Cops don't deserve to be given attitude just because they're doing their job.

For that matter, no one who's just doing their job should have to put up with attitude.

I wonder how much saliva from wait staff Mr Gates has consumed in his time.

I don't believe that we should accept that cops are wild animals as "basic reality".

They're not wild animals, they're just people, who don't get paid enough to put up with the crap they cop from some of the arseholes out there.

eta: bold and underlining. My point is they're not robots. They go out of their way to help people in trouble and perform heroic deeds every day (as a group of people) so why shouldn't they be shown the respect they're due for putting their lives on the line constantly?

If we see them as people, then why do I see so many "don't poke the bear" style responses?

It may be a good idea not to mouth off to cops, but that doesn't render anything they do any more acceptible.

It reminds me of people who say that a girl deserves what she gets if she walks through a shady neighborhood wearing a short skirt.

I don't see them as 'don't poke the bear' responses, but it's just a metaphor anyway. Being people means they don't have unlimited tollerance for dickheads.

I don't think anything the cop did was unacceptable. The man refused to comply and the cop can only assume the worst or he could get shot or stabbed or worse if he decides to take the 'suspects' word, and I think that's the key in this case. The man was a suspect until he proved his identity, but by then he'd already committed a misdemeanor making him the fair recipient of his subsequent treatment.

Nope, I have no sympathy for people who treat cops like crap. I think they do deserve what they get.

As to the short skirt reference, well, I have some thoughts on that, but it's another discussion entirely.

"Deserves what she gets" is a little harsher when we're talking (presumably) about rape rather than spending a few hours under arrest. And while no one ever deserves rape, my own daughter will be expected to use her brain and take responsibility for the situations she chooses to put herself in.

Following standard procedures to ensure their own safety and the effectiveness of their job is the exact opposite of acting like wild animals. They aren't just pulling this shit out of their ass on the fly as you seem to think.

No anything they do, just the stuff they do correctly (like not taking some dude's word for it that he didn't just break into the house the cop was dispatched to check on) Cops get in trouble/sued all the time, especially if they don't follow procedure.

I was just watching a clip of the "made for TV" movie :blush: A Cry For Help. Of course it's a very sensationalized account of the cop's response, but it pointed out, to me, what jinx just said. In this movie, the cop responded to a domestic violence case BADLY. This case led to a law in Connecticut about treating DV like any other violent crime: follow procedure.

Police Officers are trained in exactly what to do in unknown situations. To NOT follow the protocol that has been developed after years of advancement in all aspects of our society is to beg for lawsuits when you "guessed" wrong and didn't follow procedure.

I'm not saying there aren't abuses, as with anything. However, how hard is it, when you know you're where you're supposed to be, to just explain the situation? There is time when indignation is warranted. This was not one of those times.

eta: the movie was about Tracey Thurman.

From here.

Sorry for the tangent.

No he hadn't.Nobody's saying they should have taken the guy's word, but once the guy's word was corroborated, the cop should have left.

So you are still maintaining the position he was arrested because of his ability/inability to prove his identity? The man was arrested for not cooperating with police. If you are cock to a cop who is following correct procedures you had better plan for your day to go downhill. That seems pretty damn simple to understand. Or maybe you think Gates was arrested because the cop was a white jackass and the professor was a poor, oppressed black man just trying to make his way in this brutal world. Of course, you'd be wrong but maybe that is what you think.

He behaved in a manor that led the cop to believe further investigation was warranted. Why was he so agitated and confrontational when the cop was just there to do his job, of protecting the professor's property?
If you get pulled over for speeding but behave in a manner that leads the cop to think you're drunk, he's not going to just leave after he writes your ticket - he's going to investigate further.

I've lived in a small town and a bad urban area and there is a HUGE difference on how cops hold themselves and the relations that follow.

The first and largest difference I noticed is that cops protect some neighborhoods and control others. For example, in my old neighborhood, I've had police pull out guns on me for a potential speeding ticket, have pulled guns out on some of my friends monthly for looking "suspicious", and have taken 40 minutes to respond when someone tried to break into my apartment.

There are many reasons why cops act like that, some justified and some not, but it is putting up with that type of mentality that causes such hate towards cops, especially in the African American community. When the police force feels more like a foreign occupying force who obviously don't give a shit about you then neighbors potentially risking their lives to protect their community, a rebellious nature cannot be surprising.

My theory is that besides the natural corruptness that comes with a job that holds power over the rest of society, is that most rookie police officers do not try to become racist asshole LAPD wannabes, but they are tired of putting up (I can relate with this as well) with many civilians that act rebelliously because of past experiences with other cops along with exposure to older cops. Its really a cause and effect spiral that has been out of control for some time.

The teenagers act the way they do because of teenage rebellion and police behavior, and in response the police act like assholes because of this and corruptness, and then the population responds and etc.

Obviously not. He proved his identity, and the cop arrested him anyway. At which point, he should have been gone, and there woud be nobody for Gates to be a cock to.In effect, but not legally. He wasn't charged with obstruction or disobeying a lawful order. Presumably because he did, in fact, provide the ID. He was arrested for being disorderly. In his own home. Don't poke the bear. It's pretty simple to understand, and good advice. But it absolves the bear.

This is how I see this whole situation with Gates:

The police responded to a call regarding a possible break in.

The police (eventually) verified the suspects as the resident.

At that point their job (investigating a B&E) was done at that residence and they should have left.
- - - -
Notice I left out things that are irrelevant, namely: race and ass-hattery of participants.

Gates was in his own yard, exercising his first amendment rights. By definition, that cannot be illegal. You don't have to like or agree with what he says or how he says it.

Exactly.

Having the "right" to be a dickhead doesn't mean you HAVE to be a dickhead, especially not to someone who is only following procedure and trying to protect you. Everyone is so concerned that their righteous indignation be heard (a unique though rampant form of attention-whoring) that they forget to even think about the other side, and the implications of behaving like an asshat or acting like a decent person.

It's really that simple. :headshake

I don't think I've defended anything but his right to be a dickhead. I certainly don't think he had to be. I fully agree that he was an ass, and shouldn't have been. I've said so several times.

But you believe that, rather than follow procedure, the cop should bow to the asshat?

I don't consider not arresting someone to be bowing.

It is if procedure calls for arrest, and the alleged "perp" (i love that word) gets his way (the cop not following procedure) because the alleged perp is throwing a hissy fit.

I feel safer already. When the drunk down the street decides to kill someone, I'll be glad to know he was able to scare the cop off by crying foul.

So...to clarify, are you saying that the cop should arrest someone even if they aren't doing anything illegal?

The asshat in question did do something illegal, called interfering with government adminitration and disorderly conduct. He wasn't arrested for B&E, or being a dick, he was breaking the law! How many times do you need to be told that?

Understanding that basic fact makes it near impossible for all the boo-hooing poor pitiful me crap to go on. Facts render the unreasonably indignant mute. There's no attention in mute.

"Don't taze me bro!"

Damn! thats the first I heard of that - Did the cops even have tasers?

I have no idea. I just seemed appropriate in the slant of the thread and how some people believe that Gates was some kind of victim in all of this. He was not. If anything he was an instigator. I would have tazed him just for the hell of it. I guess that is why I am not a cop.

He was arrested for disorderly conduct, in his own home. It is all but impossible for that charge to stick. How would he "cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly [create] a risk thereof" in his own home?I'l wait for the first time that it's told to me when true.

No, he was arrested outside of his home, on his property, but outside the front door, which is why they could have made it stick. Well until the President of the United States thought it was a good idea to throw in his opinion on a local police matter.

Well, it was a color issue and Obama was supposed to fix all that, right?

Oh he fixed it alright. How about a beer?

We agree that he was not in his house, but that he was on his own property.

I guess then, we need to determine, by local law, if private property is considered "public" or not.

His dickishness is not in question. He *was* a dick. But being a dick on your own property is *not* against the law!

And not just on his property, but on his porch.It was dismissed long before Obama said anything.

we still on about this? (shakes head)

:lol:

There really is nothing more to add.

I second that.

Yea, in view of the public. Hence, disorderly conduct. They should have left him in jail for at least a night.

The law is written vaguely enough that it could apply, even to private property, which, IMHO, is unconstitutional. But it is a law, HM, wrong as it is.

Here is the Massachusettes statute:

They should have tazed his ass.

Yeah, because tazing (which is potentially lethal if old guy has ANY heart condition at ALL) is such an appropriate reponse to an asshat.

Should I point out I believe it should be legal to simply off anyone I deem to be a fuckstick? The line forms behind the arguing professor gates and dick cheney.

Smarter either way you look at it, seems to me.

It's also part of growing more mature.

See? You told. :mad:

Told? I Quoted. :p

Until you quote it, no one reads it. I'm safe in Shawnonimity. Have you been here before?

:bleh:

Um, never. How's the sangria? Can we get windsurf lessons?

The sangria is so-so. There is no wind-surfing, but there is cliff-jumping, which might interest you. ;)

Not me! I ain't skeered of widths, but I am skeered of heights!