Female rider wants apology after trooper mistakenly arrests her

[csmith12]

Originally Posted by ninjamunky85

Stupid logic... It's not the law abiding citizens carrying guns that they need to worry about, it's the criminals. Guess what? Criminals will always have guns whether they're allowed to or not. That's why they're criminals.

Legal ownership need not apply in this case. Legal != trained to handle safely. Case in point, KY cop is both legal AND trained and still sh*t happens. And guess who is being sued here? Yea.....

Link to original page on YouTube.

Always treat a gun as if it were loaded. When in doubt, check. If you don't know how to check, don't pick it up in the first place. Pretty simple....

[ninjamunky85]

Originally Posted by csmith12

Legal ownership need not apply in this case. Legal != trained to handle safely. Case in point, KY cop is both legal AND trained and still sh*t happens. And guess who is being sued here? Yea.....

I agree completely. I was just talking to my cousin about this a few weeks ago. He was an Army ranger and a sniper. Someone who used a weapon every day because his life depended on it.

He has a cc license and was telling me that a hostage situation with innocent bystanders in the area would be his worst nightmare. In his opinion he wouldn't trust the average citizen, or even the average police officer who might have to pass a weapons test once a year, at all in that kind of situation.

That being said it doesn't mean that cops should treat everyone they encounter as serious threat just because they might be carrying a weapon.

[ally99]

Originally Posted by ninjamunky85

Stupid logic... It's not the law abiding citizens carrying guns that they need to worry about, it's the criminals. Guess what? Criminals will always have guns whether they're allowed to or not. That's why they're criminals.

[alex.s]

Originally Posted by csmith12

Always treat a gun as if it were loaded. When in doubt, check. If you don't know how to check, don't pick it up in the first place. Pretty simple....

this is absolutely true but what kind of asshole keeps a new gun loaded in a display case. in my opinion the seller as well as the buyer made major mistakes of not checking the magazine before handing it off / using it. kinda odd the cop didn't see the round go into the chamber when he cocked the slide...

[alex.s]

Originally Posted by ally99

Mondays
Power trippin' cops (or any power abuser...I just have to deal with cops more than others)
Coconuts

lol. sounds like somebody's been eating lasagne.

[csmith12]

Originally Posted by alex.s

this is absolutely true but what kind of asshole keeps a new gun loaded in a display case. in my opinion the seller as well as the buyer made major mistakes of not checking the magazine before handing it off / using it. kinda odd the cop didn't see the round go into the chamber when he cocked the slide...

2 guys, 19 fingers, 0 brains.

[tfkrocks]

Originally Posted by ally99

There are very few things in this world I hate. On the short list is:

Mondays
Power trippin' cops (or any power abuser...I just have to deal with cops more than others)
Coconuts


In that order.

You don't like coconuts?! How dare you!

[ally99]

Originally Posted by alex.s

lol. sounds like somebody's been eating lasagne.

wut?

Originally Posted by tfkrocks

You don't like coconuts?! How dare you!

Pineapple was on the list until I fell in love with it as an adult in Hawaii. Now I LOVE pineapple!

[cadd]

Originally Posted by csmith12

Legal ownership need not apply in this case. Legal != trained to handle safely. Case in point, KY cop is both legal AND trained and still sh*t happens. And guess who is being sued here? Yea.....

Link to original page on YouTube.

Always treat a gun as if it were loaded. When in doubt, check. If you don't know how to check, don't pick it up in the first place. Pretty simple....

Holy crap!!!!!

Loaded on display case?!
Cop doesn't check chamber?!
Cop doesn't ask permission before dry firing?

I would not dare dry fire any firearm (especially rim fire) without asking permission to feel the trigger pull.

And cop was sweeping everyone with the muzzle.

Just so much fail!

I don't remember all the rules, but:
Treat all firearms as if there's a round in the chamber
Don't point at what you don't intend to kill
Know your target and beyond it
Keep that finger off the trigger unless you have acquired your target and have a good sight picture and sight alignment.

[Worldtraveller]

Originally Posted by ninjamunky85

Stupid logic... It's not the law abiding citizens carrying guns that they need to worry about, it's the criminals. Guess what? Criminals will always have guns whether they're allowed to or not. That's why they're criminals.

Yeah. In the last 5 years more citizens (and many of them not criminals) have been killed by cops, than cops have been killed in the line of duty. And, most cops killed in the line of duty are due to traffic accidents.

So if the cops are afraid, it's mostly because they've bought into their own hype about how dangerous their jobs are.

Also, when a white guy sets a trap for officers, and opens fire when they show up, but the cops still manage to bring him in without killing him, but a black guy is choked out for selling a cigarette, and the cops stand around laughing, it's symptomatic of a larger problem.

[choneofakind]

Are those numbers fair to be compared? For instance, there's about 316,100,000 people in the USA. We'll call it 316,000,000 to account for off duty officers. However, there are about 765,000 sworn personnel (the ones who can make arrests) in law enforcement. (both those numbers are from a quick google search) So that's not really an apples to apples comparison because there are roughly 413x more 'regular' citizens than officers.

Are there 413x more people killed by officer shootings than there are officer deaths on the job? I'm also not sure how traffic accidents are any less dangerous than shootings if traffic deaths still kill on the job. Driving is one of the most dangerous things any American will do in their lifetime.

[cadd]

The ONLY thing I found impressive with that video is that the officer did not drop that gun!!! Extremely impressive!

[Worldtraveller]

Originally Posted by choneofakind

Are those numbers fair to be compared? For instance, there's about 316,100,000 people in the USA. We'll call it 316,000,000 to account for off duty officers. However, there are about 765,000 sworn personnel (the ones who can make arrests) in law enforcement. (both those numbers are from a quick google search) So that's not really an apples to apples comparison because there are roughly 413x more 'regular' citizens than officers.

Are there 413x more people killed by officer shootings than there are officer deaths on the job? I'm also not sure how traffic accidents are any less dangerous than shootings if traffic deaths still kill on the job. Driving is one of the most dangerous things any American will do in their lifetime.

What you're doing is apples to banana trees. The fact is citizens are killed by officers (you know, the ones who are supposed to serve and protect?) at a far, far higher rate than officers are killed by citizens.

AND 1) They signed up for the job, if they think it's too dangerous, find another line of work. NYPD was kind enough to demonstrate that we don't really need that many officers anyway; 2) Their job isn't even that dangerous compared to many others, but we wouldn't give those others some special rights to be complete assholes and kill other people just because their job is dangerous.

I'm not anti-cop (although in general, I'm anti-authoritarian), but they should be held to a higher standard in these kinds of cases. Hell, I'd be happy if they were held to the same standard as your average ditch digger in terms of job competence.

The 27 felonious deaths occurred in 16 states. The number of officers killed as a result of criminal acts in 2013 decreased by 22 when compared with the 49 officers who were feloniously killed in 2012. The five- and 10-year comparisons show a decrease of 21 felonious deaths compared with the 2009 figure (48 officers) and a decrease of 30 deaths compared with 2004 data (57 officers).

Officer Profiles: The average age of the officers who were feloniously killed was 39 years. The victim officers had served in law enforcement for an average of 13 years at the time of the fatal incidents. Twenty-five of the officers were male, and two were female. Twenty-five of the officers were white, and two were black.

Circumstances: Of the 27 officers feloniously killed, six were killed in arrest situations, five were investigating suspicious persons or circumstances, five were ambushed, four were involved in tactical situations, four were answering disturbance calls, and two were conducting traffic pursuits/stops. One was conducting an investigative activity, such as surveillance, a search, or an interview.

Weapons: Offenders used firearms to kill 26 of the 27 victim officers. Of these 26 officers, 18 were slain with handguns, five with rifles, and three with shotguns. One officer was killed with a vehicle used as a weapon.

Regions: Fifteen of the felonious deaths occurred in the South, six in the West, four in the Midwest, and two in the Northeast.

Suspects: Law enforcement agencies identified 28 alleged assailants in connection with the felonious line-of-duty deaths. Twenty of the assailants had prior criminal arrests, and six of the offenders were under judicial supervision at the time of the felonious incidents.

Accidental Deaths

Forty-nine law enforcement officers were killed accidentally while performing their duties in 2013. The majority (23 officers) were killed in automobile accidents. The number of accidental line-of-duty deaths increased by one from the 2012 total (48 officers).

Officer Profiles: The average age of the officers who were accidentally killed was 41 years; the average number of years the victim officers had served in law enforcement was 13. All 49 of the officers were male. Forty-one of the officers were white, six were black, and race was not reported for two officers.

Circumstances: Of the 49 officers accidentally killed, 23 died as a result of automobile accidents, nine were struck by vehicles, four officers died in motorcycle accidents, four officers were killed in falls, two were accidentally shot, two drowned, one died in an aircraft accident, and four officers died in other types of duty-related accidents. Seatbelt usage was reported for 22 of the 23 officers killed in automobile accidents. Of these, 14 officers were not wearing seatbelts, three of whom were seated in parked patrol vehicles. Eight officers were wearing their seatbelts at the times of the accidents.

Regions: Thirty-one of the accidental deaths occurred in the South, nine in the West, five in the Northeast, and 4 in the Midwest.

[algs26]

[QUOTE=ally99;971431]wut?



Did I guess right? Waddya win?

[Daks]

Another reason why I ride with a camera. They can't magically make the hard drive fail on two rolling cameras. Once I get another I want to put it on the bike so they can't see it immediately.

Funny how they fail at such opportune times, eh?

[CZroe]

Originally Posted by Daks

Another reason why I ride with a camera. They can't magically make the hard drive fail on two rolling cameras. Once I get another I want to put it on the bike so they can't see it immediately.

Funny how they fail at such opportune times, eh?

Actually, if they are subject to the same shock and the shock is enough to trigger one failure it will probably trigger the other. That's why you don't want an HDD.

That's why we use flash memory these days.

[Road Dawg1]

Originally Posted by choneofakind

Man, police stations really should work on getting more reliable computers. Seems like they keep losing videos and are unable to show them when they would be really helpful! All this money on cameras and they're unable to be useful for anything because of computer problems.

I'd say that computer and all the other equipment involved should be impounded as soon as they couldn't get the video.

Cops can make mistakes, but "tampering with the evidence?" Not so much.

[GearMonkey]

1. Of course more citizens are killed by officers than vice versa. That's like saying more terrorists are killed by professional soldiers. One group is trained, armed, and armored. The other untrained, antagonistic, with nothing to lose and usually outnumbered. Yet still, the ratio is estimated at 4:1. (Stats estimated and skewed because not all agencies report)

2. Most line of duty deaths are caused by GUNFIRE. Roughly twice as many as deaths caused by vehicle accidents (number 2 cause).

3. She couldn't stop the bike without a jerking movement? I don't understand this. How? Stop the bike, put in neutral or hold the clutch and kill the engine with the kill switch, kickstand switch, or key.

4. I've seen enough @$$hole riders throughout the states to know we are our own worst enemies. From riders doing no less than 95+ On I-95, to the clowns speeding and swerving through traffic on Atlanta's interstates while stunting. It's no wonder we may be viewed with suspicion by law enforcement.

Just as not all sportbike riders are reckless assholes, not all police officers are trigger happy thugs hiding behind a badge. Hard to make any judgement without hearing both sides of a story and viewing all the evidence.

I think I'll follow Chris Rock's advice on how to avoid getting my ass kicked by the cops... Obey the law and don't do dumb ****.

Thank you to all public servants on here for keeping us safe.

(These stats are easily found on the interwebs)

[FreelancerMG]

The initial news story feels very incomplete and missing a lot of background info. The original guy they were chasing was probably doing a lot more than just speeding and evading. Usually when the suspect evades and runs, the posture the officers take goes to the next level. If you try to evade cops, when they catch you you're getting a gun drawn on you and physically manipulated along with some tazing if you prove to be combative. You have to see it from the perspective of the officers. You find a suspect matching the description given and immediately go to prevent the suspect from getting away again. That's going to involve physically removing the rider off their bike so they don't try to evade again. The firearm is out now because the suspect has been evading and may be more prone to use a weapon if given the chance. It sounds like she was apprehended, but the other officer came in time to stop any form of arrest happening. While it's obviously a scary and crappy thing to have happen to you, I do understand the cop's side as well.

As said before, this isn't a cut and dry incident and usually these kind of events never are. This was a series of bad choices that caused this escalation. It started with the initial pursuing officer giving a very generalized and curt description of the suspect. This could have also been a ball dropped by the dispatcher who may have dropped a lot of the description or given a very basic one of just the vehicle and very general rider characteristics. The responding officer later on is then at fault a bit when he doesn't ask for clarification or a more detailed description. Obviously there was one about since the next officer to come up immediately knew that she was not the suspect. She also made the mistake of not complying fast enough. That little red button on the bike will shut the bike off and you wont have it surging on you to do it either.

So when I look at it standing back a bit, it could potentially be a series of small bad decisions that are all linked and snowballed into this. It's a lot of "what ifs" that could easily have gone on that this article doesn't even give the slightest hint of. It's purely based to boot the police force in the balls and carries that objective to play to the people's distrust of the police to further ratings and profit. Objective reporting doesn't really exist these days so whenever I read any news headline I try to always analyze everything from both sides to the best of my ability to build a perspective for inference.

Critical thinking is an important skill that I don't think is used enough. We need to try and keep emotions in check and go through the steps of critical thinking to arrive at a logical conclusion based on evidence and research. You can't truly say the officer in the initial story is a power hungry, authority abusing pig without researching and knowing what his perspective may have been.

Just like the second video, the officer in the gun store didn't safe and clear the weapon when handed the weapon and the store clerk before handing the weapon over never safe and cleared the weapon either. This is what happens when you become complacent and ignore the basics and fundamentals. It'll come back to bite you in the as...err.. finger.

In the end we come away with the fact that cops are people too and make mistakes just like any of us.

[|eric|]

Take this into account : she is asking for a public apology probably because the officer was still an ass-hole after the fact / being rude .

now its evident that this police officer was going after the wrong person so before i stop somone i would think that the an officer would ask confirmation on who he is persuing . specially if she stopped without "issues"

i would certainly not go out there gun's blasing etc.. its apparent to me that most of society has compleatly lost the meaning of respect and or politeness.
the feeling of empowerment of officers, that the general society distrust police and the "no-blame" attitude of police departments only aggravates situations like this. did somone get shot ? did somone get hurt by the other motorcyclist ? NO so there is clearly an abuse of force here. yes people where "endangered" that i agree even tho its a load of crap , cars are way more dangerous then bikes ! but that does not authorise the use of threat to life with a gun. not only an internal investigation should have been lauched but the drawing of the weapon should be justified/explained in the report of the officer. and yes the officer should publicly apologise to the woman personally .. and maybe a gift of some kind for the inconvinience ... ( i would expect no less for a situation like this)

[KROMATRON]

hitting the wallet always gets your attention and i have seen it shape some people up quickly. Hopefully they do something to make him understand he has great responsibility with that power.

[FreelancerMG]

Originally Posted by |eric|

Take this into account : she is asking for a public apology probably because the officer was still an ass-hole after the fact / being rude .

now its evident that this police officer was going after the wrong person so before i stop somone i would think that the an officer would ask confirmation on who he is persuing . specially if she stopped without "issues"

i would certainly not go out there gun's blasing etc.. its apparent to me that most of society has compleatly lost the meaning of respect and or politeness.
the feeling of empowerment of officers, that the general society distrust police and the "no-blame" attitude of police departments only aggravates situations like this. did somone get shot ? did somone get hurt by the other motorcyclist ? NO so there is clearly an abuse of force here. yes people where "endangered" that i agree even tho its a load of crap , cars are way more dangerous then bikes ! but that does not authorise the use of threat to life with a gun. not only an internal investigation should have been lauched but the drawing of the weapon should be justified/explained in the report of the officer. and yes the officer should publicly apologise to the woman personally .. and maybe a gift of some kind for the inconvinience ... ( i would expect no less for a situation like this)

It wasn't obvious at first that it was the wrong person for the officer otherwise he wouldn't have wasted time with her to begin with. Also, he isn't going to just sit in his cruiser to run her info when the person they are chasing had just ran from a bunch of cops. You also don't know if the stopping and pulling over is them giving up or just trying to screw with the officer. One of the oldest tricks in the book is to stop like you're giving up then gun it when the officer gets out of their car and starts heading over to you. This forces officers to immediately engage with the suspect to ensure they don't go mobile again. They do it with a drawn gun because of fight and flight responses. Usually when a suspect has lost the ability to flee after fleeing, they go right into fighting. This is usually when most officers are injured and killed so an officer has to immediately control the suspect and win the fight before it ever starts. This is going to mean ripping the suspect out/off of their vehicle and getting control over them asap. The gun is out to prevent the suspect from wanting to employ their own weapon and if they did, then the officer is already ready.

While the circumstances sucked for her, I still don't believe the officer in question did anything wrong or not by the book for the circumstances involved. Saying that though, I do believe there should be an apology for the inconvenience and emotional trauma. Also a small sum of money paid for any damaged equipment and clothing. This really didn't have the makings of some psychopathic despot drunk on power.

[Bill N]

There are good cops and bad cops. But they all have guns. The ones you have to fear are those that will accept zero risk for themselves and not measure the magnitude of the threat. (Cop shoots kid with toy gun etc.)
Have you ever had a cop put a gun on you?
I did as a teenager and I'll never forget it. Late at night I closed up the pizza shop and took the purse home with me just as my boss desired and that I had done for a year or so. The place had been recently broken into so it was being watched. Arriving at home a cop that followed me jumped out of his car with gun in hand and pointed at me yelling for me to hit the ground. What a freaking idiot!
I complied and wasn't shot. But the feeling of hate I have for him has not diminished. Having a gun pointed at your head by an over emotional cop is traumatic.
I'm a cop supporter but I think then and now some are too hyper and not fit for a job that requires threat assessment, judgement, awareness, and some acceptance of risk before pointing a gun at a suspect. Bill

[|eric|]

in my opinion the reaction was a bit too much dispite him having ran and honestly why didn't he confirm the profile on the radio ? and confirm that way that it was the suspect ... remember he had lost eye contact! ( he didnt know who he was stopping that was self evident!) there is about 1 car per person in america thats 300 million cars! same with motorcycle just a smaller proportion : choices are limited so it would be easy to mistake somone if your only basis is the motorcycle! and it would be VERY DUMB .

i dont think the trigger happy police enforcement these days is justified . now here what IS disturbing is not the trigger happy part its the part where this woman didn't even get an apology !! what poor standards police must have wen people assault you *(yes this was an ASSAULT whether it was justified or NOT ) then figure its a mistake and dont even offer an appology! .