Body worn cameras stop a lot of cop abuse (and also false accusations of abuse) since in the aftermath of some incident the footage often speaks for itself. As is the case here.
How even? Are the cops supposed to search the ground first? Like seriously, regardless of the circumstances leading to the arrest, how to prevent that?
You’re assuming that this was an accident and that he didn’t do it on purpose (he absolutely did). Humoring this theory though, let’s consider your question:
**Q: **Should a cop survey his surroundings, including the ground, before restraining someone?
**A: **Yes, of course, you would be a fucking idiot not to. Furthermore, forcing a person into some sort of hazard and injuring them, even unintentionally, is a problem to be avoided.
How to prevent that?
Your idea seems to be to do nothing at all so I’ll start by saying that’s fucking stupid.
Some might say to abolish law enforcement, but honestly, with compassionate police training emphasizing de-escalation, harm reduction, and civil service, we might actually have an ethical system someday. Also by firing cops on the first offense for use of excess force and blacklisting them from law enforcement for years requiring re-certification to ever become a cop again. And abolishing police unions and narrowing legal immunity for on-duty cops so that they don’t get away with maiming and killing people. And not funneling all of the excesses of the U.S. Military Industrial Complex into the hands of every suburban police department so that they can act as a standing army in our turnkey dictatorship.
Since you are the only person that actually replies: Has nothing to do with the case at hand, as I said (or the person I reply to) generally speaking. Since thinking abstract is hard, here an example: There was an armed robbery, they got the person cornered, one officer gets ready to charge him in order to disarm. This works. Person now on the ground. Face is wherever it happened to land. How to avoid that? Is that possible?
Did you even read the article? She accidentally drove the wrong way in a bus lane. Her son was still in the car. The police officer freaked out and instead of calmly talking to her, they called backup and the officer who came freaked out even worse and slammed her to the ground on an ant hill and then ignored her saying that ants were boring her face. You don’t see any point where this could have been avoided?
If you take someone into your custody via an arrest, you are then responsible for their wellbeing. This is common sense.
Imagine if someone is in the middle of a shallow river getting arrested. Would it be okay to hold their head underwater while you are restraining them? Of course not.
The officer is responsible for making sure that the suspect is not put into harms way during the course of having them in their custody. If they fail that very basic expectation, they should not be in law enforcement period.
Yes, cops are supposed to check the ground they are shoving someone’s face into to prevent injury to that person. Maybe not shove any nonviolent faces into the ground at all? But that is too much to ask, I guess.
Kindly go put your face on a fire ant nest, and then come back and tell us how the cop shouldn’t have moved her once she yelled about the fire ants.
The nests can sometimes be hard to spot, so I’m not voting one way or another on that. But basic human decency says, if you accidentally put someone on a fire ant nest, you move them asap once you notice.
“This lawsuit is brought to prevent this from ever happening again”
In the country where cop abuse happens all the time, and nothing ever stops or prevents it.
And we (as a whole) worship the police, especially thru idealized shows like Law & Order.
I’ve seen a bunch of rights violations on Law & Order.
My first thought after reading that sentence was “I have some bad news for her…”
Edit: fixed dad to bad.
Does she not know who her dad is? Or maybe you’re referring to the child’s father?
It was bad dad news.
Body worn cameras stop a lot of cop abuse (and also false accusations of abuse) since in the aftermath of some incident the footage often speaks for itself. As is the case here.
How even? Are the cops supposed to search the ground first? Like seriously, regardless of the circumstances leading to the arrest, how to prevent that?
Or listen to her screaming about the ants biting her face.
Like she was in the bodycam video.
So let’s break this down.
You’re assuming that this was an accident and that he didn’t do it on purpose (he absolutely did). Humoring this theory though, let’s consider your question:
**Q: **Should a cop survey his surroundings, including the ground, before restraining someone?
**A: **Yes, of course, you would be a fucking idiot not to. Furthermore, forcing a person into some sort of hazard and injuring them, even unintentionally, is a problem to be avoided.
Your idea seems to be to do nothing at all so I’ll start by saying that’s fucking stupid.
Some might say to abolish law enforcement, but honestly, with compassionate police training emphasizing de-escalation, harm reduction, and civil service, we might actually have an ethical system someday. Also by firing cops on the first offense for use of excess force and blacklisting them from law enforcement for years requiring re-certification to ever become a cop again. And abolishing police unions and narrowing legal immunity for on-duty cops so that they don’t get away with maiming and killing people. And not funneling all of the excesses of the U.S. Military Industrial Complex into the hands of every suburban police department so that they can act as a standing army in our turnkey dictatorship.
Since you are the only person that actually replies: Has nothing to do with the case at hand, as I said (or the person I reply to) generally speaking. Since thinking abstract is hard, here an example: There was an armed robbery, they got the person cornered, one officer gets ready to charge him in order to disarm. This works. Person now on the ground. Face is wherever it happened to land. How to avoid that? Is that possible?
My guy this lady was driving in a bus lane at a school, not armed robbery. What the fuck.
How can you think that I specifically talk about this case? And not an example for why this would not always be possible?
They could try not slamming people to the ground and hogtying them for the crime of… cutting in line at a school drop-off.
Did you even read the article? She accidentally drove the wrong way in a bus lane. Her son was still in the car. The police officer freaked out and instead of calmly talking to her, they called backup and the officer who came freaked out even worse and slammed her to the ground on an ant hill and then ignored her saying that ants were boring her face. You don’t see any point where this could have been avoided?
Mmmm, boot
Treat people like people, would be a nice start.
If you take someone into your custody via an arrest, you are then responsible for their wellbeing. This is common sense.
Imagine if someone is in the middle of a shallow river getting arrested. Would it be okay to hold their head underwater while you are restraining them? Of course not.
The officer is responsible for making sure that the suspect is not put into harms way during the course of having them in their custody. If they fail that very basic expectation, they should not be in law enforcement period.
Yes, cops are supposed to check the ground they are shoving someone’s face into to prevent injury to that person. Maybe not shove any nonviolent faces into the ground at all? But that is too much to ask, I guess.
You can’t be serious
I suppose looking at the ground is beyond the intelligence of most pigs…
bro even you don’t believe you’ve asked an actual question here
Kindly go put your face on a fire ant nest, and then come back and tell us how the cop shouldn’t have moved her once she yelled about the fire ants.
The nests can sometimes be hard to spot, so I’m not voting one way or another on that. But basic human decency says, if you accidentally put someone on a fire ant nest, you move them asap once you notice.