Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Subject: Police Officer Loses Job After Losing Temper.
  • Subject: Police Officer Loses Job After Losing Temper.
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4
Subject: Police Officer Loses Job After Losing Temper.
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Telec
Remember kids: when Uncle Delta tells you he has sweeties, he isn't lying.

Now get in the van.


The Black Chapter

Well the judge ruled it to be so, thus it is.
Not sure many people will have been aware of this case until it appeared on the Daily Mail so I can't see public outcry being a very problematic cause.
You're just a meanie

  • 11.26.2012 1:59 PM PDT


Posted by: deltahalo UK

Posted by: Sgt Drifter

Posted by: deltahalo UK
You could probably argue that it violates parental sovereignty too.


What, a parent's right to a have a muppet running around and doing whatever he pleases and not complying with authority (WHEN that authority is in the right)?

Hah- I don't think so.

It's not exactly teaching discipline- it's using it and having the kid learn the hard way.

If he was going to teach a lesson he'd have gone further. Hell, even teachers can discipline.


In that only a parent has the right to imbue lessons upon a child, or when someone has the legal right of 'In Loco Parentis', which is why teachers have the right to discipline.
If someone wishes not to comply with the Police, that is their right. The only time the police are able to interject is when that lack of compliance violates a law. In this case the kid probably did do so, but then the Officer reacted with what has been deemed 'excessive force' - thus he doesn't have a job anymore.
he was restraining the kid from doing any damage to anything, well within the law and not excessive force, excessive force would be tazering him, or flat out tacklling him full force, a hammer lock is literally nothing compared to what he could've done to the kid.

  • 11.26.2012 2:01 PM PDT

Es ist Zeit für einige Gefahr-pay


Posted by: deltahalo UK
Well the judge ruled it to be so, thus it is.
Not sure many people will have been aware of this case until it appeared on the Daily Mail so I can't see public outcry being a very problematic cause.


That's usually what the case is, this is the first I have heard about this so I'll admit that was speculation



You're just a meanie


Well, sorta- more just strict and tried of seeing troubled youths get away with no consequences.

[Edited on 11.26.2012 2:03 PM PST]

  • 11.26.2012 2:03 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Two movies you should watch: Fight Club and Pineapple Express

"Wait. What do you mean, it's dead?"
"If marijuana is not legal within the next five years I have no faith left in humanity, period. Everyone likes smoking weed. They have for thousands of years. They're not going to stop anytime soon. You know? It makes everything better. Makes food taste better, makes music better. It makes sex feel better for God's sake. It makes -blam!- movies better you know?"


Posted by: deltahalo UK
lol no it isn't.
A Police Officer keeps the peace and enforces the law. Individual discipline is not within their realms of responsibility. They can act if a lack of discipline is preventing their legal duty, but they have no right to teach discipline

They have the right to act like an -blam!- apparently, atleast from my experience with them.

  • 11.26.2012 2:03 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Telec
Remember kids: when Uncle Delta tells you he has sweeties, he isn't lying.

Now get in the van.


The Black Chapter


Posted by: DaViDlIkEsPiE2
he was restraining the kid from doing any damage to anything, well within the law and not excessive force, excessive force would be tazering him, or flat out tacklling him full force, a hammer lock is literally nothing compared to what he could've done to the kid.


So your argument is that he was restraining the child for what he potentially could have done, and that the Officer could have done a lot more damage?
Of course he could. He is a grown man grabbing a quite frankly tiny teenager. Your argument is weird.

  • 11.26.2012 2:03 PM PDT

Es ist Zeit für einige Gefahr-pay


Posted by: The_Black_Coyote

Posted by: Sgt Drifter

Posted by: deltahalo UK

Posted by: Sgt Drifter

Posted by: deltahalo UK
You could probably argue that it violates parental sovereignty too.


What, a parent's right to a have a muppet running around and doing whatever he pleases and not complying with authority (WHEN that authority is in the right)?

Hah- I don't think so.

It's not exactly teaching discipline- it's using it and having the kid learn the hard way.

If he was going to teach a lesson he'd have gone further. Hell, even teachers can discipline.


In that only a parent has the right to imbue lessons upon a child, or when someone has the legal right of 'In Loco Parentis', which is why teachers have the right to discipline.
If someone wishes not to comply with the Police, that is their right. The only time the police are able to interject is when that lack of compliance violates a law. In this case the kid probably did do so, but then the Officer reacted with what has been deemed 'excessive force' - thus he doesn't have a job anymore.


Except that excessive force is case by case and is determined mainly by public outcry, not anything legal.

If this did not get any news, I doubt the officer would have lost his job and at most would have gotten paid leave.

If it was uniform, then yeah- but it's not.
just becuase he is a child doesn't mean he can be excuse of any consequences from wrongdoing when not around a parent. In my area of Louisiana, anyone older than 18 while you are under 18 has authority to discipline like if you stole something or if you hit a lady. However if you are in the right and an adult is confrontational you contact the sheriff or the deputy or your parents if those two are unavailable (I only have a sheriff and deputy so...)


Isn't that more-or-less what I was saying?

  • 11.26.2012 2:04 PM PDT

Posted by: Sgt Drifter
It's not sucking up- it's pointing out that many people, such as yourself- have issues with authority and somehow conjure these stereotypes that every cop is a bad cop, or even that a majority are.
Most cops that I've run into are. Maybe they're not all bad cops - the majority of them are probably good - but the problem with the police force is that they get too much discretion. A cop can let me go if he's having a good day, or give me a $500 fine if he's having a bad one (or if he doesn't like me on a personal/racial level).

There should be a blanket code that they have to follow.

[Edited on 11.26.2012 2:07 PM PST]

  • 11.26.2012 2:06 PM PDT

Posted by: Seggi31
Posted by: Doctor Jensen
I've challenged my beliefs. What is the book about?


I find that this is usually untrue. If religious people honestly, diligently and intelligently challenged their beliefs, there would be no religious people.

Wait, this counts as excessive force in Britain? What, do cops ask you nicely to go to jail when you have time when you're arrested?

  • 11.26.2012 2:08 PM PDT

In memory of those fallen in the defense of Earth and her colonies.

March 3, 2553


Posted by: Sgt Drifter
Blame society- our children are precious and can do no wrong.

  • 11.26.2012 2:09 PM PDT


Posted by: deltahalo UK

Posted by: DaViDlIkEsPiE2
he was restraining the kid from doing any damage to anything, well within the law and not excessive force, excessive force would be tazering him, or flat out tacklling him full force, a hammer lock is literally nothing compared to what he could've done to the kid.


So your argument is that he was restraining the child for what he potentially could have done, and that the Officer could have done a lot more damage?
Of course he could. He is a grown man grabbing a quite frankly tiny teenager. Your argument is weird.
no it isn't he was en-forcing the law, you know, HIS JOB. but apparently by your logic, if you "discipline" (Restrain) a teenager for possibly harming you and the people around you, you deserve your job being taken because it's "excessive force" to restrain the child and prevent any more damage being done.

  • 11.26.2012 2:09 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Telec
Remember kids: when Uncle Delta tells you he has sweeties, he isn't lying.

Now get in the van.


The Black Chapter


Posted by: cameo_cream

Posted by: Sgt Drifter
Blame society- our children are precious and can do no wrong.


I doubt that this is specifically because he was a minor, but because of the disparity in size and the situation. 4 Police Officers are really at no real risk from a mini-teen

Posted by: DaViDlIkEsPiE2

Posted by: deltahalo UK

Posted by: DaViDlIkEsPiE2
he was restraining the kid from doing any damage to anything, well within the law and not excessive force, excessive force would be tazering him, or flat out tacklling him full force, a hammer lock is literally nothing compared to what he could've done to the kid.


So your argument is that he was restraining the child for what he potentially could have done, and that the Officer could have done a lot more damage?
Of course he could. He is a grown man grabbing a quite frankly tiny teenager. Your argument is weird.
no it isn't he was en-forcing the law, you know, HIS JOB. but apparently by your logic, if you "discipline" (Restrain) a teenager for possibly harming you and the people around you, you deserve your job being taken because it's "excessive force" to restrain the child and prevent any more damage being done.


The issue is not that he is restraining the child, but the manner in which the Officer restrained him.
The teen was posing no risk, so you can't proactively restrain someone for the claim that they might cause you risk at some point.

[Edited on 11.26.2012 2:12 PM PST]

  • 11.26.2012 2:10 PM PDT

Mreh.


Posted by: AgentCOP1
If that happened in America, we would all be like "HELL YEAH WOOP THAT LITTLE TWERPS ASS!"


No, I think the story would have ended the same way.

  • 11.26.2012 2:11 PM PDT

Posted by: Seggi31
Posted by: Doctor Jensen
I've challenged my beliefs. What is the book about?


I find that this is usually untrue. If religious people honestly, diligently and intelligently challenged their beliefs, there would be no religious people.


Posted by: Ushan

Posted by: AgentCOP1
If that happened in America, we would all be like "HELL YEAH WOOP THAT LITTLE TWERPS ASS!"


No, I think the story would have ended the same way.
Maybe if the kid was white, I've seen treatment like this plenty of times and there was no outrage.

  • 11.26.2012 2:15 PM PDT


Posted by: deltahalo UK

Posted by: cameo_cream

Posted by: Sgt Drifter
Blame society- our children are precious and can do no wrong.


I doubt that this is specifically because he was a minor, but because of the disparity in size and the situation. 4 Police Officers are really at no real risk from a mini-teen

Posted by: DaViDlIkEsPiE2

Posted by: deltahalo UK

Posted by: DaViDlIkEsPiE2
he was restraining the kid from doing any damage to anything, well within the law and not excessive force, excessive force would be tazering him, or flat out tacklling him full force, a hammer lock is literally nothing compared to what he could've done to the kid.


So your argument is that he was restraining the child for what he potentially could have done, and that the Officer could have done a lot more damage?
Of course he could. He is a grown man grabbing a quite frankly tiny teenager. Your argument is weird.
no it isn't he was en-forcing the law, you know, HIS JOB. but apparently by your logic, if you "discipline" (Restrain) a teenager for possibly harming you and the people around you, you deserve your job being taken because it's "excessive force" to restrain the child and prevent any more damage being done.


The issue is not that he is restraining the child, but the manner in which the Officer restrained him.
The teen was posing no risk, so you can't proactively restrain someone for the claim that they might cause you risk at some point.
you're wrong, the only reason it was so controversial because he was a minor, society thinks childern are delicate creatures who can do no wrong. and the public will take any excuse they can to attack police officers.

and no, it was no where near excessive force, holding someone in a hammer lock is not as painful as people make it, I've been in the same situation during the time I did martial arts, and it's not painful at all.

  • 11.26.2012 2:17 PM PDT

As someone who has wrestled for a long time, I know exactly how an arm bar feels. It's painful.

I'm not sure why an officer would face anything less than what this officer did after he used force on someone who wasn't attacking him. To my knowledge, force is used only in self defense. If the officer wanted the boy to empty his pockets, he should have just emptied them himself.

I'm also curious as to how you claim that you are "somewhat knowledgable in the area of Use of Force", but then you bring up irrelevancies like the kid's previous encounters with the law and how the officers' time was "wasted".

  • 11.26.2012 2:17 PM PDT

Studies show that men think about sex every 7 seconds. I do my best to eat hotdogs in under 6, just so things don't get weird.

Please allow me to introduce Myself
I'm a man of wealth and taste
I've been around for a long, long year
Stole many a man's soul and faith

In the UK the officer gets sacked. In the US he would have been promoted.

  • 11.26.2012 2:18 PM PDT

"There's this theory that if there were an infinite number of monkeys pecking away at typewriters, they would eventually write the great works of Shakespeare, but thanks to the internet we now know that's not true." -Adam Savage

"Time is not made out of lines. It is made out of circles. That is why clocks are round." -Caboose

NOTE: This is my new primary account. My old account was AgentCOPP1, and I changed it because it was linked to a gamertag that I no longer use.

Posted by: MadMax888

Posted by: AgentCOP1
Posted by: spartain ken 15

Posted by: TheBestTheyHad
Kid should do as he's told.


Ah yes, lets all always follow what big brother wants.

"Dissension is the greatest form of Patriotism"
- Thomas Jefferson

Anarchy FTW!
No, that's not what that means.

I know, I'm just being stupid.

  • 11.26.2012 2:18 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Telec
Remember kids: when Uncle Delta tells you he has sweeties, he isn't lying.

Now get in the van.


The Black Chapter


Posted by: DaViDlIkEsPiE2

and no, it was no where near excessive force, holding someone in a hammer lock is not as painful as people make it, I've been in the same situation during the time I did martial arts, and it's not painful at all.


Essentially he used enough force to cause bleeding and bruising on someone in police custody by being the aggressor in a situation where he and his colleagues outnumbered the detainee 4:1, and where there was no evidence of threat. That is not something a Police Officer can do.
The fact the detainee was a minor does add to the situation, though really any which way a Police Officer should not be aggressive to a non-threatening detainee regardless of age.

  • 11.26.2012 2:24 PM PDT

Please stop complaining about the 'death of a loved one' it's my job. They probably deserved it anyways. Here's a warning, if you keep making pentagrams out of the neighbors livestock I will personally come to your house and kill everyone you love. Now leave me alone, I got to get back to work.
~M.D~

When you're in a position of power you must keep your cool.

  • 11.26.2012 2:25 PM PDT

I am a pharmaceutical scientist. I received my Masters degree in Pharmaceutics from the University of the Sciences in Philadelphia in 2010, after working as a Pharmacist for 4 years. I currently work in King of Prussia, PA, and focus on the analytical chemistry of small molecule APIs. My clients include some of the most well known big pharma companies in the world.

I don't know if I missed it in the article or video, but why was the boy being asked to empty his pockets? I'm fairly certain that if the boy didn't do anything illegal in plain sight, he is not required to submit to a search (ie turning out his pockets), so there's that. He can be a nuisance, a right pain in the arse, but you can't just search someone because you don't like them.

Anyway, I think the proper way to deal with this would have been to detain the kid if he in fact was under suspicion of having committed a crime. Could have just cuffed the kid and then if he fought back or kicked, well then it's resisting arrest. When it comes down to it, what was the kid really going to do to the cops? They always have the power to be in control of the situation regardless of how the teen acted. I see no point in using intimidation for the officer to get what he wanted.

Let me just say that I'm attempting to be neutral with this. There are a lot of people who are very brazen with the police and do bend, but not break, the laws which probably do warrant some sort of justice or punishment. However, there's a lot of citizens that are law-abiding and still get harassed. I don't think what the officer did was necessarily wrong, but not knowing all the details, I think it could have been handled better.

EDIT: I have been asked to submit to a search before even when having done nothing wrong. I declined the search and the officer went on his way. A lot of people have actually chastised me saying that people like me shouldn't exercise my rights because if I had done nothing wrong, then there's no reason to avoid a search. However, I enjoy my rights and prefer them not to be violated. I tolerate, but do not like, positions of authority, but we each have the authority to defend ourselves legally.

[Edited on 11.26.2012 2:33 PM PST]

  • 11.26.2012 2:26 PM PDT

Name's John. I'm a 21-year-old firefighter/EMT from lolhio who doubles as a die-hard Halo fan. I've been enjoying the franchise since 2001. My favorite iteration of Halo would have to be Halo 2 simply because I never got to experience the joy of a full-on Halo: CE LAN.


If you have any other questions, feel free to ask.

Oh yeah, and boot Zome.


Posted by: Dback139
I don't know if I missed it in the article or video, but why was the boy being asked to empty his pockets? I'm fairly certain that if the boy didn't do anything illegal in plain sight, he is not required to submit to a search (ie turning out his pockets), so there's that. He can be a nuisance, a right pain in the arse, but you can't just search someone because you don't like them.


They can have you empty your pockets to ensure you have no weapons.

  • 11.26.2012 2:30 PM PDT

I am a pharmaceutical scientist. I received my Masters degree in Pharmaceutics from the University of the Sciences in Philadelphia in 2010, after working as a Pharmacist for 4 years. I currently work in King of Prussia, PA, and focus on the analytical chemistry of small molecule APIs. My clients include some of the most well known big pharma companies in the world.


Posted by: The Ruckus 2010

Posted by: Dback139
I don't know if I missed it in the article or video, but why was the boy being asked to empty his pockets? I'm fairly certain that if the boy didn't do anything illegal in plain sight, he is not required to submit to a search (ie turning out his pockets), so there's that. He can be a nuisance, a right pain in the arse, but you can't just search someone because you don't like them.


They can have you empty your pockets to ensure you have no weapons.
Yes, but if it's not in plain sight, or visibly protruding/bulging from the pocket, then he can still refuse the search.

EDIT: As far as making the kid turn out his pocket, he would have to point out what visibly suggests that he "might" be concealing a weapon in his pocket, then the kid would have to submit to a pat-down, not search. And if the pat-down was suspicious, then he would have to turn out the pockets.

[Edited on 11.26.2012 2:37 PM PST]

  • 11.26.2012 2:33 PM PDT

About me: I am a vicious wolf of a man.

But really am sweet at heart. =)

I think that the way that the Police in general in the UK is BS. So a kid who was being a smart ass gets pinned to a table for a few seconds and who assaulted an officer wins a court case? What? I fail to see how a punk can win a case against a police officer with a clean record of over a decade.

Coupled with the stupidity of most officers not even being allowed to carry weapons, I really don't understand the venomous attitude towards cops these days.

Even in America, all I ever see is hate towards men and women who risk their lives daily to keep scum off the streets. Yeah, some lose their temper some times, but more often than not, what the youtube video, or cell phone camera doesn't catch, is the smartass who has been giving the officer lip, or been physically threatening them for several minutes before hand.

I'd love to see these self entitled judgemental pricks try to do ANY better than these trained, volunteer, men and women.

  • 11.26.2012 2:37 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Telec
Remember kids: when Uncle Delta tells you he has sweeties, he isn't lying.

Now get in the van.


The Black Chapter


Posted by: Gottalovec4

Coupled with the stupidity of most officers not even being allowed to carry weapons


& yet its faaaaaaaaaaaaar safer to be a Police Officer here.


Even in America, all I ever see is hate towards men and women who risk their lives daily to keep scum off the streets.

People don't see that, they just see the Policeman turning his sirens on so he can drive through a red, or waiting on the roadside with a radar gun, or in my case, stealing a chip from me.

Yeah, some lose their temper some times, but more often than not, what the youtube video, or cell phone camera doesn't catch, is the smartass who has been giving the officer lip

Which an Officer is trained to deal with.

or been physically threatening them for several minutes before hand.


In which case a Police Officer is well within their rights to arrest them

[Edited on 11.26.2012 2:43 PM PST]

  • 11.26.2012 2:42 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4