• 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!

"I'm Not Your Brother," Officer tazes Man in Front of His Children.

dirtpoorchris said:
How do you know he was refusing to leave and not just arguing with the bank on his way out? Griping about how they are being mean. Sorta as he was doing with the cop, calmy walking not trying to escape until the cop assaulted him.
Click to expand...

Yes...where is the rest of that 22 minute video?
 
Jerry said:
Can't wait for your kids in a private area. Go wait in the food court.
Click to expand...

I hear ya, but the response from the police was inappropriate. Some one said, maybe you about cops flexing their authority. Their authority could have been flexed in a different way.
 
ChezC3 said:
I hear ya, but the response from the police was inappropriate. Some one said, maybe you about cops flexing their authority. Their authority could have been flexed in a different way.
Click to expand...
The police in the video acted well within the range of appropriate behavior. Only the second cop had any kind of aditude but even he didn't step outside of professionalism.
 
Capster78 said:
I understand people who don't feel they need to comply with orders by an officer without reasonable suspicion or a warrant. Where I have a problem, is that they are confronting officers ON THE SCENE! This is not the place to resolve the situation. The proper and rational way of dealing with this is to inform the officer that you are against what you feel is an illegal search/detainment. Refuse at first, but if the officer insists, just repeat your refusal and comply with the officers request. Then, after the confrontation is over, file a complaint or take the city to court. THAT IS THE PROPER WAY TO HANDLE THIS. People need to start acting like adults and not spoiled little brat children throwing temper tantrums on the side of the road with an officer. Its not worth your life or the officers time to sit and argue with you. The reason we are not the Middle East is because we resolve our grievences in court rooms and on the floor of congress instead of on the street...
Click to expand...

What if we have a problem with something the state considers legal and just behavior by a police officer? I guess we are just supposed to roll over and deal with it.
 
Henrin said:
What if we have a problem with something the state considers legal and just behavior by a police officer? I guess we are just supposed to roll over and deal with it.
Click to expand...
That's not what happened here.
 
Jerry said:
Maybe, maybe not, your scenario is imaginary so we'll never know.
Click to expand...

Have you even read my posts in this thread? How many people do you think have a problem with strip searches or cavity searches? I'm going to guess a huge chunk of the population. Are both of those legal for police officers to do? Yes.
 
Jerry said:
The police in the video acted well within the range of appropriate behavior. Only the second cop had any kind of aditude but even he didn't step outside of professionalism.
Click to expand...

You have an interesting take on what constitutes professionalism.
 
Henrin said:
Have you even read my posts in this thread? How many people do you think have a problem with strip searches or cavity searches? I'm going to guess a huge chunk of the population. Are both of those legal for police officers to do? Yes.
Click to expand...
No strip-serch or cavity-serch occured in this situation that I'm aware of.
 
That guy hasnt sued them yet? I would have and gotten myself a limo, that way I wouldnt have to wait at a crummy bench to pick up my kids lol.
 
Redress said:
How not to get tased:

1: don't act like a douche to cops
2: If asked for ID, show it
Click to expand...

Why is this so difficult to understand over there? Is it unnecessary repetition? Perhaps somewhat especially more frequent against the black population maybe?
 
Jerry said:
That's what's wrong. I am discussing the video, this man, and including everything known about this incident. That's the thread topic. I'm not taking one small snipit of the whole pictiure, puting that snipit in a vacume and extrapolating armagedon from it, as you are.


Their use of pre-emptive force was apropriot in this instince. Other cops in other situations might not use force correctly. It all depends on the facts of a given situation.


Strictly speaking, calmly putting handcufs on a compliant person is "violence", its the use of phisical force even if no one is harmed, so yes "violence" is apropriot to effect an arrest. More violence becomes apropriot as the person resists. This man resisted enough to justify a tazing.
Click to expand...

but jerry you engaged me I did not engage you..i comment on what the cops said...that's all I did.

it is stupidity for the cops to say " we were "violent".......you would never use that word.....it means intent to harm., and what made it even worse is to say , it for someone running away.

cops are always at a disadvantage, because they cannot use violence, unless it is used first on them.
 
Henrin said:
What if we have a problem with something the state considers legal and just behavior by a police officer? I guess we are just supposed to roll over and deal with it.
Click to expand...

You have a few options. Write your state representative. You can start a protest campaign and bring your situation into the public eye. You can move out of the state. All of these are much better then getting shot over something that really is not that big of a deal and can be handled in a more mature manner.
 
ChezC3 said:
You have an interesting take on what constitutes professionalism.
Click to expand...
I have a common take. Both cops that I could see in the video conformed to all ethical standards. Mr. Lollie is responsable for escalationg the situation, and the police were correct in their responcees to his behavior. That's professionalism.
 
CRUE CAB said:
Was Mr Lollie on school grounds?
Click to expand...

He was in a private employee only area of a bank and told multiple times to leave by the bank security. That is why the police were called. Then he refused to give his name or information to police despite having been in a private area of a bank, that he should have known was a private area because he was told multiple times, according to the bank, to leave.
 
ernst barkmann said:
but jerry you engaged me I did not engage you..i comment on what the cops said...that's all I did.

it is stupidity for the cops to say " we were "violent".......you would never use that word.....it means intent to harm., and what made it even worse is to say , it for someone running away.

cops are always at a disadvantage, because they cannot use violence, unless it is used first on them.
Click to expand...
Violence does not mean intent to harm. Violence is merly the use of phisical force. The word does not regard intent, only behavior.

Police even have to use an aproved martial art with aproved grappeling tecniqus designed to use phisical force while causeing little to no harm.
 
roguenuke said:
He was in a private employee only area of a bank and told multiple times to leave by the bank security. That is why the police were called. Then he refused to give his name or information to police despite having been in a private area of a bank, that he should have known was a private area because he was told multiple times, according to the bank, to leave.
Click to expand...
Did the bank have signs up stating this? Are you sure he wasnt arguing this on his way out of the bank? I wonder what his side of the full story is.
 
ernst barkmann said:
St. Paul police Chief Tom Smith says officers became violent with Lollie because they "believed he might either run or fight with them



so they became violent...because he may run away?.. or because he may fight them......

putting the cart before the horse there.
Click to expand...

This is another bull crap excuse for officers using inappropriate force on a person who has given them no reason. All the officers should have done is tell the man that he needs to go somewhere else and these kids would have not have to witness their dad being tasered for no good reason whatsoever. The man had not given them any indication that he would flee with his kids standing right behind them (he was on his way to pick up these kids) and fighting them? Excuses, nothing more and nothing less to avoid getting sued for breaking a mans civil rights IMO.
 
DiAnna said:
Well, this is turning into a race war, so before the derail is irreparably complete, let me just add the following:

The citizen repeatedly said he did not know he was in a private area, and repeatedly asked where the signs designating it as a private area were located. He received no answer.

He repeatedly told the police he was just there to pick up his children, so the police were aware that if they assaulted/tazed him, his children would likely see it happen, and if they dragged him to the police station, his children would be left alone in the group of strange adults milling around, putting them in danger as well as having traumatized him by seeing their father tazed.

The "crimes" he committed were clearly so heinous and the evidence against him was so overwhelming that the charges were dropped almost immediately.

As I've said, in this case I'm on the citizen's side despite the fact that his own behavior was less than appropriate for the situation.
Click to expand...

He lied, or at least his story contradicts what the police were told by the security guards that made the complaint about him.

As for being tazed in front of his children, so? He should have cooperated. I say it is his own fault he got tazed in front of his children because he refused to cooperate. He almost certainly knew he was not supposed to be in the area. If not, then why was he giving the police such a hard time? Why didn't he file a complaint against anyone, the police or the security for lying about him? Afterall, if the security guard(s) lied about asking him multiple times to leave a restricted area, especially before they called the cops, then that means they could be partially responsible for what happened to him.
 
dirtpoorchris said:
Did the bank have signs up stating this? Are you sure he wasnt arguing this on his way out of the bank? I wonder what his side of the full story is.
Click to expand...

They don't need signs if they've told him multiple times not to be in that area. And a bank wouldn't be public property. The area outside the bank may be, but not the bank itself. What is his side? He's had months to tell his side. In fact, he could have easily filed a complaint in that time against anyone and everyone involved, particularly those security officers if they lied about asking him to leave a restricted/private/employee area.
 
Peter King said:
This is another bull crap excuse for officers using inappropriate force on a person who has given them no reason. All the officers should have done is tell the man that he needs to go somewhere else and these kids would have not have to witness their dad being tasered for no good reason whatsoever. The man had not given them any indication that he would flee with his kids standing right behind them (he was on his way to pick up these kids) and fighting them? Excuses, nothing more and nothing less to avoid getting sued for breaking a mans civil rights IMO.
Click to expand...
That's the perfect discription of the exact opposit of what happened.
 
roguenuke said:
As for being tazed in front of his children, so? He should have cooperated. I say it is his own fault he got tazed in front of his children because he refused to cooperate.
Click to expand...
You can bet this isn't the first time his children have seen him act like a jackass.
 
This is the copy of the police report of what happened.

After arrest video goes viral, police defend officers' actions | Minnesota Public Radio News

In one of the reports, the officers even asked the guy if they could call someone to pick up his kids for him, and he said "no, that's okay, they're not there yet". I am so frickin confused about the information this guy is putting out. Weren't his kids supposedly there, watching him get tased? If so, then wouldn't he need someone to take care of them? Or did that not happen?

Watch: Black Man Reportedly Tased in Front of His Kids for Sitting in Public Space - The Root

So, where were his kids and when exactly did he have to pick them up? Were they there, as he claimed, watching him get tased? If so, then why in the heck did he not want them to get someone to pick them up?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom