Use of Force 101 - Page 4

OmniscientX · 01-13-2011, 16:42

Good stuff TBO.

***TBO*** · 01-24-2011, 22:19

BTT for latest

michpatriot · 01-27-2011, 22:12

First off ,I do not work in law inforcement...That being said I feel this type of information should be taught in public/private schools maybe starting at the junior high level. All individuals that are subject to the laws of the land need to understand the concequences of their actions beforehand..you would think that to a certain extent this would be learned in the home, but sadly as we can all see it doesn't always happen this way..Too many generations with entitlement syndrome and no spankings,entertained by hollywoods brightest dolts is starting to show America.

***Newcop761*** · 01-27-2011, 22:38

use2b6L32 · 02-20-2011, 21:34

This should be a sticky.

ICARRY2 · 02-20-2011, 21:57

Quote:

Judge Davies ruled in his sentencing memorandum5 that, of the total fifty-plus baton strikes, only about the last six (or so) inflicted by Officer Powell were unreasonable, and therefore excessive. The judge further ruled that Rodney King’s head injuries, facial fractures, as well as his fibula (leg) fracture were all part of a reasonable use of force. It only became unreasonable when Officer Powell failed to stop striking him toward the very end of the tape, when it was judged that King had stopped resisting.

So the judge ruled that 6 baton strikes were unreasonable out of fifty-plus baton strikes and he sentenced them to prison. So much for not being a Monday morning quarterback.

Those officers should have never been fired, prosecuted or much less sent to prison.

***TBO*** · 02-24-2011, 03:57

View the video link below of a Police Shooting:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7At5...eature=related

After viewing this what does it look like? Grounds for shooting, no grounds for shooting, undetermined? This is what is often presented in a News article on TV, paper, or Online.

For more information there is a second video link below of the same incident from the 2nd squad on the scene. This would the the squad/officer to the right of the first video. What, if anything, does this information add/change. Does video really "show it all". Did video 1 show it all. These are things that need to be contemplated upon each and every "breaking" event.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPEiR...eature=related

4949shooter · 02-24-2011, 04:33

Those are great videos. They truly illustrate that events don't always appear as they seem to someone looking in from the outside.

This is why we must piece the puzzle together from the video, the officers' reports, and the evidence at the scene to determine what really transpired.

***TBO*** · 05-21-2011, 23:32

txleapd · 05-22-2011, 07:03

This thread should really be a sticky....

CJStudent · 05-22-2011, 09:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by txleapd

This thread should really be a sticky....

Agreed!

use2b6L32 · 05-26-2011, 16:56

BTT for stickyness.

ateamer · 05-26-2011, 20:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by ICARRY2

So the judge ruled that 6 baton strikes were unreasonable out of fifty-plus baton strikes and he sentenced them to prison. So much for not being a Monday morning quarterback.

Those officers should have never been fired, prosecuted or much less sent to prison.

And the judge was also a no-balls POS for not having the spine to move the trial to a venue where a fair jury could be gotten, one that wasn't terrified of what was going to happen if they acquitted. And he also could have thrown out that "dual sovereignty" BS out the window.

Straight Pipe · 05-27-2011, 18:42

1950 - tell, make.

1960 - tell, tell again, make.

1970 - ask, tell, make.

1980 - ask, tell, tell again, make.

1990 - ask, ask again, tell, tell again, make.

2000 - ask, ask again, ask again, tell, tell again, ask once more, make.

2010 - ask, ask again, tell, ask again, tell again (in a firm but non-disrespectfull voice), ask one more time, tell them this time you mean it, beg, make (if you're not already dead).

***Rabbi*** · 05-27-2011, 18:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Pipe

1950 - tell, make.

1960 - tell, tell again, make.

1970 - ask, tell, make.

1980 - ask, tell, tell again, make.

1990 - ask, ask again, tell, tell again, make.

2000 - ask, ask again, ask again, tell, tell again, ask once more, make.

2010 - ask, ask again, tell, ask again, tell again (in a firm but non-disrespectfull voice), ask one more time, tell them this time you mean it, beg, make (if you're not already dead).

I like that....sad, but true.

lawman800 · 05-27-2011, 19:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Pipe

1950 - tell, make.

1960 - tell, tell again, make.

1970 - ask, tell, make.

1980 - ask, tell, tell again, make.

1990 - ask, ask again, tell, tell again, make.

2000 - ask, ask again, ask again, tell, tell again, ask once more, make.

2010 - ask, ask again, tell, ask again, tell again (in a firm but non-disrespectfull voice), ask one more time, tell them this time you mean it, beg, make (if you're not already dead). Get disciplined or fired for doing your job because someone thought you were being a nag for asking too many times when they didn't want to do it in the first place.

Corrected it for you.

**RussP** · 05-27-2011, 21:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by txleapd

This thread should really be a sticky....

Done, thanks to Mrs. VR!

***Dragoon44*** · 05-27-2011, 22:05

We had a much shorter use of force process.

Tell

call and ambulance to transport for treatment or transport to jail whichever was required.

ICARRY2 · 05-28-2011, 02:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by ICARRY2

So the judge ruled that 6 baton strikes were unreasonable out of fifty-plus baton strikes and he sentenced them to prison. So much for not being a Monday morning quarterback.

Those officers should have never been fired, prosecuted or much less sent to prison.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ateamer

And the judge was also a no-balls POS for not having the spine to move the trial to a venue where a fair jury could be gotten, one that wasn't terrified of what was going to happen if they acquitted. And he also could have thrown out that "dual sovereignty" BS out the window.

What is dual sovereignty? Never heard of it before.

lawman800 · 05-28-2011, 11:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by ICARRY2

What is dual sovereignty? Never heard of it before.

It's a way for the government to get two bites at the apple, so to speak. Double jeopardy prevents you from being tried for the same crime twice by the same government entity, such as a state or federal court. If you got acquitted or case dismissed once jeopardy has attached, you are good to go and cannot be guilty of that crime in that jurisdiction's court of law.

This is also part of public policy for the government to bring all charges forward at the same time because they can't come back and keep charging you for different things out of the same action.

However, as the state and the Feds both may have jurisdiction over something, then you have two sovereign entities with separate courts and both can try you for the same thing and not violate double jeopardy.

Case in point, Rodney King. The state has jurisdiction over the state crimes against the officers, which then acquitted them. The Feds have jurisdiction over the civil rights part, which convicted them, even of it was out of the same transactional occurrence. No double jeopardy occurred even though the officers were tried twice for the same action.

DaBigBR · 05-28-2011, 12:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by ICARRY2

What is dual sovereignty? Never heard of it before.

lawman covered it, but here's more info:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separat...ate_sovereigns

Also called the separate sovereigns doctrine.

coyote_bait · 06-01-2011, 08:04

Not all of us civilians are completely ignorant of reasonable use of force. My first exposure to it was Rodney King, and the first thing that came to mind was, "I guess that dude should have done what he was told." I started talking to friends that were cops at the time and they began to educate me a bit on some of the use of force tactics and rules. (I have a MUCH greater understanding now as I have several friends and family members in law enforcement, and we "war game" regularly). Then the riots came, I could see fire from my house, (I lived in Long Beach at the time) NOT a real good thing to see. I was disgusted with the second trial, first, for the fact that it was filed, (this was when I learned that there is a "work around" for double jeopardy). Second, that the officers were found guilty. This was SO obviously done to prevent another riot. Later, when the O.J thing was going on, I saw a woman on T.V. say that if O.J. was found guilty that they would riot again.
Just my $0.02, and you probably got ripped off.

Straight Pipe · 06-03-2011, 04:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by coyote_bait

Not all of us civilians are completely ignorant of reasonable use of force. My first exposure to it was Rodney King, and the first thing that came to mind was, "I guess that dude should have done what he was told." I started talking to friends that were cops at the time and they began to educate me a bit on some of the use of force tactics and rules. (I have a MUCH greater understanding now as I have several friends and family members in law enforcement, and we "war game" regularly). Then the riots came, I could see fire from my house, (I lived in Long Beach at the time) NOT a real good thing to see. I was disgusted with the second trial, first, for the fact that it was filed, (this was when I learned that there is a "work around" for double jeopardy). Second, that the officers were found guilty. This was SO obviously done to prevent another riot. Later, when the O.J thing was going on, I saw a woman on T.V. say that if O.J. was found guilty that they would riot again.
Just my $0.02, and you probably got ripped off.

In the Roney King incident there were at least two times when the officers would have been justified if they used deadly force.

In other words: Those Officers got in trouble for saving his sorry life.
Needless to say, that lesson has been well learned by a lot of Officers.

coyote_bait · 06-03-2011, 18:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Pipe

In the Roney King incident there were at least two times when the officers would have been justified if they used deadly force.

In other words: Those Officers got in trouble for saving his sorry life.
Needless to say, that lesson has been well learned by a lot of Officers.

Yep, good thing they didn't because he went on to be such a fine, upstanding citizen....

Sorry, my sarcasm got away from me for a minute there.

lawman800 · 06-03-2011, 20:37

Hey, Rodney went on to move to the exotic upscale city of Rialto where there is only 1 or 2 murders a week and the police force experiences 100% turnover every few years and who is your Chief changes depending on the whim of the City Council.

But I digress... he also has a nice, successful marriage to one of the original jurors in the civil trial who voted to give him the millions of dollars. Can anyone say, Gold DIGGAH!?!?!