Everyone is dancing around the truth in the Sandra Bland arrest. What happened is obvious.

[PredFan]

I already answered that question. Nothing will happen to him because he followed widely accepted police procedures. If you disagree please tell us what it was he did wrong.

He told her to get out of the car. For a routine traffic stop this was not a lawful order

Wrong. He didn't tell her to get out of the car because of the traffic stop, he told her to get out of the car because of her refusal to comply with his lawful order. The order to get out of the car is standard procedure all accross the nation. It is for the safety of both the officer and the driver. ALL cops do this because it separates the driver from any potential weapons he or she might have in the car. This is standard procedure and was not wrong. No police department or law enforcement department or grand jury or prosecutor anywhere would call that misconduct.

Asking her to put out her cigarrette was not a lawful order. And telling her to get out of the car in a traffic stop is not standard procedure

You don't have the faintest idea what "standard procedure" is...do you, Hawkeye? Standard procedure in a traffic stop is for the police officer to tell the detained person to remain in their car for that person's safety. When a police officer tells a detained person to step out of the car it's become something other than a routine traffic stop. At that point the officer has concerns that the detained person may have something dangerous inside of the car and is going to remove them from the car for the safety of the officer. When a police office is interacting with you he or she does indeed have the right to tell you to extinguish a burning cigarette. Once again it's a safety issue.

That is the whole point. The cop is making a routine traffic stop into something more. And nobody has to obey an unlawful order.

Again you are completely wrong. Bland turned that routine stop into something more and all of his orders were lawful.

 

[Hawkeye2j]

He told her to get out of the car. For a routine traffic stop this was not a lawful order

Wrong. He didn't tell her to get out of the car because of the traffic stop, he told her to get out of the car because of her refusal to comply with his lawful order. The order to get out of the car is standard procedure all accross the nation. It is for the safety of both the officer and the driver. ALL cops do this because it separates the driver from any potential weapons he or she might have in the car. This is standard procedure and was not wrong. No police department or law enforcement department or grand jury or prosecutor anywhere would call that misconduct.

Asking her to put out her cigarrette was not a lawful order. And telling her to get out of the car in a traffic stop is not standard procedure

You don't have the faintest idea what "standard procedure" is...do you, Hawkeye? Standard procedure in a traffic stop is for the police officer to tell the detained person to remain in their car for that person's safety. When a police officer tells a detained person to step out of the car it's become something other than a routine traffic stop. At that point the officer has concerns that the detained person may have something dangerous inside of the car and is going to remove them from the car for the safety of the officer. When a police office is interacting with you he or she does indeed have the right to tell you to extinguish a burning cigarette. Once again it's a safety issue.

That is the whole point. The cop is making a routine traffic stop into something more. And nobody has to obey an unlawful order.

Sorry, she has a first amendment and a fourth amendment right here. He is violating both
Again you are completely wrong. Bland turned that routine stop into something more and all of his orders were lawful.

 

[JimH52]

Someone please call Donald Trump and see what he thinks. We need to know.

 

[Jarlaxle]

People who don't use their turn signals are fucking morons and assholes.

It turns out that this bitch had been pulled over before for failure to signal. I think it's safe to assume that she's one of those psychopaths and/or sociopaths who rarely if ever use their turn signals.

Of course she was pulled over before for that. It is a calculated move by police to get a reason to pull someone over, you speed behind them so they naturally pull over to let you pass and then they nab you for failing to signal. No wonder she was irritated. It is a money generator. Basically entrapment.

Solution: while driving an old beater Suburban, brace against the headrest and STAND on the brakes with both feet! Stagger out holding your neck and screaming for an ambulance.

 

[Oldstyle]

Where did you come up with the idea that the police should avoid emotionally disturbed individuals? That isn't their JOB, Sparky! They're out there on the streets LOOKING for emotionally disturbed individuals because it's disturbed individuals who do crazy things!

Unless you really believe we are living in Nineteen Eighty Four I suggest you shed the delusional notion that police should be looking for emotionally disturbed individuals.

Compared with most developed nations the U.S. is populated with an extraordinarily high percentage of citizens who can be described as emotionally disturbed. Stand on a street corner in any city and they will pass you by at a fairly constant rate. Some are conspicuous, others aren't. But most of them manage to get through life peacefully and quietly.

So the police officer's job is to look for criminal behavior, not benign psychiatric disorder. Someone who reacts more temperamentally than most to provocation may be regarded as emotionally disturbed, but unless that person's behavior violates the law the only concern a police officer should have is not unnecessarily provoking such individuals.

And behaving with demonstrated annoyance at being stopped by a cop and issued a traffic summons is not a violation of any law!

You obviously don't know many police officers, Mike...because is you DID...then you'd know that they spend a great deal of their time dealing with people with psychiatric disorders. The majority of homeless people fall into that category, many of them on prescription medicines to treat psychiatric disorders which they quite often are not taking.

 

[Oldstyle]

And that isn't a "game" that the police are playing...in case you haven't noticed...police are being shot and killed at an ever increasing rate lately. The scenario you just described happens all the time now because quite frankly, the police are understandably on edge. They're being targeted for attack not because of anything they have done but rather for the uniform that they wear.

The scenario I described does not report on one lonely cop on a desolate country road who is confronting a driver whom he has cause to believe could be armed and potentially violent. I described (typically) three or more cars, which had participated in a pursuit in which there was no reason to believe the driver was armed or dangerous.

If you watch COPS you will see this scenario frequently. I have seen it no less than two dozen times. And not once has the subject been armed, or reportedly dangerous. In the vast majority of situations a small amount of marijuana was found and/or the driver was evading pursuit because of some bullshit warrants or the car was stolen.

So what we see is half-a-dozen or more police cars pursuing a car at deadly speeds through residential neighborhoods and on crowded highways -- risking lives when they have no idea why the pursued driver is fleeing. The pursuits typically end when the pursued car is wrecked along with causing extreme property damage. And there usually are a dozen cops milling around and high-fiving in an atmosphere which is not unlike the end of a successful high-school football game.

I will say that more recently a number of jurisdictions have adopted the sensible policy of high-speed pursuits being continued only when there is known cause for a superior officer to authorize it. Otherwise it is called off and a lookout order is issued for the fleeing car.

Your knowledge of what a police officer's day is like seems to have been gleaned from watching TV, Mike.

 

[Oldstyle]

As someone who's had a cigarette ground into my forearm as I was escorting someone out of a bar I can state without a doubt that a lit cigarette is a potential weapon and I have the scar to prove it.

Escorting someone out of a bar unmistakably implies a disorderly, possibly violent person, which is a significant departure from a peaceful motorist who has committed some benign traffic infraction and is calmly waiting for you to issue a warning or a summons, in which case there is no cause for physical contact, therefore no reason to fear attack by a deadly cigarette.

So try again.

The person who put their cigarette out on my arm was a rather petite girl who up until that point hadn't shown any tendency at all towards violence. My point is that you never know what people are going to do. You can make light of the pain a cigarette can inflict, Mike...I happen to know how excruciating it is. Ever since that incident, if someone was smoking a butt...I always made sure it was going on the floor before they were getting escorted out of the bar.

 

[Oldstyle]

I already answered that question. Nothing will happen to him because he followed widely accepted police procedures. If you disagree please tell us what it was he did wrong.

He told her to get out of the car. For a routine traffic stop this was not a lawful order

Wrong. He didn't tell her to get out of the car because of the traffic stop, he told her to get out of the car because of her refusal to comply with his lawful order. The order to get out of the car is standard procedure all accross the nation. It is for the safety of both the officer and the driver. ALL cops do this because it separates the driver from any potential weapons he or she might have in the car. This is standard procedure and was not wrong. No police department or law enforcement department or grand jury or prosecutor anywhere would call that misconduct.

Asking her to put out her cigarrette was not a lawful order. And telling her to get out of the car in a traffic stop is not standard procedure

You don't have the faintest idea what "standard procedure" is...do you, Hawkeye? Standard procedure in a traffic stop is for the police officer to tell the detained person to remain in their car for that person's safety. When a police officer tells a detained person to step out of the car it's become something other than a routine traffic stop. At that point the officer has concerns that the detained person may have something dangerous inside of the car and is going to remove them from the car for the safety of the officer. When a police office is interacting with you he or she does indeed have the right to tell you to extinguish a burning cigarette. Once again it's a safety issue.

That is the whole point. The cop is making a routine traffic stop into something more. And nobody has to obey an unlawful order.

You are detained during a routine traffic stop, Hawkeye. The police officer is well within his rights to ask you to put out a lit cigarette. They are also within their rights to ask you to step out of the vehicle. Failure to do so will get you arrested EVERY TIME. If you want to get arrested and go to jail...then cop an attitude and refuse to follow the police officer's commands. I hope you make lots of new friends during your stay down at the jail!

 

[Hawkeye2j]

He can ask you anything he wants you do not have to comply. If he asks you to step out of the vehicle you do have to comply but the court will then make him explain why he made her get out of the car. The court then will most likely inform the cop he violated her fourth amendment rights.

 

[Blackrook]

There is no point in disobeying a cop and giving him a hard time. You are much more likely to be arrested if you piss off the cop. Remember he is king of his own little world while he has you in his custody. Just act polite, take the ticket, and move on.

Any arguments you want to make should be directed to a judge in a court of law. If you think your ticket is unreasonable, court is the place to make that argument.

 

[Hawkeye2j]

Whether or not it is wise is not the question. The question is whether or not she was within her rights and she was.

 

[PredFan]

Wrong. He didn't tell her to get out of the car because of the traffic stop, he told her to get out of the car because of her refusal to comply with his lawful order. The order to get out of the car is standard procedure all accross the nation. It is for the safety of both the officer and the driver. ALL cops do this because it separates the driver from any potential weapons he or she might have in the car. This is standard procedure and was not wrong. No police department or law enforcement department or grand jury or prosecutor anywhere would call that misconduct.

Asking her to put out her cigarrette was not a lawful order. And telling her to get out of the car in a traffic stop is not standard procedure

You don't have the faintest idea what "standard procedure" is...do you, Hawkeye? Standard procedure in a traffic stop is for the police officer to tell the detained person to remain in their car for that person's safety. When a police officer tells a detained person to step out of the car it's become something other than a routine traffic stop. At that point the officer has concerns that the detained person may have something dangerous inside of the car and is going to remove them from the car for the safety of the officer. When a police office is interacting with you he or she does indeed have the right to tell you to extinguish a burning cigarette. Once again it's a safety issue.

That is the whole point. The cop is making a routine traffic stop into something more. And nobody has to obey an unlawful order.

Sorry, she has a first amendment and a fourth amendment right here. He is violating both
Again you are completely wrong. Bland turned that routine stop into something more and all of his orders were lawful.

Again you are wrong. He is not violating any rights at all. First Amendment? Wtf, are you talking about? He never said she couldn't say anything. Smoking a cigarette is a 4 th amendment right?

Dude you are messed up. I know you will never ever believe me. But you are going to be proven wrong when all investigations prove the cop did nothing wrong.

 

[MikeK]

You obviously don't know many police officers, Mike...because is you DID...then you'd know that they spend a great deal of their time dealing with people with psychiatric disorders. The majority of homeless people fall into that category, many of them on prescription medicines to treat psychiatric disorders which they quite often are not taking.

What do you mean "dealing with people with psychiatric disorders?" Are you now saying police officers are psychiatric interns? Or are you talking about people with severe mental disorders whose conduct occurs between the categories of simple disorderly conduct to serious felonies (assault, etc.)? In the latter case the police are doing what police should do, which is intervene when laws are broken.

But referring to the example of Sandra Bland, that woman obviously was emotionally disturbed -- because she killed herself. But she wouldn't have done that were it not for the excessive conduct of some stupid sonofabitch who saw fit to antagonize her into providing him with some minimal cause to arrest her. If he had any sense, or if he were not an authoritarian whose ego is rooted in the 1950s, he would have realized the best way to deal with Bland would be to issue a summons and say goodbye.

 

[PredFan]

He can ask you anything he wants you do not have to comply. If he asks you to step out of the vehicle you do have to comply but the court will then make him explain why he made her get out of the car. The court then will most likely inform the cop he violated her fourth amendment rights.

I'll bet you ANYTHING that that will not happen. Anything at all, name it.

 

[PredFan]

You obviously don't know many police officers, Mike...because is you DID...then you'd know that they spend a great deal of their time dealing with people with psychiatric disorders. The majority of homeless people fall into that category, many of them on prescription medicines to treat psychiatric disorders which they quite often are not taking.

What do you mean "dealing with people with psychiatric disorders?" Are you now saying police officers are psychiatric interns? Or are you talking about people with severe mental disorders whose conduct occurs between the categories of simple disorderly conduct to serious felonies (assault, etc.)? In the latter case the police are doing what police should do, which is intervene when laws are broken.

But referring to the example of Sandra Bland, that woman obviously was emotionally disturbed -- because she killed herself. But she wouldn't have done that were it not for the excessive conduct of some stupid sonofabitch who saw fit to antagonize her into providing him with some minimal cause to arrest her. If he had any sense, or if he were not an authoritarian whose ego is rooted in the 1950s, he would have realized the best way to deal with Bland would be to issue a summons and say goodbye.

Bull shit. He was polite and courteous until she started bitching and mouthing off. She got exactly what she deserved. I'll bet she's normally a raving lunatic bitch and thats why her boyfriend left her to rot in jail.

 

[MikeK]

The person who put their cigarette out on my arm was a rather petite girl who up until that point hadn't shown any tendency at all towards violence.

Then why were you called to escort a petite, peaceful girl out of a bar? What are you -- a cop or a bouncer? And if the girl was petite and non-violent, what cause did she have to burn you with a cigarette? And because of that one extremely unusual incident you feel it is sufficient cause to tell everyone you encounter to put their cigarettes out. If one person punches you in the face does that mean you need to handcuff everyone you encounter regardless of the level of complaint?

My point is that you never know what people are going to do. You can make light of the pain a cigarette can inflict, Mike...I happen to know how excruciating it is. Ever since that incident, if someone was smoking a butt...I always made sure it was going on the floor before they were getting escorted out of the bar.

You do a lot of escorting out of bars, don't you?

 

[PredFan]

The person who put their cigarette out on my arm was a rather petite girl who up until that point hadn't shown any tendency at all towards violence.

Then why were you called to escort a petite, peaceful girl out of a bar? What are you -- a cop or a bouncer? And if the girl was petite and non-violent, what cause did she have to burn you with a cigarette? And because of that one extremely unusual incident you feel it is sufficient cause to tell everyone you encounter to put their cigarettes out. If one person punches you in the face does that mean you need to handcuff everyone you encounter regardless of the level of complaint?

My point is that you never know what people are going to do. You can make light of the pain a cigarette can inflict, Mike...I happen to know how excruciating it is. Ever since that incident, if someone was smoking a butt...I always made sure it was going on the floor before they were getting escorted out of the bar.

You do a lot of escorting out of bars, don't you?

Telling suspects who are combative even slightly, to put out their cigarette is common practice and common police procedure throughout the US.

 

[MikeK]

There is no point in disobeying a cop and giving him a hard time. You are much more likely to be arrested if you piss off the cop. Remember he is king of his own little world while he has you in his custody. Just act polite, take the ticket, and move on.

In the most general sense you are absolutely right and I fully agree. But some cops are intolerably obnoxious authoritarian bullies with a pathological need to have their asses kissed. These are the cops whose abusive conduct reflects badly on all cops, including the good ones who don't deserve the stigma. Run into one of these guys when you're having a bad day and it's not always easy to follow the good advice you've laid out.

Any arguments you want to make should be directed to a judge in a court of law. If you think your ticket is unreasonable, court is the place to make that argument.

It's not that easy. With very few exceptions, all lower court judges are solidly on the side of the cop. These people are players on the same team. If you have a problem with a traffic cop, if you have a good story and the judge is in a good mood the most you can hope for is a dismissal. But if you have a complaint against the cop, unless you have filed a separate complaint with his HQ, and you have evidence to support your complaint, your complaint will be tossed out. If you have all your ducks in a row you will be referred to a superior court and its going to cost you for the time your lawyer will need to spend on appearances and "research."

And after all the hassle you will be put through, unless your complaint involves serious criminal conduct the best you can hope for is the cop gets a page in his folder and a few days off without pay -- which he fills in with a few days as an armed escort or security guard through his union.

The only way you can come out ahead is if you are severely abused and it becomes publicized. Then you will be courted by well-connected, high-power lawyers who will take up the sword for you on contingency and shoot for million dollar awards or settlements -- which well-publicized cases are always good for.

And that's it: Serious complaint, good evidence. Otherwise, forget it -- unless you're rich and don't mind spending a lot of time in court.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Yes, everyone is dancing around the truth, and the truth lies with Cecil the lion.

 

[MikeK]

Yes, everyone is dancing around the truth, and the truth lies with Cecil the lion.

I'm glad you mentioned that news item. Isn't that a goddam shame?

I'm very pleased that rotten sonofabitch dentist, Palmer, is getting the publicity his criminal act deserves. I have sent an email to Obama asking him to extradite Palmer to Zimbabwe. Please do the same. He deserves anything and everything he gets as the result of his reprehensible activities.