It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


VIDEO: Driver Tased For Asking Why He Was Stopped

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 05:00 PM
Para, look its like this, the civillian is not triend to act in a certain way to given situations as the police are, you can tell alot from that footage a the cops body langauge told me that at not point did he feel threatened until the driver walked to him.

The cop stood at the drivers window, he walked away with his back to the occupants of the vehicle all signs that he did not feel treatened.

Unfortunately as a previous poster stated cos he did not kiss ass the driver got tasered pure and simple. Yes the cops deserve respect but you have to give respect to earn respect, this cop has one and now the driver and his partner have none either. Thas my point many cops think they are above the law and all no cops are criminals, if you start your day with a bad attitude expect to get it back.

As for my comments, I have posted many times that I know of no other democratic country other than the US that its law officials regularly shoots its citizens, be it Waco, Ruby Ridge etc.

Just think of Waco alone, the authorities could have knocked every one out in that building without a shot being fired and no one would have died.

How many innocents were killed, Waco is a great stain on your country and even worse that so many sat back and did nothing.

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 05:08 PM
reply to post by magicmushroom

Ok, I agree with you more now. I think some of the disagreement is on the kissing ass part. What some call kissing ass I call giving respect to someone who has chosen to protect our communities and lives. Say what you want about cops but they are risking their lives and have a difficult job enforcing law.

What may be seen as kissing ass to me is saying, "ok, I know i'm not a bad guy but I also know that you (the cop) doesn't know that, so I'll try to act respectful and non threatening for, if anything, to give the officer peace of mind that I'm a normal everyday citizen who is merely concerned with what is going on." When you start disobeying orders or doing the ", I'll just slowly start moving back towards my car." it becomes suspicious to the officer. I can't imagine what scenarios he has been in so I don't know how he's going to react to that, but I bet most times when someone starts walking away from you and disobeying an order to stay still or show me your hands (basically prove to me you don't intend to use a weapon) then I'd be worried. Maybe the cop was tazer happy because he had some bad experiences, it is by no means an excuse, not at all, but he's a person just like me and you, with the same thoughts and fears.

It really seems to be a lot of miscommunication and assumption of both parties that led to the scenario, it just ended in a bad way with someone being tazed. I hope this clarifies my position or what I'm thinking about.

Ha, oh and I study psychology if that helps show where i'm coming from

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 05:11 PM

I just saw your signatures view on pain and thought it was an interesting contrast to my own signatures thoughts.

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 05:16 PM
Para, I know the driver could have been smarter, but sometimes we have to relly on the proffesionals and I just see it as a worrying sign overall.

Just likwe here in the UK cops have been killing people for years in RTA's and other incidents and not one hads ever been prosecuted, the police overall have lost alot of respect from the people and its getting worse.

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 05:26 PM
An important point is that the cop should not use his considerable power unless he absolutely has to - the situation basically demands it.

Neither should he be too slow to use it, because making assumptions about the detainee by how he/she looks is perilous.

But if I had to guess, I'd suspect the guy he just stopped prior to this one probably bullied him and got over a little and the cop was smarting from that - feeling he was too generous. Drivers don't always realize that the cop sees this crapola everyday all day - people wanting to argue with him.

I think studies have shown that some guys who get into law enforcement suffer from some low esteem issues, and have bullying tendencies.

Couple this with the hidden dangers of traffic stops and you can see what happens.

I think if you're normally calm and assertive and self-confident you don't need to let every little jerk you stop get your goat and make it into an ego-challenge. Back off unless you really have no choice (i.e. the guy is much bigger, threatens you, etc.)

This is why I agree with the previous poster that as soon as the guy declined to sign, he should have gone back to his car and called for backup and told the guy to stay in his car. Better to use the overwhelming numbers technique in this case.

I mean this is how you'd act if you -really- thought the guy was enough of a threat to the public to taze - so do it by the book.

[edit on 23-11-2007 by Badge01]

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 05:36 PM

Originally posted by magicmushroom
Para, I know the driver could have been smarter, but sometimes we have to relly on the proffesionals and I just see it as a worrying sign overall.

I can 100% agree with that. I think that's really what it comes down to. We have to be smart and handle situations like this as best as we can, in that we worry about the things we can control. I think then, and only then, can we accurately determine what force or coercion is being used against us because we've done all we can do. That is how we get answers, but we have to be smart to begin with.

To me if the driver would have been a little more cooperative and the had cop acted the same way I'd be all over it. But the drivers behavior leaves that bit of doubt or whatever that is open to, 'well maybe the officer had some reason to feel threatened (not to taze)'. The whole acting smart thing can hopefully take our responsibility out of the equation so we can see the officer, and his actions, for what they truly are.

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 05:52 PM

Originally posted by Badge01
This is why I agree with the previous poster that as soon as the guy declined to sign, he should have gone back to his car and called for backup and told the guy to stay in his car. Better to use the overwhelming numbers technique in this case.

What is wrong with not signing the ticket? I can't find anything where it says it is breaking the law if you don't sign a speeding ticket. Why couldn't the officer just said "Ok, don't sign it. It is still a valid ticket and will be admited to the court. Have a nice day"?

Does anyone have any info on how this thing ended? Was the officer found in the wrong? I read that all charges except the speeding ticket had been dropped.

[edit on 23-11-2007 by assassini]

[edit on 23-11-2007 by assassini]

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 05:58 PM
YOU DO NOT HAVE TO SIGN A TICKET. Signing a ticket doesn't mean jack. ZETA is a mental case who if he is still in law enforcement after 3 whole years he should have his head examined. Any who think like him, too. The officer should have marked on his copy driver refused to sign. It was clear to me that the Utah nazi was way out of bounds.

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 06:17 PM
Can you imagine if the driver had just said "ooops, I screwed up, sorry, wont do it again".....he might not have even gotten a ticket. And this video would not be.

One of my very close friends is a cop (*GASP*)....and he told me that if he pulls someone over for speeding and they are polite and not giving lip...he usually will just give them a verbal warning and that's it.

But as soon as someone gives lip, they get a ticket no matter what.

Common courtesy and respect goes a long way. Giving attitude doesnt.

YOU DO NOT HAVE TO SIGN A TICKET. Signing a ticket doesn't mean jack.

This is NOT true in every state. In some states you can go to jail for refusing to sign a ticket.

[edit on 23-11-2007 by greeneyedleo]

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 06:19 PM
reply to post by fossilfuelfugue

You don't have to sign the ticket, but the consequences are going to jail. Signing the ticket is NOT an admission of guilt, it only means that you were there and are aware that you have been ticketed. If you do not wish to sign your name to state you were there then the officer can detain you until you see a judge. It's akin to not posting bail.

The traffic ticket contains an actual notice to you of a pending court date at which you must appear. By signing the ticket, you are providing an acknowledgment of receipt of the "notice to appear." Since the officer is charging you with a violation of law, he could take you into custody. By signing the traffic ticket, you avoid being taken into custody at that time, and are "released on your own recognizance" pending the court date. It is better to sign the traffic ticket and go about your business pending the court date. By signing the traffic ticket, you remain free and retain the right to show up at the hearing to contest the issuance of the citation or summons.

If you can refute this I'd like to see some evidence beyond your ranting and name calling.

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 06:44 PM
He was told why he was pulled over. The officer told him to place his hands behind his back and he refused. All you do is follow the officer's orders and nothing will go wrong. Refusing to sign and refusing to show your license and registration is an act of defiance. The guy was looking for trouble and he got it.

Doesn't this simpleton know that signing a speeding ticket does not mean you are confessing guilt?

I was laughing when the man was saying, "read me my rights". His rights are not required to be read. He is not a suspect and he is not being questioned.

Good job to the officer

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 06:45 PM
reply to post by Parabol

Perhaps I was a bit harsh, I loathe these power hungry tobit dictator wannabees

here you go Achtung

If the local practice is to require you to sign a traffic ticket issued to you, you should be aware of any consequences if you refuse to sign. While your signature acknowledging the ticket is not an admission of guilt, your refusal to sign may result in the officer taking you into custody so you can be formally charged and be required to post a bond.

Obviously my "rant" made you see red for clearly it is as I stated, you do not have to sign. Now I watched the video many times and I listened carefully, I heard alot, except the officer saying :
"Listen if you don't sign this I have to take you into custody" thats the local,state or whatever law here. I am sure the guy would have signed and that would be that.
If an officer is so afraid that he won't make it home to his wife and babies that he has to resort to abusing that power he really should find another job, Perhaps Floral arrangments or Interior decorating. I as a taxpayer don't want these nuts on the streets.

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 06:53 PM
As magicmushroom pointed out, citizens are not trained to deal with the police, the police are supposed to be trained to deal with citizens.

Unfortunately it seems our police are increasingly only trained in "dominance" tactics meant to be used against hardened criminals, and more and more these tactics are used against ordinary citizens simply going about their business.

It is amazing to me that there are so many people out there defending this officer, who clearly escalated a nonviolent situation into a violent one without any provocation.

Unfortunately some people will always support authority figures no matter what.

Anyway, here is a related link that may be of interest, an interview with the man who was tasered: CNN Motorist Interview

The police should be more aware that not everyone is a crazed sociopath, and act accordingly. If the police continue to lose the support of the populace, their jobs will continue to become more dangerous.

[edit on 11/23/07 by xmotex]

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 07:10 PM
Ah the voice of reason, xmotek, Hear Here.

I believe this is a policy across the US, anyone who speaks up for themselves must be cowed. With our prison population the largest in the world the Authorities must rule by fear of one form (brutal, no habeus corpus) or manipulation (GWOT, Islamofascists will get you etc.) Just remember if the authorities stop you, never mention you have rights, in their minds you have none.

just keep your eyes down say yessir, no sir, I am so sorry sir. May I please breathe the same air as you, my fine uniformed hero.


posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 07:17 PM
Great find. Good questions on the part of the interviewer.

The spokesman was pretty good though he lied when he replied to the question 'does "he took a ride on the Tazer" does that suggest that this sort of thing is routine"'. Hell, yes it means that. The higher ups have to give defacto approval for the tazer to be used this causally.

AND, if they are so open in the Utah PD, why not PUBLISH the 9 page guidelines on Tazer usage?

I know I defended the cop but it was with qualification. I don't expect them to be put in a position where they have to argue with the detainee. If the guy doesn't co-operate then yes, he gets tazed. It would be NICE if there was more warning, more dialog, and I question this cops motivation, but as it happened, he is allowed to taze at the point he did (excepting for omitting the warning - maybe due to stress he forgot).

To the poster above - fossil - yeah, but it's not the same - traffic stops are among the most hazardous and the cops must have fairly wide latitude to get compliance. By rights, he could have shot the wife when she didn't get back in the car and started advancing on him.

[edit on 23-11-2007 by Badge01]

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 07:22 PM

Originally posted by xmotex

It is amazing to me that there are so many people out there defending this officer, who clearly escalated a nonviolent situation into a violent one without any provocation.

Look, I don't know if you're lumping me in there but I assume I may be seen on the side of the officer because I'm not damning him to hell. The driver didn't do much in the way of directly provoking the officer but regardless of any previous situation, if you are asked to put your hands on your head and you are ordered to turn around, multiple times, you are indirectly provoking action by the officer.

Not that he provoked the officer into tazing him, but when you present yourself as a threat, even when you are not one, the police officer has to act in some manner. What was the cop supposed to do, just let him walk back to his car and drive away? He didn't have to taze him, to make it clear again, but the driver was not helping the situation and is partly responsible because he has the power to choose his behavior. The driver would have never been tazed had he put his hands on his head and not attempted to go back to his vehicle. That's all I'm saying. Doesn't clear the cop, but the driver played a part in the incident.

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 07:27 PM
Lets just take a step back for a second I've seen some interesting and very very manipulated and conditioned posters in this thread justifying this act and wronging this CITIZEN.
First at most this CITIZEN went a little over the speed limit a MINOR traffic infraction warranting ONLY at MOST a ticket,
Lets move ahead a bit, Ive seen replies which imply this CITIZEN for some strange reason is OBLIGATED to be talkative, friendly and courteous to this cop,
Really? so a badge and a gun somehow earns such things?

Is it really earned or is it instilled by preconceived fear?

Also maybe you all are forgetting the whole fact you don't have to say a damn word to a cop I don't care what they threaten you with you don't have to talk.

But the cops does, he works for YOU, He has to identify himself at your request, he has to tell you what you have done which warrants him to interrupt YOUR LIFE.

I don't know what world some of you live in, or how anyone finds it acceptable for whats essentially a perfect stranger much less someone you know, ordering you around like a little monkey when you have committed no crimes against another, and not violated anyones individual rights...

as stated at most this guy went a little over speed limit warranting at most a ticket who cares if he signs it? hes getting a summons to TRAFFIC COURT regardless of what he doe's with the ticket...

some will say the COP may have feared for his life which is funny seeing as the mans life was more in danger then the cops as the cop had on a Kevlar vest...

Also the cop never once acted nor handled the situation at all as if it were one that warranted fear of life, he turned his back on the man multiple times, even when he ordered the man to step out of the vehicle he had his back turned.. so thats just a BS excuse... that cop didn't fear anything he had no reason to..

he already ran the guys plates and License which would show if the man had a record... and I'm not sure about the laws in that state, but also a CCW license..

But whatever lets live in lala land where its acceptable for someone to resort to VIOLENCE for a petty TRAFFIC INFRACTION and victim less crime...

Some of you need to grow a spine and understand you are born free men, Citizens, understand that no man, no majority, and certainly no government holds power over you unless you violate the rights of another, you aren't some little monkey to be ordered around thrown on the ground and treated like dirt, you are free men, act like it.

civil disobedience, try it sometime.

[edit on 23-11-2007 by C0le]

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 07:47 PM
None of these pertain directly to this case but if anyone would like to see what can go wrong at a traffic stop here you go...

Traffic Stop Assault
Driver Unloads AK-47 During Traffic Stop
Traffic Stop Assault
Officer Dragged By Car During Traffic Stop
Another Traffic Stop
The Last One

This isn't mean to defend the tazing, but this is the kind of thing cops have to take into consideration during a traffic stop. They have no idea what kind of people they are going to encounter.

If you were a cop and something like this happened to you or a fellow officer how would you feel about pulling people over? How would you feel about someone who won't put their hands on their heads and walks away from you? How would you feel about another person coming out of the passenger side towards you?

Cops, sadly, have to assume the worst in the hopes that it won't happen. Now do you think it's that way because cops are evil people and they are out to get us or because they've seen enough citizens do something like in the videos?

Not defending the tazing, he should have communicated better, he should have called for backup, he should have taken the tazed man away from the road, he could have done many many things better but.... the drivers choices put himself in a position to allow something like this to happen. Had he listened to very simple commands (come on, putting your hands on your head is easy enough) it could have been avoided.

Is there anyone who feels that the driver could not have avoided being tazed? If so, tell me how he had no free will, no choice to comply in the slightest manner to avoid the use of force.

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 08:02 PM
The Driver did not obey rule #1 when pulled over by the police, follow the policeman's directions. That he repeatedly kept questioning the officer about the details did not help him.

All he had to do was provide his insurance, registration and license and the officer would have been on his way, but the driver insisted on trying to prove his point. When asked to sign the ticket and then refusing, he basically gave the officer no choice. Signing a ticket is not an admission of guilt, just acknowledgement of receiving the ticket. By refusing to sign it, the driver basically said "go ahead and arrest me", which is why the officer asked him to step out of the vehicle and put his hands on the car. That the driver left the car, proceeded to disobey a direct order from a police officer, walk past him with a hand in is pocket and then again disobey another direct order from the police officer did not leave the officer with many options. I guess he could have tackled the driver and then handcuffed him, but I am guessing the proper procedure is to use more hands off methods of subduing people, like the taser or pepper gas.

Point blank, if the driver just obeyed the directions of the officer, he would not have been tazed. Officers don't have to be charming when pulling over cars, antagonizing and disobeying them is a sure way to get in more trouble.

posted on Nov, 23 2007 @ 08:03 PM
reply to post by xmotex

Nice job on the CNN follow up video link. I was able to put my intuition to work. Did the young guy have a secondary agenda? I don't think so.

IMO the young man was clearly confused on both videos. I'm not sure the officer really communitated clearly and concisely. When he told the young man to get out of the car, he just turns and walks away. The young man walks by pointing at the speed sign, and the next thing he's got a gun in his face, family in the car, and not a clue. Most normal people go a little fuzzy with a gun in thier face. (Probably some kind of self preservation gene. )

Again, in IMHO, this could have surely been avoided if this Officer had better verbal skills. Everytime I have been pulled over the Officer came up and clearly told me exactly what I did, and how fast I was going. In this case he just says something like you were going a little fast there.

I guess we now live in a world were anyone could be a criminal. If you are stopped by the police, know they are taking that posture toward you. Sad, really.

I have plenty of respect for the Officers in my area. I've had to call them a few times recently at my office complex. I was pleased they showed up, and they handled each situation without incident.

That's my two Ameros worth.

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in