Cop Pulls Gun and Manhandles Black Teen Girl at Pool Party

**Brett N** · 06-12-2015, 12:46 PM

I don't think he drew his weapon at the bikini clad girl.

Do you draw on someone if they are trying to take your holstered weapon from you?

Can a group of unarmed men not be a lethal threat to an officer?

You seem to have a pretty strong opinion about the matter but you don't take the time to read any comments in this thread about it. I honestly don't remember anyone on here saying the cop was in the right when he drew. He overreacted to a situation, pretty simple.

Why would an officer take an ass whooping from a group of people, ever? How could he possibly know how far the "ass whooping" was going to be taken? Maybe a couple good head stomps while the others already beat him to the ground? That way he would be good and messed up so some dumb punk kid can grab his gun?

Sounds like a real bad judgement call to just take an ass whooping when you are armed. Protecting yourself with a firearm is just that. This ain't the wild west where fights are fair and you meet in a dirt road and wait for the other to draw.

I am definitely not a cop lover but I do believe in common sense.

**DADDYDBOL** · 06-12-2015, 01:01 PM

Hmmm....he had 9 other officers as back up

This is his job....when he is unable to distinguish between a group of teens and a life threatening situation....well I believe that is when he should turn in his badge

Did someone attempt to take his gun?

He is s whacko and resigned before he got fired.....common sense isn't so common now a days as demonstrated by this officer

**energizer bunny** · 06-12-2015, 02:21 PM

That cop was upset because he fell over! needed to make someone pay for his little fall.

**Brett N** · 06-12-2015, 02:34 PM

Daddydbol, you said nobody should ever draw there weapon unless one was drawn towards them. I was proving the point that there are always exceptions to any rule. That's why I stated the drawing a weapon comment.

Obviously there was no chrime committed because there are no civil charges being brought up. The guy resigned I am sure because he was encouraged to by his union rep to keep peace in the community.

**DADDYDBOL** · 06-12-2015, 02:53 PM

No I see what you're saying and I was referring to people that carry....but really given the non lethal options a trained officer has yeah drawing your side arm should be last resort

Did they draw down on Rodney King? He was high on crack and PCP physically attacking the cops and I am not 100% sure but I don't remember them drawing a weapon other than batons

**Brett N** · 06-12-2015, 04:36 PM

No. They didn't draw down on him. They drug him out of his car and kicked the shit out of him. It was like 5 on 1. They may of drawn at first but it turned into a gang style beat down. F'ed up from the get go.

Latest in ferguson, the cop drew when brown tried to take his firearm while officer was seated in his police car. That's how it started.

**thegodfather** · 06-13-2015, 02:20 AM

Originally Posted by Brett N

Shouldn't be a chrime isn't the same as not a chrime.

Not all laws are agreed on by all people but they are the law. Until enough people do something to get the law changed, it is still against the law. Plus, not all of these kids parents are in jail for selling weed. There's armed robbery, murder, rape...etc. Not to mention just deadbeat dad's that just want nothing to do with the family or bad birth control methods.

I have no issues with weed being legal but some of the other drugs I don't think should be readily available. Blaming all of societys parenting issues ( or single parents) on the legality of drugs is ridiculous. Shit parents are going to be shit parents whether drugs are legal or not. It's called being responsible.

When 1.1 million people are serving prison sentences for NON-VIOLENT drug offenses, yes, I think we can attribute a large portion of our societal ills with lower income communities to this failed initiative from the late 1970s. Add another 6 million people who become convicted felons each year, disenfranchising them from society by denying them the right to vote, own firearms, get student loans, and gain MEANINGFUL employment. Sorry, we've tried it this way and its failed, a new models time has come.

**lovbyts** · 06-13-2015, 03:02 AM

Originally Posted by thegodfather

When 1.1 million people are serving prison sentences for NON-VIOLENT drug offenses, yes, I think we can attribute a large portion of our societal ills with lower income communities to this failed initiative from the late 1970s. Add another 6 million people who become convicted felons each year, disenfranchising them from society by denying them the right to vote, own firearms, get student loans, and gain MEANINGFUL employment. Sorry, we've tried it this way and its failed, a new models time has come.

That may be but the way I look at it is if it's illegal and I decide to do it I know the risk I'm taking and not going to cry it's unfair if I get caught and have to pay the price. Lots of stuff is considered no violent but if you do it and especially keep doing it then you should be in jail or prison.

Most all the people in jail for marijuana are not in there for that alone and probably plea bargainied down to the lessor crime conviction.

If the same guy broke into your car to steal what was in side a dozen times wouldn't you be bitching about him not being in jail or prison?

I think at the most the cop who pulled his gun should have been reprimanded or had to do more training. He may have over reacted slightly but no one was shot or even close. The who thing is out of hand with civil disobedience and being fueled by the media.

I think (my conspiracy theory) this is exactly what government wants so they can swoop in and replace the cops with national guard so they have even more control than they do now.

**Metalject** · 06-13-2015, 04:05 AM

Originally Posted by lovbyts

That may be but the way I look at it is if it's illegal and I decide to do it I know the risk I'm taking and not going to cry it's unfair if I get caught and have to pay the price. Lots of stuff is considered no violent but if you do it and especially keep doing it then you should be in jail or prison.

Most all the people in jail for marijuana are not in there for that alone and probably plea bargainied down to the lessor crime conviction.

If the same guy broke into your car to steal what was in side a dozen times wouldn't you be bitching about him not being in jail or prison?

I think at the most the cop who pulled his gun should have been reprimanded or had to do more training. He may have over reacted slightly but no one was shot or even close. The who thing is out of hand with civil disobedience and being fueled by the media.

I think (my conspiracy theory) this is exactly what government wants so they can swoop in and replace the cops with national guard so they have even more control than they do now.

Perhaps one of my favorite quotes, "An unjust law is no law at all." Originally said by St. Augustine and made famous in the modern era by MLK. The point being, something being law doesn't make it just. Something being law doesn't mean we should stand by it simply because it's the law. Yes, when a bad law exist, as with a good law we're responsible when we break it, but that doesn't mean there was justice in the law. And of course there are numerous different levels of law this can apply to. It would be impossible to compare the horrific segregation laws of the early to mid-1950's to the more modern drug laws of today, the former is obviously worse. But justice, what should and shouldn't be law and the existing laws themselves should not be how we measure things. All things should be measured by liberty, this applies to all laws and even when voting for a candidate. If a law or candidate represents an expansion of liberty it is good, if it takes away from it then it's bad. All things related should be this simple.

And you are 100% correct, this hysteria that's being driven by identity politics will be used by the White House and the national government overall to attempt instituting a national police force. In the case of Obama it will never come to full fruition, although he could attempt an executive order. But nearly anything he does like that will never be approved by the existing congress, and if he tries an executive order congress won't fund it. It is possible that the White House may use the executive order and pull funds from other existing areas, but it's too late to really get a full force off the ground when it would be turned over, unless Clinton was to win and uphold it. Not sure what she would do in such a case but in the long-term it would require congressional approval and mass funding. Anyway, sure I could be wrong.

**Brett N** · 06-13-2015, 08:48 AM

Have to agree, just because a law is a law does not make it just. But, there is still punishment to breaking it and we all know that. When I was in the military during desert storm, there wasn't anybody in the country that wouldn't buy me a drink if I went into a bar in uniform. I was under 21 so it was illegal. If the establishment served me they could lose their liquor license. Is that just? No, but it is the law. You will not go to prison for selling weed one time. If you repeat it multiple times, the punishment will get worse. If you make selling weed legal. ( only weed, not meth, coke or any other so called harder drugs) you would not change the amount of people in prison. These guys would no longer sell weed to make money. Legalizing weed would hurt the cash illegal pot seller. He would switch to something else where the demand would outweigh the supply so he could control the price. Vicious circle, single parent, another criminal in prison, anther kid growing up with shit role models and fairly certain to do the same thing. And so on and so on

Also. This can't be blamed on Obama. This has been happening throughout time. Since before the Reagan era. This is not a right wing left wing thing. This is a money thing and government itself is a for profit business. Crime is profitable for all involved except the actual criminal. Look at all the money involved in the criminal process from the police , lawyers, judges, courthouses, bailiffs , prisons , prison guards, prison supplies, food, appeals, clothing , contracts in maintaining, tax dollars they create. The list goes on and on. Government will always be corrupt. You think Halliburton getting all the contracts for Saudi and Afghanistan was a coincidence?

**thegodfather** · 06-13-2015, 07:26 PM

Ten worst sentences for marijuana-related crimes - Salon.com

whatever you need to tell yourself, i guess...

**Brett N** · 06-13-2015, 07:35 PM

If you're going to break a law, don't be a dumbass about it. I break laws all the time, I just know how to keep it to myself and shut my mouth about it.

**j3374** · 07-06-2015, 09:59 PM

Originally Posted by thegodfather

You're at least partially right. There is no amount of policing that will fix the situation. The only thing that will fix the situation is to end the drug war and decriminalize all drugs, and end prison terms for possession of said drugs. The drug war is simply a war on poor people and minorities. Before you respond, you should consider I'm a registered Republican.

You absolutely don't sound like registered Republican. You sound like my progressive college instructors. And you're a Libertarian at heart? Is that what happens to conservatives when they become educated?

**Euroholic** · 07-09-2015, 03:52 AM

Everything looks different in hindsight. those 2 blokes(potential threats) just jumped in right behind him. So he draw his weapon at the ready until he eliminated the Potential threat

**musclestack** · 07-09-2015, 10:18 AM

Originally Posted by DADDYDBOL

Lol this idiot has been waiting his whole career to pull his weapon....unarmed teens made the perfect scenario....my parents carry I carry most of my friends carry....it's an unspoken rule you don't draw on someone unless they draw on you....period....if you can't walk away or take an ass whipping but that gun makes you feel like a man something mentally has gone wrong

With respect to your opinion, I disagree with this. While I don't 'carry on my person', I keep my hand gun in my truck. I am not one to start fights with anyone. In fact, I've never been in a fight that I instigated myself. The only time I would ever physically attack someone is if it was self defense. Having said that, if someone approaches me and threatens violence against me, why should I not be able to draw my weapon just because they don't have one? I view them as a threat (which they are), and my only objective is to neutralize that threat in the most efficient way possible. Most people will back away if they have a gun drawn on them. If not, hey, you were warned. The gun doesn't make me 'feel like a man'; not sure where that came from?? It's a tool used to neutralize a threat.

"An armed society is a polite society". If you don't want to risk getting shot, then don't start fights. If you don't like the way I play the game, you best play with someone else.

**jackfrost88** · 07-09-2015, 11:47 AM

Like other people have said, I don't see anything the cop did wrong. Sure he was yelling and obviously on edge but there was no police brutality. The people there were acting like idiots, they were asked to leave the "scene" or whatever it was (conveniently the video started pretty late into the situation) and chose to stay and talk shit to the police? Are they stupid or trying to start a "police brutality" situation.

Then after the cop takes the girl down, she resists arrests and starts shreaking and yelling. The whole group of people which should have left the area but chose to stay are quick to blow the situation up and act like its another LA cop murder when really its just a bratty girl instigating shit with police and resisting arrest.

Then those idiots start posturing up and acting like their going to fight the cops? Are they retarted? Of course they got run down and arrested to.

If anything I give this cop an A+ for dealing with ghetto shitheads like this on a daily basis for 50k a year.

**Euroholic** · 07-09-2015, 09:30 PM

Its a thankless job being a cop. Ive noticed you guys over there use the word "law enforcement" seems very aggressive if you ask me. like your forcing people. We use terms like. "Policing"

If a cop says "im a police officer I'm enforcing the law" then he appears arrogant and less trust worthy. But if he says "im doing my policing duties" it comes across less enforcing of the civilin. Words have a way of being understood differently. My 9cents

**Metalject** · 07-09-2015, 11:23 PM

Originally Posted by Euroholic

Its a thankless job being a cop. Ive noticed you guys over there use the word "law enforcement" seems very aggressive if you ask me. like your forcing people. We use terms like. "Policing"

If a cop says "im a police officer I'm enforcing the law" then he appears arrogant and less trust worthy. But if he says "im doing my policing duties" it comes across less enforcing of the civilin. Words have a way of being understood differently. My 9cents

The founding fathers of the U.S. never intended for their to be a police force in the U.S. as there is today, or more importantly, judicial power as there is today. The police or any law enforcement branch are simply arms of the judiciary, which is something people tend to forget. And of the three branches of government in the U.S. (Federal) but this also applies to each state with their individual constitutions, the judiciary was given the least amount of power of the three branches. But, as years have passed the courts have gained more power - Jefferson warned of this repeatedly stating the constitution wasn't intended to be interpreted. I always find it odd when people say the constitution is vague and needs interpretation when it's perhaps one of the most straightforward documents ever written. You could only use the argument of interpretation if you didn't like the document. Anyway, getting off track - as the courts have gained more power, their arms have gained more power, their arms being law enforcement, and we allow it because of the "it's all about keeping you safe" argument. This argument can be translated to "I can't take care of anything myself and I need you to do it for me" which is the argument for everything these days.

John Jay, first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court “Every member of the State ought diligently to read and to study the Constitution of his country…By knowing their rights, they will sooner perceive when they are violated and be the better prepared to defend and assert them.” Sadly, most think their rights and the rights of the state are whatever fits them in the moment and when those moments don't exist, well they could tell you more about the Kardashians than they could about anything of relevance.