Deputy unloads entire "gun clip" on car.

[jsbhike]

In this day and age, calling the cops to your position is like calling for an artillery fire-mission ON your position. If you're calling the cops you'd better be calling them because you're being overrun, or you're calling for them to respond to somewhere besides where you are. If you didn't call the cops, DON'T answer your door!



That IS torture! Every one of those cops should be fired and prosecuted!

Their QI defense(no doubt coming and no doubt novel due to using stinging insects as torture) may fall on deaf ears because they did it in the same circuit as the 2 Houston cops who let the drunk driver go and then falsely arrested the Good Samaritan who played a role in stopping the drunk.

[glocktogo]

Their QI defense(no doubt coming and no doubt novel due to using stinging insects as torture) may fall on deaf ears because they did it in the same circuit as the 2 Houston cops who let the drunk driver go and then falsely arrested the Good Samaritan who played a role in stopping the drunk.

The video is damning in one very important way. Officer Excessive Force is intentionally lifting her right leg and both cuffed hands up, so as to maximize contact between her face and the ants. I don't care what Soccer Mom did to piss him off, at that point he's over the line.

[SteyrAUG]

Experts say gun alone doesn’t justify deadly force in fatal shooting of Florida airman

https://apnews.com/article/florida-d...6b255235f3ba70

Policing experts say Fortson simply holding a gun when he opened the door wasn’t enough justification to use deadly force, but investigators will also have to consider what information the deputy knew when he responded and whether Fortson showed any behavioral indication that he posed a threat. They also say the proliferation of legal and illegal firearms is forcing officers throughout the country to have to decide faster than ever what constitutes a deadly threat.

Supreme court already ruled on that one too. Simply being armed doesn't constitute justification for deadly force. This one is pretty bad.

[tn1911]

Supreme court already ruled on that one too. Simply being armed doesn't constitute justification for deadly force. This one is pretty bad.

When I was a patrol officer we encountered armed folks routinely. Traffic stops were the most common thing but from time to time we did answer burglary/prowler calls where we just assumed the homeowner who calls us was going to be armed for their protection.

And many were.

Our dispatch was great at keeping them on the line and telling them, ok the police are at you location. Stay inside and wait on them to come to you.

We never shot a homeowner in the many hundreds of those calls I answered. A lot of times once the property was cleared we would end up answering their questions about use of force in defense of property or life under current Georgia law.

They were grateful and so were we.

[SteyrAUG]

When I was a patrol officer we encountered armed folks routinely. Traffic stops were the most common thing but from time to time we did answer burglary/prowler calls where we just assumed the homeowner who calls us was going to be armed for their protection.

And many were.

Our dispatch was great at keeping them on the line and telling them, ok the police are at you location. Stay inside and wait on them to come to you.

We never shot a homeowner in the many hundreds of those calls I answered. A lot of times once the property was cleared we would end up answering their questions about use of force in defense of property or life under current Georgia law.

They were grateful and so were we.

As it should be. I've also seen the other side. I remember when a plain clothes officer responded to an "armed suspect" call, despite the badge on his belt and that he was wearing business attire (shirt and tie) he was shot killed by another uniformed officer simply because he was holding a gun.

Lots of people really have no business being LEOs.

[Averageman]

Lots of people really have no business being LEOs.

So how do we better weed them out before the dumbassery begins?
I've known some highly trained foul-up's.

[jsbhike]

So how do we better weed them out before the dumbassery begins?
I've known some highly trained foul-up's.

Considering this is the locale of the acorn mag dump, it seems this type of thing is at least condoned if not encouraged.

Vigorous enforcement of these 2 would greatly reduce the frequency of rights violations.

18 U.S. Code § 241 - Conspiracy against rights | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241

18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/242

[Averageman]

Considering this is the locale of the acorn mag dump, it seems this type of thing is at least condoned if not encouraged.

Vigorous enforcement of these 2 would greatly reduce the frequency of rights violations.

18 U.S. Code § 241 - Conspiracy against rights | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241

18 U.S. Code § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/242

Well that's all good and well and I understand and agree with it, but unfortunatly, it's not one Cop, or even one Department.
I would say we're not doing due dilligence in choosing these guys when it's more than one Cop getting in on the fun as per the Fire Ant example. I've had to Med-evac a guy that decided to sleep on the ground in Texas, I can't imagine holding someone on a Fire Ant mound, let alone 3 or 4 guys watching without a complaint.
Where is the Sgt Elias in this group, because at that point it's not about Law, it's about human F'ing decency.
I don't Hate Cops, but I avoid them at every turn and this is exactly why.

[jsbhike]

Well that's all good and well and I understand and agree with it, but unfortunatly, it's not one Cop, or even one Department.
I would say we're not doing due dilligence in choosing these guys when it's more than one Cop getting in on the fun as per the Fire Ant example. I've had to Med-evac a guy that decided to sleep on the ground in Texas, I can't imagine holding someone on a Fire Ant mound, let alone 3 or 4 guys watching without a complaint.
Where is the Sgt Elias in this group, because at that point it's not about Law, it's about human F'ing decency.
I don't Hate Cops, but I avoid them at every turn and this is exactly why.

That would be where the conspiracy kicks in. Deprivation of rights that results in death or includes kidnapping(which is really what an unlawful arrest is) is supposed to have some very stiff penalties for all parties involved.

And neither of those are limited to just cops.

[Averageman]

That would be where the conspiracy kicks in.

And perhaps at the very root of..

"Deprivation of rights that results in death or includes kidnapping(which is really what an unlawful arrest is) is supposed to have some very stiff penalties for all parties involved. And neither of those are limited to just cops."

They just don't understand that they will be held liable for their actions?
Because I think they're confused to the point of QI. You should be more responcable for your actions and if your behavior can't be put in check, you're fired, and if you really screw the pooch, you're going to prison.
Because a lot of these guys think and badge makes them immune from being held to a professional standard.
Perhaps we need some sort "Scared Straight" program for Cops where they go into prison and talk to some former Law Enforcement about how they got there by abusing peoples rights and/or being a crooked Cop?