Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Police Stop, Handcuff Every Adult at Intersection in Search for Bank Robber

page: 14
47
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by SyphonX
 


Please post if you find anything... I've been waiting to do the same after catching up reading all of this thread. I was hoping that there would be actual confirmation by now... but I haven't seen anything and now I can start digging myself.




posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 01:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by tpsreporter

Originally posted by AgentSmith
I started reading the thread, but frankly can't be bothered to go through the 12 pages of keyboard warrior drivel.
Bearing in mind that everyone was quickly released and the culprit found with two loaded handguns, so the intelligence was sound, I just have one simple question to anyone that disagrees with the course of action taken:

In the same position, having to make a split second decision knowing the dangerous armed robber was stopped at the red light but without any description whatsoever, how would YOU specifically deal with the situation?


By obeying the constitution of the United States of America.

and not doing this...

Photo

^ not the robber, that was just a kid who was in one of the cars.
edit on 6-6-2012 by tpsreporter because: (no reason given)


Can I see the link to the original video, I want to see the whole report. I live at this intersection and I don't recognise the backround vegitation at all...

It may be accurate, i just want to look at the whole video to verify it is the correct scene you took a snapshot of.

Thanks,



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
reply to post by SyphonX
 


Yes I read some of those views before getting bored. However as they had no information on the suspect apart from he was physically at that location at the time I'm not sure they could have followed it up.
They caught him without anyone being hurt, yes it was risky, but letting him go would be a risk too.
They ignore the information and he escapes, a few weeks later an armed robbery takes place and a security guard tries to fire back. A kid is killed in the crossfire and a few bystanders are injured. They could have stopped him weeks ago, but they didn't as it was too risky. So is it still right to have left him to escape?
Yes I'm speculating, but then so is saying how so many people could have been injured by them trying to apprehend him - as they did and no one was hurt.


It wasn't that it was RISKY.... It was a violation of one of the most basic fundamental tenets of a free society, of which the US is supposed to be the greatest... It is on face, but we have allowed these usurpers to violate it and bastardize to the point of non-recognition.

Jaden



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 02:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Masterjaden
 


Yes, it was both a violation and risky in my opinion. I've kind of gone off on a tangent about the reckless endangerment aspect.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElohimJD

Originally posted by tpsreporter

Originally posted by AgentSmith
I started reading the thread, but frankly can't be bothered to go through the 12 pages of keyboard warrior drivel.
Bearing in mind that everyone was quickly released and the culprit found with two loaded handguns, so the intelligence was sound, I just have one simple question to anyone that disagrees with the course of action taken:

In the same position, having to make a split second decision knowing the dangerous armed robber was stopped at the red light but without any description whatsoever, how would YOU specifically deal with the situation?


By obeying the constitution of the United States of America.

and not doing this...

Photo

^ not the robber, that was just a kid who was in one of the cars.
edit on 6-6-2012 by tpsreporter because: (no reason given)


Can I see the link to the original video, I want to see the whole report. I live at this intersection and I don't recognise the backround vegitation at all...

It may be accurate, i just want to look at the whole video to verify it is the correct scene you took a snapshot of.

Thanks,


Yes, here you go, screen grab at 0:48

Original Video showing cops pointing gun at kid
edit on 6-6-2012 by tpsreporter because: (no reason given)


edit on 6-6-2012 by tpsreporter because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by AgentSmith
 





I simply would like to know exactly how anyone else would deal with the situation


Traffic cams, dash cams, cell phone cams, business surveillance cams....they would have caught him with all those possible means of recording that intersection....but it would have been work.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 02:13 PM
link   


Yes, here you go, screen grab at 0:48

Original Video showing cops pointing gun at kid
edit on 6-6-2012 by tpsreporter because: (no reason given)


Also note the montage at the end where only minorities are being led away in hand cuffs.
edit on 6-6-2012 by tpsreporter because: (no reason given)


Their were white people cuffed too lol.

But I can verify that was the scene, and the snapshot you displayed was accurate. I found the video to be a pretty good mix of explaining the police choices and explain the questionable means they utilized in achieving their goal.

The shotgun to a boy is over the top and unneeded.

One thing the video did reveal was that all 5 complaints came from onlookers and no one detained filed an argument, because the police were very clear as to why they were stopped and who they were after, those involved understood the reason they were needing to be ruled out before continuing on with their day.

I would say anyone in this thread should check out the video, it is pretty fair to both sides.

God Bless,



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElohimJD


Yes, here you go, screen grab at 0:48

Original Video showing cops pointing gun at kid
edit on 6-6-2012 by tpsreporter because: (no reason given)


Also note the montage at the end where only minorities are being led away in hand cuffs.
edit on 6-6-2012 by tpsreporter because: (no reason given)


Their were white people cuffed too lol.

But I can verify that was the scene, and the snapshot you displayed was accurate. I found the video to be a pretty good mix of explaining the police choices and explain the questionable means they utilized in achieving their goal.

The shotgun to a boy is over the top and unneeded.

One thing the video did reveal was that all 5 complaints came from onlookers and no one detained filed an argument, because the police were very clear as to why they were stopped and who they were after, those involved understood the reason they were needing to be ruled out before continuing on with their day.

I would say anyone in this thread should check out the video, it is pretty fair to both sides.

God Bless,


I'm sorry, i did not mean to imply that no Whites were handcuffed, just that the editing near the end was poorly made.

Also, you said the only people who complained were bystanders. Well you should watch this video if you haven't to get an idea why making a complaint against the police is not as easy as it seems.

Why Cops Fear SHTF - the middle chapter covers what happens when you try to complain



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by AgentSmith
I started reading the thread, but frankly can't be bothered to go through the 12 pages of keyboard warrior drivel.
Bearing in mind that everyone was quickly released and the culprit found with two loaded handguns, so the intelligence was sound, I just have one simple question to anyone that disagrees with the course of action taken:

In the same position, having to make a split second decision knowing the dangerous armed robber was stopped at the red light but without any description whatsoever, how would YOU specifically deal with the situation?


Well it wouldnt be to handcuff and detain civilians and children in the vicinity of a supposedly dangerous, armed bank robber, if you catch my drift. Unless their deaths would be OK with you.

To do what you can peacefully and not be so hellbent in catching the crook no matter how high the risk or what liberties must be violated.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by ElohimJD

One thing the video did reveal was that all 5 complaints came from onlookers and no one detained filed an argument, because the police were very clear as to why they were stopped and who they were after, those involved understood the reason they were needing to be ruled out before continuing on with their day.

God Bless,


So not only were these 40 people put in harms way from a shootout, but they allowed bystanders? Well I guess in a way they couldn't control that, but still there could have been a lot of damage from the actions of this department. It was certainly a bad call.

I can't see the yahoo videos at this time... going to try to search on youtube for it.
edit on 6-6-2012 by SilentKillah because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 02:29 PM
link   



I'm sorry, i did not mean to imply that no Whites were handcuffed, just that the editing near the end was poorly made.

Also, you said the only people who complained were bystanders. Well you should watch this video if you haven't to get an idea why making a complaint against the police is not as easy as it seems.

Why Cops Fear SHTF - the middle chapter covers what happens when you try to complain


That is a fair statement and sadly understandable. Perhaps some fall under both categories, but your point is valid. Thanks,

God Bless,



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 03:15 PM
link   
Let me ask you one question... Is it better to arrest and detain 100 innocent people in order to catch one criminal, or is ti better that one criminal be let go in order to preserve the rights and freedoms of 100 innocent individuals?



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by ObservingTheWorld
 


Absolutly better to let 1 criminal go to preserve the rights of 100 people.

Crime will not be stopped as a whole by catching 1 criminal or stopping 1 crime. The cops want us to believe that the ends justify the means, but they do not. Freedom is absolutely valued over all other things, or it should be. If people are willing to join the military and lay their lives down for freedom, if the patriots who helped found the county were willing to face death to preserve and ensure freedom, then freedom takes precedent over all things.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 03:40 PM
link   
Dumb #s. Why would they handcuff everyone? If the teller did his job and issued the bait and the cameras in the bank were working, then why handcuff everyone! How ridiculous.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 04:59 PM
link   
This entire debate and the many responses in favor of the police action in this instance represent a
paradigm shift in the way the American people view their freedom and safety.

It is a sad and hypocritical change in the way we think about ourselves...
...a very, very, dangerous slippery slope to hell

And it is borne from an ignorance of human history... instances where free societies have degraded into
totalitarian, fascist states.

The Hitler meme is cogent in this case in that a question was raised...How should this have been handled?

Had this been Hitler's Germany, this instance would have been handled exactly the same way that
it was handled--by using deadly force to stop all citizens, and then assuming they are all guilty until
each are able to prove their innocence.

In this country it is assumed that all people are innocent until proven guilty...
and here is where the paradigm shift is occurring.

We have begun to see ourselves as a nation of guilty parties, unworthy of trust (and liberty) until we
prove ourselves innocent

And it is a zeitgeist that is beginning to permeate our culture...

The TSA assumes guilt with every scan, every question, every pat down.

Roadside DUI checkpoints assume the guilt of every driver....and every driver must prove his innocence
before he will be allowed to continue.

Answer the questions, "Where are you going?" and "Where are you coming from?" during a routine
traffic stop, with the answer, "I'm sorry, but that's personal" and you will get to experience first-hand
what it is like to be assumed guilty until proven innocent.

We have become lazy and complacent citizens....and we are paving the road to tyranny with our
acquiescence.

We are frightened, scared, trembling, little lambs...and if we don't draw a line in the sand, and say....
"This far....And no further!....we are going to be slowly led to the slaughter.....but at least we'll be
safe from the criminal citizens among us...until we arrive at our destination




edit on 6-6-2012 by rival because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 05:27 PM
link   
reply to post by rival
 


I get the feeling that a good portion of the people on this thread praising and supporting the police action are simply "Shills" getting paid to support the system no matter the cost.

I won't deny there are some misguided minds who might actually believe the cops were justified, but those people just probably don't understand the value of real freedom anyway.

I dunno whats better/worse, that we have so many Shills or that we have so many who are too ignorant with freedom to realize the wrongness of the police in this situation?



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 07:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Really, we'd already established that Terry was not valid in this instance as they had no reasonable suspicion, specific and articulateable information upon which to compare all the individuals at the intersection as the basis for even a Terry stop.

Second in later posts you cite that "officer safety" is enough justification for handcuffing someone - I would agree that in some instances this may indeed be the case but it's certainly not a blanket justification to handcuff everyone you encounter for your safety while you conduct a detention for investigation.

The officer still has to have some reasonable suspicion that he is in danger to justify handcuffing someone for his safety. Again, that is prior knowledge, criminal history or witnessed or verbally expressed acts of violence by the suspect.

You can't just handcuff everyone you stop for your safety because you are a cop.

If you are that afraid of everyone perhaps a change of profession is in order.

I'd even take exception to being handcuffed if I had my weapon on me since I have a CCW. I have been vetted and a traffic stop doesn't constitute any probable cause that I am somehow a danger to you. Breaking a traffic law is not an act of violence. I also would never consent to a search of my vehicle.

I have yet to be involved in a traffic stop while in possession of a CCW permit and a weapon but in talking with our Sherriff who I count a personal friend he is of the opinion the stop itself is not a reason to disarm me for the duration – at least I know I’m good in our county.

There must be some demonstrated aggression or willful noncompliance with your reasonable lawful orders to ask me to surrender my firearm. I have no duty to inform and I don’t think I have to surrender my weapon on demand just because you are afraid of an armed citizenry. If armed and asked I am required to show my CCW.

You can't just disarm a valid CCW holder because they have a weapon during a stop as a precaution – it negates the whole point of the vetting process. You have to meet the reasonable officer standard – would any officer given the objective facts in that particular situation feel threatened under the circumstances. I'd say juries might give you the benifit of a doubt once or twice because being a LEO is scary sometimes....

Sure you can lie each time and say they were acting suspicious or evasive, aggressive or whatever but I would hope that eventually enough people would complain and if I were Sherriff you’d be gone. Not everyone with a gun is a threat.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 07:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Golf66
 





Second in later posts you cite that "officer safety" is enough justification for handcuffing someone - I would agree that in some instances this may indeed be the case but it's certainly not a blanket justification to handcuff everyone you encounter for your safety while you conduct a detention for investigation.


Indeed! It is the height of stupidity to argue that police had to handcuff people because they so antagonized them to the point of putting themselves in danger. If police officers value safety they shouldn't go about picking fights with the innocent, their lives are dangerous enough with actual criminals about, the last thing they need is to alienate the righteous.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by thisguyrighthere
 


Exactly, we are just random people while cops are looking for 'Waldo'



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 07:22 PM
link   
All these coward cops, that think treating people like animals is OK because they are scared..... You better drive those morons from the police force. You think there won't be any "blowback"? Keep up this crap and cops will really have something to be scared of. People are getting sick and tired of their employees acting like overlords....





new topics

top topics



 
47
<< 11  12  13    15 >>

log in

join