Texas police officer grabbing a high school student by the throat

That was my whole point in the first place -- that cops meddle too much in people's lives by pulling people over for technically-illegal but actually perfectly safe and reasonable behaviors. I'm not talking about this incident of a teenager copping an attitude and having a traffic stop go drastically wrong, I'm talking about the traffic stops in the first place. Every cop-citizen interaction carries a little risk with it. And given the police MO of making up more reasons to have interactions that are not value-add, we balloon the number of interactions and with it the number of tragic escalations (while also adding opex to the PD, deadweight loss to the taxpayer, and putting the risk of the incremental extra deaths predominantly on the innocent and generally law-abiding). So just because they can pull you over, and you shouldn't be surprised when they do pull you over, it doesn't mean they should pull you over. As a good libertarian, I'm sure you can agree that, so long as no one is endangered or hurt, the less cops meddle in the lives of citizens the better.

 

I don't see this as a cop "meddling" in that the kid was actually breaking the law....a law that is a law because of driving safety concerns due to past accidents caused by drivers being blinded by high beams.

As a "good Libertarian" as you put it, I do think that less things should be illegal, but you endanger others when you use your high beams within 500 feet of an oncoming car....you also show impaired judgement when you are flashing your high beams at someone who doesn't have their high beams on.

Also, there's something about people that are just so damn stupid that they can manage to take what would be a warning that would take maybe 10 minutes and turn it into something much more serious. Sandra Bland was one of those idiots, this kid is another one of them. People who act like that lose all sympathy in an instant. The kid is dead because he was an ******* then he chose to be a violent *******. The parents are suing the state, but honestly they should know that they are to blame for raising a violent *******. If your 17 year old kid is out attacking cops, that's a guarantee that you completely and totally failed as a parent in every way possible.

 

Yes.

Rummaging through somebody else's backpack is criminal as is assault/fighting.

 

Again, I find the idea of a courtesy flash as dangerous laughable. But, from what I've read of this particular case, the cop had a new cruiser with particularly bright headlights. While he did not have on his high beams, he had a number of people prior to this incident give him a courtesy flash, for which he's pulled them over. So he (a) knew he had disruptive lights that impacted other drivers but did nothing to fix it and (b) actually turns the situation around on hapless citizens and pulled them over as if they were the unsafe drivers, when it's him causing the problem in the first place. Whose judgment here is really impaired -- the courteous driver or the cop who uses his bright headlights as a pretext to pull people over? So, again, I find the public safety argument to not be credible.

I'm also concerned about the lack of empathy you show here and really every thread about altercations between people. You'll often dismiss the complainant as being dumb, or aggressive, or otherwise deserving of misfortune. I did that earlier in this thread about the kid who got choke-slammed, but nothing very bad happened to him. This high-beams kid died. Trayvon died. Michael Brown died. Maybe you really believe and maybe even you're right that they are the authors of their own destruction. But, you have a surprising lack of sympathy for people who suffer grave misfortunes. When I see someone kill themselves through their own poor judgment, even if they were trying to do evil, I say to myself "Man, that sucks that guy was so dumb he got himself killed." But, all you'll offer is a "served him right!" A de facto merciless death penalty for random poor decision-making. I think it's not a healthy way to live.

 

I'm not excusing the 14yr. old from his behavior!!!!

AND I'm certainly not excusing that cop for the way he handled the situation!!! It seems to me that exercising force to (LOL...DEescalate) a situation is becoming acceptable and common by law enforcement now in days! The in your face/pushing by the cop sure helped that kid regain his composure! I'm not sure if the #1 objective by the cop was to de-escalate the situation OR show everyone there that he wasn't just a short/fat cop who (with backup by his side) could take down a 14yr. old!

If you think the officer acted properly and professionally, so be it! I in the other hand think he acted totally the contrary!


(P.S) Why you no use MOAR smiley-face?
:grin:

Spoiler

.......
.......
.......

 

How does that kid end up dead? Even if he was a jackass, I don't understand why the cop couldn't handle him. Isn't that part of an officer's job? To handle a situation without deadly force unless absolutely necessary?

I respect officers who uphold the law and have common sense and a broad understanding of the intricacies of diverse communities and categorized groups of people. I think the best cops are highly-intelligent and compassionate, even with a badge and gun.

As a whole, though, I have more and more difficulty respecting cops, even though I'm "supposed to" respect them simply for their title. I don't know if we're at the point anymore where respect is automatic. In my "community" there have been so many deaths at the hands of officers, to the point where the notion of respect is a "reward" which must be earned.

There are rotten apples in every bunch, but it is becoming commonplace for officers to exert the maximum force allowable in situations which arguably require much less. Tasers, pepper spray, dogs,etc.. are used in place of deadly weapons to value life, so I thought. Too many of these cops bring guns to environments where they are unnecessary. Or, they flash that gun and get people riled up because, well, they can. Afterwards, law enforcement and parts of the public are shocked when people protest against the same men and women who were put in power to protect everyone, even those with unpopular beliefs or lifestyles.

It's such a complex issue at this point in our timeline. Unfortunately, after so many unnecessary deaths with little to no apology or responsibility (like Eric Garner), people tend to not respect law enforcement altogether. I can't say that I blame them for that sentiment.

My brother-in-law is an officer in D.C., so I'm lucky enough to get the "cop perspective." We've had heated discussions, but I appreciate being educated from the other spectrum of belief. However, we both agree that the relationship between cops and the public is permanently tarnished. It can never be repaired, I think, largely due the profound abuse that has been captured on social media. We can't erase what we've seen or experienced first hand at the control of law enforcement.

It's sad to say the least, but I would be dishonest if I claimed to have the same sort of respect for a given cop as I do for a fireman. It's derived from what I've experienced and what I've witnessed. Even this video makes me question the officer, despite his alleged injuries. I don't comprehend how the end result occurred.

All in all, it's just sad state of affairs without any sort of resolution in sight. Time, I guess, heals all. But, you can't say that to the families of slain men, who many of which were African American or part of a minority group. That's a different conversation, but it also has me question whether or not the relationship between parts of the public, and the police, would be "better," if individual cops were found guilty in the court of law for their crimes committed on the job.

 

To adequately answer, I'll have to take this in parts

Turning your high beams on within 500 feet of an oncoming car is illegal and it is illegal for safety reasons. This is not disputed. Sure people will often flash their high beams at someone "as a courtesy" if theirs are on, but this is still illegal.

In this case, the cop didn't have his high beams on, so it's not like he was baiting the guy to break the law. New cars have bright lights, it's just how it is, that doesn't give someone else the right to break the law and having a new car isn't "causing" any problem or baiting someone to break the law.

The cop was understanding in the beginning and was just going to give the guy a warning while explaining that he didn't have his bright lights on and that it's not legal to turn your bright lights on with oncoming traffic.

Of course that never got to happen because the kid was being a dick....probably because he had just smoked weed and was paranoid about getting in trouble for it hence the just cracking the window and being an idiot about handing over his license. Now of course the only real evidence of that is the high amount of THC in the kid's system along with his weird actions, but I think it's reasonable. We could argue that weed should be legal (which I'd agree with)....but even if it was fully legal for recreational purposes, it wouldn't be legal for minors so there's no reason to get into that debate in this instance.

There's no question, I don't have much sympathy for those who case their own deaths by being violent assholes or by being completely, unreasonably ridiculous/stupid. I can empathize with them on some level....but not sympathize.

The 14 year old kid that got taken down for being disrespectful to the cop I can have a bit of sympathy, he was just a really stupid, really young kid who hopefully won't ever do it again. I do think that was too harsh of treatment of someone his age.....but if he was just a few years older, I'd be totally fine with it.

As to Trayvon, Micheal Brown, and this kid, they got themselves killed by being violent assholes and attacking others....I just can't sympathize with that. I personally believe that your life is a fleeting thing, and one should protect it. People going around attacking police officers are effectively throwing their life away, and I find that people who absurdly disrespect their own lives like that to be undeserving of them in the first place. Furthermore, I know a lot of people who died young due to no fault of their own, people that really deserved to live longer than they got a chance to and I think when someone like this 17 year old kid, or Trayvon, or Micheal Brown, or Sandra Bland and so on throws their lives away frivolously it's disrespectful to those people. Because of those reasons, I don't have sympathy for them even if on some level I can empathize. Due to their actions, they deserve to be dead while so many deserve to be alive.

 

so·ci·o·path
ˈsōsēōˌpaTH/
noun
a person with a personality disorder manifesting itself in extreme antisocial attitudes and behavior and a lack of conscience.

 

Wow.

I read this with an open mind, but you lost your credibility when you grouped Trayvon in here. Totally different situation with a man who thought he was an officer or responsible for enforcing ordinances of his own making.

There is a huge difference between hired,police officers using self-defense and a neighbor pursing a teen after being told not to do so. One is arguably within the rights of an officer. The other is murder, intentional or not. It's not appropriate for you to group them together. You're pushing it with the other name-drops, but I'll let it go, with the hope that you have decent intentions and that you're not trolling with some not-so subtle, common groupings.

What's troubling, like another person said, is your seemingly complete lack of sympathy for human life. Death is death, and I'm sure, if you've experienced the loss of a loved one, very painful. Are you detached because you didn't know the victims, or is because you truly believe that they were behaving recklessly enough to warrant death? I don't understand how you make the judgment that someone "deserves to be dead, while so many deserve to be alive." It comes across as a bit perverse, as though you deem yourself as person who is able to make a value judgment on the validity of life in others. How do you equate "deserving" to live from one person to the next?

You mentioned the fleetingness of life and how it should be protected by any means. Isn't it possible that none of the individuals that you mentioned had a legitimate chance of protecting their livelihood, once another person, or officer, came into the picture? For example, (which, again, your name drops are inappropriate to be polite) can you prove that Sandra Bland had control of her life after being arrested? I don't think you can. Moreover, I don't think you can claim that any other person deserves life more than she did. That's a sickening judgment without any sort of merit.

I'm a bit taken back by your post. It's narcissistic by nature, but it also shows a distorted sense of superiority.

Deserving death and deserving life...seems like it should be left up to someone/something else.

 

How do you explain cars with auto-leveling headlights?

 

The connection between those I mentioned is pretty clear, they were all instances of justifiable homicide because the shooters were all acting in self defense. Sure in Trayvon's case it was just a random nobody that he attacked and not a cop but even that random nobody had the right to self defense.

With the example of Sandra Bland, she committed suicide, how would you argue that she didn't have control of her life? She chose to end it. If you take your own life, you certainly don't deserve it as much as someone who wanted to live longer but had their life taken from them through no fault of their own. I mean, that seems pretty self-explanatory.

Anyway, when it comes to not having sympathy for those who die while attempting to victimize another (the 17 year old kid, Trayvon, and Micheal Brown) or those who take their own life (Sandra Bland), I don't see a problem with it. I don't feel sorry that their actions led to the end of their lives, their actions were wrong and the end of their lives was nothing but the consequences for those actions. On some level I can empathize with their loved ones, but in a couple of those scenarios they are partly to blame for the death of their loved one. In the case of Sandra Bland, she killed herself because no one cared enough about her to bail her out of jail which was going to cost her the new job she just got. She hung herself in her cell right about the time she was to report to work for her first day. In that case, I can understand why her loved ones feel sorrow for her loss, but if she was REALLY that important to them, they'd have bailed her out of jail.

In other instances, it was parents who failed to raise a child who was worth a damn. You raise a violent ******* of a kid who is going to attack people, you are at least partly to blame when that kid gets shot for it.

Obviously all of these situations are unfortunate, but they are well deserved fates. I save my sympathy for cases of wrongful death or truly tragic situations involving innocents.

 

Someone with Bobby's mindset is a danger to society, it's probably best that he stay isolated from the rest of world. When he is out in public, the chances of something fatal happening increase tenfold. Someone as delusional as him can probably take anything as a threat and from that point on you are in Bobby's "self-defense territory" where anything is justified, including death.

Imagine a situation where his judgment has been impaired due to having a bad day, enduring traumatic emotional experience, or having a few drinks too many. Would you really want to cross someone like him? Dude might get into little scuffle with you, perceive his life to be in danger, and then kill you with no remorse. Scary thought.

 

Well-deserved fates, huh? As a former educator, this is beyond disgusting to read. You rely so heavily on ill-thought assumptions that have little to no value for human life. No one "deserves" death, let alone young men and women. Who are you to make that judgment? My goodness, that is some twisted stuff, dude.

The more I read from you, the more insight I get, along with the reminder to not take you seriously. There's no way you believe half of the stuff you post, especially in here. This post and one of your previous messages of vitriolic disappointment are eerily similar to something I'd see on ID, or perhaps, the male version of "Gone Girl."

Is it a mix of narcissism or borderline personality disorder? I don't know, but for your sake, I truly hope you get some help. The world is a lonely place, I'd imagine, when it is lived with such a lack of compassion and socially deviant ideas of people and the world.

I thought I misunderstood one of your posts from earlier with the same, unnerving undertones. It turns out that I read it correctly, I guess.

With regard to Trayvon and the other murder victims, we'll have to just disagree. Facts show that Tray' was followed unjustly, after George was told to stay back. It was a murder that didn't need to happen, regardless of if George was found "innocent." We both know that he didn't need to die. The fact that you have little to no remorse for that is troubling. Even with the twitter allegations, Tray wasn't a bad kid, and based on your logic, he wasn't deserving of his fate. Have you lost someone to murder before?

What you wrote about Sandra Bland is appalling. It's not that no one "cared enough about her." There's this thing called finances that not everyone has.

Have you ever heard of mental illness? She had a history of depression. So, again, your logic implies that her fate was deserved because she was already depressed. Did I get that right? Let's just forget the idiotic reason for her arrest while we're at it.

I'm sure you've heard this before, Bobby, but you should seek some help or some positive influences in your life. It's one thing to disagree, about basketball or whatever, but it's another to show such disregard for human life.

I'm hopeful that your moniker is just a trolling persona that you play online. If it was for shock value, you've definitely succeeded. But, I'm past that. I genuinely hope you're not this miserable to actually believe what you've written about people.

I know, I know...it's just the internetz...

But, either way, this is beyond sad.

 

Assault charges are wholly discretionary, imagine what a nightmare for interscholastic sports if every physical altercation was prosecuted. Rummaging through backpacks, when the value of the items therein is likely negligible, can be handled without law enforcement.

 

Thanks for posting that, JV. I find the comments Bobby makes in this forum when it comes to these incidents very bizarre. And it isn't Bobby simply giving his opinion. That wouldn't bother me. After all, we are here to give our opinions. It is the endless number of posts repeating that same opinion, over and over and over again, that I find strange and disturbing. He is far from the only member that behaves in this way, however, when something of this nature is reported by the media. There is a little clique that reacts in such a similar manner that they seem to be doing it in concert, whether they are or not. I'm reminded of a very good song by The Doors. People are strange.

 

It seems like a lot of people these days have the new bluish-bright-as-hell LED headlights and do not know how to angle them properly. It can be blinding to meet someone on a dark road, even without their brights on. I guess I am in need of a stop and frisk and a beating and a tasing, because I have flashed my lights at people who forget to take their brights off, or people whose lights are just too damn bright (how can you tell the difference?). I had no earthly idea that this was against the law (what law, btw? Seriously interested) It's kind of hard to tell if it's a cop or not when you're a quarter mile away.

 

You can find the law in Texas, here http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/txstatutes/TN/7/C/547/E/547.333

 

I really do think it shows racism. People think racism is calling someone the N-word or saying, "I think black people are stupid". It's not, it's a bias where you excuse negative attitudes about people as being justified because of various factors. It's the act of excusing and treating people different. Most racists don't admit they are racists.

Bobby may not be a KKK member, but he is a racist.

 

Really? Now I've known for a long time that you aren't the brightest person that posts here, but why do you insist on going full r****d so often? How is anyone supposed to take you seriously? That's an honest question by the way.

In what way, in your simple little mind, have I excused or treated people differently due to race? Please, enlighten me, if you think you can.

 

Questioning a person's intelligence and common sense, while calling them a "r****d," puts you in the box that you so desperately want to avoid. And, I wouldn't be so sure that Sweet Lou is the intellectually-inclined person you think he is. A quick search would show a definite inaccuracy on your part.

If you were building some sort of defense of your character, you lost it in one post. Do you find enjoyment in ridiculing those with learning disabilities? You're not fooling anyone. You're never the victim. More often than not, you are the instigator, whether you try to bait others with passive-aggressive discussions or flat out offend underrepresented groups, African American adults and youth, and now, those afflicted with mental r****dation.

You have countless posts with undertones that are offensive. Just because you don't drop the N-word all the time does not hide the meaning you attempt to convey in your posts.

We've already examined the narcissistic, borderline qualities in your replies. There's no need to extend your lack of compassion and decency any further.

Of course, no one would expect you to apologize. We can only hope that education and time will provide you with the opportunity to grow and heal the bitterness and damaged self-concept which are so apparent in your words.