Post: #76

(12-08-2017 03:52 PM)speculator Wrote:  In the context of all lives matter, what are your opinions regarding this song?

Couldn’t get through it.
I have no time to listen to someone talking like that

Post: #77

(12-09-2017 03:48 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  American cops are already starting to find out the hard way that when you piss of a segment of the community enough that they go from reacting to your presence to actually ambushing you then you are officially fucked.

Many of these dickheads have been on a power trip for so long they think they're invincible. But the reality is that all it takes is for a couple of guys to call 911, make an inconspicuous complaint, and when an officer arrives to investigate they step out from behind cover and hose him down with .223 rounds.

These cops are not soldiers. They are not rolling 5 strong in an armoured vehicle moving to a military objective to sweep and clear. Most of the time they're wearing level 2 armour at best with no helmet and packing a 9mm pistol. Heaven help them if the civilian population ever decides they're a problem, not a solution.

Odds are by the time this happens civilization will be in full economic collapse mode and the cops won't be responding to 911 calls. It's like all those nuclear war movies, the military and police will immediately turn themselves into the biggest armed gangs taking supplies from everyone else.

Post: #78

(12-08-2017 04:11 PM)Kona Wrote:  If someone walks into my office right now, and tries to snatch my 25 ounce Busch Beer, I will then assume they don't have one of their own.

I hope that makes sense.

Aloha!

Your job lets you drink tall boys at work? Did I read that correctly?

What have I been doing with my life?

Post: #79

(12-09-2017 03:48 AM)Leonard D Neubache Wrote:  It's fucking moronic, and sadly the elites are all too happy to keep pushing in this direction because pitting the public against the cops puts the cops on the side of the elites.

Back then I made the same suggestion I'll make now. If American cops don't want to end up on the wrong side of a civil conflict then they're going to have to put away their fancy second hand war rifles and start thinking in other directions.

Quite right. Police behavior only begins to make sense when you realize that their original purpose--to serve and protect the communities they hail from--has been slowly subverted over the last 30 years or so. And deliberately so---they now have gov't sanctioned access to military hardware and heavy weapons, the license to plunder the citizenry via asset forfeiture, expectations of total compliance/obedience combined with aggressive rules of engagement, sympathetic courts/legislators, lifelong income streams during a time of privation for many, etc.

All these things add up to only one thing: the police now function primarily as a Praetorian Guard for the elites. They are being armed and positioned to support & protect the elites in any upheaval that stems from financial collapse and/or escalating economic inequality. Any other duties they execute are secondary at this point.

Post: #80

(12-08-2017 04:11 PM)Kona Wrote:  

(12-08-2017 03:34 PM)Mage Wrote:  I don't buy the cop fearing him pulling out a gun. It would have been a small handgun hidden in his pants against a cop in armored vest and a machine gun. The likelihood of the man taking a precise and quick shot from that crawling position was very very low low, he was not even looking at the cop. There is no way he could have be a threat to that cop.

I think replacing a day or two of gun training at the police academy with a logic or mathematics class would save some lives.

This cop is wearing a bullet proof vest, probably has a tazer, whackin stick, pepper spray, and a radio that can call in fucking air support if necessary. Instead he uses his heavily modified assault weapon to diffuse the situation. Even if the kid had a gun, the cop could have waited a millisecond to actually see it before opening fire.

Waiting that millisecond, and realizing how much you have the person out gunned could have been cleared up by a simple class. Let's relate that,to Michael Brown. A cop with all the whackin sticks and bullet proof cars shoots someone for apparantly trying to steal his weapon. Now, simple logic says if someone is grabbing for your gun, they don't have a gun of their own.

If someone walks into my office right now, and tries to snatch my 25 ounce Busch Beer, I will then assume they don't have one of their own.

I hope that makes sense.

Aloha!

If the kid did have a gun and pulled it from his waistband he could have fired at the officers killing one of them in a matter of a second. When you're in a situation where you could be killed or maimed and have less than a second to decide what to do the default is often to protect yourself and the lives of your friends.

I agree with the other comments about problems with police and them being poorly trained and trigger happy but this argument is silly. You're not thinking about fucking mathematics and college classes when you think someone reaching for a weapon to kill you. You think about someone getting shot and dying from a hole in their neck. This is nerd logic gone haywire.

Post: #81

^^^ Pain Positive. You didn't convince me.

First 3 of your videos are a test, only the last one is real and in all of them situation is different. These videos confirm police officers are trained to be paranoid - I mean they used an example of 10 year old girl killing people. Not saying it can't happen but what it accomplishes is cops becoming too mentally separated from society. 2nd video is just a good example why a woman shouldn't be a cop.

So in 4th video:

1st case: Cop is wrong because he didn't even warn the person that he suspects him and may shoot, he just asked to get him license which the poor guy did. It's cops fault for not explaining how the victim should move while doing so. If the cop was so scared he should just handcuff the guy and search for driving license on his own.

2nd case: Cop is right because he recognizes one criminal already and is outnumbered and it's fucking hard to see what the guys in car are doing.

3rd case: The cop should have pulled the gun out and aimed at suspect. Should have shot after seeing the suspect drawing out a gun.

Note that in neither in your cases is the victim crawling and humiliated, visibly scared and clearly confused like in the video this thread is about.


I don't buy that a guy can get a handgun out of his pants so lightning fast and take a precise shot in head (cop's body is covered in vest) with one hand while supporting his weight with other in crawling position and not even looking because his head was looking at floor all the time, that the cop with an automatic rifle already aimed at suspect and finger on trigger couldn't react after seeing the gun. The cop we are discussing displayed autist levels of comprehending the body language of a truly scared unlucky person.

Post: #82

I have not been paying attention to this at all until I saw the video. I have four questions the stems to the issues that I have on this:

1: Was this cop alone and why is that? I have never been a cop, but I thought that in situations like that they are ordered to call backup ASAP. They are never allowed to go at it alone with someone who has been demonstrated as armed. I would think that if the cop saw a threat of that level back-up should have been called immediately. Who the fuck does he think he is, Raylan Givens?

2: If the cop saw a weapon through the window how is that considered to be a crime where you are required to have some modicum of privacy in a hotel room provided that you abide by the law? We are also talking about Arizona which a state with one of the most lenient gun laws. Unless specifically stated as a "Gun Free Zone," I believe that that man had the right to have a weapon in his possession in the hotel. Most people who are Conceal Carry Permit Holders, can take their weapons into places like hotels, and even in an open carry state like Arizona, having a weapon out like stated in the Original Post is preferred.

3: What was the underlying crime that the cop was investigating? As stated before, I was not paying attention to the case so I have no idea. Given the situation, the cop may have used the tired "Suspicion of Drug Activity" as the reason to confront the assailant.

4: How is it that securing the man shot in any way close to standard protocol for securing an assailant? Once again I am not a cop, but I don't see how making the man that you are securing crawl to you in a hotel hallway is an improvement than exactly where he was kneeling. It is reasonable in my mind to move to the cop if you are in a crawl space, up a tree or some other place that is not easily accessible or detaining someone. He should have been ordered to lie down and the officer to come there and cuff him right there. This would have not been that much of a problem if the cop had backup.

I for one think that there is a lot more to this story than meets the eye. A don't believe that this cop was just cruising around and saw a guy flash a weapon while inside a hotel room is what happened. Likewise, I obviously think that this was not justified homicide. On the face of it, I believe that he was a trained officer who was at best criminally negligent, and should have received jail time for it. I believe that the FBI has reason to investigate this case as there is at least one constitutional violation that I see here. Normally I tend to think that the FBI is getting too involved in officer involved shootings as of late, but that is the fault of the States. This is one of the exceptions.

This is about as bad as the shooting in Charleston, but without the conviction. The only good news is that he is off the police force. Hopefully he will never get to work in Law Enforcement again. Likewise I tend to think that the family has a case against the City of Mesa, given that they can change the venue to Tucson, which is probably where the case should have been originally tried.

I am of the opinion that the State should investigate local police involved shootings, using State Investigative Agencies, Highway Patrol, with a specific prosecutor or deputy attorney general who does it for the state and the whole team is answerable to the Attorney General for the state alone. It may not be perfect, and there may be some close ties between local and state, but if done right it would be a lot better than an Internal Affairs Department handling officer involved shootings, and better than having the FBI investigate every single officer involved shooting.

Post: #83

(12-09-2017 10:47 AM)Mage Wrote:  ^^^ Pain Positive. You didn't convince me.

First 3 of your videos are a test, only the last one is real and in all of them situation is different. These videos confirm police officers are trained to be paranoid - I mean they used an example of 10 year old girl killing people. Not saying it can't happen but what it accomplishes is cops becoming too mentally separated from society. 2nd video is just a good example why a woman shouldn't be a cop. I agree

So in 4th video:

1st case: Cop is wrong because he didn't even warn the person that he suspects him and may shoot, he just asked to get him license which the poor guy did. It's cops fault for not explaining how the victim should move while doing so. If the cop was so scared he should just handcuff the guy and search for driving license on his own.

2nd case: Cop is right because he recognizes one criminal already and is outnumbered and it's fucking hard to see what the guys in car are doing.

3rd case: The cop should have pulled the gun out and aimed at suspect. Should have shot after seeing the suspect drawing out a gun.

Note that in neither in your cases is the victim crawling and humiliated, visibly scared and clearly confused like in the video this thread is about.


I don't buy that a guy can get a handgun out of his pants so lightning fast and take a precise shot in head (cop's body is covered in vest) with one hand while supporting his weight with other in crawling position and not even looking because his head was looking at floor all the time, that the cop with an automatic rifle already aimed at suspect and finger on trigger couldn't react after seeing the gun. The cop we are discussing displayed autist levels of comprehending the body language of a truly scared unlucky person.

Mage, I wasn't trying to convince you of anything I'm simply telling you that you're wrong. No amount of "reading body language" and "mathematics classes" stops a man from pulling a gun from his waist band and firing shots blindly into a narrow hallway full of people.

Do you think a vest will save you from bleeding out and dying? I know many people who were wearing full body armor, helmet, side plates, kevlar crotch and lower back protectors and still died.

Have you ever been in a situation like that? Where the lives of your co-workers and friends are the line. Do you know anything about how long it takes to draw a weapon and pull a trigger three or four times? By the sound of it you know nothing about these things so please, stick to what you know. Mathematics and logic classes.

Note: I dislike the way police operate in the US. I don't like these shootings. I think this cop was a retard and would be the one to shoot this kid just by the sound and looks of him alone. He's a fag.

Post: #84

(12-09-2017 09:47 AM)PainPositive Wrote:  If the kid did have a gun and pulled it from his waistband he could have fired at the officers killing one of them in a matter of a second. When you're in a situation where you could be killed or maimed and have less than a second to decide what to do the default is often to protect yourself and the lives of your friends.

To me this is murder or at least manslaughter, because there is a difference between being thrust into this situation where a potentially armed crazy guy is crawling towards you, and creating that situation on your own. In the former I would say his actions are excusable, and the latter, not so much.

At what time point in these encounters does the point of responsibility actually start? If I'm doctor, and I'm on a remote expedition with only Tylenol, then someone gets an infection and dies because of no antibiotics, did I do a good job? Given that I only had Tylenol, I followed a reasonable course of action. However, if I was the one responsible for only having Tylenol, because I outfitted the med kit, then I basically killed the guy.

Same thing here. For whatever reason cops are happily bringing situations to the point where a life or death, split second decisions are imminent. In such a situation everyone generally loses, unless you make perfect decisions with perfect timing in a situation that isn't that likely in the first place. For every Las Vegas gunman, there are probably 1000 guys drinking beers and showing off their guns to friends. But headlines of "Hero Cop Kills terrorist! Prevents massacre!" were probably flashing through his head.

"Protect the public" has becomes "Protect ourselves", and unfortunately an arms race of mistrust has spiraled out of control between the cops and huge swaths of the public.

Despite being in Canada where we don't see issues like this, despite being a professional with good income who contributes more to society than he takes, and despite having never broken any major laws, I still avoid cops like the plague. That doesn't seem like the hallmark of a healthy relationship.

Post: #85

(12-09-2017 03:49 AM)Highpool Wrote:  Quick fact drop, this guy



is the shooter and the guy who went on trial, but he was not the guy barking instructions. Instructions came from an unnamed cop who was standing by the elevator, you can't see him in the bodycam video.

This is a game-changer and clarifies the rationale behind the verdict.

Seeing the suspect reach near his pocket area creates a tough split second decision. I'm not sure how I would've reacted if I was the armed officer in that spot. Most of the blame should fall on the moron who created that bad situation by making the suspect play a 4 minute long game of Simon Says for absolutely no reason.

Put the cop who led that ridiculous interaction on trial.

Post: #86

(12-09-2017 11:26 AM)PainPositive Wrote:  

(12-09-2017 10:47 AM)Mage Wrote:  ^^^ Pain Positive. You didn't convince me.

First 3 of your videos are a test, only the last one is real and in all of them situation is different. These videos confirm police officers are trained to be paranoid - I mean they used an example of 10 year old girl killing people. Not saying it can't happen but what it accomplishes is cops becoming too mentally separated from society. 2nd video is just a good example why a woman shouldn't be a cop. I agree

So in 4th video:

1st case: Cop is wrong because he didn't even warn the person that he suspects him and may shoot, he just asked to get him license which the poor guy did. It's cops fault for not explaining how the victim should move while doing so. If the cop was so scared he should just handcuff the guy and search for driving license on his own.

2nd case: Cop is right because he recognizes one criminal already and is outnumbered and it's fucking hard to see what the guys in car are doing.

3rd case: The cop should have pulled the gun out and aimed at suspect. Should have shot after seeing the suspect drawing out a gun.

Note that in neither in your cases is the victim crawling and humiliated, visibly scared and clearly confused like in the video this thread is about.


I don't buy that a guy can get a handgun out of his pants so lightning fast and take a precise shot in head (cop's body is covered in vest) with one hand while supporting his weight with other in crawling position and not even looking because his head was looking at floor all the time, that the cop with an automatic rifle already aimed at suspect and finger on trigger couldn't react after seeing the gun. The cop we are discussing displayed autist levels of comprehending the body language of a truly scared unlucky person.

Mage, I wasn't trying to convince you of anything I'm simply telling you that you're wrong. No amount of "reading body language" and "mathematics classes" stops a man from pulling a gun from his waist band and firing shots blindly into a narrow hallway full of people.

Do you think a vest will save you from bleeding out and dying? I know many people who were wearing full body armor, helmet, side plates, kevlar crotch and lower back protectors and still died.

Have you ever been in a situation like that? Where the lives of your co-workers and friends are the line. Do you know anything about how long it takes to draw a weapon and pull a trigger three or four times? By the sound of it you know nothing about these things so please, stick to what you know. Mathematics and logic classes.

Note: I dislike the way police operate in the US. I don't like these shootings. I think this cop was a retard and would be the one to shoot this kid just by the sound and looks of him alone. He's a fag.

I haven't been in exact situation like this obviously but I have been in life threatening situations and I can tell you that yes - a person can keep his calm and apply complicated skills like body language reading (which is not complicated at all btw) and mathematics if:
1)he himself chooses the timing of danger and is prepared.
2)he is in position of power.
3)he is a professional trained to do exactly that.

All that applies to a cop.

A person should not be expected however to make no mistake if:
1)He doesn't choose the time of dangerous situation and it just drops on him unexpectedly, he is unprepared.
2)he has no power and is completely dependent on other party
3)he is not a professional and hasn't had the proper training.

All that applies to the poor victim.

If what you say is true and cops are justified to make mistakes like that so easily despite training, weapons superiority and themselves choosing the time and approach to that situation then such situations just simply should not be allowed to happen and the whole procedure is wrong. Just shoot every suspect with tazer immediately throw a smoke/sleeping gas/flash grande from the start and then sort it out on numb bodies.

But if you don't do that and the legal procedure is for cops to speak with victims and demand cooperation then they also need to be trained to do so in a way that leaves the innocent people alive even if that person is inadequate and makes mistakes due to being nervous or sick or confused. What if the person is blind? or deaf? Or movement impaired? Or drunk? What if he has diarrhea? What if he is a foreigner with bad understanding of language?

What your are saying is that cops are just human. Yeah but the victim is also just a human the difference is that one is a prepared well equipped professional and the other is a poor slob with loose trousers.

Since when should cops assume that their job is a safe space? If you take that job be prepared to take some reasonable risk for the better of society to which you serve. Shooting a person for fidgeting is just avoiding any risk. The cop absolutely should take a small risk and wait to see what it is that the suspect pulls out of his pants before firing, the probability is high that it's not a gun and even if it is the probability is high that the cop will shoot the guy down first anyway. The chance that the suspect could fire first precisely is very low and the cop should take that very small chance. If not then don't work there or change the procedure to ambushing and tazering everybody immediately and asking questions after they are immobilized.

Post: #87

(12-09-2017 12:37 PM)Delta Wrote:  

(12-09-2017 03:49 AM)Highpool Wrote:  Quick fact drop, this guy



is the shooter and the guy who went on trial, but he was not the guy barking instructions. Instructions came from an unnamed cop who was standing by the elevator, you can't see him in the bodycam video.

This is a game-changer and clarifies the rationale behind the verdict.

Seeing the suspect reach near his pocket area creates a tough split second decision. I'm not sure how I would've reacted if I was the armed officer in that spot. Most of the blame should fall on the moron who created that bad situation by making the suspect play a 4 minute long game of Simon Says for absolutely no reason.

Put the cop who led that ridiculous interaction on trial.

I agree it makes a difference, and can maybe see how he could dodge second degree murder charge even though I don't agree, but no way should he have got off the reckless manslaughter charge.

Post: #88

SHE PLACES THE LOTION IN THE BASKET OR SHE GETS THE HOSE!

Post: #89

I'm disgusted that the police now accept people with tatts like this. Degeneracy.

Post: #90

(12-09-2017 02:20 PM)RexImperator Wrote:  I'm disgusted that the police now accept people with tatts like this. Degeneracy.

Tattoos are degeneracy? You may not realize how far they date back if you think this is somewhat new.

https://www.vfw.org/news-and-publication...ry-tattoos

Migration to the U.S.
German immigrant Martin Hildebrandt is believed to have opened the first tattoo shop in New York City in 1846. He travelled the country tattooing Civil War soldiers. Civil War veteran Wilbur F. Hinman wrote in his novel Corporal Si Klegg and His Pard: “Every regiment had its tattooers, with outfits of needles and India-ink, who for a consideration decorated the limbs and bodies of their comrades with flags, muskets, cannons, sabers and an infinite variety of patriotic emblems and warlike and grotesque devices.” Hinman served with the Ohio 65th Volunteer Infantry. This trend of tattooing military servicemembers persisted. It’s said that even Smedley Butler sported a tattoo of the Marine Corps emblem.

“Interesting cases of present-day employment of tattooing to express social solidarity are common enough among soldiers,” Hambly wrote.

“Military men not infrequently mark themselves with something which shows allegiance to their profession, for example, the date of a battle, cross-guns, a flag, a cannon, or a pyramid of bullets. Naval men prefer a ship or an anchor, and sometimes the marking does not merely connect the wearer with some particular army, but further identifies him with a certain corps. Thus a cavalryman tattooed a horse on himself.”

Hambly claims in his book that at the time of publication (1925) some 90% of U.S. Navy sailors were tattooed.

Post: #91

(12-08-2017 03:21 PM)kamoz Wrote:  I took a look at the video.





Right before he shot him it appears like he was reaching for something with his right hand at his belt. I can understand why the cop did what he did, but being in that situation and accidentally doing something wrong is obviously scary. However, I would want to look more into how the situation came to that point.

If I'd done this during a paint-ball training exercise back in my military days I would have been charged for a negligent discharge of a firearm.

Post: #92

Take away lesson: when dealing with a police officer, you need to be the voice of calm and reason.

I don't want to see any of you shot, gentlemen. If you happen to be pulled over by the police, it's up to you to de-escalate.

Start by putting your hands up on the steering wheel, with your window down, and the engine off. Keep them visible and stay relaxed. Respond to everything with "Yes, Officer," and then repeating the actions you're going to take.

"I need your license and registration."

"Yes, officer. They're in my glove compartment. I'm going to reach over to get them. Is that okay?"

When the officer says yes, move SLOWLY and do what he said.

Assure the officer that they're safe. "I have no weapons officer. I do have a pocket knife in my back pockets but I have no weapons on me officer."

If the officer interrupts you mid-movement, stop - and reassure him that you are complying, and tell him what the result will be.

"You'd better not pull a knife out of that pocket or I'll shoot you!"*

*Freezes*. "I am only pulling my wallet out for you, officer. There is no knife in this pocket. Should I continue pulling my wallet out?"

Make sure they feel in control. Make sure everything is predictable. Keep calling them officer. If they're freaking out, you slow the pace of your voice and your movements. Don't jerk around and allow yourself to become visibly nervous; assert emotional control of the dynamic to help bring them back from the edge.

It's disgusting that we need to adhere to these protocols, but this is the world we live in.

*Actually something I had a cop say to me, after breaking into my house because our neighbour heard my girlfriend and I watching a horror movie.

Post: #93

Let's be careful not to over-generalize in reaction to this. I see no evidence that cops are much different from any other profession. A few are total dickheads like in this video, a few are the "heroes" that the authoritarian right makes police out to be, and the vast majority are just regular guys doing a job to get paid. The only difference is that shitty cops can end up killing innocent people and create spectacles worthy of a viral video. Basically, those with a "fuck the police" attitude are being fooled by anecdata. Police interactions like the one in this video are NOT typical.

Post: #94

(12-09-2017 04:20 PM)Delta Wrote:  Let's be careful not to over-generalize in reaction to this. I see no evidence that cops are much different from any other profession. A few are total dickheads like in this video, a few are the "heroes" that the authoritarian right makes police out to be, and the vast majority are just regular guys doing a job to get paid. The only difference is that shitty cops can end up killing innocent people and create spectacles worthy of a viral video. Basically, those with a "fuck the police" attitude are being fooled by anecdata. Police interactions like the one in this video are NOT typical.

Problem is the "good" cops will try and protect another cop that fucked up. That's just as bad in my opinion.

I don't really blame the cops as individuals as much as the authoritarian nature that law enforcement in general has become in this country. They're trained and expected to act this way.

Post: #95

(12-08-2017 03:52 PM)speculator Wrote:  In the context of all lives matter, what are your opinions regarding this song?

You can't lose the argument if you write your opponent's lines too.

BlackGuyTappingHisHeadMeme.jpeg

So woke.

Post: #96

They could have made a better straw man than that.

Post: #97

Another innocent white man, killed by a police officer. It's a clear attack on not only the victim, but on all Caucasians in America. To protest, I'll do the only thing that's logical...looking to the Freddy Gray incident for guidance.

Break into the mall and steal as many Nike sneakers as I can...

Post: #98

(12-09-2017 08:12 AM)BortimusPrime Wrote:  ...
Odds are by the time this happens civilization will be in full economic collapse mode and the cops won't be responding to 911 calls. It's like all those nuclear war movies, the military and police will immediately turn themselves into the biggest armed gangs taking supplies from everyone else.

There's still a large chance of a slow collapse that will hit various regions harder than others.

I take what opportunities I can to warn people against betting on a sudden collapse rather than considering other possibilities. There is a real chance that the various Western nations heading towards authoritarianism simply descend relatively slowly into large scale banana republics.

Let's say the US dollar folds as the reserve currency for oil. What's to say that the Feds don't order a banking holiday and in the face of total collapse simply pass a law that nationalises everyone's 401ks and banks balances "for the greater good". Some pundits have speculated that the federal government will actually re-issue a new currency (rolled out mostly digitally) and scrap the old one, leaving anyone holding dollars completely fucked, but what do they care if the alternative is total anarchy? People will scream and protest but at the end of the day they will choose order over chaos.

In any case, the elites are not hiring and training trigger happy asset forfeiture hounds for no reason. They anticipate a severe dislocation of the old order, and I very much doubt it involves them scrambling to escape to an island somewhere and hope their servants don't shank them on day two.

What this means for the individual is varied. Some areas will devolve into open rebellion. Others will knuckle under North Korea style. Personally I recommend Matthew Bracken's fictional books, not as prophetic material but as food for thought about what direction the USA could take. But don't bet everything on "business as usual until a total collapse". It's actually the rarest of likelihoods.

Post: #99

That video of the shooting is bizarre. The cop tells the guy to keep his hands straight up in the air, that he'll be shot if his hands come down for any reason. ("You think you're gonna fall, you better fall on your face!") Then the cop tells him to "crawl towards me" — WTF?

I was surprised he wasn't blown to bits the moment his hands went down to the floor.

The guy crawls, then reaches a hand to the back of his pants, apparently to adjust them. The officer specifically said if his hand went to his back he would be shot. But then he brings his hand to the front (empty), and then the cop with the machine gun shoots him.

Crazy. As others have mentioned, it seems to be a situation that could have been handled a lot more intelligently. If it had, it likely would have had a much more mundane outcome.

EDIT: I just watched the full-length video. The cop gives the woman the same instruction to "crawl towards me" once she's on her knees, but she seems to shimmy on her knees with her hands still in the air, which is apparently what the officer meant by "crawl." The guy was ordered to look down at the carpet while this was happening, so he could not have seen that. Most people I think would interpret the command "crawl" as crawling on your hands & knees. But this action apparently put the cops even more on edge, as in their eyes he was not following instructions. (The cop yelled a second time "Crawl towards me!" as soon as the guy started crawling.) These cops seem to have a very different definition of "crawl" from the rest of the world.

Post: #100

The article I read about this basically said that the jury found the cop not guilty essentially because the defense proved that the cop did everything by the book, and correctly did as he was trained, so they can find him not guilty and disagree with the training.

The whole "simon says" routine seemed idiotic. But I digress.