Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Here is another example of how you disconnect from reality. You know how you feel. We all get that but what you don't know is how other people feel.
We live in a system where people get to pick who will represent them to govern them. On a rather frequent basis we get to decide if we want to keep those people or pick new ones. We also have a set of rules that cant be easily changed with defines our relationship with the government. (the Constitution)
While the system is far from perfect, it has produced the wealthiest and most technologically advanced nation the world has every know.
I believe in that system a lot more than I believe in your feelings. I also know a lot more about the realities of the road than you do. I also know that I am charged with a duty to enforce the laws of this land as passed/overseen by the representative government of this nation.
The only thing you know is how you feel about all of that. I know how I feel as well...but you don't want to be ruled by my feelings any more than I want to be ruled by yours. That is something else I don't think you understand. We can either live with rules or be ruled.
Do you enforce every single traffic law, without prejudice, every single day or do you pick and chose which offenses are big enough to justify pulling someone over?
Do you ever break speed limits? Maybe roll through a stop sign in your neighborhood when no one else is on the street? Or are you perfect in every single way?
Pure speculation, yet you're both so quick to throw those statements out there as though they are facts. I would suggest that unless you were at the scene of the murder that you don't slander the deceased.
As someone that took a concealed carry class from a police officer, I can assure you, we were coached on EXACTLY what to say if we are ever in a situation where we would have to use our weapon. In training throughout the day we were told and had to rehearse, over and over and over again that we were to say as loudly as we could 'STOP! I AM IN FEAR FOR MY LIFE!'
In addition, one night on my way to class at SAC, I had the pleasure of witnessing a police training session going on in the parking lot. The officers were coached repeatedly on exactly what to say when asking someone to exit a vehicle. They were told to say the exact same thing, over and over and over again.
So does it surprise me to hear that the cop can be heard on an alleged recording of the incident saying the same things over and over again? Absolutely not, it is what they are trained to do.
You're missing the point. The officer had to continue to tell him over and over, roughly 50+ times. If that shows anything, it's that the guy obviously wasn't listening/complying.
Nobody is "slandering" anyone. First of all, you don't have the right term. It's "libel", and nobody's doing that, either. Secondly, this entire conversation is "speculation". Not just one side. That's why it's called a "discussion board".
We're mostly going over what-ifs and how-it-might-have-happened. We all have our own ideas and thoughts and we're just talking. Goodness.
(Not that I don't think some officers aren't trained monkeys. But, I'd say that for any profession, especially those involving ample amounts of hormones, male or female.)
You're missing the point. The officer had to continue to tell him over and over, roughly 50+ times. If that shows anything, it's that the guy obviously wasn't listening/complying.
Which is why I pointed out the fact that the police are coached to do exactly that in training and throughout their careers in law enforcement. The audio that has been referred to, that may or may not actually exist, proves nothing more than the cop in question followed his training. I will say again, in a concealed carry class I took with a police officer as the instructor, we were coached repeatedly on exactly what to say and how to say it, and these are his words not mine, "so that if we ever end up in court because we shot someone, our ass is covered."
Now with that fact in mind and the admission of Neshomamench that this type of coaching is EXACTLY what happens in police training and it happens for a reason, is it fair to have a reasonable doubt as to the importance of the alleged evidence that the UIW student was told roughly 50+ times to do something and he, allegedly, did not comply? Not only that, but if this alleged audio evidence does exist, is it possible that a cop, that just shot someone, might go back and recreate 'evidence' to protect himself? I understand that there are many people out there that ALWAYS want to give cops the benefit of the doubt, just understand, there are also a lot of us out there that don't want to give them the benefit of the doubt and we have a right to be heard too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mom2Feebs
Nobody is "slandering" anyone. First of all, you don't have the right term. It's "libel", and nobody's doing that, either. Secondly, this entire conversation is "speculation". Not just one side. That's why it's called a "discussion board".
Fair enough, unlike most cops, I not only admit that I am not perfect, I will also admit that I make mistakes from time to time. So, it is libel and not slander. Thank you for the correction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mom2Feebs
We're mostly going over what-ifs and how-it-might-have-happened. We all have our own ideas and thoughts and we're just talking. Goodness.
(Not that I don't think some officers aren't trained monkeys. But, I'd say that for any profession, especially those involving ample amounts of hormones, male or female.)
I absolutely understand this and I am willing to accept that not everyone qualifies an opinion as what it is, including myself. However, if I am going to be called on to prove or provide evidence every time I state an opinion as something more than an opinion than everyone with an opinion contrary to mine that commits the same offense can expect the same treatment from me. If we can all agree that this is a 'discussion board' and people can make statements without having to hire a lawyer and go to court to prove that their statement is 100% fact (when NO ONE can prove that) then I will quit responding in kind.
All I have said here is that I don't trust cops and that this story has 'suspicious' and 'cover up' written all over it. I am an otherwise reasonable person and open to respectful discussion when I too am treated with respect.
The outdoor SAC exercise being described as a course in "covering up" the brutalization of citizens is not a convincing characterization.
CYA is not about assaulting someone while repeating a few lines by rote. It is saying (and doing) the right things to CYA so no one can come later and say you did not do your job right.
If Carter had shot the perp after the 3rd warning but added in another 53 just for fun then maybe this would be a case of police brutality. Let us wait for the recording to see and please keep claims of doctoring evidence to a minimal if and when it is released.
Now with that fact in mind and the admission of Neshomamench that this type of coaching is EXACTLY what happens in police training and it happens for a reason....
That is an absurd characterization about what they are doing at SAC (or every Police Academy) and what I said about it. Pure propaganda.
Do you enforce every single traffic law, without prejudice, every single day or do you pick and chose which offenses are big enough to justify pulling someone over?
Do you ever break speed limits? Maybe roll through a stop sign in your neighborhood when no one else is on the street? Or are you perfect in every single way?
You do realize that part of the law is Officer discretion. I do get to pick and choose in some cases governed under very strict laws. While being under the threat of losing my honor, my job, my pension and my freedom, my health, and my life...for every action I take as an LEO.
Here is another example of how you disconnect from reality.
It's funny to hear a cop talk about a disconnect from reality regarding traffic stops.
So when was the last ticket you received? Right, you flashed your badge and went on your way.
Last cop with a DUI? Even if you get one the DA will sweep it under the rug. You don't even have to be a cop, just be related to one. Our local DA has proven that.
From several media reports it can be gathered that the subject was speeding, hit a curb, ignored the police officer pulling him over, parked in his regular parking space, continued to ignore the officer by attempting to walk away, then ignored lawful orders and became physically aggressive with the officer.
None of that happened, nor has that been reported. Here is what was reported:
-cop claims he saw suspect hit a curb and bounce back into oncoming traffic. No witnesses have come forward to confirm seeing this. No evidence has been presented showing damage to the student's car. What would be interesting to hear would be information from whoever was working at Whataburger about whether the cop took his burger before going after the student. If he waited for the burger, then obviously the driving couldn't have been that erratic, but it would explain why he didn't catch up to the student for 1.5 miles.
-cop has never claimed that he tried to pull the student over on the street. The student was already parked, had exited the car, and was walking to his apartment by the time the cop caught up to him.
-no information has been given about any lawful orders given or ignored. No proof that the student became physically aggressive, first or at all. The only aggressive actions we have are the cop pulling out his baton and gun. Pulling out the gun makes it legal for the student to defend himself against lethal force.
None of that happened, nor has that been reported. Here is what was reported:
-cop claims he saw suspect hit a curb and bounce back into oncoming traffic. No witnesses have come forward to confirm seeing this. No evidence has been presented showing damage to the student's car. What would be interesting to hear would be information from whoever was working at Whataburger about whether the cop took his burger before going after the student. If he waited for the burger, then obviously the driving couldn't have been that erratic, but it would explain why he didn't catch up to the student for 1.5 miles.
-cop has never claimed that he tried to pull the student over on the street. The student was already parked, had exited the car, and was walking to his apartment by the time the cop caught up to him.
-no information has been given about any lawful orders given or ignored. No proof that the student became physically aggressive, first or at all. The only aggressive actions we have are the cop pulling out his baton and gun. Pulling out the gun makes it legal for the student to defend himself against lethal force.
Is this your personal opinion or are you declaring this as fact? If you are claiming this as a fact I would think you would want to at least provide a link to the report to back up your facts otherwise it is no more than just an opinion.
None of that happened, nor has that been reported. Here is what was reported:
-cop claims he saw suspect hit a curb and bounce back into oncoming traffic. No witnesses have come forward to confirm seeing this. No evidence has been presented showing damage to the student's car. What would be interesting to hear would be information from whoever was working at Whataburger about whether the cop took his burger before going after the student. If he waited for the burger, then obviously the driving couldn't have been that erratic, but it would explain why he didn't catch up to the student for 1.5 miles.
-cop has never claimed that he tried to pull the student over on the street. The student was already parked, had exited the car, and was walking to his apartment by the time the cop caught up to him.
-no information has been given about any lawful orders given or ignored. No proof that the student became physically aggressive, first or at all. The only aggressive actions we have are the cop pulling out his baton and gun. Pulling out the gun makes it legal for the student to defend himself against lethal force.
You clearly don't have all the facts. The Chief of Police for Alamo Heights said the cop had a microphone on him.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
