^^Newsflash: people change.

Newsflash: this "newsflash" shit is some bitch shit.

Bitch.

9/11/2007 7:56:06 AM

I don't like the common method of cops yelling, screaming and threatening you with increasing intensity if you don't cooperate exactly the way they want you to. The practice is demeaning, and it reflects poorly on our police force.

However, if I were a cop and some little punk tried to go all street lawyer on me while recording it just to make me look bad, I'd probably find a way to beat his ass with impunity, just to teach him not to be such a douche

9/11/2007 12:10:13 PM

I agree, the Bill of Rights is for fags.

9/11/2007 12:30:06 PM

Its not that, if a cop comes up to some one who is just being a total jackass, then yeah, I would get him on every damn technicality there is. However, this guy (the cop) was crossed the line by far and he deserves punishment.

If a cop comes up to me, before he even speaks to me, I start out with a certain level of respect for him, more then the respect I'll give some random person. I respect the uniform. Pretty much every single run in with cops, I've been extremely polite and have always been treated well. Now if the cop started acting like this guy, then yeah, my respect for him is going to drop dramatically.

9/11/2007 12:34:30 PM

I agree that the guy could have at least told him why he was there, and then that would have probably been the end to it, however, in his non-cooperation, he was able to weed out a guy who does not need power over others. Just because you have a badge does NOT give you the power to do whatever you want.

9/11/2007 12:40:51 PM

^I agree, and in a way this guy is performing a service. But I still don't like him.


Driving and using our roads is a priviledge, not a right. That doesn't mean innocent until proven guilty, but when a cop wants to see your license and registration, you show it to him. You don't try to tell a law enforcement officer how to do his job, especially when it's a shitty job at 2 in the morning. That seems like common sense to me.

[Edited on September 11, 2007 at 12:50 PM. Reason : 2]

9/11/2007 12:49:17 PM

If the officer asks to see your license and registration, then by all means show it (its the law). However, other than giving your name, you are under no legal requirement to answer any other question the officer asks, even if it seems innocent.

In practice, though, it certainly helps to be cooperative.

[Edited on September 11, 2007 at 1:34 PM. Reason : .]

9/11/2007 1:33:24 PM

^

9/11/2007 6:15:19 PM

Quote :

"Chief [Scott] Uhrig said Kuehnlein stopped to talk to Darrow because police have received reports of thefts from cars in the area. But, Uhrig said, based on his viewing of the online video, the officer acted inappropriately when he threatened to make up charges, and used a disrespectful tone and inappropriate language. 'We don't do that,' Uhrig said. 'Someone either violated the law or they didn't. You don't say, I'll lock you up and then come up with why afterward.'"

Indeed, Chief.

9/12/2007 12:36:53 AM

I would say, okay, stop threatening me with charges and charge me with something. If you don't have anything, have a night night, officer. Then drive away. Thats within my rights, correct?

Plus, am I legally obligated to get out of my car if there is no reasonable suspicion of concealed weapons or anything?

[Edited on September 12, 2007 at 1:01 AM. Reason : .]

9/12/2007 12:58:13 AM

You probably have the right to drive away if the cop cannot find any pending charges/record of your crimes. But, if you drive away before he gives you the go ahead, then this will probably happen:

You drive off and cop chases in pursuit. Multiple other cruisers are on pursuit. Your car gets the spike strip. Your tires throw sparks after a while. And then they nail you in the rear and send your car careening towards a ditch and a light pole. Then they drag you out of the burning car, broken bones and all, and cuff you.

You don't have to get out of the car, but let me explain what will probably happen if you don't:

You mention to cop that you are not getting out of the car. Cop slams you to the ground and sprays your eyes full of mace before he mashes his knee on top of your head. Then he will proceed to bend your arms beyond their physical limits and hand cuff you, pinching the senstive nerves on your wrist.

That's what I usually see on TV when someone doesn't do what a cop asks them to do.

9/12/2007 1:10:18 AM

I would ask if I could drive away before doing so.

There are many ridiculous traffic laws that they can bust you on, just driving safely through an empty parking lot.

9/12/2007 1:12:38 AM

^^ oh jesus christ, can you even give one example where that has happened and the guy running was innocent

9/12/2007 1:13:24 AM

^^^^ Some states have laws about following an officer's directives. If you don't comply, you might be charged.

These days, most cops don't want you to get out of the car. In some places if you get out of your car without being told to do so--like Virginia--the cop will likely draw his or her weapon on you.

Cooperate but you don't have to say anything. And if you're guilty, definitely don't say anything--especially answers to questions. For example, if you answer what time that day you started drinking, you just admitted to drinking. See?

^ I can say that innocent people do get convicted all the time. The guy below on the right, Ronald Cotton, was an inmate at the prison where I worked--he's been all over TV. He finally got out of prison--11 years later.



[Edited on September 12, 2007 at 1:22 AM. Reason : .]

9/12/2007 1:16:22 AM

'tis true. 99% of people who drive off or refuse to get out of their car are guilty of something. But there are a few cases. Like the one posted previously in this thread where the cop dragged that lady out of her car when she refused to come out.

9/12/2007 1:17:07 AM

Quote :

"I would say, okay, stop threatening me with charges and charge me with something. If you don't have anything, have a night night, officer. Then drive away. Thats within my rights, correct? Plus, am I legally obligated to get out of my car if there is no reasonable suspicion of concealed weapons or anything? "

you have to comply with all lawful orders regarding your operation of the motor vehicle.

if they want to see your license/reg/insurance... you better show it.
if they want you to turn off the engine and/or step out of the car ... you better do it.
if they give you any other reasonable directions to move your person or car to a certain place... yeah that too.

in theory, the Fourth Amendment protects you so that you don't have to give any statements, you dont have to answer any questions, and you don't have to consent to a search of your vehicle or person.

but if you try that, you will probably get arrested, and searched, your vehicle impounded, and if you dont have a video camera streaming secure uploads, you'll probably come out on the losing end of whatever the cop wants to say you were doing which will likely involve "obstructing a police officer" at the very least.

Constitutional theory doesnt always meet up with the facts.

anyhow, ive found in 19 times out of 20, if you're polite and respectful to the cops, they'll be decent to you. theres always that 1 out of 20, though. im glad this Darrow guy was able to nail one of them.





[Edited on September 12, 2007 at 1:21 AM. Reason : ]

9/12/2007 1:19:43 AM

http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/stlouiscitycounty/story/DD258E792AE58A0286257354000FA1BC?OpenDocument

New update. Information is going to the county prosecuter.

9/12/2007 10:03:20 AM

^The police cruiser dash camera footage has "disappeared". Ha, figures.

9/12/2007 4:22:01 PM

wow, chalk one up for the good guys.

although i have a huge respect cops for the jobs they do [and how little they get paid to do it], i hate the assholes with authority complexes who routinely pull shit like this. i know you have your 10% everywhere, but i feel that number is higher on many police forces.

it is a little suspect that this kid was rolling around with a rear mounted video camera...thats always rolling (so he turns it on every time he gets in the car??), but its not like he entrapped the cop...he didn't force the cop to behave like that. hes just an asshole cop. sounds like they kid had a run-in with an asshole cop before so i guess i see why he had the camera.

and who said that the kid's video camera was uploading somewhere outside the car? i seriously doubt that was the case.

9/12/2007 4:48:47 PM

this might be an incorrect assumption or implication, but i got the feeling that he was driving a ricer, which would explain having the camera (to tape races or whatever) and the loud clicking, which I assumed was a high-dollar radar detector.
maybe not, but it would be interesting to see the outside of the car.

like Chance said on the first page, though, it certainly does bring up a good reason to carry a pocket recorder in your console or something, and just click it on whenever you get pulled over.

9/12/2007 5:00:38 PM

^nissan maxima

9/12/2007 5:09:19 PM

The video wasn't uploading anywhere. The kid lied and said "the video's not even in the car" so the cop wouldn't steal the tape.

It'd be nice to have a car-puter with several webcams pointing in all directions, constantly recording. Who knows what you'd catch on film. And with a service like Clearwire, you really could periodically send the recordings somewhere else for safe keeping.

9/12/2007 5:44:27 PM

Quote :

"And with a service like Clearwire Sprint's Aircard you really could periodically send the recordings somewhere else for safe keeping. "

fixed that for you

9/12/2007 5:50:21 PM

Yeah, I haven't really looked into it since Nextel had that test market thing going on here a few years back.

9/12/2007 6:01:33 PM

pretty much all the big cell companies offer a mobile data service that has much better coverage than clearwire

9/12/2007 6:11:43 PM

The thing about the EV-DO is most of the carriers only have it in larger cities right now. Its still way better than clearwire but head out to the sticks and your shits gonna be slower than dial up, you will not be transferring any videos.

9/12/2007 11:12:14 PM

the sprint card i have for my laptop has never been slower or even equal to dial up, even in rural areas i'm barely getting signal or roaming.

that article is awesome... ultimate pwning.

9/12/2007 11:22:54 PM

aaaaaaand another one:

http://video.nbc6.net/player/?id=157250

Kid is certainly an idiot for not shutting up, but the cops just act like douches the entire time and then claim "inciting a riot." GG for whoever kept the camera rolling though.

9/17/2007 8:48:45 PM

^ that's a different situation, and I would say an entirely different category of police-abuse-of-power videos. There are countless videos recently of students acting like jackasses and mostly drawing attention to themselves to make an example. A lot of these people act like jerkoffs then ham it up for the camera just to make a point. I'm not saying he's right or wrong, i'm saying his intention was to make a scene, not to catch the cops doing something bad.

but the original video of the single cop and kid in the car is totally different. This was a circumstance where the cop didn't know he was being watched and he was abusing his power, and the kid was trying to protect his own rights.

9/17/2007 10:29:30 PM

I wasn't trying to infer that the situations were the same, I just figured they were on the same general topic and a new thread wasn't needed.

9/17/2007 10:35:25 PM

I don't see how this guy was being a smartass. All he asked was "did I do something wrong" and the cop starts yelling. It's obvious the redneck cop wanted to go on a power trip before he even talked to the guy.

I don't know about you, but I've always asked "what seems to be the problem" when I've been pulled. That's a pretty reasonable thing to ask.

[Edited on September 17, 2007 at 10:47 PM. Reason : df]

9/17/2007 10:45:56 PM

and why do some of you think his camera WASNT uploading to a secure source?

9/17/2007 10:53:21 PM

You know what, after thinking about it, I'm all for a law explicitly protecting the rights of citizens to record their encounters with police.

The law enforcement profession naturally doesn't exactly attract the best and the brightest, and it's not safe for citizens to give these people unchecked, one-sided power.

Needless to say, props to this kid for getting assholes with badges off the street. We need more people like him.

[Edited on September 17, 2007 at 11:09 PM. Reason : sdf]

9/17/2007 11:03:44 PM

9/18/2007 2:16:09 AM

you guys are fucking retarded if you ever think that by either

-mouthing off
-video taping
-being out late
-questioning
-or not cooperating - but doing so within the law

you should ever be penalized or deserve to have your civil rights abused / thrown out by a police officer

unlawful search and seizure is based on this principle, and next i am going to hear morons like P Nis say shit like, if you had nothing to hide, you would submit to a search.

fucking sad...

9/18/2007 9:03:20 AM

Quote :

" in theory, the Fourth Amendment protects you so that you don't have to give any statements, you dont have to answer any questions, and you don't have to consent to a search of your vehicle or person. but if you try that, you will probably get arrested, and searched, your vehicle impounded, and if you dont have a video camera streaming secure uploads, you'll probably come out on the losing end of whatever the cop wants to say you were doing which will likely involve "obstructing a police officer" at the very least. "

unfortunately i agree with this statement, but more people should stand up and exercise their rights so that this bullshit does not become the norm anymore

it works like any other situation, if somebody is going to be an intimidating jackass to me, im not going to willingly cooperate (legal non-cooperation of course)

Some Cops seem to think that they should not have to deal with people who don't cooperate with them. Well, bitch, man up, everyone has to deal with uncooperative people day in and day out.

9/18/2007 9:10:42 AM

Quote :

"Some Cops seem to think that they should not have to deal with people who don't cooperate with them. Well, bitch, man up, everyone has to deal with uncooperative people day in and day out."

But not cops. If you've got nothing to hide you've got no reason not to cooperate. I have never heard a counterargument to this that holds water.

That said, this cop was insane.

9/18/2007 9:26:11 PM

Quote :

"The law enforcement profession naturally doesn't exactly attract the best and the brightest, and it's not safe for citizens to give these people unchecked, one-sided power. "

really? who does it attract then?

I'm guessing you know thousands of cops personally to make such a statement?

(and why is it that law enforcement seems to be the one profession where all 100% of employees must be angels - omniscient angels at that - all their lives: past/current/future)



Of the millions of police/citizen interactions every day, how many do you hear about?

9/18/2007 9:58:15 PM

Quote :

"But not cops. If you've got nothing to hide you've got no reason not to cooperate. I have never heard a counterargument to this that holds water. That said, this cop was insane. "

Either you are trolling or you are a large tool bag.

Your response is an excellent example of intolerance, lack of education, and forgetfulness of the principles under which this nation was created. No wonder this country is going to shit.

9/18/2007 10:38:13 PM

Quote :

"really? who does it attract then? I'm guessing you know thousands of cops personally to make such a statement? (and why is it that law enforcement seems to be the one profession where all 100% of employees must be angels - omniscient angels at that - all their lives: past/current/future) Of the millions of police/citizen interactions every day, how many do you hear about?"

This post is a perfect example of how law enforcement doesn't attract the best and the brightest. I don't have to do a survey of law enforcement to know that they aren't as bright as, say, lawyers.

The reason is simple economics that applies to almost any job: talent of employees is low simply because the pay for these positions is relatively low. On average, people aren't going to accept jobs that pay them less than they are worth. Hence, people who are brighter than cops are doing jobs that pay more/are more rewarding.

If you want to get cops who actually have an understanding of the law, then pay them like lawyers. This way, the job will attract applicants who are as talented as lawyers.

9/18/2007 10:59:45 PM

Quote :

"and why is it that law enforcement seems to be the one profession where all 100% of employees must be angels"

well, probably because they're one of the few professions where each of them (generally) are allowed to carry guns and enforce their will upon the public at large. Most other don't have, by virtue of their professions, such direct and supreme power and influence over other people.

9/18/2007 11:15:33 PM

^exactly. They are in a position to do a lot more harm more frequently.

9/18/2007 11:48:45 PM

so compensation directly correlates to intelligence?

You should absolutely work for the government - where an employee's paycheck is used as a major determining factor for their ability.

agentlion= the public can absolutely expect law enforcement to be held to a higher standard, but no human is perfect 100% of the time. Cops do not "enforce their will upon the public" , they enforce the publics will upon criminal violators (except the small number of the public who are wearing badges but shouldn't be)

Quote :

"They are in a position to do a lot more harm more frequently"

True, but only because they respond to dangerous situations that often require split second decision making. Fortunately the judicial review for those decisions doesn't allow for 20/20 hindsight and only takes into account what was known/believed at the time the decision was made. They are often in a position to do more good than a lot of people too. All reasons that this isn't a job chosen for monetary compensation alone.

Quote :

"This post is a perfect example of how law enforcement doesn't attract the best and the brightest. I don't have to do a survey of law enforcement to know that they aren't as bright as, say, lawyers. "

You've decided I am not the best and brightest, meh. How is that one short post "the perfect example?" Again, how do you know? You just know? No survey, no personal knowledge, no research - nothing? But your knowledge should be accepted as fact....

9/19/2007 9:04:51 AM

Quote :

"so compensation directly correlates to intelligence?"

not always directly, but in general, yes. Intelligence is probably the largest factor or indicator of a person's current or potential compensation. Then of course combine it with other factors - motivation, background, opportunity, luck, other personal attributes. But it's no coincidence that the highest paid professions are the ones that require either 1) the most intelligence and/or 2) the most schooling, which is roughly correlated to intelligence.

Quote :

"Cops do not "enforce their will upon the public" , they enforce the publics will upon criminal violators (except the small number of the public who are wearing badges but shouldn't be)"

I know, I chose the worse "enforce their will" on purpose. I know they are supposed to, and 99% of the time they do, enforce the law on people. But I'm saying by simple virtue that they carry a gun and a badge, cops are in the unique position to enforce their own will, if they so choose.

9/19/2007 9:49:19 AM

Quote :

"Your response is an excellent example of intolerance, lack of education, and forgetfulness of the principles under which this nation was created."

It all comes down to what the citizens will give up in the short term to preserve those principles. Some care more about the general wellfare of the country rather than exercising their own rights in a trivial manner.

Emphasis on "trivial." Telling a cop where you are headed if he asks you is NOT an unreasonable breach of privacy. There are most definitely limits. I guess my limits are more in the interest of national safety. Cooporate with law enforcement = criminals get caught quicker and easier.

Funny coincidence, actually. A badge showed up at my door at 8:30 the other night looking for some woman, probably the tenant who lived in my apartment before me. He skeptical when I said I had no clue who she was and asked to take a quick look around.

I said no problem. He spent about one minute doing a quick search, thanked me, and left. And guess what?! I didn't wake up in 1984! I ended up with the matter resolved and absolutely NO inconvenience to me.

9/19/2007 12:27:03 PM

http://www.sltrib.com/ci_6928168?source=rss

9/19/2007 1:07:14 PM

^ WHAT THE HELL????

It is actually against the law to not water one's own lawn? WOW... and America wants to export democracy and freedom to other countries???

This sort of shit really frustrates and angers me.

WhoTF came up with such a fascistic law? Really, what is the logic behind it? It has to be a strange country where organizations like KKK and NAMBLA can exist, but not watering one's lawn is a crime.

9/19/2007 4:15:21 PM

Ahaha I was about to say, it's against the law to water your lawn in Raleigh now, didn't realize this was about the opposite.

9/19/2007 7:02:32 PM

Quote :

" Emphasis on "trivial." Telling a cop where you are headed if he asks you is NOT an unreasonable breach of privacy. "

Our constitution and current judicial system disagrees with your statement. That is why we are not required to tell a police officer such things. Its about preventing abuse of such powers. Again, refer to my last post and go get an education.

Remember, there would be no general welfare of the greater good or whatever communist bullshit you said if it were not for our basic civil liberties and freedoms granted to us under the constitution.

You lose - any way you look at it you lose. I have the constitution backing me, which comes with centuries of debates, court cases, trials, you name it - it is still there for a reason.

I bet you voted for George Bush.

9/20/2007 1:02:34 AM

set em up ----------------------->

9/20/2007 1:04:44 AM