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.
Originally posted by BastianCain
Pity, stop showing pity for this obviously foul officer.
She is not reaching in her shirt, her hands look as if they are reaching in to the collar of her shirt, but why should a police officer assume that a 15 year old girl, or anyone for that matter, is capable of pulling out a pistol from their collar.. oh yeah, it must of been holstered in her bra!
he let his ego get to him, plain and simple.
Originally posted by BastianCain
Pity, stop showing pity for this obviously foul officer.
She is not reaching in her shirt, her hands look as if they are reaching in to the collar of her shirt, but why should a police officer assume that a 15 year old girl, or anyone for that matter, is capable of pulling out a pistol from their collar.. oh yeah, it must of been holstered in her bra!
he let his ego get to him, plain and simple.
Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
Originally posted by BastianCain
Pity, stop showing pity for this obviously foul officer.
She is not reaching in her shirt, her hands look as if they are reaching in to the collar of her shirt, but why should a police officer assume that a 15 year old girl, or anyone for that matter, is capable of pulling out a pistol from their collar.. oh yeah, it must of been holstered in her bra!
he let his ego get to him, plain and simple.
Precisely!
Originally posted by pityocamptes
Originally posted by BastianCain
Pity, stop showing pity for this obviously foul officer.
She is not reaching in her shirt, her hands look as if they are reaching in to the collar of her shirt, but why should a police officer assume that a 15 year old girl, or anyone for that matter, is capable of pulling out a pistol from their collar.. oh yeah, it must of been holstered in her bra!
he let his ego get to him, plain and simple.
Well I'm not showing him pity. We are seeing the video from the SIDE, we do not have his view from BEHIND - which could be completely different with a different judgment call. The brain usually focuses on movements and familiar actions before zooming into the details.
Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
Originally posted by pityocamptes
Originally posted by BastianCain
Pity, stop showing pity for this obviously foul officer.
She is not reaching in her shirt, her hands look as if they are reaching in to the collar of her shirt, but why should a police officer assume that a 15 year old girl, or anyone for that matter, is capable of pulling out a pistol from their collar.. oh yeah, it must of been holstered in her bra!
he let his ego get to him, plain and simple.
Well I'm not showing him pity. We are seeing the video from the SIDE, we do not have his view from BEHIND - which could be completely different with a different judgment call. The brain usually focuses on movements and familiar actions before zooming into the details.
His view does not matter. His actions are not justified. He broke all sorts of protocols and rules by not commanding her to stop, by not identifying himself as an officer and by using excessive force without due process. But somehow, that's ok with you because it's apparently normal for cops to assume guilt before innocence.
Originally posted by pityocamptes
Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
Originally posted by BastianCain
Pity, stop showing pity for this obviously foul officer.
She is not reaching in her shirt, her hands look as if they are reaching in to the collar of her shirt, but why should a police officer assume that a 15 year old girl, or anyone for that matter, is capable of pulling out a pistol from their collar.. oh yeah, it must of been holstered in her bra!
he let his ego get to him, plain and simple.
Precisely!
Once again your looking at it from a SIDE view, NOT from BEHIND. Angles can make a huge difference on how things are perceived...
Originally posted by pityocamptes
Originally posted by Liquesence
Originally posted by pityocamptes
Originally posted by Liquesence
Originally posted by ~Lucidity
reply to post by CastleMadeOfSand
You have the video. Have at it. I've watched it no less than 45 times now. You're free to do the same and look for the indicators as I was.
edit on 5/6/2011 by ~Lucidity because: (no reason given)
The "indicators," whatever they may or may not be, do not justify the action.
Period.
So if you were in that situation and did not know if she had a weapon, but realized that she was violent, would yo uhave acted any differently? What happens to you if she did have a weapon?
Yes. If i were a cop i would not have thrust a high school girl head first into a concrete, unless i was absolutely sure there was an immediate and justifiable danger or threat to my person or those around me.
I would have been trained to handle the situation in an appropriate manner. And that manner was completely inappropriate.
At what point do you determine that there is immediate or justifiable danger? When you see the weapon, or when its being pulled on you? Since no audio exists, perhaps someone said that she had a weapon, but did not specify?
Originally posted by pityocamptes
Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
Originally posted by pityocamptes
Originally posted by BastianCain
Pity, stop showing pity for this obviously foul officer.
She is not reaching in her shirt, her hands look as if they are reaching in to the collar of her shirt, but why should a police officer assume that a 15 year old girl, or anyone for that matter, is capable of pulling out a pistol from their collar.. oh yeah, it must of been holstered in her bra!
he let his ego get to him, plain and simple.
Well I'm not showing him pity. We are seeing the video from the SIDE, we do not have his view from BEHIND - which could be completely different with a different judgment call. The brain usually focuses on movements and familiar actions before zooming into the details.
His view does not matter. His actions are not justified. He broke all sorts of protocols and rules by not commanding her to stop, by not identifying himself as an officer and by using excessive force without due process. But somehow, that's ok with you because it's apparently normal for cops to assume guilt before innocence.
...and you know all that how? Were you there?
Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
Originally posted by pityocamptes
Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
Originally posted by BastianCain
Pity, stop showing pity for this obviously foul officer.
She is not reaching in her shirt, her hands look as if they are reaching in to the collar of her shirt, but why should a police officer assume that a 15 year old girl, or anyone for that matter, is capable of pulling out a pistol from their collar.. oh yeah, it must of been holstered in her bra!
he let his ego get to him, plain and simple.
Precisely!
Once again your looking at it from a SIDE view, NOT from BEHIND. Angles can make a huge difference on how things are perceived...
This is common sense and protocol:
If an officer assumes that a person has a gun, they DO NOT rush them. Instead they pull out their firearms and command them to drop their weapon.
Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
Originally posted by pityocamptes
Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
Originally posted by pityocamptes
Originally posted by BastianCain
Pity, stop showing pity for this obviously foul officer.
She is not reaching in her shirt, her hands look as if they are reaching in to the collar of her shirt, but why should a police officer assume that a 15 year old girl, or anyone for that matter, is capable of pulling out a pistol from their collar.. oh yeah, it must of been holstered in her bra!
he let his ego get to him, plain and simple.
Well I'm not showing him pity. We are seeing the video from the SIDE, we do not have his view from BEHIND - which could be completely different with a different judgment call. The brain usually focuses on movements and familiar actions before zooming into the details.
His view does not matter. His actions are not justified. He broke all sorts of protocols and rules by not commanding her to stop, by not identifying himself as an officer and by using excessive force without due process. But somehow, that's ok with you because it's apparently normal for cops to assume guilt before innocence.
...and you know all that how? Were you there?
Ok, I am now arguing with a brick wall here. I know because I saw the video. I know what cops can and cannot do. Your straw man is rapidly losing straw.
...derpy derp.edit on 5/6/2011 by CastleMadeOfSand because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by pityocamptes
Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
Originally posted by pityocamptes
Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
Originally posted by BastianCain
Pity, stop showing pity for this obviously foul officer.
She is not reaching in her shirt, her hands look as if they are reaching in to the collar of her shirt, but why should a police officer assume that a 15 year old girl, or anyone for that matter, is capable of pulling out a pistol from their collar.. oh yeah, it must of been holstered in her bra!
he let his ego get to him, plain and simple.
Precisely!
Once again your looking at it from a SIDE view, NOT from BEHIND. Angles can make a huge difference on how things are perceived...
This is common sense and protocol:
If an officer assumes that a person has a gun, they DO NOT rush them. Instead they pull out their firearms and command them to drop their weapon.
They will from behind if they can safely contain you before you pull it out. So your a cop, someone in front of you has been suspected of a crime. You tell them to halt, Police, they keep walking. You run up behind them to detain them because you believe they are fleeing. As you get closer you notice that they quickly reach into their jacket or front chest area (remember you are coming up from behind). What do you do? You either pull your gun, or if you believe that you can get to them before they completely pull a weapon, turn and fire, you take the chance. You know why the late is always on the cops mind? Because no one wants to kill a kid, especially since these type of situations are dynamic and your eyes could be "fooling you". Most cops error on the side of caution and usually get shot.