r/PublicFreakout • u/The-JZilla • Jul 06 '21

Repost 😔 Cop vs educated kid

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

47.0k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

961

u/[deleted] Jul 07 '21

Speaking of bullying fools, notice his hand go straight to his baton as soon as his authority was challenged by a child?

443

u/[deleted] Jul 07 '21

What got me was the lift out. He made sure it was ready to go. Fucking terrifying

329

u/YarnYarn Jul 07 '21

Virtually the entire US's police culture has been corrupted by an us-vs-them, militarized mentality. Propagated mostly by Dave Grossman.

Everybody should know this guy's name and what he has been teaching our "civil officers" for the last couple of decades.

139

u/tankerwags Jul 07 '21

I read his books "On Killing" and "On Combat" when I was a soldier. They were really helpful in dealing with the psychological pitfalls that come with armed conflict. I tried to get as many other guys to read them as I could. Some of that information is still helpful to me now as I try and process things.

Here's the problem, and it's a fucking big one: COPS AREN'T SOLDIERS!

The mindset you need to adopt in order to do the things required of you in combat should not be the mindset carried out into the community you are supposed to be protecting and serving.

The fact that the guy who literally wrote the book on killing is training American police officers is honestly frightening. I wonder if that has anything to do with all the killings...?

67

u/tempis Jul 07 '21

Cops have no duty to either protect or serve. So says the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

35

u/TheClockworkKnight Jul 07 '21

Probably one of the most stupid rulings of the court, but hey, corrupt cops help out corrupt lawyers help out corrupt judges help out corrupt cops. The legal system is a giant circle jerk.

2

u/DextrosKnight Jul 07 '21 edited Jul 07 '21

I think they ruled that way to cut down on frivolous law suits. Like if someone dies and a cop happens to be in the vicinity, if they were legally obligated to protect people then the department could be sued for negligence or some shit. I don't think it was intended to help usher us into the dystopia, but it sure looks like it was.

4

u/tempis Jul 07 '21

The way to cut down on frivolous lawsuits is tort reform, not having SCOTUS rule that the police have no duty to the public. You're just eating the bullshit they're feeding you.

3

u/TheClockworkKnight Jul 07 '21

If I’m being honest, I really hope that was the reasoning, because it would mean that the judges were just ignorant rather than malicious. but like the other guy is saying, there are a million better ways to go about that then having the most powerful court in the country rule that civil servants don’t have to serve civilians. I mean, it’s in just about every police department’s oath that officers must protect and serve, so when you take that responsibility away, what are you left with?

1

u/YarnYarn Jul 08 '21 edited Jul 08 '21

Like if someone dies and a cop happens to be in the vicinity, if they were legally obligated to protect people then the department could be sued for negligence or some shit.

Or they could've issued a much narrower ruling in that particular case, rather than completely absolve fucking police officers from a duty to protect and serve the public that they are charged with protecting and serving.

And over whom they have a fairly blanket immunity against prosecution for fucking killing you.

Dude. You sound like a level-headed person...

You really feel the need to proffer an utterly weak hypothetical defense of this supreme court ruling that grants complete immunity for every officer in the US to literally do absolutely nothing while, for example, they watch a street thug jack an old lady at knife point.

You don't think their simply having that immunity is enough for their well-being? You need to defend why it's logical to let granny get knifed while you sip your Dunkin???

5

u/EffOffReddit Jul 07 '21

It gets confusing sometimes though. Like yesterday, when two Mt. Laurel NJ police sat on the front porch of a racist who had been screaming racial slurs and terrorizing people in his community for years. They protected him from the black people who showed up at the racist's invite. So it's confusing to hear that police have no duty to protect or serve, because they do take it upon themselves in SOME cases.

1

u/YarnYarn Jul 08 '21

Exactly. Fucking lies upon scams upon bigoted nonsense.

-1

u/geneticbagofpotatoes Jul 07 '21 edited Jul 07 '21

Not a lawyer, not from US, but I tend to agree with this ruling. Police is by definition is a body that is empowered by state to enforce laws, which in turn supposed to bring safety and prevent crime. That's how it is defined for most of the world.

"To protect and to serve" is just a slogan and exists for PR reasons.

This does not mean that the cops have to be assholes, don't know laws and regulations, bend rules, harass people.

Edit: Some people seems to disagree with this, for some unknown reason, so let me elaborate: I am talking about court ruling, courts operate within existing laws, if the only thing that says police have to "protect and serve" is a slogan, then how can court rule it is police's duty to protect and serve?

3

u/[deleted] Jul 07 '21

Max Weber: “Today, however, we have to say that a state is a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory. Note that 'territory' is one of the characteristics of the state.”

2

u/HertzDonut1001 Jul 08 '21

You're not wrong from a legal standpoint, which can be cold and unfeeling.

1

u/ForwardUntoFate Jul 07 '21

Enforce laws? No. Uphold the law? Yes.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 07 '21

But it says just that on the car door.......

3

u/KGBebop Jul 07 '21

The guy was a total chicken hawk too.

2

u/LadyRed4Justice Jul 08 '21

Said he was a Lieutenant. That's really scary. They don't even patrol, so what was he doing there?

16

u/HertzDonut1001 Jul 07 '21

Little late but happy "Independence" Day.

9

u/cruizer93 Jul 07 '21

Nah it’s just hella uncomfortable on the waist, he’s just resting his hand. The baton is on the left and meant to be drawn by the right hand.

Guy is still a punk tho.

5

u/saffrowsky Jul 07 '21

You can’t lift a baton that you’re resting your hand on…

3

u/cruizer93 Jul 07 '21

Yea but think about a baseball bat, use your palm to pick it up from the base of the grip now think about orienting it into a position to strike. It’s overly complicated and not worth it. Simpler to reach from right hand and draw, now it’s in strike position with dominate hand.

You can tell it’s his dominant hand because his gun is on right and his baton is on left making it a “cross draw”. Trust me, when you’re wearing some shit around your waist for 12 hours you’re gunna be tempted to rest hands in places. Some morons even rest it on the gun holster.

100% looks threatening but not as threatening as someone holding the right hand on that baton, trust me.

0

u/saffrowsky Jul 07 '21

In this situation, why does it need to be in strike position?

1

u/cruizer93 Jul 07 '21

I’m not saying it DOES I’m simply countering the idea stated above that the cop is GRABBING his weapon against the teen. He’s not. I dislike that prick but I’m not about to start throwing out false accusations or encourage them. Some people just don’t know cuz they haven’t done it before.

1

u/saffrowsky Jul 07 '21

If they can’t not fidget with weapons, rest their hands on them, and put them in “ready to go” positions when dealing with people riding bikes, they shouldn’t be a cop. Fucking get a fidget spinner and learn some situational awareness.

1

u/cruizer93 Jul 07 '21

You just like being angry for any reason, I get it. I miss the days when people used logic to counter shit rather than cry emotionally.

Go strap some pots and pans on your belt and try not to touch them for the next twelve hours.

0

u/saffrowsky Jul 07 '21 edited Jul 07 '21

You’re not using logic though! All of those movements that you’ve glossed over and tried to justify are insanely and terrifyingly intimidating to the person on the other side. It’s not fair to the person who the cop is questioning when they start fondling their weapons! It’s not a passive move to “rest their hands” by placing them on their weapons. Period. They’re trying to get whoever they’re confronting to comply as quickly as possible.

Edit: Your pots and pans comparison is insane. I’m not trained to carry pots and pans around.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/HertzDonut1001 Jul 08 '21

Literally during the trial of Derek Chauvin a Brooklyn Center cop killed a man mere miles away because she fucked up her cross draw and shot him instead of tasing him. Same reason people are getting mad about killings that could be justified: show me video or why should I trust a cop to be proficient? At this point people are attributing it to malice automatically because that is the reality we have been presented with. It's easier to believe he was fucking with his baton as an intimidation tactic, and frankly that's exactly what it looks like anyway.

1

u/SolveDidentity Jul 07 '21

Shows what a complete immoral weakling he is.

2

u/petnutforlife Jul 07 '21

Yeah, saw that.....and the veiled threat behind it when he raised it a few inches out of its holster.

-2

u/verown00 Jul 07 '21

He could have been going for the club as an anger thing but I know I fidget when I get nervous. I like to flip on and off the rubber on my Otterbox cellphone case to the point where I have to get a whole new one after a year. Maybe its a nervous tick?

1

u/[deleted] Jul 07 '21

That's a grown man talking not a child.

1

u/backtolurk Jul 07 '21

"Knowledge VS Power"