Is this how you treat a member of the armed forces during a routine traffic stop?

[Sharkbiscuit]

You are way off base here. I know all the keyboard legends here would know exactly what do while having conflicting orders screamed at them under gunpoint and pepper sprayed but it is a little different in real life. Civilians have to act completely perfect while zero standards for LE, sounds like freedom to me.

?????

The cop is: DONE. Correct? So there was pretty clearly a standard here.
Civilians don't have to act perfect. The Karen in Ohio with the cell phone wasn't perfect.
You'll notice I said pepper spray was too much as well, yes? But failure to comply is generally not helpful.

 

[john4surf]

KKK billboards were posted on farm property facing I-95 South and, I-95 North visible to I-95 travelers as they entered Fayetteville, NC city limits in the late 1960s and early 1970s. At one time, members (black and white) of the 82d Airborne Division were getting ready to visit the farms and ’deal with’ the billboards. Fortunately, strong leadership on Fort Bragg (adjacent to Fayetteville) prevailed. Billboards... free speech or ?

 

[hammies]

Those cops were way out of line. I'm sure they wouldn't have been such dicks had the guy been white. The guy has a legit beef.

I saw an interview with a black cop once and he said they usually can't tell the race of the person they're pulling over.

 

[kidfury]

Free speech on private property

 

[hal9000]

This is absolutely true and how cops think



Ask anyone who has grown up or lived somewhere that's not a "privileged" suburb how often they get pulled over for made up bullshit regardless of race. Step out of your bubble and you may end up learning quite a lot

ps- unless someone is wearing a type of hairstyle that only certain hair types can pull off even a cop can't tell race through tinted windows

ask all your black friends how many times they‘ve been pulled over for a DWB.

 

[hal9000]

The guy wasn't getting the fook out of the car as peacefully and cooperatively as possible; my point fits in this case even if the motivation wasn't being a tough guy.

There are two simple choices.

1. Do what you're told by the cops (and your teachers and firefighters and military personnel while trespassing on base at Mayport to hide behind the jetty for groomed peaks).

2. Do not complain.

das ist gut, ya?

 

[sussle]

You are way off base here. I know all the keyboard legends here would know exactly what do while having conflicting orders screamed at them under gunpoint and pepper sprayed but it is a little different in real life. Civilians have to act completely perfect while zero standards for LE, sounds like freedom to me.

This and that:

 

[ElOgro]

This and that:

That’s all well and good but decidedly not applicable to this case. A Lt. in the US Army has way more training than than the cop clowns he encountered.

 

[Autoprax]

The race hysteria is fucking up everyone's neuroception.

I knew this would happen.

Darn it!

 

[GDaddy]

- cant' see who is driving when the windows are tinted. Stand 20ft behind your SUV and try to say otherwise. I mean, without deliberately lying about it - which is exactly what some of you are doing.

- He led them for a mile without stopping. That automatically raises the suspicion - based on experience with most of the other drivers who do the same - that the driver has something to hide.

- He refused to exit or comply with the lawful commands. Continuously.

- The cops deescalated a couple times, first by putting their weapons down and then later when they went to trying to use their hands to using the pepper spray. What they didn't do was change their minds about removing him from the car in order to see what (they thought) he was trying to hide.

- the driver controlled every single point of the encounter, up to and including getting sprayed. He could have quit and complied any time he wanted to.

- the driver had no right to refuse to comply or to resist. Had he gone with it instead of fighting it they almost certainly would have let him go with a comment about the hanging obstruction that they noticed when they approached. No way would he have even gotten cited for that except if he made them work for it.

 

[mundus]

- cant' see who is driving when the windows are tinted. Stand 20ft behind your SUV and try to say otherwise. I mean, without deliberately lying about it - which is exactly what some of you are doing.

- He led them for a mile without stopping. That automatically raises the suspicion - based on experience with most of the other drivers who do the same - that the driver has something to hide.

- He refused to exit or comply with the lawful commands. Continuously.

- The cops deescalated a couple times, first by putting their weapons down and then later when they went to trying to use their hands to using the pepper spray. What they didn't do was change their minds about removing him from the car in order to see what (they thought) he was trying to hide.

- the driver controlled every single point of the encounter, up to and including getting sprayed. He could have quit and complied any time he wanted to.

- the driver had no right to refuse to comply or to resist. Had he gone with it instead of fighting it the

All based on the cops stupidity, he had a tag. Are you not supposed to drive to a safe well lit area to pull over? The guy had his flashers on and going less than 20 mph, not trying to escape. I can count on you to defend the indefensible, and then wonder why people hate cops. How about them threatening to invent charges after they established he had committed no crime?

 

[afoaf]

- cant' see who is driving when the windows are tinted. Stand 20ft behind your SUV and try to say otherwise. I mean, without deliberately lying about it - which is exactly what some of you are doing.

- He led them for a mile without stopping. That automatically raises the suspicion - based on experience with most of the other drivers who do the same - that the driver has something to hide.

- He refused to exit or comply with the lawful commands. Continuously.

- The cops deescalated a couple times, first by putting their weapons down and then later when they went to trying to use their hands to using the pepper spray. What they didn't do was change their minds about removing him from the car in order to see what (they thought) he was trying to hide.

- the driver controlled every single point of the encounter, up to and including getting sprayed. He could have quit and complied any time he wanted to.

- the driver had no right to refuse to comply or to resist. Had he gone with it instead of fighting it they almost certainly would have let him go with a comment about the hanging obstruction that they noticed when they approached. No way would he have even gotten cited for that except if he made them work for it.

when being pulled over I always get off the road and, if dark, to a well-lit area

I put my hazards on, turning them off to signal the lane changes as I proceed off the thoroughfare

there's no way to verbally tell a officer what you are trying to do and I am often afraid that it will
be perceived as a stall tactic and create a negative outcome

I refuse to stop alongside the fkn road....

 

[crustBrother]

Are you not supposed to drive to a safe well lit area to pull over?

No. When they hit you with the lights they want you to immediately get on the breaks, signal, and pull over. You have the right to proceed to a well lit area, but if your goal is to minimize friction with the police, just pull over when they hit you with the lights. If they want you to go elsewhere, they will get on the bullhorn and tell you once you're stopped.

 

[GDaddy]

Had he *only* proceeded to the well lit location that would have been the end of it. But he didn't. He escalated from there by refusing to exit, which resistance he had no right to commit.

IRL they let him off after all that anyway, in part and as they explained because he is a service member. Without writing him up for the resistance. That's how you can tell they would have let him off with the warning over the hanging chad.

As for the tags, it's common for cops to make stops for tags that are obscured by tint or otherwise. He didn't do anything wrong with the way he mounted it (unless the tint was too dark, which is a thing in some locales). Those don't tend to result in citations, but by the same token they're still legitimate stops. Not being able to see the tag isn't the same thing as ignoring it. Although some of the liars are trying to say otherwise.

 

[plasticbertrand]

Had he *only* proceeded to the well lit location that would have been the end of it. But he didn't. He escalated from there by refusing to exit, which resistance he had no right to commit.

IRL they let him off without writing him up for the resistance. In hindsight that was a mistake on their part. They should have booked him for the resistance, called his command and towed his vehicle.

So pointing guns and screeching was justified, it was the driver who "escalated" because he asked wtf is going on?

Thank you for consistently demonstrating what's wrong with cop thinking. Holy fück.

 

[mundus]

Had he *only* proceeded to the well lit location that would have been the end of it. But he didn't. He escalated from there by refusing to exit, which resistance he had no right to commit.

IRL they let him off after all that anyway, in part and as they explained because he is a service member. Without writing him up for the resistance. That's how you can tell they would have let him off with the warning over the hanging chad.

As for the tags, it's common for cops to make stops for tags that are obscured by tint or otherwise. He didn't do anything wrong with the way he mounted it (unless the tint was too dark, which is a thing in some locales). Those don't tend to result in citations, but by the same token they're still legitimate stops. Not being able to see the tag isn't the same thing as ignoring it. Although some of the liars are trying to say otherwise.

Let him go? He committed no crime! Those officers should be charged with something. Keep defending the indefensible.

 

[Ifallalot]

Let him go? He committed no crime! Those officers should be charged with something. Keep defending the indefensible.

Did he have a warrant or is that just a rumor?

 

[mundus]

Did he have a warrant or is that just a rumor?

That was the kid killed in Minn. If the Lt reached for his seatbelt and was shot dead Gdaddy and ilk would be here defending it "Only Police lives Matter!!!!".

 

[GDaddy]

Factually untrue.

The LT wasn't guilty of what they originally stopped him for (no tags) but even when they're operating off a mistake for the stop he still had no right to not comply with their commands to exit the vehicle. And they had every reason to make those demands under those circumstances because *normally* what happens when someone strings them along like that without stopping is they're riding dirty in some way and/or looking for a good place to bail and run. Stolen cars being just one example of that. Probably most foot pursuits are the result of the driver first looking for a better spot to bail and run.

Now you can say that the laws requiring that compliance are unjust and have a disparate impact on minorities because they are afraid of the po-lice but that doesn't change anything about what those laws do allow. Now whatever it is the cop (apparently a latino) got fired for may have been a violation of dept. policy, but there's no observable violation of the law going on.

This whole fallacy that people have the right to resist a lawful command is what led to this driver deciding to resist.

 

[mundus]

Factually untrue.

The LT wasn't guilty of what they originally stopped him for (no tags) but even when they're operating off a mistake he still had no right to not comply with their commands to exit the vehicle. And they had every reason to make those demands under those circumstances because *normally* what happens when someone strings them along like that without stopping is they're riding dirty in some way and/or looking for a good place to bail and run. Stolen cars being just one example of that.

Now you can say that the laws requiring that compliance are unjust but that doesn't change anything about what those cops are and aren't allowed to do. Now whatever it is the cop (apparently a latino) got fired for may have been a violation of dept. policy, but there's no observable violation of the law going on.

He did not comply with 2 people screaming conflicting orders, the cops were completely in the wrong. How about if they realized they made a mistake send him on his way with an apology. No scumbag cop is more dangerous when proven wrong, it hurts their fragile egos and then they have to make the person pay. The only color that matters when it comes to cops is blue.