“This lawsuit is brought to prevent this from ever happening again”
In the country where cop abuse happens all the time, and nothing ever stops or prevents it.
And we (as a whole) worship the police, especially thru idealized shows like Law & Order.
My first thought after reading that sentence was “I have some bad news for her…”
Edit: fixed dad to bad.
Does she not know who her dad is? Or maybe you’re referring to the child’s father?
How even? Are the cops supposed to search the ground first? Like seriously, regardless of the circumstances leading to the arrest, how to prevent that?
What a stupid fucking take. She said there were fire ants on her face. In that instance you move her. I’m not a cop, and I know this, and wouldn’t do this to someone, because I’m not a fucking moron.
I swear to god you guys who stick up for the cops don’t even think for five seconds before hungrily jamming pig cock down your throats for all to see.
So let’s break this down.
You’re assuming that this was an accident and that he didn’t do it on purpose (he absolutely did). Humoring this theory though, let’s consider your question:
**Q: **Should a cop survey his surroundings, including the ground, before restraining someone?
**A: **Yes, of course, you would be a fucking idiot not to. Furthermore, forcing a person into some sort of hazard and injuring them, even unintentionally, is a problem to be avoided.
How to prevent that?
Your idea seems to be to do nothing at all so I’ll start by saying that’s fucking stupid.
Some might say to abolish law enforcement, but honestly, with compassionate police training emphasizing de-escalation, harm reduction, and civil service, we might actually have an ethical system someday. Also by firing cops on the first offense for use of excess force and blacklisting them from law enforcement for years requiring re-certification to ever become a cop again. And abolishing police unions and narrowing legal immunity for on-duty cops so that they don’t get away with maiming and killing people. And not funneling all of the excesses of the U.S. Military Industrial Complex into the hands of every suburban police department so that they can act as a standing army in our turnkey dictatorship.
Since you are the only person that actually replies: Has nothing to do with the case at hand, as I said (or the person I reply to) generally speaking. Since thinking abstract is hard, here an example: There was an armed robbery, they got the person cornered, one officer gets ready to charge him in order to disarm. This works. Person now on the ground. Face is wherever it happened to land. How to avoid that? Is that possible?
Did you even read the article? She accidentally drove the wrong way in a bus lane. Her son was still in the car. The police officer freaked out and instead of calmly talking to her, they called backup and the officer who came freaked out even worse and slammed her to the ground on an ant hill and then ignored her saying that ants were boring her face. You don’t see any point where this could have been avoided?
If you take someone into your custody via an arrest, you are then responsible for their wellbeing. This is common sense.
Imagine if someone is in the middle of a shallow river getting arrested. Would it be okay to hold their head underwater while you are restraining them? Of course not.
The officer is responsible for making sure that the suspect is not put into harms way during the course of having them in their custody. If they fail that very basic expectation, they should not be in law enforcement period.
Kindly go put your face on a fire ant nest, and then come back and tell us how the cop shouldn’t have moved her once she yelled about the fire ants.
The nests can sometimes be hard to spot, so I’m not voting one way or another on that. But basic human decency says, if you accidentally put someone on a fire ant nest, you move them asap once you notice.
She was dropping her son off as school. Her son was still in the car. She drove into the bus lane accidentally. The officer’s response was that he was “scared she was going to run someone over” … while her son who goes to the school is in the car. You could verify that in a 5 second radio call to the front office.
We need to re-think policing in general if cops are allowed to enforce their worst fears instead of seeing what’s actually happening.
My read was that she was trying to bypass the line of cars dropping off kids, and he was trying to stop her so she wouldn’t run over a kid exiting a vehicle. If you’ve ever dropped off kids at school in the morning, you know this is a major nono. The problem is that, if you rush someone yelling “STOP” in that situation, you run the risk of making them panic and do something even more unexpected (like accidentally turn into the bus lane). It would have been better to flag her down calmly, and explain the problem. But this guy was so obsessed with enforcing The Rules that he got aggressive and created a much worse situation for everyone involved.
Without knowing the exact layout of the lanes, I couldn’t be sure, but I do think you’re correct. She did need to stop, but he only escalated the situation.
Considering she had PTSD from a previous police encounter, it sure seems like a regular crossing guard or traffic director without a gun on their hip would’ve prevented this from escalating in the first place.
You can point out that someone fucked up and incited the initial incident while still acknowledging that the response was overblown. If someone breaks into my house and I kill them thats one thing, if I instead lock them in a shed and torture them for a month they are still a victim while also initially putting themselves into the situation. Ones a fuck around find out scenario the other is disproportionate insanity.
And if she struggles because of the ants and moves around, she gets beaten, shot with a heart attack machine, and/or shot with a gun, then charged with resisting arrest
I would say she has a strong case.
Clearly if she had just complied, those ants wouldn’t have bitten her.
