It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Next Level BS #11: The Overly Aggressive Hammond, Indiana Police Department

page: 1
100
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+47 more 
posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 07:53 PM
link   
In this episode of Next Level BS, we focus exclusively on the seat belt stop heard around the world. We're talking about Hammond Police officers, Lieutenant Vicari and Sergent Turner, stopping Lisa Mahone for a seat belt violation and demanding passenger Jamal Jones to produce identification. The police officers demand, without giving cause, that Jamal exit the vehicle. Jamal said that he didn't want to, and that he was afraid of the overly aggressive posture of the police, from a simple seat belt violation stop. So the police smash the passenger side window, and drag Jamal from the car. We cover all the angles of the incident, and also reveal how the Hammond Police department might be one of the most overtly aggressive in the country. But we have a surprise interview, and an even more surprise ending. So keep with this longer than normal video from us, it's worth the wait.


(Caution, this video contains snippets of other videos that might be disturbing, and which contain a high number of vulgarities.)

Watch in HD on www.TheNLBS.com


Share this video. Tell your friends. Expose the Next Level BS!


Follow Next Level BS on Twitter @theNLBS

Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Check us out on DailyMotion

Or, just go to the website: www.theNLBS.com
edit on 10-10-2014 by SkepticOverlord because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Ty Joe. You just helped me teach my son how to make a good persuasive argument. I loved how well you used research and cited good sources. I used this as a teachable moment!


+9 more 
posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 08:39 PM
link   
a reply to: theNLBS

The average citizen is wasting his/her time talking to and trying to explain themselves to rogue thug cops on situations that are totally innocent.

These types of cops have superiority complexes and deserve nothing but condemnation and should be outright shunned by society and put in jail with the rest of the criminals.

Who the flux shoot a dog in the face, smashes a car window spraying kids with glass? - I'll tell you who - a little boy in a mans body who wants to be a real man but has such a small manhood that it may as well not exist.

I can't wait for the day that one of these pricks gets a taste of his own medicine.

Hammond Police.........hang your heads in shame, you are yet another shining example of everything that is wrong with America.

Pathetic pieces of ship.


+7 more 
posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 08:46 PM
link   
If this is going to stop then we need to stop training our police to be terrorist response units. After 9/11 our police forces is trained to see everyone as a potential terrorist and thereby a threat to them that is why they are responding with so much violence. These officers need to be retrained to where they understand they are servants of the community not it's masters.



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Laws and training are the key. To protect and serve is a dangerous job yet all the laws are for the police protection.

I agree with the former officer things will get worst before things get better, just watch Ferguson and how it will spread.

Star & flag



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 09:30 PM
link   
Thanks for managing to work three topics into one video. It was very broad, pretty much all encompassing. Blending the topics went well.

First topic, police-civilian relations in America. Garth was a good interview. Did you notice that he suggested that a frightened citizen should go to his police station, sit down with the Chief or senior management and talk about the problem? Did you also notice that he suggested going to a town council meeting if the police weren't helpful? And finally, did you notice how you and the posters are suggesting the police have to make the first move?

I'd like to hear what move they're supposed to make. If you can come up with one that isn't insane, that might be an easy start. But did you also notice how Garth mentioned that Departments need more money for necessary training? Are you on board with that?

Second topic, the Hammond police force in general. How could a nice little piece of small town America have such problems? Going up I-90, the center of downtown Chicago is 23 miles away. Small town America, hah! Nowhere near the truth. The violent recruiting video said at the end "Hostage Rescue Team." You want them to be polite to the average citizen on the street? They never deal with the average citizen on the street. Yes, I want them to know how to shoot a rifle.

Third topic, this particular traffic stop. Here, I am most disappointed. You quoted from the thread involving this incident, so did SkepticOverlord, so I assume you both read it.

The claim was made in the thread that the officers did nothing illegal. Supreme Court cases were cited, so was Indiana law. The piece of Indiana law you mentioned doesn't apply in this case. There was nothing presented that correctly said that anything the officers did was illegal. Let me repeat, the officers acted within the law. The officers, based on the evidence we have available, were perfectly within their rights. Nothing presented in your video changes that.

Now, did they do everything in the most polite manner possible? Who knows? This was video taped by the kid. Is it coincidence that the clip we see starts at least 15 minutes after the original stop? What happened before that? Certainly the kid was taping that as well. But this level of anger at the police isn't because they didn't make the stop in the most polite manner.

You are quite correct in saying the car, driver, and passengers can't be inspected, searched, or detained just because of a seat belt violation. Please remember that nobody there was inspected, searched or detained just because of a seat belt violation, so why bother mentioning it?

Despite your stated desire to be rational in discussing the situation, we were given emotional images and misleading legal information.

If you want to discuss this, you can look at thread and see the discussion, or you can ask me about it.

(Oh, and yes, I have my admission to the Bar certificate hanging on the wall. I can read a statute.)



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 09:51 PM
link   
a reply to: charles1952



Let me repeat, the officers acted within the law. The officers, based on the evidence we have available, were perfectly within their rights. Nothing presented in your video changes that.

Show where it says in the law where they had the right to bust out the window and tazer the guy. Seeing how you have your admission to the bar it should be easy for you.



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 10:11 PM
link   
a reply to: buster2010

If an officer sees a man committing a crime, then the man runs into a house, and slams the door right in the policeman's face, can the policeman kick down the door to arrest the guy? Of course, he can.

Or consider the protester who chains himself to the front door of a bank. Does the officer have the right to destroy the chain to arrest the protester for trespass? Of course.

Similar situation. The officer sees a crime being committed, they know that the man is in the car. He won't come out. Officers are allowed to come in, even if the door is locked.

Sheeesh! That's on just about every TV crime show. Don't need a bar admission for that. In the case of the house, it's hot pursuit. In the case of the car, the officer doesn't even have to pursue, he's right there.

And use common sense. A serial killer locks himself in a car and says he won't come out because he's afraid. Do the police have the right to break into the car and arrest him? Sure.

I don't think you really want case cites. I may be misjudging you this time, but I've seen you in action before. This should be sufficient to make my point.



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 10:11 PM
link   
I live in Indiana, and let me tell you a thing or two about Indiana 'cops'.

Insert ad homenim here.

Last month got pulled over less than 50 feet from my house sitting at a stoplight the police officer made an illegal U-turn to get in behind me.

And the rest is history.

Funny part there is instead of biting my tongue. I said I guess you got pay for them cars somehow eh.

He said what ?

Walked back to his car.

That is the thing about 'seat belt' tickets.

It is the way local government, state government police departments pay for some of their 'toys'.

And 20 years ago still in Indiana I was coming home from a crap job at a printing company.

Ended up getting pulled over by 6 cops with their guns drawn.

Silly me I was stupid enough to reach for my id. Since the law says I have to have it, and show my papers.

I really don't have anything nice to say about the Indiana police.

Then or now.

Nothing surprises me anymore when it comes to them.

Dunno what the hell is going on anymore.

I am sure there are some good cops out there, but they are more elusive than unicorns these days.



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 10:22 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

This may come as a shock, but I basically agree with you. It wasn't that long ago, maybe a month, when I saw that AAA had declared a small town in Florida the country's worst speed trap. It truly was, and all of the national publicity forced the town to change it's various speed limits.

Yes, I hate abusive cops. They're there and when convicted, they should be punished more severely than the average citizen if their offense is job related. But if the city says "This is the law in our town," and the boss says "I'm telling you to put extra emphasis on enforcing this law," what do you do? You can quit, saying I don't think it's right to enforce this particular law. But if you announce to the Department you're only going to enforce the laws you happen to agree with, you won't need to quit. They'll take care of it for you.

I'll be satisfied if the police stay within the limits of the law, and don't engage in excessive force and violence, or corruption, in getting their job done. Any other problems have to be referred up the chain, maybe to the people who wrote the law, as in the Florida speed trap town.

No, I don't think the police used excessive force in the Hammond stop. They had grounds to arrest the passenger, they decided, as is their right, to arrest him, he refused to come out, they went in to get him. Bad publicity, but legal.



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 10:37 PM
link   
a reply to: theNLBS

Best one yet. Love the show guys.

And the police need to know and follow the law. They shouldn't be aloud to do whatever they want just because they say.
edit on 10/9/2014 by onequestion because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 10:43 PM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

Do you think they didn't follow the law? There's no evidence that they did.



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 11:18 PM
link   
a reply to: charles1952

There's no reason for the police to instigate violence because they feel like it.



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 11:38 PM
link   
a reply to: charles1952
If they "followed the law", then # the law. There is no excuse for that bull#. # the police, I am just glad I don't have to deal with the police around here. I feel sorry for people that do.



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 11:43 PM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

Dear onequestion,

It wasn't because they felt like it, they were arresting a man who was committing a Class B misdemeanor (Penalty - up to 6 months) in front of their eyes.

With respect,
Charles1952
edit on 9-10-2014 by charles1952 because: Add a bit.



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 11:46 PM
link   
a reply to: TKDRL

Dear TKDRL,

I agree with you! Surprised? Yes, if the law is bad, change it. But don't go after the cops who are following the law. Yell at the legislators. Lead demonstrations and marches. Anything that is not illegal. But get the law, not the people who promised to enforce it.

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 11:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: charles1952
a reply to: onequestion

Do you think they didn't follow the law? There's no evidence that they did.



Did Nazis follow the law?


+5 more 
posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 11:49 PM
link   
a reply to: charles1952

I think the most important point, in this particular situation, which you simply refuse to accept or acknowledge, is that they didn't have to. There was no good reason to start the escalation toward violence.

But, we shouldn't be surprised from the police department of a small town that proactively fosters a culture of aggression and violence.



posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 11:50 PM
link   
a reply to: olaru12

Dear olaru12,

I'm confused, but then I often am. Are you saying that America's laws are invalid or corrupt? If so, change the laws.

Are you saying the police officers behaved like Nazis making traffic stops in Berlin?

Help, I really don't know what you are saying with that rather cryptic comment.

With respect,
Charles1952


+19 more 
posted on Oct, 9 2014 @ 11:51 PM
link   
a reply to: charles1952

Please don't be obtuse in your increasingly obvious trollery. It's unbecoming.







 
100
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join