The Ask A Cop Thread

[ninetynine99]

Originally Posted by DblBarrelJ

No. I'm somewhat of a health nut myself. I handled a dog who really enjoyed a Ham & cheese croissant from Dunkin Donuts though.

I'm not a health nut, but I don't care for donuts either.

[EZmoney74]

Is there such a thing as selective enforcement? And have you ever been ordered to not bust people for certain things? ( pot for example )

[DblBarrelJ]

Originally Posted by EZmoney74

Is there such a thing as selective enforcement? And have you ever been ordered to not bust people for certain things? ( pot for example )

I've never been "ordered" to not enforce anything, but yes police have discretion on Misd offenses. I've never been a big drug type unless they were driving high.

[Howard Beale]

Last question from me:

Do you think that ppl who know you're in law enforcement treat you differently? IOW, are they guarded?

[d10]

I'm Facebook friends with my old college roommate who's a cop now and he posted a video of two cops beating up some drunk guy in a casino they were trying to arrest. The suspect looked unhappy and not totally cooperative but not at all violent. It looked unprovoked and excessive to me but all his cop friends were commenting on the video like it was the right call and basically anything you need to do to ensure you and your partner get home safely each night is justified. As a member of the military I feel like I face similar situations but we're instructed to use minimal force, even at the risk to our own safety.

Am I correct in thinking these situations are similar? Is the attitude of my friend and his coworkers typical among police or are they just like the members of the military you hear about in the news for using unnecessary force and not representative of the average police officer? If this is the typical attitude why do you think there's such a difference between two professions where the need to fight to survive is occasionally part of the job description? Which is the correct attitude to have IYO?

[Matt Williams]

Thoughts on this video?

And yes, it's real.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXpMzT5yGp8

[DblBarrelJ]

Originally Posted by Howard Beale

Last question from me:

Do you think that ppl who know you're in law enforcement treat you differently? IOW, are they guarded?

I went through a time like that, don't really deal with it anymore. I try not to spend to much time hanging around "ZOMG IT'S THE POPO!" types anyway.

Most of the time the people who act like that now are the frequent flyers who know me by name. The gas station down the road from my house has a few local morons who like to loiter and panhandle and shoplift, and even now when I pull up they walk down the road till I leave.

As for my circle of friends, nah. If they were like that I wouldn't want to be friends with them.

[DblBarrelJ]

Originally Posted by Matt Williams

Thoughts on this video?

And yes, it's real.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXpMzT5yGp8

First part I can't really comment on because I have no idea why they're shooting. Second part was horrible.

I will say if the guy in the green car was shooting at anybody and refusing to drop his weapon, I'm cool with it.

Second part, you can clearly see they're trying to take his phone.

[Matt Williams]

Originally Posted by DblBarrelJ

First part I can't really comment on because I have no idea why they're shooting. Second part was horrible.

I will say if the guy in the green car was shooting at anybody and refusing to drop his weapon, I'm cool with it.

Second part, you can clearly see they're trying to take his phone.

It was a hit and run and the driver was unarmed. Cops assumed he was armed and firing his gun as he drove.


http://colorlines.com/archives/2011/...each_week.html


According to police reports, a man struck a police officer with his car at around 4:00 AM, then sped off, bouncing off of parked vehicles for the next three blocks. Unconfirmed reports say the driver was firing a gun as he drove; Youtube video shows police firing into the car multiple times until it comes to a halt, then surrounding it. The driver was declared dead at the scene; no gun was found in the vehicle. An internal police investigation is underway.

[DblBarrelJ]

Originally Posted by d10

I'm Facebook friends with my old college roommate who's a cop now and he posted a video of two cops beating up some drunk guy in a casino they were trying to arrest. The suspect looked unhappy and not totally cooperative but not at all violent. It looked unprovoked and excessive to me but all his cop friends were commenting on the video like it was the right call and basically anything you need to do to ensure you and your partner get home safely each night is justified. As a member of the military I feel like I face similar situations but we're instructed to use minimal force, even at the risk to our own safety.

Am I correct in thinking these situations are similar? Is the attitude of my friend and his coworkers typical among police or are they just like the members of the military you hear about in the news for using unnecessary force and not representative of the average police officer? If this is the typical attitude why do you think there's such a difference between two professions where the need to fight to survive is occasionally part of the job description? Which is the correct attitude to have IYO?

IDK, it's harder to judge with you being military. If you felt it was excessive, you're probably correct.

In general a lot of people really don't understand a lot of the mechanics of physical combat. They want to see all this cool ninja stuff when the reality of it is if a 245 lb man does something as simple and basic as a rear armbar takedown on a hard surface such as concrete, someone's going to get hurt.

I agree with the concensus of going home every night, but that only comes into play when someone's trying to injure/kill you.

Passive resistance can be strategically defeated with many less lethal tools that do not require the officer to go hands on at all, thus reducing risk for both officer and suspect.

[DblBarrelJ]

Originally Posted by Matt Williams

It was a hit and run and the driver was unarmed. Cops assumed he was armed and firing his gun as he drove.


http://colorlines.com/archives/2011/...each_week.html


According to police reports, a man struck a police officer with his car at around 4:00 AM, then sped off, bouncing off of parked vehicles for the next three blocks. Unconfirmed reports say the driver was firing a gun as he drove; Youtube video shows police firing into the car multiple times until it comes to a halt, then surrounding it. The driver was declared dead at the scene; no gun was found in the vehicle. An internal police investigation is underway.

In that case they're likely ****ed. I'm not familiar with FL law, but in GA if you intentionally hit someone with a motor vehicle, that's going to be a "Forcible Felony", which puts it in the realm of things you can use deadly force for.

If it was an accident and he got scared, that's one thing, and the shooting is wrong (based on the knowledge I have of this case). If he intentionally saw a cop standing on the side of the road and ran him down, he was an imminent threat to every single cop out there on that scene, and that's an easily articulatable defense for the normally wrong action of shooting an "unarmed man" (If the latter is the case, the vehicle is the weapon, so he's not "unarmed") therefore, with that set of facts, he'd be armed and dangerous in one scenario and unarmed and non-compliant in the other.

That's how one small detail can justify or unjustify a shooting.

However, the ending of that video, there is no justification for at all.

As an aside, if you have multiple reports of a firearm, you're going to assume there's a firearm. You're also going to be justified.

Shootings aren't judged based on the facts after an investigation, they're judged based on the facts and perceptions the officer had at the time, and the reasonableness of those perceptions.

If, hypothetically, six people reported immediately before this occurred seeing him shooting, I see no reason to not state the belief he was armed was "reasonable"

[I_AM_EVIL]

I have no problem with the police going after the guy with the camera. They were just involved in a shooting where it was reported someone was shooting a gun and their emotions are running high. One of them sees someone holding something up and pointing it in the direction of the police. There's justification for them to check the guy and make sure it wasn't a gun.

Taking his phone and breaking it is totally different. They should have been reprimanded for that.

[DblBarrelJ]

Originally Posted by I_AM_EVIL

I have no problem with the police going after the guy with the camera. They were just involved in a shooting where it was reported someone was shooting a gun and their emotions are running high. One of them sees someone holding something up and pointing it in the direction of the police. There's justification for them to check the guy and make sure it wasn't a gun.

Taking his phone and breaking it is totally different. They should have been reprimanded for that.

Oh, if I'm involved in a shooting and see someone filming I'm going after them to, because I want that tape. I'm certainly not going to destroy the phone though.

I've personally been cleared of two use of force investigations by cell phone cameras.
One the person gave it to me because they knew it would help my cause. The other was funny, guy filmed me and a female officer dealing with an irate man, who punched her in the stomach. Of course at that point it's an active threat and not just being non-compliant.

He had a small screen phone, such as an LG Shine I think, and he thought we were excessive so he went all secret squirrel and set up a secret meeting with the head of professional standards to turn his evidence over.

This is a local drunk who thought he was getting his revenge on me for 2 DUI convictions. I wish I could've seen the look on his face when Professional Standards told him his video captured the punch that I was blocking view of on my Dashcam that the didn't believe happened, completely justifying my forearm strike to the face that was in question at the time.

[DblBarrelJ]

Originally Posted by leoslayer

well im no legal scholar. but id say destruction of private property. maybe assault. im sure our officer friend would be able to tell us.

Well, going through GA law, it'd be criminal damage to property, either 2nd or 3rd, depending on the value of the phone.

I have no particular issue with the weapons drawn since jumping into a vehicle while running from the police is about as suspicious as you can get.

They don't know if he knows the person he just hopped in with, hell he may be carjacking at the time. He was attempting to run on foot. If he does know the person he's just doubled his fighting abilities because he's not alone, and in either case he's now in a 1 1/2+ ton cage he can use to either flee or attack people, or both.

[Rizzeedizzee]

Where do you side on the taser debate - amazing invention that saves lives of cops and suspects, or crutch that cops have become too reliant upon?

Name one TV show that really has nailed what it genuinely is like to be a cop, and another that really blew it.

What percentage of cops do you think are non-democrats?

What percentage of cops do you think have helped ever themselves to evidence (drugs, money, weapons) recovered from a crime?