Police misconduct 2

[heironymouspasparagus]

Cop handled that one perfectly.   Never got belligerent or abusive.   When someone calls 911 it is their job to respond and he handled it with professionalism.    

Nice to see a good one.

Yeah....right....

People are nervous....  <shaking of head in disbelief>

I guess that is the best we can expect.

[TheArtist]

Officer tells black man that walking with his hands in his pockets was "making people nervous"

A white police officer stopped a black Michigan man on Thanksgiving just for walking with his hands in his pockets, according to a video posted on Brandon McKean's Facebook page on Nov. 27.

The Pontiac, Michigan police officer detained Brandon McKean for "making people nervous," after he was seen "walking by with your hands in your pockets." McKean can be heard saying that his hands were in his pockets because it was snowing outside.

"There's 10,000 people in Pontiac right now with their hands in their pockets," McKean told the officer.

"You're, right, but we do have a lot of robberies," the officer told McKean, "So I'm just checking on you." The officer can also be seen simultaneously recording the encounter on his phone.

"Just got stopped Walking BECAUSE MY HANDS WERE IN MY POCKETS... POLICE STATE," wrote McKean when he posted the video on Facebook.

https://time.com/3611812/pontiac-police-michigan-stop-man-hands-pockets-cold/

Probably been a lot of shootings, too, but you only see one guy walking around with a gun...

The only police "misconduct" I see here is that the officer should have been arresting the person who made the prank/nuisance/defamatory/time wasting/taxpayer money wasting,  phone call in the first place. Someone should have gotten in trouble for that, either the dispatcher who took the call and failed to screen it effectively or the person making the call.  And if I were the officer I would have been mad at one of the two, or a crappy policy, and certainly not the guy "walking down the street".  And yes the officer probably did the best he could in the sad situation he was put into.

[DolfanBob]

My take on that is. Stop acting like you have a chip on your shoulder. If it was any other color individual he would have been asked the same questions. Just answer like someone who has nothing to hide and then maybe both you and the Officer can laugh it off. But no. He has to break out the phone. Start filming and acting like he is all of the sudden a victim of racial profiling. For a race of people who spout out all kinds of wanting respect. It seems a lot of them don't want to show any. 

[heironymouspasparagus]

My take on that is. Stop acting like you have a chip on your shoulder. If it was any other color individual he would have been asked the same questions. Just answer like someone who has nothing to hide and then maybe both you and the Officer can laugh it off. But no. He has to break out the phone. Start filming and acting like he is all of the sudden a victim of racial profiling. For a race of people who spout out all kinds of wanting respect. It seems a lot of them don't want to show any. 

Really??

How many times have you walked down the street?  On a cool day with your hands in your pockets?  I do it all the time when it is cool - have for at least the last 50+ years.  Have never made anyone nervous...'course the reason would be obvious if one saw me - old fat white guy, walking slowly - no threat there....  Never been stopped while walking by a cop to ask about what I was doing.  Just because it never happens to you, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

Actually, he WAS profiled.

[TeeDub]

Really??

How many times have you walked down the street?  On a cool day with your hands in your pockets?  I do it all the time when it is cool - have for at least the last 50+ years.  Have never made anyone nervous...'course the reason would be obvious if one saw me - old fat white guy, walking slowly - no threat there....  Never been stopped while walking by a cop to ask about what I was doing.  Just because it never happens to you, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

Actually, he WAS profiled.

If someone calls the cops, it is their duty to respond.

[DolfanBob]

If someone calls the cops, it is their duty to respond.

Exactly. And if it would have just happened to be an Officer of color. We wouldn't be having this conversation. Racism works both ways. It's just hard to convince some people that it does.

[Townsend]

How many times have you walked down the street?  On a cool day with your hands in your pockets?  I do it all the time when it is cool - have for at least the last 50+ years.  Have never made anyone nervous...'course the reason would be obvious if one saw me - old fat white guy, walking slowly - no threat there....  Never been stopped while walking by a cop to ask about what I was doing.  Just because it never happens to you, doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

You walk down streets...all the time...in Tulsa?

[heironymouspasparagus]

You walk down streets...all the time...in Tulsa?

Not necessarily "all the time" - sometimes I still have to work, but regularly enough to see cops drive by without stopping to ask me anything.  Ever.

Tulsa.  OKC.  Owasso.  Bixby.  Jenks (that's gotta make some nervous...)  Broken Arrow.  Moore.  Norman.  Collinsville.  Claremore.  Oologah.  Talala.  Inola.  Redfork.  Milwaukee.  Minneapolis.  St. Louis.  Dallas.  Knoxville.  Portland.  Seattle - actually a little town outside of.  Just a few....  And drive even more!  Not so much in Sand Springs or Sapulpa - just outside my traffic pattern for whatever reason.

[cannon_fodder]

My take on that is. Stop acting like you have a chip on your shoulder. If it was any other color individual he would have been asked the same questions. Just answer like someone who has nothing to hide and then maybe both you and the Officer can laugh it off. But no. He has to break out the phone. Start filming and acting like he is all of the sudden a victim of racial profiling. For a race of people who spout out all kinds of wanting respect. It seems a lot of them don't want to show any. 

This is a great example of a huge attitude shift in America.  If you aren't doing anything wrong, just answer the nice man's questions and we can all move on. He's from the government and has to ask.  The government knows best...

While treating officer's with respect is both easier and advisable, it isn't a requirement. The officer, on the other hand, is employed by We the People and should be expected to treat you, the citizen, with respect.  In the video shown, I don't have a huge problem with the officer's behavior and I doubt it was racial profiling.  BUT - an officer does not get blind authority to stop a citizen because some other citizen reports him (again, here the Officer did not actually "stop" the individual in the technical sense). An officer is free to, and very often does exercise discretion in choosing to address certain concerns.  "Officer, a man has his hands in his pocket and it is scaring me."  "Ma'am, I can't pester a citizen because he scared you simply by having his hands in his pockets.  Is he doing anything else or is this a person you know to be dangerous?  Then I'm sorry ma'am, this isn't really a police matter."

In this instance, it was harmless.  But DUI checkpoints, immigration checkpoints, and a plethora of other stretches of the 4th Amendment continue to erode our freedoms.

Why is this is conservative position? It seems backwards to me.

Conservatives argue that we need to expand police power and that we owe obedience to governmental authority.  The police are the primary actors of the government.  If your constitutional rights are going to be violated, it will probably be in an interaction with the police (most common governmental actor).  Yet it is the conservatives who want them better armed, with broader authority to search citizens, and with more immunity when rights are violated.

The liberals are the ones arguing for less governmental interference and more governmental accountability when government violates citizen rights.

Seems totally backwards!  Shouldn't the liberals be arguing for more police to "keep us safe!" while conservatives argue that safety means nothing if it comes at the expense of giving up our rights to the government?

[swake]

Not necessarily "all the time" - sometimes I still have to work, but regularly enough to see cops drive by without stopping to ask me anything.  Ever.

Tulsa.  OKC.  Owasso.  Bixby.  Jenks ('s gotta make sothat's gotta make some nervous...) 

Jenks requires sidewalks in all new developments and actively is adding sidewalks/trails to major streets that don't have them. Downtown/old town Jenks has to be the most walkable part of the metro outside of downtown/midtown.

[patric]

Just answer like someone who has nothing to hide and then maybe both you and the Officer can laugh it off.

Some thoughts on that tactic, from someone in a unique position to speak about civil rights and privacy:

When you say, 'I have nothing to hide,' you're saying, 'I don't care about this right.' You're saying, 'I don't have this right, because I've got to the point where I have to justify it.' The way rights work is, the government has to justify its intrusion into your rights.

http://techcrunch.com/2014/10/11/edward-snowden-new-yorker-festival/

[heironymouspasparagus]

This is a great example of a huge attitude shift in America.  If you aren't doing anything wrong, just answer the nice man's questions and we can all move on. He's from the government and has to ask.  The government knows best...

While treating officer's with respect is both easier and advisable, it isn't a requirement. The officer, on the other hand, is employed by We the People and should be expected to treat you, the citizen, with respect.  In the video shown, I don't have a huge problem with the officer's behavior and I doubt it was racial profiling.  BUT - an officer does not get blind authority to stop a citizen because some other citizen reports him (again, here the Officer did not actually "stop" the individual in the technical sense). An officer is free to, and very often does exercise discretion in choosing to address certain concerns.  "Officer, a man has his hands in his pocket and it is scaring me."  "Ma'am, I can't pester a citizen because he scared you simply by having his hands in his pockets.  Is he doing anything else or is this a person you know to be dangerous?  Then I'm sorry ma'am, this isn't really a police matter."

In this instance, it was harmless.  But DUI checkpoints, immigration checkpoints, and a plethora of other stretches of the 4th Amendment continue to erode our freedoms.

Why is this is conservative position? It seems backwards to me.

Conservatives argue that we need to expand police power and that we owe obedience to governmental authority.  The police are the primary actors of the government.  If your constitutional rights are going to be violated, it will probably be in an interaction with the police (most common governmental actor).  Yet it is the conservatives who want them better armed, with broader authority to search citizens, and with more immunity when rights are violated.

The liberals are the ones arguing for less governmental interference and more governmental accountability when government violates citizen rights.

Seems totally backwards!  Shouldn't the liberals be arguing for more police to "keep us safe!" while conservatives argue that safety means nothing if it comes at the expense of giving up our rights to the government?

It is backwards.  It has been heading backwards for a long, long time.  It is less government interference for corporate entities (the ones that own the representatives) and more interference for the people.  In general, more of all the good stuff for the corporate entities and less of all the good stuff for people.  And vice versa.

[Ed W]

Why is this is conservative position? It seems backwards to me.

Conservatives argue that we need to expand police power and that we owe obedience to governmental authority.  The police are the primary actors of the government.  If your constitutional rights are going to be violated, it will probably be in an interaction with the police (most common governmental actor).  Yet it is the conservatives who want them better armed, with broader authority to search citizens, and with more immunity when rights are violated.

The liberals are the ones arguing for less governmental interference and more governmental accountability when government violates citizen rights.

Seems totally backwards!  Shouldn't the liberals be arguing for more police to "keep us safe!" while conservatives argue that safety means nothing if it comes at the expense of giving up our rights to the government?

I disagree. This isn't a left/right issue. It's a common belief among those who take their rights seriously and believe that law enforcement will overstep the limits of their authority. I don't think that's a deliberate attempt to attack our fundamental rights. Instead, I tend to believe it's more about taking shortcuts to make their jobs easier. Still, there are too many opportunities for abuse.

For example, a security guard approached someone and asked to search him, saying he had the authority to do so since the person was on private property and implying that he could be arrested and searched if he did not comply. The guy could have said no and left the property, but he didn't know this was an option. This was wrong on two fronts: the person didn't know his rights and the security guard took advantage of that lack of knowledge.

[TheArtist]

If someone calls the cops, it is their duty to respond.

Good next time I see you walking down the street or driving I will call the cops and have them come talk to you, and they can tell you that the reason they are stopping you to talk to you is because someone called about you.  Apparently "I" am free to do so, for any reason I come up with, without repercussions, so why not?

[cannon_fodder]

Denver citizen board getting involved in a classic "citizen records bad cops/cops erase evidence and arrest citizen on his way to the news."
http://kdvr.com/2014/12/11/witness-who-shot-video-of-police-punching-suspect-arrested-sent-to-jail/