When will people learn................

[evoman3957]

..........that it is much easier to comply, when told to do something by the Police, than it is not to and to then give them an excuse to have to restrain somebody. Having been taught control and restraint techniques, by the best in the business, I can tell you, the first rule is to take them down to the floor; where they are easier to control. Having said that, there are some EXTREMELY BIG People around, that take an awful lot of effort to get under control.......physically. This latest Black Guy, in America, was very big and strong and it was never going to be easy to restrain Him. He may very well have been doing nothing, to warrant the attention of the Police; but why didn't He just go along and argue the point in the Police Station. He was asthmatic ( from what I can gather ), so the last thing He needed; was the radical exertion that was required to control Him physically. Black People, in some of these places in America, may have a genuine grievance; but pushing things, to force a confrontation every time, is not going to get any kind of a result that will make anybody happy.

[cee-dee]

I don't suppose I'll get any prizes for saying this, but it seems to me that the race card always gets played in circumstances like that but when you look at things with an open, unbiased mind, the race angle starts the other way round.

A simple question gets responded to with verbal aggression before anything physical happens and the initial trigger gets overshadowed by the result of the confrontation and gets blown up in to a racial thing.

[right-then-petal]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-30336995

peek at second video

[suzieseaside]

Hi evo - did you forget a link?  What are you referring to? The recent incident in Phoenix?

[suzieseaside]

Thanks petal - you posted when I was posting. 

[suzieseaside]

Evo posted - This latest Black Guy, in America, was very big and strong and it was never going to be easy to restrain Him. He may very well have been doing nothing, to warrant the attention of the Police; but why didn't He just go along and argue the point in the Police Station.

From the second video in the link that petal posted, it doesn't look as if the police gave him any chance, but just piled in to get him on the floor. I'm sure that the cops in the US have a tough job but there seem to be a lot of incidences of either excessive force or trigger-happy cops over there. 

For example -the Cleveland force which has just been declared by the US Justice Dept to systematically use excessive force, and in the case of the 12 year-old with a toy gun being shot, the officer who killed him was clearly not up to the job and had previously displayed immaturity and loss of composure in handgun training. 

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-cleveland-police-probe-20141204-story.html

Thank goodness we don't have the level of handgun ownership and armed officers over here.  I know that many US citizens believe in the right to carry guns supposedly to defend themselves, but I would think that it would inevitably lead to greater tensions and actions before thought.  I hope we never will.

[evoman3957]

Hi Suzie, I didn't actually post a Link; as I was referring to several incidents, that have taken place in the US of late, the link that Petal posted, being the latest one that made Me post. The Big Guy in petals post, definitely wasn't going to go anywhere voluntarily; so confrontation was the only outcome. Rightly or wrongly, the Police have the law on their side initially; so compliance really is the only choice. Whether they use or abuse that power, is another question; but to resist them at the time, can not have an outcome that would be in the person's ( who is resisting ) interest. Sometimes, a full frontal attack; is not the way to win a battle and if somebody kept on doing it, they'd lose the war as well.

[suzieseaside]

I agree that compliance is the only choice.  I guess there's not enough video of the big guy to show his behaviour before they jumped on him so perhaps no surprise that there has been some protests about police methods in that instance.

[right-then-petal]

point of interest

i watch the ID channel and cops program,what we in UK do'nt realise is over there across the pond lots of peeps carry guns and they pull these guns out of very warm strange places and use em

thats why police are a lot rougher

just watch and think what would you do

[suzieseaside]

I think most people do realise petal, and hence my point above about so much handgun ownership making people (civilians and police) more twitchy, and yes as you say, cops are probably a lot rougher as a consequence.

Not an easy job I'm sure and scary at times.

[upthecreekyetagain]

We have very short memories.

In the mid 70's I worked in Wandsworth with a number of black colleagues - every single one of whom complained of regularly being stopped by the police under the 'sus laws' whilst at the same time none of the white workers had been stopped even once  One guy was stopped five times in a matter of three days and on the sixth occasion objected to being stopped and resisted attempts to search him ending in his arrest.  Some of his fellow workers sympathised with his actions as thankfully so did the company.

It's easy to say that he should have complied as should the other tens of thousands being stopped in cities across the UK but if they had would the 'sus' laws still be in force and would we ever have had a review of the police force that revealed an ethos of institutionalised racism in various forces.

It was only following the Brixton riots in London, the St Pauls riots in Bristol, the Chapeltown riots in Leeds and the Toxteth riots in Liverpool that the Vagrancy Act was repealed in the early 80s.

I don't know if I would have had the patience to meekly comply with being stopped five times or the courage to resist on the sixth but I won't criticise individuals on the basis that they should have done as they were told and that any ill consequences are their own fault without knowing the full facts.

[blackburn_stevie]

Maybe if a person was stopped and searched he or she could be given photo relevant post to say that they were A1 fit to survive kind of thing.. So, if you get stopped, you flash the card and away you go. Just a thought.

[al**bear]

Jumped by 6 Police officers when he had his hands up - yep big threat there

This time the Video shows clearly he has his hands up

His crime ?  - not an  assault, not a robbery, just an infraction against local sales laws

He was selling some loose Cigarettes

[al**bear]

Yes EVO  ,

being Black and having watched what happens to your fellow Blacks & the other poor in American Police stations, fills you with a great sense of well being and civic duty to help the MAN

[lambsy_uk]

---

@upthecreekyetagain wrote:

We have very short memories.

In the mid 70's I worked in Wandsworth with a number of black colleagues - every single one of whom complained of regularly being stopped by the police under the 'sus laws' whilst at the same time none of the white workers had been stopped even once  One guy was stopped five times in a matter of three days and on the sixth occasion objected to being stopped and resisted attempts to search him ending in his arrest.  

---

My suggestion would be that the time to question such unwarranted attention is not at the point of most vulnerability and possible confrontation. After the event would be best..

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@lambsy_uk wrote:

---

@upthecreekyetagain wrote:

We have very short memories.

In the mid 70's I worked in Wandsworth with a number of black colleagues - every single one of whom complained of regularly being stopped by the police under the 'sus laws' whilst at the same time none of the white workers had been stopped even once  One guy was stopped five times in a matter of three days and on the sixth occasion objected to being stopped and resisted attempts to search him ending in his arrest.  

---

My suggestion would be that the time to question such unwarranted attention is not at the point of most vulnerability and possible confrontation. After the event would be best..

---

In the case I related that is exactly what he did on the first five occasions - on the sixth he 'lost it'.  Best course of action? - Probably not - Understandable? - I think so.

[cee-dee]

The "sus" Laws???

Isn't everyone arrested "on suspicion"?

"I'm arresting you on suspicion of ****** ******* etc You do not have to say anything but........ etc etc etc" is what those arrested hear isn't it?

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@cee-dee wrote:

The "sus" Laws???

Isn't everyone arrested "on suspicion"?

"I'm arresting you on suspicion of ****** ******* etc You do not have to say anything but........ etc etc etc" is what those arrested hear isn't it?

---

True, but the 'sus law' was based on the Vagrancy Act which allowed police officers to stop and search individuals based purely on the officers 'word'.  No record of such 'stops' were required nor were officers required to justify their reasons for stopping individuals.  Refusing to allow the police to search them or refusal, or inability in the case of the homeless, to give the officers details of their permanent address was an arrestable offence.

The biggest objection to the 'sus laws' was that they were used in the majority of cases to stop and search members of ethnic minorities and were based on nothing more than the colour of an individuals skin, the clothes they were wearing or the location they were seen in.  The vast majority of those stopped were never arrested so your contention regarding suspicion being a key part of an arrest is not relevant.

Since the early 80s and the repeal of the Vagrancy Act the police have been given more and more specific stop and search powers, specifically by the Public Order Act and the various Terrorism Acts - at least now these 'stop and search' incidents are recorded and include the ethnic origin of those stopped and the grounds on which the suspicion that a criminal act had or was about to be committed was based - although under the Criminal Justice and Public Order  Act 1994 the police can designate a specific area for a period of 24 hours where they no longer have to show reasonable grounds for suspicion when stopping individuals. 

[evoman3957]

As seem to be so often the case on here, my point has been missed ( more often that not by the same people ). Whether the Police were right or wrong is not the point......at the time.......is it !!  If the Black Guy had simply turned around, put His Hands behind His back ( ready to be cuffed ) and gone with them quietly ( regardless of HOW many times it had happened to Him before ); He'd be ALIVE now. Somebody was Filming the incident, so it would have been for ALL to see; that He had gone quietly and was unharmed / unmarked. If anything had happened to Him after that, while in Police custody, THEN they would have had a lot of explaining to do and He might have got some justice. More evidence or more facts of the incident aren't required, the Police wanted Him to go with them and He didn't want to; that gave them an excuse to jump on Him and now He's Dead.........as I said......When will people learn. I'm not debating whether the Police are over zealous, power crazy, right, wrong, or justified........I'm saying THEY have the Power and a wrong reaction by YOU / US ( especially in America ), could cost YOU / US our Lives.

[upthecreekyetagain]

---

@evoman3957 wrote:

As seem to be so often the case on here, my point has been missed ( more often that not by the same people ). Whether the Police were right or wrong is not the point......at the time.......is it !!  If the Black Guy had simply turned around, put His Hands behind His back ( ready to be cuffed ) and gone with them quietly ( regardless of HOW many times it had happened to Him before ); He'd be ALIVE now. Somebody was Filming the incident, so it would have been for ALL to see; that He had gone quietly and was unharmed / unmarked. If anything had happened to Him after that, while in Police custody, THEN they would have had a lot of explaining to do and He might have got some justice. More evidence or more facts of the incident aren't required, the Police wanted Him to go with them and He didn't want to; that gave them an excuse to jump on Him and now He's Dead.........as I said......When will people learn. I'm not debating whether the Police are over zealous, power crazy, right, wrong, or justified........I'm saying THEY have the Power and a wrong reaction by YOU / US ( especially in America ), could cost YOU / US our Lives.

---

Not missing the point at all - it is exactly the point I addressed in my first post!

"I don't know if I would have had the patience to meekly comply with being stopped five times or the courage to resist on the sixth but I won't criticise individuals on the basis that they should have done as they were told and that any ill consequences are their own fault without knowing the full facts."

That is my answer to your 'point'.

Of course if the guy in question had fully complied then he wouldn't have been killed on the spot and logic says that would have been the best outcome - all I'm saying is that I won't judge nor criticise his actions without knowing the full facts.