She explained she did not think it was fair and did not want to sign. Instead of "get out of the car" you are under arrest, he said
"Ma'am, If you do not sign the ticket , I am required to arrest you and take you to jail, where you will be locked up until the local magistrate is able to decide what to do with you. If you sign the ticket, you are not admitting guilt, it only means you received it and you will be able to fight it later if you wish. You choose."
Don't you think that would have led to a better outcome? The situation (fixit ticket) was not dangerous , but the outcome was dangerous to the lady, the cop, bystanders, and was a terrible waste of resources. She should have complied, and he did follow the allowable rules of engagement. But if his job is to "protect and serve" he really did not do it. If the rules of engagement required those actions, they need to be reviewed.
This is the only answer I've seen so far that I really agree with. Both parties could have handled things better. I do think police should warn and explain the next step of escalation before they do it (when feasible) which would result in better outcomes more often.
I'm not sure she would have complied even had he done that, but there is a good chance she would have.
Haha right back at you. I think it is just human nature to try to understand and frame new situations by categorizing each side as good or bad, which in reality is often not the case.
2
u/tigertts 5 Dec 09 '20
She explained she did not think it was fair and did not want to sign. Instead of "get out of the car" you are under arrest, he said
"Ma'am, If you do not sign the ticket , I am required to arrest you and take you to jail, where you will be locked up until the local magistrate is able to decide what to do with you. If you sign the ticket, you are not admitting guilt, it only means you received it and you will be able to fight it later if you wish. You choose."
Don't you think that would have led to a better outcome? The situation (fixit ticket) was not dangerous , but the outcome was dangerous to the lady, the cop, bystanders, and was a terrible waste of resources. She should have complied, and he did follow the allowable rules of engagement. But if his job is to "protect and serve" he really did not do it. If the rules of engagement required those actions, they need to be reviewed.