Curious George
Veteran Member
These people were detained for shoplifting. Though I am not certain if more was stolen, the 4 year old girl did steal a barbie doll. This was the police response.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
There was a lot more to it than you see in that short video:
These people were detained for shoplifting. Though I am not certain if more was stolen, the 4 year old girl did steal a barbie doll. This was the police response.
That is a bit harsh. Yes, they ran from the police and caused a major scene, but that does not make them terrorists.****ing terrorists
I am talking about the policeThat is a bit harsh. Yes, they ran from the police and caused a major scene, but that does not make them terrorists.
Well seems like that response that is "not the most polite" needs to be trained out of them.There was a lot more to it than you see in that short video:
Running from the police tends to cause not the most polite response.
These people were detained for shoplifting. Though I am not certain if more was stolen, the 4 year old girl did steal a barbie doll. This was the police response.
****ing terrorists
Running from the police is usually done by those that require a bit more force to subdue. There are countless cases where the police pull over a seemingly non-violent person and suddenly there is a gun. When people run from the police they tend to assume the worst. And usually for good reason.Well seems like that response that is "not the most polite" needs to be trained out of them.
If a police officer cannot assess the situation better, cannot refrain from escalation, and cannot refrain from yelling directly in peoples ears while they are in custody, then they should not be a police officer. Full stop.
I don't think the multiple car response was the instance of poor training. However, i can understand that having too many officers might encourage their adrenaline. I do not know that it could have been avoided. I also am not sure where they would have came to that conclusion.The multiple car response was because the people who called it in thought the child was in danger
She's using a 4 year old as a human shield! For ****s sake
One would think that a loving mother would put her child down and instruct it to get out of the way.The multiple car response was because the people who called it in thought the child was in danger
She's using a 4 year old as a human shield! For ****s sake
No. Even after the mother was out of the car in clear view the police officer escalated the situation by yelling at the woman and jumping toward her with a finger in her face. Even after the man was already detained was the police officer screaming in his ear. You cannot wash away the officers poor choices.Running from the police is usually done by those that require a bit more force to subdue. There are countless cases where the police pull over a seemingly non-violent person and suddenly there is a gun. When people run from the police they tend to assume the worst. And usually for good reason.
One would think that a person entrusted with the authority to police would be able to check themselves.One would think that a loving mother would put her child down and instruct it to get out of the way.
Maybe she was scared to ****ing deathOne would think that a loving mother would put her child down and instruct it to get out of the way.
Maybe she was scared to ****ing death
There was no actual violence. There were threats of violence but none took place.I don't know that any defense of her actions are necessary. Her behavior does not excuse the police behavior.
With that said, it is certainly a reasonable choice to not want to let go of your child when confronted with extreme levels of violence. Was that the best decision? Probably not in this situation. There was an open car seat, she could have complied more with the officers' commands. But that takes us down the spiral of this should have been done or that should have been done. The facts are what they are and we can play the what if game for a very long time. Given the situation the police were in, should they have behaved differently? Was their response to the situation reasonable? I think any analysis yields a "no."
Threatening someone with a gun is violence, so is lunging at them and screaming in their face. You can play semantics all day long but that will not make the police response professional or okay.There was no actual violence. There were threats of violence but none took place.
Granted they could have handled it a bit better, but it is unreasonable to not acknowledge that one does not run from the police with children in the car. That is child endangerment.
I disagree. Violence is usually defined as an action not as a threat. You might want to use a different term or change your wording.Threatening someone with a gun is violence, so is lunging at them and screaming in their face. You can play semantics all day long but that will not make the police response professional or okay.
Regarding fleeing with children, i agree. But two wrongs don't make a right. I suppose you can also claim that if man hadn't eaten the forbidden fruit none of this would have happened. I am merely addressing the police behavior given the circumstances. Of the behavior which they had control, the police exercised that control poorly.
Because sitting in a parked car is running from the policeThey ran from the police. One has to know what one is getting oneself into when one does that.