Mention it to who?
Cop in America doing a bad job, again
- Thread starter Sigma
- Start date
Mention it to who?
At least no one was shot or tased…
The person being arrested. I get this isn't the same situation as serving an arrest warrant but people usually like to understand the reason why you've drawn a gun on them.
"Turn off the vehicle, put the phone down and step out of the car with your hands where I can see them. There's a warrant for your arrest."
Communication skills are important, especially when screaming the same command over and over again isn't working. It's the same old story with cops, though, always escalating to a point where violence becomes the only option.
Just like in the video cal just posted above. No assessment, no communication, jumping straight to force.
I can’t really give a blanket statement to cover all instances, but I’ve personally never pulled someone over for KNOWING they have a warrant. Usually I’ve ran someone’s information after a traffic stop, and then if they’ve come back with a warrant, I determine what the best course of action would be. For just a warrant, Ive never had someone at gunpoint. I’ve also typically not told them they had a warrant until I’d had them
step out of the vehicle and removed them from whatever may be in the vehicle with them, and removed the possibility of them suddenly driving off.
With firearms it’s a little different, especially depending on the call and what information you have. I’ve had times I’ve drawn my weapon out, and times I’ve talked to them and removed the firearm from their person or the vehicle and handled it at a lower level. The biggest determination of how things go usually is the compliance of who you’re dealing with. If someone knows they have a warrant, or they know they have a firearm, they’re sometimes less likely to just go with the program and follow instructions. The last person I had that was called in for brandishing a firearm, I contacted him at his window and told him why he was stopped. He said it was bullshit and I said maybe so, but based on the information we had (description of him down to his sunglasses, description of the vehicle down to the number stickers, and a description of the firearm), I had to do my due diligence and search his vehicle. He said he didn’t consent, I told him in this case it was irrelevant, and we could wait for a supervisor if he preferred, but that either way I was gonna be taking a look. He then relented and advised me he had a firearm in a holster on his left side under his sweatshirt. Hands on the steering wheel, don’t reach for it etc, and we went from there. If I was making the stop and he took off, or began being aggressive, or jumping out of the vehicle, or didn’t listen to commands, then I’d have had to change my course of action and justify why I did that. That’s also why it’s hard to determine why officers took certain actions in small video clips. Based on the stop made, it certainly appears that they went overboard with the force used, I’m just filling in the blanks without trying to justify their actions.
Yeah, based on the details you gave earlier, the interpretation is contingent on the officer having run the plates and determined that this guy could be the person with warrants, etc. If that's the case then the reaction makes some sense but I still think there's means to get the guy to comply with putting the phone down (he seems to not know why the guns are out). Maybe you don't need to be 100% transparent about the warrant but if he had prior firearms offences you can surely put that out there?
Like you say, taking a better approach can make a big difference to stress levels and outcomes for everyone involved.
Not sure they are American cops, but 
Not sure they are American cops, but
Holy hell, I hope they were American cops. That was amazing.
If they'd been American, he'd be dead.
A distinct lack of guns, and shooting, gave it away.
Bad, good, gun, guy…
I give up.
I give up.
From replies:
Person, woman, man, camera, TV.
Straight up execution…
I was in sympathy with the cop until he drew his firearm and calmly shot the guy in the head from close range. He straight-up murdered the guy
Thats murder plain and simple. Cop needs to go to jail. Jesus.
I can't believe I was in Texas driving my cousin's car to shopping malls on my own. I had a UK licence but no papers for the car, probably no insurance, etc. Had I known what this country was like back then, I wouldn't have left their house for any reason on my own. Sometimes you look back on when you think you could have died. On hindsight, this is probably top 5 for me.
Another time was when a gun was pointed at my temple while I was being robbed in Pakistan and I honestly didn't feel like I was going to get shot at all then as I was fully complying. I almost enjoyed the bucket list experience. But if a US officer stops me, a potential terrorist looking brown person, then I will be saying my last prayers for sure.
Another time was when a gun was pointed at my temple while I was being robbed in Pakistan and I honestly didn't feel like I was going to get shot at all then as I was fully complying. I almost enjoyed the bucket list experience. But if a US officer stops me, a potential terrorist looking brown person, then I will be saying my last prayers for sure.
They'll argue the suspect was warned to let go of the taser repeatedly whilst also resisting arrest, therefore somehow it's justified because American cops are allowed to just shoot to finish the job.
Officer fearing for his life, etc.
I wouldn't want to be an American cop because I don't know how he resolves that in a different manner if he's unsure when backup is arriving (Sirens were heard straight away after the firing so not too far away at least). Similarly I wouldn't want to be targeted by one either because you just end up dead.
If you're in a bad struggle like that with someone where you can't overpower them and they're resisting and there's a taser involved and a gun involved, what would you do? Forget being a cop for a minute. I'm genuinely not sure because I'd be fecking terrified and the adrenaline would be pumping, fight or flight fully activated.
Terrified mind then knowing you have a gun at their disposal...it must be pretty easy to go to that zone in your head to pull it out and shoot.
It still absolutely doesn't justify him pulling the trigger, but it's easy to see how he got there. The gun is the problem as ever because it's a crutch.
Officer fearing for his life, etc.
I wouldn't want to be an American cop because I don't know how he resolves that in a different manner if he's unsure when backup is arriving (Sirens were heard straight away after the firing so not too far away at least). Similarly I wouldn't want to be targeted by one either because you just end up dead.
If you're in a bad struggle like that with someone where you can't overpower them and they're resisting and there's a taser involved and a gun involved, what would you do? Forget being a cop for a minute. I'm genuinely not sure because I'd be fecking terrified and the adrenaline would be pumping, fight or flight fully activated.
Terrified mind then knowing you have a gun at their disposal...it must be pretty easy to go to that zone in your head to pull it out and shoot.
It still absolutely doesn't justify him pulling the trigger, but it's easy to see how he got there. The gun is the problem as ever because it's a crutch.
Last edited:
In a just world it would come down to the question of was the force used reasonable.
I don't think it was but how much leeway does a US cop have to beat a suspect these days? It's probably easier to shoot them despite what we hear about the administrative headaches that come with discharging a firearm in the line of duty. Obviously that's a terrible approach.
I don't know what started the interaction but if there isn't any immediate danger why can't they just let suspects in non-violent situations flee? He could/should have stopped trying to corral a guy that he was struggling with physically and then tazered him, or just let him run.
American cops are stuck in a mindset where they have to Dudley Do-Right every fecking suspect even if it means killing them. This needs to stop. It's reasonable to have a 'must pursue and capture' approach for suspects who present a significant danger to the public but a lot of the cases we see in this thread don't seem to meet that threshold.
I don't think it was but how much leeway does a US cop have to beat a suspect these days? It's probably easier to shoot them despite what we hear about the administrative headaches that come with discharging a firearm in the line of duty. Obviously that's a terrible approach.
I don't know what started the interaction but if there isn't any immediate danger why can't they just let suspects in non-violent situations flee? He could/should have stopped trying to corral a guy that he was struggling with physically and then tazered him, or just let him run.
American cops are stuck in a mindset where they have to Dudley Do-Right every fecking suspect even if it means killing them. This needs to stop. It's reasonable to have a 'must pursue and capture' approach for suspects who present a significant danger to the public but a lot of the cases we see in this thread don't seem to meet that threshold.
Fully agree with all of this.
I should have know better than to read the replies to the tweet.
That’s murder. Plain and simple.
That’s murder. Plain and simple.
Kind of hard when this is the general mindset of a large section of law enforcement
I should also add that the fight or flight was fully activated in the victim too, going for the taser to stop being tased is probably the most rational thing that happened there.
He shot the guy in his head for a traffic stop!
He was more or less in physical control of the situation when he drew his firearm and aimed for the guy's head. I am not part of the aim for the legs school but he could have easily shot the guy in his legs
Or just, you know, not shot him.
I’ve said it before but the biggest issue with US cops is that they see the gun as the answer to every question. When the only thing you know how to use is a hammer then everything looks like a nail.
Kind of hard when this is the general mindset of a large section of law enforcement
Oh totally, it's that mindset that needs to change. You can always get your man without it having to happen right away.
Last edited:
He man is literally on top of the guy! If he has to shoot him then when doesn’t he go for a leg or something?
He executed a guy for running away from a traffic stop, he should be spending the rest of his life behind bars hiding from the gangs who know he’s a cop.
He executed a guy for running away from a traffic stop, he should be spending the rest of his life behind bars hiding from the gangs who know he’s a cop.
There isn't a big enough pay-check to make me want to move to the US. When the people paid to protect you do this...
Thry aren't paid to protect you. They're paid to protect property/the city/the rich.
It was still part of a fight/struggle, I don't think anyone could reasonably say he had the siutation under control and then shot him.
He still absolutely shouldn't have shot him of course.
As others have said, the culture/psychology has to change. American cops must be a bucket of nerves every time they put on their uniform. If they don't get their man straight away do they lose their jobs or suffer other consequences? There's no allowance for lateral thinking, it's so regimented.
Couple that with being power-mad and having weapons and it results in the way they are.
Complete disregard for the guys life. The man is a murderer.
And the only reason this man has a leg to stand on and not been ruined is video evidence to the contrary of what this cop claimed. Now imagine the amount of times there is no video evidence where this kind of thing happens.
That second video of the back of the head execution… I should have known better than to re-enter this thread.
Can’t quite feel any sorrow for him at all.
For those interested that's his own lieutenant shooting him in that clip.
It was during a $60 drug bust. He got shot 9 times by his own boss...
The story has a good ending however as the guy not only survived but sued the state department and won $6.5 million.
just confirming that you driving a vehicle in the US with no interaction with anyone is in the top 5 times you might have died?
to be fair, based on my time driving in the UK I can see how a Brit driving over here might make it top 5. Especially in Texas. If he had been in Atlanta it would be top 3.