• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Video showing cop forcibly cutting woman's hair weave makes waves

I don't think this example is actually representative of all law enforcement, at least not yet. If we allow such things to continue, then they will become more frequent no doubt.

Were we to drop the war on drugs and concentrate on violent offenders instead, then it would become less likely that ordinary citizens encounter harassment by police.

Good point.
 
I'm not sure that a lot of this isn't a natural reaction to a lousy, crappy job. Not speaking to this incident, in particular, but to the jaded us-against-them attitude LEOs develop after years on the job. And that attitude is, of course, quickly imparted to new recruits. I think it's a hazard of the job.

Then we should either be far more selective in who we allow to become police, do a whole lot more to change that attitude, or drastically reduce the amount of discretion that individual police exercise.

LEOs (in big cities, especially, and depending on their beat) see the underbelly of society. The dregs of U.S. humanity, day-in/day-out.

So do public defenders. When was the last time you heard about a public defender beating the crap out of a suspect?

They interact with drug addicts, people who lie right to their face, women-beaters, child abusers, drunks, murderers, you name it. They walk into crime scenes that would make most of us puke our guts out and be haunted for the rest of our lives.

I think it'd be pretty damned hard not to let that become a pervasive downer in one's life. I wonder...if PTSD is real? I'd think (again, especially in big cities) that our LEOs are rife with it.

As above, if the job has such damaging effects, than police should work far fewer hours, receive treatment, and be placed in a much more positive work environment. And our laws need to change a lot. As Ditto says, the drug war has encouraged a very powerful "us vs them" mentality between police and everyone else. Individual police discretion needs to be heavily curtailed, and police who abuse their authority need to be punished. Clean out the cops who can't handle the responsibility, and do whatever we can to support those who can.

I don't think this example is actually representative of all law enforcement, at least not yet. If we allow such things to continue, then they will become more frequent no doubt.

Of course not all. But far too much.

Were we to drop the war on drugs and concentrate on violent offenders instead, then it would become less likely that ordinary citizens encounter harassment by police.

That would do a lot to help things. That police are trained basically to assume that everyone is a drug smuggler has escalated violence and destroyed the fourth amendment.
 
So do public defenders. When was the last time you heard about a public defender beating the crap out of a suspect?

you seem to be minimizing the difference in context here: the Public Defender doesn't have to deal directly with these situations, they deal with them in the sanitized confines of the court system after the physical mess has been cleaned up by the police
 
Meh, what happenned here is precisely what should have happenned - the offending officer was suspended, the incident investigated, and the officer fired. Not sure what folks want beyond that.
 
Yeah, no tough talk about supposed rights and such. Once the cops have you, forget about your rights. This is a police state after all.

Prisoners have some specific right to wear a wig? Might as well let them have a gun; there IS a specific right have a gun.
 
Then we should either be far more selective in who we allow to become police, do a whole lot more to change that attitude, or drastically reduce the amount of discretion that individual police exercise.



So do public defenders. When was the last time you heard about a public defender beating the crap out of a suspect?



As above, if the job has such damaging effects, than police should work far fewer hours, receive treatment, and be placed in a much more positive work environment. And our laws need to change a lot. As Ditto says, the drug war has encouraged a very powerful "us vs them" mentality between police and everyone else. Individual police discretion needs to be heavily curtailed, and police who abuse their authority need to be punished. Clean out the cops who can't handle the responsibility, and do whatever we can to support those who can.



Of course not all. But far too much.



That would do a lot to help things. That police are trained basically to assume that everyone is a drug smuggler has escalated violence and destroyed the fourth amendment.

Exactly, and asset forfeiture, spawned by the war on drugs, has destroyed the fifth as well.
 
I don't think this example is actually representative of all law enforcement, at least not yet. If we allow such things to continue, then they will become more frequent no doubt.

Were we to drop the war on drugs and concentrate on violent offenders instead, then it would become less likely that ordinary citizens encounter harassment by police.

IKR, with traffic violations being handled by cameras (which I'm opposed to) I would probably never have to talk to an officer again.
 
you seem to be minimizing the difference in context here: the Public Defender doesn't have to deal directly with these situations, they deal with them in the sanitized confines of the court system after the physical mess has been cleaned up by the police

This is very much a tangent and not even at all related to my main point, but you are very much wrong with the elements that public defenders deal with. As hard as you think it is to stomach the situations of violence and crime, it is much easier when one cam simply condemn them. Try striving, every day, to see their side of things. There is no sanitized version of reaction to crime.
 
Prisoners have some specific right to wear a wig? Might as well let them have a gun; there IS a specific right have a gun.

A weave is NOT a wig. A weave is sewn into the natural hair, and glued to the scalp. It takes hours upon hours to "install", costs hundreds of dollars, and lasts for months... unless some power-mad bitch corrections officer decides to hack and rip it off against jail policy, and promptly loses her job over the breach in jail protocol.
 
This is very much a tangent and not even at all related to my main point, but you are very much wrong with the elements that public defenders deal with.

I never read about Public defenders needing to be concerned about getting shot in the face every time they pull someone over or pulling a baby suffering from severe chemical burns from a meth house.

As hard as you think it is to stomach the situations of violence and crime, it is much easier when one cam simply condemn them. Try striving, every day, to see their side of things. There is no sanitized version of reaction to crime.

I'm not saying public defenders have an easy or ideal job, I am saying what they see and what they deal with directly is very different than police officers.
 
Prisoners have some specific right to wear a wig? Might as well let them have a gun; there IS a specific right have a gun.

Post it 1000 times and it is still a lie. She was not wearing a wig.
 
A weave is NOT a wig. A weave is sewn into the natural hair, and glued to the scalp. It takes hours upon hours to "install", costs hundreds of dollars, and lasts for months... unless some power-mad bitch corrections officer decides to hack and rip it off against jail policy, and promptly loses her job over the breach in jail protocol.

It's fake hair, either way.
 
It seems unnecessary, but on the other hand, the woman doing the cutting doesn't seem to be abusing the lady or anything. She's not treating her roughly, she's just cutting her hair.

I'm shocked the cop got fired. I've seen other cops do far worse and get away with nothing more than a slap on the wrist, and this lady gets fired for cutting someone's hair.
 
I'm shocked the cop got fired. I've seen other cops do far worse and get away with nothing more than a slap on the wrist, and this lady gets fired for cutting someone's hair.

the power of internet outrage. It can even get people a new car when they lie about getting stiffed on a tip
 
Last edited:
How is removing a prisoner's weave "brutality"? Obviously, the prisoner wasn't injured. She was restrained in am approved restraint. She wasn't assaulted. Obviously, some people will bitch about anything the cops do.

Here's a little bit of reality for you: It's prison. If you don't like the way you get treated in prison, don't break the law and get sent to prison.

It was a jail, not prison. The charges were dropped. Why do you think it is OK for the officer in the jail to assault somebody when they didn't do anything to put themselves there. There was no conviction in this case.

The officer had no right to cut anything onthis womans body.
 
It was a jail, not prison. The charges were dropped. Why do you think it is OK for the officer in the jail to assault somebody when they didn't do anything to put themselves there. There was no conviction in this case.

The officer had no right to cut anything onthis womans body.

the video didn't seem like assault. It seemed more of a means of forcing compliance with a policy. Now feel free to question that policy, but don't characterize someone simply being restrained, to force compliance with it, as assault.
 
How is removing a prisoner's weave "brutality"? Obviously, the prisoner wasn't injured. She was restrained in am approved restraint. She wasn't assaulted. Obviously, some people will bitch about anything the cops do.

Here's a little bit of reality for you: It's prison. If you don't like the way you get treated in prison, don't break the law and get sent to prison.

Don't you have to be convicted of a crime to go to prison? What crime has she been convicted of? Oh yeah, the charges were dropped. Huh!
 
It was a jail, not prison. The charges were dropped. Why do you think it is OK for the officer in the jail to assault somebody when they didn't do anything to put themselves there. There was no conviction in this case.

The officer had no right to cut anything onthis womans body.

There are folks here who approve of everything cops do, no matter what. It doesn't matter how violent or vicious it is, if a cop does it, its just fine. This woman is fortunate the cop didn't kill her, but if she had there would be people here defending it.
 
the video didn't seem like assault. It seemed more of a means of forcing compliance with a policy. Now feel free to question that policy, but don't characterize someone simply being restrained, to force compliance with it, as assault.

She wasn't 'simply being restrained'. Her hair was forcibly removed. That's assault, and that's why the sadistic bitch was fired.
 
There are folks here who approve of everything cops do, no matter what. It doesn't matter how violent or vicious it is, if a cop does it, its just fine. This woman is fortunate the cop didn't kill her, but if she had there would be people here defending it.

did you even watch the video?
 
She wasn't 'simply being restrained'. Her hair was forcibly removed.

lol, Wiggen, try reading with precision:"It seemed more of a means of forcing compliance with a policy."



That's assault, and that's why the sadistic bitch was fired.

I'm not really seeing anything sadistic in the video. And it looks exactly like what someone being restrained, to facilitate removing their fake hair, should look like.

Try settling down, taming your endless outrage, and watching it from a more objective perspective.
 
the video didn't seem like assault. It seemed more of a means of forcing compliance with a policy. Now feel free to question that policy, but don't characterize someone simply being restrained, to force compliance with it, as assault.

If what you say is true, and there is a policy that the officer was following, she wouldn't have been suspended nor fired.
 
If what you say is true, and there is a policy that the officer was following, she wouldn't have been suspended nor fired.

This assumes that an elected or politically appointed official wouldn't throw someone under the bus to save their own career.
 
This assumes that an elected or politically appointed official wouldn't throw someone under the bus to save their own career.

That is a smaller assumption tan there was a policy that allowed this when you don't know.

I am sure this was not the first woman to come in with a weave. Do you have any information that this happened to other women as well?
 
Back
Top Bottom