Cops smash car window to taser passenger

[SuckOnThis]

[blackmonsters]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

Nazi America.

.

[just a punk]

Why the police officer's face is blurred out? Don't you have a legal right to film cops on duty?

[Rochard]

Not caring.

During a routine traffic stop, police have the right to ask everyone for identification. This man refused, then refused orders to step out of the car. Asking for ID is both routine and common, and the fact that he refused is suspicious in itself.

When police ask you to step out of the car, it's less of a question and more of an order. One way or another he was coming out of the car.

[just a punk]

Originally Posted by Rochard

During a routine traffic stop, police have the right to ask everyone for identification.

Ok, they have a right to ask. You have a right to film them. Why face of that cop is blurred out?

Originally Posted by Rochard

When police ask you to step out of the car, it's less of a question and more of an order. One way or another he was coming out of the car.

Don't he must show you his own id with a photo first to identify himself? Who knows, maybe he is not a cop at all, or maybe he is on drugs... I my country I have a right to know his name and the department number to make a phone call and ensure he is a real cop and he is on duty. Even if he is a cop on duty, but if he acts inadequately (e.g. tries to threatened me with a gun), I'll report him to the internal department of security and those guys will take care of him...

[SuckOnThis]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Not caring.

During a routine traffic stop, police have the right to ask everyone for identification. This man refused, then refused orders to step out of the car. Asking for ID is both routine and common, and the fact that he refused is suspicious in itself.

When police ask you to step out of the car, it's less of a question and more of an order. One way or another he was coming out of the car.

So send flying glass at kids and tase the guy. Makes sense.

[CDSmith]

Originally Posted by CyberSEO

Ok, they have a right to ask. You have a right to film them. Why face of that cop is blurred out?

Who told you that nonsense?

Originally Posted by CyberSEO

Don't he have to show his own id first and identify himself? Who knows, maybe he is not a cop at all, or maybe he is on drugs... I need to know his name and the department number to make a phone call and ensure he is a real cop and he is on duty.

You'll go far in life with that attitude. :D

Getting all "my rights" and smartassy with a cop is about the dumbest thing you can do in the US. Canada too for that matter. Best thing to do is to comply with them fully, and if they do anything that you think is wrong or unfair you wait until later and let your lawyer do your talking.

Unless of course one WANTS to be a star on youtube. :D

[SuckOnThis]

Originally Posted by CDSmith

Who told you that nonsense?

The United States Supreme Court.

Supreme Court Upholds Legality of Videotaping Police

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by CyberSEO

Ok, they have a right to ask. You have a right to film them. Why face of that cop is blurred out?

Being as I have no idea who blurred the image out, I cannot answer this. I am assuming it was the TV station - most likely because they fear being sued by the officer?

[just a punk]

Originally Posted by CDSmith

Who told you that nonsense?

I don't know about free and democratic America, but in tyrannical Russia this right is given by the law: http://www.rg.ru/2009/07/07/mvd-reglament-dok.html

25 A police officer is not allowed to impede the use of video and audio recording equipment, if it is not prohibited by law. In case of prohibition, the officer must inform the citizen who does the record.

So it's not a nonsense, it's a law (at least n my country).

BTW, look at this video. The police officer has clutched his holster (didn't even get his gun out) without a reason. Guess that? The next day this video was on all federal TV news channels (yes, because we have a right to film police on duty) and just a day later he was fired from his job:



Yes, I'm not an American citizen. I'm not free and I have no idea what democracy is, but I know my rights...

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

So send flying glass at kids and tase the guy. Makes sense.

You are right - it doesn't make sense.

It doesn't make sense for the police to have to smash the window at all, kids or not. But it also doesn't make sense that a grown man is going to refuse to produce ID during a routine traffic stop, no less to completely disobey a lawful command from a police officer.

Police, after someone refuses to produce ID, will not say "Oh, no problem, just go about your way, drive safely" - That's not how it works. Once the police says "We need to see your ID" everything stops until they have identified that person - no exceptions. This man forced police into a very difficult situation that quickly escalated - When you refuse to get out of the car, police are going to come in to get you. It's just not open to discussion.

[just a punk]

Originally Posted by CDSmith

You'll go far in life with that attitude. :D

I'm already far Believe me ;)

In my country police don't shoot civilians left and right. The last case of mass murder when a cop shot dead 2 Moscow citizens was in 2009. That animal now servers a life time (we have no death penalty in Russia), the director of Moscow police has lost his job too. Here is an article in wikipedia about that shooting (use Google translate to read): https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%94...BE%D0%B2%D0%B0

[just a punk]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Being as I have no idea who blurred the image out, I cannot answer this. I am assuming it was the TV station - most likely because they fear being sued by the officer?

Sued for that? If he was on duty, he can not impede citizens to film him. Course if he is NOT on duty, he is just a private person and you can't film him if he is not agree for that. That's a normal practice, isn't it?

[L-Pink]

Originally Posted by CyberSEO

Sued for that? If he was on duty, he can not impede citizens to film him. Course if he is NOT on duty, he is just a private person and you can't film him if he is not agree for that. That's a normal practice, isn't it?

You don't give a shit either way. You just can't pass up criticizing anything American.


.

[CDSmith]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

The United States Supreme Court.

Supreme Court Upholds Legality of Videotaping Police

Originally Posted by CyberSEO

I don't know about free and democratic America, but in tyrannical Russia this right is given by the law: http://www.rg.ru/2009/07/07/mvd-reglament-dok.html



So it's not a nonsense, it's a law (at least n my country).

BTW, look at this video. The police officer has clutched his holster (didn't even get his gun out) without a reason. Guess that? The next day this video was on all federal TV news channels (yes, because we have a right to film police on duty) and just a day later he was fired from his job:



Yes, I'm not an American citizen. I'm not free and I have no idea what democracy is, but I know my rights...

While all that is true you guys still don't get it. I'm a realist. While you're all squawking about your so-called "soopreme court RIGHTS" I know the truth of it. If a cop is in a certain situation and sees you (as in you the person he has pulled over, you the person he is focused on at the time) video-recording him when you should be obeying his commands he is often very likely going to set you straight, and not in a good way.

Try it, you'll soon see how right I am.

As a bystander though, sure, you probably have every right to do this. That still doesn't negate the fact that on any given day that one cop won't walk over and rip your phone out of your hands and toss it down a sewer or stomp on it.

Am I saying the cops are right to do this in all situations? No. I'm simply urging all you "I have rights" activists to be real. If a cop tells you to step out of the vehicle and you instead keep your windows up and get out a phone and start filming don't be surprised at the outcome. That's all. :D

[just a punk]

Originally Posted by L-Pink

You don't give a shit either way. You just can't pass up criticizing anything American.

No that's not true and you know that. Have I told you that you can't criticize my country? Ever. No, I haven't, because I believe it's a free board and everybody can express his/her own point of view (yes, I know, I have a very perverted understanding of democracy because I'm a Russian piece of shit who has no idea what real freedom is). If you want criticize Russia, please feel free to post into all those threads about Russian aggression on the Ukraine and similar. Who am I to allow or disallow you to do so?

As to contents of this thread, we are talking about the police behavior (blame the OP for posting the news about US police and for ignoring India, Tanzania and Nigeria). And yes, it's normal if I compare it with my own country. Just because it's something I know best (I'm not the one who is used to play an expert for other countries). This is why I don't claim anything for your country. I just read the posts of the US citizens, ask my questions (read above) and then just compare what they say with my own country.

It's not criticizing. It's just a comparison

P.S. I've been to your country for a few times and I had no problems with your police. To be fair, I had no real problems with Russian police either. Maybe because I'm a special one? ;)

[femdomdestiny]

one word : terror

[Tom_PM]

Why are people presuming that he refused to show ID? The video says simply that he failed to produce it. That means he doesn't have one to produce in my mind, it does not magically turn into a refusal on his part. What was suspicious about him anyway? Riding while black male?

[just a punk]

Originally Posted by CDSmith

Try it, you'll soon see how right I am.

The people here do it every single day (yes, all that famous Russian dashcam and "funny" police videos on youtube). Don't you understand what if you won't use the law to enforce your rights, the police will just turn you into a herd of docile animals? Give them up a part of your rights and you'll lost them all. Just my

[pornmasta]

Originally Posted by CyberSEO

I don't know about free and democratic America, but in tyrannical Russia this right is given by the law: http://www.rg.ru/2009/07/07/mvd-reglament-dok.html
.

[Tom_PM]

From an article on the incident
"In the video, officers ask Jones, who was in the passenger seat, to show his ID. However, he did not have his license on him."

Also...

"When the passenger displayed movements inside of the stopped vehicle that included placing his hand in places where the officer could not see, officers' concerns for their safety were heightened."

Finally..

"The lawsuit alleges excessive force, false arrest and battery. "

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...window-n219916

[sandman!]

fucking with the cops will get you fucked up.

sad but true

[SuckOnThis]

Originally Posted by Rochard

You are right - it doesn't make sense.

It doesn't make sense for the police to have to smash the window at all, kids or not. But it also doesn't make sense that a grown man is going to refuse to produce ID during a routine traffic stop, no less to completely disobey a lawful command from a police officer.

Police, after someone refuses to produce ID, will not say "Oh, no problem, just go about your way, drive safely" - That's not how it works. Once the police says "We need to see your ID" everything stops until they have identified that person - no exceptions. This man forced police into a very difficult situation that quickly escalated - When you refuse to get out of the car, police are going to come in to get you. It's just not open to discussion.

He didnt refuse to produce his ID, he was looking for it when the cops drew their guns which is why he refused to exit the vehicle and requested a Sgt. Here's the raw video...

[rogueteens]

woooooohhh. worldstar!

[just a punk]

Originally Posted by sandman!

fucking with the cops will get you fucked up.

Not at all. Especially if they see you know the law (your rights), and especially when they know they are being filmed. When I'm talking to police I do not act like an ass, but I always definitely show them what I know my rights. Perhaps that's the reason I haven't had any serious problems.

Here is another video. The guy speaks like an asshole with a police Colonel (that's not a typo) while his wife filming it on camera. He smokes on the officer and denies to stop because he "don't want to smoke inside the car where his kid is". He also expose the officer for not knowing the law (article 185, which says that the policeman must not just show his id. He must tell his full name and explain the reason of stop). Once again, he acts like an asshole (personally I would never to do that just because I have a respect to the people on duty> especially if they are 30 year older than me), but he does not break the law. Otherwise he uses it for his own benefit:

[seeandsee]

only in america

[blackmonsters]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

He didnt refuse to produce his ID, he was looking for it when the cops drew their guns which is why he refused to exit the vehicle and requested a Sgt. Here's the raw video...

We must learn from this :

Officers need to stop you for not having a seat belt on because you could get hurt.

See, that guy got hurt didn't he?

.

[blackmonsters]

Originally Posted by CyberSEO

Not at all. Especially if they see you know the law (your rights), and especially when they know they are being filmed. When I'm talking to police I do not act like an ass, but I always definitely show them what I know my rights. Perhaps that's the reason I haven't had any serious problems.

Here is another video. The guy speaks like an asshole with a police Colonel (that's not a typo) while his wife filming it on camera. He smokes on the officer and denies to stop because he "don't want to smoke inside the car where his kid is". He also expose the officer for not knowing the law (article 185, which says that the policeman must not just show his id. He must tell his full name and explain the reason of stop). Once again, he acts like an asshole (personally I would never to do that just because I have a respect to the people on duty> especially if they are 30 year older than me), but he does not break the law. Otherwise he uses it for his own benefit:

You don't understand how things work in America.

It works like this :

We make up a bunch of rights that protect us and then the cops do whatever they want to do and a bunch of sheep file into a court room and hang your ass for thinking you got any motherfucking rights.

.

[PR_Glen]

Originally Posted by CyberSEO

The people here do it every single day (yes, all that famous Russian dashcam and "funny" police videos on youtube). Don't you understand what if you won't use the law to enforce your rights, the police will just turn you into a herd of docile animals? Give them up a part of your rights and you'll lost them all. Just my

having a dashcam filming everything and shoving a camera in a cops face when he pulls you over isn't even the same thing and you know it. If you get pulled over IN RUSSIA and if they suspect you of a crime, give you orders to drop it and comply and your response is to shove a camera in their face you are going to get your camera smashed and you will be wrestled to the ground and arrested.. just as you should in that instance.

this is such a stupid thing to argue about.

[just a punk]

So right, in case if it was not filmed by your wife/relative/friend or any other stranger with a camera. I mean it's really hard to do for a police officer if he is being filmed by others. He can arrest you if you are suspected for a crime, but he can't arrest a guy who films him from another car. That's how it works. If we all we give up, thy will do everything they want. Just like they already do in the States.

[Tom_PM]

Every time I share a story like this with one friend, I get the same 2 comments.

1) They accuse me of thinking that all cops are evil at all times.

2) They say that the person should have complied with the order, regardless of ALL circumstances.

If this sounds like you, then this face is for you.

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by CyberSEO

Sued for that? If he was on duty, he can not impede citizens to film him. Course if he is NOT on duty, he is just a private person and you can't film him if he is not agree for that. That's a normal practice, isn't it?

I don't know. I am not an attorney, nor do I have any idea what local laws apply.

Using common sense, which is completely lacking on GFY.... It would seem to me that recording an officer is perfectly legal. However, at the same time, I can see how playing the video on national TV can considered an invasion of privacy giving the officer a right to sue. I would imagine the officer could sue due to invasion of privacy, or perhaps he could sue on the ground he lost his job due to this video influencing popular opinion, etc....

It's just like our industry - we pay a model to shoot photos or videos, and legally we own the rights to that content yet we still require a model release even though it's a grey area.

You are asking questions which are irrelevant to the story. The story is about the man in the car and the police officer, NOT why the TV station decided to blur out his face.

[Rochard]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

He didnt refuse to produce his ID, he was looking for it when the cops drew their guns which is why he refused to exit the vehicle and requested a Sgt. Here's the raw video...

No, he wasn't looking for anything. The video was over a minute long with them arguing with the officers and refusing all of their instructions.

It's simple. When police say "get out of the car" you get out of the car. You do not say no. You don't argue with police officers. You do not call 9/11. You do not refuse a lawful order of a police officer. Period. Ever.

[dyna mo]

what rochard's trolling here is failing to comprehend is the simple fact that the guy that got tasered through the window was not the person driving nor the person committing any crime or traffic infraction, he was simply a passenger in a car pulled over because the driver was not wearing a seatbelt, therefor, he has ZERO obligation to surrender his rights to that cop.

The precedent for following cop orders is very clear. If you are the one under arrest or being ticketed for the infraction, then you must comply with the order to exit your vehicle, otherwise you are completely free to walk away from the scene.

[blackmonsters]

Originally Posted by Rochard

No, he wasn't looking for anything. The video was over a minute long with them arguing with the officers and refusing all of their instructions.

It's simple. When police say "get out of the car" you get out of the car. You do not say no. You don't argue with police officers. You do not call 9/11. You do not refuse a lawful order of a police officer. Period. Ever.

He say's at least 3 times "I already gave you my information".
He said he didn't have a license.
So why would he keep looking for something he already told them he didn't have?

But why don't you consider that he is the passenger and the driver is the one with the seat belt violation and
there is really no reason to be suspicious of the passenger and the cop just has a hard on for nothing.

What was the major crime solved by pulling the passenger out of the car?

Nothing, how about cops stop wasting our tax money by fucking with people for nothing.

What happened there was not about crime; it was all about showing authority.
The cops want to show that they set the rules and they do that by beating you over a
seat belt violation that ain't even yours.

[just a punk]

Originally Posted by Rochard

I don't know. I am not an attorney, nor do I have any idea what local laws apply.

This is not good, man. You must know your laws (both State and Federal ones) and course you must know your rights. Doesn't matter what country you live in.

Originally Posted by Rochard

I would imagine the officer could sue due to invasion of privacy

Once again, I really not familiar with the US laws about that, but I know that in my country an officer on duty has no privileges as a private person. He is a representative of the law, so there is no privacy for him. When he is off his job, he's just a regular citizen and sure he has the same privacy rights. That's the law says. I think it's fair.

Originally Posted by Rochard

It's just like our industry - we pay a model to shoot photos or videos

Sorry, but no. When you pay to the models, you are signing a contract. Only you and them (on the mutually profitable base of course). You pay them for that, not anybody else, because you are their only employer.

When you are speaking about police, it's a way different story. Every citizen of your/my country is their direct employer - the boss who pays their bills. We pay their salary and nobody else. They work for us and only for for us. If you don't understand this simple thing, you will continue suffer from the people who's get paid from your own pocket. They are your servants, not you are their one

[Tom_PM]

Want more cops tasering citizens through car windows action? Google:

zachary noel taser

and get your fix.

[John-ACWM]

Originally Posted by blackmonsters

We must learn from this :

Officers need to stop you for not having a seat belt on because you could get hurt.

See, that guy got hurt didn't he?

.

[Spunky]

Gotta listen to the men or get hurt by disobeying them

[tony286]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

He didnt refuse to produce his ID, he was looking for it when the cops drew their guns which is why he refused to exit the vehicle and requested a Sgt. Here's the raw video...

He lost his license for some violation and was going to produce the the ticket showing that. Yep he was afraid and I dont blame him.
I remember years ago, my friend and I were going to work at the nightclub. A cop stopped my friend for speeding. The cop shined the light in the car and saw me sitting in the passenger seat. He said who are you? My friend told him that's none of your business. The cop went back wrote a ticket and we were off. If we were black I think that would of played differently.

[MrTrollkien]

[just a punk]

[huey]

The point being missed here is why did they ask him for his DL in the first place. If it was a white couple in a BMW that was pulled over for a seat belt fine, the pigs are not asking the passenger for ID.

[Tom_PM]

Originally Posted by huey

The point being missed here is why did they ask him for his DL in the first place. If it was a white couple in a BMW that was pulled over for a seat belt fine, the pigs are not asking the passenger for ID.

Because they CAN is why they did. Some law allows them to ask passengers for ID, and when he reached in his bag to see if he had it there they then claim his hands were out of sight so he might have had a gun. They instigated the entire series of events because they could. Just like the cop who asked a guy for his license and then shot at him saying that he went to get his license "aggressively" and he became scared so he shot at him 4 times.

Just several years ago people went ape shit over Arizona because they wanted to ask anyone who had been detained for committing a crime to show their identification to prove citizenship. Yet these cops in rural America can already just demand ID from anyone sitting in a car just because they pulled it over for whatever reason they want to come up with. Those people didn't even commit a crime and they're forced to identify themselves or get dragged out of the car window and be arrested.

Where's the ape shit response to this? Doesn't exist, nobody cares. Cops were scared, what did you expect them to do and all that rot.

[NatalieK]

Bad parent, excessive force from the police. The police need reprimand & the guy needs to do what's asked by a police officer when asked, especially infront of his child. Those with children shall understand

[DWB]

Originally Posted by dyna mo

what rochard's trolling here is failing to comprehend is the simple fact that the guy that got tasered through the window was not the person driving nor the person committing any crime or traffic infraction, he was simply a passenger in a car pulled over because the driver was not wearing a seatbelt, therefor, he has ZERO obligation to surrender his rights to that cop.

The precedent for following cop orders is very clear. If you are the one under arrest or being ticketed for the infraction, then you must comply with the order to exit your vehicle, otherwise you are completely free to walk away from the scene.

This.

I honestly hope the little bubble Rochard lives in doesn't burst someday and he finds himself, or worse, his family, at the end of an abusive prick with a badge, a gun, and an attitude. Life can turn on a dime.

[Robbie]

I'd love to be able to get one of these bully cops without his uniform or gun on and have him try to talk to me like that or push me around.

These guys are bullies plain and simple on a power trip.
Without those badges and guns they would get the shit slapped out of them so fast their heads would spin.

[blackmonsters]

Originally Posted by GspotProductions

Bad parent, excessive force from the police. The police need reprimand & the guy needs to do what's asked by a police officer when asked, especially infront of his child. Those with children shall understand

How about we stop making excuses for power tripping pigs who abuse authority and
our kids will understand that.

[Robbie]

Here in Vegas last night was another shooting.

The story being told by the survivors (the cops) is that they pulled a guy over (not sure why he was being pulled over, that part of the story isn't out yet). The guy in the car jumped out and ran.

It was on the outskirts of town apparently because he ran into the desert.

The way the news reported it is that when the cops gave chase "gunfire erupted".
And one of the cops is shot up pretty bad (4 shots to the lower body).
The guy they were chasing is now dead.

I guess there's two ways to look at this:
Maybe the guy was a car thief? And in that case, the cops had the stolen car and the bad guy would have gotten away. But nobody gets shot and nobody dies.

Or the guy owns the car and had "illegal" drugs on him and panicked and ran.
The cops have his car, know where he lives, and can arrest him at their leisure. No need to chase him. Nobody gets shot, nobody dies.

BUT...the cops decide to give chase on foot. Maybe they watch too many cop shows on television.
One cop gets shot up bad. The guy running is killed.
It's a miracle that both cops didn't get killed.
And for what? A traffic stop?

This kind of superhero cop shit should be used when people's lives are in danger. Not on a traffic stop by a couple of cops hoping to get a promotion.

Instead, one is hurt badly. The other one is involved in killing another human being.
And the 29 year old guy who ran is dead.

Seems like a pretty extreme result for a stupid traffic stop.

[DAMNMAN]

Originally Posted by Rochard

Not caring.

During a routine traffic stop, police have the right to ask everyone for identification. This man refused, then refused orders to step out of the car. Asking for ID is both routine and common, and the fact that he refused is suspicious in itself.

When police ask you to step out of the car, it's less of a question and more of an order. One way or another he was coming out of the car.

They can ask all they want, but it is our constitutional right to say no!!!! Unless the police have evidence/probable cause to think a crime has been committed, they do not have the right to accost you. PERIOD!!!