Patterico's Pontifications

5/15/2009

Distraction to the Head

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 9:17 pm



View the video:

Listen to the lawyer for the police union:

“Unfortunately these things never look good on video. Sometimes officers have to use force when dealing with bad guys,” said Dammeier. “The officer initially came upon the suspect alone. The suspect hadn’t been searched and was a parolee and a gang member. The individual officer saw some movement. He feared the parolee might have a weapon or be about to get up. So the officer did what is known as a distraction blow. It wasn’t designed to hurt the man, just distract him.”

Did you see all that movement?

High five!

P.S. Boot to the head.

P.P.S. In case it wasn’t crystal clear, my point is that the defense of the officer is laughable. The gang member who evaded the cops is scum who needs to be prosecuted, but this defense of the cop doesn’t pass the laugh test.

207 Responses to “Distraction to the Head”

  1. The suspect looked like he was choking to me. The officer wisely applied the horizontal head heimlich with his foot, which is the approved method, and probably saved the guy’s life. Forget the BS about the distraction kick. The suspect should be thanking the officer is the way I look at it.

    Nice tats on the dude too. Mom would be so proud.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  2. Go to Jail. Go directly to Jail. Do not pass Go! Do not collect $200. I have absolutely no sympathy for these kinds of assholes. If I had my druthers, any crime committed by a police officer while in uniform would have a mandatory sentence of at least 10 years. Bad cops like this need to learn that they are not above the law.

    tjwilliams (831c6e)

  3. “Boom! Headshot!”

    tjwilliams (831c6e)

  4. tj – Do you support the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on our detainees in Afghanistan and Iraq?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  5. Looks like the video’s been pulled. It’d be interesting to know who complained, and on what grounds.

    Steven Den Beste (99cfa1)

  6. After seeing that, will it be any surprise when the next guy chooses to try to kill the officer rather than meekly submitting as that guy did?

    I may not have much sympathy for this gangster but what about when it’s your innocent son or daughter, caught in the back yard while checking out the noise of the real bad guy going over the fence. That is why we have due process instead of just letting the police shoot the guy. How are those police different from any other gangster since they no longer operate under the authority of law and have instead chosen the principle of brute force?

    I’m a little pissed.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  7. It’s still up for me.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  8. The guy was a gang banger, he had just led a high speed chase, who knows what he was saying or screaming, the cop’s adrenalin is pumping and he gave the kid alove tap to the head. Whilst carrying a loaded weapon. I think he showed excellent restraint and also got the attention of the perp real quick and without injury. Punks like that always run the cops ragged, endangering lives with their driving, and as soon as a cop gets near them, they don’t want to “play’ anymore.
    Then everyone goes nuts on the cop, and bleats about a thug’s rights. Then we wonder why people don’t want to join the police force. Two generations ago, the cop would have beaten him silly, then took him home to his dad, who would have repeated the lesson.
    The punk has opted out of society, so he does not deserve it’s unfettered protections. And no, I am not advocating that he should be beaten senseless, I am just saying that treating him a little brusquely is no big deal, Heck, his gang initiation ceremony was probably 10 times worse than that.
    Live by the sword, die by the sword.

    Gazzer (206e15)

  9. While it’s certainly an ugly thing to witness and it’s difficult for me to applaud the officers, it’s quite clear that the suspect had more than ample opportunity to end it all much sooner, or better yet, not even commit the traffic violation in the first place. Instead he continued to compound the risk and danger by speeding through stop signs, lights, and recklessly endangering the lives of citizens by driving on a sidewalk. He put many innocent people’s lives at risk as well as the police officers themselves. And at any point in time he could have ‘meekly’ surrendered. He chose not to.

    I’m just unable to know what the stress of a pursuit like that causes and the rush of fear and adrenaline combined. By the time the officers get to a suspect who has shown nothing but brazen contempt toward them as law enforcement, what sort of fear for their own lives do the officers feel? One thing I do know, the quoted professor from Nebraska in the article perhaps knows even less than me about that sort of fear. How does one who lives in the ivory tower and in a state where criminal gang numbers are nothing compared to So. California’s, presume to make his horrified determination? I heard on the news today that a poll of citizens in El Monte revealed that many approved of the officers actions because they themselves know firsthand the direct affects of criminal gang members living in their midst and the daily fear that comes with it.

    Dana (4a6e8c)

  10. And when they mistake you or a loved one for one of the bad guys this will be OK? No hard feelings cause you might have deserved it if you were who they thought?

    The police in my family and among my friends did not join to do that to unresisting people. They joined to stop that kind of thuggery. Criminal police like those thugs are what drive out or ruin good cops when they are expected to cover for what they wanted to stop. No need for kid gloves but police should not be handing out “manners lessons”.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  11. That is why we have due process instead of just letting the police shoot the guy.
    Where is anyone suggesting shooting the thug? He got a tiny tap to the head from a pumped up gun-wielding cop. Big deal.

    Gazzer (206e15)

  12. I say no harm, no foul.

    Alta Bob (28abe4)

  13. If you are going to let police be judge, jury, and executioner, then require that they shoot the bad guy humanely. If they are to be law enforcement officers subject to the law, then the actions of at least three officers appears to be criminal. Power does not corrupt, immunity corrupts. If you take armed men and make them immune from the law then you start down the road to roving death squads as we see in South America. I’ll die fighting that here.

    If the officer can’t control himself he should not have a gun!! We expect teenagers to come out of prolonged firefights with soldiers and terrorists and to accept their surrender without killing or torturing them, but you say a policeman can’t handle a car chase without beating the first person that he meets??? Sorry, I don’t buy it.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  14. He received a vicious kick to the head, the second policeman kneedropped his kidney, and the third man was working at letting the dog get at his inner legs and maybe crotch. There was an interesting skip at that point.

    Where do we draw the line? You can kick and punch him but not shoot him? If they are not subject to the law then why would they obey that rule. If you want invigilate police then change the law. Having them work outside the law leaves no control or restraint at all except “don’t get caught”. We have seen this before and it DOES end up with people being shot.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  15. We expect teenagers to come out of prolonged firefights with soldiers and terrorists and to accept their surrender without killing or torturing them, but you say a policeman can’t handle a car chase without beating the first person that he meets???
    Wow! Straw man much? The first person he sees? Roving death squads? Immune from the law? Good grief!

    Gazzer (206e15)

  16. there’s no civil rights violation under the NHI clause.

    give him a can of Kiwi and a 3 day pass.

    redc1c4 (9c4f4a)

  17. We have often enough seen corrupt police become worse than the gangsters they are supposed to control. Once they start down that road, what stops them?

    How were the thugs at Waco or Ruby Ridge, different than the death squads?

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  18. redc1c4,
    Sorry, I don’t know what the NHI clause is.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  19. I wonder what the attorney would say if he had been on the receiving end of that “Distraction Blow.”

    Fritz J. (182a9d)

  20. Do you think one Founding Father would apply the Constitution to these gang neighborhoods and the bangers who infest them?

    In every major city in the U.S., we have kids/punks/”adults” with guns controling blocks, even miles of America. I even see them on TV shows bragging about their exploits and even waving guns for the cameras. Punks stand in public, easily identifiable, bragging about their b.s. Seriously, think about the situation for a minute. They occupy (OCCUPY) numerous parts of America, and we know who most of them are. They control those blocks. Hello, Janet Napolitano!

    Machinist, it is almost enough to give death squads a good name, but you are right. We can’t have death squads. We need to send the military in to round up these useless tattooed toxins and kill ’em. True, it is not the American way, but the neighborhoods they live in are no longer America. Besides, all those gang funerals would be a great stimulus to the economy.
    Steve

    steve (75fbbd)

  21. redc1c4,
    Sorry, I don’t know what the NHI clause is.

    that’s funny: you seem to know everything else.

    redc1c4 (9c4f4a)

  22. Gazzer is probably a lefty troll moby. Hate to be paranoid. If not a moby, then an idiot.

    The real problem is that the other cops did not immediately arrest the cop who needlessly assaulted the criminal. Saying he was suffering from adrenaline is saying he can’t handle his job.

    The kid showed ‘some movement’. He stopped and laid down on the ground submissively. The cop had a drawn weapon, and there was simply no risk of this thug getting out of that situation. There are not ‘if’s about this. The cops who did not arrest this assaulter belong in prison themselves for letting a felon go free because he’s their friend.

    I’m a huge fan of cops, and to be an honorable cop is very hard and heroic. Doesn’t make this particular cop any less a criminal.

    There is absolutely no chance the victim criminal did not suffer some degree of injury from this, BTW.

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  23. Steve, yes, I think all of our founding fathers would apply our legal protections to our criminals. remember, ALL of them were considered criminal traitors to their police department, King George’s redcoats. They understood that a police department that isn’t observing basic rights is something worth preventing.

    Not sure what you’re talking about though. This criminal is on tape running from the cops… what would be problem be with giving him his due process rights?

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  24. cholos and other bangers are like coyotes. they live on the edge of society, feed from it, terrorize it, and prey on it without participating in it, because they know they can get away with it.

    they should get the same consideration that they give: open season and no limits.

    once it starts being deadly and stops being hip to be a thug, they will go away.

    CCW’s are a start.

    redc1c4 (9c4f4a)

  25. Juan, I am talking about the gang occupation of American cities. They are an occupying force that should be dealt with in the harshest terms. Again, I say, we have many miles of Amercia that are the under control of gun-toting violent punks. The gangs’ control makes the Constitution irrelevant to those who suffer under the gangs’ presence. Anyone concerned with the Constitution should realize that it logically calls for martial law in those areas. A boot to the face is hardly the satisfaction owed to those of us with a true sense of justice.
    Steve
    Steve

    steve (75fbbd)

  26. I suspect the only areas where gangsters openly terrorize there neighborhoods are where the government protects them from their victims by disarming the citizens. It is hard to stand up to gangs when the government sides with them.

    I don’t think you saw that in Texas.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  27. As a conservative Republican I think I might well be targeted by those troops if sent in by this administration.

    I don’t think the Founders ever contemplated our society ever becoming such sheep we would allow the government to leave us so helpless to stand up to gangs. Many of these founders supported laws requiring citizens to be armed and ready to defend their communities.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  28. red, what does that even mean?

    It’s stupid. They are criminals, and deserve long prison sentences after a very professional and thorough trial. Hard labor would be great. More cops would be great.

    But kicking people in this head like this could easily kill someone, obviously would hurt and cause some kind of injury, and is going to get cops killed if it’s the norm. Why do you think the thug stopped and got so submissive so fast? Because he was trying to avoid a painful altercation, no doubt. But he didn’t avoid it. If he could go back in time, he would resist violently. I don’t want people learning that lesson.

    These kids are drug dealers… and I think that makes them murderers. They should never be released from prison for such a crime. But the fact that cops are enforcing a democratically decided code does not make them the good guys. That they have to follow that same code is what makes them the good guys.

    it’s just not reasonable to assume that this gangster was threatening in any way from his movements. That’s why the defense of this is ‘no mercy!!!! look how bad the bad guy is!!!!

    If this isn’t OK to do to your grandma, then it’s not OK. Shoot him dead if he actually jerks in a threatening way. i won’t lose any sleep over that.

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  29. “that’s funny: you seem to know everything else.

    Comment by redc1c4 — 5/16/2009 @ 12:25 am ”

    Would you care to explain, Sir? Have I said something in error? Am I not allowed an opinion? Who decides?

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  30. Steve, I do not think the constitution calls for martial law in any situation. And I don’t even think it’s all that relevant here… the California Penal Code’s provisions on battery are more relevant to what the cop did to that man.

    And it sure as hell looked like a clean neighborhood with tons of cops. It did not look like an area under ‘enemy control’. LA isn’t perfect and stronger police measures are probably warranted in many ways. More and better cops… harsher penalties, immigration and drug controls, etc. But saying ‘hey, we are not competent at law enforcement… therefore let’s just pretend the law doesn’t apply to us!’ is just stupid.

    CCWs would be awesome (whoever mentioned that). Citizens shooting criminal robbers or assaulters is a beautiful thing.

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  31. 24.Gazzer is probably a lefty troll moby. Hate to be paranoid. If not a moby, then an idiot
    Resorting to insults means you just lose. A simple click on my nic would take you to my blog where I have posted over 250 posts since January, none of which are vaguely troll-like, or lefty in nature, and one, I am proud to say, that was featured on Instapundit. Yet I did all this so that one day, someone called Juan, would discover my true trollness, and call me out. I fabricated the whole thing to counter your argument. Sheesh!

    Gazzer (206e15)

  32. I can’t envision a situation where, if I am pointing a gun at a dealer and I think he’s reaching for gun, my reaction to that is to run up and kick him in the head.

    if that’s emblematic of the quality of what they are teaching these gentlemen, it’s no wonder they are having a hard time with crime. If a criminal is really reaching for a gun, shoot him.

    and really, if a shooting wasn’t justified, then stomping on his head probably wasn’t, either. Even if it’s a ‘diversion’ tactic.

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  33. Gazzer, I didn’t insult you, and if you are going to make ad hominems while saying they mean ‘you just lose’, then you are absurd.

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  34. It sounds like the liberal school of government. A dictator is OK as long as the right people have absolute power. Unfortunately the right kind of people don’t want such power and the ones who do should never have it. Again, an old story.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  35. By the way, it was a disjunctive. Either you’re a moby, which is entirely possible (you could use any URL and name), or you’re an idiot.

    As I said above when I brought it up, I hate to be paranoid about it, but you’re just so nonsensical. I notice that your response to me does not address my substantive comments on WHY your point of view is extreme and wrong.

    Funny… it seems that makes you the one relying on invalid arguments, though.

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  36. You’re way too smart for me. Thanks for checking out my blog anyway.
    35.Gazzer, I didn’t insult you,
    If not a moby, then an idiot.
    You must have all that book learning my pappy never could afford. Just so that I know, for comparison purposes, would you be kind enough to actually insult me so that I may later discern when you are not. It is hard to tell the difference, the way you sell it. And take your time, as I won’t be back till morning. So please do not mistake my silence for victory.

    Gazzer (206e15)

  37. Oops, I forgot to discuss your $5 word “disjunctive.” We know it means an either or proposition. You seem to think that by merely making that assertion, no other possibility exists. You are even asserting that I am using any URL or name to reenforce my position. Yet, you are clearly hiding behind a nic that I am unable to click on. Clearly, I am Moby Mc Moby from Mobyville. You, on the other hand , are beyond reproach due to your anonymity. I salute you.

    Gazzer (206e15)

  38. And when they mistake you or a loved one for one of the bad guys this will be OK?

    If any of my loved ones lead the cops on a high-speed chase, I’d frankly only be pissed off if the cops didn’t smack them around.

    Scott Jacobs (90ff96)

  39. and if you are going to make ad hominems while saying they mean ‘you just lose’, then you are absurd.

    Actually, Juan, he lampooned you quite effectively. You were wrong. And you were the first to actually throw an insult. That he took the time to call someone on their glaring logical fallacies doesn’t make him the bad guy.

    Your inability to admit your own errors, and attempt to spin a “I work here is done” moment out of defeat, just makes you even more of a tool.

    Scott Jacobs (90ff96)

  40. I can’t envision a situation where, if I am pointing a gun at a dealer and I think he’s reaching for gun, my reaction to that is to run up and kick him in the head.

    Oh, so your problem isn’t that the cop kicked him when he should have done nothing, it’s that the cop kicked him instead of shooting him. I get it now…

    You’re an idiot.

    Scott Jacobs (90ff96)

  41. I don’t mind the cops being rough in apprehending a punk after a chase like that. I DO mind the kick to the head when the punk wasn’t offering resistance.

    The po-po need to be under the law like we are under the law. I would get arrested and charged with battery if I kicked someone in the head while they were offering me no violence.

    Also, I agree with Machinist: If the honorable law abiding citizens of SoCal were armed and trained in the use of arms gang violence would be reduced.

    About the founding fathers: I have no doubt the founding fathers would have considered gangs like MS13 nothing more than land pirates and treated them as such and given them no quarter. They would have wiped them off the face of the planet, fighting them the same way they fought the Barbary Pirates. The founding fathers lived in a time when men had chests, they were not at all squeamish and had a much better grasp on liberty and the responsibility of the state to keep the peace and the populace safe. They didn’t play.

    Vivian Louise (c0f830)

  42. The founding fathers wouldn’t have had any problem with the head kick.

    But to be honest, I do. I’ve seen the video and it didn’t look right to me. None of the cops took the slightest moment to assess the situation, such as a spread eagled suspect, unmoving on the ground.

    Cop one should have just held the gun on him. Cop 2 should not have dropped on the suspect and the K9 unit should not have allowed the dog to even approach the suspect.

    Though I would have been OK with the dog pissing on the suspect after he was hand-cuffed.

    You can’t have rights without responsibilities. You sure as shit can’t have positive rights without positive responsibilities.

    jack (d9cbc5)

  43. Those who are paid to enforce the law are not immune from the law. They also are required to obey it.

    The boot to the head was an unprovoked assault. The distraction defense is an aggravating factor on punishment.

    The officer who committed this criminal offense should be fired for lacking the moral character required of the job and for not being bright enough to understand that the camera overhead was recording his illegal act.

    Terry Gain (4f27d2)

  44. Hey Machinist: I’m not a big fan of anyone overstepping their authority but all this “what if” crap gets old. If the POC didn’t want to get kicked in the head then he should have pulled over and stopped in the beginning. Endangering other people’s lives because he thought he might get coverage on the news earns him the right to be abused. Blame his parents for not giving him better sense.

    I tell people that if I ever see one of those show-boater sport bikers go down because he/she is being stupid on the street that I’m going to first—–wait for it—-KICK THEM IN THE HEAD!

    Stupidity should hurt.

    PatriotRider (37b91c)

  45. “And when they mistake you or a loved one for one of the bad guys this will be OK?”

    What if they raped one of your loved ones before leading the police on a high speed chase. Can the officers tune him up a little before putting him in cuffs Mr. Dukakis?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  46. Machinist, with all due respect, you’re attempting to argue that the police are bound to operate under some kind of antiquated Victorian Marques du Queensbury rules of conduct. Yes, they should obey the law, but unless we can view the entire chase scene before the end result, we have no way of understanding the context of the event itself. And as Daley notes above, your use of strawman arguments are ridiculous – that’s exactly the kind of temporizing that usually gets mocked repeatedly here, so you can either attempt to deal directly with the argument at hand or risk undergoing additional beclowning at will.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  47. Machinist would next like to offer the ACLU’s opinion on this outrage of lawless torture and affront to the goodwill of all mankind.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  48. Oh, my! Little Dmac, the self-appointed Sheriff of the Comments, is going to administer “mockery” and “beclowning.” If that isn’t enough to turn a man to jello…

    I haven’t seen any “straw man” arguments here. Machinist has correctly made the point that if police officers feel empowered to administer punishment in the course of making arrests, it will fall on the guilty and innocent alike.

    This video will be evidence in a trial and this officer is going to face a jury.

    Tim McGarry (9fe080)

  49. Tim demonstrates once again that he’s forever the thin – skinned bloviator, he never fails to go for the bait. Awesome work there, Tim.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  50. So the officer did what is known as a distraction blow. It wasn’t designed to hurt the man, just distract him.”
    Just curious. Just how do you give someone a blow to the head without hurting the person? Is that a new Bruce Lee technique? LOL! I love this new one: “I did not hurt you by slamming your head on the wall. I only distracted you.” LOL!

    The Emperor (09c9e3)

  51. Scott, at 42: I read his position as being that the cop should have done nothing other than cuff the kid, and that the cop’s excuse for kicking him is a transparent lie – because if the justification provided in the excuse were true, he should have shot the kid instead.

    aphrael (9e8ccd)

  52. If Jerry Dunphy is around, perhaps he can give a knowledgeable insight on situations like this.

    It seems some don’t have a huge problem with the head kick because they are reacting to the overall frustration with gangs having attained such power and control over portions of society coupled with a seeming freedom to roam and terrorize while law abiding citizens feel fairly helpless due to constraints of the law. We are not an armed society and the ability to protect is grossly limited. So one thug gets his head kicked and there are cheers because we’d actually like to see all of them get their heads kicked…and some even more than that.

    Dana (4a6e8c)

  53. You think patriotic ideal citizen would have been administered an asskicking if he had gone along with cops like the rest of his crew did? Seems that can’t we all just get along offal has a history of being a puke and endangering others. Pity he could not improve the gene pool by having a single car accident that killed him.

    I’ve always been quite respectful to policemen, even though I know some are real power trip jerkoffs. I was last stopped outside of Daytona by Fl State Police. The one of two black officers had an attitude. Ok, I was stopped for following to closely when the assturd in front of me slammed on his brakes when he saw the police car parked to the side. Then a K9 dog decided I had drugs in the car. So I was asked did I and I said not that I know of and the nasty prick black wanted to know why I would not be aware. Anyway I got off with a warning. I am find with cops fecking up people who show their ass or don’t follow instructions and especially if they carrying drugs, illegal weapons, etc.
    Many years ago I worked around the criminally insane and administered some needed ass kicking on occasion. Most of them realized that I could act crazier than they did and were leery of stepping out of line. Got in hot water with staff once when I gave a black supervisor attitude after The King assassination when the dude said it was time for all of us honkey mf’ers to die. So I was getting death threats of a sort to which I responded with eff you, n…..! The point is that is it probably best to keep a low profile and turn the other cheek but sometimes emotions come into play. So I fine with the gangbanger of this post getting his sorry ass kicked. Vic mackey on The Shield had the right idea.
    Plenty of those central american scum illegals gangsters north of me in Boca. I’d be down with the cops wiping them out with preemptive raids.

    aoibhneas (425204)

  54. This looked pretty severe to me. It was no doubt done out of frustration and adrenaline after the long chase. But there is still no excuse, and it is doubly stupid to do with a news copter taping him from overhead. I’m not aware of any law that permits cops to administer a well-deserved punishment on the spot.

    As a few have noted, I would be arrested for A&B for doing that. There really shouldn’t be much difference in this case. When the chase ends, the guy very clearly follows direction, turns around, walks and lays down with his hands and feet spread. That’s it. Just cover him and wait for a few seconds for your backup.

    carlitos (aa025a)

  55. Dana, you are really “distracting” me with that comment. :)

    The Emperor (09c9e3)

  56. oops, I was referring to the esteemed AA Rodney King in previous post. It was really nice how the LA police did restrain themselves when the locals went berserk and killed innocents and tried to kill that Denny dude. Should have just pulled a Wilson Goode/Jack and Jill Africa/Move type bombing raid on South Central vermin who were acting out. Wonder if anyone ever did a follow up on those cretins? How many have been in and out of justice system since?

    aoibhneas (425204)

  57. I do agree strongly with Machinist and Dana’s contention regarding the gun ownership issue – we’ve had a monstrous problem here in Chicago with gang violence spinning out of control, with neighborhoods becoming shoot – outs on a nightly basis and many getting killed within the alleged safety of their own homes. When the mayor is questioned about his resistance to obeying the cessation of the strict gun ownership laws here, he does nothing but fulminate and rage that we need even stricter gun control here, and that the source of all of the gang’s firearms is coming from those evil gun dealers from out – of -state. Yeah, right.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  58. As Chris Rock put it, if the police have to come chase you, they’re bringing an ass whoopin’ with ’em

    Horatio (55069c)

  59. Hey, my bad. I’m all done trying to commit vehicular manslaughter with this automobile and committing multiple traffic violations and leading the police on a high speed chase and not obeying your instructions to pull over. I got it all out of my system now. How about you guys?

    Let’s be friends. Whaddya say?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  60. Dmac,
    I do indeed feel the police should be bound by the law and by a code of conduct. With that badge and gun goes more accountability, not less.

    Is concern for police mistaking an innocent man for their suspect is a strawman argument, shouldn’t we allow police to beat a confession out of people they just know are guilty, like Sipowicz did on NYPD Blue? Japanese police have something like a 95% conviction rate because they can use these police state tactics. Why give bad guys due process? The police never make a mistake, right?

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  61. Again, Flores could have put an end to the episode far earlier than he did, and before others were put at risk.

    Someone questioned re injuries after a kick like that. Fox reported suspects were taken to the hospital and no injuries were sustained.

    Interesting sidenote: there is a report that one of the officers (San Gabriel Valley News cites a City Hall source that it *the* officer who administered the head kick) involved sells a line of gang attire.

    The officer sued a Los Angeles police detective in October 2007 alleging the detective sent an e-mail message to members of the California Gang Investigators Association denigrating the clothing line. The lawsuit was later dismissed.

    “Has anyone seen or know about this gang clothing that a police officer is selling to gangsters,” the message by Detective David Espinoza said. “I understand the gangs really love this cop. I understand the clothing has hiding places for contraband, guns and dope. Things that can hurt our real cops on the street.”

    Dana (4a6e8c)

  62. So, in his own words, what Dmac does here is “mock,” “beclown” and “bait.” Worth remembering.

    #53

    Dana, I live in the middle of Los Angeles and share the visceral anti-gang emotions you described. I also appreciate the enormous difficulty of police work. I get the frustration. At the same time, it seems clear that justice is undermined when police go beyond what is needed to effect an arrest and commit assault under the color of authority.

    Tim McGarry (9fe080)

  63. I guess the media will be all over this egregious abuse of a citizen’s constitutional rights. I’m sure there is no question about his possible illegal or otherwise criminal status.

    Just what was the kicking officer’s INTENT? Or perhaps the peace officer was merely stressed out? Eric Holder stated recently that whether or not waterboarding was torture all depened on the intent. Thousands of trainees enduring it are not being tortured because it is merely a training exercise. Of course it seems that if terrorists being waterboarded, the fact that intent is to provide info to prevent future attacks does not count as said terrorists need to have their human rights protected.

    Funny how libtard pussies like Holder and some here such as the Jap condom wannabe are always so concerned about the right of criminals and terrorists. A kick in the head is bad or caterpillars put into a cell/panties over the head is so horrible, dehumanizing and evil and and should be revealed numerous times as per the NY Times examples with Abu Graib BUT for dare allow pictures of 911 over Daniel Berg’s head detached from his body because you don’t want ordinary citizens reminded of the heinous acts perpetrated by the Religion Of Peace. Let’s nominate Osama and the three poor high profile terrorists who were waterboarded for Peace Prizes or at least give them monetary damages for pain and suffering, assault, intentional infliction of emotional distress and even false imprisonment. And then let’s go after the really truly evil pricks like Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld for crimes against humanity. Allahu Akhbar!

    aoibhneas (425204)

  64. 62 and one wonders just what is the overall crime rate in Japan? We know Singapore can be quite harsh meting out justice. Oh, the injustice of that poor widdle american teen getting his ass caned some years back despite pleas from Prez Clinton. Do you think those strict drugs laws have any chilling effect on the commission of crimes? Andy Sipowicz got results as does Jack Bauer.

    Why not follow the lead of that Sheriff in Az. who makes sure life is no bed of roses for prisoners? In fact, why not bring back chain gangs? If you can’t do the time, then don’t do the crime, Bobby Blake. Ship their dupas to Alaska to work their time off in the wilderness.

    aoibhneas (425204)

  65. I wish those advocating that the police should be empowered to punish bad guys would consider that there is no hard stop between that position and the postings of aoibheas, above. Do you really want to start down that road?

    Civil rights are not to protect the guilty, but the innocent. ” I give the Devil benefit of law for my own safety’s sake.”

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  66. I have never heard of Sheriff Joe grabbing someone off the street without due process and punishing them. Can’t you see the difference between a convicted criminal and a suspect?

    The Constitution is not a suggestion for when it is convenient.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  67. I’m not particularly fond of preening moralists of any stripe. In this case we have a video with no sound, no detailed explanation of the background and a rush to judgement by the moralists. I prefer to wait for more information.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  68. Guys, there is a show called Law and Order. It’s on right now, one at least one channel. Watch an episode. The first half, they catch the bad guy. The second half, the guy goes to court, where they decide his punishment. It’s pretty straightforward.

    The government only has the rights that we citizens grant them. We have not granted the local police the power to punish criminals, only to catch them.

    carlitos (aa025a)

  69. sorry, forgot my
    /preening moralist

    :)

    carlitos (aa025a)

  70. Hey Bonehead, if the guy I’m chasing just committed a multitude of traffic violations, rammed several cars in the process, and had NO regard for anyone else, I’d say he’s due for a kick to the head. Do you get that? He earned it! Comprende? I don’t feel sorry for that piece of work. I would go as far to say he needed shooting but I’ll be happy with the boot to the head.

    PatriotRider (37b91c)

  71. carlitos – In Chicago that perp might have fallen down a few times before he got to the station after a chase like that or become acquainted with a few telephone books in an interrogation room.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  72. Steve: We can’t have death squads. We need to send the military in to round up these useless tattooed toxins and kill ‘em. True, it is not the American way, but the neighborhoods they live in are no longer America. Besides, all those gang funerals would be a great stimulus to the economy.

    WTF.

    Cognitive dissonance and tyranny go hand in hand. As does being a troll.

    Steve, you are a troll and should be banned for that statement. It’s only purpose is to inflame, and make the Right look even more stupid than usual.

    Benjamin (54ce60)

  73. carlitos – Preening becomes you!

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  74. If the Constitution comes with a clown nose for us “preening moralists” I will proudly “beclown” myself. I don’t recall you having much patience with that position when Lovey wanted to “wait for more information” about Nancy.

    So you are only for due process for police and not for citizens? I am all for investigating it but too many here are saying it is no problem.

    I guess “preening moralist” is a bit easier to understand than “libtard pussie”. I can’t recall being called that before, ever.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  75. “clown” on the other hand is pretty much a given.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  76. “So you are only for due process for police and not for citizens?”

    Machinist – Can you point out where I said that? I don’t think so. Just more strawmen. I also was not the one to call you a libtard pussie, so check your references.

    Your unceasing calls for civility are kind of grating, though.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  77. Daley, you are due for a distraction to the head. It won’t hurt a bit….

    The Emperor (09c9e3)

  78. I may not have much sympathy for this gangster but what about when it’s your innocent son or daughter, Comment by Machinist — 5/15/2009 @ 10:26 pm

    That’s why context is — as they say — everything. And although I give you some leeway due to your ideological background (IOW, you’re not a painfully clueless, ACLU-high-fiving, phony-baloney, latte-sipping “lefty”), I think you’re definitely bending over backwards to make some type of hypothetical (ie, “wonder if it was your innocent son or daughter?!!) fit what was caught on video.

    Moreover, based on what I see, the worse thing the cop did was use his foot to sort of — as the saying goes — “bitch slap” the fleeing suspect on his head (meaning it appears to have been probably no more physically significant or painful than the classically angry spouse getting irate with the philandering husband), which already is covered with a baseball cap.

    Mark (411533)

  79. daleyrocks #73,

    That has certainly worked out well in Chicago, hasn’t it? Took good care of the gang and crime problems.

    PatriotRider #72, What if the next officer thinks he should be shot? Is that OK?

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  80. “I don’t recall you having much patience with that position when Lovey wanted to “wait for more information” about Nancy.”

    Machinist – If this was actually serious you are considerably less intelligent than I thought.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  81. When cops cross the line, they should be punished in the same manner as the common criminal. We should expect better behavior from the people who are given the public trust. When that public trust is squandered, we know what happens. The little douchebag that put the lives of everyone on the street with him in jeopardy should not be sainted by the wrong actions of the cop. The cops’s anger is likely understandable, but he should have been able to control it.

    JD (e7c77f)

  82. Daleyrocks,
    I did not think or say that you called me a “libtard pussie”. Sorry if it sounded that way.

    If my calls for civility are annoying you I am afraid I can’t help you there, Sir.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  83. Our founders established a country based on rule of law, not men. No one should be above it.

    Sorry to disappoint you, Sir. I never claimed much intelligence, did I?

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  84. Daley, you are due for a distraction to the head. It won’t hurt a bit….

    Comment by The Emperor — 5/16/2009 @ 9:47 am

    *High-fives The Emperor*

    Benjamin (54ce60)

  85. I am afraid I have seen too many examples of police being sure a suspect was guilty to consider this whole issue of due process the strawman that some seem to think it is.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  86. 77 actually I was not commenting on Machinist at all. He’s entitled to his POV and the Cops should be held accountable to a higher standard, but not so that obvious blatant criminal acts are excused. Punish the cop but still let the evidence speak. Hell, hold judges to some kind of responsibility for sending scum free.

    My pussy reference was meant in reference to Holder worrying about rights of terrorists who’ve murdered thousands in name of the great pedophile allah. And the cop should face some kind of judgement and justice. I just don’t see why the scumwads of the earth are set free over and over to inflict further damage on society. The good citizens of places like DC, LA, Chitown and Detroit should have a right to deadly force when faced with home invasions and such. There are some c*nts on this board imho, including the condom wannabe. And I judge Obama as one for things like aplogizing for America’s past actions and also opening door to potential show trials of previous administration who actually did a yeoman’s job of protecting us the past seven years. Feck this admin. and its enabling media wads.

    aoibhneas (425204)

  87. JD, #83,
    I agree, Sir. Well said.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  88. #88, I stand corrected. I am just a bit surprised at how many people on this thread want to put police above the law and constitution.

    If police are free to apply a little street justice then why can’t Obama step outside the law to “save” our economy from the evil Capitalists?

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  89. Don’t let them get to you, Machinist. You represent true Americanism.

    The Emperor (09c9e3)

  90. Dana (#53) — I’m working on a piece about it for Pajamas Media. Look for it over there in a day or two. I take a skeptical view of the “distraction” defense.

    –Jack (not Jerry) Dunphy

    Jack Dunphy (1bb566)

  91. Emperor,
    I doubt we share the same vision of true Americanism.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  92. I think the police are often damned if they do and damned if they don’t. Of course they have ceratin ROEs to live by and the criminals are giving the full benefit of doubt vis a vis innocent until proven guilty. The mutant criminal types know how to evade incarceration by using under age thugs as killers, for example. Watch the show The Wire to get some idea of lawlessness in the inner city.

    No doubt that there are bigger fish merrily escaping justice. ACORN comes to mind and how greta is it that we the taxpayers are funding them to a large extent? I’m sure they won’t be playing hanky panky with the census, for example.

    Or we talk about the constitution and the rule of law BUT it seems liberals want their judges to freely interpret the constitution and laws in order to shape social policies in the direction that libtards and socialist crave. Yes, touchy feelies like the condom want the USA to be a modern version of the novel 1984 or Animal Farm Obama and his minions plus the various unions and thugs who supported are more equal than the test of us. Isn’t it obvious that the recent circumvention of the bankruptcy laws to screw bondholders in deference to the UAW is grossly illegal? As far as Obama saving the economy, I don’t believe he has any better judgment than that other magical negro Robert Mugabe. I guess time will tell. Keep rpinting money, raise taxes, kiss the euroweenies’ asps, start disarming unilaterally, make sure Israel gives up more land for more useless promises of peace (hudna) and, in general, take full advantage of fact that a signifiacnt portion of the population will give you a pass regardless of how much you screw up, obsessed as they are with being sodomized by Ear Leader.

    aoibhneas (425204)

  93. Comment by aoibhneas — 5/16/2009 @ 10:01 am

    The more he writes, the more my head hurts.

    The Emperor (09c9e3)

  94. Jack @ 92 – apologies~

    I’ll keep an eye out for the piece PJ’s.

    It’s an awful thing and I admit there is a small part of me that thinks he got what he had coming. Yet because we live in America and because we have a Constitution and laws to protect, and an assertion of innocent until proven guilty, it was in fact not what he had coming – and especially not from those in uniform.

    Dana (4a6e8c)

  95. I reckon it gets quite painful when one’s head is stuck firmly up one’s rectum. Is it possible that society as a whole was better off when the Police wiped out the SLA quite some time ago? Would it not be poetic justice had the same fate befallen Ayers and Bernadette? Is it really just that both are free to walk and be enriched while working to poison young minds in the school system? I guess libtards think attempting to kill oodles of GIs at a Ft. Dix area soiree was a good thing? And of course Free Mumia because you just KNOW racist america conspired to frame him for cop killing..ditto for ira eichorn and OJ.

    aoibhneas (425204)

  96. I missed this,

    Dana, I live in the middle of Los Angeles and share the visceral anti-gang emotions you described. I also appreciate the enormous difficulty of police work. I get the frustration. At the same time, it seems clear that justice is undermined when police go beyond what is needed to effect an arrest and commit assault under the color of authority.

    I agree. And perhaps not only go beyond what is needed but also to go beyond what the law allows (if that is the case).

    Dana (4a6e8c)

  97. Related Chris Rock video here.

    No matter how many times I watch this video, I still laugh out loud.

    Of course for laugh out loud viewing pleasure (way off topic) watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oz9RNVkbcY

    Horatio (55069c)

  98. While there are a lot of good law enforcement officers who risk their lives everyday for the citizens they serve and stay within the law, there are also a number of asshole cops who are sadistic cowards. They use their badge as a cover to mete out their own personal vendettas against the ‘dirt bags”( a favorite name cops apply to anyone they feel are below themselves).
    The really sad part of this unlawful scenario are the constant excuses and cover-ups by police supervisors

    Edward Cropper (6a7a91)

  99. NHI = No Humans Involved

    A pretty cynical attitude found in some cowboy cops and wanna-be Dirty Harry types.

    Everytime I see something like this, I think of Bill Whittle’s “Tribalism” essay, and its deep truths. The cop was out of control, the perp was out of control. Unfortunately, the perp is likely to get off scott free because of the police officer’s actions.

    And that is a shame.

    MunDane68 (54a83b)

  100. #

    Emperor,
    I doubt we share the same vision of true Americanism.

    Comment by Machinist — 5/16/2009 @ 10:30 am

    Oh yeah? What’s your vision?

    The Emperor (09c9e3)

  101. Except Edward Cropper, in this situation there aren’t constant excuses and cover-ups by police supervisors, rather they have been careful not to comment until the facts are determined, with the exception of the above-quoted lawyer for the union. That may change but for now…

    El Monte Assistant Chief Steve Schuster, “From our perspective [we] hate to comment until we have more facts. What’s in the mind of the officer may not be what’s in the mind of the viewer,” Schuster said Wednesday. “As soon as we feel we can make a statement based on facts, we’ll do that.”

    El Monte police Chief Tom Armstrong said he had not yet seen the video and could not comment.

    “Before coming to any conclusion, I want to look at all the facts,” Armstrong said. “I don’t know what was in the mind of the officer.”

    Dana (4a6e8c)

  102. if by movement you mean was he breathing heavy, then yeah, i saw movement….lol Police suck ass, especially around here, i own a house in the city and i cant even live there, it’s been broken into 3 times in the last year. It’s been vacant now for 6 months, my step dad went in there last week to check it out, police officer sitting right across the street, no asking who he was or if he had any business being there, and they know it’s vacant.

    slizzle (cebb6d)

  103. aoibhneas, I know that you weren’t directing your comments at me, but, well, I can’t figure out at whom you were directing them. You are rivaling our lefty commenters with the non-sequiturs. Eichorn? Ayers? ACORN? No offense, but you may want to focus.

    carlitos (aa025a)

  104. Just step around it, Machinist.

    nk (a1896a)

  105. #101, Thank you for the explanation.

    #102,
    It is not a bumper sticker slogan I can drop into a comment, and such a volatile thread is not the right place for such an off topic discussion with someone I don’t trust. Maybe another time and place, thank you.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  106. #

    Just step around my shit, Machinist.

    Comment by nk — 5/16/2009 @ 11:28 am

    Yeah, you do that, Machinist. Step over it.

    The Emperor (09c9e3)

  107. (Looks around.) Who? Me?

    The Emperor (09c9e3)

  108. I’ve got no sympathy for the punk who got kicked in the head. The crime he committed, the high-speed chase, and the attempt to evade capture after he crashed were completely unnecessary.

    I won’t have any sympathy for the cop when he’s fired and prosecuted for assault. The kick to the head was completely unnecessary. The punk being a punk doesn’t excuse the cop. Police don’t get to punish criminals. Whether they should be able to or not is another argument, but as it stands that’s not the job.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  109. Is there a rule about rewriting someone’s comment so that someone who has not followed the thread thinks he made it? DRJ? Patterico?

    nk (a1896a)

  110. Emperor,
    You are free to talk about me of course but unless you are challenging some point I have made or claiming offense at something I have said, I would prefer you don’t address me. Also, I do hope you will NOT feel free to misquote me as you just did nk. That I would have to take issue with. Thank you.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  111. The “to the head” part bothers me. If it had been “to the butt”, I would be applauding the officer.

    nk (a1896a)

  112. Comment by nk — 5/16/2009 @ 11:50 am

    Now he calls for the teacher. Typical baby. Booohoooohooowwwaaaahhhhhhyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!

    The Emperor (09c9e3)

  113. While I know why people are upset, it just seems to me that there are some things people do that they cannot just “meekly surrender” after doing. There need to be immediate consequences. This looked like a fairly measured consequence for a major assh*le.

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  114. Hey Emperor…why not say: “I was angry at nk, so I rewrote his comment without being clear that I had done so. That is not right, though I am angry with him.”

    You don’t even need to apologize.

    Because it is dishonest to rewrite someone’s comment and post it as if it was not rewritten—that sort of thing doesn’t go on very often here. Yet. I have seen people strike out some words in another person’s comment, and then write “Fixed that for you.”

    Your comment at #115 is awfully tough sounding yet not very mature.

    Move on to the next topic?

    Eric Blair (57b266)

  115. Having said that, the officer will rightly be up on department charges since the current standards don’t permit what he did.

    But they maybe should. And that’s the real issue: has the post-Warren legal environment gone too far in protecting “rights”? At times you have to decide what is effective, not what is correct.

    (and see the waterboarding debate)

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  116. EB,

    lovey is always dishonest, without exception. The rare moments she appears to comment honestly are just cover. She doesn’t mean it. I think “step around” is the best course.

    Stashiu3 (460dc1)

  117. Getting back to the topic, it is VERY difficult for people who aren’t in that business to know what it is like. It is easy to say what a police officer ought to have done or not done.

    I doubt that there is a good answer, either way.

    Eric Blair (57b266)

  118. “I am just a bit surprised at how many people on this thread want to put police above the law and constitution.”

    Machinist – I think you have successfully misinterpreted everything I have said on this thread and what others have said in your rush to criminalize the begavior of the officer in this snippet of video. You have already pronounced him guilty but proclaim we are a nation of laws. Where is the presumption of innocence or a desire to find out the facts of what actually happened? If a finding is made that he acted improperly under the circumstances or illegally, he should be punished. Since we’ve seen way too many of these sensational videos hyped by libtard pussies, I’m nor willing to rush into that judgement the way so many others of you on this thread are without knowing more facts. It’s as simple as that. You all should be ashamed of yourselves for your presumption of guilt on the officer who is trying to protect and serve, particularly you Machinist. Sir, do you have any evidence that he brutalizes every person he arrests before constructing your facile “what if” it was one of your relatives he did this to arguments? If not, why did you even bring that type of stupid libtard argument up? I could say he had just planted a biological weapon and said there was another one about to go off and the officer was employing Presidentially sanctioned EIT to extract information about it and it would have as much applicability to the cuttrnt situation as your hypotheticals.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  119. #116,

    How do you make sure the police issue consequences to the right person? If a bigot decides he doesn’t have to be sure about the ID because all those ______ are guilty, is that OK? Who decides how much “consequence” is enough?

    Once again, the civil rights are not to protect the guilty but the innocent. The jury and the law are supposed to determine guilt and “consequence”, not the most violent or least restrained officer on the scene.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  120. I’m sure you are right, Stash. I do think that rewriting other people’s comments is a serious offense, though I don’t know how Patterico feels about it.

    What it suggest to me is not necessarily trusting any quotation that this person Emperor/Love2008/Emperor 7 makes in any of his or her posts. Which is sad.

    Eric Blair (57b266)

  121. Comment by Machinist — 5/16/2009 @ 11:50 am

    Really, Machinist. What is your problem? First I make a complimentary comment to you and called you a true American. Based on the way I felt you have conducted yourself on these threads. Nothing more. It was a word of recognition and respect. But you responded rather rudely by saying we don’t share the same vision of Americanism. To which I responded with asking you what your vision was. I saw a comment from you that was addressed to a comment #102 while mine is #103 and wondered who you were talking to. Now this. I am not afraid of trouble as you may have seen on this blog. But I prefer to be at peace with fellow commenters. I mean you no insult. But if you don’t want my friendship, it’s okay. I apologize for whatever way I may have hurt your feelings. God bless you.

    The Emperor (09c9e3)

  122. At times you have to decide what is effective, not what is correct.

    The police officer had his weapon drawn, the suspect was already spread eagle on the ground – why would anything else have been necessary? In an addition, there were other officers immediately surrounding and a canine. In this case, it would seem more than effective in subduing one suspect.

    Dana (4a6e8c)

  123. The “to the head” part bothers me. If it had been “to the butt”, I would be applauding the officer.

    Comment by nk — 5/16/2009 @ 12:04 pm

    Exactly. That kick was pretty forceful; don’t understand how some in the story are saying unequivocally that the man was uninjured. Concussion or internal cranial bleeding comes to mind, assuming the eyes, ears, mouth and nose were all avoided (can’t tell from the handsome pic of the perp at the link).

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  124. Machinist – If my Aunt had nuts she’d be my Uncle.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  125. daleyrocks,
    Please show me where I have suggested we should deny the officer due process. That is the most annoying of the insults you have thrown at me today and I take exception to it, Sir.

    What I have objected to on this thread is the statement by several people that kicking the suspect was OK or justified if the officer did it. You have misrepresented what I said to an extent that seems dishonest. I have ONLY objected to that justification and advocacy of the action. I have not suggested any action against the officer without investigation and determination of facts.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  126. Emperor,
    You have not offended me so no apology is requested or called for.

    I will pass on the friendship as I am not comfortable about it, but thank you.

    Thank you for respecting my request.

    My apologies about the comment misnumber. They changed after I posted.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  127. Is there a rule about rewriting someone’s comment so that someone who has not followed the thread thinks he made it?

    Yes. That is not allowed.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  128. Noyk,

    There was a very good book, by Vincent Patrick, “Family Business”, about three generations of criminals, made into an equally good movie starring Sean Connery (grandfather), Dustin Hoffman (father) and Matthew Broderick (son).

    In the book, the son gets sentenced to prison for the first time. In the assessment center, a guard advises him how to behave and what to look out for, depending on which one of three New York prisons he gets sent to. And the guard finishes the lesson with a hard kick to his butt saying, roughly, “Why did you ever get in here in the first place, you stupid little jerk?”

    nk (a1896a)

  129. Comment by Eric Blair — 5/16/2009 @ 12:16 pm
    Judge impartial judgment Eric. For once in your life be neutral. Why focus on condemning my turning nk’s abusive post against him and leave out the fact that he continues to make unwholesome and provocative comments about me in practically every thread he sees my comment. Even when that comment is focused on the topic at hand. I am very disappointed in you Eric. You should not allow your partisanship and fear of falling out with certain folks here stop you from telling the truth and judging fairly. But what else can I expect, really? You are all the same.

    The Emperor (09c9e3)

  130. re: rewriting comments, will add for Emperor’s (and others’) info:

    What nk predicted might happen already has. Emperor yesterday rewrote an nk comment in the exact same way. We all read fast around here, so even though I’d already read nk’s first comment I did a double take and had to go back and confirm it said what I’d thought it did. If nk’s comment hadn’t been addressed to me I might not have done that.

    So I agree with others that strikeout is needed when “fixing” comments or it’s dishonest. And, yes, I would see as totally appropriate approaching the host about someone monkeying with my comments; in this fast paced environment it’s exactly the same as sockpuppeting them.

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  131. The Emperor,

    Re: NK’s comment.

    Please don’t quote other comments and change the words they used. I know you wouldn’t like it if other people quoted you inaccurately.

    I also know you understand and agree with this because you’ve spent the better part of two days defending Nancy Pelosi’s words and arguing she should be given the opportunity to defend her position. Wouldn’t you be the first to object if I changed a Pelosi quote to make her look worse?

    DRJ (f55947)

  132. Comment by Patterico — 5/16/2009 @ 12:31 pm


    Comment by no one you know — 5/16/2009 @ 12:35 pm

    Hate it when my poky typing skills get exposed. *amused sigh*

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  133. Machinist – Don’t shift the goalposts like a libtard. I didn’t say you denied him due process. I said you judged him guilty before any process, which you have. Since you asked:

    Comment #6 – Officer Guilty: How are those police different from any other gangster since they no longer operate under the authority of law and have instead chosen the principle of brute force?

    Comment #10 – They’re Criminals: Criminal police like those thugs are what drive out or ruin good cops when they are expected to cover for what they wanted to stop.

    I think your position was clear and that I in no way misrepresented it, but nice try at righteaous indignation anyway.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  134. Emperor,
    “You should not allow your partisanship and fear of falling out with certain folks here stop you from telling the truth and judging fairly. But what else can I expect, really? You are all the same.”

    So I have been afraid of falling out with folks here on this thread? Your painting with a rather broad brush there.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  135. righteous

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  136. Comment by Patterico — 5/16/2009 @ 12:31 pm

    Okay Host. Noted. But is there a rule against making provocative comments about fellow commenters? Even when such comments are not called for and have a tendency of causing people to veer of the topic at hand and get into abuses and counter-abuses?

    The Emperor (09c9e3)

  137. Emperor yesterday rewrote an nk comment in the exact same way.
    Comment by no one you know — 5/16/2009 @ 12:35 pm

    Which other one please, noyk? I have been away.

    nk (a1896a)

  138. In the book, the son gets sentenced to prison for the first time. In the assessment center, a guard advises him how to behave and what to look out for, depending on which one of three New York prisons he gets sent to. And the guard finishes the lesson with a hard kick to his butt saying, roughly, “Why did you ever get in here in the first place, you stupid little jerk?”

    Comment by nk — 5/16/2009 @ 12:31 pm

    LOL
    That reminds me of the very amusing SF writer Theodore Sturgeon, whose story “Uncle Fremmis” was about a nephew whose uncle invented a mysterious “motivational tool” which put miserable people happily back on track in their lives.

    Since this was SF, the reader plays along till the very last paragraph, when the ne’er-do-well narrator realizes he needs a motivator himself. Kind and generous Uncle Fremmis offers him a free session with his motivational tool, and delivers, in the last line of the story, “a good swift kick in the ass.”

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  139. “he continues to make unwholesome and provocative comments about me in practically every thread”

    Lovey – Do you think there might be a way for people to stop treating you in this fashion?

    Think hard.

    I’ll provide hints if you ask nicely.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  140. daleyrocks,

    I am assuming guilt on the basis of what I see on the tape. I have not called for any action or sanction against the officer without due process. The people I was arguing with were saying the police officers actions were OK, not that there was question about his guilt. But I may be wrong as I’m just a preening moralist of low intelligence, right.

    Your attacks on me today are personal and irrational. Why?

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  141. The Emperor,

    Your last comment/question was directed at Patterico and I’ll defer to his answer, but my feeling is that some commenters like to engage in provocative banter and others don’t. If you don’t like it, you can comment elsewhere or you can ignore the things you find offensive. We all know how to do that. Sometimes I like to joke around and other times I prefer to avoid the discussion. And for those times when you feel you’ve been the victim or an unacceptable offense (as nk did above), you can address it with Patterico.

    DRJ (f55947)

  142. Comment by Machinist — 5/16/2009 @ 12:46 pm

    That comment was not referring to you, Machinist. I read your last comment to me. That means you can assume that no comment made by me here is to you. Thank you.

    The Emperor (09c9e3)

  143. Which other one please, noyk? I have been away.

    Comment by nk — 5/16/2009 @ 12:47 pm

    nk,

    Here’s the comment from Emperor from yesterday.

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  144. #139 is a remarkable statement, given some of the recent comments I have seen from that poster, complete with profanity and faux tough guy prose.

    But I guess we are all the same.

    Eric Blair (674253)

  145. Comment by no one you know — 5/16/2009 @ 12:54 pm

    Thank you, noyk. I think we all have its number by now.

    nk (a1896a)

  146. Emperor,

    “…You are all the same.”

    Sorry, I don’t see how that does not include me. Whatever.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  147. “Your attacks on me today are personal and irrational. Why?”

    Machinist – All my comments on this thread were pretty general until I believe you addressed #77 to me. If you can state why you believe any of my comments are irrational I’d be happy to listen. So far you have attempted to shift the goalposts of your own argument several times. You claimed you had not determined the guilt of the officers without process and I proved you wrong. Please, please show me the irrationality.

    In terms of getting personal, comparing me to Lovey I consider a very vile insult, so there you have it. If you can’t handle it, you should not start dishing it out, after all, aren’t you the one who keeps calling for civility?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  148. Do you think there might be a way for people to stop treating you in this fashion?

    Think hard.
    Comment by daleyrocks — 5/16/2009 @ 12:50 pm

    Yes. I think I know. By my quitting this blog. No point hanging around with people who don’t like you. There is no justice here. There is no room for honest debate and dissent. If you don’t agree with the general meme and vilify everything that is different, you get attacks from everywhere. I know you all want me to go. Some of you. I just might.

    The Emperor (09c9e3)

  149. I think the kick to the head looks unprofessional.
    Any cop who witnesses a civilian delivered kick to the head that results bruising and/or bleeding gets a civilian a possible felony charge.
    If the cop felt he needed to kick the prone, arms extended felony evader, the right armpit/upper rib area would have been a better choice.
    The high five looks unprofessional as well, but only because the kick ruined it.
    18 year old kids in Iraq can be held to tight ROE’s and police are too.
    It is called professionalism and that involves controlling emotion/adrenaline, proportional escalated response.

    I am not a fan of unprofessional police/sheriffs and in my opinion this kicker guy needs a month or two of retraining.
    Then make him take a 12 week group Anger Management course with all the DV offenders before getting back on the street.

    Disclaimer below:

    I was “tuned up” as a juvenile (17) so I was nearly an adult. I was innocent they had the wrong guy on a BS visual ID and my attitude with the cops about that (which was because they couldn’t bring themselves to believe me) infuriated them.
    The detectives slammed my head on their table, crushed me face first into the corner of the room where I think someone had pissed and drop kneed me in the back of the head and in the butt because I’d told them I didn’t do it, wasn’t there, and oh by the way then if you aren’t smart enough to know that, then how the hell did you get to be a detective? Mayberry is missing two idiots. I never really saw the whole good cop bad cop routine… it went all bad cop early.
    Granted, I was running my mouth at them, but I wasn’t guilty and they wouldn’t listen so f*** them.
    My dad finally showed up and showed them that I’d been trying to tell them all along, which was that I’d been working 40 miles away as a counselor at an Outdoor School program for kids from troubled homes in their crime spree timeframe.
    My last word as I left was “morons”.

    A year later one of the detective genius guys moved in down the street from where I lived and I’d flip him off and spit at his plain black detective guy car when I’d drive by. Later I got to know his wife who worked at my bank and I decided that since she was OK I’d make peace so I started slowing down and waving (using all my fingers this time), since she had no idea I hated her husband she’d smile and wave back.
    I could see them talking in my mirror and she always looked at me funny at the bank until one day I went and sat at her desk and made some small talk and then told her that her husband and I had once had a misunderstanding over an incorrect visual ID. Honest mistake. No hard feelings (obviously untrue, but downright neighborly of me don’t you think?)
    The guy could have just apologized… to me. Not to my dad.
    My dad should have told him to apologize to me and asked them to shake hands on the apology… after all if the cop wanted to be old school then be all in..

    All that said, if I was on a jury, I wouldn’t convict this cop of anything based on this picture. Because stupid isn’t a crime.

    SteveG (c99c5c)

  150. Now, I don’t mean to be difficult, but doesn’t this post…

    http://patterico.com/2009/05/15/distraction-to-the-head/#comment-496042

    …seem a bit hard to reconcile with #151?

    Generally speaking, folks don’t get vilified here unless they are slinging the mud, too. Sometimes there are misunderstandings, but I think that a review of recent comments suggest a different pattern at play in this case.

    The absolutism and generalities in #151 are quite telling:

    There is no justice here.

    There is no room for honest debate and dissent.

    If you don’t agree with the general meme and vilify everything that is different, you get attacks from everywhere.

    I seem to remember a number of posts involving goats, for example. Less mudslinging might result in a better environment all around. But it will take some time, after the history.

    Or so it seems to me.

    Eric Blair (57b266)

  151. “But I may be wrong as I’m just a preening moralist of low intelligence, right.”

    Completely your decision to adopt both labels. Just sayin’.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  152. Comment by The Emperor — 5/16/2009 @ 1:05 pm

    Leviticus and aphrael don’t leave, they don’t agree with the conservatives here and they always get treated with respect. Do you think there might be some other way, besides quitting this blog, that you might be able to get the treatment they get?

    There is no justice here. There is no room for honest debate and dissent

    Am sure you didn’t intend to sound like a broad-brush whiner, not to mention the tacit insult to our hosts. Why don’t you try again.

    no one you know (1ebbb1)

  153. The Emperor,

    You are overreacting. This is an online forum, not a gulag, and the only way people can hurt you is if you let them. Maybe you should take a break and think about that.

    DRJ (f55947)

  154. You should have left months ago, but better late than never – so keep your word this one time and begone.

    Getting back to the topic, it is VERY difficult for people who aren’t in that business to know what it is like

    Bingo, and that’s my main point about the many postings by Machinist here – he assumes guilt by the officer without any mention of extenuating circumstance pertaining to the situation on a macro level. By all means the officer should at least be reprimanded, but to act as judge, jury and executioner based on 20 seconds of video is unreal. This “off with his head!” attitude reminds me of the Mad Hatter in Alice in Wonderland.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  155. Comment by no one you know — 5/16/2009 @ 1:16 pm

    For the records, I would never mean to insult our hosts. Never. I hold them with the highest esteem. I think they (Patterico and DRJ) are doing a great job. I actually boast about this blog to friends. And I will continue to do so even when I leave. I believe that if they were more around, things would be a lot different. I simply expressed my frustration with recent happenings here.

    The Emperor (09c9e3)

  156. So, in his own words, what Dmac does here is “mock,” “beclown” and “bait.” Worth remembering.

    No, just in your case, Tim – and that is precisely because you’ve proven to be dishonest commenter, one who forever runs away when challenged to provide the barest of supporting evidence to your many rants. Just to cite one recent example, you made the claim less than two days ago that GITMO was “the vilest prison on earth,” or words to that effect. I asked you for any supporting evidence for that statement, but you ran away and never responded, only to pop up here and continue your tiresome babblings.

    So how ’bout it, Tim? It’s not baiting when someone asks your to back up your statements with supporting evidence. You want to be a lawyer, yes? Have you not covered this subject yet in your course work?

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  157. I’m not sure about this, Dmac, but I find that some people, when they have a VERY strong opinion on a topic like this…have had some experience with it in one way or another. Poor syntax, but you know what I mean. Video can fool the eye.

    I remember a friend of mine from high school who got into drugs pretty hot and heavy. He sassed some police officers one night after making a buy. And got a tooth knocked out for his trouble.

    I was conflicted about it. He shouldn’t have shot his mouth off, and the police officer shouldn’t have belted him. But I wasn’t there.

    Still, I don’t have a beat with police officers, and there are some areas where they take their lives into their hands every time they do a traffic stop.

    I don’t have a solution. Machinist is usually very even tempered and thoughtful, and I want to continue to see his posts.

    I don’t think any of us want to see police beating on suspects, or police officers being shot by suspects. Maybe we should all be grateful that, for the most part, our jobs are less stressful and dangerous.

    Eric Blair (57b266)

  158. Daleyrocks #150,

    Since you bring up line 77 why don’t you look at the second line and explain how my position has changed.
    “So you are only for due process for police and not for citizens? I am all for investigating it but too many here are saying it is no problem.”

    Your comments were general until #77?
    #70-“I’m not particularly fond of preening moralists of any strip”
    #48-“that’s exactly the kind of temporizing that usually gets mocked repeatedly here, so you can either attempt to deal directly with the argument at hand or risk undergoing additional beclowning at will.”
    #47-“What if they raped one of your loved ones before leading the police on a high speed chase. Can the officers tune him up a little before putting him in cuffs Mr. Dukakis?”

    My initial reaction to that gem was to tell you to go fuck yourself but I decided against it. I will just say that the one time I found myself in that terrible position I did not call the police, I took care of it.

    Your complaint about “Your unceasing calls for civility are kind of grating, though” confused me a bit. Have I called for this on this thread? How long has it been since I called for civility anywhere on this site?

    As for the comparison to Emperor I just pointed out how similar your argument was and that you did not buy it from him/her. Where was I incorrect? If facts offend you that is your problem.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  159. Tim, remember this one from just yesterday?

    Obama can’t keep Gitmo open, since he pledged not to and it’s a vile place

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  160. Dmac,

    When have I called for action against this officer. I have objected to people justifying his action as seen on the tape. These people were mostly not disputing what he did but saying if he did it it was OK. This is far from what you say my position is. As I mentioned, I have friends and family in law enforcement. This is not what they joined to do.

    Again, I object to justifying the conduct. I have not proposed denying the officer due process, including consideration of extenuating circumstances.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  161. Eric, I was thrown in jail for a few hours in Antioch when a local officer stopped me because my new car had the dealer temporary vehicle license sticker mounted on the wrong side of the window. He was a complete nutcase, and scared the hell out of me. They finally let me go after realizing their mistake, but no explanation was offered and no apology was made – but I felt I had no realistic recourse because I had zero witnesses to the action itself, other then two other cops in the station. I had a big problem with the police for the next two years, but I realized that he was a redneck cop in a podunk town, while the Chicago Police have much more serious things to deal with than a misplaced vehicle plate.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  162. Holy Toledo.

    I can’t believe this Lovie mess started in “DRJ’s Commenting Rules.”

    As for the post topic, I agree with Pat–this doesn’t pass the laugh test.

    Paul (creator of "Staunch Brayer") (1284e4)

  163. Fair enough, Machinist – I don’t think any further discussion is necessary here on my part; we’ll have to agree to disagree, and leave it at that.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  164. Dmac,
    “the vilest prison on earth,”
    You put this in quotes but it is a far cry from what you just posted. The one you showed as a quote was ridiculous while the other could be understandable given the false press coverage. You might acknowledge that. It would be to your credit.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  165. I guess we will, given your accusation that I represent the ACLU. Fine.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  166. “I have not proposed denying the officer due process, including consideration of extenuating circumstances.”

    Machinist – That is your current position after numerous boots to the head and after starting out at they are criminals and thugs. Let’s be honest here but let it drop.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  167. You call me dishonest but say, “let it drop”. There is no greater charge you can make against me, Sir. Honor is more important than life to me.

    I have showed you that I said the same thing as far back as comment 77. Please show the world my dishonesty by showing a remark where I suggested the officer should be denied due process.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  168. #158, #160

    Look before you leap, Dmac. I haven’t made any posts about Gitmo, here or elsewhere.

    Tim McGarry (9fe080)

  169. Dmac, I have lots of friends with stories like that. On college campuses, students don’t seem at all afraid to act out against police. This always surprised me. Where I was born and raised, you were very careful about that sort of thing.

    I have never been run in, but I have certainly been hassled. It was wrong of the police officer, but what could I do?

    Rule #1, from my father (a retired firefighter): don’t run from the police. Ever.

    Okay, one “funny” story. Many years ago, I was visiting some friends at UCLA, and didn’t know anyone well enough to crash with them. So I got an el cheapo hotel room in an el cheapo part of town (i.e., not Westwood).

    What I didn’t know is that a white male had robbed a bank that same day wielding a shotgun, and the police were canvassing local el cheapo hotels, looking for him.

    So at 6 AM the next morning, while I was taking a shower, there was a horrible banging on the door. I wrapped a towel around me, and went to the door.

    “POLICE! OPEN UP!” went the shout.

    So I opened the door.

    And faced three police with pistols aimed and pointed.

    Without thinking, I said “Do you mind if I only raise one hand?” since I was holding the towel around me. I wasn’t being funny, the words just came out.

    One police officer smiled. I guess the fact I was shaking and white gave away that I wasn’t being a smart-alec. The other officers did not smile, and I am here to tell you that the muzzle of a pistol looks HUGE from the side opposite to the grip.

    I sat on the bed while they searched the place.

    After they finished looking around and asking me questions, one police officer told me to have a nice day.

    I told him that that was very likely, given how it had started.

    He laughed out loud as they left.

    They never told me what was going on. I had to figure it out from the hotel manager and the TV news.

    So I guess that has colored my view of the police. Don’t run. Be polite. Move slowly. Don’t sass them.

    Sorry for the long tale!

    Eric Blair (57b266)

  170. Maybe you should take a break and think about that.

    Comment by DRJ — 5/16/2009 @ 1:18 pm
    Will surely do that. But first I must apolgize for that “there is no justice here..” comment. That wasn’t the way I should have put it. I was angry and I broke a rule: Never speak when you are angry. It was an overreaction. It was unfair. It was wrong. There is justice here. I have been shown hospitality and goodwill. Both by our host who graciously allows me to post my comments here. Even when he may not agree with some of them. But he does. I am most grateful. Also DRJ. She has been indescribably good to me especially. There is justice here. And people are free to make there comments here. Both liberals and conservatives. Dems and Reps alike. I don’t intend to quit this blog. Not like this. But I will take a break for now. Thank you for everything. God bless.

    The Emperor (09c9e3)

  171. Dmac,

    I think it was timb, not Tim, who called GTMO vile but I’m having a hard time staying on top of who says what. It’s nice to have many viewpoints expressed but it’s getting harder to remember who said what.

    DRJ (f55947)

  172. Good decision, The Emperor.

    DRJ (f55947)

  173. I think it was timb, not Tim, who called GTMO vile

    My mistake, you’re both correct. I can’t keep up with the simularities either.

    You put this in quotes but it is a far cry from what you just posted

    What on earth are you talking about? I wasn’t addressing you with that comment – you’re obviously confused as well. You’d be well advised to let the matter drop at this point.

    Dmac (1ddf7e)

  174. “Please show the world my dishonesty by showing a remark where I suggested the officer should be denied due process.”

    Machinist – I already addressed this spurious argument in comment #136. Was it unclear or are your prior comments now unclear to you? If your honor is as important to you as you claim, you should recognize that your rush to judge the police officers involved in this incident is not the most honorable action one can take toward one’s fellow man. If you could also settle in on one position and argue that it would help.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  175. I found and approved one comment each from SteveG and the Machinist in the filter so you may want to review the comments thread for any new comments. I linked SteveG’s comment but I’m not sure which one was from the Machinist since I approved the comments without making note of the time-stamps.

    DRJ (f55947)

  176. If your honor is as important to you as you claim, you should recognize that your rush to judge the police officers involved in this incident is not the most honorable action one can take toward one’s fellow man.

    Machinist is cool; y’all need to calm down. As for this quote, I pretty much judge the dude too. This kick to the head is completely unjustified — and I’m VERY wary about reaching such judgments on the basis of videotape.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  177. DRJ

    Sorry about the f word****

    That was how I felt at the time, and here we are 35 years later and it still seemed to sum up my feelings. Some things change very slowly I guess

    To the rest of the board:

    How about if we don’t drag DRJ into referee status here?
    Speaking of BS, nothing would make me more upset than to have this kind of petty board nonsense push DRJ into leaving again…. DRJ obviously has better things to do with her time and lets help out by self regulating.
    OK?

    For my part, I’ll try to find ways to express my love for law enforcement that don’t have an “f” in them.

    SteveG (c99c5c)

  178. dalyrocks,
    I base my opinion of the officers’ conduct on the same video you are using to judge the drivers conduct. I have called for no action and suggested no penalty for the officers with or without trial or hearing. That is another matter. Several commenters, including you, have said the police should be justified in what they did. These comments did not suggest the policemen did not do what is shown on the clip. They said it was OK for the police to do this. All of my objections from my first comment have been to the idea that police misconduct was OK or justified. You will find no comment from me about punishing or trying the officers because I consider that a separate issue and not appropriate for this thread. You have said I received several kicks to the head but frankly I have seen very little attempt to argue with me on a rational basis. Most people have made personal attacks or have invented new positions for me and argued against those, as you are doing. When I point out that you are misrepresenting my position you say I am moving the goalposts and call me dishonest.

    Don’t force it. Either take the position that police should be above the law and Constitution or reconsider your position. You are trying too hard to fake or force your argument and it is unworthy of you. You seem anxious to emulate men like Brother Bradley or Eric Blair but you just don’t have their skill and knowledge for it.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  179. Patterico – I’m not saying he’s not cool, but if he’s gonna get all preachy about his positions he should be able to argue for them better than he did on this thread.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  180. You seem anxious to emulate men like Brother Bradley or Eric Blair but you just don’t have their skill and knowledge for it.

    Brother Bradley bravely ran away from getting involved in this thread! :-)

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes (0ea407)

  181. I am going to take Patterico’s recommendation.

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  182. The cop in the video will probably be told by *someone* to go see a chiropractor today on an emergency basis for the back injury he suffered during the chase but before he stumbled and the alledged distraction technique as per page 902 of the manual implemented itself upon the side of the head of known scum

    SteveG (c99c5c)

  183. “Brother Bradley bravely ran away from getting involved in this thread!”

    Proof of wisdom!

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  184. Police are only human and strangely enough not above the law. In fact being charged by society for upholding the law and empowered to do so thier behavior should be above reproach. There is no criminal as low as one who hides behind a badge.

    Was the behavior of this group of officers above approach? I think not. At some point fear of unlawful police activity makes running a logical and rational response.

    Amused Observer (b158e5)

  185. Patterico – 3:12pm –I pretty much judge the dude too. This kick to the head is completely unjustified

    Typical ACLU-loving leftist! You and that Jerry Dunphy!

    Apogee (e2dc9b)

  186. Scott Jacobs only recently joined the Marines and is already acting like a Hollywood stereotype of a Marine. When I was in the Army, they often said Marines were dumb, but I’ve never actually met a marine who was. Hopefully Scott will grow out of it.

    Nothing I said here makes me an “idiot,” Scott. A shame you can’t understand that a badge doesn’t make someone above the law. If the criminal was really ‘reaching’ for a ‘weapon’, then kicking him in the head is an inferior response to shooting him. The cop wasn’t afraid of anything.

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  187. At some point fear of unlawful police activity makes running a logical and rational response.

    Well, if one is going to rationalize and excuse, I’d rather it be in the direction (or favor) of the cops instead of the criminals—at least until the US truly becomes a Banana Republic, per below. Otherwise, you’ll end up with the mentality of some of those wonderful citizens of safe and prosperous Oakland, who a few weeks ago appeared to be a tad bit nonchalant about some of their city’s cops being killed by a felon with a rather extensive crime background.

    There may be a time in the future (perhaps not-too-distant?) of this country when arguing about a particular case like that of a cop kicking the head of a gangbanger will seem quaint, cute and academic. After all, if more of the US becomes more like a Mexico, or a Brazil — whose president, incidentally, is somewhat ideologically in the same camp with the US’s president — nightmarish scenarios or incidents involving both lawbreakers and law enforcers will be the new paradigm.

    Patrick Schultz, thestreet.com
    06/30/08

    The plague of crime and corruption is the biggest bearish argument against the sustainable growth of Brazil’s economy and bigger market gains. It is a corrosive and threatening crisis because as we all learned in high school, the foundation of any prosperous and civil society or market takes root in the rule of law.

    Investors must have an absolute and unconditional belief that the system is untainted… Lacking an honest system of checks and balances, investment and commerce cannot exist.

    The most alarming aspect of the corruption is that it does not consist of petty crime and lone actors. It is a systemic and institutional issue that will dismantle and crush all its recent progress.

    Even high-ranking government officials are on the take. The glaring example is former president Fernando Collor de Mello in 1992. He was forced to resign to avoid impeachment over influence peddling schemes that funneled millions of dollars into accounts set up by his campaign treasurer (who was later murdered).

    A more recent example comes from Paulo Maluf, the former Mayor of Sao Paolo, the largest city and commercial hub of the nation. He was arrested for diverting hundreds of millions of dollars to personal Swiss and Channel Island bank accounts.

    I had a personal encounter with the police in Rio de Janeiro that spotlights the fraud and ugliness. Just after landing with a friend in Rio, we went for dinner. On our return to the hotel around 10 p.m., we ran into what locals call a “police blitz.” Basically, it was a police checkpoint.

    But this was no checkpoint we have ever been to. It was full of heavily armed military police officers wielding attack machine guns and unholstered side arms being waved around.

    Even stranger, all of this was taking place in a very nice section of Rio, comparable to the Upper West Side of Manhattan or the Gas Lamp district of San Diego.

    These twisted defenders of law and order immediately told our taxi driver to pull over and pointed for us to get out vehicle. We were yelled at, harassed and thoroughly searched, but nothing was found. The only way to describe what ensued was the worst theatrical performance of “good cop, bad cop” I have ever seen.

    “Want to go to jail?” the bad cop screamed. You name it. They did it.

    Luckily, I can speak conversational Portuguese, so I could communicate and understand what they wanted — it was a shakedown, and they wanted money. I actually think I came out on top in our “negotiations” in which we settled on giving them R$45, or USD$28.

    This was a small shakedown, but the history of Latin America is littered with stories of bigger shakedowns and the ruins of banana republics toppled by corruption.



    BBC, 3-27-09:

    Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva [formerly a labor leader and organizer of the Workers Party] has said the world’s poor people should not be forced to pay for the global financial crisis. President Lula said white, blue-eyed people – not Indians, nor black, nor poor people – had created and spread the crisis throughout the world.

    President Lula has long argued that poor and developing nations have been victims of mistakes made in richer countries, caused by irresponsibility or a lack of regulation in the world’s banking systems.

    Mark (411533)

  188. Sorry to double post, but something else bothered me about Gazzer and Scott Jacob’s identical trains of thought.

    When they call me names, and use their insults to justify their conclusion, that’s an ad hominem fallacy.

    But when someone provides a train of reasoning that supports a conclusion, and then additionally says something personal, such as ‘sorry to be paranoid, but you are acting like a moby or an idiot’, that is not an ad hominem or a fallacy. This is because the personal comments are not being used to support any conclusions.

    Scott said that Gazzer completely took my argument apart, but Gazzer had not even mentioned my argument. Both just zeroed in on the fact that I said he was not coming across like a sincere and intelligent commenter.

    What’s interesting is that both used their personal attack on me as the entire justification for their argument that I’m completely wrong is saying this cop should not break the law. They are the ones relying on the ad hominem argument, while at the same time projecting their flaw onto me when I actually did not rely on such an argument.

    I think it’s really unfortunate of Scott to act like a jackass. Gazzer I’ve never seen here before, but Scott has often acted like a reasonable person from time to time. Regardless of that, it’s annoying to me when people use the ‘ad hominem’ warning to shield themselves from criticism or the need to read and think. The fact that I express a low opinion of Gazzer alongside my argument does not invalidate my argument.

    Beyond that, Gazzer, I was joking when I implied that by calling you an idiot, I was not insulting you and was in fact being charitable. I realize that I was being a bit opaque. I don’t think my command of English is somehow impressive (in fact, English is not my first language). I’m amused that you tried to pick on me for using a ‘fancy word’.

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  189. Some of the most-excellent regulars here are ucharacteristically taking differences of opinion a bit too personally with each other. Perhaps the recent troll infestation has put this group on edge, understandably so.

    My own opinion is that when a subject has stopped resisting, any more violence by an officer is gratuitous and wrong. The average person might want to rough up the subject, but police are supposed to be better trained than the average person. If the video is a fair reflection of what happened, the officer was wrong. It was a lapse of self-control. That’s always dangerous in an armed person.

    The proper way to deal with criminal gangs is not to rough members up when arrested, it’s to relentlessly prosecute them and put them into prison for a loooooooooooooooong time.

    Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407)

  190. Gangster = wrong

    Cop = wrong

    Wrong x 2 /= right

    Alan Kellogg (a5839a)

  191. Scott Jacobs only recently joined the Marines and is already acting like a Hollywood stereotype of a Marine. When I was in the Army, they often said Marines were dumb, but I’ve never actually met a marine who was. Hopefully Scott will grow out of it.

    Nothing I said here makes me an “idiot,” Scott. A shame you can’t understand that a badge doesn’t make someone above the law. If the criminal was really ‘reaching’ for a ‘weapon’, then kicking him in the head is an inferior response to shooting him. The cop wasn’t afraid of anything.

    God, where do I start…

    No, you know what, I’m going to leave this comment be. It’s hardly worth the effort.

    When they call me names, and use their insults to justify their conclusion, that’s an ad hominem fallacy.

    I find it amazingly ironic that the first person to toss an insult between the two of you is taking offense that he was insulted. It’s charming, really…

    Your fallacy was your false conclusion, your illogical leap of logic that went from a kick to the head to an army of gun-blazing death against any and all who look at them funny. It does not follow, and is idiotic.

    You didn’t use an ad hominem fallacy, you just used an amazingly stupid line of non-reasoning.

    Scott Jacobs (90ff96)

  192. Juan, I am talking about the gang occupation of American cities. They are an occupying force that should be dealt with in the harshest terms. Again, I say, we have many miles of Amercia that are the under control of gun-toting violent punks. The gangs’ control makes the Constitution irrelevant to those who suffer under the gangs’ presence. Anyone concerned with the Constitution should realize that it logically calls for martial law in those areas. A boot to the face is hardly the satisfaction owed to those of us with a true sense of justice.

    What is stopping private citizens from organizing vigilante death squads to deal with the threat?

    About the founding fathers: I have no doubt the founding fathers would have considered gangs like MS13 nothing more than land pirates and treated them as such and given them no quarter. They would have wiped them off the face of the planet, fighting them the same way they fought the Barbary Pirates. The founding fathers lived in a time when men had chests, they were not at all squeamish and had a much better grasp on liberty and the responsibility of the state to keep the peace and the populace safe. They didn’t play.

    We would do well to learn those lessons.

    Michael Ejercito (7c44bf)

  193. “About the founding fathers: I have no doubt the founding fathers would have considered gangs like MS13 nothing more than land pirates and treated them as such and given them no quarter”

    LOL they would have felt the same way about the king’s men running roughshod over the locals and would taken steps to create a new form of government. A government of laws not men.

    Amused Observer (a5fa60)

  194. All gangsters engaging in criminal acts should be treated in this manner. I hope the officer was wearing a steel toed boots.

    Knuckles (9716a0)

  195. Holy cognitive dissonance! I went from being glad that the gangbanger ran out of room (outrunning a helicopter is a losing proposition) to being ashamed of the officer.

    It isn’t pretty. It does remind me of the dominance dance done by bullies in high school. They only did it after the smaller kid gave up. My take from that was to never give up to them.

    I think other people get the same thing from watching this.

    I hope the perp doesn’t get to walk from this, but being LA, he might. What happened after doesn’t have anything to do with whether or not he is guilty, but any smart defense lawyer will use it to distract the jury, and radically increase his chances of success.

    Don Meaker (9ceac6)

  196. I think it also lends some air of legitimacy to every bogus brutality claim some lowlife makes.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  197. Sort of like what happened at Abu Ghraib tars the entire military?

    daleyrocks (5d22c0)

  198. That is what really made me mad about that.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  199. Some immature reservists (if I recall, not sure) entertained themselves by acting like frat boys and damaged the reputation, image and honor of their government and the finest military in the world. I was furious with them and the irresponsible commander who let that go on.

    Machinist (c5fc28)

  200. Emperor,
    If you look back in at this thread I wish to apologize for my response to your comment about me and true Americanism. It was rude and uncalled for. I should have let it pass. I stand by my later remarks but that comment was wrong and I am sorry. I beg your pardon.

    Machinist to The Emperor (c5fc28)

  201. Thank you very much, Machinist. You are very kind. Apology accepted. Accept my apology too for any way I may have acted to make you respond that way. I am not perfect. No one is. But we must continue to strive towards it.

    The Emperor (09c9e3)

  202. Comment by Machinist to The Emperor — 5/18/2009 @ 12:22 am

    I see you also visited my “desolate” blog. (Laughs.) At least something good has come out of this. Thanks.

    The Emperor (09c9e3)

  203. The Emperor,
    Thank you. Very gracious of you under the circumstances.

    No apology by you is called for on my part. You have not offended me nor attempted to do so that I recall.

    Not my first visit.

    Machinist (c5fc28)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.6156 secs.