17 yo boy shot by police because he wasn't resisting arrest.

[ChrisL]

We have red light cameras which allow for traffic citations to be issued without any interaction between law enforcement and citizen. When a traffic violation such as this occurs, and the driver is uncooperative, it could be treated like a red light camera. The officer writes the citation and the driver gets the ticket in the mail.....which he can choose to dispute or not.

Allowing assholes in uniform to exorcise their demons on unsuspecting citizens....using a traffic violation as an excuse.....is bullshit.

And lets not forget, there WAS NO traffic violation. The only violation was the cop blinding people after being told repeatedly about it. Which he admitted.

It's almost like if someone would've wrecked from being blinded they would find the driver at fault saying "well, He IS a cop though" while scratching their ass crack

BTW, if a driver would have had an accident as a result of the cop flashing his lights, then yes he would be totally liable. Let's not make accusations on things that didn't happen though. the facts are the facts and you don't like the facts, right?

Are you kidding? Lol. OMG.

 

[jc456]

Here is an officer dealing with a VERY difficult motorist that he pulled over. Now, see how the cop handles this driver. THIS is how the police need to behave. This officer should be an example to ALL police officers. He keeps his cool. He never takes it personally. He realizes that this motorist has some "issues." He remains calm and does NOT escalate the situation. It's not right for an officer to rip someone out of their car because he is angry. This is part of his job, dealing with difficult people.

There's a difference *****. The "difficult" motorist DID hand over the paperwork asked for by the cop.
The loser punk brat repeatedly refused to hand over the paperwork.
The cop asked the loser punk brat SIX times nice a politely and calmly for the paperwork. The thankfully happily dead loser punk brat refused and he choose to attack the cop. Good day for the rest of us. We'll never have to deal with the loser punk brat.
Thanks to mommy's Liberal enabling (cough) parenting skills.

Was that you in that car?

Anyhow, the cop completely lost his cool. He is terrible at his job and should resign before he kills another unarmed child because he's angry at his authority being challenged. We citizens have rights. The police do not have the right to shoot unarmed teenagers. That is why there needs to be two officers per car. That would cut down on these kinds of incidents. Correct?

The teenager did in fact have arms and attached were hands. (Not sure how much good they are now though). The teenager attacked the cop with arms and hands.......which are legally considered 'weapons' BTW. The cop needed medical assistance after the teenager attacked him.
What advice would you give any teenager who gets stopped by a cop.....for any reason?
Would you advise the teenager to behave the way the now dead loser punk brat behaved?
Thought not.

Of course I wouldn't advise anyone to behave that. Some people can't help themselves. Teenage boys are hormonal, have a lot of boyhood pride, and get adrenaline when challenged. Anyone who knows kids knows this much. It's also widely recognized in the psychiatric community. That is why we classify a 17-year-old boy as a CHILD. That is why he can't drink, smoke, vote, etc.

If there had been two officers, this probably would not have happened.

But a 17 year old is given a license to drive a vehicle that is a weapon. And as such there are rules. And those rules are that police officers are entitled to do certain things and as a licensed driver, the 17 year old is expected to obey the rules he received his license for. Hmmmmmmmmm?

 

[jc456]

We have red light cameras which allow for traffic citations to be issued without any interaction between law enforcement and citizen. When a traffic violation such as this occurs, and the driver is uncooperative, it could be treated like a red light camera. The officer writes the citation and the driver gets the ticket in the mail.....which he can choose to dispute or not.

Allowing assholes in uniform to exorcise their demons on unsuspecting citizens....using a traffic violation as an excuse.....is bullshit.

And lets not forget, there WAS NO traffic violation. The only violation was the cop blinding people after being told repeatedly about it. Which he admitted.

It's almost like if someone would've wrecked from being blinded they would find the driver at fault saying "well, He IS a cop though" while scratching their ass crack

BTW, if a driver would have had an accident as a result of the cop flashing his lights, then yes he would be totally liable. Let's not make accusations on things that didn't happen though. the facts are the facts and you don't like the facts, right?

Are you kidding? Lol. OMG.

am I kidding what?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Obviously, you dummies can't argue any of my points.

What exactly are your points?

From what I have seen the driver failed to comply with just about every instruction given to him and then did in fact attack the officer. Police just want to do there job and go home at the end of the day, they don't need belligerent punks giving them a hard time. If the kid would have simply complied the odds are he would have got a warning for flashing his high beams and been on his way. HE chose to make things hard for himself and it ultimately cost him.

That there needs to be two officers per patrol car at all time. At no time should an officer be out on patrol alone. This is nothing but trouble. He/she has no one to back them and have to wait for help to get there. This is going to make them more likely to shoot instead of trying to restrain.

The police need better training to deal with kids who might be difficult or others that might be suffering from some kind of mental illness that would make it difficult for them to cooperate. The police are here to protect and serve and are paid by taxpayer money. They are OUR employees. Something THEY need to realize. They are not the Gestapo.

How about people obey the officers instructions and not having to have two cops on scene.

You seem to blame the cop when the idiot driver is the only one at fault.

Kids who are difficult need better parenting. They are here to protect and serve and to ticket and arrest those that violate the law.

So your solution to the problem is shoot citizens if they are "difficult." Sorry, unacceptable. I don't care if a child is "bratty." That is not a capital punishment crime. Now, my solution would fix most of these issues.

Your solution is to allow the cop to get beat up or killed and not defend himself.

This was more than a "bratty" kid, this kid attacked the officer and that is unacceptable. Your solution is lawlessness. Don't comply with an officer and he should just let you go because you're a whiney brat. That is ******* ridiculous!

 

[ChrisL]

Here is an officer dealing with a VERY difficult motorist that he pulled over. Now, see how the cop handles this driver. THIS is how the police need to behave. This officer should be an example to ALL police officers. He keeps his cool. He never takes it personally. He realizes that this motorist has some "issues." He remains calm and does NOT escalate the situation. It's not right for an officer to rip someone out of their car because he is angry. This is part of his job, dealing with difficult people.

There's a difference *****. The "difficult" motorist DID hand over the paperwork asked for by the cop.
The loser punk brat repeatedly refused to hand over the paperwork.
The cop asked the loser punk brat SIX times nice a politely and calmly for the paperwork. The thankfully happily dead loser punk brat refused and he choose to attack the cop. Good day for the rest of us. We'll never have to deal with the loser punk brat.
Thanks to mommy's Liberal enabling (cough) parenting skills.

Was that you in that car?

Anyhow, the cop completely lost his cool. He is terrible at his job and should resign before he kills another unarmed child because he's angry at his authority being challenged. We citizens have rights. The police do not have the right to shoot unarmed teenagers. That is why there needs to be two officers per car. That would cut down on these kinds of incidents. Correct?

The teenager did in fact have arms and attached were hands. (Not sure how much good they are now though). The teenager attacked the cop with arms and hands.......which are legally considered 'weapons' BTW. The cop needed medical assistance after the teenager attacked him.
What advice would you give any teenager who gets stopped by a cop.....for any reason?
Would you advise the teenager to behave the way the now dead loser punk brat behaved?
Thought not.

Of course I wouldn't advise anyone to behave that. Some people can't help themselves. Teenage boys are hormonal, have a lot of boyhood pride, and get adrenaline when challenged. Anyone who knows kids knows this much. It's also widely recognized in the psychiatric community. That is why we classify a 17-year-old boy as a CHILD. That is why he can't drink, smoke, vote, etc.

If there had been two officers, this probably would not have happened.

There's a little thing called Social Darwinism.
Pretty much 100% of people who at any age "can't help themselves" to the point where they are refusing to comply with a lawful order from a cop and end up attacking the cop get's shot.
You attack a cop and you have signed your death warrant. This is the only way to prevent total anarchy. Which is how the dead loser punk brat was certainly behaving at home with parents who were enabling the behavior.
It's not any cops 'duty' to look at anyone of any age and say themselves: "This person just can't help himself so I won't do my duty".
Cops and prisons exist to protect normal people from those who "can't help themselves".

Oh please, sorry, but the cops are not the judge, jury and executioner. They need better training and two officers per patrol car at all times. Six weeks in police academy is not enough . . . obviously.

It brings to mind the incident in NY, where a cop shot 9 innocent bystanders.

NYPD: 9 shooting bystander victims hit by police gunfire

 

[ChrisL]

Obviously, you dummies can't argue any of my points.

What exactly are your points?

From what I have seen the driver failed to comply with just about every instruction given to him and then did in fact attack the officer. Police just want to do there job and go home at the end of the day, they don't need belligerent punks giving them a hard time. If the kid would have simply complied the odds are he would have got a warning for flashing his high beams and been on his way. HE chose to make things hard for himself and it ultimately cost him.

That there needs to be two officers per patrol car at all time. At no time should an officer be out on patrol alone. This is nothing but trouble. He/she has no one to back them and have to wait for help to get there. This is going to make them more likely to shoot instead of trying to restrain.

The police need better training to deal with kids who might be difficult or others that might be suffering from some kind of mental illness that would make it difficult for them to cooperate. The police are here to protect and serve and are paid by taxpayer money. They are OUR employees. Something THEY need to realize. They are not the Gestapo.

How about people obey the officers instructions and not having to have two cops on scene.

You seem to blame the cop when the idiot driver is the only one at fault.

Kids who are difficult need better parenting. They are here to protect and serve and to ticket and arrest those that violate the law.

So your solution to the problem is shoot citizens if they are "difficult." Sorry, unacceptable. I don't care if a child is "bratty." That is not a capital punishment crime. Now, my solution would fix most of these issues.

Your solution is to allow the cop to get beat up or killed and not defend himself.

This was more than a "bratty" kid, this kid attacked the officer and that is unacceptable. Your solution is lawlessness. Don't comply with an officer and he should just let you go because you're a whiney brat. That is ******* ridiculous!

No. My solution is to have two officers per car and for police to be trained better in de-escalating such situations and people.

 

[ChrisL]

We have red light cameras which allow for traffic citations to be issued without any interaction between law enforcement and citizen. When a traffic violation such as this occurs, and the driver is uncooperative, it could be treated like a red light camera. The officer writes the citation and the driver gets the ticket in the mail.....which he can choose to dispute or not.

Allowing assholes in uniform to exorcise their demons on unsuspecting citizens....using a traffic violation as an excuse.....is bullshit.

And lets not forget, there WAS NO traffic violation. The only violation was the cop blinding people after being told repeatedly about it. Which he admitted.

It's almost like if someone would've wrecked from being blinded they would find the driver at fault saying "well, He IS a cop though" while scratching their ass crack

BTW, if a driver would have had an accident as a result of the cop flashing his lights, then yes he would be totally liable. Let's not make accusations on things that didn't happen though. the facts are the facts and you don't like the facts, right?

Are you kidding? Lol. OMG.

am I kidding what?

You're nuts! Lol. There were NO facts in your statement.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Here is an officer dealing with a VERY difficult motorist that he pulled over. Now, see how the cop handles this driver. THIS is how the police need to behave. This officer should be an example to ALL police officers. He keeps his cool. He never takes it personally. He realizes that this motorist has some "issues." He remains calm and does NOT escalate the situation. It's not right for an officer to rip someone out of their car because he is angry. This is part of his job, dealing with difficult people.

There's a difference *****. The "difficult" motorist DID hand over the paperwork asked for by the cop.
The loser punk brat repeatedly refused to hand over the paperwork.
The cop asked the loser punk brat SIX times nice a politely and calmly for the paperwork. The thankfully happily dead loser punk brat refused and he choose to attack the cop. Good day for the rest of us. We'll never have to deal with the loser punk brat.
Thanks to mommy's Liberal enabling (cough) parenting skills.

Was that you in that car?

Anyhow, the cop completely lost his cool. He is terrible at his job and should resign before he kills another unarmed child because he's angry at his authority being challenged. We citizens have rights. The police do not have the right to shoot unarmed teenagers. That is why there needs to be two officers per car. That would cut down on these kinds of incidents. Correct?

The teenager did in fact have arms and attached were hands. (Not sure how much good they are now though). The teenager attacked the cop with arms and hands.......which are legally considered 'weapons' BTW. The cop needed medical assistance after the teenager attacked him.
What advice would you give any teenager who gets stopped by a cop.....for any reason?
Would you advise the teenager to behave the way the now dead loser punk brat behaved?
Thought not.

Of course I wouldn't advise anyone to behave that. Some people can't help themselves. Teenage boys are hormonal, have a lot of boyhood pride, and get adrenaline when challenged. Anyone who knows kids knows this much. It's also widely recognized in the psychiatric community. That is why we classify a 17-year-old boy as a CHILD. That is why he can't drink, smoke, vote, etc.

If there had been two officers, this probably would not have happened.

How long have you been a boy?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

What exactly are your points?

From what I have seen the driver failed to comply with just about every instruction given to him and then did in fact attack the officer. Police just want to do there job and go home at the end of the day, they don't need belligerent punks giving them a hard time. If the kid would have simply complied the odds are he would have got a warning for flashing his high beams and been on his way. HE chose to make things hard for himself and it ultimately cost him.

That there needs to be two officers per patrol car at all time. At no time should an officer be out on patrol alone. This is nothing but trouble. He/she has no one to back them and have to wait for help to get there. This is going to make them more likely to shoot instead of trying to restrain.

The police need better training to deal with kids who might be difficult or others that might be suffering from some kind of mental illness that would make it difficult for them to cooperate. The police are here to protect and serve and are paid by taxpayer money. They are OUR employees. Something THEY need to realize. They are not the Gestapo.

How about people obey the officers instructions and not having to have two cops on scene.

You seem to blame the cop when the idiot driver is the only one at fault.

Kids who are difficult need better parenting. They are here to protect and serve and to ticket and arrest those that violate the law.

So your solution to the problem is shoot citizens if they are "difficult." Sorry, unacceptable. I don't care if a child is "bratty." That is not a capital punishment crime. Now, my solution would fix most of these issues.

Your solution is to allow the cop to get beat up or killed and not defend himself.

This was more than a "bratty" kid, this kid attacked the officer and that is unacceptable. Your solution is lawlessness. Don't comply with an officer and he should just let you go because you're a whiney brat. That is ******* ridiculous!

No. My solution is to have two officers per car and for police to be trained better in de-escalating such situations and people.

So you want to pay higher taxes for more police instead of having a society that respects the law. The kid attacked an armed cop, you think two cops would have made a difference?

The cop didn't escalate the matter, the punk kid did. Stop blaming the cop when the kid made a conscience decision to attack an armed officer.

 

[ChrisL]

Here is an officer dealing with a VERY difficult motorist that he pulled over. Now, see how the cop handles this driver. THIS is how the police need to behave. This officer should be an example to ALL police officers. He keeps his cool. He never takes it personally. He realizes that this motorist has some "issues." He remains calm and does NOT escalate the situation. It's not right for an officer to rip someone out of their car because he is angry. This is part of his job, dealing with difficult people.

There's a difference *****. The "difficult" motorist DID hand over the paperwork asked for by the cop.
The loser punk brat repeatedly refused to hand over the paperwork.
The cop asked the loser punk brat SIX times nice a politely and calmly for the paperwork. The thankfully happily dead loser punk brat refused and he choose to attack the cop. Good day for the rest of us. We'll never have to deal with the loser punk brat.
Thanks to mommy's Liberal enabling (cough) parenting skills.

Was that you in that car?

Anyhow, the cop completely lost his cool. He is terrible at his job and should resign before he kills another unarmed child because he's angry at his authority being challenged. We citizens have rights. The police do not have the right to shoot unarmed teenagers. That is why there needs to be two officers per car. That would cut down on these kinds of incidents. Correct?

The teenager did in fact have arms and attached were hands. (Not sure how much good they are now though). The teenager attacked the cop with arms and hands.......which are legally considered 'weapons' BTW. The cop needed medical assistance after the teenager attacked him.
What advice would you give any teenager who gets stopped by a cop.....for any reason?
Would you advise the teenager to behave the way the now dead loser punk brat behaved?
Thought not.

Of course I wouldn't advise anyone to behave that. Some people can't help themselves. Teenage boys are hormonal, have a lot of boyhood pride, and get adrenaline when challenged. Anyone who knows kids knows this much. It's also widely recognized in the psychiatric community. That is why we classify a 17-year-old boy as a CHILD. That is why he can't drink, smoke, vote, etc.

If there had been two officers, this probably would not have happened.

But a 17 year old is given a license to drive a vehicle that is a weapon. And as such there are rules. And those rules are that police officers are entitled to do certain things and as a licensed driver, the 17 year old is expected to obey the rules he received his license for. Hmmmmmmmmm?

Yes, well in my opinion, if they aren't old enough to drink, smoke or vote, then they have no business driving either. And there are plenty of adults who are even more difficult than this boy. The police need to learn and be trained to handle these types of situation, setting a calm tone. If a citizen asks for a police officer's badge number, he should give it. He should remain calm and do his job to the best of his ability, not with attitude. Some of these officers behave as if a traffic violation is . . . the equivalent of an armed robbery.

 

[ChrisL]

Here is an officer dealing with a VERY difficult motorist that he pulled over. Now, see how the cop handles this driver. THIS is how the police need to behave. This officer should be an example to ALL police officers. He keeps his cool. He never takes it personally. He realizes that this motorist has some "issues." He remains calm and does NOT escalate the situation. It's not right for an officer to rip someone out of their car because he is angry. This is part of his job, dealing with difficult people.

There's a difference *****. The "difficult" motorist DID hand over the paperwork asked for by the cop.
The loser punk brat repeatedly refused to hand over the paperwork.
The cop asked the loser punk brat SIX times nice a politely and calmly for the paperwork. The thankfully happily dead loser punk brat refused and he choose to attack the cop. Good day for the rest of us. We'll never have to deal with the loser punk brat.
Thanks to mommy's Liberal enabling (cough) parenting skills.

Was that you in that car?

Anyhow, the cop completely lost his cool. He is terrible at his job and should resign before he kills another unarmed child because he's angry at his authority being challenged. We citizens have rights. The police do not have the right to shoot unarmed teenagers. That is why there needs to be two officers per car. That would cut down on these kinds of incidents. Correct?

The teenager did in fact have arms and attached were hands. (Not sure how much good they are now though). The teenager attacked the cop with arms and hands.......which are legally considered 'weapons' BTW. The cop needed medical assistance after the teenager attacked him.
What advice would you give any teenager who gets stopped by a cop.....for any reason?
Would you advise the teenager to behave the way the now dead loser punk brat behaved?
Thought not.

Of course I wouldn't advise anyone to behave that. Some people can't help themselves. Teenage boys are hormonal, have a lot of boyhood pride, and get adrenaline when challenged. Anyone who knows kids knows this much. It's also widely recognized in the psychiatric community. That is why we classify a 17-year-old boy as a CHILD. That is why he can't drink, smoke, vote, etc.

If there had been two officers, this probably would not have happened.

How long have you been a boy?

Oh, so you can't address the points I've made. I see. Funny old fart, you are.

 

[ChrisL]

That there needs to be two officers per patrol car at all time. At no time should an officer be out on patrol alone. This is nothing but trouble. He/she has no one to back them and have to wait for help to get there. This is going to make them more likely to shoot instead of trying to restrain.

The police need better training to deal with kids who might be difficult or others that might be suffering from some kind of mental illness that would make it difficult for them to cooperate. The police are here to protect and serve and are paid by taxpayer money. They are OUR employees. Something THEY need to realize. They are not the Gestapo.

How about people obey the officers instructions and not having to have two cops on scene.

You seem to blame the cop when the idiot driver is the only one at fault.

Kids who are difficult need better parenting. They are here to protect and serve and to ticket and arrest those that violate the law.

So your solution to the problem is shoot citizens if they are "difficult." Sorry, unacceptable. I don't care if a child is "bratty." That is not a capital punishment crime. Now, my solution would fix most of these issues.

Your solution is to allow the cop to get beat up or killed and not defend himself.

This was more than a "bratty" kid, this kid attacked the officer and that is unacceptable. Your solution is lawlessness. Don't comply with an officer and he should just let you go because you're a whiney brat. That is ******* ridiculous!

No. My solution is to have two officers per car and for police to be trained better in de-escalating such situations and people.

So you want to pay higher taxes for more police instead of having a society that respects the law. The kid attacked an armed cop, you think two cops would have made a difference?

The cop didn't escalate the matter, the punk kid did. Stop blaming the cop when the kid made a conscience decision to attack an armed officer.

Kids do NOT make "conscious" decisions in a lot of instances. Another reason why they are considered "children."

 

[ChrisL]

That there needs to be two officers per patrol car at all time. At no time should an officer be out on patrol alone. This is nothing but trouble. He/she has no one to back them and have to wait for help to get there. This is going to make them more likely to shoot instead of trying to restrain.

The police need better training to deal with kids who might be difficult or others that might be suffering from some kind of mental illness that would make it difficult for them to cooperate. The police are here to protect and serve and are paid by taxpayer money. They are OUR employees. Something THEY need to realize. They are not the Gestapo.

How about people obey the officers instructions and not having to have two cops on scene.

You seem to blame the cop when the idiot driver is the only one at fault.

Kids who are difficult need better parenting. They are here to protect and serve and to ticket and arrest those that violate the law.

So your solution to the problem is shoot citizens if they are "difficult." Sorry, unacceptable. I don't care if a child is "bratty." That is not a capital punishment crime. Now, my solution would fix most of these issues.

Your solution is to allow the cop to get beat up or killed and not defend himself.

This was more than a "bratty" kid, this kid attacked the officer and that is unacceptable. Your solution is lawlessness. Don't comply with an officer and he should just let you go because you're a whiney brat. That is ******* ridiculous!

No. My solution is to have two officers per car and for police to be trained better in de-escalating such situations and people.

So you want to pay higher taxes for more police instead of having a society that respects the law. The kid attacked an armed cop, you think two cops would have made a difference?

The cop didn't escalate the matter, the punk kid did. Stop blaming the cop when the kid made a conscience decision to attack an armed officer.

The police need to learn that they are NOT the Gestapo.

 

[jc456]

There's a difference *****. The "difficult" motorist DID hand over the paperwork asked for by the cop.
The loser punk brat repeatedly refused to hand over the paperwork.
The cop asked the loser punk brat SIX times nice a politely and calmly for the paperwork. The thankfully happily dead loser punk brat refused and he choose to attack the cop. Good day for the rest of us. We'll never have to deal with the loser punk brat.
Thanks to mommy's Liberal enabling (cough) parenting skills.

Was that you in that car?

Anyhow, the cop completely lost his cool. He is terrible at his job and should resign before he kills another unarmed child because he's angry at his authority being challenged. We citizens have rights. The police do not have the right to shoot unarmed teenagers. That is why there needs to be two officers per car. That would cut down on these kinds of incidents. Correct?

The teenager did in fact have arms and attached were hands. (Not sure how much good they are now though). The teenager attacked the cop with arms and hands.......which are legally considered 'weapons' BTW. The cop needed medical assistance after the teenager attacked him.
What advice would you give any teenager who gets stopped by a cop.....for any reason?
Would you advise the teenager to behave the way the now dead loser punk brat behaved?
Thought not.

Of course I wouldn't advise anyone to behave that. Some people can't help themselves. Teenage boys are hormonal, have a lot of boyhood pride, and get adrenaline when challenged. Anyone who knows kids knows this much. It's also widely recognized in the psychiatric community. That is why we classify a 17-year-old boy as a CHILD. That is why he can't drink, smoke, vote, etc.

If there had been two officers, this probably would not have happened.

There's a little thing called Social Darwinism.
Pretty much 100% of people who at any age "can't help themselves" to the point where they are refusing to comply with a lawful order from a cop and end up attacking the cop get's shot.
You attack a cop and you have signed your death warrant. This is the only way to prevent total anarchy. Which is how the dead loser punk brat was certainly behaving at home with parents who were enabling the behavior.
It's not any cops 'duty' to look at anyone of any age and say themselves: "This person just can't help himself so I won't do my duty".
Cops and prisons exist to protect normal people from those who "can't help themselves".

Oh please, sorry, but the cops are not the judge, jury and executioner. They need better training and two officers per patrol car at all times. Six weeks in police academy is not enough . . . obviously.

It brings to mind the incident in NY, where a cop shot 9 innocent bystanders.

NYPD: 9 shooting bystander victims hit by police gunfire

sure cops are when threatened. What world you livin in? Go walk into a police station with a gun and see how much attention you receive. It's fools like you who have kids like this kid. you can't take care of your kid so let society and BTW, don't follow society's rules.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

There's a difference *****. The "difficult" motorist DID hand over the paperwork asked for by the cop.
The loser punk brat repeatedly refused to hand over the paperwork.
The cop asked the loser punk brat SIX times nice a politely and calmly for the paperwork. The thankfully happily dead loser punk brat refused and he choose to attack the cop. Good day for the rest of us. We'll never have to deal with the loser punk brat.
Thanks to mommy's Liberal enabling (cough) parenting skills.

Was that you in that car?

Anyhow, the cop completely lost his cool. He is terrible at his job and should resign before he kills another unarmed child because he's angry at his authority being challenged. We citizens have rights. The police do not have the right to shoot unarmed teenagers. That is why there needs to be two officers per car. That would cut down on these kinds of incidents. Correct?

The teenager did in fact have arms and attached were hands. (Not sure how much good they are now though). The teenager attacked the cop with arms and hands.......which are legally considered 'weapons' BTW. The cop needed medical assistance after the teenager attacked him.
What advice would you give any teenager who gets stopped by a cop.....for any reason?
Would you advise the teenager to behave the way the now dead loser punk brat behaved?
Thought not.

Of course I wouldn't advise anyone to behave that. Some people can't help themselves. Teenage boys are hormonal, have a lot of boyhood pride, and get adrenaline when challenged. Anyone who knows kids knows this much. It's also widely recognized in the psychiatric community. That is why we classify a 17-year-old boy as a CHILD. That is why he can't drink, smoke, vote, etc.

If there had been two officers, this probably would not have happened.

How long have you been a boy?

Oh, so you can't address the points I've made. I see. Funny old fart, you are.

You haven't made any points. You trying to tell us men how boys behave. As if they can't control their hormones, pride or adrenaline which is absolute bullshit.

A 17 year old "child" can injure or kill.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

How about people obey the officers instructions and not having to have two cops on scene.

You seem to blame the cop when the idiot driver is the only one at fault.

Kids who are difficult need better parenting. They are here to protect and serve and to ticket and arrest those that violate the law.

So your solution to the problem is shoot citizens if they are "difficult." Sorry, unacceptable. I don't care if a child is "bratty." That is not a capital punishment crime. Now, my solution would fix most of these issues.

Your solution is to allow the cop to get beat up or killed and not defend himself.

This was more than a "bratty" kid, this kid attacked the officer and that is unacceptable. Your solution is lawlessness. Don't comply with an officer and he should just let you go because you're a whiney brat. That is ******* ridiculous!

No. My solution is to have two officers per car and for police to be trained better in de-escalating such situations and people.

So you want to pay higher taxes for more police instead of having a society that respects the law. The kid attacked an armed cop, you think two cops would have made a difference?

The cop didn't escalate the matter, the punk kid did. Stop blaming the cop when the kid made a conscience decision to attack an armed officer.

Kids do NOT make "conscious" decisions in a lot of instances. Another reason why they are considered "children."

Yes kids make conscience decisions, they do not respond by instinct. They are human after all and make stupid decisions but they're very much conscience of it.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Obviously, you dummies can't argue any of my points.

What exactly are your points?

From what I have seen the driver failed to comply with just about every instruction given to him and then did in fact attack the officer. Police just want to do there job and go home at the end of the day, they don't need belligerent punks giving them a hard time. If the kid would have simply complied the odds are he would have got a warning for flashing his high beams and been on his way. HE chose to make things hard for himself and it ultimately cost him.

That there needs to be two officers per patrol car at all time. At no time should an officer be out on patrol alone. This is nothing but trouble. He/she has no one to back them and have to wait for help to get there. This is going to make them more likely to shoot instead of trying to restrain.

The police need better training to deal with kids who might be difficult or others that might be suffering from some kind of mental illness that would make it difficult for them to cooperate. The police are here to protect and serve and are paid by taxpayer money. They are OUR employees. Something THEY need to realize. They are not the Gestapo.

How about people obey the officers instructions and not having to have two cops on scene.

You seem to blame the cop when the idiot driver is the only one at fault.

Kids who are difficult need better parenting. They are here to protect and serve and to ticket and arrest those that violate the law.

So your solution to the problem is shoot citizens if they are "difficult." Sorry, unacceptable. I don't care if a child is "bratty." That is not a capital punishment crime. Now, my solution would fix most of these issues.

He did not get shot for being difficult he got shot for ATTACKING the cop.

 

[ChrisL]

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Lets see, who to believe? An idiot on a n internet board that saw and can not understand a video or a DA that had all the evidence, all the facts and investigated the situation?

 

[dannyboys]

So your solution to the problem is shoot citizens if they are "difficult." Sorry, unacceptable. I don't care if a child is "bratty." That is not a capital punishment crime. Now, my solution would fix most of these issues.

Your solution is to allow the cop to get beat up or killed and not defend himself.

This was more than a "bratty" kid, this kid attacked the officer and that is unacceptable. Your solution is lawlessness. Don't comply with an officer and he should just let you go because you're a whiney brat. That is ******* ridiculous!

No. My solution is to have two officers per car and for police to be trained better in de-escalating such situations and people.

So you want to pay higher taxes for more police instead of having a society that respects the law. The kid attacked an armed cop, you think two cops would have made a difference?

The cop didn't escalate the matter, the punk kid did. Stop blaming the cop when the kid made a conscience decision to attack an armed officer.

Kids do NOT make "conscious" decisions in a lot of instances. Another reason why they are considered "children."

Yes kids make conscience decisions, they do not respond by instinct. They are human after all and make stupid decisions but they're very much conscience of it.

This brat made a conscious decision to get into a fight with a cop. The brat attacked the cop as the video proves. The DA saw all the evidence........including the data recovered from the cop car's black box.
It PROVED the car did NOT have it's high beams on. The car was examined and the headlights were properly adjusted. The dash cam recording PROVED the brat was flashing his high beams at the cop car which is a civil crime in that state.
The brat was out looking for trouble and he found it. End of story.