Rise Of The Police State & No-Knock Raids - Either We Are Against Them Or Allowing Th

[BluesStringer]

I understand your point, I need to back up a little and clarify mine.

The right word wasn’t “Why”, what I was referring to was the driver’s repeated question of “For suspicion of what crime are you detaining me?” (Which in and of itself is a mouth full). If the cop tells you he’s detaining you I don’t see any point in asking what crime he suspects you of committing. He can lie about that anyway and it’s legal, so I wouldn’t bother asking.

As for the “Why” the driver did ask the cop “Why are you stopping me?” and the cop answered him “Public safety check point.” or some such nonsense. Whether you and I agree with these check points doesn’t change the fact that the Supremes say they’re Ok and arguing the point with the cop isn’t going to get you anywhere.

Personally I would have done it like this:

Eidolon: Good evening officer why are you stopping me?

Cop: Public Safety check point.

Eidolon: I do not consent to this interaction, Am I free to go?

Cop: You are not free to go.

Eidolon: I would like to speak to MY lawyer; I have nothing more to say.

Cop: Blah, Blah, Blah.

Eidolon: ………

Like I said, I agreed with every other point you made, including that the guy talked way too much and stumbled and bumbled his way through what he did say. I think the problem for him (and likely many, if not all of the other videos that you referenced having seen) is that they have the basic idea and rap down, but the incidence of being contacted by cops is so rare for most of 'em, that their adrenaline kicks in and makes 'em sound like whiny puppies. Adrenaline management skills aren't achieved by reading about them, or watching a YouTube video. At best, a citizen can go through some simulated stressful situational training that may help if s/he refreshes that training on a regular basis, but the real-deal situation is likely to sound and look more like the subject video for most people in any case.

I have had fairly extensive adrenaline management training. Even refreshed it several times. All of the training and the refresher courses were several years ago though, and I've only been contacted by cops twice in all those years. One was a DUI check-point just before midnight when I was on my way to work, which would've gone fine except that I couldn't find my insurance card right away, so I had to pull over and rummage through some stuff to find it. Made me late for work, but that was my fault, so though I didn't appreciate the stop, the cop didn't really do anything wrong or try to be intimidating.

The other time was in my own backyard which I wrote about it here and had an extended exchange with a truly moronic troll who no longer posts here(?) that led to one of my posts where I stated:

I did nothing to escalate that encounter. I told him right off I was walking my dog, which is a mistake as far as I'm concerned.

The "mistake" I was referencing was exactly because of what you suggest; I was talking too much. I was taken by total surprise and the training that I had let lapse over a period of several years was pretty much useless once being startled in my own backyard at 1:00 in the morning.

Knowing what little I know about your background, I have little doubt that you can manage stress on-the-spot better than the average citizen, and such an encounter would go just exactly as you describe above. Which only means you're not a fair representation of the "average" citizen that cops are well-practiced at intimidating and throwing off their game.

Blues

 

[Eidolon]

The other time was in my own backyard which I wrote about it here and had an extended exchange with a truly moronic troll who no longer posts here(?) that led to one of my posts

Based on a picture you posted in that thread the cop walked across the street through your front yard and all the way across your backyard without ever once stopping and thinking to himself " This is a private residence and maybe, just maybe, the person out behind it with a dog in the middle of the night might be the PROPERTY OWNER? and maybe I should ask that question first??"

I think I would have been just a little pissy in your shoes too

 

[gunnerbob]

NYPD officer caught on camera violently tackling pregnant woman onto her stomach

http://rt.com/usa/190380-nypd-tackle-pregnant-woman/

 

[gunnerbob]

Sept 4 Groubert traffic stop

Annnnd, another one for the record books.

The officer fired as soon as the man turned (apparently mistaking a wallet for a firearm) and then continued to fire after the man put his hands up. This is a bad-shoot no matter how anyone tries to justify it, the officer should be fired and sued for damages. However, he will most likely be protected by his department and said to have acted appropriately and then the city (read: taxpayers) will pay for damages.

Can you believe that some cops don't understand why citizens don't trust them?

 

[aacx22]

Annnnd, another one for the record books.

The officer fired as soon as the man turned (apparently mistaking a wallet for a firearm) and then continued to fire after the man put his hands up. This is a bad-shoot no matter how anyone tries to justify it, the officer should be fired and sued for damages. However, he will most likely be protected by his department and said to have acted appropriately and then the city (read: taxpayers) will pay for damages.

Can you believe that some cops don't understand why citizens don't trust them?

It certainly doesn't help.

That was so fast. The police officer was shooting before he could see what it was that the guy was getting. What is the first thing that you need any time you're stopped? Your ID, and add to that registration and insurance because he was driving. This stuff is often placed in the glove box. All it takes is one mistake, a mistake anyone can make, and a police officer who's on the edge, and you'll end up like this guy.

But you are mistaken, this LEO was fired and prosecuted.
Ex-South Carolina State Trooper Charged Over Traffic Stop Shooting - NBC News

 

[Eidolon]

Annnnd, another one for the record books.

The officer fired as soon as the man turned (apparently mistaking a wallet for a firearm) and then continued to fire after the man put his hands up. This is a bad-shoot no matter how anyone tries to justify it, the officer should be fired and sued for damages. However, he will most likely be protected by his department and said to have acted appropriately and then the city (read: taxpayers) will pay for damages.

Can you believe that some cops don't understand why citizens don't trust them?

On another forum I’ve heard this description

This is an example of what I refer to the "fundamentally decent person problem". Most really decent people have no clue about bad people and bad things, and no idea that their actions might be consistent with those of a dangerous offender, because it's clear (to them) that they are decent people.

It’s already been settled that the cop wasn’t justified in shooting but I will bet that right up to the time he pulled the trigger his actions were 100% consistent with his training and his training was probably that people that jump into their cars like that are very likely reaching for a gun.

I would bet that there’s not a person on this forum that wouldn’t have drawn in that situation and a couple that would have fired.

As a person that carries a gun all the time I think about stuff like this and situations like this are precisely the reason that if I am pulled over I make damn sure my hands are in plain view the whole time and if I have to retrieve anything I tell the cop exactly what I’m doing and why before I move.

 

[BluesStringer]

It’s already been settled that the cop wasn’t justified in shooting but I will bet that right up to the time he pulled the trigger his actions were 100% consistent with his training and his training was probably that people that jump into their cars like that are very likely reaching for a gun.

"Very likely" isn't good enough. So what if that is part of his training?

I would bet that there’s not a person on this forum that wouldn’t have drawn in that situation and a couple that would have fired.

Only cops on this forum would ever find themselves in that situation. No defensive shooter would ever order someone to show ID first, then draw when the subject begins to comply, then order the subject out of the car, and finally open fire when he complies with that order. That is the exact sequence of events shown in that video.

If the cop's training informs him that it is "very likely" someone complying with his orders is a threat, then the training needs drastic adjustments made to it.

The cop was charged with "assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature." While the "high and aggravated nature" part of it brings the "enhanced" possibility of a 20 year sentence, I'll be pretty damned surprised if Groubert is ever convicted, and downright amazed if he spends more than a handful of months in jail even if he is convicted.

There is nothing in that video that smacks of what anyone I can think of on this forum would do in "that" situation. It just shows another trigger-happy pig who immediately set about excusing his own lawless behavior when he answered the question of the victim in the video about why he was shot with, "Well, you dove head-first back into your car," Groubert says (which was following Groubert's order to show his ID). "Then you jumped back out, I'm telling you to get out of your car." (The victim jumped back out because Groubert was yelling at him to get out of the car! What a freakin' moron.

Blues

 

[Eidolon]

Only cops on this forum would ever find themselves in that situation. No defensive shooter would ever order someone to show ID first, then draw when the subject begins to comply, then order the subject out of the car, and finally open fire when he complies with that order. That is the exact sequence of events shown in that video.

Yes and no, I do agree that this isn’t a situation your normal citizen is going to find themselves in. It’s not a situation I’ve ever been in but when that guy jumped into the car my first thought was “Oh crap he’s going for a gun”. Like I said above I’m positive the driver never even thought that he would appear to be doing anything but complying with instructions.

Let me ask you this would you have done what the driver did or would you have told the cop where your wallet was as in “Hey my stuff’s sitting on the seat I have to get it.”?

If the cop's training informs him that it is "very likely" someone complying with his orders is a threat, then the training needs drastic adjustments made to it.

Is the cop’s training “People complying with your orders are a threat” or “Someone lunging into a car like that is probably reaching for a gun”?

The cop was charged with "assault and battery of a high and aggravated nature." While the "high and aggravated nature" part of it brings the "enhanced" possibility of a 20 year sentence, I'll be pretty damned surprised if Groubert is ever convicted, and downright amazed if he spends more than a handful of months in jail even if he is convicted.

First I agree, I bet anything the cop will walk. Second I agree again the cop was not justified in shooting. He was (I’m sure) in a blind panic and he needs to accept the consequences of his actions

There is nothing in that video that smacks of what anyone I can think of on this forum would do in "that" situation. It just shows another trigger-happy pig who immediately set about excusing his own lawless behavior when he answered the question of the victim in the video about why he was shot with, "Well, you dove head-first back into your car," Groubert says (which was following Groubert's order to show his ID). "Then you jumped back out, I'm telling you to get out of your car." (The victim jumped back out because Groubert was yelling at him to get out of the car! What a freakin' moron.

Blues

I can't comment I didn't see that part of the video

 

[BC1]

Annnnd, another one for the record books.

The officer fired as soon as the man turned (apparently mistaking a wallet for a firearm) and then continued to fire after the man put his hands up. This is a bad-shoot no matter how anyone tries to justify it, the officer should be fired and sued for damages. However, he will most likely be protected by his department and said to have acted appropriately and then the city (read: taxpayers) will pay for damages.

Can you believe that some cops don't understand why citizens don't trust them?

This cop? Coward, chicken-****, criminal. I want jail time for him.
.
NEVER tell a cop you're carrying unless the law requires you to do so. On any given day these morons will kill you for NOTHING!

 

[BluesStringer]

Yes and no, I do agree that this isn’t a situation your normal citizen is going to find themselves in. It’s not a situation I’ve ever been in but when that guy jumped into the car my first thought was “Oh crap he’s going for a gun”. Like I said above I’m positive the driver never even thought that he would appear to be doing anything but complying with instructions.

And like I said, if complying with the order to get his license invokes rote training that results in an unjustifiable cop shooting, then the training needs drastic adjustments made to it. There can be no tolerance for what we see in that video in a so-called "free" society. No excuses, especially not excuses that the training he's provided is what prevented him from being the clear-headed professional taxpayers in his state pay him to be.

Let me ask you this would you have done what the driver did or would you have told the cop where your wallet was as in “Hey my stuff’s sitting on the seat I have to get it.”?

I would've done the latter. So?

Is the cop’s training “People complying with your orders are a threat” or “Someone lunging into a car like that is probably reaching for a gun”?

In this case, they're one in the same, which is why I said the training needs revamping (at least).

I can't comment I didn't see that part of the video

The cops says what the link I posted quotes him as saying starting at about 1:20 in the video that gunnerbob posted in Post #104.

Or are you claiming my sequence of events isn't depicted in the video?

Blues

 

[Eidolon]

Or are you claiming my sequence of events isn't depicted in the video?

Blues

No I saw the video on the news and it ended right after the driver backed out of the frame.

 

[gunnerbob]

It certainly doesn't help.

That was so fast. The police officer was shooting before he could see what it was that the guy was getting. What is the first thing that you need any time you're stopped? Your ID, and add to that registration and insurance because he was driving. This stuff is often placed in the glove box. All it takes is one mistake, a mistake anyone can make, and a police officer who's on the edge, and you'll end up like this guy.

But you are mistaken, this LEO was fired and prosecuted.
Ex-South Carolina State Trooper Charged Over Traffic Stop Shooting - NBC News

Thanks for the follow up, I'm pleasantly surprised that I'm wrong and the man was fired.

 

[gunnerbob]

On another forum I’ve heard this description



It’s already been settled that the cop wasn’t justified in shooting but I will bet that right up to the time he pulled the trigger his actions were 100% consistent with his training and his training was probably that people that jump into their cars like that are very likely reaching for a gun.

I would bet that there’s not a person on this forum that wouldn’t have drawn in that situation and a couple that would have fired.

As a person that carries a gun all the time I think about stuff like this and situations like this are precisely the reason that if I am pulled over I make damn sure my hands are in plain view the whole time and if I have to retrieve anything I tell the cop exactly what I’m doing and why before I move.

FWIW, I have an LEO acquaintance that blatantly stated to me that the officer was wrong from the second he drew his weapon. This acquaintance of mine said that his training, given the proximity of the man in question, is to immediately rush him while his back is turned. I understand that this is "Monday morning quarterbacking" but, well, there it is. My professor stated as much today during class, he is a retired LE Capt. with 30 years on the job working everything from narcotics to internal affairs. The (former) officer was unjustified, period.

 

[aacx22]

FWIW, I have an LEO acquaintance that blatantly stated to me that the officer was wrong from the second he drew his weapon. This acquaintance of mine said that his training, given the proximity of the man in question, is to immediately rush him while his back is turned. I understand that this is "Monday morning quarterbacking" but, well, there it is. My professor stated as much today during class, he is a retired LE Capt. with 30 years on the job working everything from narcotics to internal affairs. The (former) officer was unjustified, period.

The feeling I have been getting over time is that LEOs are escalating things instead of defusing them, drawing their weapon too quickly, and then shooting before they really know what they are shooting at. I do not believe, nor to I intend to insinuate that it's all of them or even many of them... but it's certainly enough of them to warrant being concerned any time one makes contact.

 

[gunnerbob]

The feeling I have been getting over time is that LEOs are escalating things instead of defusing them, drawing their weapon too quickly, and then shooting before they really know what they are shooting at. I do not believe, nor to I intend to insinuate that it's all of them or even many of them... but it's certainly enough of them to warrant being concerned any time one makes contact.

Agreed, while it may seem unfair comparatively to other professions, LEOs aren't allowed to have bad days or make bad calls because people may die as a consequence. I've had a few conversations with a some LEOs, both full-time and reserves, who have tried to mitigate officer-involved shootings with the argument that people are entitled to that one bad day or that one bad call. My rebuttal to that assertion, while not denying people have bad days, is that such actions are never justified regardless of how "bad" or "angry" that particular officer felt. Much like being in the military, we were held to a higher standard and when we fell short we were disciplined. LEOs should be no different and in fact, should be held to an even higher standard of conduct given what they do. Joining the police force shouldn't be an excuse to shoot/kill people for your own reasons or based of off how you're feeling that day.

 

[Firefighterchen]

Agreed, while it may seem unfair comparatively to other professions, LEOs aren't allowed to have bad days or make bad calls because people may die as a consequence. I've had a few conversations with a some LEOs, both full-time and reserves, who have tried to mitigate officer-involved shootings with the argument that people are entitled to that one bad day or that one bad call. My rebuttal to that assertion, while not denying people have bad days, is that such actions are never justified regardless of how "bad" or "angry" that particular officer felt. Much like being in the military, we were held to a higher standard and when we fell short we were disciplined. LEOs should be no different and in fact, should be held to an even higher standard of conduct given what they do. Joining the police force shouldn't be an excuse to shoot/kill people for your own reasons or based of off how you're feeling that day.

Just imagine if all first time murderers could get away with having "one bad day..."

If they truly feel that way, we should ask them if they would use that as a legal defense.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app

 

[gunnerbob]

Family Traveling With Children Terrorized By Cops in Horrific Stop

Welcome to Police State USA: Family Traveling With Children Terrorized By Cops in Horrific Stop | The Free Thought Project

Thoughts?

 

[gunnerbob]

How Police Justify Stealing American Citizens' Money

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-...y-–-how-police-justify-stealing-american-citi

Can somebody explain to me again how police don't understand why most citizens dislike them?

 

[aacx22]

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-...y-–-how-police-justify-stealing-american-citi

Can somebody explain to me again how police don't understand why most citizens dislike them?

Insane.

 

[Firefighterchen]

Link Removed

Mostly good right? Phhhhhhhhfffffffff

90% follow the blue line, 9% excessive ego, 1% have integrity.

Sent from my HTCONE using USA Carry mobile app