Some More Cops Who Need to Be Fired

[skinsmarydu]

If you assault a student you should be fired. Good action taken.

This.

If a parent took the action the officer did, the parent would be arrested.

If a teacher took the action the officer did, the teacher would be arrested.

 

IMO, the officer should receive the same treatment as a parent or teacher.

[Kilmer17]

There is absolutely nothing preceding this video that justifies what he did.

We know that now. We didn't when the cop haters immediately went to their anti blue battle stations immediately after the video surfaced.

This.

If a parent took the action the officer did, the parent would be arrested.

If a teacher took the action the officer did, the teacher would be arrested.

IMO, the officer should receive the same treatment as a parent or teacher.

Absolutely. And he did

[twa]

This.

If a parent took the action the officer did, the parent would be arrested.

If a teacher took the action the officer did, the teacher would be arrested.

 

IMO, the officer should receive the same treatment as a parent or teacher.

 

 

So why call the cops?

 

What actions by the police are you ok with that the teacher or principle could not do?

 

the sheriff nailed it, don't call the police in w/o expecting force to be used....force like authority easily leads to excess.

[MisterPinstripe]

We know that now. We didn't when the cop haters immediately went to their anti blue battle stations immediately after the video surfaced.

Absolutely. And he did

I think that is an unfair statement to most of the people in this thread. I am certainly not a cop hater, I appreciate the work they do. But I am completely against bad cops, cops that abuse their authority, and cops who use too much force. They should be held accountable because of the power that they hold over people. To call those of us who call out the bad ones cop haters is unfair and inaccurate. The whole point of this thread is bad cops, so all you are going to see in this thread is posts about them.

[Springfield]

I know I'm behind the times, but why are kids allowed to bring their cell phones to school or into class?

[s0crates]

I know I'm behind the times, but why are kids allowed to bring their cell phones to school or into class?

Yeah, you are behind the times. First, parents want to be able to keep in touch with their kids. Second, the phones and devices have classroom uses (for example, many teachers are using audience response systems like Poll Everywhere).

To be fair, there are some old timers who still enforce a no phones policy, because they view the devices as nothing more than distractions. And this isn't entirely false. Students texting in class, browsing Facebook, etc. is a problem.

My opinion: Just like any other tool, the devices have a use and a misuse. I allow my students their phones if they use them for class (recording lectures or looking up relevant info on the web, for example). If they misuse them (in a way that distracts from class) then I make them put them away.

[twa]

I know I'm behind the times, but why are kids allowed to bring their cell phones to school or into class?

 

 to communicate, store data and distract.

 

some still ban them or use during class , but generally the parents support the kids having them.....therefore 

 

the matter in this case was not the phone, it is defiance....phone is just a prop

[Springfield]

Yeah, you are behind the times. First, parents want to be able to keep in touch with their kids. Second, the phones and devices have classroom uses (for example, many teachers are using audience response systems like Poll Everywhere).

To be fair, there are some old timers who still enforce a no phones policy, because they view the devices as nothing more than distractions. And this isn't entirely false. Students texting in class, browsing Facebook, etc. is a problem.

My opinion: Just like any other tool, the devices have a use and a misuse. I allow my students their phones if they use them for class (recording lectures or looking up relevant info on the web, for example). If they misuse them (in a way that distracts from class) then I make them put them away.

So teachers just allow open texting or phone calls in class? What reason should parents have to keep in touch with kids while they are in school other than helicoptering them? What can't wait until after school?

Audience response systems? What happened to raising your hand?

This is something that I'm going to have to get accustomed to though. I never got to use my pager or cell phone when I was in high school, however texting was in its infancy and the best game out was snake.

Get off my ****ing lawn.

[Chew]

phones in school lol.  of course I expect every kid to have one, but not during school hours.  need to be out of sight in a locker or a backpack.  These ****ing Whole Foods, hot yoga moms kill me.

[Larry]

So why call the cops?

 

What actions by the police are you ok with that the teacher or principle could not do?

 

the sheriff nailed it, don't call the police in w/o expecting force to be used....force like authority easily leads to excess.

 

Wow, now there's a new one. 

 

"If you don't want somebody assaulted, don't call the cops." 

 

Maybe they could make Geico commercials.  "It's what they do". 

 

Edited October 29, 2015 by Larry

[twa]

Wow ya avoid the questions.

 

What actions by the police are you ok with that the teacher or principle could not do?

 

why call the cops?

[DogofWar1]

What actions by the police are you ok with that the teacher or principle could not do?

 

Whichever ones would be reasonable based on a slow movement up the use of force continuum.

 

As the Sheriff said, once verbal commands fail, he was allowed to put his hands on her, something a teacher might not, and a parent (not her parent) definitely isn't, allowed to do (her own parents have some leeway...but they also are dead I think...so there's that).  Not a problem there, and that's where the cops are useful and can take actions beyond teachers, principals, and other parents.

 

However, there are different levels of "putting hands on somebody," and flipping the desk and dragging the kid exceeded what was necessary and reasonable in the situation.

 

Hence the firing.

Edited October 29, 2015 by DogofWar1

[twa]

teachers and administrators are allowed to put hands on them here., but if not there then you support him putting hands on her?

 

you mentioned soft hands earlier and now want to add slow movement up  ....you do not understand use of force .

 

perhaps your understanding of passive resistance needs adjusting.

 

dragging was not allowed/recommended policy ,hence the excuse to fire him.

 

can you tell me what defines hard hand moves?

[Chew]

did details ever come out of what happened before the officer rag-dolled her?  is it true that she tried to swing at him?

 

regardless of whether she did or didn't, I guess a grown ass man who has been trained to deal with violent adults, felt "threatened" by the punches of a 15 year old girl who appears to weigh around 100 pounds?   and spare me the "well that officer has no idea if she's armed" crazy people talk

Edited October 29, 2015 by Chew

[DogofWar1]

did details ever come out of what happened before the officer rag-dolled her?  is it true that she tried to swing at him?

 

There is no evidence that a swing occurred before the officer began initiating physical contact, the strike from her was not until he had her in the choke-hold and was lifting her.  That's where the swing in the 3rd video comes from.

 

 

teachers and administrators are allowed to put hands on them here., but if not there then you support him putting hands on her?

 

you mentioned soft hands earlier and now want to add slow movement up  ....you do not understand use of force .

 

perhaps your understanding of passive resistance needs adjusting.

 

dragging was not allowed/recommended policy ,hence the excuse to fire him.

 

can you tell me what defines hard hand moves?

 

You have absolutely no understanding of anything with regards to police protocol or authorization regarding force, as demonstrated by the fact that you seem to not be able to grasp the very basic concept that there are levels of force in between verbal commands and flipping a desk with a girl in it.

 

I'm gonna post the quote from the article on the use of force continuum I posted earlier, which you clearly haven't read nor care to understand, because you keep persisting in this "If he can't flip desks and drag her, what use does he have?" garbage that makes no sense.

 

From http://www.nij.gov/topics/law-enforcement/officer-safety/use-of-force/pages/continuum.aspx

 

 

 

The Use-of-Force Continuum

Most law enforcement agencies have policies that guide their use of force. These policies describe a escalating series of actions an officer may take to resolve a situation. This continuum generally has many levels, and officers are instructed to respond with a level of force appropriate to the situation at hand, acknowledging that the officer may move from one part of the continuum to another in a matter of seconds.

An example of a use-of-force continuum follows:

• Officer Presence — No force is used. Considered the best way to resolve a situation.
  • The mere presence of a law enforcement officer works to deter crime or diffuse a situation.
  • Officers' attitudes are professional and nonthreatening.
• Verbalization — Force is not-physical.
  • Officers issue calm, nonthreatening commands, such as "Let me see your identification and registration."
  • Officers may increase their volume and shorten commands in an attempt to gain compliance. Short commands might include "Stop," or "Don't move."
• Empty-Hand Control — Officers use bodily force to gain control of a situation.
  • Soft technique. Officers use grabs, holds and joint locks to restrain an individual.
  • Hard technique. Officers use punches and kicks to restrain an individual.
• Less-Lethal Methods — Officers use less-lethal technologies to gain control of a situation.

  (See Deciding When and How to Use Less-Lethal Devices. )

  • Blunt impact. Officers may use a baton or projectile to immobilize a combative person.
  • Chemical. Officers may use chemical sprays or projectiles embedded with chemicals to restrain an individual (e.g., pepper spray).
  • Conducted Energy Devices (CEDs). Officers may use CEDs to immobilize an individual. CEDs discharge a high-voltage, low-amperage jolt of electricity at a distance.
• Lethal Force — Officers use lethal weapons to gain control of a situation. Should only be used if a suspect poses a serious threat to the officer or another individual.
  • Officers use deadly weapons such as firearms to stop an individual's actions.

 

 

Now, for this incident, to make this very simple to understand, we started here:

 

 

 

• Officer Presence — No force is used. Considered the best way to resolve a situation.
  • The mere presence of a law enforcement officer works to deter crime or diffuse a situation.
  • Officers' attitudes are professional and nonthreatening

 

This was insufficient, so he moved here:

 

 

• Verbalization — Force is not-physical.
  • Officers issue calm, nonthreatening commands, such as "Let me see your identification and registration."
  • Officers may increase their volume and shorten commands in an attempt to gain compliance. Short commands might include "Stop," or "Don't move.

 

This too failed, which is the point where the officer is SUPPOSED to go here:

 

 

 

Empty-Hand Control — Officers use bodily force to gain control of a situation.

• Soft technique. Officers use grabs, holds and joint locks to restrain an individual

 

but instead went here:

 

 

Empty-Hand Control — Officers use bodily force to gain control of a situation.

• Hard technique. Officers use punches and kicks to restrain an individual.

 

If you listened CRITICALLY to the Sheriff yesterday, you'd have gotten this analysis out of it too.

 

He was allowed to move to soft technique.

 

Choke-holds, however, are, at best, dancing along the line between the two (NYC ban), and his subsequent flipping of the desk was clearly hard technique.

 

And no, he doesn't get to move to hard technique because she slapped at him when she was put in a choke-hold, because based on her size, weight, and potential threat level, soft technique was still perfectly reasonable to subdue her.

 

If, after the slap, he then attempted further soft technique, grabbing her arm, attempting to lift her under her arms from behind, and she continued striking him, and especially if she did so in a manner that appeared threatening to her classmates, THEN he'd have been authorized to move to hard technique.

 

But again, he skipped a step which as per his training he wasn't supposed to, which was a violation of police protocol, and was fired for it.

Edited October 29, 2015 by DogofWar1

[tshile]

was she suspended?

[twa]

he never used hard technique.....the drag or sliding is the closest

 

she clearly resisted initial soft hand guidance

 

if you want to argue he should have simply drug the chair and her out of the class that is fine, but that could be done by school staff.

 

once she resisted he advanced to more soft hand force , being seated at the desk resistance ensures either injury or the chair flipping....try it sometime.

 

now you could reasonably argue he could disengage and wait , call for help,or use a taser ect.....but you would not have a good understanding of being engaged physically.

[s0crates]

So teachers just allow open texting or phone calls in class?

No that isn't allowed, which is why I distinguish between use and misuse. I'd call taking calls during class misuse.

What reason should parents have to keep in touch with kids while they are in school other than helicoptering them? What can't wait until after school?

I can see parents calling kids for the same reasons they would call the school and pull you out of class in the old days (e.g. family emergency). Although I have to grant helicopter parenting is a big problem (we're inadvertently teaching kids that they are products of circumstance instead of agents, but that is a can of worms).

Audience response systems? What happened to raising your hand?

I prefer the show of hands, but the advocates for the polling like the anonymity, which benefits shy kids and helps avoid conformity bias.

There are many potential uses of cells in class beyond this: Almost all students have an entire library at their fingertips, why not take advantage of that? I'll often have students look things up online that contribute to class discussion.

I also have students who record lectures, use their cameras to take pictures of classmates' notes from a day they were absent, put assignments in their calendars, etc.

I have colleagues who use text alerts for assignment deadlines, play learning games like jeopardy using web based apps involving cell phones or tablets, and have students document lab experiments for online science classes by taking video.

There are pitfalls here of course, so you have to be careful, but times change, and education will change with them. We're still learning.

(Realizing this has not much to do with cops, so I'll also add another reason to allow cells in the classroom: for documenting police brutality).

Edited October 29, 2015 by s0crates

[Springfield]

Good response Socrates.

This is just something that I'm going to have to grow accustomed to, and find the right parenting strategy for, as my kids grow up.

Re: Your edit. I see the video recording aspect of cell phones more problematic to the student body than police. I.e.: I suspect they'd be recording themselves doing stupid (and often illegal) things more than recording the police beating others. I'd imagine the prevalence of what amounts to "child pornography" or other misbehavior recorded on their phones (uploaded online or kept on the device) is a major problem. Teenagers often do things with little caution to the repercussions.

Anyhow, this is all way off topic...

Edited October 29, 2015 by Springfield

[s0crates]

Springfield,

Yeah I think you hit on one of the biggest "potential pitfalls" we should be careful of there. The privacy issues are a very real concern.

And yeah we're off topic.

Edited October 29, 2015 by s0crates

[Dan T.]

Wow ya avoid the questions.

 

What actions by the police are you ok with that the teacher or principle could not do?

 

why call the cops?

 

 

 

I think many assume that a cop working in a school as a school resource officer might be inclined to handle situation in a classroom a little bit differently than a regular street cop.

[twa]

I think many assume that a cop working in a school as a school resource officer might be inclined to handle situation in a classroom a little bit differently than a regular street cop.

 

I would say he did , a street cop would call for backup for a real beating.

 

Odd ya question a veteran school resource officer though in that case then ....either you value experience or not.

 

he never even used compliance blows....kindergarten cop

[DogofWar1]

he never used hard technique.....the drag or sliding is the closest

 

she clearly resisted initial soft hand guidance

 

if you want to argue he should have simply drug the chair and her out of the class that is fine, but that could be done by school staff.

 

once she resisted he advanced to more soft hand force , being seated at the desk resistance ensures either injury or the chair flipping....try it sometime.

 

now you could reasonably argue he could disengage and wait , call for help,or use a taser ect.....but you would not have a good understanding of being engaged physically.

 

The key difference between soft technique and hard technique is pretty self evident, and you're being silly suggesting the desk flip is soft technique.

 

Soft technique involves grabs, holds, and joint locks.  Hard technique involves punches and kicks.  The difference is obvious, soft involves restraining techniques, hard involves empty hand impacts.  It's the empty hand equivalent of the next step up, blunt impact instruments (like batons).

 

Now which side is flipping a desk closer to?

 

I'll answer that for you, it's closer to hard.  Heck, if one views the desk as an instrument, it's almost a step ABOVE hard technique.  But we'll keep it at hard technique because it is utilizing an impact, not a mere restraint.

 

And again, you keep ignoring the OBVIOUS middle grounds in conduct he could have taken, purely to support your clearly indefensible position.

 

He attempted a single hold, one which likely was ill advised in the first instance, being a choke-hold, and then proceeded to go straight into slamming her.

 

As I've mentioned before, he could have tried an armbar, or picked her up from behind underneath her arms.

 

He didn't need to drag her into the hallway, desk and all, or disengage and wait, or use a taser (which would have been even worse).

 

Just because YOU cannot fathom alternative options to what the cop did that would both continued physical engagement AND in line with police protocol does not mean that such alternative options did not exist.  The Sheriff's action and discussion demonstrate that.

 

 

At the end of the day, your narrow minded view of options is woefully insufficient compared to reality, and leads to you being flatly wrong.

 

The cop was fired.  He was wrong in his actions.  Your arguments contort logic and reason into fallacies and irrationality.  If you were right, he would still be employed today.  He's not.  You're wrong.

[Bang]

Bottom line.

No matter who you are, if it was your kid, you'd be spitting nails.

And if you say you would not, you are a liar.

 

 

well, maybe "liar' is strong..  how about "person with an unrealistic view of themselves due to living too long within the vapors of their own ass"

 

 

~Bang

Edited October 29, 2015 by Bang

[twa]

You miss that he tried taking her by the arm and shoulder before her pulling away and elbow striking the officer

 

he did not go to a head hold until she actively resisted.....try to keep up 

 

taking control of the head ensures no head trauma as he forced her out of the desk against her struggles

 

 

slinging her away is what got him....no real justification for that.