More and more I'm starting to hate cops.

[Odin]

I'm neither a legal adviser nor lawyer. I never said I knew my rights, I just know that things that happened to me were morally wrong.

Morals are not regulated by the police. The polce enforce the laws that were passed into legislation by the people through their elected officials. If you feel that a police officer is morally wrong for legally enforcing a law then your problem is not with the police officer, you problem is with the law.

Also, as a citizen you should know your rights. Many men have sacrificed and even died for those rights, and you seem to be the type to complain when you feel that those rights are being violated, so it seems the least you could do is know your rights before you complain.

I'm a person who doesn't give a shit about the law,

I can't imagine why you would have a problem with the police with that attitude.

I don't do things that I think are morally wrong, obviously what I think is morally wrong tuns out to be illegal too.

In other words, you ignore the laws that you don't like and only follow the laws that you choose to follow, and to justufy this you claim that you are following your own set of morals which should be sufficient for anyone who has a problem with your actions.

Like I said, I can't imagine why you would have a problem with the police with that attitude.

If you ever take a vacation I suggest taking a little trip to the real world, you might be surprised what you find there.


First, I need to say that my responses will be based on your side of the story. Knowing what I know about people and stories, I already know that if I talked to the officers in volved that their story would not be the same as your story. Having said that, I'll try to respond as if your story is factual and complete.

I was driving to work & decided to stop by at 7/11 to get a cup of tea. I leave the 7/11 & in a minute I see 3 police cars pulling me over. As soon as they approach me they ask me to get out of the car & not even letting me to get out of it myself literally dragging me out of it. They put my hands on the car & search me. I haven't said anything yet, so far I was just following orders.

In the US, the police have the right to detain suspects and conduct investigations. Their actions are guided by law and policy, and they take these actions when training, experience, and circumstances dictate that these actions are necessary.

You don't know why you were being stopped, but you did stop. That means you followed the law up to this point. If you matched the description of a suspect they were looking for then they had the right to stop you and detain you, including taking you out of your car and patting you down for weapons.

They tell me to sit on the pavement & put my hands where they can see one of them pointing gun at me.

It is at this precise moment that an adult person of reasonable intelligence would sit on the pavement and put their hands where they can be seen.

If having a gun pointed at you by uniformed police officers who are giving you lawful commands to get on the ground with your hands visible does not get your attention then I suspect that you are either (a) not very bright or (b) have an attitude problem and are looking for trouble.

If the answer is (a) then you have my sympathy, if the answer is (b) then you should realize that people who act like a suspect generally get treated like a suspect, and people who comply with lawful orders are generally sent on their way with minimal inconvenience.

I tell them that I wouldn't like to sit on the dirty pavement, if possible we can throw something on the ground before I sit.

At this point, if you were a possible felony suspect and failed to follow my orders you would have been taken to the gound hard and fast. I would not listen to your requests. You are being detained as part of a police investigation, and the officers involved are concerned for their safety, your safety, and the safety of the citizens. The situation is dynamic and they are making decisions at light speed based on information that you are not aware of. This is no time to debate. Especially when you're the one on the receiving end of a gun.

You should have followed their lawful commands. If you are harmed in any way while following their commands you can seek compensation for your losses in the appropriate venue. FYI, the appropriate venue is not while you're being ordered to the ground.

They tell me to shut up & follow orders. While I'm sitting on the ground 2 other cops are searching my vehicle. After all they check my license & they tell me that there was a criminal activity in the area & that I can go. They didn't even apologize to me.

There's your answer, just as I suspected. You git the description of a suspected criminal and they were responding as they had been trained to respond based on the limited information that was available to them.

They were acting lawfully. If you were harmed in any way or felt that you were mistreated you should have contacted the police dept. and spoken with a supervisor.

If I were an officer in that situation I would have apologized to you for what you had to go through. Understand that the police probably cannot give you any details about their investigation if you are not involved, and if you were the wrong guy then they probably needed to get moving to find the suspect. But I still would have apologized for the inconvenience because i think it's the decent thing to do.

Other time I walk out of a local store, 2 cops approach me & tell me to turn around. Next thing I know I'm handcuffed, nobody tells me my rights when doing this.

What rights? The police are no required to read you your Miranda rights when they detain you or when they arrest you. The only time you are required to be notified of your Miranda rights is when (a) you are in custody, (b) you are suspected of a crime and (c) you are being questioned about the crime and anything you say to the police might later be used as evidence against you. If the police are arresting you but not interrogating you then they do not need to read you your Miranda rights.

I'm trying to ask what's going on, they tell me to shut the hell up & sit in their car. They are taking me to the police station on the way talking to me like I'm the lowest crapbag ever, I still have no explanation why I'm being taken to the police station, one of them keeps on telling me how I'm gonna like the time I'll spend in jail. In the station they cuff me to the bench, take everything I have on me & tell me to sit tight there until they are back.

OK, so it sounds like you were detained and/or arrested. The police don't have to talk to you when they arrest you. They do have to charge you with a crime within a certain amount of time or release you. I am 100% certain that there is more to this story than I have been told, but since I wasn't there I don't know the whole story.

I've been sitting like that for 4hrs. After they take the cuffs off & tell me that there was an illegal activity in the area & the description of the suspect matched me. So please tell me what the hell this can be called if not illegally handcuffed.

You were lawfully detained. You were released without being charged.

Now the way you tell the story you have been apprehended twice while just minding your own business. In both instances you said the police apprehended you and then just let you go. They didn't tell you why they detained you, they didn't question you about anything, they didn't explain anything, they just snatched you up and cuffed you then cut you loose.

Do you have any idea how ridiculous this sounds? There's a whole lot more to your stories, we're just not hearing about it here. Do you think the police have scavenger hunts where they have to scoop up guys that look like you and hold them for a while? What possible motive would the police have for repeatedly picking you up and then releasing you with no explanation.

I don't believe these stories are the 100% truth and whole story, not at all.

Do you know how it feels to have cuffs on sitting in the police station for 4hrs with no idea why this is happening to you?

No. And I never will.

It seems to me like the term "illegal activity" is being used by cops every time they need to harass someone.

So I don't know if this legal or illegal & honestly I don't give a shit, but if it's not illegal than some laws need to be rewritten.

I doubt you'll convince many people here or anywhere else that your stories are exactly what happened and that there's nothing more to these stories. You sure as hell won't convince me. But if I got struck by lightning twice I might want to consider what I was doing the two times I got struck by lightning and see if I could avoid a third strike, if you get my drift.

 

[Gitfiddler]

Odin, are you a police officer or atty?

 

[Odin]

Odin, are you a police officer or atty?

I'll give you one clue - I ain't a lawyer.

 

[nbarts]

I have no reason to convince you or anybody else how true my story is. They both happen about 4 years ago with something like 2 months difference from each other. I've told this story to my close friends & they wouldn't believe me. I wouldn't believe it myself if it didn't happen to me. If you think it sounds ridiculous that's because it was ridiculous. You don't believe me because it would be too inconvenient for you to believe me. I think if I was arrested that would go on my record, no? If so then I wasn't arrested.

Have a nice day!

 

[fearhk213]

I haven't read this entire thread. I'm neither an officer, an attorney, or a law student, but he is right whether you (or I) like it or not. Essentially in these type of instances the balance of justice weighs more on the side of public order than to individual rights. Read Terry v. Ohio and it spells it out very clear. The verdict of that case created the term "reasonable suspision," which is different than probable cause. In other words cops are to be active, not reactive. Of course that's where it gets hairy because what happens when they act on the wrong person? However, if all they can do is react, then it's too late and victimization occurs. Anyway, all would do well to read that case because it is the basis for how our 4th Amendment rights are viewed.

I'm neither a legal adviser nor lawyer. I never said I knew my rights, I just know that things that happened to me were morally wrong.

Morals are not regulated by the police. The polce enforce the laws that were passed into legislation by the people through their elected officials. If you feel that a police officer is morally wrong for legally enforcing a law then your problem is not with the police officer, you problem is with the law.

Also, as a citizen you should know your rights. Many men have sacrificed and even died for those rights, and you seem to be the type to complain when you feel that those rights are being violated, so it seems the least you could do is know your rights before you complain.

I'm a person who doesn't give a shit about the law,

I can't imagine why you would have a problem with the police with that attitude.

I don't do things that I think are morally wrong, obviously what I think is morally wrong tuns out to be illegal too.

In other words, you ignore the laws that you don't like and only follow the laws that you choose to follow, and to justufy this you claim that you are following your own set of morals which should be sufficient for anyone who has a problem with your actions.

Like I said, I can't imagine why you would have a problem with the police with that attitude.

If you ever take a vacation I suggest taking a little trip to the real world, you might be surprised what you find there.


First, I need to say that my responses will be based on your side of the story. Knowing what I know about people and stories, I already know that if I talked to the officers in volved that their story would not be the same as your story. Having said that, I'll try to respond as if your story is factual and complete.

I was driving to work & decided to stop by at 7/11 to get a cup of tea. I leave the 7/11 & in a minute I see 3 police cars pulling me over. As soon as they approach me they ask me to get out of the car & not even letting me to get out of it myself literally dragging me out of it. They put my hands on the car & search me. I haven't said anything yet, so far I was just following orders.

In the US, the police have the right to detain suspects and conduct investigations. Their actions are guided by law and policy, and they take these actions when training, experience, and circumstances dictate that these actions are necessary.

You don't know why you were being stopped, but you did stop. That means you followed the law up to this point. If you matched the description of a suspect they were looking for then they had the right to stop you and detain you, including taking you out of your car and patting you down for weapons.

They tell me to sit on the pavement & put my hands where they can see one of them pointing gun at me.

It is at this precise moment that an adult person of reasonable intelligence would sit on the pavement and put their hands where they can be seen.

If having a gun pointed at you by uniformed police officers who are giving you lawful commands to get on the ground with your hands visible does not get your attention then I suspect that you are either (a) not very bright or (b) have an attitude problem and are looking for trouble.

If the answer is (a) then you have my sympathy, if the answer is (b) then you should realize that people who act like a suspect generally get treated like a suspect, and people who comply with lawful orders are generally sent on their way with minimal inconvenience.

I tell them that I wouldn't like to sit on the dirty pavement, if possible we can throw something on the ground before I sit.

At this point, if you were a possible felony suspect and failed to follow my orders you would have been taken to the gound hard and fast. I would not listen to your requests. You are being detained as part of a police investigation, and the officers involved are concerned for their safety, your safety, and the safety of the citizens. The situation is dynamic and they are making decisions at light speed based on information that you are not aware of. This is no time to debate. Especially when you're the one on the receiving end of a gun.

You should have followed their lawful commands. If you are harmed in any way while following their commands you can seek compensation for your losses in the appropriate venue. FYI, the appropriate venue is not while you're being ordered to the ground.

They tell me to shut up & follow orders. While I'm sitting on the ground 2 other cops are searching my vehicle. After all they check my license & they tell me that there was a criminal activity in the area & that I can go. They didn't even apologize to me.

There's your answer, just as I suspected. You git the description of a suspected criminal and they were responding as they had been trained to respond based on the limited information that was available to them.

They were acting lawfully. If you were harmed in any way or felt that you were mistreated you should have contacted the police dept. and spoken with a supervisor.

If I were an officer in that situation I would have apologized to you for what you had to go through. Understand that the police probably cannot give you any details about their investigation if you are not involved, and if you were the wrong guy then they probably needed to get moving to find the suspect. But I still would have apologized for the inconvenience because i think it's the decent thing to do.

Other time I walk out of a local store, 2 cops approach me & tell me to turn around. Next thing I know I'm handcuffed, nobody tells me my rights when doing this.

What rights? The police are no required to read you your Miranda rights when they detain you or when they arrest you. The only time you are required to be notified of your Miranda rights is when (a) you are in custody, (b) you are suspected of a crime and (c) you are being questioned about the crime and anything you say to the police might later be used as evidence against you. If the police are arresting you but not interrogating you then they do not need to read you your Miranda rights.

I'm trying to ask what's going on, they tell me to shut the hell up & sit in their car. They are taking me to the police station on the way talking to me like I'm the lowest crapbag ever, I still have no explanation why I'm being taken to the police station, one of them keeps on telling me how I'm gonna like the time I'll spend in jail. In the station they cuff me to the bench, take everything I have on me & tell me to sit tight there until they are back.

OK, so it sounds like you were detained and/or arrested. The police don't have to talk to you when they arrest you. They do have to charge you with a crime within a certain amount of time or release you. I am 100% certain that there is more to this story than I have been told, but since I wasn't there I don't know the whole story.

I've been sitting like that for 4hrs. After they take the cuffs off & tell me that there was an illegal activity in the area & the description of the suspect matched me. So please tell me what the hell this can be called if not illegally handcuffed.

You were lawfully detained. You were released without being charged.

Now the way you tell the story you have been apprehended twice while just minding your own business. In both instances you said the police apprehended you and then just let you go. They didn't tell you why they detained you, they didn't question you about anything, they didn't explain anything, they just snatched you up and cuffed you then cut you loose.

Do you have any idea how ridiculous this sounds? There's a whole lot more to your stories, we're just not hearing about it here. Do you think the police have scavenger hunts where they have to scoop up guys that look like you and hold them for a while? What possible motive would the police have for repeatedly picking you up and then releasing you with no explanation.

I don't believe these stories are the 100% truth and whole story, not at all.

Do you know how it feels to have cuffs on sitting in the police station for 4hrs with no idea why this is happening to you?

No. And I never will.

It seems to me like the term "illegal activity" is being used by cops every time they need to harass someone.

So I don't know if this legal or illegal & honestly I don't give a shit, but if it's not illegal than some laws need to be rewritten.

I doubt you'll convince many people here or anywhere else that your stories are exactly what happened and that there's nothing more to these stories. You sure as hell won't convince me. But if I got struck by lightning twice I might want to consider what I was doing the two times I got struck by lightning and see if I could avoid a third strike, if you get my drift.

 

[kannibul]

What irks me is when I watch COPS, and they gang-pile a suspect, and damn near break his arm trying to get him in cuffs, meanwhile the suspect is stating that he/she isn't resisting and that their arm doesn't bend the way the officers are trying to force it.

Maybe the person is lieing their ass off, but come on...I mean when you can see the odd angles and shit...

 

[nbarts]

OK, let me tell you another story. I happen to work as a delivery driver after 5pm. So one day I'm very hungry cause I haven't had anything all day long, so I grab some wings with fries, put them on the passenger seat & eat them while I'm driving. Then I've noticed a police vehicle driving behind me, I didn't have my seatbelt on & I kept on eating my food (I was really starving). So finally they pull me over & I put my seatbelt on before she approaches me. She asks me if I just put my seatbelt on, I agree that I did & I tell her the story of how hungry I was. She asks me for my license, I hold it over to her, she looks at it and holds it back to me asking me to be careful when I eat & drive at the same time. I tell her that appreciate her understanding the situation, she smiles & leaves. Do you believe this story?

gigidy-gigidy-goo

 

[Odin]

What irks me is when I watch COPS, and they gang-pile a suspect, and damn near break his arm trying to get him in cuffs, meanwhile the suspect is stating that he/she isn't resisting and that their arm doesn't bend the way the officers are trying to force it.

Maybe the person is lieing their ass off, but come on...I mean when you can see the odd angles and shit...

OK tough guy...you try to handcuff a subject that is actively resisting being handcuffed. I'll let you take your biggest friend along for help and I guarantee that you still won't be able to get a resisting person in cuffs without beating the balls off of them. The police aren't beating him, they're forcing him to comply with a lawful order.

Notice that when you're watching COPS and it takes 5 officers to handcuff someone, when the suspect stands up with cuffs on he's not injured (maybe minor scrapes from fighting). Sure, he squeals while he's being cuffed because he's in pain, but the officers are using pain complaince techniques that do not cause permanent injury, only tmeporary pain.

It's a lot harder than it looks to handcuff someone who is resisting and until you've tried it you really don't know what you're looking at on TV. Would you rather see a cop rear back and knock the shit out of someone and then slap the cuffs on while the guy is laid out on the pavement?

Contrary to what most people think, police work isn't all pretty and nice, and sometimes when suspects resist or fisht people get hurt. On a daily basis police deal with people who would like to kill or injure them, people who want to fight, etc... and when it's time for someone to go to jail the police do not have the option of backing down when a subject fights or resists. If you want to cooperate you'll go to jail, if you don't want to cooperate you'll go to jail tired and sore. Either way, you're going to jail. Don't complain when the police aren't nice to someone who is uncooperative.

Some people believe that they can stand around and argue with the police like they do with their mama or their wife. The police are under no obligation to listen to your side of the story and debating the merits of your argument before taking action. Just because your parents didn't raise you to respect the law doesn't mean that the police you come into contact with will tolerate your attitude.

 

[Odin]

OK, let me tell you another story. I happen to work as a delivery driver after 5pm. So one day I'm very hungry cause I haven't had anything all day long, so I grab some wings with fries, put them on the passenger seat & eat them while I'm driving. Then I've noticed a police vehicle driving behind me, I didn't have my seatbelt on & I kept on eating my food (I was really starving). So finally they pull me over & I put my seatbelt on before she approaches me. She asks me if I just put my seatbelt on, I agree that I did & I tell her the story of how hungry I was. She asks me for my license, I hold it over to her, she looks at it and holds it back to me asking me to be careful when I eat & drive at the same time. I tell her that appreciate her understanding the situation, she smiles & leaves. Do you believe this story?

gigidy-gigidy-goo

Sure, I believe that it very likely could have happened that way. I don't know if it is true or not, but it is very believable. That happens a million times a day in this country. Contrary to what you may believe, when the police stop a vehicle it usually isn't to issue a ticket, it's a reason to make contact with the driver.

Someone who is eating might be driving in a manner that could cause an officer to believe the driver might be impaired. After stopping the vehicle and seeing that the driver was distracted by eating and that there was no serious infraction the driver may be let go with a warning. The driver may also be cited for violations if the officer chose to do so.

Everybody does something, or has some equipment violation on their vehicle, that would give the police a legal cause to stop the vehicle. The police rarely make a traffic stop at night for minor violations unless they want to check out the driver more closely. If the driver checks out OK then they are rarely issued a citation.

 

[Hapless]

Cops only read you "your rights" if they are going to question you. They can detain you on suspicion (probable cause), but they'd better have a good reason. Taking you to jail without even questioning you is not a good thing. I would be pissed to, but I understand how they want you just to follow orders without question while they're doing their business. FWIW, it's not too hard to come up with PC to detain someone. Arresting them however.........

You've almost got it right. As someone has already mentioned, Terry v. Ohio and other more recent cases ruled that police may stop and detain someone based upon reasonable suspicionthat they have committed, are committing or are about to commit a crime. The reasonable suspicion must be articulable, i.e., the officer must be able to put it in words. The officer's gut feeling doesn't cut it. The officer may also pat down or frisk {not search} the stopped person based on other factors which may indicate the subject is armed. These factors must also be articulable.

Reasonable suspicion is much lower than probable cause. PC is required to arrest or search. As my brother in arms Odin has already stated, Miranda only applies in a custodial interrogation situation, or when a suspect could reasonably believe he is in custody.

As to the other guy with cop problems...dude, you live in Chicago. Other cops shake their heads in disbelief at some of the things Chicago coppers do. But like Odin said, your story is definitely suspect.

 

[Odin]

What I find humorous is that a lot of people who come into contact with the police proclaim "I know my rights" and then demonstrate that everything they think they know is 180 degrees opposite of reality.

I'm not going to go into any sepcific details here that would help people sidestep the law, but two of the most common misconceptions are usually found in the same people.

First, there's the "You can't arrest me without a warrant, I don't have to talk to you, you can't detain me, you can't check me for weapons, you didn't read me my rights so this is an illegal arrest, etc..." guy who professes to be a street lawyer. He usually is friends with the chief and mayor, and is a lawyer, and wants to drop a name to get out of jail free, etc...

The fact is that the police can arrest you without a warrant, if you are stopped and questioned you are obligated to identify yourself, the police can detain you while conducting an investigation and they can pat down your outer clothing to check for weapons (that's not a "search"), and they don't have to read you your rights.

The funny part is that this same guy will raise all that bullshit and then when the officer asks "do you mind if I look in your car" the guy will give consent to search even though he's got dope, drug paraphernalia and an illegal weapon in the car. The one right that Mr. Dumbass has - the right to refuse a search of his vehicle - is the one right he doesn't even realize he has. Hey genius - if the officer had PC to search your car then he probably wouldn't be asking for your consent. But since you gave him the OK guess what - he's gonna search now, and he's gonna find that joint in your cigarette pack, he's gonna find that pipe in that little hiding place in the console, he's gonna find that butterfly knife that you have no idea how it got in your car.

I have a newsflash for street lawyers - you probably don't know your rights, the police do know their job, you aren't going to get the officer fired when you talk to your (insert relative here)...and this one might be a shocker, but that cop can see right through your lies. Believe it or not, you aren't the first person to lie to the police and the officer is quite good at seeing through your lies.

 

[kannibul]

What irks me is when I watch COPS, and they gang-pile a suspect, and damn near break his arm trying to get him in cuffs, meanwhile the suspect is stating that he/she isn't resisting and that their arm doesn't bend the way the officers are trying to force it.

Maybe the person is lieing their ass off, but come on...I mean when you can see the odd angles and shit...

OK tough guy...you try to handcuff a subject that is actively resisting being handcuffed. I'll let you take your biggest friend along for help and I guarantee that you still won't be able to get a resisting person in cuffs without beating the balls off of them. The police aren't beating him, they're forcing him to comply with a lawful order.

Notice that when you're watching COPS and it takes 5 officers to handcuff someone, when the suspect stands up with cuffs on he's not injured (maybe minor scrapes from fighting). Sure, he squeals while he's being cuffed because he's in pain, but the officers are using pain complaince techniques that do not cause permanent injury, only tmeporary pain.

It's a lot harder than it looks to handcuff someone who is resisting and until you've tried it you really don't know what you're looking at on TV. Would you rather see a cop rear back and knock the shit out of someone and then slap the cuffs on while the guy is laid out on the pavement?

Contrary to what most people think, police work isn't all pretty and nice, and sometimes when suspects resist or fisht people get hurt. On a daily basis police deal with people who would like to kill or injure them, people who want to fight, etc... and when it's time for someone to go to jail the police do not have the option of backing down when a subject fights or resists. If you want to cooperate you'll go to jail, if you don't want to cooperate you'll go to jail tired and sore. Either way, you're going to jail. Don't complain when the police aren't nice to someone who is uncooperative.

Some people believe that they can stand around and argue with the police like they do with their mama or their wife. The police are under no obligation to listen to your side of the story and debating the merits of your argument before taking action. Just because your parents didn't raise you to respect the law doesn't mean that the police you come into contact with will tolerate your attitude.

Well, if I'm ever in that kind of situation, I'll let you know how it turns out.

 

[nbarts]

Hey genius - if the officer had PC to search your car then he probably wouldn't be asking for your consent. But since you gave him the OK guess what - he's gonna search now, and he's gonna find that joint in your cigarette pack, he's gonna find that pipe in that little hiding place in the console, he's gonna find that butterfly knife that you have no idea how it got in your car.

So after all it turns out I was illegally searched. Thanks for pointing that out. So insulting a person is legal? O yea, right, I forgot, it's not permanent injury........... This world needs some serious changes.

BTW Hapless. I've never had this sort of problem with Chicago police, actually I've never had any kind a problem with Chicago police. I've been pulled over very few times since I've moved to IL, really nothing like assholes in NJ.

After all my whole cop bashing has not much to do with my personal problems with them. And if really there are some police officers around here I'd like to ask some questions & see what their version of answer is.

And Odin, it's always easier to believe what you want to believe, you just proved it to me one more time.

And you know what, I'm happy that they are where they are, not because of what they do, but because of the myth of what they are supposed to be doing.

 

[Bob Savage]

What irks me is when I watch COPS, and they gang-pile a suspect, and damn near break his arm trying to get him in cuffs, meanwhile the suspect is stating that he/she isn't resisting and that their arm doesn't bend the way the officers are trying to force it.

Maybe the person is lieing their ass off, but come on...I mean when you can see the odd angles and shit...

I have yet to see a Cops or any similar show where a "gang-pile" is going on and the suspect is not resisting. Merely saying you're not resisting means nothing if you're physically resisting. Often times the complaints about an arm not being the way law enforcement is trying to "bend it" are because of RESISTANCE.

And Jeff, Odin already mentioned it, but subduing a resisting opponent is far more difficult than it may seem. We're not talking about a coordinated training session here where your partner is allowing you to get a hold of their hand, etc. and take them down. Resisting opponents are very difficult to deal with. Haven't you noticed how difficult it is for officers to subdue even small women when they *really* do not want to be restrained? Sometimes it takes a "gang-pile" to ensure nobody including the suspect is seriously injured. With a one-on-one restraint methodology the officer the use of excessive force is often necessary to get anything accomplished and nobody wants that because it leads to certain injuries. The "gang-pile" is the quickest, safest way to a solution.

 

[Odin]

What irks me is when I watch COPS, and they gang-pile a suspect, and damn near break his arm trying to get him in cuffs, meanwhile the suspect is stating that he/she isn't resisting and that their arm doesn't bend the way the officers are trying to force it.

Maybe the person is lieing their ass off, but come on...I mean when you can see the odd angles and shit...

I have yet to see a Cops or any similar show where a "gang-pile" is going on and the suspect is not resisting. Merely saying you're not resisting means nothing if you're physically resisting. Often times the complaints about an arm not being the way law enforcement is trying to "bend it" are because of RESISTANCE.

And Jeff, Odin already mentioned it, but subduing a resisting opponent is far more difficult than it may seem. We're not talking about a coordinated training session here where your partner is allowing you to get a hold of their hand, etc. and take them down. Resisting opponents are very difficult to deal with. Haven't you noticed how difficult it is for officers to subdue even small women when they *really* do not want to be restrained? Sometimes it takes a "gang-pile" to ensure nobody including the suspect is seriously injured. With a one-on-one restraint methodology the officer the use of excessive force is often necessary to get anything accomplished and nobody wants that because it leads to certain injuries. The "gang-pile" is the quickest, safest way to a solution.

If the only goal is to get you in handcuffs in the shortest amount of time I can make that happen - but you'll be going to the ER before you go to jail (probably won't even need those handcuffs). Getting a resisting subject in handcuffs without officers or the suspect sustaining serious injury can be a difficult task.

 

[Bob Savage]

If the only goal is to get you in handcuffs in the shortest amount of time I can make that happen - but you'll be going to the ER before you go to jail (probably won't even need those handcuffs).

I'm guessing that this comment is referring to my one-on-one comment?

 

[Digital Jams]

What irks me is when I watch COPS, and they gang-pile a suspect, and damn near break his arm trying to get him in cuffs, meanwhile the suspect is stating that he/she isn't resisting and that their arm doesn't bend the way the officers are trying to force it.

Maybe the person is lieing their ass off, but come on...I mean when you can see the odd angles and shit...

The "gang-pile" is the quickest, safest way to a solution.

My vote goes for, when the asset is present, the 4 legged weapon Sgt McShephard. I was watching one episode where the guy was tazored twice with little effect so the Shephard was unleashed.

5 seconds it was over

 

[Digital Jams]

What irks me is when I watch COPS, and they gang-pile a suspect, and damn near break his arm trying to get him in cuffs, meanwhile the suspect is stating that he/she isn't resisting and that their arm doesn't bend the way the officers are trying to force it.

Maybe the person is lieing their ass off, but come on...I mean when you can see the odd angles and shit...

I have yet to see a Cops or any similar show where a "gang-pile" is going on and the suspect is not resisting. Merely saying you're not resisting means nothing if you're physically resisting. Often times the complaints about an arm not being the way law enforcement is trying to "bend it" are because of RESISTANCE.

And Jeff, Odin already mentioned it, but subduing a resisting opponent is far more difficult than it may seem. We're not talking about a coordinated training session here where your partner is allowing you to get a hold of their hand, etc. and take them down. Resisting opponents are very difficult to deal with. Haven't you noticed how difficult it is for officers to subdue even small women when they *really* do not want to be restrained? Sometimes it takes a "gang-pile" to ensure nobody including the suspect is seriously injured. With a one-on-one restraint methodology the officer the use of excessive force is often necessary to get anything accomplished and nobody wants that because it leads to certain injuries. The "gang-pile" is the quickest, safest way to a solution.

If the only goal is to get you in handcuffs in the shortest amount of time I can make that happen - but you'll be going to the ER before you go to jail (probably won't even need those handcuffs). Getting a resisting subject in handcuffs without officers or the suspect sustaining serious injury can be a difficult task.

Funny, the State Police Academy here in CT does not teach this " I know that I am better than my foe " theory.......

Man you must be one bad mofo......special forces?

 

[nbarts]

If the only goal is to get you in handcuffs in the shortest amount of time I can make that happen - but you'll be going to the ER before you go to jail (probably won't even need those handcuffs). Getting a resisting subject in handcuffs without officers or the suspect sustaining serious injury can be a difficult task.

You seem to be very proud that you are capable of doing this.

 

[Odin]

If the only goal is to get you in handcuffs in the shortest amount of time I can make that happen - but you'll be going to the ER before you go to jail (probably won't even need those handcuffs).

I'm guessing that this comment is referring to my one-on-one comment?

Right. The police don't just have to handcuff you, they have to do it without beating you into submission. And if you decide to resist it's gonna be real hard to handcuff you without knocking you down/out unless the suspect is tiny and the officer is huge, and even then it can be difficult.

Like you said, when you see 5 cops pile on 1 guy to handcuff him it's because they are trying to control the arms and legs and force compliance without causing injury to the suspect.