Another example of poor police training

[Subduction Zone]

Because sitting in a parked car is running from the police

Wrong. Watch the video that I linked.

 

[Curious George]

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.

And the problem was that they were not complying. They ran from police which is guaranteed to cause a multi-car response, they did not comply.

Did you watch the breakdown video that I posted. It is rather informative. If she had merely complied even after running there would have been no "violence" beyond guns being drawn, and again that was made necessary by their running from the police.

Regarding violence, i am only concerned with the legal definition not your semantics.

I did watch your video. That changes nothing. I have said with respect to the police actions.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Regarding violence, i am only concerned with the legal definition not your semantics.

I did watch your video. That changes nothing. I have said with respect to the police actions.

There is a problem with the "legal definition". By definition that was not violence either since it was within the law. I am not playing semantic games. You merely used a poor term. You could have said "threats of violence" and you would have been correct. If the police got violent then you would have probably would have had a legitimate beef. If the actions that we saw were all that happened.

 

[Curious George]

There is a problem with the "legal definition". By definition that was not violence either since it was within the law. I am not playing semantic games. You merely used a poor term. You could have said "threats of violence" and you would have been correct. If the police got violent then you would have probably would have had a legitimate beef. If the actions that we saw were all that happened.

You are mistaken. Police violence here just falls under the continuum of force. The question is whether they ureasonably exceeded the force. This however does not make their actions non-violent. You are simply wrong in your understanding of words.

 

[Darkforbid]

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

You are mistaken. Police violence here just falls under the continuum of force. The question is whether they ureasonably exceeded the force. This however does not make their actions non-violent. You are simply wrong in your understanding of words.

So as you've labelled this incident as due to bad training. How should it be handled?

 

[Subduction Zone]

You are mistaken. Police violence here just falls under the continuum of force. The question is whether they ureasonably exceeded the force. This however does not make their actions non-violent. You are simply wrong in your understanding of words.

But again, by both dictionary and legal definition there was no violence since they were well within the continuum of force. Technically by their non-compliance they escalated it past the verbal point:

The Use-of-Force Continuum | National Institute of Justice

And from another site:

That whole confrontation was in the green. The running from police made drawn guns a must. And they still did not respond to voice commands. You are forgetting that this was an ongoing situation before the video started. You are looking at it after they fled from the police and refused to comply with commands. They could have broken out the OC spray but restrained themselves. While in the car they did not comply but were seen moving furtively around. That is very risky in a drawn gun situation.

 

[Curious George]

So as you've labelled this incident as due to bad training. How should it be handled?

The million dollar question, eh? I am not an expert regarding training measures, however there must be training that can effectively help an officer maintain composure, and stay observant in high stress situations. Further, some method of tagging in should be instituted, so when an officer is clearly flooded by emotions as was the case here another officer feels comfortable stepping in and resuming control. Is this possible? I hope so.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The million dollar question, eh? I am not an expert regarding training measures, however there must be training that can effectively help an officer maintain composure, and stay observant in high stress situations. Further, some method of tagging in should be instituted, so when an officer is clearly flooded by emotions as was the case here another officer feels comfortable stepping in and resuming control. Is this possible? I hope so.

You would think, but no one has seem to discover it yet. Cops are humans after all.

 

[Curious George]

But again, by both dictionary and legal definition there was no violence since they were well within the continuum of force. Technically by their non-compliance they escalated it past the verbal point:

The Use-of-Force Continuum | National Institute of Justice

And from another site:

That whole confrontation was in the green. The running from police made drawn guns a must. And they still did not respond to voice commands. You are forgetting that this was an ongoing situation before the video started. You are looking at it after they fled from the police and refused to comply with commands. They could have broken out the OC spray but restrained themselves. While in the car they did not comply but were seen moving furtively around. That is very risky in a drawn gun situation.

You misunderstand again. I have not even begun to discuss where on the continuum this event falls. I mere stated that the officers use of force was on that continuum. Simply being on the continuum of force however does not make an act non violent. My response was towards your assertion.

 

[Curious George]

You would think, but no one has seem to discover it yet. Cops are humans after all.

We will not get better police action by defending police wrongdoings. I also understand that we will not get better police action by nitpicking every little misconduct. What is observed in the video is not little misconduct. It is bad policing. It demonstrates an over aggressive police force that disregards public safety and child welfare. The line for poor policing needs to be drawn somewhere. I would suggest we expect better observation, better assessment, better composure, and better professionalism from our police. You seem to disagree. I wonder where you would draw the line?

 

[Darkforbid]

The million dollar question, eh? I am not an expert regarding training measures, however there must be training that can effectively help an officer maintain composure, and stay observant in high stress situations. Further, some method of tagging in should be instituted, so when an officer is clearly flooded by emotions as was the case here another officer feels comfortable stepping in and resuming control. Is this possible? I hope so.

There's no loss of control I can see. Just an attempt at distraction letting the officer move in closer. He messed the first grab up but considering what she was carrying, forgivable

 

[Mock Turtle]

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.

I think some people need to do a retraining course on how not to escalate confrontations. Unless shouting aggressively is the taught method to ensure compliance.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You misunderstand again. I have not even begun to discuss where on the continuum this event falls. I mere stated that the officers use of force was on that continuum. Simply being on the continuum of force however does not make an act non violent. My response was towards your assertion.

The point was that by either the legal or non-legal definition it was not violence. To be violent they would have to be breaking the law. And they were not.

 

[Darkforbid]

Unless shouting aggressively is the taught method to ensure compliance.

Yes, obviously! Especially if they won't shut up and start listening it's 'loudly while maintaining clarity

 

[Mock Turtle]

Yes, obviously! Especially if they won't shut up and start listening it's 'loudly while maintaining clarity

Swearing is part of the training? If one wants to escalate things - rather than doing one's job - then carry on. Having a gun pointed at one hardly helps either. Fortunately never experienced that, and here in the UK (and elsewhere) - mostly unnecessary.

 

[Darkforbid]

Swearing is part of the training? If one wants to escalate things - rather than doing one's job - then carry on. Having a gun pointed at one hardly helps either. Fortunately never experienced that, and here in the UK (and elsewhere) - mostly unnecessary.

They did their job. But I haven't any idea on the US's police conduct laws/rules

 

[Curious George]

The point was that by either the legal or non-legal definition it was not violence. To be violent they would have to be breaking the law. And they were not.

That is incorrect.

 

[Curious George]

There's no loss of control I can see. Just an attempt at distraction letting the officer move in closer. He messed the first grab up but considering what she was carrying, forgivable

Well if that was "in control" then they should not be officers. It was unreasonably excessive. I would expect cops to not have weapons drawn once it is clear the woman posed no harm. I would expect the commands to be calm and assertive. And i would expect no police officer to shout in the ear of a handcuffed individual who is cooperating.

 

[Curious George]

I think some people need to do a retraining course on how not to escalate confrontations. Unless shouting aggressively is the taught method to ensure compliance.

Raising voices and even yelling are sometimes necessary. One question is was the level here and the words chosen appropriate? I am not so much worried about the swearing. But death threats? There is a limit to what is acceptable.

 

[Darkforbid]

Well if that was "in control" then they should not be officers. It was unreasonably excessive. I would expect cops to not have weapons drawn once it is clear the woman posed no harm. I would expect the commands to be calm and assertive. And i would expect no police officer to shout in the ear of a handcuffed individual who is cooperating.

Cooperating she's still screaming at the end of your video