09-2010, 05:56 PM

[QUOTE=Kobal2;12722228]

Originally Posted by Sage Rat

I don't believe that that's true. The purpose of a taser is to incapacitate a person, not to make them feel pain. The pain is just a side-effect of the method used.

Point in fact, I'm nigh 100% certain that incapacitating a person is the sole intended and prescribed purpose of a taser.

You would be wrong. From Wiki :

[QUOTE=Wikipedia]Some Taser models, particularly those used by police departments, also have a "Drive Stun" capability, where the Taser is held against the target without firing the projectiles, and is intended to cause pain without incapacitating the target. "Drive Stun" is "the process of using the EMD weapon [Taser] as a pain compliance technique. This is done by activating the EMD and placing it against an individual

Welcome to Discuss Everything Forums...

Tags for this Thread

Thread: Woman calls police. They brutalize and arrest her.

Thread Tools

Rate This Thread

Display